←back to thread

129 points abstractbg | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.431s | source
Show context
Paracompact ◴[] No.45676908[source]
As a longtime chess and go player, I was just doing some research the other day into what modern abstracts are out there. I was disappointed by how dry I came up.

Even if you expand the search criteria to include video games, there just aren't many deeply strategic discrete-time games that weren't invented centuries ago and have players online at any given time. Here I exclude games that are perpetually changing and/or have strategies locked behind progression systems and paywalls, such as TCGs and virtual deck builders. The very few exceptions I found were niche Discord communities around games like Tak, Hex, or Advanced Wars.

When did we as a society lose the appreciation for these things? I get why including a component of dexterity in strategic video games (e.g. RTS) is to take full advantage of the medium, but all this in conjunction means we are very likely never to see another deeply studied cerebral game like go, chess, shogi, mahjong, etc. arise ever again.

replies(10): >>45677077 #>>45677184 #>>45677279 #>>45677935 #>>45678176 #>>45678288 #>>45678431 #>>45680296 #>>45680329 #>>45681382 #
1. BrenBarn ◴[] No.45678288[source]
I think "have players online at any given time" is the tough part there, but it's also the tough part for many non-abstract games. If you look around on Board Game Arena you can see a number of abstract games available, but with many you'll struggle to find any other players.

There are some cool abstract games out there, but they're not super popular. Abalone was mentioned in another comment here. Octi is another cool one. Some like Azul or Patchwork have a light theme but it doesn't really affect the rules, mostly just an excuse for the piece design, which I think puts them in a similar category to chess.

I'm not sure I'd say we won't get another deeply studied game. I mean, if we're comparing to chess and go, it will take hundreds of years to really know if any modern game has that staying power, let alone remains interesting to analyze. But I do wonder if we'll ever get a game that's both deep and popular.

The popularity of RPGs, TCGs, and expansion-based games suggests to me that a lot of people really like feeling a sense of immersion into a "world" that's constantly revealing new "content", rather than discovering new variety within an existing system. Maybe this is just a stereotype, but I also feel like there's a synergy this and a similar vibe prominent in stuff like fanfic, where people like to engage in this sort of generative building on some core ideas. The "pure" or "cerebral" gamer who is really interested in the ramifications of a fixed ruleset is somewhat more rare. Also there are so many games out there now that even cerebral gamers may be tempted to explore new ones rather than digging deep into familiar ones.

This is just to say that maybe some existing abstract games are actually deep, but in order to know that, we'd need people to take the time to analyze them and explore them. Maybe time will tell.

replies(1): >>45679897 #
2. Paracompact ◴[] No.45679897[source]
Yeah, Azul stands out as a great exception to my rant. I get similar feelings playing it as I do playing riichi mahjong (a fabulously deep emergent blend of luck, planning, and player psychology). It's also managed a decent popularity not just as a quasi-abstract but as a board game, period.

There is another aspect to the thing I didn't mention but you did: It may be that the sheer amount of interest in board and video games at large is more to blame for the lack of deep abstracts than is the inherent lack of appreciation for them. In sum total, there are probably games out there currently that could be mechanically fit as a successor to chess or go, but with so many competing games out there (both cerebral and otherwise), even the cerebral gamer is unlikely to pursue them singlemindedly.