Page 1 of 3
Abstract Games - The Underclass
Posted: 27 November 2025, 05:27
by MarkSteere
It's astounding that the beta announcement of Yinsh only received 4 responses in the past 4 months. This game is HUGE in the abstract games community, as are all Kris Burm games.
Personally I'm not a fan of any Kris Burm games. They're outside the realm of a much smaller class - abstracts which are based on an ultra simple mechanism, employ ultra simple equipment, and are naturally finite, decisive, scalable, etc. This abstract subclass wears a cloak of invisibility at BGA.
I wish BGA would make some effort to lift abstracts from the shadows. For some of us, it's not about The Reign Of Burger King, Special Whopper Edition. The two player abstract is the highest form of a game.
Re: Abstract Games - The Underclass
Posted: 27 November 2025, 07:47
by Meeplelowda
MarkSteere wrote: ↑27 November 2025, 05:27
The two player abstract is the highest form of a game.
You had me up until this point. This kind of snobbishness in the hobby turns people off. Here's a wild concept: not everyone likes the same kinds of games as you do.
And I say this as someone whose second most played game on BGA is an abstract game and who regularly hosts a tournament for said game.
Re: Abstract Games - The Underclass
Posted: 27 November 2025, 10:40
by MarkSteere
The abstract is arguably the highest form of a game. This is not just my "snobbish" opinion (though it is that too, lol). ChatGPT sums up the argument surprisingly well...
Argument: Why the Two-Player Abstract Could Be the Highest Form of a Game
1. Pure Competition
Two-player abstracts (chess, Go, Hex, etc.) represent pure adversarial interaction:
Zero-sum
Perfect information
No randomness
No hidden state
No diplomacy or temporary alliances
This strips the game to its essence: you versus me, with nothing to hide behind. In that sense, the game becomes a direct test of:
perception
calculation
intuition
creativity
strategic vision
Many claim that this makes the form uniquely “pure.”
2. Strategic Depth from Minimal Rules
Abstracts often have very small rulesets but massive emergent complexity.
Examples:
Go: 2 rules → more possible positions than atoms in the universe
Hex: simple placement → provably deep and rich
Checkers: tiny ruleset → computationally deep
The argument is that maximal emergent complexity from minimal input represents a peak of game design elegance, akin to elegance in mathematics or physics.
3. Perfect Information = Complete Skill Expression
In team sports or multiplayer games, victory can be distorted by:
luck
weak partners
kingmaking
alliances
politics
unbalanced roles
Two-player programs remove all that. Your win/loss is entirely due to:
your decisions
your interpretation
your foresight
To many theorists, this is the purest reflection of gameplay as art.
4. These Games Approach “Solvable Universes”
A two-player perfect-information deterministic game is a closed system. This gives it a special philosophical property:
The game is a universe with immutable laws and no chance events.
Because of that, it can be analyzed with tools from mathematics, logic, and AI. Some argue this makes abstracts uniquely “complete” or “self-contained.”
5. They Are the Only Games Where “Optimal Play” is Conceptually Meaningful
In multiplayer or random games, “optimal play” is:
undefined
context-dependent
influenced by meta-game politics
But in two-player abstracts:
you can talk about perfect play
game-theoretic value is well-defined
strategies can be mathematically compared
This makes them the only games that fully satisfy game theory’s original framework.
6. Historical and Cultural Weight
Many of the oldest and most respected games in human history are two-player abstracts:
Go
Chess
Shogi
Xiangqi
Mancala variants
Tafl games
Cultures have traditionally elevated these games as intellectual achievements. This gives weight to the idea that they represent a mature “pinnacle” of the game form.
A Concise Thesis Version
The two-player abstract can be considered the highest form of a game because it isolates pure strategic interaction within a closed, deterministic system, maximizing the expression of human skill while minimizing external noise or distortions.
Re: Abstract Games - The Underclass
Posted: 27 November 2025, 11:50
by nik592
MarkSteere wrote: ↑27 November 2025, 05:27
For some of us, it's not about The Reign Of Burger King, Special Whopper Edition.
And for some of us, it's not about denigrating the choices of others as lesser just because they don't enjoy those things. The nice thing about BGA is it caters for many tastes and interests.
Most games that are still in beta aren't heavily promoted because they are still being worked on (hence, beta). Sometimes if they're in beta for a while it's just because the number of games they can "announce" to move from beta to full release are limited (however, I doubt that's the case for YINSH, given you're talking about the beta announcement). There are a number of games I enjoy that are still awaiting their full release too.
DVONN was promoted on the front page when it went to a full release, YINSH likely will too. Like basically all other games on this site. I doubt people who want to play it can't find it. In my experience, people who like abstracts are often in something of a minority, and also often annoyed by that. People like what they like. Telling them their choices are lesser isn't usually a good way to get them interested in what you're interested in.
Re: Abstract Games - The Underclass
Posted: 27 November 2025, 12:14
by MarkSteere
It's not so much that, "not everyone likes the same kind of games I do." It's more like, "almost nobody here likes the same kind of games I do." But maybe they would if there was some kind of general promotion of abstracts, beyond announcing an indie abstract no one ever heard of.
I know games are not promoted in beta. I'm just trying to highlight the extreme contrast in interest levels. Twilight Imperium has hundreds of forum responses in beta.
It's just my opinion that abstracts warrant a little bigger piece of the pie than the molecular crumb they currently have.
Re: Abstract Games - The Underclass
Posted: 27 November 2025, 13:04
by RicardoRix
What exactly is being discussed here? Why abstract games don't get a lot of forum posts...?
In general there is not a whole lot of discussion about most things. Cherry picking TI4 is not valid.
I'm not sure why you are expecting much more than 'yay - great game' in an abstract game. And yet TI4 is like a world within worlds with full of potential discussion.
My guess is that there are very active abstract games discussions going on elsewhere, so why would it need to be brought to BGA.
The BGA site gives roughly the same love to all games except the new announcement part. There has been abstract games in the news items in the past.
IIRC Battle of Lits had a good discussion going by andy, and I am guessing that is because that game can only really be played here. Find the right mood and the right partners and you might start a fire.
So it's not a question of BGA's involvement, it's just is how it is. You can't make people dance.
There is no distinction between abstracts and themed games for me here, they are all just games, and I either like them or not. Turns out, I don't like TI4 as much as I though I would, but I am really enjoying homeworlds.
I am about to unleash some new game options for Evo. To me they are really cool. My bet is 50/50 as to whether it gets a forum post at all.
Re: Abstract Games - The Underclass
Posted: 27 November 2025, 13:29
by nik592
MarkSteere wrote: ↑27 November 2025, 12:14
Twilight Imperium has hundreds of forum responses in beta.
Sure, but I don't think that's down to any particular promotion of TI4 by BGA. I know it has been mentioned here and there, but I wouldn't call that heavy promotion. TI4 has a pretty decent community around it outside of BGA too. Again, people like what they like. And as Ricardo mentions, there's probably a lot more to discuss in a heavily thematic game.
MarkSteere wrote: ↑27 November 2025, 12:14
But maybe they would if there was some kind of general promotion of abstracts, beyond announcing an indie abstract no one ever heard of.
I'm not sure if you're referring to DVONN or YINSH. I've heard of both. Among others. I know they're abstracts, I know I generally don't enjoy abstracts. I'm not necessarily refusing to play them, but neither am I going to seek them out when I'm spoiled for choice on other things I prefer. Maybe you should try "The Reign Of Burger King, Special Whopper Edition" (or whatever equivalent this refers to, assuming it's not TI4) and see why others like it. Maybe you'll find something unexpected too. And if you're going to tell me you have tried some of the popular games, and didn't like them, then I'd still suggest to try another one you haven't tried yet - there's probably plenty to choose from and I doubt you've played them all.
And for the record, I don't enjoy TI4 either, and am not particularly interested that it's available on BGA. But I understand why there are people excited about it on a platform like this.
Re: Abstract Games - The Underclass
Posted: 27 November 2025, 14:02
by MarkSteere
Sorry about the "Reign of Burger King" thing. That was overly negative and critical. I'm not really much of a player. Lately I only play Run Buster, Blast Radius, 420, Oust, and Herd here - all very simple games of my own design.
I never understood the rules of any more complicated games, much less how to play them decently. Catan was recommended as one of the easier games, but I didn't get it, didn't enjoy it, and gave up in short order.
Actually, the one game that piques my interest is TI4. Someday I might study the rules carefully and attempt to get into it.
Re: Abstract Games - The Underclass
Posted: 27 November 2025, 17:35
by RicardoRix
Everytime you take a step away from a abstract 2-player you are undoubtable introducing different elements and combinations that you may or may not like (luck can be a huge factor here). And that's often very personal, which is why you can get a very varied opinion about the same game from 2 different people that otherwise share common interests. We are all here after all, we all like board games. It's all getting very philosophical.
So often people blandly ask "what can you recommend" ? The answers flood in with their own personal opinions. What you really want to say at the same time is what you enjoy and why you enjoy that, now it's possible to try and relate and offer some games even if we ourselves didn't much like them.
Re: Abstract Games - The Underclass
Posted: 27 November 2025, 19:46
by Meeplelowda
MarkSteere wrote: ↑27 November 2025, 10:40
ChatGPT sums up the argument surprisingly well...
I'd love to see the prompt you used for this, because it looks like you just asked a notorious fount of sycophancy to confirm your argument rather than give a balanced perspective. Here is what you get if you ask: Objectively analyze the pros and cons of the statement that "two player abstract games are the highest form of games."
Below is a neutral, structured, intellectually honest analysis of the statement:
**“Two-player abstract games are the highest form of games.”**
---
# **Pros**
### **1. Pure Strategic Depth**
Two-player abstract games (like chess, go, shogi, checkers, hex) often remove randomness, hidden information, and thematic elements.
This produces:
* **Maximal emphasis on decision quality**
* **Transparent cause-and-effect**
* **High skill ceilings**
* **Rich positional theory and emergent complexity**
Supporters argue that this “purity” makes them the pinnacle of strategic thought.
---
### **2. Perfect Information → Perfect Competition**
With both players seeing the entire state at all times:
* There are no luck-based excuses.
* Outcomes reflect preparation and skill.
* Competitive fairness is extremely high.
This makes them appealing for tournaments, ranking systems, and AI research.
---
### **3. Elegance and Universality**
Good abstract games tend to be:
* **Rule-light but depth-heavy**
* **Theme-independent**, thus culturally universal
* Mathematically analyzable
This elegance often appeals to philosophers, mathematicians, and game theorists who view them as the “purest” distillation of game design.
---
### **4. Ideal Testbeds for AI and Theory**
Abstract games are widely used in:
* AI research (Chess → Go → Hex)
* Combinatorial game theory
* Decision-making and search algorithms
Their clarity and structure give them scientific prestige.
---
# **Cons**
### **1. “Highest form” is inherently subjective**
Different players value different qualities:
* Narrative
* Social interaction
* Sensory immersion
* Creativity
* Exploration
* Multiplayer dynamics
Claiming primacy of one subset of games imposes one aesthetic standard on a vast, diverse medium.
---
### **2. They often lack emotional, thematic, or experiential richness**
Abstract games rarely provide:
* Storytelling
* Role-play
* World-building
* Surprise or drama
* Character expression
For many people, these elements define the *height* of what games can be.
---
### **3. Limited types of fun**
According to common frameworks (e.g., Bartle, Schell, LeBlanc):
Two-player abstract games mainly satisfy:
* **Challenge**
* **Mastery**
* **Competition**
They typically don’t offer:
* **Discovery**
* **Social collaboration**
* **Aesthetic delight**
* **Power fantasy**
* **Chaos and unpredictability**
* **Sandbox creativity**
Games are a multidimensional medium; abstract strategy is only one dimension.
---
### **4. Exclusionary framing**
Declaring them the “highest form” can imply:
* Games with luck = lower
* Games with theme = less meaningful
* Multiplayer = not as serious
* Casual or party games = inferior
This can alienate whole communities and downplay accomplishments across genres (e.g., narrative design, open-world engineering, cooperative gameplay innovation).
---
### **5. Not the most widely loved or played**
Popularity metrics consistently show:
* Thematic games outperform abstract strategy in mainstream appeal.
* Cooperative and multiplayer games dominate digital play.
* Narrative-driven games often win awards for impact and artistry.
If “highest form” implies cultural importance, abstract games don’t hold that top spot.
---
# **Conclusion**
The statement **can be defended** if “highest form” is defined as:
> *the purest, most intellectually demanding, least luck-dependent structure for competitive decision-making.*
But it becomes **indefensible** if “highest form” is meant to apply to games as a holistic cultural, emotional, social, or artistic medium.
**Abstract games excel at distilled, perfect-information strategy.
They do *not* encompass the full expressive range of what games can achieve.**