2008 game Pandemic is taking hold at a feverish pitch

Pandemic is not Chutes and Ladders. It's not Candy Land. Or even Risk.

First published in 2008, it is enjoying an explosion of interest — for obvious reasons — that has put it just behind Monopoly and Clue on Amazon's board-game sales chart.

The game's goal is easy to grasp: stop an infectious disease from spreading across continents and killing millions. The stakes couldn't be starker — either everybody wins or everybody loses.

Players begin in Atlanta at the headquarters for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), then travel across the globe, taking actions to slow disease transmission and save lives. You don't move plastic pawns or metal thimbles across a board; you deploy field tents and maps on a board, performing various roles — medic, researcher, quarantine specialist.

Instead of traditional competition and a single champion, players work together, looking for a cure to halt the spread of a virus. Which has made Pandemic something of a staple in classrooms (and medical schools) eager to foster cooperation among students.

"Really, it's the grandfather of cooperative gaming," said J.P. Nery, owner of Chicagoland Games Dice Dojo. "Pandemic was not the first game to introduce the idea — you don't roll the dice then come to a winner — but it did bring the concept of cooperative board games into the mainstream."

It was created by Matt Leacock, a former graphic designer. He's unsure of the exact inspiration for Pandemic but notes he developed it between the SARS epidemic of 2003 and the H1N1 swine flu outbreak of 2009, with warnings about the spread of infectious diseases in the 21st century on his mind.

Now 48, he's intently following coronavirus news — along with everyone else — and is contemplating the endgame. He spoke about the legacy of his scarily prescient creation. The following has been edited and condensed for space and clarity.

Q: Have you ever heard from the CDC about Pandemic?

A: They are using it in an exhibition on cultural reactions to the spread of infectious diseases [opening in late May]. And there's been some contact from epidemiologists who worked in West Africa and loved the game. But mostly I hear this stuff just anecdotally.

The University of Leicester's medical school in the UK used it for a couple of years to teach communication cooperation and found some good results with it. I was contacted just today by a high school in San Francisco looking to buy copies of Pandemic in bulk, to teach concepts about the spread of infectious disease. It's not a simulation, but it's great for introducing concepts, which is really what games have always been good at.

Q: Did developing it give you a window into how we handle actual pandemics?

A: I'm certainly more attuned now to the spread of disease. I've had to read a lot of books about it just to work on the products based around Pandemic. I guess I'm not surprised now when something like coronavirus happens. I certainly see how the real world works and think of how those actions might work their way into future versions of the game.

The earliest versions didn't have quarantines. It was one thing too many. We later introduced it. You can kind of see the advantages and disadvantages of real-world quarantines, but we can't necessarily capture everything in a game. We have three different expansions, and it's hard to add more to the base game without making it too complicated.

Q: Did you interview medical professionals?

A: No, just casual research. I was sort of an indie game designer, doing this game as a hobby on the side. There was no pressure to have a well-researched product. The pressure was, will I ever get a game published? I didn't even name the diseases in the game because I didn't want it too clinical — which, actually now, makes it kind of topical.

Q: What's the biggest mistake people make when they play Pandemic?

A: They focus on short-term objectives. They run around the world and try to put out local fires without thinking about a long-term goal, which is the only way they can win.

Q: Do players generally win?

A: Depends who comes to the table. If they have experience making critical decisions and communicating, they have a higher chance. There are difficulty levels but someone new might get beat up. If it's a close loss, I tend to be happy. Especially if players blame themselves and know what they'd do differently. But real life is infinitely more complex.