Like Arkham horror. Will we ever see more?
More games for one player
At some point in the past I would've said you're smoking crack; wanting more solitaire games. Lately, however, I've found myself playing solo versions of games, or trying to create solo variants as my group and I lack the time to get a gaming night in. I just found the solo rules for Battlestar Galactica and can't wait to give it a try. I don't know if I really want more solo games, but I do appreciate their designers taking time to test/balance/implement solo rules for their games.
I agree with Warwhore: while solo games can be nice (Ghost Stories really rocks), I would prefer solo rules for established two- or multiplayer games.
But judging from recent FFG announcements, the trend seems to be going the other way, towards games requiring three players or more. that's too bad. I can sometimes manage one other player but two or more? Very rarely these days, and when I do get a group over, they want to play something fast, simple and interactive like (shudder) Apples to Apples.
David Spangler said:
I agree with Warwhore: while solo games can be nice (Ghost Stories really rocks), I would prefer solo rules for established two- or multiplayer games.
But judging from recent FFG announcements, the trend seems to be going the other way, towards games requiring three players or more. that's too bad. I can sometimes manage one other player but two or more? Very rarely these days, and when I do get a group over, they want to play something fast, simple and interactive like (shudder) Apples to Apples.
This is something I've noticed across the board. People want games you can finish in 30-1hr time, not 2-6hrs and require a small army to play. That is one of the reasons why Descent's RTL expansion was so hugely accepted by that games population.
Yes, its awesome when it does happen, but usually the game ends before the end is actually established. Going back and setting up solo rules for Descent, as an example, would at least give the option of playing a quick game instead of wasting time in front of the PC or TV. Looks at video games for a good point of view on the topic, people want multiple player games, yet the majority of those game are multiplayer online only, single player otherwise.
Challenge I could see though is making the battle difficult enough for a player, yet random so play can't get used to the 'dance'. Warhammer quest way back in the day was really good with this, as everything had a random table for mobs, which heroes they would attack, treasure that would drop, rooms located, ect. Unfortunately, that type of gameplay is not easily found anymore and would require almost an expansion to a game alone in order to make some systems work effectively.
golembane said:
Going back and setting up solo rules for Descent, as an example, would at least give the option of playing a quick game instead of wasting time in front of the PC or TV. ...... Unfortunately, that type of gameplay is not easily found anymore and would require almost an expansion to a game alone in order to make some systems work effectively.
Still, solo Descent or RTL would be a real boon and a wonderful game to play. Nice suggestion!
Saddly, I get the same experience. Two player games I get to play once in a while. Three or more, once every two years. 
David Spangler said:
I agree with Warwhore: while solo games can be nice (Ghost Stories really rocks), I would prefer solo rules for established two- or multiplayer games.
But judging from recent FFG announcements, the trend seems to be going the other way, towards games requiring three players or more. that's too bad. I can sometimes manage one other player but two or more? Very rarely these days, and when I do get a group over, they want to play something fast, simple and interactive like (shudder) Apples to Apples.
more interesting would be the possibility of a solo Strategy game, since solo adventure games are easy to come by (mostly via modifications of already established adventure games previously mentioned). I would be very much interested in a strategy game where players' real challenge is the game itself, rather then player competition. Kingsburg seems to come to mind, but i'm aiming for something challenging enough for a single player to be able to enjoy ti when attempting to defeat the board.
I assume something in the likes of a "defense" game (much like the popular tower defence games, only in a board-game version. Rather nifty idea, now that it comes to my mind - especially in potential multyplayer.).