I don't remember which one is better off the top of my head. but this cool video was circulating the forums for a while.
They're both equally important, focusing too much on one over the other is just a pointless waste of time.
The fun in complexity is depth. You really don't want much complexity if you can avoid it, but it is proportional to depth.
The video nailed it. One of the big problems with making tons of UI tools is that it places a heavy burden on the player up front.
depth. complexity can be good but only if it is fun when it relates to game. is the game fun to play is a good question. is it too complex for me to manage playing and still be enjoying myself? depth on the other hand is always good, if it doesn't break the game or make it less enjoyable.
I don't think one is better than the other. Instead, achieving the perfect balance between the two is the goal of a game – particularly a RTS.
Look at the game nidhogg ... pretty simple (or simplistic?) On the ammount of stuff you can do (complexity) but yet a lot of possibilities on what exactly you can do with that stuff ... (depth) Hope i got that one right ....
That is not how it works. Complexity is bad. But complexity essentially serves as the currency needed to purchase depth. Clever game design attempts to create the highest possible amount of depth using the lowest possible amount of complexity.
