Originally posted by Xasapis

When you can have your big bang of initial sales and recoup your investment with a flashy but shallow game, why struggle through the lifecircle of an mmorpg in order to create something deep enough, that would keep your customers occuppied?

The theory even has some merit. But you can state it easier:

The market is dynamic.  "Idealized game" models tend to be static.

Originally posted by fenistil

Originally posted by Po_gg

I think LotRO chose the optimal way with Inspired Greatness, one can decide to go solo or go grouped. And those few instas which were left for forced grouping shows clearly, that nowadays people like options better than forcing. Even in a great community like LotRO's.

...

So, while I don't like a lot of changes in mmo's in the last few years, the extinction of forced grouping is one I can fully support. Make it optional, but not forced.

Well actually Inspired Greatness make it solo not optional. There is no 'optional' thing. There is either soloable or not soloable. There is very few places in any game that force solo like solo instances in which you cannot bring anyone else.

Changes in Lotro were done and 'necessary' cause Turbine decided to end with 'balancing solo & group' in order to fully go with 'fast ride to end-game' to attract new audiences to game.  

Partially it is also because of themepark design - each expansion add further vertical linear 'requirements' which make it hard to not modify previous parts of game expecially if game is about running instances in end-game and previous content is made to be quickly blast through.

Sorry, I don't want to derail the thread, but IG is fully optional. When you take the quest, there's the choice to take it solo with IG, or take it as a regular grouped one. I levelled a few alts since Turbine switched to f2p and started putting IG in instances, and I'm still saying, a lot of changes were bad, but switching forced grouping to optional was a good decision.

(can't say actual numbers, but I think I played instances about 40% solo and 60% grouped since IG exists. IG is good when I have only a short time to play, and nobody is online at the moment :) )

Originally posted by Kyleran
Nope, those days are pretty much gone, doubtful we'll ever see a title with forced grouping at it's core again.

and good riddance!!!

Originally posted by Po_gg

Originally posted by fenistil

Originally posted by Po_gg

I think LotRO chose the optimal way with Inspired Greatness, one can decide to go solo or go grouped. And those few instas which were left for forced grouping shows clearly, that nowadays people like options better than forcing. Even in a great community like LotRO's.

...

So, while I don't like a lot of changes in mmo's in the last few years, the extinction of forced grouping is one I can fully support. Make it optional, but not forced.

Well actually Inspired Greatness make it solo not optional. There is no 'optional' thing. There is either soloable or not soloable. There is very few places in any game that force solo like solo instances in which you cannot bring anyone else.

Changes in Lotro were done and 'necessary' cause Turbine decided to end with 'balancing solo & group' in order to fully go with 'fast ride to end-game' to attract new audiences to game.  

Partially it is also because of themepark design - each expansion add further vertical linear 'requirements' which make it hard to not modify previous parts of game expecially if game is about running instances in end-game and previous content is made to be quickly blast through.

Sorry, I don't want to derail the thread, but IG is fully optional. When you take the quest, there's the choice to take it solo with IG, or take it as a regular grouped one. I levelled a few alts since Turbine switched to f2p and started putting IG in instances, and I'm still saying, a lot of changes were bad, but switching forced grouping to optional was a good decision.

(can't say actual numbers, but I think I played instances about 40% solo and 60% grouped since IG exists. IG is good when I have only a short time to play, and nobody is online at the moment :) )

I am not saying that you cannot do it with a group.  I am saying content is either soloable (ie you can do it alone) or it is not soloable (you cannot do it alone).

Instances with IG are soloable. Simple as that.   That does not matter it cannot be done with a group. Every soloable content can be done with a group. (with very minor amount of forced solo content).

Pretty much have gone the way of the dinosaur since world of warcraft brought mmorpg's to the casual smacktards. The olkd style of mmo's like FFXI pre-abbysea, and the old mmo's casuals cant get into since everything takes time and isin't handed to them, Devolopers see this and relize there is more profit just making a biliant wow-clone/wannabe that is solo centric till endgame. Its compounted by the fact that grouping in most of these newer mmo's have really bad exp splits as well, so much that it'd be 2-3x faster just to solo. In FFXI I don't like how in Abbysea you can go from 30 to 99 in a day, some people can take a new job and get it from 1 to 99 in a day or so, Which ruins how the game was more about the journey. There also si the fact that wow has caused the average MMO gamer to just wanna rush till level cap for so called endgame. Sorry but I don't call pve raiding with 0 purpose endgame, I prefer pvp endgame with pve raiding for gear like daoc was before you could craft your own magical items.

Overall WoW has killed the mmorpg market considerably, nothing comes out anymore that doesn't just feel like its trying to clone wow. Personally? I wish someone would bomb all the wow server's and shut the game down. Preferably late at night so as to prevent casualties. Not going to happen, but the mmorpg genre needs WoW to die in order for it to start to recover itself.

Originally posted by fenistil

I am not saying that you cannot do it with a group.  I am saying content is either soloable (ie you can do it alone) or it is not soloable (you cannot do it alone).

Instances with IG are soloable. Simple as that.   That does not matter it cannot be done with a group. Every soloable content can be done with a group. (with very minor amount of forced solo content).

We're talking the same thing, only I adding option in it as well :)

I am saying content is either soloable (ie you can do it alone) if you take the quest with IG  or it is not soloable (you cannot do it alone). if you take the quest as the regular group version.

It's your choice. They didn't modified the original content, only gave an option to go in with a buff, which can help you if you're not in a group. Heck, sometimes it isn't soloable even with IG, since it's a default buff, and every insta / every class is different :)

(Based on forum posts hunters have some problems soloing a few instances, on the other hand captains or minis are literally switching into godmode with IG and ripping through every instance... again, only if they choose so)

---

Originally posted by Siveria
Pretty much have gone the way of the dinosaur since world of warcraft brought mmorpg's to the casual smacktards. The olkd style of mmo's like FFXI pre-abbysea, and the old mmo's casuals cant get into since everything takes time and isin't handed to them, Devolopers see this and relize there is more profit just making a biliant wow-clone/wannabe that is solo centric till endgame. Its compounted by the fact that grouping in most of these newer mmo's have really bad exp splits as well, so much that it'd be 2-3x faster just to solo. In FFXI I don't like how in Abbysea you can go from 30 to 99 in a day, some people can take a new job and get it from 1 to 99 in a day or so, Which ruins how the game was more about the journey. There also si the fact that wow has caused the average MMO gamer to just wanna rush till level cap for so called endgame. Sorry but I don't call pve raiding with 0 purpose endgame, I prefer pvp endgame with pve raiding for gear like daoc was before you could craft your own magical items.

Overall WoW has killed the mmorpg market considerably, nothing comes out anymore that doesn't just feel like its trying to clone wow. Personally? I wish someone would bomb all the wow server's and shut the game down. Preferably late at night so as to prevent casualties. Not going to happen, but the mmorpg genre needs WoW to die in order for it to start to recover itself.

---

Originally posted by Siveria

Pretty much have gone the way of the dinosaur since world of warcraft brought mmorpg's to the casual smacktards. The olkd style of mmo's like FFXI pre-abbysea, and the old mmo's casuals cant get into since everything takes time and isin't handed to them, Devolopers see this and relize there is more profit just making a biliant wow-clone/wannabe that is solo centric till endgame. Its compounted by the fact that grouping in most of these newer mmo's have really bad exp splits as well, so much that it'd be 2-3x faster just to solo. In FFXI I don't like how in Abbysea you can go from 30 to 99 in a day, some people can take a new job and get it from 1 to 99 in a day or so, Which ruins how the game was more about the journey. There also si the fact that wow has caused the average MMO gamer to just wanna rush till level cap for so called endgame. Sorry but I don't call pve raiding with 0 purpose endgame, I prefer pvp endgame with pve raiding for gear like daoc was before you could craft your own magical items.

Overall WoW has killed the mmorpg market considerably, nothing comes out anymore that doesn't just feel like its trying to clone wow. Personally? I wish someone would bomb all the wow server's and shut the game down. Preferably late at night so as to prevent casualties. Not going to happen, but the mmorpg genre needs WoW to die in order for it to start to recover itself.

Vanguard was after WOW so it hasn't all gone the way of the dinosaur, you just choose to play these casual games.

Originally posted by lizardbones

This post illustrates part of the reason that solo content is so successful. Starting way back in the day, when content required groups, you had people who divided players into "The Elite" (themselves) and "The Rabble" (everyone else). When content requires groups, but most of your players are "The Rabble", they quit playing. When the content allows everyone to play, not the "The Elites", the games make more money.
 

Well, come on, we're in a thread with REAL MMOZ in the title, what else were you expecting?

Originally posted by lizardbones

 

This post illustrates part of the reason that solo content is so successful. Starting way back in the day, when content required groups, you had people who divided players into "The Elite" (themselves) and "The Rabble" (everyone else). When content requires groups, but most of your players are "The Rabble", they quit playing. When the content allows everyone to play, not the "The Elites", the games make more money.
 

This. You should post it in every thread about f2p, or sandbox, or solofication :)

Let's face it, we (people on gaming forums) are only the tip of the iceberg, there are a sh*tload of gamers who never looks into a forum or community page, only plays. A lot of them also like their games easy, solo-oriented, carebear-ed, and (horribile dictu) f2p. Since the game development turned into an industry, it's a pretty easy choice to them, which playergroup should they target.... They can make a lot more money with less effort from the "rabble" (if we stick to your terms, although I never considered myself among those stuck-up elites :) )

Originally posted by Po_gg

Originally posted by fenistil

I am not saying that you cannot do it with a group.  I am saying content is either soloable (ie you can do it alone) or it is not soloable (you cannot do it alone).

Instances with IG are soloable. Simple as that.   That does not matter it cannot be done with a group. Every soloable content can be done with a group. (with very minor amount of forced solo content).

We're talking the same thing, only I adding option in it as well :)

I am saying content is either soloable (ie you can do it alone) if you take the quest with IG  or it is not soloable (you cannot do it alone). if you take the quest as the regular group version.

It's your choice. They didn't modified the original content, only gave an option to go in with a buff, which can help you if you're not in a group. Heck, sometimes it isn't soloable even with IG, since it's a default buff, and every insta / every class is different :)

(Based on forum posts hunters have some problems soloing a few instances, on the other hand captains or minis are literally switching into godmode with IG and ripping through every instance... again, only if they choose so)

It is same dunegon / quest  regardless of small diffrences in mobs sometimes+huge buff you get if you choose solo version.  It is soloable.  Just because you can choose to do it with a group it does not mean it is not soloable.   It is zero-sum game.  Either you can do it solo or you cannot. 

Originally posted by Po_gg

Originally posted by fenistil

Originally posted by Po_gg

I think LotRO chose the optimal way with Inspired Greatness, one can decide to go solo or go grouped. And those few instas which were left for forced grouping shows clearly, that nowadays people like options better than forcing. Even in a great community like LotRO's.

...

So, while I don't like a lot of changes in mmo's in the last few years, the extinction of forced grouping is one I can fully support. Make it optional, but not forced.

Well actually Inspired Greatness make it solo not optional. There is no 'optional' thing. There is either soloable or not soloable. There is very few places in any game that force solo like solo instances in which you cannot bring anyone else.

Changes in Lotro were done and 'necessary' cause Turbine decided to end with 'balancing solo & group' in order to fully go with 'fast ride to end-game' to attract new audiences to game.  

Partially it is also because of themepark design - each expansion add further vertical linear 'requirements' which make it hard to not modify previous parts of game expecially if game is about running instances in end-game and previous content is made to be quickly blast through.

Sorry, I don't want to derail the thread, but IG is fully optional. When you take the quest, there's the choice to take it solo with IG, or take it as a regular grouped one. I levelled a few alts since Turbine switched to f2p and started putting IG in instances, and I'm still saying, a lot of changes were bad, but switching forced grouping to optional was a good decision.

(can't say actual numbers, but I think I played instances about 40% solo and 60% grouped since IG exists. IG is good when I have only a short time to play, and nobody is online at the moment :) )

Turbine put in IG for book chapter quests so people could complete the books due to lack of grouping for newcommers when most LOTRO players were max leveled.

I haven't played LOTRO for some time now, are there IG on all group quests nowdays or still only the book chapter quests?

Originally posted by Torgrim

Turbine put in IG for book chapter quests so people could complete the books due to lack of grouping for newcommers when most LOTRO players were max leveled.

I haven't played LOTRO for some time now, are there IG on all group quests nowdays or still only the book chapter quests?

Still only for book quests, and as you say, that was the whole purpose of it.

When a mandatory quest forcing you to group (and you can't find a group to help), you are stucked. Of course you can do something else, while waiting for some willing help, but it still sucks. That's why IG is a good solution, if you have a group, you have a nice group experience, if you don't, you can try it solo. Not as much fun, but at least you won't be stuck with the book.

Originally posted by syntax42

Too many people want one extreme or the other.  I get frustrated when I see people claim MMOs should be a certain way because that is what that person enjoys.  You are not the only person playing the game.  Get over yourself and realize not everyone likes everything the same way you do.

 

MMOs so far have catered to a crowd and that ends up being their target market.  If the target market is too narrow, the MMO will fail.  I believe The Secret World fell victim to this.  Leveling was a decent solo experience but end-game was sudden forced grouping.  Not everyone wanted that kind of transition, and many people didn't like the solo leveling.  Thus, players could either put up with the part of the game they didn't enjoy as much, or simply quit.

 

The biggest challenge in a MMO is to figure out how to make the player (you) feel important.  If you only feel like another person in an army of clones, will you really keep playing?  The next big MMO (WoW big) won't deliver a strict solo or group experience.  Somehow, it will find a way to cater to both groups of players.

Hence my arguement companies need to make different flavors instead of one generic one. The biggest problem is all mmorpg's have been changed/created to be pretty much the same (quest to level, solo to top level within a week, run instances to rng for gear, and do instanced pvp at the end).

Again, you can't have everything rolled into 1.

Originally posted by lizardbones

 

---

Originally posted by Siveria
Pretty much have gone the way of the dinosaur since world of warcraft brought mmorpg's to the casual smacktards. The olkd style of mmo's like FFXI pre-abbysea, and the old mmo's casuals cant get into since everything takes time and isin't handed to them, Devolopers see this and relize there is more profit just making a biliant wow-clone/wannabe that is solo centric till endgame. Its compounted by the fact that grouping in most of these newer mmo's have really bad exp splits as well, so much that it'd be 2-3x faster just to solo. In FFXI I don't like how in Abbysea you can go from 30 to 99 in a day, some people can take a new job and get it from 1 to 99 in a day or so, Which ruins how the game was more about the journey. There also si the fact that wow has caused the average MMO gamer to just wanna rush till level cap for so called endgame. Sorry but I don't call pve raiding with 0 purpose endgame, I prefer pvp endgame with pve raiding for gear like daoc was before you could craft your own magical items.

 

Overall WoW has killed the mmorpg market considerably, nothing comes out anymore that doesn't just feel like its trying to clone wow. Personally? I wish someone would bomb all the wow server's and shut the game down. Preferably late at night so as to prevent casualties. Not going to happen, but the mmorpg genre needs WoW to die in order for it to start to recover itself.

---

This post illustrates part of the reason that solo content is so successful. Starting way back in the day, when content required groups, you had people who divided players into "The Elite" (themselves) and "The Rabble" (everyone else). When content requires groups, but most of your players are "The Rabble", they quit playing. When the content allows everyone to play, not the "The Elites", the games make more money.

 

Good in theory bad in practice, because due to cutting corners and laziness we arrived at the state that instead of having 500 hours (random number) of solo content and 500 hours of group content now soloable, we have just 500 hours of some kind of content that is too simple or pointless for both groups.

So in reality the players still quit playing, arguably in larger numbers, but nowadays not because they simply cannot do something, but because there is nothing left to do instead of the things they are either unable or unwilling to do.

Flame on!

:)

Originally posted by madazz
MMO's are trying to hard to make you do one thing or another. In UO, I soloed a ton. You could solo nearly everything if you worked at it. Yet, for some reason I grouped up and met more people in that game than any other. 

Nope, its only logical. In MMO's where grouping is forced, people do not do it of their own free will, which may give them a negative mindset. In UO however, people grouped up of their own free will, and there were no "artificial incentives" to force you into groups, due to this, you grouped with likeminded people. Thus the community was much more healthy.

Originally posted by madazz
MMO's are trying to hard to make you do one thing or another. In UO, I soloed a ton. You could solo nearly everything if you worked at it. Yet, for some reason I grouped up and met more people in that game than any other. 

UO was about tools and mechanics to allow people to break into groups they chose to be in with people they chose to be with. Outside of the guild unit, few other MMOs support that.

Originally posted by Neherun

Originally posted by madazz
MMO's are trying to hard to make you do one thing or another. In UO, I soloed a ton. You could solo nearly everything if you worked at it. Yet, for some reason I grouped up and met more people in that game than any other. 

 

Nope, its only logical. In MMO's where grouping is forced, people do not do it of their own free will, which may give them a negative mindset. In UO however, people grouped up of their own free will, and there were no "artificial incentives" to force you into groups, due to this, you grouped with likeminded people. Thus the community was much more healthy.

It's not only or even mainly this.   In most modern mmorpg's until you also don't have to group and almost all people don't group doing all non-group dungeon content alone.  

In UO and SWG this was due to game design in broader sense and due to tools those games give.  Like Loktofeit said. 

It was NOT solo centric game BUT it allowed to solo ~95% of it if you really did want to and put some effort into it.

It is contrary to modern themepark design where design IS solo centric.

Thing is many of design choices in games like UO would not be welcomed by alot of folks playing other types of mmoprg's.