So, I think one way that a historical game can succeed both as a game and as an authentic account of history is by focusing on the precariousness of historical events.
Quotes about history
The spirit of my suggestion is that no historical events are off-limits, but good historical games are those designed to explore the contingency of history, which may be achieved by focusing on aspects of history that are no less interesting than the battles. I would like to think that it is possible to design good games that focus on the parts of history that we would rather forget, and by playing such games, come to a deeper appreciation of that history.
A work of history can only tell about the events it depicts; a wargame can show the events, and give insight into why the commanders did as they did, and provide the player a gut understanding of the forces at play and the factors that influenced the outcome.
Games that focus on [the precariousness of historical events] have a ready answer to the issue of replay-value: players should want to replay the game multiple times to appreciate the subtlety of the contingent factors that lead to some historical event. And they can offer genuine engagement with the history. One can come to a deeper appreciation of the details of historical events by experiencing what happens when those events are slightly altered.
One can make the case that wargame sales are better than ever, if one simply changes the definition of a wargame. […] But that’s like saying that historical fiction should be reflagged as history books because few people will buy and read real history books anymore. No, the problem is that historical wargames were always a small market because they emphasized information and analysis at the expense of entertainment.
