As someone who stopped playing the TCG because it was becoming increasingly obvious that I was no longer the target audience (being older than 12), I think that yes, the TCG has become increasingly simple, to the point where I don't see how it's even possible to deny it. Look at any, and I mean any, fully-evolved e-card, and compare it to any fully evolved BW-on card and tell me there is not a noticeable difference in complexity. And no, I cannot imagine deckbuilding has become more complex when the number of possible interactions has gone down significantly. If most attacks do simple numerical damage with little to no extra effects, having more possible synergies seems essentially impossible. If Vir/Gen is the height of competitive complexity, I don't want to know what the bottom is like.
I'm not here to discuss the reality of a decrease in complexity, though, I'm here to discuss the implications. Simplicity is obviously used to attract a younger audience. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that market research during Platinum showed that less and less kids were buying boosters. This doesn't surprise me, the average age of Pokémon players increases as the old-skool kids get older (but keep on playing), but the sales don't seem to be rising as much. Instead of accepting this and focussing on both younger players and the older segment they have apparently decided to go all-in on the younger players (8 to 14, roughly). This seems reasonable, but I don't like it one bit. I'm going to try to explain why based on the 3 psychographic profiles used to design Magic the Gathering cards.
Here's a full article (a very interesting read), but to summarise:
Timmy plays the game for fun, they tend to like big creatures, flashy cards, cool design, etc. Most younger players are Timmies. Also, the reason Pokémon-EX exist is almost solely to please Timmy.
Johnny plays the game to be creative. They like to build creative decks, do weird stuff, etc. If Johnny wins one game in 20, but in a very unique and surprising way, they're happy.
Spike wants to win. That's it. Spike doesn't care if it's "lame", if a card is "broken", Spike will copy complete decklists off of the internet if that will make them win.
What the TCG has been doing by reducing simplicity is focus almost solely on the Timmy players. While Spike is still allowed to win, it's become easier and easier. Because so few cards differ in anything but power level, it's not hard to decide which the best cards are and play them. When things like Mewtwo EX come along — broken things which because of fewer options in terms of effects have no real counters — Spike will play those. But it's easy, Spike doesn't have to study the metagame much, Spike doesn't have to optimise their deck. Spike just has to build the best deck and win. They'll be happy (to the extent Spike can be happy), but the game won't keep them occupied. Johnny (full disclosure: I'm a total Johnny) gets hit the hardest. Because few, if any, cards have any interesting effects, it's very hard to make a unique deck. Durant seemed kind of fun, and there's definitely a few possible alternative strategies, but nothing like back in the day. When I didn't play a rogue deck, I usually played a very weird fringe deck, one of which was based on the Regigigas lvX in the article. The point of the deck was to get Energy in the discard (there were some Pokémon which did this, as well as a few supporters, most notably Felicity's Drawing). This would allow you to hit for 100 on turn 2 using his Poké-Power pretty consistenly. Then the point was to play lots of basics with come-into-play effects (Most notably of course Uxie), use the effect and the sacrifice them to keep Regigigas alive (its power healed for 8, and it was almost impossible to kill it in 1 hit for every Pokémon but Machamp). One of the 2 decent Regigigas you could level up from (both were decent, though), allowed you to remove all Special Conditions from Regigigas if you attached an Energy to it, so that protected you from Special Conditions.
Against Machamp I used Unown G, which could be searched for with my basic Pokémon searchers (also used to fetch both the Pokémon to discard energy with and the Pokémon to sacrifice, as well as Regigigas, obiously) and which could be attached to Regigigas to prevent all effects, excluding damage, essentially nullifying Machamp's first attack. The deck had a wide verity of Pokémon, a lot of weird interacting parts, and a trainer pool which was essentially unique for that deck. This wasn't even close to the most complicated deck I've played, though, that would be Mynx (look it up). When I see newer cards, I don't feel exited one bit. The only recent card I remember being intrigued by was Gothitelle FFI, and only because of possible interactions with cards in formats long past. The recent TCG is not for Johnny.
So that leaves Timmy. Timmy has it all, they have super flashy big cards with massive numbers. And they're basic! Timmy can add a bunch to their deck without having to go through the trouble of trying to be consistent! Timmy is happy, I'm sure of it. But Timmy doesn't always stay Timmy. I've watched many a Timmy grow into Spikes, I've watched myself become more and more of a Johnny. These guys don't stick with Pokémon, and if they ever left they sure aren't coming back. That means the TCG has to rely mostly on a constantly renewing market, and no market is as fickly as children's entertainment. And the worst thing is, I don't think they have to. I was a mostly a Timmy-kid during Base Set (though not as Charizard-loving as most, and I did have Johnny tendencies even back then), when the cards were about as simple as they are now, but I think growing up with the Neo sets, the e-series, the EX series, etc. has thought me a lot about strategic thinking, analysing problems, finding connections, and loads of other skills I think the current TCG doesn't imbue anymore. I didn't mind that the cards were complicated, it motivated me. Most kids ignore the more complicated cards, or at least ignore the interactions, but I feel that those who do want to get more out of the game, those who do want to learn, are no longer given that opportunity. Dumbing down the game helps no-one, except for maybe Nintendo's finances.
I also think there are different kinds of complexity. I'm not advocating Yu-Gi-Oh-levels of text on cards, it's a game not an interactive rulebook. But you can have complex interactions without having complex cards. Magic, for example, is known for being a pretty complex game, with lots of weird combos and strategies, and it doesn't even have half as much text on the average card as Yu-Gi-Oh. On the other hands, Yu-Gi-Oh always struck me as a rather simplistic game, where raw power outshines synergy, and it has lots of text. Pokémon has the possibility of being complex without being wordy. It's in my opinion the best TCG ever designed, because it allows for so much consistency and so many interesting interactions and though choices, but the current TCG doesn't seem to embrace this. And yes, I do think that's a problem.
