Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

Originally posted by Neanderthal

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

Originally posted by Neanderthal

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

So, to summarise:

As a soloer, I'm happy for you to enjoy challenging group content from level 1 to max.
As a grouper, you're not happy for me to enjoy challenging solo content from level 1 to max.

And yet, in your OP you're complaining about the attitiude of the soloers?

But what he was saying is right.  It might not sound right.  You might not want it to be right.  But it's right none the less.

People still complain that EQ had forced grouping just to level up even though soloing was a perfectly viable way to level in EQ.  You could experience solo, get the same levels solo, it just went a little slower.  So even though it really was perfectly viable to solo people call it a forced grouping game.

Whether it makes sense or not people will always take the path of least resistance and feel like they are being cheated if their preferred playstlye is NOT the path of least resistance.  It's just the way it is and we ALL do it.

I'll be honest; I've absolutely no sympathy or consideration for an MMO gamer who would choose to ignore their preferred playstyle and engage in activities that they don't enjoy in order to maximise their XP gain. It's something that I would never even consider.

i didn't play EQ, so I won't venture an opinion on how well the solo playstyle was supported by its game mechanics.

Yeah, I'll admit I used say similar things myself in regard to a similar mmorpg topic but in reality it just doesn't work the way it seems like it should.

I can't imagine a game trying to have EQ style grouping and WoW style soloing in the same game.  There is just no way in hell that it would work out.

Imagine that you took a EQ zone like Unrest with EQ rules and stuck it next to a zone with WoW style solo questing and WoW rules.

Ok people, here are your choices; you can go to Unrest, go through the trouble of putting a group together and try to fight your way to a good spot.  If you die you lose a big chunk of experience and have a nasty corpse run which might litterally be impossible without help.  You will fight things which will absolutely gauranteed kill you unless your group is working together.  Sometimes you will get adds and get caught up in insane fights which might or might not force you to run for your lives.  Some of these fights will last for 10 minutes or more.  And you will do all of this while dodging trains of mobs (caused by other groups running for their lives).  You will do it with slow regen of mana/health (which is part of what encourages grouping and part of what makes it more challenging).  Loot and experience will be slow and hard to come by. 

OR....you can go to the WoW zone where you will frolic along and watch mobs drop dead merely by approaching them closely.  There will be no death penalty if you do somehow manage to kill yourself.  No trains.  No hassles.  Experience will flow like the Amazon river in the rainy season.  Shiney loot upgrades will fall out of the asses of every NPC you talk to.

Maybe you can't see it but this just wouldn't work.

 

You're using exaggerated scenarios to support your point of view.

We're not talking about EQ or WoW.
We've not discussed death penalties, downtime or mechanics.

I agree that an easy solo game squished together with a hard group game would not work.

A challenging game that provided complete support to both playstyles would work.

 

the devil, as they say, is in the details.

What's easy? What's hard?

What acceptable?

DaoC works for me, WoW doesn't.

DAoC allowed you to solo, but it was challenging. WoW makes grouping until you get to raid level more or less pointless, not to mention the fact that the actual game play when grouped is sadly lacking compared to EQ or DAoC.

If you think DAoC was fine, then we're in agreement and we could play the same game.

If you think WoW is  a great grouping game, then we probably need to play on different servers.

Originally posted by Neanderthal 

What Imho is pointing out (for the umpteenth time) is that it's not the same thing.  Look at the typical solo quest grinder game and think about what actually happens when you group for the normal content in that game prior to the endgame. 

The way it usually goes is like this:

     1)  You get a quest to go kill 15 ducks (or whatever).

     2)  You run over to the duck pond (or whatever).

     3)  You see some other guy there and invite him to group with you.

     4)  He accepts, so now you and he will share credit for each others kills.

     5)  But you don't actually work together.  He runs around killing ducks on his own and you do the same.  As soon as he fills his quota of ducks he disbands and runs off to work on his next chore.

So the "grouping" in those games is really nothing more than sharing credit for each others solo kills and seeing each others' names and health bars on your screen.  It isn't even real grouping because you aren't working together as a group.  It's just a mechanism to let you take credit for each others kills.

If it were designed for real grouping it would be designed in such a way that people would truly work together to kill the ducks instead of running around soloing ducks.

Actually the diffrerence between this scenatio and Ihmo's favoured 'group camping' setup is really a question of mob power.   The two players in your scenario only solo the ducks becuase the ducks are soloable.  The proper continiuation of your scenatio is that the two playuers finish killign the ducks and then move on to kill bears which they cannot normally solo (until a few levels later) but which give better rewards.  If the next quest involves killing bears they will usually move to it together.  Otherwise they will move to it if they prefer xp grinding over xp questing.

The different outcomes of that scenario are not really dependant on whether a person likes to solo or group.  If they did not want to group they would have never grouped for the ducks quest.  The issue actually is whether they prefer doing quests or camping spawns.  

My problems with Ihmotep's ideas are not that he advocates grouping which (which I actually prefer) but that it advocates spawn camping sessions (which I hate).

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

If you think WoW is  a great grouping game, then we probably need to play on different servers.

I would never make that claim.

WoW has some pretty decent group content in the form of instances, but it's too sparse to properly support the grouping playstyle from level 1 onwards.

I barely played DAoC either, so I don't have an opinion on its gameplay.

Originally posted by Kyleran

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

So, to summarise:

You want a game with group content all the way from level 1 to max.
I want a game with solo content all the way from level 1 to max.

There's absolutely nothing to say that we can't coexist.

I could level from 1 to 10 via soloable content in Antisocial Alley.
You could level from 1 to 10 via group content in Codependancy Canyon.

What's the problem?

I don't think a single game can adequately cater to both types of play styles w/o either becoming incredibly average (see WOW) or alienating one side or the other.

But these group names made me laugh.  What if I'm antisocial and codependent? Does that make me just plain crazy?

Presumably, you'd just need two accounts.

What people want I guess is:

You can solo from 1 to 10 and will take you 3-5 hours

Or

You can group from 1 to 10 and will take you 1.5-3 hours

Both have a choice but if one wants to achieve things easier/faster one needs to group.

In wow grouping while questing would make you take longer to reach, drops were not shared (as far as I played) so you had to do it x per player in party and mobs give crap exp to prevent botting.

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

No, I am happy for you to enjoy solo content from level 1 to max.

But not if it destroys my grouping content.

The only way the two have no effect on one another is if they do not exist in the same game on the same server.

You cannot ad a feature to the MMORPG that does not affect me.

If you can solo, I can solo.

Again, you're inventing extremist scenarios to support your point of view.

Providing that your playstyle remains supported by the game mechanics, nothing added to game can destroy it unless you decide to destroy it for yourself.

Originally posted by Torik

Originally posted by Neanderthal 

What Imho is pointing out (for the umpteenth time) is that it's not the same thing.  Look at the typical solo quest grinder game and think about what actually happens when you group for the normal content in that game prior to the endgame. 

The way it usually goes is like this:

     1)  You get a quest to go kill 15 ducks (or whatever).

     2)  You run over to the duck pond (or whatever).

     3)  You see some other guy there and invite him to group with you.

     4)  He accepts, so now you and he will share credit for each others kills.

     5)  But you don't actually work together.  He runs around killing ducks on his own and you do the same.  As soon as he fills his quota of ducks he disbands and runs off to work on his next chore.

So the "grouping" in those games is really nothing more than sharing credit for each others solo kills and seeing each others' names and health bars on your screen.  It isn't even real grouping because you aren't working together as a group.  It's just a mechanism to let you take credit for each others kills.

If it were designed for real grouping it would be designed in such a way that people would truly work together to kill the ducks instead of running around soloing ducks.

 

Actually the diffrerence between this scenatio and Ihmo's favoured 'group camping' setup is really a question of mob power.   The two players in your scenario only solo the ducks becuase the ducks are soloable.  The proper continiuation of your scenatio is that the two playuers finish killign the ducks and then move on to kill bears which they cannot normally solo (until a few levels later) but which give better rewards.  If the next quest involves killing bears they will usually move to it together.  Otherwise they will move to it if they prefer xp grinding over xp questing.

The different outcomes of that scenario are not really dependant on whether a person likes to solo or group.  If they did not want to group they would have never grouped for the ducks quest.  The issue actually is whether they prefer doing quests or camping spawns.  

My problems with Ihmotep's ideas are not that he advocates grouping which (which I actually prefer) but that it advocates spawn camping sessions (which I hate).

Ok, these two posts are very insightful.

The issue here, IMO, is not questing versus grinding. It's true, I prefer spawn camping to quest grinding, but that is a separate issue from grouping versus solo content.

here's my issue with quest grinding. The quest stories dont' have any impact on the game world, so they dont' interest me. HOWEVER< if you insist on quest grinding, ok, fine. I'll run around and get all the quests, before killing the mobs, and then run around turning them all in, after killing the mobs. I'm not going to get any extra fun out of the running around, but it's not a deal breaker. I can scroll through the stupid text to get to the Kill X part, but why you want to make me do that, I don't know.

But on to the ducks.

This is EXACTLY my point.

I'm NOT asking for someone to join my group, and I can see his health bar, he can see mine, and then he kills a duck while I kill a duck. THAT is WoW before the raids.

BUT, let's take that a step further. I'm not even asking for a Giant Duck, that he whacks on, while I whack on the same duck.

What I'm asking for, is he is going to die if I don't do my job, and I'm going to die if he doesn't do his job. And I better pay close attention to what he's doing, and vice a versa.

I can't just spam heals, I need to use them wisely, only when he's low. and he can't just shoot off his best spell whenever, he needs to wait till I get aggro.

And we need to watch for ads, hopefully someone can mez, and we need to not pull till the mage has more mana, and maybe two light tanks will have to switch off aggro, etc., etc.

But if it's just a zerg, I don't really care if we are in a group, or running around solo. It's all the same to me. And WoW feels like a Zerg, before the raids, compared to EQ or DAoC.

But, if you design grouping that way, so that it's not a zerg, it makes grouping hard. It's not just hey, jump in my group so we can do this dungeon at the end of the quest line, kthxbye.

And if grouping is that hard, well, it's going to have to give you a good reward or guess what? Might as well go to solo alley because it's better than getting wiped by a bunch of incompetents.

BUT, if the reward is great, well then, I can do the hard grouping, and I can put up with the incompetents. the reward will make up for that occaisional wipe.

Originally posted by bloodaxes

What people want I guess is:

You can solo from 1 to 10 and will take you 3-5 hours

Or

You can group from 1 to 10 and will take you 1.5-3 hours

Both have a choice but if one wants to achieve things easier/faster one needs to group.

In wow grouping while questing would make you take longer to reach, drops were not shared (as far as I played) so you had to do it x per player in party and mobs give crap exp to prevent botting.

Slight correction; WoW group questing is very fast XP. Lots of quest drops are shared and/or have increased drop rates while you are grouped. Obviously, groups complete quests faster (especially kill quests) and have much less chance of failing due to content being scaled for soloers.

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

No, I am happy for you to enjoy solo content from level 1 to max.

But not if it destroys my grouping content.

The only way the two have no effect on one another is if they do not exist in the same game on the same server.

You cannot ad a feature to the MMORPG that does not affect me.

If you can solo, I can solo.

Again, you're inventing extremist scenarios to support your point of view.

Providing that your playstyle remains supported by the game mechanics, nothing added to game can destroy it unless you decide to destroy it for yourself.

I want a game that takes a year to max level.

Now, you ad mobs that give 10x the xp, and you can make max level in a month.

Is that the same game?

After all, I can NOT fight any of the new mobs, and it will still take me a year to max level.

Is that the same game?

I say it is not. You say it is?

"over and over and over"?   Really?   I've never once seen a soloer say that grouping is just seeing other players health bars.  I have absolutely no idea where this is coming from -.-

Even if you found someone who actually said that, why bother making a thread based around a terrible argument?

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

I want a game that takes a year to max level.

Now, you ad mobs that give 10x the xp, and you can make max level in a month.

Is that the same game?

After all, I can NOT fight any of the new mobs, and it will still take me a year to max level.

Is that the same game?

I say it is not. You say it is?

We're discussing solo and group mechanics, not levelling speed.

And again, you're inventing extreme hypothetical scenarios to support your point of view.

What about...giving soloers 1-2 hireable NPCs that will eat a portion of your XP. They will have AI movement, but players will be the ones who control their actions. Using a single NPC is only for the "skilled" players, but one NPC will not eat that much XP, and will be very close to grouping XP. Using 2 NPCs will be for the more casual players. Mobs will die pretty fast(if you control the NPCs properly), but your XP will be reduced by a large amount.
To balance this, 2-3 man player parties will  have the tools to tank and AoE a few mobs.
Ultimately, grouping will give more XP, but soloing will be viable(and you'll require more than spamming 1-1-1 with the occasional 2 until the mob is dead). Then, it's the choice of the more "skilled" players to choose if they're gonna use AoE tools in a risky but rewarding manner.
Plus that way both sides will win and it will also award individual understanding of the game. Soloing will also have the "keep the lewtz" thing.
 

I'm playing Champions Online currently, and while the game is pretty fun, I can't help thinking that it really needs to push grouping more.  When you have a full team raiding a villain's lair, the game is fantastic.  But just wandering solo on the streets of Millenium City gets really dull really quickly.

Originally posted by bloodaxes

What people want I guess is:

You can solo from 1 to 10 and will take you 3-5 hours

Or

You can group from 1 to 10 and will take you 1.5-3 hours

Both have a choice but if one wants to achieve things easier/faster one needs to group.

 

In wow grouping while questing would make you take longer to reach, drops were not shared (as far as I played) so you had to do it x per player in party and mobs give crap exp to prevent botting.

What actually happens in my experience, is an average of this.
 

If the time spent actually whacking mobs is 3-5 hours solo, and the actual time spent whacking mobs is 1.5 - 3 hours in a group for the same 1-10, then BOTH players will spend roughly 3-5 hours to get from 1-10.

yes, one set, the group, spends less time actually whacking mobs.

But that same set, the group, spends more time NOT whacking mobs.

Rather than bore you with a dozen examples, I'll give just one.

Rolling need for greed, and arguing need before greed.

I need that sword. No you don't, you're a thief. Yes, but I can duel wield with that sword. Yes, but it gives the Ranger +1 to hit points, he should roll, but not you. Yes, but my cloak is worn out, and I need a new one. Nothing drops here but swords. How am I going to get a new cloak, if I don't ever get to roll?

Ok, fine, you all suck, I'm not going to play in your group.....No wait, you can roll on the sword. Ok, let's roll...WTF?! I thought you were going to roll? Oh, sorry, I was reading a message from my guild...Ok, now let's roll...

That is time spent NOT whacking mobs, time the solo player will never spend, unless he has a split personality and argues with himself.

Originally posted by Axehilt

"over and over and over"?   Really?   I've never once seen a soloer say that grouping is just seeing other players health bars.  I have absolutely no idea where this is coming from -.-

Even if you found someone who actually said that, why bother making a thread based around a terrible argument?

Disturbing as it may be, I'm actually starting to understand Ihmotepp's logic.

What he's actually saying is that soloers keep telling him that he can "group" in any MMO because all of them support the basic grouping mechanic. He's disputing the logic of this argument on the basis that the ability to group doesn't constitute "group content".

Why he decided to state this is such an abstract manner, I've no idea. I'm not fluent yet.

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

I want a game that takes a year to max level.

Now, you ad mobs that give 10x the xp, and you can make max level in a month.

Is that the same game?

After all, I can NOT fight any of the new mobs, and it will still take me a year to max level.

Is that the same game?

I say it is not. You say it is?

We're discussing solo and group mechanics, not levelling speed.

And again, you're inventing extreme hypothetical scenarios to support your point of view.

you just said game mechanics can't affect me unless I let them.

Is your statement true or not?

Would this game mechanic affect you are not?

Only if you let it?

We ad mobs to the game that give 100x the xp and now you can level to max in one week.

Did this change the game or not?

I add a solo option to the game, and now you can solo faster than  grouping.

Does this effect everyone on the server, or only solo players?

Game mechanics affect everyone on the server, not just some people.

Game mechanics dont' cease to exist just becuase you want to pretend you are playing a different game.

I make a perma death game.

If you die, your character is deleted.

Now, I change it so there's not more perma death.

BuT! You can still delete your character if you die.

Did I change the game or not? Are you affected or not? Isn't EVERYONE on teh server affected by this change, not just the people that dont' decide to wipe their characters?

Originally posted by Axehilt

"over and over and over"?   Really?   I've never once seen a soloer say that grouping is just seeing other players health bars.  I have absolutely no idea where this is coming from -.-

Even if you found someone who actually said that, why bother making a thread based around a terrible argument?

that's what they are saying in effect, when they say, I can solo to the cap just as fast as you. But look, you can still group. So there you go, that's a game for everyone! Why are you complaining?

Because that's not a game for everyone, it's a game where other players can join together and see each other's health bars, but the group advocates are not asking for games where they can see other players health bars.
 

They are actually asking for good group content.

Go back and read all the group vs solo threads. you'll see post after post that reads, but you can group in WoW, and I can solo. So there! You have your grouping, what more do you want?

Great, you're going to let me see some other players health bars. How nice of you. The only problem is, the groupers arent' asking for that.

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

What actually happens in my experience

<snip>

You're comparing a bad group with a good solo session.

A true comparison of a 5 hour play session would be:

Good

Grouper logs on, jumps into a group and successfully gets 5 hours of XP.
Soloer logs on, jumps into the solo content and successfully gets 5 hours of XP.

Bad

Grouper logs on, spends ages LFG, has drama and gets virtually no loot or XP.
Soloer logs on, gets repeatedly killed trying to quest and gets virtually no loot or XP.

Increasing group reward to balance a bad group experience with a good solo experience is flawed logic. Why would you want to reward someone for their failure?

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

you just said game mechanics can't affect me unless I let them.

I said, (in reference to soloing and grouping):

"Providing that your playstyle remains supported by the game mechanics, nothing added to game can destroy it unless you decide to destroy it for yourself."

Your example was/is off topic.

I add a solo option to the game, and now you can solo faster than  grouping.

Does this effect everyone on the server, or only solo players?

if you don't solo, how would it affect you?

Your game experience as a grouper would not have changed.

Game mechanics affect everyone on the server, not just some people.

Game mechanics dont' cease to exist just becuase you want to pretend you are playing a different game.

I make a perma death game.

If you die, your character is deleted.

Now, I change it so there's not more perma death.

BuT! You can still delete your character if you die.

Did I change the game or not? Are you affected or not? Isn't EVERYONE on teh server affected by this change, not just the people that dont' decide to wipe their characters?

You're off-topic again. We're discussing solo/group, not permadeath.

grouping is boring

most of the time you're soloing while waiting to get a group together

and when you do get a group most of the time no one even talks