*Patreon:* www.patreon.com/RollingSolo | *Facebook Community:* facebook.com/groups/330345337770347/ | *Discord:* discord.com/invite/c5HQrcK Rollers! Today, I wanted to do something a bit different. I recently checked out a video from Rob Oren at Rob's Tabletop World around solo play and the disappointment that can come from lackluster (tacked on) solo modes and the use of the 1 player 'label'. I had to watch it front to back and I agree with him. I also have some additional thoughts I wanted to add to the mix overall. *I'm looking forward to hearing everyone's personal take/thoughts on this and also seeing your answers to the two questions I posed near the end of the video. Thanks for watching my friends and keep on rolling solo! ;D* Rob's TableTop World (Do You Feel Ripped Off When A Game Says It Has A Solo Option And It Really Doesn't?): ruclips.net/video/1mQPg91SGR4/видео.html Intro 0:00 Overview & My Thoughts on Rob's Video 0:13 Solo Gamers Get The Most Value From Their Board Games 7:23 *Two Questions for the Community!* 30:50 Rolling Solo Producers 33:21 *Media Inquiries:* rollingsologamer@gmail.com You can connect with the Rolling Solo community in multiple places! Rolling Solo Patreon: www.patreon.com/rollingsolo Rolling Solo Community Discord: discord.gg/c5HQrcK Rolling Solo Facebook Page: facebook.com/TryRollingSolo/ Rolling Solo Board Game Community | Facebook Group: facebook.com/groups/330345337770347/ Twitter: twitter.com/TryRollingSolo Instagram: instagram.com/ro11ingsolo/ BGG Guild: boardgamegeek.com/guild/2998
you're so right about multiplayer games with non-existant to tacked-on solo modes! as a mostly solo-player myself, I have been considering buying games only if they have a good solo mode from the start. I have way too many multiplayer games I haven't played for quite a while (or at all), sadly. it really difficult to get the right people at the right time for a multiplayer game you really like to play. a lot of times, it just wasn't perfect, whilst when sitting down to solo play a game, I always enjoy myself.. :D
This is the main message I believe the industry hasn’t fully understood yet. Multiplayer board games aren’t in the front seat anymore in terms of consumer purchases.
Like you, I started multiplayer first, solo second. Over the last 4-5 years however, solo play comes first and multi-player second and that has become my mantra when it comes to my board game purchases now. The solo mode NEEDS to stand on its own! I like having the multiplayer option and I certainly consider that a bonus when I spend my money on my entertainment. The multiplayer aspect has evolved into a secondary/tertiary consideration now. Life is very chaotic presently and the world has become a much more difficult place to navigate. My gaming group has long since scattered and I am so grateful that I purchased not a few great solo player games. It's nice to put on a coffee, play appropriate low volume music and lose myself in my hobby... alone! Also, I am very wary of app driven games, escpecially if it is the only solo option. I don't like technology intruding into and/or substituting for the rules in my boardgame experiences. Automa Factory is the way to go to simulate an "extra player(s)" in my solo games. Apps will eventualy be removed and/or become no longer supported. Paper, cardboard, plastic and wood do not have this issue. I really appreciate your thoughts on gaming and I thank you for sharing them.
as I do not have the physical solo mode for Raiders of the North Sea, I really enjoyed playing it solo using the app.. a breeze to handle, not interfering with my physical gaming experience at all! but I wouldn't want to play a game needing an app all the time..
This really hit home for me. I was a multiplayer-only gamer for a very long time and then my daughter was born and my gaming group meet ups became less frequent / more cluttered with “filler” games when we did get together. When I added cloud spire and 7th continent to my collection purely for solo play, I was blown away at how much more enjoyable they were compared to prior games with solo as an “after thought” and also how much more I played them. It changed the way I prioritize my board game purchases. It’s generally a better feeling to buy or kick start a new game with putting yourself first as the beneficiary as opposed to thinking “well, who is actually going to play this with me and when if I do buy this.” The only tough thing for me personally is that it takes a lot of energy/hype for me to set up/re-learn a game for a solo play after a week or so of work/parenting and all :)
This makes so much sense, thank you for sharing your thoughts! I felt exactly the same way for a long time, with the mentality that board games were to be enjoyed with others and that solo play concept in board gaming sounded so sad. Over the years, however, I've really turned around 180 degrees for all the reasons you gave, realizing that it was just impossible to get many of my board games played with friends for one reason or the other - either ppl just didn't have the time to get together or when we did, we would end up just playing one main game for the evening with so many others that just end up never being played, and of course COVID and recently having a child amplified the difficulty of gaming with others even more. I now actively pay attention to the solo-ability of a game as a purchasing condition in order to ensure that I can play it on my own, and at the very least, how easy and fun it is to play multi-handed for something like a dungeon crawl campaign (something I'm hoping to do with Gloomhaven JotL and Middara) where I would be more interested in the stories/adventures they provide. App-assisted games definitely help with this and I've really enjoyed playing many of the Unlock! escape room games solo as they are so easy to get going by yourself and I enjoy working out the puzzles quietly on my own. So yeah, 1-2 player gameplay is really my current focus (for the occasional gaming with my wife), the higher player counts are just too infrequent. It's a bit sad seeing all the expansions I have for Imperial Assault gathering dust, I hope to get that played someday solo with the app scenarios as I just have no idea when we could ever play the actual multiplayer campaign. The video game analogy is apt, I really do think there is a major paradigm shift going on now where solo play will become more and more a critical factor as there is only so much money, shelf space, and time available so ppl want to make sure they get some value and playability out of the games being purchased.
I completely agree Adam, more and more I look for games that have solo mode, if it doesn’t have it it has to be an game that I’m really interested in then I would back it. For me first the theme of the game, solo mode, the multiplayer.
I started with multiplayer but switched to solo as I got older. Found it more and more difficult to get friends together and I also got tired of trying to teach people rules to games that would rarely get played a second time for one reason or another. A game having any kind of solo mode is the first thing I look at. Without any solo the chances of me backing the game drop drastically. Theme is the second biggest. I used to love high fantasy but it seems like they are a dime a dozen. If the theme doesn't interest me than the mechanics may persuade me to back. The cost is the third major one. I have a good job and have a decent amount of disposable income but I've wasted hundreds of dollars on games that I purchased, never played, and eventually got rid of. In the last couple of years I started avoiding costly games that offer little other than tons of miniatures. A fourth one is is the campaign outside the USA. My bank is fairly tight about fraud and it becomes and annoyance to call them (to clear the payment) when the campaign ends, when I have to pay shipping later, and if I want to add anything.
You nailed this perfectly and I couldn’t agree more! I learned pretty darn quickly that the games I buy must offer solo play. I can’t count how many times early on where I bought multiplayer games, took the time to learn the game for a weekly gaming group only to find those games not being chosen to play. So yes, solo is very, very important on my buying decisions going forward. Obviously, if a game doesn’t have eye candy, it has far less chance of me considering it, but if it does, then my decisions on whether to buy a game include: 1. How is the solo replayability? (I’m less likely to buy a one-and-done type solo game.) 2. Price and whether the game will be going to retail. With crowdfunding projects, I already will have to wait 1-2yrs before I get the game. At this point in my collection, there needs to be a substantially good reason to warrant buying the game plus paying shipping costs vs just waiting for retail. For those games that won’t ever make it to retail, they really need to have the solo play through videos on the page from the get-go. If I can’t see it in play solo, I’m much less likely to hand over my moola. If they are throwing in 5 extra cards to warrant paying full MSRP with shipping, forget it. 3. How does it play with two players? If I do play multiplayer, it will most likely be with my gaming friend. So two player is my next decision (watching Rahdo videos for his viewpoint). 4. When considering multiplayer (4-5 players), how long does it play? If it takes longer than 2 hours, it won’t likely get chosen in my gaming group (if that group ever gets back up and running after Covid). Thanks for doing this video! I hope every game designer and publisher will watch it and read thru the comments to see just how many people completely agree with you! One good thing about Covid is it has made a lot more people into solo gamers!!! So please up your games and deliver a solo game that allows a gamer to experience your full game. My most recent game I just taught myself how to play and throughly enjoyed was Auztralia. That game completely nailed the solo experience! I want many more games that do that.
I was playing co-op quite frequently a few years ago. After my son was born and I had a family I have yet to get together with anyone to play games. I did start going back to school so my time is limited. I have shifted my thought process and started looking into solo gameplay. I started going through my library and trying to play my multiplayer games solo. Most just didn't have the same impact solo or weren't possible. I have continued to purchase games, but have been looking into the solo player option versus multiplayer. I did back earthborn rangers on Kickstarter recently due to the fact that I could play it completely solo. I was on the fence about descent until I realized that this is more of a solo game than a multiplayer based on certain gameplay decisions and trying to get everybody on board with them. I do look at price first, but ultimately my deciding factor comes down to solo and how accessible this game is, playing solo. If I can get this to the table multiple times during my limited amount of free time I will buy it no matter the cost. This does however limit the amount of purchases I can make in let's say a year's time. But if I'm playing one game more then it makes up for that.
Here's why I'm a solo gamer. I got older and started a family and it has just become few and far between that I can get a group together. So big campaign games (which I love), are impossible to get to the table on a regular basis due to scheduling and time commitments. So for those big dungeon crawlers, I primarily solo them because that's the only way for me to enjoy them so if can't play by myself, I'm out. For that reason I'm excited about Descent, and the upcoming Chronicles of Drunagor. But I still do have game nights at my place every now and then, so I do like to have multiplayer options. But due to those constraints (time commitments, scheduling), for my group I gravitate to one-shot games like Dice Throne, or Nemesis, or big event games like Eclipse where I can make an afternoon out of it and fire up the grill for my buddies. A great solo game with multiplayer options is Marvel Champions for example. It's something I can play on my own whenever I want but works great if I have a buddy come over, and if we do play a campaign, it only requires maybe 2 sessions so the commitment is so much less. Anyways, love the channel Adam. We're cut from the same cloth dude.
great video! I agree with all your points 1) solo, for all the reasons you mentioned 2) I look for: 1. solo mode or a “soloable” coop mode 2. theme 3. shipping to my country (Mexico) 4. price thanks for your thoughts
1.) I come from the starting point and growing up with, Boardgame means Multi Player by nature, and Video means Solo, but getting older and loosing friends or connection/location with families members, it became harder to have a weekly Boardgame Table Round, even way (Years) before COVID. But throughout COVID, alone on the couch, I found my way back to that great hobby of my youth and childhood, and discovered an amazing community, so many games, so many RUclips content creators, so many top ten lists and off course my first Kickstarter experiences, my first fomo feelings about board games…. So in the meantime a played my first solo Champaign’s on boardgames, funny it was To many Bones, wich you kind of mentioned. But still it’s a step for me, coming home late from work, exhausted and tired, looking to my improvised Gaming Table, with the great Sleeping Gods Champaign, and I am kind of to lazy, seems just one step out of reach for me, to take the seat there and remember all, and dive into it again, seems like, looking at a wonderful ocean sunset, but fearing it’s to cold to dive into the weaves, so I am ending up on the couch and watching ur videos about the benefit of Solo Games. Yes man, life is strange, isn’t it?
Really interesting food for thought. For your questions.... 1. Solo is by far my priority. (I would say my gameplay is split 98% solo, 2% successfully conning family to play with me 😂) 2. My order of importance in considering a game is 1. Strong solo playability; 2. Theme/art that appeals to me; 3. Price/shipping (with crowdfunding games, price and shipping in is less important as it's a risk they may never hit the Australian retail market) And not that you asked, but my 3 pet peeves with crowdfunding and solo playability is 1. Solo mode is still being developed/considered (Witcher I'm looking at you here!! Went in for a dollar just cos it's Witcher but I don't think they are going to have any strong option) 2. Solo play as a stretch goal (so obviously tacked on and potentially under developed) 3. Solo play as an expansion (so I'm paying for a base game that I predominantly won't use, but I need to pay more to make parts of it functional for me)
I love this conversation. I'm 90% solo gamer, just because I only know one other person that plays board games and game nights are once in awhile. My NUMBER ONE thing I look for is a fully fleshed out solo experience, not just a mode. Early in my board gaming I came into Gloomhaven and that's my bench mark for solo play. It's the full game, just one player. Since then, I've been tricked into solo "modes" which are usually some automa that randomly tries to take points from you. It's not really the full game. My NUMBER TWO, back to Gloomhaven, is value. Not just price. I've put over 100 hours into GH so the value is off the charts. Since I'm a solo player, I can dedicate night after night to these massive campaigns and really get the value out of them. And NUMBER THREE, your basic "how does it play". In the end, it's gotta be fun. Thanks for reading my opinion!
Q1: I'm 100% solitaire/co-op/solo (can't define % on each, though), 0% multiplayer. I did have a period where I was able to play multiplayer with family, but distance and aging has changed that. Q2: First = Are there aspects that would make playing multiple sides solo difficult (e.g., hidden information)? Second = Is the game interesting, especially on a game mechanic side? Related = Does the game do anything differently from other games? Third = varies. Could be artwork, components, how many expansions, etc. I would like to add that I distinguish between solitaire (one player plays against a game engine/A.I.), solo (playing multiple players to the best of their ability or using random decision elements), and co-operative (same as solo, but it's really a combination of the other two). I have found some games are multiplayer only by design, but they generate such great narrative that they are entertaining solo. Examples: Heroscape, Duel of Ages 2. I think this comes from being introduced to gaming through wargames where finding opponents is really difficult. I enjoy all three of these. If you consider yourself a solo gamer and are thinking about it strictly in terms of solitaire/cooperative, you might try what I define as solo to see if that opens games to your experience that you might otherwise overlook. Finally, as far as crowdfunding, I've mostly stayed away from Kickstarter due to having really bad experiences with that platform. That's a rant for another time. Edit: Just watched Rob's excellent video. He (and you) are describing "truth in advertising" regarding stating a game has a solitaire option when it doesn't. I completely agree with that point.
Adam my brother thanks for the kind words …it really comes down to a simple equation if you put it on the box live up to it…..the hard thing for guys like you and I is we see a bunch of games each month. And don’t have time to research like people have brought up …. I can handle a solo mode not being good more than a company saying it’s there when it’s not..
I thought you nailed it in your video. I went down another angle to add to the conversation. I agree with you, the use of the 1 player label or should I say, misuse at times can be deceiving. Especially if you don't have the time to dig in. Cheers!
This is a great topic. Thanks for bringing this up. As to your first question, for me I will always look for solo playable first. If it offers multi-play as well, that is a bonus. For your second question, I look for the following: 1. Value (This includes price sure, but what is the bang for the buck, amount of game for the money). 2. Solid solo play (Easy to get with co-op's and games built specifically for solo play) 3. Quality (I know, broad description, but I am talking about not only the play, but design, components, presentation, etc.)
As someone who was the only child in the house as a kid, I became extremely used to be my own opponent. A gamedoesn’t necessarily need a solo mode for me to play it on my own. Ive done Blood Bowl tournaments where I control both teams, played descent second edition controlling both the heroes and the enemies… Countless instances of this. I think this has led me to appreciating a dedicated solo mode but not necessarily requiring one.
I did this from a young age as well. Making up rules to card games. I would use basketball cards and try to come up with a solo game. Solo is just more accesible than multiplayer in regards to the tabletop industry.
I am primarily a solo player. A friend, whom I still play multiplayer with, got me into the hobby and they lent me some games at the beginning of the pandemic that had solo modes and I was completely hooked. So I went from owning zero games to 65+ games that all have a solo mode. When purchasing/backing a game they must have a solid solo mode from the beginning, I am a sucker for table presence so art/theme must be there, and it is a tie for multiplayer/cost for the third requirement (I find that I love solo mode in a multiplayer game and only like solo only games). Cheers!
So much in agreement. I spend a lot of money on games and at first would put up with ‘tacked on’ options. Now I am choosy and unforgiving of solo modes which are not real and built in by default. I back everything awakened realms puts out … it’s not a coincidence! Great video
the three things I look for before kickstarting a game: 1. do the theme and/or art and/or components intrigue me or not - 2. is it playable solo (and not just tacked-on or beat-your-own-score solo mode) and will I enjoy playing it solo (or maybe also multiplayer, which is - for me also - a bonus!) - 3. the price tag (base game, addons, shipping costs, VAT, EU-friendly or not, etc.)
got goosebumps after you mentioned Lords of Hellas. I was practically screaming it in my head the whole time watching the video. They are bringing in david turczi in Lords of Ragnarok and this is a good sign that the game is built with solo mode in mind. Hope they release improved solo for LoH as well
You hit it bang on. I really wanted to back Scarface 1920, and with it being $300+ Canadian, I couldn’t take this risk. Without being 100% certain, it would end up as a dust collector. So I passed and ended up backing some other solo DVG war games instead.
Good points. I often find that solo gaming is dismissed as a compromise. People sometimes make the assumption that solo gaming is not how we would like to play if we had a choice. Sometimes (and with some games) this is true, but sometimes not.
I have a hard time getting people to play any game these days ... I prefer playing COOP games, but that needs other players ... so I have tended now to put SOLO gaming as my number one priority (just like you said you have shifted to that focus). Next I look at how complex the game is. I have been playing games for over six decades and used to be pretty sharp with strategy games ... but now I can't handle the complexity as much as before, so the game needs to be light to mid level for me. Third might be if I am paying extra for a game because it includes miniatures - I don't really like them. Standees are just fine for me, so if the core game includes them I am paying for something that I don't really want (and sometimes there isn't a standee option either). I appreciate your video Adam and included it in an article on My ISS Vanguard that talks about playing ISS Vanguard SOLO (I had one suggestion for Awake Realms in my article :)
That sounds great! Enjoyed reading this too. Thanks for adding the video to your stuff. We all change over time in our likes and dislikes as well as what we want out of our games. Sounds like you know exactly what you’re after! Cheers 👍🏼
Bravo! You're saying exactly what needed to be said to too many developpers yet. If you don't want to put in the work for a decent solo mode, just don't do it. Oh and DO NOT FOR ANY REASON TACK ON A SOLO MODE IN STRETCH GOALS. As for solo mode as an expansion, they are also usually bad because they weren't thought of from the start, so I don't even inform myself further about the game unless I'm really into it. I think this clearly answered your question 1 =) What I'm looking for on a campaign page, 1. Can I play solo? There's really no way around it. And as I said, if the answer is yes but only as a SG or an add-on, or even if the page as been modified to include 1p but it was presented initially as multiplayer only, then I just skip it. This is not negociable to have my money. 2. Are there playthrough(s) from someone I know and trust (Rolling Solo, One Stop Coop Shop, Rob's Gaming table, Not Bored Gaming)? I really study how the game plays out and if it looks enjoyable, I'm in. I rarely back a game without any playthroughs (and I don't mean reviews or paid ads, full playthroughs of the solo mode). 3. Price, but not as a straight up number as I have the money for it, but is it worth it backing the game right now (1-2 years before I receive it) and paying the pledge price + shipping to Canada, or should I wait for retail to hit? That means, is there a decent saving and are there promos such as KSE or a deluxe upgrade unattainable in retail? Since there are rarely savings to be had, the question heavily leans towards the worthiness of exclusives and promos included.
With Gloomhaven, I basically just solo the scenarios that we don't do as a group. So basically, I play the "alternate path" scenarios solo, so I can play every single scenario in the game, while my group strictly sticks to the rules of which scenario is available.
Interesting video. I watched Rob's, too, and generally agree here. It is disappointing to buy a game that says it has solo / supports solo play only to find you can't play everything in the box. Other things I don't like are 2P played by yourself being called solo, or requiring an expansion to play solo, although I'm sure I must have at least one game of both types. There must have been other factors that overrode my general tendency not to like those when I chose to get those games. I'm almost exclusively a solo player. As a general rule, no 1P support = no purchase from me, so for the most part, I don't care about multiplayer, except that I often have to learn multiplayer rules before I can play solo (which is another thing I'm not a fan of -- I'd like the solo rules to stand alone and not require learning some other game mode first). I tended to prefer solo-only games, because I know they had to have been designed for solo play from the start, but I'm fine with having games that support both solo and multiplayer. The multiplayer is more of a nice to have for me, because (as noted) I don't really care about non-solo play. However, on rare occasion, I might be able to get my wife to join me in a co-op game, but not a competitive one, so occasionally I might go for a 2P co-op game. But anything that has 3P+ as a minimum or gets called a party game is pretty much out of the question for me. About criteria for selecting a game to back, I think I typically look for #1 = solo / 1P support, #2 = price/value, #3 = overall interest. To add some detail, solo mode being my #1 is basically explained by my answer to the first question. I put price/value, which I know aren't necessarily the same thing, second because there are too many games coming out for me to buy everything, and I do have a typical maximum price I like to pay for board games. I have made exceptions and expect I'll continue to do so now and then, but in general, if I see a solo game and the price is too far above what I typically look to pay, it's out. A really interesting theme might save it though, as might a price that's over but still kind of close to my general maximum. In cases like that, the criterion tends to lean more towards value than price and whether I think I'll get enough out of the game for the price I'm asked to pay. When the price is low enough to easily fall into my budget, the value isn't as much of a concern. So it's a sort of combination of price and value that I'm checking next. As for #3, this was a bit harder, but I think that usually once I know there's solo and I'm OK with the price/value, I'm then looking for how interesting the game seems to me and do I want to play it. This is probably really a combination of a lot of factors though, so I may be cheating a bit with this as an answer. Things like theme/setting, play time, overall game play, specific game mechanics, and more get looked at when deciding if I think I'll like the game as a whole.
I think one big reason I enjoy solo gaming so much is because I don't have to worry about if the other players are enjoying a game. Without that aspect I can focus entirely on the story and thematic elements. Plus honestly I just don't like scheduling a time to play, I mean some of these games take multiple hours ours out of your day. Whereas solo I can pickup and play and go about my business. It doesn't turn into a 10 hour session of sitting on my ass. The downside is there aren't really any surprises and sometimes the dice chucking gets really repetitive. And the math, so much math. Thats just my two cents though.
The points made in this video are spot on, from first to last. The board game scene was already changing, but the pandemic further pushed the question ‘What if I cannot play this game with my friends?’ Question 1: I consider myself more a solo player, because as mentioned in the video, get together with friends is not easy nor granted. I play solo around 3-4 times a week and multiplayer 2-3 times a month. Do the math. Question 2: When I think about purchasing a game I consider (1) if the game can be played solo, (2) how solo mode works compared to multiplayer, (3) gameplay length (in other words, how likely the game will hit the table).
Exactly! The change had already started to lean the industry to solo play and covid just pushed it much faster. Which in my opinion is a positive for the industry out of a bad situation. I just hope more designers/publishers realize this. Ignoring it is to their own detriment. Thanks for sharing your thoughts! 🔥
I only recently even got into more complex board games like this (with Gloomhaven). I've played the majority with 2 players, but have soloed a few scenarios (using 2 characters). I'm now planning to go through more of Gloomhaven solo, and may also do Middara solo (depending on if the other player is interested in it). With Middara, I think I'm going to try playing all 4 characters, but I'm not sure yet.
2.) Being not so much experienced by now, I first look on the theme, if I could imagine my into that world thematicly. Second I look out for the mechanics, how it might be played and if that’s fits with the theme, if I enjoy or could image enjoying that mechanic (in case I don’t have or know a game with that mechanic), and third how language depending it might be, if there’s a German Version offered on KS or if it’s likely that there will be a rule book translation on BGG, cause of the Fanbase or Company size. So much different points then yours. But maybee that will slightly change, having watched ur great video tonight, u really have a point there, in measuring the value of a Kickstarter by its solo game mode. Thank u for ur efforts and ur different point of view.
I just don’t think there’s a good understanding in the industry that as a primary design focus, solo play is key. Not having it, greatly reduces the chances the game will get played.
1) I consider myself a solo gamer, but I'd still prefer to play multiplayer if I have the opportunity. My game group is more likely to play a game we haven't played or have only played one other time, so if I want to play a game over and over, it better have an enjoyable solo mode. 2) I'd say my priorities are "Will this get to the table enough that I can justify buying it?" and that's about it. But that includes a lot of things, including price and solo mode quality. If a game is a great two player game that my wife will like, it could be worth purchasing, or if it's a solo campaign game, it could be worth it. If it's a game I will legitimately play 50 times, $50 could be inexpensive, but if it's a game I'll probably only play once or twice, $30 is an expensive game.
I no longer consider multi-player games for purchase. I've been slowly culling my collection of multi-player games that are just gathering dust. I play solo almost exclusively now and it's what I look for first in a new purchase. Solo mode or Co-op games. I enjoy 2 handed solo games and it's my go to option so co-op totally works for me. Playing single handed is a nice option. I totally agreed with Rob the other day and also agree with you. Publishers... get on board the SOLO TRAIN.
Honestly, this is the reason that I haven't backed any kickstarters as yet. I'm only a couple of years into the hobby and solo is 100% my priority. I only want to buy games that I know are amazing solo experiences, because I want to be able to get it to the table and enjoy it every night. Right now for me, I feel the only way I can have that assurance is to buy games that are being highly recommend buy our amazing community of solo players, who luckily, unlike myself, feel confident in taking the risk of buying ks games and giving them a go... I hope that as I become a more experienced player I will have the confidence to do this, so that I can then offer recommendations to others like myself, who are currently too green to really know exactly what they are looking for in an as yet unreleased title. Although, hopefully by then, maybe, solo might be a standard player count in the majority of games from the outset 🤞🤞🤞
Appreciate the sharing of your thoughts! Glad the video landed and lined up for you. Don’t worry, after about a year or two you become much more savvy in the games you choose. Like anything it just takes some time at the start. 😄👍🏼
For me I actually found your channel because I generally enjoy coop games, they are great for me because it gives the ability to play at any (depending on the game) player count. Saying that primarily I look for games that are good to play for 2 so I can play with my partner. As for crowd funding: 1, mechanisms-my favourite games tend to be narrative, deck/engine builders, or dungeon crawlers. 2, publisher and reputation of the games they produce-have I enjoyed previous games from them. 3, price-Is it worth it for what I get backing now, can I sell it on if I don't like it.
I primary play solo games because of finding the time issues but I prefer playing with friends. It's just not working with the games I have I would need multiple times a week group to make it work. In terms of what I look for before buying a game that's actually depends on the game a lot. I only have so much money to spend so price is a big consideration. It doesn't mean I dont pay expansive games it does mean that I want to be able to resell them at a reasonable price to buy new ones. It also means that if I just sold a big game I got more money to spend and if all KS are delayed like they are now because of covid I don't buy new games. The next thing I want from a game is to be able to bring it to the table. Rather that is because I know it will work in my group or it has a solo mode I belive both is possible. Or like descent allows you to switch the player count each mission. That's pretty nice to me. A solo mode is however always going to allow me to play. Having an solo mode that I belive in is going to pass this check. The first two are really checks a game needs to pass. If I can't afford a game/I don't believe it will be worth it's money it's not worth to consider. A game that I can't get to the table is also worthless. It might be the best game in the world but if I won't get to play it there is no reason to buy it it's that simple. But once a game passes these checks I need to figure out what game to actually get. And though I like to belive I decide on gameplay I honestly think art is more important here. I mostly buy KS games because I like big crawlers or boss battlers and those are hard to get. But even if I check out all the gameplay I feel there is a lack of information often. Basically if you have a reasonable track record and the gameplay demo looks good I'm sold. But often it's like one mission and that tells you nothing of balance build mission variety the difference between enemies etc. maybe that was all the game had and it really shines in that one scenario but it's not enough to carry for 50-100h of the campaign. I don't really think that we can decide that before the campaign unless there are red flags. Art on the other hand if the game looks good it will just always draw me in. I'm immediately interested.
Things I look for in a retail or crowd funded game. 1st. Does the game look like fun to me, solo or multiplayer. 2nd. Can it be played solo. 3rd. If multiplayer is an option does it play the player count I desire. 4th bonus. Would I play this multi handed in multiplayer mode by myself. If all 4 line up, I'll probably buy or back it. Euro or engine building games are usually an easy game to table solo for me. Where I run into stumbling blocks is in story driven narrative games, usually after the first scenario or chapter I can't help but think "this is really a lot of fun... Should I wait until I can find someone to enjoy this with". Then I have to decide either push on through or pack it away until I find someone.
I primarily play my board games solo, but I love to play multiplayer when I can. It's just challenging to get together when you and your group have kids and other life priorities. I make the majority of my purchases through retail.
Just a few weeks ago, I played Bullet. Hands down, it has to have one of the best implementations of solo I have ever played. It doesn’t matter which mode you play, you get the entire experience. There is zero trade-off. Co-op board games work well for me because it feels like I’m behind a control tower guiding each character through each situation. Feels great and is fun. Also, I don’t have a game group so solo is the only way I play. So far, the only game that was a complete bust was Mind: MGMT. What a joke and I’m still upset about that one. I would’ve bought a different game if I would’ve known. Other than that, I try to really research before I invest and it has worked well for me so far. I also come from a video game background and I agree, single-player first, multiplayer second. If I could do it over again, I would’ve introduced my kids to board games instead of video games. That mistake caused me to become a solo board gamer but I’m okay with that.
I’ll say the same thing I posted on Rob’s video: The bg industry needs better labeling for player counts-beyond x-y. They need solo-as-a-teaching, full solo, solo expansion, solo that’s actually multi-hand, et al. But beyond that, they need better labeling at all levels. If a game says 2-4p but it’s actually a 2p game and the 4p mode is two teams of two, that needs to be stated. Otherwise, it’s litigiously close to false advertising.
I agree. I love solo games, most of my games are solo or have solo capacity. Solo first! For instance, I love Tammany Hall, haven’t played it in at least 3 years.
Right now I'm torn on the Witcher: Old World. Love the IP but can't bring myself to back with the solo/coop portion of the game still hidden away in a back room somewhere. Feels like they are still trying to make it work. Good news is they say playthrough should come in October. Love the conversation, keep on rolling.
Agreed, that's a tricky one. The IP may lure you in (me too) but the lack of solo information certainly is hurting it. I believe they should have had that better squared away before launch. I reached out to them but no luck. I'll be keeping my eyes on it though!
My thoughts exactly. I was really excited about this one, until I noticed the lacking solo mode. I feel like it would just turn into a box of badass minis and a ton of cards and tokens, just sitting on my shelf.
@@zer0zer082 That’s certainly a risk with this one. It’s possible the solo ends up being good or worth it of course. That’s the gamble…which certainly makes it hard for solo gamers.
I'm going to multi-hand a game before I play a tacked on solo mode. The games that comes to mind is Hel vs. Tainted Grail. While Hel hasn't been released the solo mode seems like an alternative story/streamlined experience. Tainted Grail is the full game experience. I think Middara's variant buff system might be an okay compromise.
I think most solo players are fine playing 2 or more characters in a cooperative game. But I think a portion of designers and gamers assume solo means just 1 character. Which has to be a harder design challenge I think.
@@guruthosamarthruin4459 Not yet. It is next on my list. I've played all 4 in Tainted Grail and Gloomhaven but found 3 to be less tedious and a mental drain. I might do the same, but will try 4 first in Middara.
Yep I play Middara /-player variant and it is done so well. I don’t think it would be too hard to run 4 characters but for me it’s the table space. Each character (especially with playermats) take up quite a bit of room and the only reason I got it was because at least there was an alternative to 4-player. I think it’s done really well.
@@Heidelmann There seems to be fewer choices in Middara, where you're just choosing which items to use every round, as opposed to choosing exact abilities in Gloomhaven, which I think takes a lot longer.
I think that the thought of having solo as a backup when you do not have a team to play with, can lead to unnecessary purchases (even if I do not find a team to play with, I can solo it so buy it). That makes us (solo gamers) extra careful when we check for new releases that say that solo play is included. Also we have limited time in our life to play ,even solo, every game that we purchase if we are not careful.
Completely agree with you. That was the message behind the video. It’s better to assume you’ll only be playing it solo so you can guarantee that it can get played. Otherwise it’s a gamble! Thanks for watching!
Dinosaur Island's Totally Liquid expansion (retail) was a let down for saying Solo Mode included on the box yet it was only included on Kickstarter, or a free download which just isn't the same as actually including the components. Dinosaur World looks to be in the same boat.
1. I play both but prefer solo games so that I don't have to wait to get a group together. 2.1 Soloplay 2.2 Replayability (kind of story related, I don't want to keep replaying the exact same story over and over again so either have different characters or choices) 2.3 Multiplayer
Solo first, theme, solo reviews. If i am backing a Kickstarter game and I am unsure of the solo mode, I will back for a dollar and review the rules when published. I also watch reviews from this channel and other solo review channels, that I trust and who seem to have similar game genre taste.
@rolling Solo - Could not help but see Star Wars Rebellion in the background... do you recommend that for Solo? As for what I look for: KS = 1) Solo, 2) Base game price, 3) Theme & components (I don't even bother looking at multi - it WILL have it as boardgames are designed that way unless it's a small game) Retail = 1) Does it Solo, 2) how well does it score Solo on BGG in 'recommended', 3) Can I find it in the Top 100 solo games and/or Reddit/Facebook/sologames hit my table on BGG solo Forum, 4) is it a theme my partner will like
You can indeed play SWR solo. I haven't given it a shot in that way yet but had planned to due to my love for the IP. As a multiplayer game, it's amazing. Thanks for the responses to the questions too. It's been awesome seeing others thoughts!
@@RollingSolo - I would love for you to give it a try. I have the same love for the IP but have not pulled the trigger because of aforementioned #2: How well does it solo: only 3.7% on BGG say it solos well. This doesn't have to mean it doesn't.... maybe there is an unofficial solo only a few know of, but which is great... have to delve into it.
I've passed on so so many possibly amazing games with big pricetags that's I would go all in on, had it not been for a lack of proper solo experience or a the solo is a completely different mode that doesn't feel like the same game anymore. It's frustrating to miss so much because of bad design and thought about solo gameplay.
I hear you! I think that's what a lot of publishers don't realize. They're missing out on those that would back all-in for gameplay if solo was a primary focus from the ground floor. Thanks for watching!
For me I look more for solo than multiplayer mostly because it can be hard to get people down for gaming and while I offer my wife I dont wanna make her feel she has to play she enjoys villanous alot so i enjoy that with her. When it comes to what I look for it is usually solo play, setup, and value and i mean not just miniatures or bling but content that can be played solo vs not.
Always look for solo first, multi-player I can play on other houses or at least pnp instead some party games As for my parameters I see other write it's solo first, component and theme second, and then cost. Inside of that: Solo - first I check its not automa or beat your own score because I hate those anyway. Then I check deeply about the solo. Component and theme - if it's not agriculture or animal or horror or vehicle then it's good to go because I hate those theme. Then after the theme I check the components that if they are cards mostly played. I don't have and won't have minis I hate minis. Cost - yeah totally need to check it but only if the other two are valid for me. What is the result? Not a lot of games for me and that is OK at least I have my parameters to know which games to trim
I have been only buying solo games lately because the multi-player games rarely get played. I still love playing games with other people. I feel that Firefly the Game is like that. I wasnt satisfied when I beat the game. Needs more scenarios that feel like a multi-player game.
I feel similar! You just begin to realize as time goes on that solo play is the primary way games actually get the value you pay for them. Only a handful of multiplayer games ever make it into that category.
Question #1: Solo (what’s multiplayer :) Question #2: 1. Is it playable Solo? 2. What is the Theme of the game? 3. Does it offer a Campaign? (Good story, etc…)
For your first question : Obviously, Solo. For your second question: I'll first check if it's a game made for me (type,mechanics, campaign, playable lenght,..), Then, I will look if it's a solo game (because I love finding out about new games even if I know I'll never play them ). And finally, the gatekeeping aspect, it's the overall price (including shiping ) of the game. Multiplayer is not necessary, I'll play solo 99,95% of the time.
I would rather play with other people. But I normally play 90% by myself. I would rather play true solo, then after that 2 handed at the most. Miniatures are ok because I like to paint them. I like upgraded tokens. The bigger the game and also longer the campaign the harder it is to get to the table. Any time the price goes above $100 it’s hard to justify the price for solo play.
I don't factor in a game having a solo mode option for crowd funding for these reasons, unless it's a co-op game of course then it's basically the same as a dedicated solo game already even if you have to play two or more characters. A lot of publishers just want solo modes for marketing reasons and don't care if they stink. I'd have to be pretty confident that the designer of the solo mechanics put some passion and care behind it to trust it.
Oh wow you are so right. I bought escape from tarkov. Thank god single player mod exists. Because i can enjoy it when i want the way i want and have fun without experiencing griefers try harders and wipes
@@RollingSolo yes, indeed. Luckily there are some great board games out there that are amazing for solo players. You are welcome. You have the the best board game channel i could find out here.
Hey JJ! Would be cool to revisit the game. I have the errata pack as well, we shall see what happens in the future. Thanks for letting me know your interest too!
No problem! Kickstarter is a site that house crowdfunded games. Crowdfunding is paying for something up front (investing) in a concept or a preorder. Stretch goals are used on campaigns in order to entice more people to pledge and based on growth unlock free thank yous to the backers.
The first thing I look at is the content then the mechanics then the price then the solo variant. If I think a game is overpriced for the content I don't even consider the mechanics let alone a solo variant.
I don't like to compete against my friends. I prefer to co-operate with them. To be a team. After all we are friends and not enemies. So I lean heavily on co-op games. There are great games that works both co-op and solo naturally. If the game is only PvP or cannot be played solo I just avoid it. The worthiness is doubled when the game can be played both ways. But yeah I am a solo player myself and I even have quite a few solitaire (solo only) games.
I sort of left co-op out of the equation as co-op games already allow for solo play. It’s moreso the multiplier only games that I feel lack in terms of overall value by the dollar.
In general, I feel fine playing 2 characters, but I would like to play more games to play true solo with just one character. Now I'm playing marvel champions that is perfect for true solo and wargames like storm over the reich (solitaire game). In KS only backed in this year Hoplomachus form chip theory games another true solo game.
A big offender for tacking on a bad solo version is Floodgate Games with their dice drafting game Sagrada. Right after the Kickstarter delivered, I played 12 solo games in a row, I commented about how unbalanced it was in the KS comments and a couple people thought I was playing it wrong LOL, no the game really is off on the solo. (I felt redeemed when Liz Davidson said similar in her review.) I recently found a fan produced PNP for a Solo Automa version on BBG (haven’t tried it yet). Floodgate Games also made an expansion for a fifth player, BUT did not add the dice to make it playable for five players. When backers asked to buy more dice, they were told they couldn’t. Beautiful game, but I am not a fan of the company because of all that.
Hey Nani, I can understand that completely. Companies do learn from their mistakes in most cases. Hopefully they heard your voice and feedback and took it into consideration for future products. Thanks for sharing :)
I think you are !00% got it. Me I look at solo/coop then if u can play 2 never 3 or more . To hard getting 3 or more players at one time. I also look if it is a me too game, how the price compares to the enjoyment. If it is having some kind of politically correct agenda or if the designers has made a political statement about another persons games ( those are totally taken off my list). I have back a few that said solo and they were not! Those designers from then on on my no back list too. i think you hit every point on the head. Thanks for speaking out.
I find the value per hour of a game. GH was 130. Say 80 scenarios, say 3 hours avg. From solo to 4 player; Is easily cents per hour. I have an Exit game, that I played for 2 hours, will never again, that was... 7 bucks an hour. Solo is very important though, and I won't invest in a game without one. My group will get together a few time a month, a finite amount of time per year. there are too many titles to get through. I would not like to have animosity to my group by not giving me a return on my purchase - if that makes sense.
In my opinion, not every game works with solo play, and I think solo gamers should keep that in mind. The campaign for a game should be very clear for solo gamers what type of solo mode they are running, but shouldn't necessarily start every game design with solo in mind. There are incentives for a tacked on solo mode, because it is a desire to be able to solo every game.
Fair thoughts Tim! I believe that solo (like with video games) is ‘the’ way to ensure a game has continued value to keep it in the long term. Multiplayer games are only as good as the players you can get to play them. So you end up with a whole bunch of multiplayer games that can never be tabled. Not all ‘types’ games need a solo mode. For example, Blood Rage or dudes on a map style games for the most part. But the large majority of game types can easily have a solo mode or solo play that makes logic sense. Thanks for watching too!
Exactly this is my problem with The Witcher. I'm quite afraid that the Wild Hunt expansion that makes it coop/solo is very tacked on in order to appease the amount of people asking for it. The information is so sketchy that I have difficulty believing it is going to be good.... and they simply are not releasing any information though people have begged for it from all different angles.
This is a good example for sure. It could be great...but no ones knows. They should have had that buttoned up prior to launch. It's likely having a negative effect they aren't seeing. The game would potentially sold even better if solo was solid from the jump. The IP is what has me intrigued and the potential to play this with others...but it's a high priced gamble at this point. If more information comes out, I'll be keeping my eyes peeled. I reached out to them but no luck.
@@RollingSolo - I am a $1 backer because of what you described above. They have promised to keep the Pledge manager open longer so they can show IN A VIDEO how their expansions (including the Wild Hunt) play. Fingers crossed they actually do.....
Wow yeah I saw Rob video as well and I agree with him a lot of games with solo mode are lame and I feel ripped off. But I'm anyway a solo gamer who check all of the parameters before I buy any game I've never and will never buy blindly thus also not supporting ks for example 😉 Anyway as for your question - 100% yes! Solo gamers get the best experience from the game because they can check and play everything while in multi-player not so much, when one is a specific character for example even for a whole campaign you as the other player will never get to know how to play him, while in solo you can just switch around between mission and feel the other characters for example. The time and I just want to play it constraints made me switch to solo anyway... I can have a different gaming groups all the time but just like you said it's not worth the risk, because let's face it most of the gamer people here in Israel anyway are snobs and less fun to play with
@@RollingSolo yeah man really enjoyed this content I'm tired of the content of reviews, top tens and ks... Real talk on the subjects is great keep doing that if it's fun for you as well man
🤣 I plan to make an exception for that one. I played BSG and love the gameplay but don’t like the IP. So this new version is more for me. I don’t buy many multiplayer only games at all but I’m excited for that one.
As it is now, there is not a need for another multiplayer to ever be created. They exist out there and are sufficiently developed. I have too many as is. Because of this, a game being introduced needs to do something to justify its existence. I personally am not going to trust a new game coming out unless it was built initially to work solo. A game working solo is more likely to be tested sufficiently to reduce risk of having a fatal issue.
I only buy games with a solo mode, nd a good one. Perfect exampls Dune Imperium. I don't have and will not have this game even if I love Dune. The solo mode is mediocre. I have solo games Nemo's War, Lost expedition,... 1) solo mode 2) theme 3) mecanics
Tacking on stuff during the campaign is very dangerous. This happened with the PVP mode for Bloodborne: TBG and what came from it is a broken mess (and this is from legit designers too Shinal and Lang).
Giant red flag for me is when I read “Great way to learn the game”. I saw this only last week on a KS for a cute dragon themed game. Conversely I get excited when i hear a reviewer ‘criticising’, a game being “too much multiplayer solitaire”. Agree with what you say however the one caveat I have to mention is that I know that David Turzi sometimes gets brought on to do solo modes after the game has been developed. Sometimes half way through the crowdfunding campaign. If his name, or Automa Factory, get mentioned i’ll accept it listed as a stretch goal assuming that they’ll make it work.
If a person has a good track record, that certianly helps with the 'risk factor' of a stretch goal add. However, I'll never like seeing it being an development afterthought. If you want to maximize the solo experience for a game, make it happen from the start. Thanks for sharing your take Leigh!
I am extremely jealous of people who can get a gaming group going. That's not my reality. My games need to have solo play. I might look at a game that has a solo mode "slapped" on if it looks good or the game itself is very attractive to me..ie Mythic Battles:Pantheon and Ragnarok.
WoW it is almost my thoughts what I am looking at board games and why I am playing solo Priority 1 Solo 2 Theme/Mechanics 3 Availability 4 total cost included shipping
Want to say something about multiplayer games. If the servers go down or for whatever reason get closed. Bye bye game. All the money you paid for it gone
![[Bad] - YouTube ВСЁ? (победа VK и прощание с подписчиками)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/pQ1bCOW5270/mqdefault.jpg)
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
*Patreon:* www.patreon.com/RollingSolo | *Facebook Community:* facebook.com/groups/330345337770347/ | *Discord:* discord.com/invite/c5HQrcK
Rollers! Today, I wanted to do something a bit different. I recently checked out a video from Rob Oren at Rob's Tabletop World around solo play and the disappointment that can come from lackluster (tacked on) solo modes and the use of the 1 player 'label'. I had to watch it front to back and I agree with him. I also have some additional thoughts I wanted to add to the mix overall.
*I'm looking forward to hearing everyone's personal take/thoughts on this and also seeing your answers to the two questions I posed near the end of the video. Thanks for watching my friends and keep on rolling solo! ;D*
Rob's TableTop World (Do You Feel Ripped Off When A Game Says It Has A Solo Option And It Really Doesn't?): ruclips.net/video/1mQPg91SGR4/видео.html
Intro 0:00
Overview & My Thoughts on Rob's Video 0:13
Solo Gamers Get The Most Value From Their Board Games 7:23
*Two Questions for the Community!* 30:50
Rolling Solo Producers 33:21
*Media Inquiries:* rollingsologamer@gmail.com
You can connect with the Rolling Solo community in multiple places!
Rolling Solo Patreon: www.patreon.com/rollingsolo
Rolling Solo Community Discord: discord.gg/c5HQrcK
Rolling Solo Facebook Page: facebook.com/TryRollingSolo/
Rolling Solo Board Game Community | Facebook Group: facebook.com/groups/330345337770347/
Twitter: twitter.com/TryRollingSolo
Instagram: instagram.com/ro11ingsolo/
BGG Guild: boardgamegeek.com/guild/2998
you're so right about multiplayer games with non-existant to tacked-on solo modes! as a mostly solo-player myself, I have been considering buying games only if they have a good solo mode from the start. I have way too many multiplayer games I haven't played for quite a while (or at all), sadly. it really difficult to get the right people at the right time for a multiplayer game you really like to play. a lot of times, it just wasn't perfect, whilst when sitting down to solo play a game, I always enjoy myself.. :D
This is the main message I believe the industry hasn’t fully understood yet. Multiplayer board games aren’t in the front seat anymore in terms of consumer purchases.
Like you, I started multiplayer first, solo second. Over the last 4-5 years however, solo play comes first and multi-player second and that has become my mantra when it comes to my board game purchases now. The solo mode NEEDS to stand on its own! I like having the multiplayer option and I certainly consider that a bonus when I spend my money on my entertainment. The multiplayer aspect has evolved into a secondary/tertiary consideration now. Life is very chaotic presently and the world has become a much more difficult place to navigate. My gaming group has long since scattered and I am so grateful that I purchased not a few great solo player games. It's nice to put on a coffee, play appropriate low volume music and lose myself in my hobby... alone! Also, I am very wary of app driven games, escpecially if it is the only solo option. I don't like technology intruding into and/or substituting for the rules in my boardgame experiences. Automa Factory is the way to go to simulate an "extra player(s)" in my solo games. Apps will eventualy be removed and/or become no longer supported. Paper, cardboard, plastic and wood do not have this issue. I really appreciate your thoughts on gaming and I thank you for sharing them.
as I do not have the physical solo mode for Raiders of the North Sea, I really enjoyed playing it solo using the app.. a breeze to handle, not interfering with my physical gaming experience at all! but I wouldn't want to play a game needing an app all the time..
Well written! This was fun to read. Sounds like you can count both of us as being part of the transition from multi to solo over the past 4-5 years.
This really hit home for me. I was a multiplayer-only gamer for a very long time and then my daughter was born and my gaming group meet ups became less frequent / more cluttered with “filler” games when we did get together. When I added cloud spire and 7th continent to my collection purely for solo play, I was blown away at how much more enjoyable they were compared to prior games with solo as an “after thought” and also how much more I played them. It changed the way I prioritize my board game purchases. It’s generally a better feeling to buy or kick start a new game with putting yourself first as the beneficiary as opposed to thinking “well, who is actually going to play this with me and when if I do buy this.” The only tough thing for me personally is that it takes a lot of energy/hype for me to set up/re-learn a game for a solo play after a week or so of work/parenting and all :)
Glad to hear that and your thoughts CV! 💥
This makes so much sense, thank you for sharing your thoughts! I felt exactly the same way for a long time, with the mentality that board games were to be enjoyed with others and that solo play concept in board gaming sounded so sad. Over the years, however, I've really turned around 180 degrees for all the reasons you gave, realizing that it was just impossible to get many of my board games played with friends for one reason or the other - either ppl just didn't have the time to get together or when we did, we would end up just playing one main game for the evening with so many others that just end up never being played, and of course COVID and recently having a child amplified the difficulty of gaming with others even more. I now actively pay attention to the solo-ability of a game as a purchasing condition in order to ensure that I can play it on my own, and at the very least, how easy and fun it is to play multi-handed for something like a dungeon crawl campaign (something I'm hoping to do with Gloomhaven JotL and Middara) where I would be more interested in the stories/adventures they provide. App-assisted games definitely help with this and I've really enjoyed playing many of the Unlock! escape room games solo as they are so easy to get going by yourself and I enjoy working out the puzzles quietly on my own. So yeah, 1-2 player gameplay is really my current focus (for the occasional gaming with my wife), the higher player counts are just too infrequent. It's a bit sad seeing all the expansions I have for Imperial Assault gathering dust, I hope to get that played someday solo with the app scenarios as I just have no idea when we could ever play the actual multiplayer campaign. The video game analogy is apt, I really do think there is a major paradigm shift going on now where solo play will become more and more a critical factor as there is only so much money, shelf space, and time available so ppl want to make sure they get some value and playability out of the games being purchased.
You summed up my mindset exactly. Sounds like we’re on a similar page. Hope you get IA to the table solo, I have videos to help you learn how! 😉
I completely agree Adam, more and more I look for games that have solo mode, if it doesn’t have it it has to be an game that I’m really interested in then I would back it. For me first the theme of the game, solo mode, the multiplayer.
Exactly 👌🏼
I started with multiplayer but switched to solo as I got older. Found it more and more difficult to get friends together and I also got tired of trying to teach people rules to games that would rarely get played a second time for one reason or another.
A game having any kind of solo mode is the first thing I look at. Without any solo the chances of me backing the game drop drastically.
Theme is the second biggest. I used to love high fantasy but it seems like they are a dime a dozen. If the theme doesn't interest me than the mechanics may persuade me to back.
The cost is the third major one. I have a good job and have a decent amount of disposable income but I've wasted hundreds of dollars on games that I purchased, never played, and eventually got rid of. In the last couple of years I started avoiding costly games that offer little other than tons of miniatures.
A fourth one is is the campaign outside the USA. My bank is fairly tight about fraud and it becomes and annoyance to call them (to clear the payment) when the campaign ends, when I have to pay shipping later, and if I want to add anything.
These are all valid TG! Thanks for sharing your priorities when deciding!
You nailed this perfectly and I couldn’t agree more! I learned pretty darn quickly that the games I buy must offer solo play. I can’t count how many times early on where I bought multiplayer games, took the time to learn the game for a weekly gaming group only to find those games not being chosen to play. So yes, solo is very, very important on my buying decisions going forward.
Obviously, if a game doesn’t have eye candy, it has far less chance of me considering it, but if it does, then my decisions on whether to buy a game include: 1. How is the solo replayability? (I’m less likely to buy a one-and-done type solo game.) 2. Price and whether the game will be going to retail. With crowdfunding projects, I already will have to wait 1-2yrs before I get the game. At this point in my collection, there needs to be a substantially good reason to warrant buying the game plus paying shipping costs vs just waiting for retail. For those games that won’t ever make it to retail, they really need to have the solo play through videos on the page from the get-go. If I can’t see it in play solo, I’m much less likely to hand over my moola. If they are throwing in 5 extra cards to warrant paying full MSRP with shipping, forget it. 3. How does it play with two players? If I do play multiplayer, it will most likely be with my gaming friend. So two player is my next decision (watching Rahdo videos for his viewpoint). 4. When considering multiplayer (4-5 players), how long does it play? If it takes longer than 2 hours, it won’t likely get chosen in my gaming group (if that group ever gets back up and running after Covid).
Thanks for doing this video! I hope every game designer and publisher will watch it and read thru the comments to see just how many people completely agree with you! One good thing about Covid is it has made a lot more people into solo gamers!!! So please up your games and deliver a solo game that allows a gamer to experience your full game. My most recent game I just taught myself how to play and throughly enjoyed was Auztralia. That game completely nailed the solo experience! I want many more games that do that.
Well said Christi! Appreciate you sharing your thoughts in detail. It’s been cool reading all of these. Seems the community is very much aligned!
I was playing co-op quite frequently a few years ago. After my son was born and I had a family I have yet to get together with anyone to play games. I did start going back to school so my time is limited. I have shifted my thought process and started looking into solo gameplay. I started going through my library and trying to play my multiplayer games solo. Most just didn't have the same impact solo or weren't possible. I have continued to purchase games, but have been looking into the solo player option versus multiplayer. I did back earthborn rangers on Kickstarter recently due to the fact that I could play it completely solo. I was on the fence about descent until I realized that this is more of a solo game than a multiplayer based on certain gameplay decisions and trying to get everybody on board with them. I do look at price first, but ultimately my deciding factor comes down to solo and how accessible this game is, playing solo. If I can get this to the table multiple times during my limited amount of free time I will buy it no matter the cost. This does however limit the amount of purchases I can make in let's say a year's time. But if I'm playing one game more then it makes up for that.
Awesome hearing your side of things Dustin. Thanks for checking out the video too!
Here's why I'm a solo gamer. I got older and started a family and it has just become few and far between that I can get a group together. So big campaign games (which I love), are impossible to get to the table on a regular basis due to scheduling and time commitments. So for those big dungeon crawlers, I primarily solo them because that's the only way for me to enjoy them so if can't play by myself, I'm out. For that reason I'm excited about Descent, and the upcoming Chronicles of Drunagor. But I still do have game nights at my place every now and then, so I do like to have multiplayer options. But due to those constraints (time commitments, scheduling), for my group I gravitate to one-shot games like Dice Throne, or Nemesis, or big event games like Eclipse where I can make an afternoon out of it and fire up the grill for my buddies. A great solo game with multiplayer options is Marvel Champions for example. It's something I can play on my own whenever I want but works great if I have a buddy come over, and if we do play a campaign, it only requires maybe 2 sessions so the commitment is so much less. Anyways, love the channel Adam. We're cut from the same cloth dude.
As you said, sounds like we’re very very close in how we approach solo play and multiplayer. Must be a long lost brother haha
im so glad you made this video man! Stay Hexy!
It was fun to do. Was tough to stop, almost felt I could have gone on for another 30 😜
great video! I agree with all your points
1) solo, for all the reasons you mentioned
2) I look for:
1. solo mode or a “soloable” coop mode
2. theme
3. shipping to my country (Mexico)
4. price
thanks for your thoughts
Thanks for sharing!!
1.) I come from the starting point and growing up with, Boardgame means Multi Player by nature, and Video means Solo, but getting older and loosing friends or connection/location with families members, it became harder to have a weekly Boardgame Table Round, even way (Years) before COVID. But throughout COVID, alone on the couch, I found my way back to that great hobby of my youth and childhood, and discovered an amazing community, so many games, so many RUclips content creators, so many top ten lists and off course my first Kickstarter experiences, my first fomo feelings about board games…. So in the meantime a played my first solo Champaign’s on boardgames, funny it was To many Bones, wich you kind of mentioned. But still it’s a step for me, coming home late from work, exhausted and tired, looking to my improvised Gaming Table, with the great Sleeping Gods Champaign, and I am kind of to lazy, seems just one step out of reach for me, to take the seat there and remember all, and dive into it again, seems like, looking at a wonderful ocean sunset, but fearing it’s to cold to dive into the weaves, so I am ending up on the couch and watching ur videos about the benefit of Solo Games. Yes man, life is strange, isn’t it?
🤣 It certainly can be. Thanks for sharing too. 👏🏼
Really interesting food for thought.
For your questions....
1. Solo is by far my priority. (I would say my gameplay is split 98% solo, 2% successfully conning family to play with me 😂)
2. My order of importance in considering a game is 1. Strong solo playability; 2. Theme/art that appeals to me; 3. Price/shipping (with crowdfunding games, price and shipping in is less important as it's a risk they may never hit the Australian retail market)
And not that you asked, but my 3 pet peeves with crowdfunding and solo playability is 1. Solo mode is still being developed/considered (Witcher I'm looking at you here!! Went in for a dollar just cos it's Witcher but I don't think they are going to have any strong option) 2. Solo play as a stretch goal (so obviously tacked on and potentially under developed) 3. Solo play as an expansion (so I'm paying for a base game that I predominantly won't use, but I need to pay more to make parts of it functional for me)
Awesome thoughts! Thanks for sharing Helen. 👏🏼
I love this conversation. I'm 90% solo gamer, just because I only know one other person that plays board games and game nights are once in awhile. My NUMBER ONE thing I look for is a fully fleshed out solo experience, not just a mode. Early in my board gaming I came into Gloomhaven and that's my bench mark for solo play. It's the full game, just one player. Since then, I've been tricked into solo "modes" which are usually some automa that randomly tries to take points from you. It's not really the full game. My NUMBER TWO, back to Gloomhaven, is value. Not just price. I've put over 100 hours into GH so the value is off the charts. Since I'm a solo player, I can dedicate night after night to these massive campaigns and really get the value out of them. And NUMBER THREE, your basic "how does it play". In the end, it's gotta be fun. Thanks for reading my opinion!
Awesome! It’s been a blast checking out all the great feedback here. Yours included! Thanks for watching 😄
Q1: I'm 100% solitaire/co-op/solo (can't define % on each, though), 0% multiplayer. I did have a period where I was able to play multiplayer with family, but distance and aging has changed that.
Q2: First = Are there aspects that would make playing multiple sides solo difficult (e.g., hidden information)? Second = Is the game interesting, especially on a game mechanic side? Related = Does the game do anything differently from other games? Third = varies. Could be artwork, components, how many expansions, etc.
I would like to add that I distinguish between solitaire (one player plays against a game engine/A.I.), solo (playing multiple players to the best of their ability or using random decision elements), and co-operative (same as solo, but it's really a combination of the other two). I have found some games are multiplayer only by design, but they generate such great narrative that they are entertaining solo. Examples: Heroscape, Duel of Ages 2. I think this comes from being introduced to gaming through wargames where finding opponents is really difficult. I enjoy all three of these. If you consider yourself a solo gamer and are thinking about it strictly in terms of solitaire/cooperative, you might try what I define as solo to see if that opens games to your experience that you might otherwise overlook.
Finally, as far as crowdfunding, I've mostly stayed away from Kickstarter due to having really bad experiences with that platform. That's a rant for another time.
Edit: Just watched Rob's excellent video. He (and you) are describing "truth in advertising" regarding stating a game has a solitaire option when it doesn't. I completely agree with that point.
This was awesome to read. Thanks for letting us know your thoughts too. Really enjoyed this!
Adam my brother thanks for the kind words …it really comes down to a simple equation if you put it on the box live up to it…..the hard thing for guys like you and I is we see a bunch of games each month. And don’t have time to research like people have brought up …. I can handle a solo mode not being good more than a company saying it’s there when it’s not..
I thought you nailed it in your video. I went down another angle to add to the conversation. I agree with you, the use of the 1 player label or should I say, misuse at times can be deceiving. Especially if you don't have the time to dig in. Cheers!
This is a great topic. Thanks for bringing this up. As to your first question, for me I will always look for solo playable first. If it offers multi-play as well, that is a bonus. For your second question, I look for the following: 1. Value (This includes price sure, but what is the bang for the buck, amount of game for the money). 2. Solid solo play (Easy to get with co-op's and games built specifically for solo play) 3. Quality (I know, broad description, but I am talking about not only the play, but design, components, presentation, etc.)
Nice! Thanks for sharing your thoughts Kenneth. Glad you enjoyed the video. Was fun doing it. 🔥
As someone who was the only child in the house as a kid, I became extremely used to be my own opponent. A gamedoesn’t necessarily need a solo mode for me to play it on my own. Ive done Blood Bowl tournaments where I control both teams, played descent second edition controlling both the heroes and the enemies… Countless instances of this. I think this has led me to appreciating a dedicated solo mode but not necessarily requiring one.
I did this from a young age as well. Making up rules to card games. I would use basketball cards and try to come up with a solo game. Solo is just more accesible than multiplayer in regards to the tabletop industry.
I am primarily a solo player. A friend, whom I still play multiplayer with, got me into the hobby and they lent me some games at the beginning of the pandemic that had solo modes and I was completely hooked. So I went from owning zero games to 65+ games that all have a solo mode. When purchasing/backing a game they must have a solid solo mode from the beginning, I am a sucker for table presence so art/theme must be there, and it is a tie for multiplayer/cost for the third requirement (I find that I love solo mode in a multiplayer game and only like solo only games). Cheers!
Wow! That's the kind of story I like to hear. Thanks for letting us know Brenda and glad you're here :)
So much in agreement. I spend a lot of money on games and at first would put up with ‘tacked on’ options. Now I am choosy and unforgiving of solo modes which are not real and built in by default. I back everything awakened realms puts out … it’s not a coincidence! Great video
Thanks for watching Neil! Glad to know I’m not alone in this line of thinking. 💥
the three things I look for before kickstarting a game: 1. do the theme and/or art and/or components intrigue me or not - 2. is it playable solo (and not just tacked-on or beat-your-own-score solo mode) and will I enjoy playing it solo (or maybe also multiplayer, which is - for me also - a bonus!) - 3. the price tag (base game, addons, shipping costs, VAT, EU-friendly or not, etc.)
Sounds like we’re closely aligned!
got goosebumps after you mentioned Lords of Hellas. I was practically screaming it in my head the whole time watching the video. They are bringing in david turczi in Lords of Ragnarok and this is a good sign that the game is built with solo mode in mind. Hope they release improved solo for LoH as well
I would love a much need solo boost there! LoR is on my watchlist for sure.
You hit it bang on. I really wanted to back Scarface 1920, and with it being $300+ Canadian, I couldn’t take this risk. Without being 100% certain, it would end up as a dust collector. So I passed and ended up backing some other solo DVG war games instead.
Sounds like a smart move!
Good points. I often find that solo gaming is dismissed as a compromise. People sometimes make the assumption that solo gaming is not how we would like to play if we had a choice. Sometimes (and with some games) this is true, but sometimes not.
100% I see and hear this often from individuals that focus soley on multiplayer. It's an odd push back that's quite dated at this point haha
I have a hard time getting people to play any game these days ... I prefer playing COOP games, but that needs other players ... so I have tended now to put SOLO gaming as my number one priority (just like you said you have shifted to that focus). Next I look at how complex the game is. I have been playing games for over six decades and used to be pretty sharp with strategy games ... but now I can't handle the complexity as much as before, so the game needs to be light to mid level for me. Third might be if I am paying extra for a game because it includes miniatures - I don't really like them. Standees are just fine for me, so if the core game includes them I am paying for something that I don't really want (and sometimes there isn't a standee option either). I appreciate your video Adam and included it in an article on My ISS Vanguard that talks about playing ISS Vanguard SOLO (I had one suggestion for Awake Realms in my article :)
That sounds great! Enjoyed reading this too. Thanks for adding the video to your stuff. We all change over time in our likes and dislikes as well as what we want out of our games. Sounds like you know exactly what you’re after! Cheers 👍🏼
Bravo! You're saying exactly what needed to be said to too many developpers yet. If you don't want to put in the work for a decent solo mode, just don't do it. Oh and DO NOT FOR ANY REASON TACK ON A SOLO MODE IN STRETCH GOALS. As for solo mode as an expansion, they are also usually bad because they weren't thought of from the start, so I don't even inform myself further about the game unless I'm really into it. I think this clearly answered your question 1 =)
What I'm looking for on a campaign page, 1. Can I play solo? There's really no way around it. And as I said, if the answer is yes but only as a SG or an add-on, or even if the page as been modified to include 1p but it was presented initially as multiplayer only, then I just skip it. This is not negociable to have my money.
2. Are there playthrough(s) from someone I know and trust (Rolling Solo, One Stop Coop Shop, Rob's Gaming table, Not Bored Gaming)? I really study how the game plays out and if it looks enjoyable, I'm in. I rarely back a game without any playthroughs (and I don't mean reviews or paid ads, full playthroughs of the solo mode).
3. Price, but not as a straight up number as I have the money for it, but is it worth it backing the game right now (1-2 years before I receive it) and paying the pledge price + shipping to Canada, or should I wait for retail to hit? That means, is there a decent saving and are there promos such as KSE or a deluxe upgrade unattainable in retail? Since there are rarely savings to be had, the question heavily leans towards the worthiness of exclusives and promos included.
Wow, this was a great read. Glad to hear I’m a part of the group that helps you make decisions on your games. See you around! 👏🏼
Solid insights.
I really think there should be game design from the co-op/solo mode from the start.
100% 👍🏼
With Gloomhaven, I basically just solo the scenarios that we don't do as a group. So basically, I play the "alternate path" scenarios solo, so I can play every single scenario in the game, while my group strictly sticks to the rules of which scenario is available.
great idea actually! :)
Smart! 😉
Interesting video. I watched Rob's, too, and generally agree here. It is disappointing to buy a game that says it has solo / supports solo play only to find you can't play everything in the box. Other things I don't like are 2P played by yourself being called solo, or requiring an expansion to play solo, although I'm sure I must have at least one game of both types. There must have been other factors that overrode my general tendency not to like those when I chose to get those games.
I'm almost exclusively a solo player. As a general rule, no 1P support = no purchase from me, so for the most part, I don't care about multiplayer, except that I often have to learn multiplayer rules before I can play solo (which is another thing I'm not a fan of -- I'd like the solo rules to stand alone and not require learning some other game mode first). I tended to prefer solo-only games, because I know they had to have been designed for solo play from the start, but I'm fine with having games that support both solo and multiplayer. The multiplayer is more of a nice to have for me, because (as noted) I don't really care about non-solo play. However, on rare occasion, I might be able to get my wife to join me in a co-op game, but not a competitive one, so occasionally I might go for a 2P co-op game. But anything that has 3P+ as a minimum or gets called a party game is pretty much out of the question for me.
About criteria for selecting a game to back, I think I typically look for #1 = solo / 1P support, #2 = price/value, #3 = overall interest. To add some detail, solo mode being my #1 is basically explained by my answer to the first question. I put price/value, which I know aren't necessarily the same thing, second because there are too many games coming out for me to buy everything, and I do have a typical maximum price I like to pay for board games. I have made exceptions and expect I'll continue to do so now and then, but in general, if I see a solo game and the price is too far above what I typically look to pay, it's out. A really interesting theme might save it though, as might a price that's over but still kind of close to my general maximum. In cases like that, the criterion tends to lean more towards value than price and whether I think I'll get enough out of the game for the price I'm asked to pay. When the price is low enough to easily fall into my budget, the value isn't as much of a concern. So it's a sort of combination of price and value that I'm checking next. As for #3, this was a bit harder, but I think that usually once I know there's solo and I'm OK with the price/value, I'm then looking for how interesting the game seems to me and do I want to play it. This is probably really a combination of a lot of factors though, so I may be cheating a bit with this as an answer. Things like theme/setting, play time, overall game play, specific game mechanics, and more get looked at when deciding if I think I'll like the game as a whole.
Amazing read James! Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts. This video has become quite informative. 😄👍🏼
I think one big reason I enjoy solo gaming so much is because I don't have to worry about if the other players are enjoying a game. Without that aspect I can focus entirely on the story and thematic elements.
Plus honestly I just don't like scheduling a time to play, I mean some of these games take multiple hours ours out of your day. Whereas solo I can pickup and play and go about my business. It doesn't turn into a 10 hour session of sitting on my ass.
The downside is there aren't really any surprises and sometimes the dice chucking gets really repetitive. And the math, so much math.
Thats just my two cents though.
Very true. Enjoyed reading your thoughts. All completely valid!
The points made in this video are spot on, from first to last. The board game scene was already
changing, but the pandemic further pushed the question ‘What if I cannot play this game with my friends?’
Question 1: I consider myself more a solo player, because as mentioned in the video, get together with friends is not easy nor granted. I play solo around 3-4 times a week and multiplayer 2-3 times a month. Do the math.
Question 2: When I think about purchasing a game I consider (1) if the game can be played solo, (2) how solo mode works compared to multiplayer, (3) gameplay length (in other words, how likely the game will hit the table).
Exactly! The change had already started to lean the industry to solo play and covid just pushed it much faster. Which in my opinion is a positive for the industry out of a bad situation. I just hope more designers/publishers realize this. Ignoring it is to their own detriment. Thanks for sharing your thoughts! 🔥
I only recently even got into more complex board games like this (with Gloomhaven). I've played the majority with 2 players, but have soloed a few scenarios (using 2 characters). I'm now planning to go through more of Gloomhaven solo, and may also do Middara solo (depending on if the other player is interested in it). With Middara, I think I'm going to try playing all 4 characters, but I'm not sure yet.
The KS offered scaled back character cards to use for solo play to make life easier. Those were handy!
2.) Being not so much experienced by now, I first look on the theme, if I could imagine my into that world thematicly. Second I look out for the mechanics, how it might be played and if that’s fits with the theme, if I enjoy or could image enjoying that mechanic (in case I don’t have or know a game with that mechanic), and third how language depending it might be, if there’s a German Version offered on KS or if it’s likely that there will be a rule book translation on BGG, cause of the Fanbase or Company size. So much different points then yours. But maybee that will slightly change, having watched ur great video tonight, u really have a point there, in measuring the value of a Kickstarter by its solo game mode. Thank u for ur efforts and ur different point of view.
I just don’t think there’s a good understanding in the industry that as a primary design focus, solo play is key. Not having it, greatly reduces the chances the game will get played.
1) I consider myself a solo gamer, but I'd still prefer to play multiplayer if I have the opportunity. My game group is more likely to play a game we haven't played or have only played one other time, so if I want to play a game over and over, it better have an enjoyable solo mode.
2) I'd say my priorities are "Will this get to the table enough that I can justify buying it?" and that's about it. But that includes a lot of things, including price and solo mode quality. If a game is a great two player game that my wife will like, it could be worth purchasing, or if it's a solo campaign game, it could be worth it. If it's a game I will legitimately play 50 times, $50 could be inexpensive, but if it's a game I'll probably only play once or twice, $30 is an expensive game.
Great reading this Lucas! Thanks for watching too 👍🏼
I no longer consider multi-player games for purchase. I've been slowly culling my collection of multi-player games that are just gathering dust. I play solo almost exclusively now and it's what I look for first in a new purchase. Solo mode or Co-op games. I enjoy 2 handed solo games and it's my go to option so co-op totally works for me. Playing single handed is a nice option. I totally agreed with Rob the other day and also agree with you. Publishers... get on board the SOLO TRAIN.
🚂💨
Honestly, this is the reason that I haven't backed any kickstarters as yet. I'm only a couple of years into the hobby and solo is 100% my priority. I only want to buy games that I know are amazing solo experiences, because I want to be able to get it to the table and enjoy it every night. Right now for me, I feel the only way I can have that assurance is to buy games that are being highly recommend buy our amazing community of solo players, who luckily, unlike myself, feel confident in taking the risk of buying ks games and giving them a go...
I hope that as I become a more experienced player I will have the confidence to do this, so that I can then offer recommendations to others like myself, who are currently too green to really know exactly what they are looking for in an as yet unreleased title.
Although, hopefully by then, maybe, solo might be a standard player count in the majority of games from the outset 🤞🤞🤞
Appreciate the sharing of your thoughts! Glad the video landed and lined up for you. Don’t worry, after about a year or two you become much more savvy in the games you choose. Like anything it just takes some time at the start. 😄👍🏼
For me I actually found your channel because I generally enjoy coop games, they are great for me because it gives the ability to play at any (depending on the game) player count. Saying that primarily I look for games that are good to play for 2 so I can play with my partner.
As for crowd funding: 1, mechanisms-my favourite games tend to be narrative, deck/engine builders, or dungeon crawlers. 2, publisher and reputation of the games they produce-have I enjoyed previous games from them.
3, price-Is it worth it for what I get backing now, can I sell it on if I don't like it.
Glad you found us! Thanks for sharing your take too. Co-op games are great and make things much easier for solo. 👍🏼
I primary play solo games because of finding the time issues but I prefer playing with friends. It's just not working with the games I have I would need multiple times a week group to make it work.
In terms of what I look for before buying a game that's actually depends on the game a lot.
I only have so much money to spend so price is a big consideration. It doesn't mean I dont pay expansive games it does mean that I want to be able to resell them at a reasonable price to buy new ones.
It also means that if I just sold a big game I got more money to spend and if all KS are delayed like they are now because of covid I don't buy new games.
The next thing I want from a game is to be able to bring it to the table. Rather that is because I know it will work in my group or it has a solo mode I belive both is possible. Or like descent allows you to switch the player count each mission. That's pretty nice to me. A solo mode is however always going to allow me to play. Having an solo mode that I belive in is going to pass this check.
The first two are really checks a game needs to pass. If I can't afford a game/I don't believe it will be worth it's money it's not worth to consider. A game that I can't get to the table is also worthless. It might be the best game in the world but if I won't get to play it there is no reason to buy it it's that simple. But once a game passes these checks I need to figure out what game to actually get.
And though I like to belive I decide on gameplay I honestly think art is more important here. I mostly buy KS games because I like big crawlers or boss battlers and those are hard to get. But even if I check out all the gameplay I feel there is a lack of information often. Basically if you have a reasonable track record and the gameplay demo looks good I'm sold. But often it's like one mission and that tells you nothing of balance build mission variety the difference between enemies etc. maybe that was all the game had and it really shines in that one scenario but it's not enough to carry for 50-100h of the campaign. I don't really think that we can decide that before the campaign unless there are red flags.
Art on the other hand if the game looks good it will just always draw me in. I'm immediately interested.
This was a fantastic breakdown of your perspective! Thanks for sharing this! 👏🏼
Things I look for in a retail or crowd funded game.
1st. Does the game look like fun to me, solo or multiplayer.
2nd. Can it be played solo.
3rd. If multiplayer is an option does it play the player count I desire.
4th bonus. Would I play this multi handed in multiplayer mode by myself.
If all 4 line up, I'll probably buy or back it.
Euro or engine building games are usually an easy game to table solo for me. Where I run into stumbling blocks is in story driven narrative games, usually after the first scenario or chapter I can't help but think "this is really a lot of fun... Should I wait until I can find someone to enjoy this with". Then I have to decide either push on through or pack it away until I find someone.
Sounds like you may be more 50/50 solo and multiplayer then. Thanks for sharing!
I primarily play my board games solo, but I love to play multiplayer when I can. It's just challenging to get together when you and your group have kids and other life priorities. I make the majority of my purchases through retail.
100% feel this! I enjoy multiplayer games but you don’t get the value out of them in most cases.
Just a few weeks ago, I played Bullet. Hands down, it has to have one of the best implementations of solo I have ever played. It doesn’t matter which mode you play, you get the entire experience. There is zero trade-off.
Co-op board games work well for me because it feels like I’m behind a control tower guiding each character through each situation. Feels great and is fun. Also, I don’t have a game group so solo is the only way I play.
So far, the only game that was a complete bust was Mind: MGMT. What a joke and I’m still upset about that one. I would’ve bought a different game if I would’ve known. Other than that, I try to really research before I invest and it has worked well for me so far.
I also come from a video game background and I agree, single-player first, multiplayer second.
If I could do it over again, I would’ve introduced my kids to board games instead of video games. That mistake caused me to become a solo board gamer but I’m okay with that.
I agree. Sounds like a good mistake to have made haha 😜
1) Art/Production Quality
2) Theme
2) Publisher
3) Solo Gameplay
4) General Gameplay
5) Price (including shipping)
Awesome list! Nothing wrong with going beyond three. The more the better. 😄👍🏼
I’ll say the same thing I posted on Rob’s video: The bg industry needs better labeling for player counts-beyond x-y. They need solo-as-a-teaching, full solo, solo expansion, solo that’s actually multi-hand, et al. But beyond that, they need better labeling at all levels. If a game says 2-4p but it’s actually a 2p game and the 4p mode is two teams of two, that needs to be stated. Otherwise, it’s litigiously close to false advertising.
Agree with you! It’s been a blind spot in the industry for years. It can be much better!
YOu make really important points in this vlog. I hope that many game publishers will get them. - toby
Thanks Tobias! Glad it hit home for you too. 👏🏼
I agree. I love solo games, most of my games are solo or have solo capacity. Solo first! For instance, I love Tammany Hall, haven’t played it in at least 3 years.
Thanks for watching and your thoughts! 👍🏼
Right now I'm torn on the Witcher: Old World. Love the IP but can't bring myself to back with the solo/coop portion of the game still hidden away in a back room somewhere. Feels like they are still trying to make it work. Good news is they say playthrough should come in October. Love the conversation, keep on rolling.
Agreed, that's a tricky one. The IP may lure you in (me too) but the lack of solo information certainly is hurting it. I believe they should have had that better squared away before launch. I reached out to them but no luck. I'll be keeping my eyes on it though!
My thoughts exactly. I was really excited about this one, until I noticed the lacking solo mode.
I feel like it would just turn into a box of badass minis and a ton of cards and tokens, just sitting on my shelf.
@@zer0zer082 That’s certainly a risk with this one. It’s possible the solo ends up being good or worth it of course. That’s the gamble…which certainly makes it hard for solo gamers.
I'm going to multi-hand a game before I play a tacked on solo mode. The games that comes to mind is Hel vs. Tainted Grail. While Hel hasn't been released the solo mode seems like an alternative story/streamlined experience. Tainted Grail is the full game experience. I think Middara's variant buff system might be an okay compromise.
I think most solo players are fine playing 2 or more characters in a cooperative game. But I think a portion of designers and gamers assume solo means just 1 character. Which has to be a harder design challenge I think.
Have you played Middara? Have you tried playing all 4? I'm going to play it in the future, and I'm wondering how hard it is to do it all solo.
@@guruthosamarthruin4459 Not yet. It is next on my list. I've played all 4 in Tainted Grail and Gloomhaven but found 3 to be less tedious and a mental drain. I might do the same, but will try 4 first in Middara.
Yep I play Middara /-player variant and it is done so well. I don’t think it would be too hard to run 4 characters but for me it’s the table space. Each character (especially with playermats) take up quite a bit of room and the only reason I got it was because at least there was an alternative to 4-player. I think it’s done really well.
@@Heidelmann There seems to be fewer choices in Middara, where you're just choosing which items to use every round, as opposed to choosing exact abilities in Gloomhaven, which I think takes a lot longer.
I think that the thought of having solo as a backup when you do not have a team to play with, can lead to unnecessary purchases (even if I do not find a team to play with, I can solo it so buy it). That makes us (solo gamers) extra careful when we check for new releases that say that solo play is included. Also we have limited time in our life to play ,even solo, every game that we purchase if we are not careful.
Completely agree with you. That was the message behind the video. It’s better to assume you’ll only be playing it solo so you can guarantee that it can get played. Otherwise it’s a gamble! Thanks for watching!
I don't have a ganing group, so only solo. Regarding priority; solo, game type/mode, art/theme
Nice! Thanks for watching 🔥
Dinosaur Island's Totally Liquid expansion (retail) was a let down for saying Solo Mode included on the box yet it was only included on Kickstarter, or a free download which just isn't the same as actually including the components. Dinosaur World looks to be in the same boat.
Makes it rough when it’s available in one place and not another fully. That’s a good example of what not to do!
1. I play both but prefer solo games so that I don't have to wait to get a group together.
2.1 Soloplay
2.2 Replayability (kind of story related, I don't want to keep replaying the exact same story over and over again so either have different characters or choices)
2.3 Multiplayer
Nice! Thanks for breaking that out. Loving all the feedback. 😄
Solo first, theme, solo reviews. If i am backing a Kickstarter game and I am unsure of the solo mode, I will back for a dollar and review the rules when published. I also watch reviews from this channel and other solo review channels, that I trust and who seem to have similar game genre taste.
Happy to know I can help you with that. That’s the aim! To help you make an informed choice for yourself. Cheers!
@rolling Solo - Could not help but see Star Wars Rebellion in the background... do you recommend that for Solo?
As for what I look for:
KS = 1) Solo, 2) Base game price, 3) Theme & components (I don't even bother looking at multi - it WILL have it as boardgames are designed that way unless it's a small game)
Retail = 1) Does it Solo, 2) how well does it score Solo on BGG in 'recommended', 3) Can I find it in the Top 100 solo games and/or Reddit/Facebook/sologames hit my table on BGG solo Forum, 4) is it a theme my partner will like
You can indeed play SWR solo. I haven't given it a shot in that way yet but had planned to due to my love for the IP. As a multiplayer game, it's amazing. Thanks for the responses to the questions too. It's been awesome seeing others thoughts!
@@RollingSolo - I would love for you to give it a try. I have the same love for the IP but have not pulled the trigger because of aforementioned #2: How well does it solo: only 3.7% on BGG say it solos well. This doesn't have to mean it doesn't.... maybe there is an unofficial solo only a few know of, but which is great... have to delve into it.
@@EricWoning 😄👍🏼
Also it's great to finally see your face man 😉
This is a fun way to get connected with my audience more. I’m enjoying it!
@@RollingSolo yeah we enjoy it too, keep them coming man
I've passed on so so many possibly amazing games with big pricetags that's I would go all in on, had it not been for a lack of proper solo experience or a the solo is a completely different mode that doesn't feel like the same game anymore.
It's frustrating to miss so much because of bad design and thought about solo gameplay.
I hear you! I think that's what a lot of publishers don't realize. They're missing out on those that would back all-in for gameplay if solo was a primary focus from the ground floor. Thanks for watching!
For me I look more for solo than multiplayer mostly because it can be hard to get people down for gaming and while I offer my wife I dont wanna make her feel she has to play she enjoys villanous alot so i enjoy that with her. When it comes to what I look for it is usually solo play, setup, and value and i mean not just miniatures or bling but content that can be played solo vs not.
Nice! Thanks for letting us know Billy. See you around 🎲
Always look for solo first, multi-player I can play on other houses or at least pnp instead some party games
As for my parameters I see other write it's solo first, component and theme second, and then cost.
Inside of that:
Solo - first I check its not automa or beat your own score because I hate those anyway. Then I check deeply about the solo.
Component and theme - if it's not agriculture or animal or horror or vehicle then it's good to go because I hate those theme.
Then after the theme I check the components that if they are cards mostly played. I don't have and won't have minis I hate minis.
Cost - yeah totally need to check it but only if the other two are valid for me.
What is the result? Not a lot of games for me and that is OK at least I have my parameters to know which games to trim
Thanks for sharing my friend! 🙌🏼
@@RollingSolo sure, thanks for the great subject and video
I have been only buying solo games lately because the multi-player games rarely get played. I still love playing games with other people.
I feel that Firefly the Game is like that. I wasnt satisfied when I beat the game. Needs more scenarios that feel like a multi-player game.
I feel similar! You just begin to realize as time goes on that solo play is the primary way games actually get the value you pay for them. Only a handful of multiplayer games ever make it into that category.
Question #1: Solo (what’s multiplayer :)
Question #2: 1. Is it playable Solo? 2. What is the Theme of the game? 3. Does it offer a Campaign? (Good story, etc…)
🤣 Solid answer to #1
Great list for #2 as well. Cheers!
Solo (friends don’t play board games), 1. Replay ability for price 2. Fun 3. Ease of play (when I have 4 hours I will play mage knight)
Hey Aman! Thanks for responding to the questions. Love seeing peoples lists! 🔥
For your first question : Obviously, Solo. For your second question: I'll first check if it's a game made for me (type,mechanics, campaign, playable lenght,..), Then, I will look if it's a solo game (because I love finding out about new games even if I know I'll never play them ). And finally, the gatekeeping aspect, it's the overall price (including shiping ) of the game. Multiplayer is not necessary, I'll play solo 99,95% of the time.
Thanks for sharing!
I would rather play with other people. But I normally play 90% by myself. I would rather play true solo, then after that 2 handed at the most. Miniatures are ok because I like to paint them. I like upgraded tokens. The bigger the game and also longer the campaign the harder it is to get to the table. Any time the price goes above $100 it’s hard to justify the price for solo play.
Thanks for watching Johnny!
I don't factor in a game having a solo mode option for crowd funding for these reasons, unless it's a co-op game of course then it's basically the same as a dedicated solo game already even if you have to play two or more characters. A lot of publishers just want solo modes for marketing reasons and don't care if they stink. I'd have to be pretty confident that the designer of the solo mechanics put some passion and care behind it to trust it.
This is what Rob’s video did a great job of pointing out. 👍🏼
Oh wow you are so right. I bought escape from tarkov. Thank god single player mod exists. Because i can enjoy it when i want the way i want and have fun without experiencing griefers try harders and wipes
It's funny how much of primary focus tabletop multiplayer is when it's so limited in how you must play. Thanks for watching! :)
@@RollingSolo yes, indeed. Luckily there are some great board games out there that are amazing for solo players. You are welcome. You have the the best board game channel i could find out here.
@@barbusbogdan7 Thanks for the kind words. Made my day!
Can you do another Reichbusters playthrough using the errata pack and review your thoughts?
Hey JJ! Would be cool to revisit the game. I have the errata pack as well, we shall see what happens in the future. Thanks for letting me know your interest too!
Only watched a few minutes so far. New to solo gaming. I don't know what the terms kick starter, crowd funding or stretch goal, mean.
No problem! Kickstarter is a site that house crowdfunded games. Crowdfunding is paying for something up front (investing) in a concept or a preorder. Stretch goals are used on campaigns in order to entice more people to pledge and based on growth unlock free thank yous to the backers.
Great talk… and is it an opportunity for you to do al list of Games in which the Solo Mode is Sh** and games where solo gaming shines?
🤣 Now that would be a video haha
The first thing I look at is the content then the mechanics then the price then the solo variant. If I think a game is overpriced for the content I don't even consider the mechanics let alone a solo variant.
Hey Ian! Ah yes, a logical approach my friend. I like it!
I don't like to compete against my friends. I prefer to co-operate with them. To be a team. After all we are friends and not enemies. So I lean heavily on co-op games. There are great games that works both co-op and solo naturally. If the game is only PvP or cannot be played solo I just avoid it. The worthiness is doubled when the game can be played both ways. But yeah I am a solo player myself and I even have quite a few solitaire (solo only) games.
I sort of left co-op out of the equation as co-op games already allow for solo play. It’s moreso the multiplier only games that I feel lack in terms of overall value by the dollar.
In general, I feel fine playing 2 characters, but I would like to play more games to play true solo with just one character. Now I'm playing marvel champions that is perfect for true solo and wargames like storm over the reich (solitaire game). In KS only backed in this year Hoplomachus form chip theory games another true solo game.
Good choice! 🔥
A big offender for tacking on a bad solo version is Floodgate Games with their dice drafting game Sagrada.
Right after the Kickstarter delivered, I played 12 solo games in a row, I commented about how unbalanced it was in the KS comments and a couple people thought I was playing it wrong LOL, no the game really is off on the solo. (I felt redeemed when Liz Davidson said similar in her review.)
I recently found a fan produced PNP for a Solo Automa version on BBG (haven’t tried it yet).
Floodgate Games also made an expansion for a fifth player, BUT did not add the dice to make it playable for five players. When backers asked to buy more dice, they were told they couldn’t.
Beautiful game, but I am not a fan of the company because of all that.
Opps I meant: a free fan-created pnp (print n play).
Hey Nani, I can understand that completely. Companies do learn from their mistakes in most cases. Hopefully they heard your voice and feedback and took it into consideration for future products. Thanks for sharing :)
So true. Maybe the developers should start listening.
I hope it helps them think about solo in a different light! 😄👍🏼
I think you are !00% got it. Me I look at solo/coop then if u can play 2 never 3 or more . To hard getting 3 or more players at one time. I also look if it is a me too game, how the price compares to the enjoyment. If it is having some kind of politically correct agenda or if the designers has made a political statement about another persons games ( those are totally taken off my list). I have back a few that said solo and they were not! Those designers from then on on my no back list too. i think you hit every point on the head. Thanks for speaking out.
Thanks for watching!
Agreed about having the solo mode from the beginning as being the best. It's how I designed (and balanced) Tournament Fishing.
That’s the way to do it! 👍🏼
I find the value per hour of a game.
GH was 130.
Say 80 scenarios, say 3 hours avg. From solo to 4 player; Is easily cents per hour.
I have an Exit game, that I played for 2 hours, will never again, that was... 7 bucks an hour.
Solo is very important though, and I won't invest in a game without one. My group will get together a few time a month, a finite amount of time per year. there are too many titles to get through. I would not like to have animosity to my group by not giving me a return on my purchase - if that makes sense.
Sure does!
If any of y'all want a game similar to X-Wing, but with a great solo mode... Check out Snap Ship Tactics!
Thanks for the suggestion! Hope to see you around here.
In my opinion, not every game works with solo play, and I think solo gamers should keep that in mind. The campaign for a game should be very clear for solo gamers what type of solo mode they are running, but shouldn't necessarily start every game design with solo in mind. There are incentives for a tacked on solo mode, because it is a desire to be able to solo every game.
Fair thoughts Tim! I believe that solo (like with video games) is ‘the’ way to ensure a game has continued value to keep it in the long term. Multiplayer games are only as good as the players you can get to play them. So you end up with a whole bunch of multiplayer games that can never be tabled. Not all ‘types’ games need a solo mode. For example, Blood Rage or dudes on a map style games for the most part. But the large majority of game types can easily have a solo mode or solo play that makes logic sense. Thanks for watching too!
Exactly this is my problem with The Witcher.
I'm quite afraid that the Wild Hunt expansion that makes it coop/solo is very tacked on in order to appease the amount of people asking for it. The information is so sketchy that I have difficulty believing it is going to be good.... and they simply are not releasing any information though people have begged for it from all different angles.
This is a good example for sure. It could be great...but no ones knows. They should have had that buttoned up prior to launch. It's likely having a negative effect they aren't seeing. The game would potentially sold even better if solo was solid from the jump. The IP is what has me intrigued and the potential to play this with others...but it's a high priced gamble at this point. If more information comes out, I'll be keeping my eyes peeled. I reached out to them but no luck.
@@RollingSolo - I am a $1 backer because of what you described above. They have promised to keep the Pledge manager open longer so they can show IN A VIDEO how their expansions (including the Wild Hunt) play.
Fingers crossed they actually do.....
@@EricWoning I’m certainly interested in how it turns out.
Wow yeah I saw Rob video as well and I agree with him a lot of games with solo mode are lame and I feel ripped off. But I'm anyway a solo gamer who check all of the parameters before I buy any game I've never and will never buy blindly thus also not supporting ks for example 😉
Anyway as for your question - 100% yes! Solo gamers get the best experience from the game because they can check and play everything while in multi-player not so much, when one is a specific character for example even for a whole campaign you as the other player will never get to know how to play him, while in solo you can just switch around between mission and feel the other characters for example.
The time and I just want to play it constraints made me switch to solo anyway...
I can have a different gaming groups all the time but just like you said it's not worth the risk, because let's face it most of the gamer people here in Israel anyway are snobs and less fun to play with
Glad the video lined up with your thinking as well. Sounds like I was on target which is nice to hear. 😄
@@RollingSolo yeah man really enjoyed this content
I'm tired of the content of reviews, top tens and ks...
Real talk on the subjects is great keep doing that if it's fun for you as well man
People: "We Want Solo Games!!!"
FFG: "LOL - Unfathomable"
🤣 I plan to make an exception for that one. I played BSG and love the gameplay but don’t like the IP. So this new version is more for me. I don’t buy many multiplayer only games at all but I’m excited for that one.
As it is now, there is not a need for another multiplayer to ever be created. They exist out there and are sufficiently developed. I have too many as is. Because of this, a game being introduced needs to do something to justify its existence. I personally am not going to trust a new game coming out unless it was built initially to work solo. A game working solo is more likely to be tested sufficiently to reduce risk of having a fatal issue.
For me if a multiplayer game doesn’t have a solo mode built from the ground up with it it’s at a 90% chance of being skipped out of the gates.
I only buy games with a solo mode, nd a good one. Perfect exampls Dune Imperium. I don't have and will not have this game even if I love Dune. The solo mode is mediocre. I have solo games Nemo's War, Lost expedition,...
1) solo mode
2) theme
3) mecanics
Great list! 💥
Tacking on stuff during the campaign is very dangerous. This happened with the PVP mode for Bloodborne: TBG and what came from it is a broken mess (and this is from legit designers too Shinal and Lang).
I never tried the pvp, was it that bad? Mind you I sold the game after two campaigns 😅
I haven’t gotten to the PvP portion of the game yet. Interested to see what it’s like now 😜
Giant red flag for me is when I read “Great way to learn the game”. I saw this only last week on a KS for a cute dragon themed game.
Conversely I get excited when i hear a reviewer ‘criticising’, a game being “too much multiplayer solitaire”.
Agree with what you say however the one caveat I have to mention is that I know that David Turzi sometimes gets brought on to do solo modes after the game has been developed. Sometimes half way through the crowdfunding campaign. If his name, or Automa Factory, get mentioned i’ll accept it listed as a stretch goal assuming that they’ll make it work.
If a person has a good track record, that certianly helps with the 'risk factor' of a stretch goal add. However, I'll never like seeing it being an development afterthought. If you want to maximize the solo experience for a game, make it happen from the start. Thanks for sharing your take Leigh!
I am extremely jealous of people who can get a gaming group going. That's not my reality. My games need to have solo play. I might look at a game that has a solo mode "slapped" on if it looks good or the game itself is very attractive to me..ie Mythic Battles:Pantheon and Ragnarok.
I’ve got my eyes on Ragnarok! 👀
Thanks for watching and glad you’re a part of the community here Rafael!
WoW it is almost my thoughts what I am looking at board games and why I am playing solo
Priority 1 Solo 2 Theme/Mechanics 3 Availability 4 total cost included shipping
We’re potentially aligned! 🔥
Want to say something about multiplayer games. If the servers go down or for whatever reason get closed. Bye bye game. All the money you paid for it gone
In terms of video games, you're correct there!