by DaviddesJ
skipsizemore wrote:
It isn't hard to pointlessly complexify a game like Go.
Of course. For example, you could require each player to solve a quadratic equation before taking each turn. That would be pointless complexification. What's hard is to design an appealing game with more complex rules than go. We have many examples of such, though.
You assert that the only reason someone could prefer some more complex game to Go is because the complexity improves the game for them in some other attribute than complexity. But just asserting that doesn't make it true.
You can combine Go with Chess, and that's more complex than Go, but the reasons I don't like that game more isn't because I prefer simpler games over more complex ones. It's because I don't like the Chess aspect and I don't like the way the games combine. Sure, it might be closer to my desired level of complexity, but you've made it less attractive to me in other ways.