Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 5482771" data-attributes="member: 3192">I think complexity is a Modern term. By that I mean it refers to quantity, math, and act of attempting to recognize patterns.  Chess is complex, Tic-Tac-Toe is simple.  But neither are complicated by your terms. Each has a fairly small number of rules to learn in order to play. Go may be the best example of game complexity with the shortest rules given their number and the total quantified game state (something like 1x10[sup]160[/sup] power.)Sophistication and complication, on the other hand, are more Postmodern terms, a understanding that there is no repetition or accurate understanding of our experiences. I think what we are talking about is more in line with the first understanding, something akin to mathematical elegance.  d20 has a high degree of complexity, but also a high elegance, 4E even more so.  CCGs have this as well. Lots of complexity, low entrance requirements and learning curve.  What the earlier games attempted to do, IMHO, is retain all the skill compiled by the wargaming designers in both elegant and complex game design, while removing all the rules from sight.  The DM or referee has these behind the screen in a sort of "fog of war" mechanic and the game is played with autonomy, though within the scope of the suggested social roles offered. At the table play does require a common understanding of what it means to engage with a simulated reality from an anthropomorphic POV, but it's also understood the people playing will be humans... relatively speaking*.I think computer games are designed similarly as well. The code behind the screen, software coding in this case, can be extraordinarily complex, but game play is relatively easy.  I think this is in part due to the controllers. Plus, there exists an upfront manual on how to use the controller or keyboard to effectively manipulate the game.  By attempting realism with the graphical output, the intuitiveness of the software design enables easier use - at least in theory. "If it looks like a button, works like a button, it's a button" even if it's a mishmash of pixelated lights on a computer screen. I think Bill91 has a good point about the changes in design over the decades. It hasn't been about removing complexity - I think it's all still there, if in different places - but about putting quantified options in front of the players, rather than behind a DM screen.  Is it better? I see that as subjective.  Is complexity necessary? Pragmatically no, postmodern storygames are as little as one page. Is elegance still a game design value? I think it is and recognizably so from the bigger names like Wizards and Paizo. But I believe the player learning curve has increased given the philosophical underpinnings of their designs.   And so they feel more difficult, while not necessarily meaning the same thing as challenging.*EDIT (I don't mean characters here, but the players themselves)</blockquote>

Verification