I had to ween my players off D&D Beyond early.
I never went near it. I want my character information under my own control, not that of a large company's marketing department.
My groups are pretty willing to try new systems, and also to give up on them if we aren't enjoying them.
One system that didn't get played was
Heroes of the Soviet Union, a lightweight superhero game where some of the players had ethical issues with portraying the USSR in a positive way. The chap who wanted to run it took up
Honor & Intrigue instead, which is going well.
Lost Fleet didn't work well for the Sunday group. When the GM described it, she did so mostly in terms of
Battlestar Galactica, and I don't watch TV. I asked if it was necessary to understand BG, and was told no, and that there was no need to get the rules, only the playbooks (it's a PbtA variant). The personality description system is astrological, which I found confusing, and nobody told me that the inter-character bonds are even more important than in basic PbtA. I missed the character generation session because I was sick, and it all got more and more confusing. We aborted the campaign after a few sessions.
There were different problems with
Blades in the Dark. The system looks simple, convincingly enough to fool the GM, who struggled to find the right rules a lot of the time. It also moves complexity to different places from a traditional TTRPG, which caused delays in handling things that didn't seem as though they should take up much time. However, the fatal problem was the built-in plot model of the game, which is very Hollywood, with many things not mattering unless there's a crisis going on. When we planned and executed a job so efficiently that there were no fights and nobody knew they were being robbed until too late, but our combatants got no experience or advancement from it, we ended the campaign.
