
Originally Posted by
ShinChuck
This is going to sound snarkier than I mean it, but it's a genuine bit of advice: if you really "want to suffer" you should pick up a Devil May Cry or Ninja Gaiden or Civilization and crank up the difficulty to full, because those are real, desirable challenges. When "challenge" is simply reliant on "hoping others don't screw up the strategy", it becomes a bit less so. When triumphing over a challenge is not reliant on your skill, it becomes, to a degree, "fake difficulty", partly defined as "The outcome is not reasonably determined by the player's actions."
Your compatriots are, essentially, fulfilling the roles of intelligent AI, and the outcome is not reasonably determined by your actions.
There is no reason your skills should not be able to be put to the test solo, if it different fashions. Yes, proper strategy can a test of skill, but so is handling yourself when the odds are significantly against you.
Besides all this, your premise is flawed: the idea of "more people = more challenge" isn't quite accurate, because it's all based on the inherent programming and balance of a game. Many games, more people = far less challenge. If you do simply desire challenge, and not an artificial means of forcing people to play together because you prefer to play together, then "more people" doesn't necessarily even come into play.
If your cry for "challenge" is indeed more along the lines of "I want more reasons for people to play together because I prefer to play together and not so much the challenge because I can get challenge solo properly tweaked", then that's fine too! Multiplayer content should be a rewarding experience in itself, and it can be without nerfing or limiting the experiences of those who wish to solo.