The Complexity Barrier

I’ve noticed that some people really enjoy simple games, while others like a lot more complexity. Let’s look at some levels of complexity in games.

Checkers is a pretty simple game. The board is a simple grid. Each player sets up the same number of pieces in the same pattern on opposite sides of the board. There is only one type of piece. It moves in a pretty simple way, sliding diagonally, forward and right or forward and left. It can jump your opponent’s pieces to capture them. It can also jump more than one of your opponent’s pieces in sequence. If you can capture one of your opponent’s pieces on your turn, then you must. But, if you could capture more than one of his pieces you can choose which move to make. If you get a piece to your opponent’s side of the board, it is “crowned”, and it can now move in any of the four diagonal directions. The object of the game is to capture all of your opponent’s pieces. The finer points of the game come in learning how to block your opponent from capturing your pieces, or learning how to force your opponent to capture one of your pieces and leave him in a bad position by doing so.

Now consider Chess. It is a lot like Checkers. But it gets more complicated because each side has six different types of pieces, and multiples of most of them. Players must learn how each type of piece moves. Further, the same piece might move in different ways under different circumstances. For example, the pawn typically moves one space straight forward, but on its first move it may move two spaces straight forward, and it captures pieces by moving diagonally forward one space. There are also special maneuvers, like castling, where you move both your king and a rook at the same time. Furthermore, the object of the game isn’t to capture all of your opponent’s pieces, but merely to capture his king. Except, you don’t have to actually capture his king, just force him into an inescapable position – called “checkmate”. The range and complexity of strategies in Chess is much greater than in Checkers.

Personally, I’m not a huge fan of either Checkers or Chess, I think because I prefer less abstract games, but I would probably rather play Chess over Checkers. I know people who would prefer Checkers, though, because to them “Chess is too complicated.” While there is nothing wrong with having that preference, I do wonder why some people prefer simpler games.

To me, more complexity can create more potential for nuanced and meaningful choices – which is something I like in a game. It takes more effort to master a complicated game. For me, that makes mastering the game more rewarding. I don’t like it when I play a game just a couple of times, and already I feel like there is nothing left to explore in terms of tactics or strategy.

I think it is important how complex games are presented, though. The Lord of the Rings: The Card Game is a pretty complicated game, but the rules are presented clearly in the rulebook, and a lot of the complexity comes from the rules text on individual cards in the game – making it so you can learn this aspect of the game gradually as the cards come up in play. Some games present two sets of rules – a basic set to use in your first couple of plays, and an advanced set to use thereafter. This seems to work well for those games. Space Alert, on the other hand, is a complicated game that does a poor job of presenting the rules. The rules for that game are split across two rulebooks, and I literally got a headache trying to read them. If my brother hadn’t been there to continue reading where I left off and summarize the basics to me, I probably would have boxed the game back up and put it away.

What do you think about complexity in games? Do you like simpler games, or more complicated ones? What’s the most complicated game you’ve played, and what did you think of it? I’d love to hear your thoughts on the subject.