Man, that looks like a LOT of cards for a single game... Give me a poker deck, anytime...
I play a game with some friends called Thunderstone, and it has over 400 cards. Splink! looks manageable
There are popular games in parts of Europe where even the 52 cards of a standard deck are too much - they only use 40 of them, or in some cases as few as 32!
In any game, you want there to be a certain amount of variety and complexity of play - but only to a point. Beyond that point, the game's management becomes more like work, less like play. The more components, in both number and variety, that a game has, the more complex it becomes, and past that too-much-complexity point, the number of players willing to learn it and play it diminishes with the increase of components. Fewer people play Go than Checkers, fewer play Mah-Jong than Poker, fewer play Poker than Go Fish (among children, because they have a lower complexity ceiling), fewer play Chess than Backgammon and fewer play Warhammer 40,000 than Chess (financial investment notwithstanding, though cost of a game and the number of people who can afford it is another factor in the number of people playing it) - the simpler games that still provide enough variety of play without excessive complexity are usually the more popular ones. It's also why nearly every attempt to increase the size of a standard deck of playing cards has met resistance from the market in general and has a very limited audience willing to play with the expanded version.
(Read 1367 times)
