Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9068837" data-attributes="member: 6790260">This, I agree with, 100%.This, however, I do not.People as a whole do not value "simple" any more than they value "complex" in the abstract, as a necessary go-to principle. Because "simple" can mean a bunch of good things, like straightforward, approachable, low-maintenance, etc., but it can also mean a bunch of bad things, like trivial, shallow, boring, etc.It is those good things that simplicity can, but does not always, produce--those are what people value. Something can in fact be quite complex at the highest echelons, but if its introduction is straightforward and approachable, then it will likely be popular. Likewise, if its default state is low-maintenance, but you can opt into higher-engagement methods or styles if you fancy that, you'll almost certainly find a lot of interested people.Consider Elden Ring. Intentionally NOT an easy game. Intentionally quite difficult, in fact, with a deep and complex action RPG system. And yet it was a runaway success, even moreso than other games of its style--in part because while it is hard, it has several of the virtues that simplicity can provide. There are more and less approachable methods and tools (e.g. Sorcery is very approachable as I am given to understand; I have no interest in games of this style so I have never played it myself.) Each of the bosses, while difficult, is always fair: there are signs and telegraphs for their mechanics, and results are consistent from one attempt to the next.And Elden Ring has apparently sold over 20 million copies (20.5M as of March, from what I'm seeing). Even if we allow for some 10% of those to be duplicates, you're still looking at bare minimum 18 million people who intentionally bought a hard game with lots of detail and many options--that's more people than the D&D fandom now, as I understand it, even with its explosive growth.People do not want simplistic. But a well-made simple thing can be really really good! The problem is that making a simple thing good is just as hard as making a complex thing good. Sometimes it's harder, even, because you have to force yourself to use fewer, more-restrictive, less-flexible tools to do so.Edit:Note that this applies in both directions. Complexity brings benefits when it's done well, and detriments when it's done poorly. Neither thing is valuable in and of itself. They are only valuable if they are successfully used toward a specific, desirable end. And every single part of that process is difficult! Determining what is desirable in the first place, picking a specific end within that space, and successfully reaching that desired end...every single one of those things is a challenge in design.</blockquote>

Verification