There’s an interesting theme going around again on the blue bird about… I don’t know… methods of game design and production to entice non historical gamers to historical games.
I fail to see the complication of plastering something with historical theme visuals and call it a historical game.
Grab any game about farming, construction, civil works, city management, anything non warfare like, and any associated activities, dress it as a classical Greek or Roman visuals and other historical periods and there you go, an historical game.
Players familiar with the game can immediately enter the wonderful world of historical games without spending a single minute studying rules.
… oh wait … maybe that is already a thing… Oh wait !!! It actually is !
Okay, maybe I am wrong in my perception about what the discussion was about.
Maybe, just maybe it wasn’t about “historical games” but about – “these historical games” ( shows catalogue )…
” Ah ! ” – she said, triumphantly – “Now I get it.”
“No you don’t.” – ‘Perseus’ replied with a wryly smile.
What happened was that, thanks to many in the community, the discussion moved away from titles and to media type representation of game elements and accessibility of the information.
Now that is a much more interesting theme and was wonderful to read so much varied inputs.
There’s something that true historical games require from anyone and that is a honest interest in learning what is behind the game, not just the game.
Accessibility is finding the game anywhere, everywhere.
Complexity is the willingness of the players to learn.
I read a lot of “accessibility” and “complexity” discussions but I believe it is all a marketing stunt.
Rant over.
wargamer.coffee.break 
I still don’t know what they mean by accessibility. What it sounds like, is this group of people that want all of the hard games to be watered down, so the Candy Land crowd can play them.
Not that they will, but they could, if they wanted to.
You hear the exact same discussion in the role playing game space.
Welcome Stephen.
I am unsure if that is correct. What I sense is more a shift to themes, historical based, that are not usually covered by games but that are not much sought after and end selling bad – which then is shifted towards “those grogs that refuse people” – which is a fallacy. Anyone is welcome to a table to play the game that is being played. I find the discussion really weird like everyone is talking in different languages. Like if i’m talking battle games why is someone replying to me with political decision level games is nuts. Both have their own sphere and some people don’t want to play one or the other. They just don’t. That’s it.
“I find the discussion really weird like everyone is talking in different languages. Like if i’m talking battle games why is someone replying to me with political decision level games is nuts.”
This is definitely a better way to state it.
(Pardons, I’m on day 2 of fever/sinus infection and I’m a little foggy!)
In RPG twtr it is the war game based versus story game based discussion.
Have a good rest and get better soon !