前文我们转述了英国当地的每日邮报消息称英国某妇女沉迷社交游戏small world致使她的三个年幼小孩处于无人照料的状态以及两只圈养宠物狗挨饿致死（看原文）。该新闻成为英国当地相当火爆的一条新闻，并迅速被各大媒体和网站转载。

small-world

但是small world的开发者Days of Wonder拒绝承认每日邮报和水星报关于该妇女报道的相关内容。据该公司的官方反驳称该公司的small world游戏和发生在英国妇女身上的惨剧没有任何的关联，事实上发生这么大误解的原因在于相关新闻记者和编辑并没有认真履行校对审核的义务，他们并没有区分清楚small world和smallworlds.com。

很有意思的是smallworlds.com也发表声明否认他们与该惨案有任何的关联，并暗示新闻提及的游戏是由Days of Wonder所开发的。

RockPaperShotgun转述了当时水星报的记者Roger Pearson的观点称当时法官和律师裁决依据都是small world而不是worlds。

It turns out that the Daily Mail and the Mercury Press may have been wrong in reporting yesterday that a British mother of three neglected her children and starved her two dogs due to excessive time playing Small World  (pictured below). The game’s developer, Days of Wonder, has denied any involvement in the case and points to an error it believes the both the Daily Mail and the Mercury Press made in reporting.

Days of Wonder claimed in a harsh, official rebuttal that, “Contrary to incorrect reports published in several English newspapers and their respective websites, Days of Wonder’s Small World board game is not connected to the tragedy that occurred in the London suburb of Swanley.” “Apparently journalists and editors of some British newspapers can’t be bothered to check facts and distinguish between ‘smallworlds.com’ and the family board game ‘Small World.’”

However, SmallWorlds  (seen above), an entirely different game played on the website of the same name, has also denied any role in the child neglect case. The official denial claims  that some news outlets used images of its game while referring to Small World, the social game created by Days of Wonder (confusing, we know).

British game news website RockPaperShotgun spoke with Mercury Press writer Roger Pearson, who claimed that, “The best I can tell you is that the judge and lawyers all referred in court to a game called Small World – not Worlds.” “Whether they were wrong in the way they were referring to it we can’t say.”

While the existence of a court case regarding a woman facing child and animal neglect charges due to excessive time with a social game is indisputable, we’re now unsure of which game it was if either at all. (source:games)