Imagine playing a game of Basketball like this.

You get a team together, and you go out on the court to play against another team. You've practiced with your team, and each member has his or her position to play, guard, forward, center, etc.

Suddenly, your center walks off the court, and gets another basket ball. He then walks up to the basket, and starts shooting. He tells you, yeah, the rules have changed.

He doesn't want to be FORCED to play as part of a team. But, he's still going to play the same exact game of basket ball, just the rules are a little bit different.

He can shoot at the basket, and you can't take the ball away from him, and he will score the same points as your "team" (xP).

So, why are you practicing, and playing different positions, and passing the ball now? What's the point? Oh, because it's FUN, and this guy tells you, don't worry, even though he's changed the rules, you still CAN play as a team. You know, if you really WANT to.

What? You don't really want to play as a team now that he's changed the rules? Why not? Well, it MUST be because playing as a team was never really fun, right?

Uh, no, it's because you've changed the rules to make playing as a team now irrelevant.

It's a silly argument to say changing the rules doesn't make any difference, and you should just play as a team for fun. I think everyone can agree that in this instance, teams would be irrelevant, and most people would just walk out on teh court and shoot at the basket.

Oh sure, they might form a team for  a few minutes and pass the ball around, then everyone would walk off and shoot baskets by themselves. Why not? The rules allow it, and it's MUCH easier than playing as a team. But you have to realize you've now destroyed the team play of the game. There is no way with such a rule change that the game is still the same for teams, but that's what solo players constantly argue.

I'll still LET you play as a team. I havent' changed anything, because you have the CHOICE! to play solo or as a team, so taht's better right?

If that was better, why dont' we make thaty rule change in Basket ball? Because it's retarded, and everyone can see it would destroy the team aspect of the game. It's not about FORCING everyone to play basketball as  a team player, it's about the GAME and the RULES which make Team play fun.

And so you 're not confused, the other "Team" in the MMORPG is the mobs you're fighting, not the other players.

I can find myself a court and play one vs one if I want to.  Same game, same rules, same scoring system, and I don't need anyone else on my team. 

But I disagree that you can't make a game solo friendly and have satisfying grouping.  All it takes is scalable mobs, that adjust their strength to the size/power of the group facing them.  (and give corresponding better rewards)

Most people don't group because the rewards for grouping don't outweigh the challenges of working with a group.

Give people 1.5X exp/gold/drops  vs solo play and you see a whole lot of folks suddenly want to group.  Add in the challenge of scalable mobs and you have a game that supports both solo and group play.

I think you're dead wrong. It'd be pretty easy to design a game that caters to both play styles. EQ2 -almost- has it. Lots of people group in that game, as there are lots of grouping quests or quests that are just quicker or more fun to do in a group.

But you don't HAVE to group to get to level cap, and it's not a lesson in sado-masochism if you choose not to group.

Now, if they just designed more content at end game for solo players as well as people who like to raid and group,  it'd be a pretty good example of a game where you can have either play style be sucessful.

Mind you, I don't really like that game all that much because of how butt ugly it is and how cheesy it feels  (I prefer low key fantasy to high fantasy) and it's still a bit too theme-park for me after having played way too many of that type of MMO, but I'm not going to lie: It has a lot of content and it does a decent job of pleasing both the hardcore crowd and the casual crowd. There's something to do that either group can get into without any problems at all.

Originally posted by Kyleran

I can find myself a court and play one vs one if I want to.  Same game, same rules, same scoring system, and I don't need anyone else on my team. 

But I disagree that you can't make a game solo friendly and have satisfying grouping.  All it takes is scalable mobs, that adjust their strength to the size/power of the group facing them.  (and give corresponding better rewards)

Most people don't group because the rewards for grouping don't outweigh the challenges of working with a group.

Give people 1.5X exp/gold/drops  vs solo play and you see a whole lot of folks suddenly want to group.  Add in the challenge of scalable mobs and you have a game that supports both solo and group play.

 

 

Scalable mobs and quests or even seperate content is the answer. The OP makes no sense.

I don't understand what people that like grouping are upset about.  In all recent MMO's that I've played soloing doesn't reward you with jack shiz.  You can solo for experience, you can solo for reputation, you can join an instanced PVP queue solo (but then you fight in a team inside the instance), but you don't get any meaningful loot solo.  All of the best loot comes from grouping.  Forcing players to group for everything little thing in MMOs seems a bit too extreme to me.  What would new players do in an old game?  They would find it very frustrating trying to level in empty noob zones.  It would also be an inconvenience to people with less gaming time, as they would have to waste time looking for groups.

I don't want a solo friendly game. I want a soloable game.

Classic EQ was a game centered around grouping, but was soloable if you played certain classes, albeit challenging to solo.

That's all most soloers want. We prefer the challenge. Group content becomes solo content as you grow in power and skills.

Just don't deny us the ability to solo by manipulating the mechanics so we can't pull mobs solo or access content without being grouped.

EQ2 even has solo instances!  Though they run out by lvl 50.  It would seem the content didn't get used. 

I can give a good example from EQ2.  I play 90% of my game time solo.  I try to do group content a few levels below me.  I find it both fun and a challenge.  Errors = death.  I might die 10 times trying to kill one named mob.

My wife will not play solo.  She runs a raid guild and is doing group or raid content always.  If she can't find a group (rare) she crafts or gathers resources.

100% viable to play 100% solo, 100% grouping, 100% raiding or a mix of them all.

2 words: Ultima Online.

Discussion over.

Originally posted by rmk70

2 words: Ultima Online.

 

Discussion over.

Can't deal with isometric view only. I don't feel like my character, I feel like I am playing a strategy game.

UO needs a major graphic and interface update which would basically require a new game.

Originally posted by Kyleran

I can find myself a court and play one vs one if I want to.  Same game, same rules, same scoring system, and I don't need anyone else on my team. 

But I disagree that you can't make a game solo friendly and have satisfying grouping.  All it takes is scalable mobs, that adjust their strength to the size/power of the group facing them.  (and give corresponding better rewards)

Most people don't group because the rewards for grouping don't outweigh the challenges of working with a group.

Give people 1.5X exp/gold/drops  vs solo play and you see a whole lot of folks suddenly want to group.  Add in the challenge of scalable mobs and you have a game that supports both solo and group play.

 

 

Exactly.  One other issue is when games (***cough***WoW***cough***) utilize a lot of quests that require a relatively low drop quest item.  Adding more people to the group just drags out the process to the point of utter tedium.   We all know certain quests where to get 5 certain animal parts you end up killing 20 or more of the creatures.  Add 4 other people needing the same thing in the same group and you usually sit there waiting on respawns because the area can't support it.   Make quest items lootable by all persons in the group would also be a step towards encouraging players to join parties.

Since mmos are fantasy virtual life simulators not team based sports your example is pretty bad. Unless you’re telling us you don’t leave the house without 5 of your friends?

Well, I think soloing and grouping is supported in so many MMOs that the discussion if a game can support both is pretty obsolete.

Guild Wars, for example, solves it by simply giving you NPCs you can add to your party. They arent as good as real players, of course, but you can really go anywhere with them.

Any my MMO, Vanguard, also definitely allows soloing well. Not as well as GW for sure. You cannot solo the best places; for these you really need a group. But you can solo most other areas, including areas which have nice drops, and you can always try and solo harder and harder content, depending upon your personal skill, gear, and the class you're playing (as the solo performance of classes differs substantly).

You need to learn to look at things from perspectives other than your own.

Let's take the real world for example.  It turns out, many people DO choose to go play basketball as a team.  While others choose to shoot hoops on their own.

To keep the sports analogies going, I see an MMO more like the Olympics.  There are team events like basketball.  There are relays that involve teams, but still rely on individual performance.  And there are gymnastic events where it's you against the world. 

The real problem here?  Nobody likes you, and therefor will not group with you unless they have no possible alternative.  You want developers to force people to be friends with you.

The "problem" here is that way too many players have taken "solo friendly" to the extreme and believe that it does (and should) mean "I can solo forever and access all the same content and rewards as anyone else". That is the problem.

EQ1 was "solo friendly", there were several classes well suited to soloing - more as you gained in skill, but there was also content that you simply could not access without grouping and raiding. It worked well.

In most of the current games, every class can solo it's way to max level and many (if not most) players do and then when faced with end game content that requires grouping, they whine that the game isn't solo friendly enough.

Everyone should be able to play the way they want to (heck I myself solo a lot by choice) but in a traditional MMO there should be a lot of content that is group only/raid only and if you want to be a complete loner, you miss out on it.

Originally posted by ericbelser

The "problem" here is that way too many players have taken "solo friendly" to the extreme and believe that it does (and should) mean "I can solo forever and access all the same content and rewards as anyone else". That is the problem.

EQ1 was "solo friendly", there were several classes well suited to soloing - more as you gained in skill, but there was also content that you simply could not access without grouping and raiding. It worked well.

In most of the current games, every class can solo it's way to max level and many (if not most) players do and then when faced with end game content that requires grouping, they whine that the game isn't solo friendly enough.

Everyone should be able to play the way they want to (heck I myself solo a lot by choice) but in a traditional MMO there should be a lot of content that is group only/raid only and if you want to be a complete loner, you miss out on it.

Then there should be plenty of content that is solo only, and if you want to be a complete grouper and rely on the power of others because you can't stand being alone, you miss out on it.

The OP anology sucks. What's more, it doesn't reflect the reality of MMORPGs

I don't think I've ever played an MMORPG where you didn't advance faster by grouping. And I use the word "grouping" lightly because it normally means inviting people to your group and then going your own way while you continue to get XP for everything your "teammates" do. This kind of thing goes all the way back to EQOA BTW. Of course, if you all stuck together and took down ridiculously powerful mobs, you could get even more XP. Or, if you stuck together and just farmed, you could get way more loot than you would ever need.

The first person to speedrun WoW to the level cap accomplished his goal exclusively by grouping and farming. At one point, he was in a group of forty people just tearing up the local fauna. Most of those Korean grinders that we love to hate are built around the idea of these kinds of mad, power leveling orgies. And don't forget that if you ever run into a quest boss that you just can't kill on your own, you can always go get help and the quest Xp and loot will be exactly the same.

The reality is that you can get there on your own, but it's going to take you longer. Just because someone else chooses to take a longer road doesn't mean I have to.

Originally posted by madeux

Originally posted by ericbelser

The "problem" here is that way too many players have taken "solo friendly" to the extreme and believe that it does (and should) mean "I can solo forever and access all the same content and rewards as anyone else". That is the problem.

EQ1 was "solo friendly", there were several classes well suited to soloing - more as you gained in skill, but there was also content that you simply could not access without grouping and raiding. It worked well.

In most of the current games, every class can solo it's way to max level and many (if not most) players do and then when faced with end game content that requires grouping, they whine that the game isn't solo friendly enough.

Everyone should be able to play the way they want to (heck I myself solo a lot by choice) but in a traditional MMO there should be a lot of content that is group only/raid only and if you want to be a complete loner, you miss out on it.

 

Then there should be plenty of content that is solo only, and if you want to be a complete grouper and rely on the power of others because you can't stand being alone, you miss out on it.

 

Why?  Why can't you just play Mass Effect if you want to do that?

Originally posted by grimfall

Originally posted by madeux

Originally posted by ericbelser

The "problem" here is that way too many players have taken "solo friendly" to the extreme and believe that it does (and should) mean "I can solo forever and access all the same content and rewards as anyone else". That is the problem.

EQ1 was "solo friendly", there were several classes well suited to soloing - more as you gained in skill, but there was also content that you simply could not access without grouping and raiding. It worked well.

In most of the current games, every class can solo it's way to max level and many (if not most) players do and then when faced with end game content that requires grouping, they whine that the game isn't solo friendly enough.

Everyone should be able to play the way they want to (heck I myself solo a lot by choice) but in a traditional MMO there should be a lot of content that is group only/raid only and if you want to be a complete loner, you miss out on it.

 

Then there should be plenty of content that is solo only, and if you want to be a complete grouper and rely on the power of others because you can't stand being alone, you miss out on it.

 

 

Why?  Why can't you just play Mass Effect if you want to do that?

Right, because devs should only cater to one minority and ignore everyone else.  Rather than take a little time and effort to cater to multiple types of gameplay, and therefor please the largest audience, they should completely ignore it.  Great thinking.

Originally posted by ericbelser

The "problem" here is that way too many players have taken "solo friendly" to the extreme and believe that it does (and should) mean "I can solo forever and access all the same content and rewards as anyone else". That is the problem.

This is exactly what I want from an MMO, and I do not see it as a problem in the slightest.   In fact, I see it as a limitation of the game (and the imaginations of the devs) if it is not this way.

The OP's analogy was horrible.   It would've been more accurate if the center walked off the team and said "Find yourself another player, I'm going to this other court to play 1 on 1".

What really seems to bother a lot of the pro/forced grouping crowd is that they feel their experience of content is diminished if they did it in a group and someone else did it solo.     This is silly.   Stop judging your fun in the game by what someone else did.

The pro grouping crowd always wants to enforce limitations (you must group), where the pro soloing crowd offers choices (you can group or solo).

City of Heroes tackles this issue very well.   If you team up, there will be more and tougher mobs, AND the exp is much higher (as high as triple for a full team).    You almost never have to group in that game and yet most people prefer to.   See?  It can be done.

Originally posted by grimfall

Originally posted by madeux

Originally posted by ericbelser

The "problem" here is that way too many players have taken "solo friendly" to the extreme and believe that it does (and should) mean "I can solo forever and access all the same content and rewards as anyone else". That is the problem.

EQ1 was "solo friendly", there were several classes well suited to soloing - more as you gained in skill, but there was also content that you simply could not access without grouping and raiding. It worked well.

In most of the current games, every class can solo it's way to max level and many (if not most) players do and then when faced with end game content that requires grouping, they whine that the game isn't solo friendly enough.

Everyone should be able to play the way they want to (heck I myself solo a lot by choice) but in a traditional MMO there should be a lot of content that is group only/raid only and if you want to be a complete loner, you miss out on it.

 

Then there should be plenty of content that is solo only, and if you want to be a complete grouper and rely on the power of others because you can't stand being alone, you miss out on it.

 

 

Why?  Why can't you just play Mass Effect if you want to do that?

There is a common misconception that people who like to solo all the time or some of the time rather than be forced to group are antisocial.

I solo much of the time in MMO's. Why? Because often I don't know when I might have to go afk, or stop playing, or even have time to play more than 45 minutes or an hour.  Because of that, I can only -rarely- dedicated myself to a group. How irked would you be if I joined a group and then 10 minutes later went afk to fix dinner or tend to one of the thousand other RL things that pop up during my normal daily routine?

I enjoy being in guilds. I enjoy interacting with others. I like the fact an MMO is more of a dynamic world than a single player game. I like to group on occassion. I like to RP with others in game.  Most solo players also enjoy these things, they just can't or don't like to group all of the time. And why should they -have- to? Their 15 bucks a month is just as good as the people who want to group 100% of the time. 

MMORPG means: Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game.  That means there are many people online playing the game at once.  It does not stand for Forced Grouping Online Role Playing Game.

Browse through our own developers corner for a dozen pages or so you'll find plenty of ways to have both mechanics supported whether or not the poster realizes it or not.  These are ideas from the average joe that isn't trained to think on how things interconnect, what the psychological effect will be, or anything that you'd see in a real game designer.

That had to be the worst analogy on this topic I have seen in a while.  The basketball scenario he describes simply has no basis in reality and thus makes the analogy moot.

The OP is trying to convince us that basketball 'points' all are the same and have the same value no matter how they are acquired.   That is complete bunk since it is clear that a 'point' acquired in a pickup game between friends has a completely different meaning then a 'point' scored during NBA playoffs.  As such the fact that a solo player can score 'points' has no impact on the fact that a team can score 'points'.  As such the fact that some one can shoot baskets solo has no impact on whether a team of friends can have fun playing basketball as a team. 

By presenting such a bad analogy the OP pretty much refuted his own argument.

Originally posted by KaitarBesh

Originally posted by grimfall

Originally posted by madeux

Originally posted by ericbelser

The "problem" here is that way too many players have taken "solo friendly" to the extreme and believe that it does (and should) mean "I can solo forever and access all the same content and rewards as anyone else". That is the problem.

EQ1 was "solo friendly", there were several classes well suited to soloing - more as you gained in skill, but there was also content that you simply could not access without grouping and raiding. It worked well.

In most of the current games, every class can solo it's way to max level and many (if not most) players do and then when faced with end game content that requires grouping, they whine that the game isn't solo friendly enough.

Everyone should be able to play the way they want to (heck I myself solo a lot by choice) but in a traditional MMO there should be a lot of content that is group only/raid only and if you want to be a complete loner, you miss out on it.

 

Then there should be plenty of content that is solo only, and if you want to be a complete grouper and rely on the power of others because you can't stand being alone, you miss out on it.

 

 

Why?  Why can't you just play Mass Effect if you want to do that?

 

 

There is a common misconception that people who like to solo all the time or some of the time rather than be forced to group are antisocial.

 

I solo much of the time in MMO's. Why? Because often I don't know when I might have to go afk, or stop playing, or even have time to play more than 45 minutes or an hour.  Because of that, I can only -rarely- dedicated myself to a group. How irked would you be if I joined a group and then 10 minutes later went afk to fix dinner or tend to one of the thousand other RL things that pop up during my normal daily routine?

I enjoy being in guilds. I enjoy interacting with others. I like the fact an MMO is more of a dynamic world than a single player game. I like to group on occassion. I like to RP with others in game.  Most solo players also enjoy these things, they just can't or don't like to group all of the time. And why should they -have- to? Their 15 bucks a month is just as good as the people who want to group 100% of the time. 

 

MMORPG means: Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game.  That means there are many people online playing the game at once.  It does not stand for Forced Grouping Online Role Playing Game.

Your points are correct, sadly they didn't answer the question.  This person was asking for forced solo content.  There are already hundreds of games that do this much better than any MMO, so what's the point?  You're confusing 'content that is soloable' with 'forced solo content'.

I think that a lot of pro groupers are very cynical about this subject because no game has actually gotten it right yet.  Take EQ2 and WoW, both games I have played where it is possible to solo to max level.  Both are highly dependent on quests.  However due to constant badgering by soloers there is far more solo quest content than there is group.  If you were to form a static group in either game and do group content, you would run out of quests and instances way before you reached maximum level.  Sure you CAN throw in solo quests while you are grouping, however then you need to collect quest items with a poor drop rate for everyone in your group to be fair.  It is far more efficient to go do those solo quests on your own and get them done in however long it takes to get the quest drops/updates for only one person.  Heck in both games, much of the group content is perfectly reasonable to solo as well for many classes.

If you don't choose to quest in those games and grind xp instead, the bonus rewards are nowhere near as high as they need to be for them to be considered "better".  The group content needs to be hard enough that it can't be soloed by anyone, and the rewards need to be epic.  There should be no comparison at all between items gained through grouping and items gained through soloing.  Many of the people here have the right ideas, and so do many of the devs.  These ideas need to actually be implemented however, and at this point noone has.

You could say that now with all the changes to FFXI over the past 1.6 yrs its now solo-friendly and has very satisfying grouping!  You still can't solo from 1-75 on more than 1/2 the jobs but you can still solo from time to time between parties and make good progress!