One Player Time Limit?

[Haplo]

Why is there even a time limit for playing a single-player game? I just lost my game because I had to do something and returned slightly too late. Is it a matter of bandwidth? If so, can you please at least consider extending the time? Would 20 minutes be too much? I feel like less than ten is inadequate sometimes.

The whole reason I play the 1-player games is because they are less stressful, as in I don't need to worry about time as much. If you could provide a little more time, it would make the games much more playable, especially for those of us splitting our time between other online activities.

[Johan R.]

i completely agree they should make it forever the time limit.

[Jimmy V.]

I don't remember what time limit there is. Is that 10 minutes?

The reason why we leave a time limit is because we don't want to have games hanging around. They are a pain when we need to go into maintenance for example. But there are other reasons why it is best if games don't last too long.

[Haplo]

I can understand that if everyone had games left open indefinitely, it would cause problems. But I doubt many people would do it. And you could always have a limit. Say, 10 that can be open endlessly at a time. After that, other people are warned that due to all the open games, their time will be limited.

But short of that, is it really too much to ask for more time? If not 20 minutes, why not at least give us 15?

[Kristin W.]

I think the time limits make sense because then the scores are more comparable. If you want a solo game with no time limit and no stress, then you can play in training mode.

[Haplo]

If you want a solo game with no time limit and no stress, then you can play in training mode.

Interesting thought, Kristin. I never considered the time limit as an actual feature of the solo game; the time given is really too much to present a real challenge.
-BUT-
What if there were an option for solo games where less time was given, making them more challenging? Rapid Response Solo!