Be it TTRPGs, board games or video games, a group of four players is the standard size.
DnD and adjacent systems balance their challenges around a party of four. Most boardgames come with four colours for players to choose from. Most video game consoles only can connect four controllers and most video games like Smash Bros and Mario Kart only have four slots? Why is that?
In: Other
For board games:
Game boards are historically square, tables are square, people sit around the games normally in a square, the average number of people sitting at a table is already close to 4, so 4 is just the least disrupting number in average.
The more people are required to participate in an activity, the least likely it is to gather the people necessary, so balancing a game for the “minimum viable player count” makes sense (most game allow for counts higher than 4, but are balanced for 4 players as you explained).
Why not 2? That “minimum number” also comes from the fact that board games are fundamentally a social activity (while there are plenty of very good and very popular 2 player games, they are somewhat of a different beast in terms of social dynamic).
Why not 3? I’d say in general symmetrical games are just easier to design and balance, in great part due to the fact that player interactions are normally 1 on 1, that’s also the reason why “team up” mechanics are easier to implement with a symmetrical player count.
Most board games are turn based (so are TTRPGS), so managing idle times is easier with 4 players.
Games that are essentially “multiplayer solitaire” scale great in terms of player count, but they are balanced for the expected average, in other words, it’s the norm because it’s common.
There is probably others that I’m missing but the comment is already long.
Regarding videogames I disagree about 4 being the standard, 2 players have always been and still remain a more popular count than 4 for couch multiplayer, while higher counts are much more common than 4 in online multiplayer.
Latest Answers