Simplicity in Game Design

What is simplicity in game design?

Here I share my own definition.

Simplicity in game design means the simplicity of the rules and mechanics. Counterintuitively, a simple game ≠ an easy-to-beat game. GO is a perfect example here.

I think many people mix up the definition of simple and easy. When people speak of a simple game, that usually means a game that’s easy to beat. However, simple and easy-to-beat are not correlated. Though in some cases like games specifically made for kids, simple games are indeed easy to beat, such as tic-tac-toe or connect the dots. However, simplicity doesn’t always imply the difficulty of the games.

Hollow Knight: simple to learn but hard to master

Simple ≠ easy-to-beat

I like playing simple games — games that I can pick up on the go, play immediately and get a decent experience even for a short amount of time — games that I can jump right into.

However, a good simple game is usually one that’s easy to begin with but hard to master.

Hollow Knight is a great example of a simple, yet not an easy-to-beat game. Hollow Knight is a gorgeous 2D adventure platformer with a few movements the player needs to learn, yet it is a notoriously hard game that certainly requires the player to master the meticulously designed mechanics such as forward dash and double jump to enjoy the satisfying moments. I could pick it up on a whim, enjoy grinding my teeth and smashing the buttons for a few minutes and still feel like… WOW. Simple enough, but hard to master.

Many Nintendo games are great examples. Let’s say Super Smash Bros Ultimate. It didn’t take a few rounds of playing to get the gist of the basics — basic/special attacks, jumps and air movement, shields, etc. Even when I played with 3 other experienced players when I first started, there was a ton of empty area I could distance my character from the others to learn my moves. The game was quite easy for beginners to start with. However, in order to win a game, I really had to build the necessary muscle memory to get the movements right. Also, each character has different special attacks that I should familiarize myself with for a few seconds when a round starts. Another game that’s simple to learn but hard to master.

What does simplicity mean to game designers?

As I mentioned before, simple rules and mechanics make it easy to pick up by beginners. In this modern era when every second is protected from being wasted, we are less willing to spend time on things that we think are not meant for us. When a player decides to try out a new game, they are still asking themselves subconsciously if the game is right for them every second. At least in my experience, I played Fallout 4 VR for an hour, and have yet to revisit the game since. I simply don’t have the mental energy or time to invest in such a time-consuming game. With the amount of school work I have, this game is just not right for me. Granted, it doesn’t help for it to be in VR either, not a pick-up-and-go type of medium. However, it is just my personal preference. Simple games fit right in my schedule. Yet, I think this perspective echo with many people in this world. Just take a look at the statistics. As of July 2018, people around the world threw 3.91 billion dollars into a f%*king simple mobile game Candy Crush[1]. W — T — F You get it. Accessibility means a lot $$$.

Here I shall list some of the pros & cons for simple games from a designer’s perspective:

Simple — Pros

Simple = accessible to busy people and beginners
Easier to consider all the edge cases
Can add rules and materials to build up to a more complex game

Simple — Cons

Less for exploration
High level of abstraction, less simulation

The reasoning for the above list should be fairly self-explanatory. As for complex games, just exactly the opposite.

Complex — Pros

A lot for exploration
Allows high fidelity/real-world simulation

Complex — Cons

Less accessible
Harder to consider all the edge cases
Harder to break down the materials

As a game designer, I do value complex games. Unlike simple games, there are many complex games that are not just about winning, but about the immersion and experience. The amount of material that make up the complexity can provide a simulation of the real world. For example, the fantastical world simulation game Dwarf Fortress developed by Tarn and Zach Adams is an example of an extremely complex and intricate game. It allows the player to explore a procedurally generated world with generated characters, and the player can peek into the head of every character to read about their thought process, motives, and background stories. It’s just like how it is in real life (I mean… not literally but you know). It generates this huge web of information that takes a long time for the player to absorb and become comfortable with, but it creates this world with emotional depth — the player can get attach to their characters deeply. Also SimCity. Players can make decisions and manipulate the world, but there’s no explicit goal. It’s more about the experience in the simulation.

In the end, I’d like to make some statements:

There exists an inexhaustible stream of ideas that are simple + fun.
Complexity is not a necessity for fun.

My goal as a game designer is to make simple and fun games! :)