I guess i will have not only have TIME as a factor limiting size and depth of my games, but also my ability to make tutorials for them.
Like, if one can't realistically make a needed shallow tutorial, then reduce the scope even if you can go for cooler things.
I kind of wish for some cool tutorial tech which can introduce mathematically simple but counterintuitive things easily and not as a separate tutorial but like fused with the game itself.
At the same time concepts i usually tackle (even if simple in nature) prevent me from assuming that an average Joe will easily come along without a longish journey. That would make me a mega-accomplished pedagogue if i could do that.
And when you limit yourself to things you can reliably tell and transmit to others, that's a bit different from when you just play yourself with stuff you consider fun (even when it is not really important and can be considered junk).
In other words, i currently have a "wrong" goal for my games - incorporate some cool (for me) stuff and be interesting first of all for me while letting others to play with it as well as a side-effect, instead of considering a game as a communication tool with a "purpose" of communication, i.e. sth _useless_ if not communicating properly.
Or maybe i just need to have two separate types of games, like internal and external APIs - games i want to play myself and games i made to communicate with others.