Does poker need new rules?
Barry Carter looks at whether the new game HoldemX is a sign that we need to change the rules of poker to make it more exciting.
This month the Alpha version HoldemX was unveiled. This new online take on Texas Hold'em plays exactly the same as the regular game, with the addition of xCards. Each player is given seperate xCards which change the game dynamic, for example they can redeal the flop, add an extra street or pair one of your hole cards.
More xCards will be added to the game, which is seemingly the biggest bridge between poker and 'collectible card games' like the very popular Magic: The Gathering and Hearthstone. The aim, clearly, is to not just give regular poker a shot in the arm, but to also attract gamers and MTG fans to poker.
Last year was the year where poker became a video game, and now HoldemX appears to be in prime position to capitalise on that. But does poker really need to change its format in order to grow?
Novelty and familiarity
I personally got a chance to play HoldemX a few months ago in the Beta version and I must say I did really enjoy it. It reminded me of the first time I played formats like PLO or Triple Draw. The fundamentals remained the same meaning I was able to pick it up right away, but the differences gave it a freshness and novelty that kept me very interested.
It will be interesting to see if the presence of the xCards will prove to be something that increases the skill edge or decreases it, but in the early going at least it felt like they provided much more gamble in the game than regular Hold'em. This is not a bad thing. If you want to attract recreational players, this is the way to do that.
This balance of novelty and familiarity might also be precisely what holds HoldemX back, for new players anyway. As enjoyable as it was, I was very mindful of the fact that I was enjoying it because it was a novel reboot of the traditional poker game I already love. Much in the way that a movie sequel is only enjoyable if you have seen the original, it felt like this game might have been a bit too complex for a brand new player.
The value of simplicity
This is why I think that the original poker, which takes a minute to learn and a lifetime to master, will probably always be the gateway game for most new players. Poker conforms to the popular video game theory of Bushnell's Law, that “All the best games are easy to learn and difficult to master. They should reward the first quarter and the hundredth”.
The simplicity of poker, which leads to everyone thinking they have it mastered early, is precisely what keeps new players at the tables. We might be throwing the baby out with the bathwater if we forget this.
However, to completely dismiss a game like this because of its complexity does a disservice to games like Hearthstone and Magic: The Gathering, both of which are initially more complex than poker and both of which have enjoyed popularity without using poker as a jumping off point. Perhaps more importantly, both of these games have seen thousands of players part with their own money just to play them, with no promise of financial compensation for winning. It is exactly these sorts of players we want in the game.
My gut tells me that HoldemX is going to appeal more to experienced poker players than it will video gamers looking for the new Hearthstone, which in itself is no bad thing. However, few people would have predicted how fluidly poker and video games merged together in 2015 and that shows no sign of stopping in 2016. We have also seen Open Face Chinese Poker become very popular in the last couple of years. Whether it's HoldemX or something else, maybe Texas Hold'em is ready for a makeover.
Does poker need new rules to make it more fun? Let us know your views in the comments.
