This is a very curious claim.
If something is balanced - or "in the balance" - then the outcome is uncertain.
If something is out of balance - or "imbalanced" - then the outcome is to some degree predetermined.
How can the former be less exciting than the latter?
Ooh, ooh, I've got this one!
Easy -- for some reason the imbalance isn't exploited, and thus isn't actually felt. Or, they like the imbalance being exploited.
It's more exciting in part,
because you might screw it up. (That's sort of like the ancient Chinese curse, "May you live in interesting times," but not everyone appreciates why that is a curse, either.)
Say some poor guy is walking a tightrope with a balance pole. It's a perfectly balanced pole. He holds it in the middle and walks. It's all reduced down to doing things properly. Do that, and walk across easy. For me, that's enough excitement.
Then you pull out an imbalanced pole, but one that you can get used to. It's got an extra weight on one end. You compensate by holding the pole nearer that weight. Might appear to be a little more exciting, but it boils down to the same thing--hold the pole at the right (balanced) spot, and it's all down to technique.
Then you get a poll with some kind of magical weight change that can vary at any time. It's up to the rope walker to adjust, as they weight changes, on the fly. What more could you ask for in excitement, without doing this walk over flaming alligators while also answering random calls from telemarketers?
For me again, I don't need that level of excitement. I already know from real life that if you put enough variables in the equation, you eventually allow for some "interesting" screw ups. However, I rapidly find these "interesting" screw ups rather blaise in a game about heroic characters fighting monsters. It's the same kind of divide where one person finds calculating and manipulating
fireball volume expansion "smart" or "clever" where another person finds it "cute" or "rule lawyering."