It shouldn't be a matter of redesigning every single aspect of the game from scratch. Most, if not all, of the components should be reusuable in a co-op version. It should just need some new rules and maybe new cards.
Thats the point. It's not a matter of "just some new rules". Redesigning just isnt as simple as that. It's a matter of "entriely new rules and entirely new cards.". The components that have nothing to do with rules are of course reusable. It would be an entirely new game that uses the same bits and shares the same background, that's it. End of story.
A tweak here and there to make it a co-op would just stink. To repeat myself, it would be a disservice to either design esthetic for reasons already stated.
You dont have to agree with it, but you make it sound so simple to basically make an entirely new game so easy, when that expectation simply and factually is not.
Also, I hardly see what's wrong about consumers voicing their opinion about what they want game companies to produce. If you want every game to be adversarial, feel free to go to every forum and say so. It won't bother me in the slightest.
Nothing wrong at all with people mewling for co-ops everytime a new game is made. I never attempted to say that they shouldnt. I am just pointing out the flaws in the logic in their pleas.
It is also incomprehensible to me why you would not purchase the game if it has co-op *as well as* adversarial modes. If it has the method of play you enjoy, why care if it comes with an additional method?
Its okay if you dont comprehend it. The reasons for why I have already stated. No need for more redundancy when simple reading comprehension will suffice.