Inclusion at the cost of Generalization

[Thirteenspades]

How do modern videogames and RPGs oversimplify mechanics to appeal to a wider audience? Do you think it's worth it? How could you reach multiple types of people without simplifying the game and removing anything, no matter how important, just because some random person was offended?

 

[MNblockhead]

Nope. Most people do not what a lot of complexity. Those that do will graduate to more complicated games, but those will always be more niche.

I like complex, tactical board games, but only certain friends and my sons will play them with me. Generally, I have to fall back on less complex party games for most people, including my wife.

For the few video games I play, I like story and immersion and don't want to put in the time to become skilled at complex combat mechanics to just enjoy running around a virtual world completing quests.

I'm clearly part of the "general audience" for video games and more of a hardcore fan for board games.

As for TTRPGs, 5e is about a complex as a general audience will bear. Actually, I think a system like Modern AGE would be better for getting a wider audience into TTRPGs, but the D&D Brand is just so recognizable and iconic that it attracts more people despite its fairly complex rule set.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

I'd say that generalization is more likely to result in a broader appeal, but it does come at a cost. It's easier to abandon that game for the next shiny thing that comes along, and some players WANT more crunch, subtlety and complexity and will be put off by the generalizations.

 

[FrogReaver]

If there was a clear cut answer then nearly every game ever made would reach a large audience.

I propose that the answer is branding/marketing/reputation/gameplay that isn’t bad.

 

[ccs]

How do modern videogames and RPGs oversimplify mechanics to appeal to a wider audience? Do you think it's worth it? How could you reach multiple types of people without simplifying the game and removing anything, no matter how important, just because some random person was offended?

I don't see why I should share that secret for free.

 

[Shiroiken]

There's a balance to everything. Gateway RPGs like D&D are better served with more simplicity, allowing the broadest appeal. More hardcore RPGs can add layers of complexity, because the assumption would be that almost all new players would have come from D&D or some other RPG.

 

[Umbran]

...just because some random person was offended?

So, the people who are offended are not "random". They are people who have felt the sting of real-world racism, or who have learned that the folks who are subject to racism need some support from those who are not.

Racism and its effects are not random. Quite the opposite, kind of by definition.

In addition, when we use the word "random" like this, what it often ends up meaning is, "person I don't know or care about". And that's a problem. We live in a nation of 300+ million people - we need to be able to manage more than proximal empathy to make our lives work.

 

[macd21]

How do modern videogames and RPGs oversimplify mechanics to appeal to a wider audience? Do you think it's worth it? How could you reach multiple types of people without simplifying the game and removing anything, no matter how important, just because some random person was offended?

What are you actually talking about here? Why would someone being offended by something result in simpler mechanics? I’ve never heard of a game system being simplified in order to avoid offending someone.

 

[aco175]

I think that games, and maybe- especially non-D&D games, can offer a basic edition along with an advanced edition. 5e has something like this with the free basic rules and the rest of the rules and options in the PHB. A lot of people have some sort of idea of how D&D is played so for a new system I would this is more important. I have seen more games advertise things like 1-page rules and such to draw players.

 

[Mark Hope]

For "games" in general, there should be different types - some more complex than others so that people who want different things can have them. Everything being the same is boring.

For a specific game, it's a matter of finding their audience and giving them what they want in such a way that the game is profitable so they can give their audience more of what they want. So no, games shouldn't simplify just in order to reach more people. If designers want to make a more complex game and they find an audience who will buy it in enough quantities to make it worthwhile, more power to them. It depends what the game designers want. Obviously 5e, for example, needs to corner the largest share of the market in order to maintain its status as leading brand, so it's in WotC's interest to make a game that appeals to a larger slice of people. Another company, however, doesn't have the same needs and so has more freedom in what kind of games it releases.

As for offending people, I have no idea what that has to do with mechanics, simple or otherwise. Unless you're talking about the spell design rules in original Torg.