I'm trying to think if all my girl friends have less tolerance for being frustrated by games or not; I know that the guys will throw their controllers (or other objects) across the room if they get frustrated with a game, but they'll usually come back to it unless the game is truly awful.
I was going to write some reply and read this new reply of yours.... it fits what I was going to write. From about 4PM to midnight, I just played a game of Risk 2210 with 2 other guys and a woman. The woman is good at it and wins most of her games, she loves it. Risk 2210 is NOT a light and easy to master game (card types, energy, turns, commanders, moon... see wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_2210). It's kinda Risk... 100 times deeper in strategic implications and depth. But she tried to play a very SIMPLE game (www.ogame.org) which only has:
- industry iwht its producing buildings (3 ressources)
- energy buildings to furnish buildings
- army (defense + fleets)
But it's all in numbers, with precise details for each type of building with costs, plating, shields, etc. But nothing compared to Risk 2210 strategic depth (produce -> stock -> attack). Her reaction? It's a mess to manage, I didn't understood and got it; I dumped it fast. Well... Risk 2210 is aloooot harder, but it's not a mess of management. It's straight forward, just as we could compare Civilization franchise and Europa Universalis both looking at history. Great lines from which to push DEEP strategy, or lots of shallow details (and strat of course). I resume: one has a light form and lots of content, and the other has a heavy form and also lots of content. Weird... but this heavy form looks like mechanics, cpu hardware, programmation details, etc.
Wanna hear wost? This woman, playing board games once in a while, find Civilization too much of a hassle. And from what I saw, it's not because she dislikes the strategy style or is bad at it! She's immersed in those board games, excels at it, is like strategy lovers.