I am always intrigued by would you rather question. When set up well they really push people to question their values and what they truly desire. The problem is that people can often discuss and theorize what they want but as we know from a very large number of studies that what people say they prefer and what they actually prefer can be wildly different. The thing is that ultimately these are mostly hypotheticals, not often can they be tested directly because I really don’t want to find out if I would prefer to live my life without ever having sweets again, or never being allowed to take a shower. Though occasionally we are given a chance to truly test our mettle and answer one of these questions.
In September I got to play 8 total plays of 5 total games. Three of those five games I consider “bigger” games that you get to make a game night around: Spirit Island, Slay the Spire, and Guards of Atlantis 2. In contrast so far in October I got to play 18 total plays of 12 games and most of it has been really short games, your fillers, your basics (well and Slay the Spire again). So this led me to asking a question: Would I rather play a lot of games but play fewer “game night” games or would I rather play significantly less games but each one be a more meaty game? If you asked me this several months ago I would have said that I prefer the former, I like getting those bigger games in and I am willing to give up the frequency to have that happen. Looking at it now I think the answer is a bit more murky.
One fact that I have noticed, and I feel I always knew is that when I don’t get to play games for too long I get antsy. You know you like doing your hobbies. I know some people have similar feedback loops if they don’t play some specific sport sufficiently frequently, or if they don’t get to go out with friends, or have some video game time in some regular intervals. Sometimes you can get part of this experience without actually “engaging” in the hobby directly. For example reading rule books, forums, or even browsing reviews of games you have…or most likely don’t. It may come as a surprise to no one that many people offset their inability to play games with buying games.
However, the “hit” so to speak doesn’t seem to require me to play a larger four player game for 3 hours. Getting in some basic small games that have some meaningful decisions, like Scout, Knarr or Qwirkle seem to sate my mind that “I played a game” and makes me feel better about itself. Maybe this means that I just need to hit my brain with smaller dopamine hits of board games and I will be fine…..but you know, I still want to play bigger games.
Are the Solo Players in the right?
Ugh…so I have weird feelings about solo games. I fully acknowledge from the point above that a simple solution to correct the lack of ability to play games is to play more solo games. I mean it takes away the part of board games that really differentiate it away from me playing on my computer and that is other people. Now its not just about having people, its about having people that I actually want to interact and hang out with for an evening. That gets completely lost in solo gaming. On the other hand as I noted up above about 3 topic changes ago, I feel better after playing some games, and it doesn’t always seem to matter where, or how big the game is. Now, I can much more easily convince myself to play spirit island than I can most people. Though I do often look at autonama systems and shrug. I am a firm believer that the solo game should effectively feel like the multiplayer game but I know that is not a popular fact. I guess if I want to play more I just need to make time for it instead of…oh I dunno doom scrolling or going through BGG random posts all evening.
I guess the final thought is just play more games….it may make you happier. And if it doesn’t, don’t sweat it and try again later.
Ramble done.