Concept: Complexity... the good and the bad

An ex-colleague and good friend of mine, Andrew posted the following, and I thought it would be good to share it. Here it is paraphrased to be more generic:

There are two types of complexities in games: inherent complexity and emergent complexity.



The inherent complexity is inherent within the basic mechanics of the game. Those things that you need to know in order just to be able to play it. This complexity includes the rules and interface to play the game.

In a board game, this complexity is a necessary evil as it is what creates the game in the first place. It defines the shape of the board, the pieces and the basic constraints on their movement. To play the game you must understand these constraints. (Perhaps this is less so in computer games where the interface prevents you from straying beyond them, but an overall big picture view is still really quite essential even if some details can be left till later).

To be able to play the game you need to know this. Without it you can still be clicking away but much of what is going on around you wont make sense, and I'm not sure that you could be considered to be 'playing' any more than a monkey behind the wheel of an out of control truck could be considered as 'driving'.



Then there is the other type of complexity, emergent complexity.

This includes our understanding of the consequences of the basic mechanics, and the strategies and counter-strategies we apply to playing the game.

If the inherent complexity is the game board, then emergent complexity is the game that is played upon it, for it is but a function of the various strategies, techniques and styles that players come up with given the constraints imposed upon them by the basic game mechanics.



There is a very critical difference between the two types of complexity and it is this difference that makes inherent complexity bad and emergent complexity good.

Inherent complexity is a roadblock that must be passed before a player can participate in the game. The bigger the barrier the fewer who will pass it. Learning the details that make up the inherent complexity will not let you compete better, it will merely let you compete.

It follows that we would want to minimize this aspect.

I wont argue that there is a certain satisfaction - especially for the geekier among us - in learning systems of byzantine complexity and memorizing vast tables of obscure statistics and the such, but I think its accurate to say that for the most part players would like to get their basic training out of the way and get down to the real business of playing.

Emergent complexity does not prevent you from playing.

In fact it is the secret sauce that keeps you playing, because every time you play you learn a little more about the game. Something you think you did wrong this time and are eager for next time to try and correct it. Some new idea you want to try applying in the next game.

You will notice I use the words 'think' and 'idea' here. These are not cold hard facts to be learned, instead these are subjective. They are opinions, styles, choices. Making these choices is playing the game.

Eliminating the emergent complexity means eliminating these choices. Eliminating the emergent complexity means eliminating the gameplay.

So I want people to minimize the inherent complexity and maximize the emergent complexity. Because while the inherent aspect is the price of the ticket, the emergent part is the game itself.

To finish with an example, take a look at the games of Chess and Wei Qi. Both have very simple inherent complexity but extremely high emergent complexity. They take but an hour to learn yet a lifetime is needed to master them.

I gather that both games still enjoy a certain level of popularity despite having been released quite a while ago.

[Source: forums.sjgames.com]

With this in mind, I always aim to design games that are extremely simple to get started with, but have a lot of depth that can be slowly learnt over time.

I think this is the simple reasons that some good games become so popular, and other good games rarely have more than a small fan following.


Make a game with too much inherent complexity and few people will finish learning to play it, whereas if you make a game with too little emergent complexity and most people will get bored after playing it a while.