>>718380306 (OP)
This chart is too reductive because game complexity varies wildly by genre and you can't meaningfully average it either. You also have a bunch of problematic genres like MOBA which is essentially just competitive RTS lite and it's one of the most played genres in existence. MOBAs can be even argued to be more complex than RTS games because the metagame is far more diverse so RTS is more complex by going off arbitrarily chosen elements like how much you need to split your focus. MOBAs wouldn't require you to focus on as many things at once but you need to anticipate more variation in e.g. hero sets.
Survival games? The most normie genre to exist with games that regularly top the charts and are or at least used to be the prime FOMO genre?
Why have side-view action separate from platformers? Mega Man has platforming and shooting which is it? Action because it has shooting (based on images for fps and tps)? Ok what about the games with melee combat like Hollow Knight or MM Zero? Does it have to be combat focus? Kirby is combat oriented and yet classified as a platformer. Retarded distinction.
Either way, adding the formula for normal distribution on your graph is such an embarrassingly midwit thing to do. We all went to high school and are familiar with the basic formula that is standardized and doesn't need to spelled out. Having just two thresholds of 1 sigma and 2 sigma is weird, you have so much free space but all you did is separate it into a binary too simple/complex and not too simple/complex on each side.
Also a very important thing is that assuming this distribution would be normal based on vidya industry market trends is extremely bold and extremely wrong, very few people pick games by genre alone and quality is wholly unrelated to the genre anyway.
>hurr durr he means XYZ by "quality" and "popularity" which he explains on his shitty website
Yeah well it's not written anywhere on this huge ass chart so you assume the face value meaning.
