Emergent vs Predefined gameplay

Reading up on emergent behaviour and "encoding" into rules explicit results has, bascially, got me thinking.

In a game design, predesigned out comes are reasonably easy to predict (in Monopoly, my favoured starting point, everyone wants to build houses and hotels as the reward is disproportionate to the cost.) Emergent behaviours are not only difficult, but possibly impossible to predict.


From the Wiki

"Emergent behavior is also important in games and game design. For example, the game of poker, especially in no limit forms without a rigid betting structure, is largely driven by emergent behavior. For example, no rule requires that any player should fold, but usually many players do. Because the game is driven by emergent behavior, play at one poker table might be radically different from that at another, while the rules of the game are exactly the same. Variations of games that develop are examples of emergent metaplay, the predominant catalyst of the evolution of new games."

The emergent behaviour in Poker is the Folding/Raising - and where the skill is.

This seems to suggest that the best system for Emergent Behaviour is one where the system is simple in application.

And if RPG's are defined as emergent behaviour (the roleplay is) then we really need to look at what encourages emergent play...