Originally posted by heartless

Originally posted by RamenThief7

Originally posted by LynxJSA

To use your analogy, EQ was doubles tennis, but that does not mean it is the 'rule' for all MMOs, just EQ.

 

Well, in my opinion the double tennis idea applies to virtually any group-based game out there.

Double tennis resembles the coordination part of groups. If both tennis players are in sync and know what to do, they will function nicely. However, if they are not coordinated, that leads to problems. You really can't have someone "optionally" choose whether they want to function as a team or not, because chances are you're more likely to lose if the team is not coordinated.

Let me see if I can clarify. Say you want to go and play tennis. When you get to the sport club or the park or whatever, the guy at the front door says: "This is a community establishment and you can only play doubles tennis." "But" you say, "I wanted to see how well I can do in singles." "That's too bad!" the guy at the door replies. "We in the 'Golden Balls Tennis Club (TM)' strongly believe in community and playing singles is a poor way of fostering community relations. As such, you cannot play singles tennis."

Makes sense? It doesn't to me. Neither does this whole group vs solo argument. Especially since both are preferences and neither one of them is better than the other.

 

What you are missing is the trophy.

MMORPGs have SOMETHING that you get fror doing increasingly more powerful content.

Maybe it's loot, xp, levels, skills, abilities, cool clothes, access to new areas, SOMETHING. That's what makes it an RPG.

So it would be more like, I want to enter the Doubles tournament, and I want to win the Doubles trophy. But I don't like the rules. Can you change them so I don't have to play with a partner, but still give me the same trophy?

IN your analogy, the guy would say, this way to the Singles Tournament (WOW in the leveling game).

This way to the Double Tournament (games like EQ anbd DAoC).

I'm sorry Sir, but we cannot change the rules and give you the Doubles trophy for playing a singles game.But certainly you can play the Singles game if you prefer.

Originally posted by RamenThief7

Originally posted by Vrazule

Originally posted by TdogSkal

Originally posted by berenim

 Sorry, I have to say so, but forced groupiong games don't naturally have good communities. Thay *can*, but also that's where elitists seem to go. "You need us, so our way, or no way to play". The more grouping was needed the more pricks I met, that looked for the best (fastest, less challenging) way to aquire things, were willing to kick you out of team if you weren't equipped FOTM-like, or you weren't a class contriuting DPS (lowering killspeed). Not everyone is like this, but those are the people I usually met when I got to those tiers. You couldn't do anything anymore that wasn't about loot or XP/h. Exploring? Tackle something for the fun, to check ones limits? I had to do those things alone, even thopugh I'd rather have some cool people with me.

 So forced grouping games can on the flip-side have some very elititsts on top, hard rules where you fit or are left out besides the nice people. Unfortunatly, when a community outlives itsel the first ones are those to stay.

 

I disagree.   EQ had the best community I have ever had in a game and it is a so called "forced grouping" game.   Everyone was helpful, sure you met a few asshats along the way but I met alot more people that i liked and became friends with then not.

Games that are geared towards soloing tend to have bad communities. Look at WoW, how many pugs do you run?  I never ran pugs in WoW because the community sucked... All I do is run PuGs in EQ because 9 times out of 10 the people are fun and cool to talk to.

 

Talk about your rose tinted hind sight .  The whole reason why we have instancing now and the ability to tag mobs is due to the bad behavior of people in EverQuest.  People camping spawn points for loot or content access, stealing mob kills by doing more damage despite you already having the mob down by 1/4 health, guilds blocking raid content with the afore mentioned spawn point camping, people screaming on the official website about the lack of solo content even back in 1999, when everyone supposedly loved grouping.  Verant implemented in game report features because the community was sublime.  It was not uncommon for group and raid leaders to deny you entrance due to your gear or AA set up.

The good old days were just as chock full of losers and asshats as the modern era.  The only difference now is that developers are much more supportive of fair play and good behavior and there are a lot more people playing, therefore increasing your chances of coming across people you don't get along with. 

I'm not so sure about the good old days of Everquest being what you said. From the various posts I've seen so far, it seems like the early days of Everquest spawned a good community.

Remember, Everquest was really one of the first gen mmorpgs. This was a time of new experiences. Eventually, yes, I do hear that Everquest's community started to degrade, but this was because Everquest was one of the first mmorpgs. Learning from these examples, many games now attempt to try to avoid the problems that Everquest first experienced.

In the end, soloists and groupies both can cause a community to degrade.

EQ was a first MMO for a lot of people and as such, most of those people view anything about it as great. Including the community.

It doesn't mean that it was true. UO had a lot of undesirables in it's community, especially during the early days, but I still think fondly of UO because it was my first MMO and I loved it.

Originally posted by heartless

Originally posted by RamenThief7

Originally posted by LynxJSA

To use your analogy, EQ was doubles tennis, but that does not mean it is the 'rule' for all MMOs, just EQ.

 

Well, in my opinion the double tennis idea applies to virtually any group-based game out there.

Double tennis resembles the coordination part of groups. If both tennis players are in sync and know what to do, they will function nicely. However, if they are not coordinated, that leads to problems. You really can't have someone "optionally" choose whether they want to function as a team or not, because chances are you're more likely to lose if the team is not coordinated.

Let me see if I can clarify. Say you want to go and play tennis. When you get to the sport club or the park or whatever, the guy at the front door says: "This is a community establishment and you can only play doubles tennis." "But" you say, "I wanted to see how well I can do in singles." "That's too bad!" the guy at the door replies. "We in the 'Golden Balls Tennis Club (TM)' strongly believe in community and playing singles is a poor way of fostering community relations. As such, you cannot play singles tennis."

Makes sense? It doesn't to me. Neither does this whole group vs solo argument. Especially since both are preferences and neither one of them is better than the other.

 

Well, no, you completely did not get what I was trying to say.

What I mean is that on a team, it's nice to know that both people are coordinated in their game. Let's say that a ball gets knocked near the middle. A coordinated team already can tell who should go for the ball. A non-coordinated team would both go after the ball, miss the ball entirely, and one of the people got smacked in the face with a tennis racket (which is probably the hugest reason why I hated playing tennis afterwards).

Also, I can twist your thoughts too.

What if you're trying to join a tennis-club that exclusively plays double tennis only? Have fun trying to get them to play single tennis, when their club has been double tennis champions of their region for 6 years (this is not a real life example).

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

Originally posted by heartless

Originally posted by RamenThief7

Originally posted by LynxJSA

To use your analogy, EQ was doubles tennis, but that does not mean it is the 'rule' for all MMOs, just EQ.

 

Well, in my opinion the double tennis idea applies to virtually any group-based game out there.

Double tennis resembles the coordination part of groups. If both tennis players are in sync and know what to do, they will function nicely. However, if they are not coordinated, that leads to problems. You really can't have someone "optionally" choose whether they want to function as a team or not, because chances are you're more likely to lose if the team is not coordinated.

Let me see if I can clarify. Say you want to go and play tennis. When you get to the sport club or the park or whatever, the guy at the front door says: "This is a community establishment and you can only play doubles tennis." "But" you say, "I wanted to see how well I can do in singles." "That's too bad!" the guy at the door replies. "We in the 'Golden Balls Tennis Club (TM)' strongly believe in community and playing singles is a poor way of fostering community relations. As such, you cannot play singles tennis."

Makes sense? It doesn't to me. Neither does this whole group vs solo argument. Especially since both are preferences and neither one of them is better than the other.

 

 

What you are missing is the trophy.

MMORPGs have SOMETHING that you get fror doing increasingly more powerful content.

Maybe it's loot, xp, levels, skills, abilities, cool clothes, access to new areas, SOMETHING. That's what makes it an RPG.

So it would be more like, I want to enter the Doubles tournament, and I want to win the Doubles trophy. But I don't like the rules. Can you change them so I don't have to play with a partner, but still give me the same trophy?

IN your analogy, the guy would say, this way to the Singles Tournament (WOW in the leveling game).

This way to the Double Tournament (games like EQ anbd DAoC).

I'm sorry Sir, but we cannot change the rules and give you the Doubles trophy for playing a singles game.But certainly you can play the Singles game if you prefer.

See, the singles and the doubles trophies are both equally valuable. In MMOs, solo content, loot and xp is never more valuable than group content, loot and xp.

So clarify further, since I play in the doubles tournament, my trophy should be twice as big as that of singles tournament.

Well Heartless, I don't neccessarily also think that EQ's original community was all good. There probably were asshats too, but not in a majority originally.

The first mmorpgs, including EQ and UO, really did help show the goods and bads in communities, and how to try to keep a community from going bad.

Originally posted by heartless

Originally posted by Ihmotepp 

What you are missing is the trophy.

MMORPGs have SOMETHING that you get fror doing increasingly more powerful content.

Maybe it's loot, xp, levels, skills, abilities, cool clothes, access to new areas, SOMETHING. That's what makes it an RPG.

So it would be more like, I want to enter the Doubles tournament, and I want to win the Doubles trophy. But I don't like the rules. Can you change them so I don't have to play with a partner, but still give me the same trophy?

IN your analogy, the guy would say, this way to the Singles Tournament (WOW in the leveling game).

This way to the Double Tournament (games like EQ anbd DAoC).

I'm sorry Sir, but we cannot change the rules and give you the Doubles trophy for playing a singles game.But certainly you can play the Singles game if you prefer.

See, the singles and the doubles trophies are both equally valuable. In MMOs, solo content, loot and xp is never more valuable than group content, loot and xp.

So clarify further, since I play in the doubles tournament, my trophy should be twice as big as that of singles tournament.

So what is the motivation to play in the doubles tournament if the trophy is the same size and just as shiny as the singles tournament trophy?

Is it just because I like playing doubles? becuase I like my partner? Why would I play with him though if I could win the doubles trophy playing by myself? Charity for my friend?

Originally posted by RamenThief7

Originally posted by heartless

Originally posted by RamenThief7

Originally posted by LynxJSA

To use your analogy, EQ was doubles tennis, but that does not mean it is the 'rule' for all MMOs, just EQ.

 

Well, in my opinion the double tennis idea applies to virtually any group-based game out there.

Double tennis resembles the coordination part of groups. If both tennis players are in sync and know what to do, they will function nicely. However, if they are not coordinated, that leads to problems. You really can't have someone "optionally" choose whether they want to function as a team or not, because chances are you're more likely to lose if the team is not coordinated.

Let me see if I can clarify. Say you want to go and play tennis. When you get to the sport club or the park or whatever, the guy at the front door says: "This is a community establishment and you can only play doubles tennis." "But" you say, "I wanted to see how well I can do in singles." "That's too bad!" the guy at the door replies. "We in the 'Golden Balls Tennis Club (TM)' strongly believe in community and playing singles is a poor way of fostering community relations. As such, you cannot play singles tennis."

Makes sense? It doesn't to me. Neither does this whole group vs solo argument. Especially since both are preferences and neither one of them is better than the other.

 

Well, no, you completely did not get what I was trying to say.

What I mean is that on a team, it's nice to know that both people are coordinated in their game. Let's say that a ball gets knocked near the middle. A coordinated team already can tell who should go for the ball. A non-coordinated team would both go after the ball, miss the ball entirely, and one of the people got smacked in the face with a tennis racket (which is probably the hugest reason why I hated playing tennis afterwards).

Also, I can twist your thoughts too.

What if you're trying to join a tennis-club that exclusively plays double tennis only? Have fun trying to get them to play single tennis, when their club has been double tennis champions of their region for 6 years (this is not a real life example).

Why would want to join a doubles tennis club when I can find one that allows for singles? On the other hand, if I want to play an MMORPG, I usually do not have a choice since the best content is always group oriented.

See what I'm getting at?

Now as for the first part of your post, permit me if, you may, to present the following scenario.

Say me and Anna Kournikova (I wish) are playing doubles tennis on the same team against a couple of amateurs. Who do you think will carry the team? probably AK? Chances are we'll probably win too.

Now a different scenario. I'm playing against Anna Korunikova in a singles match. Who do you think will win? Probably AK.

In which match do you think I will have an easier time, playing doubles on the same team as AK or singles against AK?

The point is that solo content could be just as challenging, if not more so, than group content. Provided, of course, that it is designed to be challenging.

Originally posted by johnspartan

Originally posted by heartless

Originally posted by Ihmotepp 

What you are missing is the trophy.

MMORPGs have SOMETHING that you get fror doing increasingly more powerful content.

Maybe it's loot, xp, levels, skills, abilities, cool clothes, access to new areas, SOMETHING. That's what makes it an RPG.

So it would be more like, I want to enter the Doubles tournament, and I want to win the Doubles trophy. But I don't like the rules. Can you change them so I don't have to play with a partner, but still give me the same trophy?

IN your analogy, the guy would say, this way to the Singles Tournament (WOW in the leveling game).

This way to the Double Tournament (games like EQ anbd DAoC).

I'm sorry Sir, but we cannot change the rules and give you the Doubles trophy for playing a singles game.But certainly you can play the Singles game if you prefer.

See, the singles and the doubles trophies are both equally valuable. In MMOs, solo content, loot and xp is never more valuable than group content, loot and xp.

So clarify further, since I play in the doubles tournament, my trophy should be twice as big as that of singles tournament.

 

So what is the motivation to play in the doubles tournament if the trophy is the same size and just as shiny as the singles tournament trophy?

Is it just because I like playing doubles? becuase I like my partner? Why would I play with him though if I could win the doubles trophy playing by myself? Charity for my friend?

Because it is fun? Strange concept, isn't it?

On the other hand, if you don't find it fun, you shouldn't be playing it in the first place.

Edit: But see, I'm not talking about playing doubles by yourself. I'm talking about both doubles and singles being both equally fun, challenging and just as rewarding.

Originally posted by ericbelser

PS ...because I just can't resist a slam at FunCom....the screwed up piece of junk that is AO is hardly worth dragging into this..talk about an annoying screwball hybrid skill/level system with way too many of both and the joy of a 1/2hour buff cycle to bootstrap better gear on sort of nonsense. (not to mention the horrible game coding lol) 

And yet it's still making money and being successful after 8 years.  Sounds like a load of jealousy on your part, to be honest.

Originally posted by heartless

Because it is fun? Strange concept, isn't it?

On the other hand, if you don't find it fun, you shouldn't be playing it in the first place.

Thanks for telling me what I should and shouldn't do. Tell me, what should I eat for dinner? How about with my future? Apparently you know everything and have the authority to tell me what I should and shouldn't do.

Loot is important to me, so is being the best and having cool stuff. To me, that is fun and that is a portion of why I play MMORPGs. I love grouping because it's more fun to play together IMO.

But that's not enough. I like playing together and it's fun to play with other people because the rewards are better too. It's not the only reason why I raid but I do like that fact about raiding.

Raiding is fun to me and getting the best gear from raiding is also fun.

Tell me, anything else I should know about myself?

So I ask again, if the ONLY thing I get is the fun from playing with others, is that really the only motivation I should have? 

Originally posted by Greenie

Originally posted by Scot

Oh lordy we can't have someone in a group getting one more xp than a solo guy can we? :D

 Nope by Cephus's attitude all xp kills should give the same xp regardless of a group or solo,, and since it all has to be fair why don't we put extra cooldowns and significantly lower damage on people who are grouped so the rate of pull is equal to the soloer as well.

Of course, I've never said that, I've often said exactly the opposite.  But let's not actually be HONEST, then you might have to admit that you have no argument.

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

"Forced grouping" means grouping is more efficient in terms of xp. It does not mean you can't solo to the level cap. You can do that in all MMORPGs if you are willing to spend the time.

When solo players say they don't want a "forced grouping" game, they dont mean they want to be able to solo to the level cap. They mean they want to be able to do it as fast as groups, and get the same loot as groups at the same level. 

It's so nice that we have you to tell us all what we really think, isn't it?  I mean, how would any of us know what we really want if we didn't have you to explain it to us?

Originally posted by heartless

Originally posted by RamenThief7

Originally posted by heartless

Originally posted by RamenThief7

Originally posted by LynxJSA

To use your analogy, EQ was doubles tennis, but that does not mean it is the 'rule' for all MMOs, just EQ.

 

Well, in my opinion the double tennis idea applies to virtually any group-based game out there.

Double tennis resembles the coordination part of groups. If both tennis players are in sync and know what to do, they will function nicely. However, if they are not coordinated, that leads to problems. You really can't have someone "optionally" choose whether they want to function as a team or not, because chances are you're more likely to lose if the team is not coordinated.

Let me see if I can clarify. Say you want to go and play tennis. When you get to the sport club or the park or whatever, the guy at the front door says: "This is a community establishment and you can only play doubles tennis." "But" you say, "I wanted to see how well I can do in singles." "That's too bad!" the guy at the door replies. "We in the 'Golden Balls Tennis Club (TM)' strongly believe in community and playing singles is a poor way of fostering community relations. As such, you cannot play singles tennis."

Makes sense? It doesn't to me. Neither does this whole group vs solo argument. Especially since both are preferences and neither one of them is better than the other.

 

Well, no, you completely did not get what I was trying to say.

What I mean is that on a team, it's nice to know that both people are coordinated in their game. Let's say that a ball gets knocked near the middle. A coordinated team already can tell who should go for the ball. A non-coordinated team would both go after the ball, miss the ball entirely, and one of the people got smacked in the face with a tennis racket (which is probably the hugest reason why I hated playing tennis afterwards).

Also, I can twist your thoughts too.

What if you're trying to join a tennis-club that exclusively plays double tennis only? Have fun trying to get them to play single tennis, when their club has been double tennis champions of their region for 6 years (this is not a real life example).

Why would want to join a doubles tennis club when I can find one that allows for singles? On the other hand, if I want to play an MMORPG, I usually do not have a choice since the best content is always group oriented.

See what I'm getting at?

Now as for the first part of your post, permit me if, you may, to present the following scenario.

Say me and Anna Kournikova (I wish) are playing doubles tennis on the same team against a couple of amateurs. Who do you think will carry the team? probably AK? Chances are we'll probably win too.

Now a different scenario. I'm playing against Anna Korunikova in a singles match. Who do you think will win? Probably AK.

In which match do you think I will have an easier time, playing doubles on the same team as AK or singles against AK?

The point is that solo content could be just as challenging, if not more so, than group content. Provided, of course, that it is designed to be challenging.

You know, I think we're trying to kill each other's thoughts with two valid points.

I also declared that solo content could be challenging (I'm sorry, I can't remember the # of the post, it's either one or two pages back from this one), just in a different way than group. Neither is more challenging than each other. However, technically groups are more difficult to work with. The challenging parts don't go away, but when you have dissenters in a group, that leads to problems...

Originally posted by LynxJSA

Let's try this again.

• Here's your statement:

"When solo players say they don't want a "forced grouping" game, they dont mean they want to be able to solo to the level cap. They mean they want to be able to do it as fast as groups, and get the same loot as groups at the same level."

• I said that was not the majority view and asked for links to support your statement as the posts on these forums have shown the majority are willing to accept a longer path if necessary as long as they can get the same or equivalent rewards.

 

• You replied with a link to the front page of MMORPG.com.

 

Did I miss something? 

No, as usual, he pulled it out of his ass and now he's backpedaling.

Anyone surprised?

First, how in the hell is this thread still going.

Second.  Lets face it,, soloers will prompt solo content... groupers will prompt group content.  neither will agree to the other sides points.   The two different play styles will not see eye to eye.  Just a fact of life.

I am a grouper, I love grouping but I do solo, I solo when I cannot find a group or when I feel like being alone.   I always rather group, I seek groups first.  That is the kind of player I am.

What bothers me is that the soloers are not happy that almost every new MMO on the market is catered towards them and they are still not happy.   I cannot understand this.   You soloers have all the games you could want to play... yet us groupers are stuck with games that are over 10 years old.  (EQ is my MMO atm and will be for a while).

Any game that questing is the major exp tool is a solo based game in my book because most quest are designed to be run solo.

Originally posted by johnspartan

Originally posted by heartless

Because it is fun? Strange concept, isn't it?

On the other hand, if you don't find it fun, you shouldn't be playing it in the first place.

 

Thanks for telling me what I should and shouldn't do. Tell me, what should I eat for dinner? How about with my future? Apparently you know everything and have the authority to tell me what I should and shouldn't do.

Loot is important to me, so is being the best and having cool stuff. To me, that is fun and that is a portion of why I play MMORPGs. I love grouping because it's more fun to play together IMO.

But that's not enough. I like playing together and it's fun to play with other people because the rewards are better too. It's not the only reason why I raid but I do like that fact about raiding.

Raiding is fun to me and getting the best gear from raiding is also fun.

Tell me, anything else I should know about myself?

So I ask again, if the ONLY thing I get is the fun from playing with others, is that really the only motivation I should have? 

You just don't want to share. Should've said so in the first place, it would've saved us both a lot of typing.

You like cool gear. So do I. You like a certain aspect of the game, I like a different aspect of the game. Why should you have the best stuff, if we both pay a monthly fee? Why should your play style be more rewarding than mine?

As for your last question: Yes. Just a personal opinion though.

Originally posted by heartless

See, the singles and the doubles trophies are both equally valuable. In MMOs, solo content, loot and xp is never more valuable than group content, loot and xp.

So clarify further, since I play in the doubles tournament, my trophy should be twice as big as that of singles tournament.

Heartless it seems to me that your complaint is not that groups get their own set of rewardsbut the 'value' of them. Basically, what you are asking for is a removal of the loot system as it pertains to overpowered items and gear.

As for all these sports analogies people keep throwing around. here's one for the mix.

A soloer coming into a group based game and then whining to developers to add more solo content is very similar to girls that sue schools for the rights to be on the boy's football/baseball/soccer team.  Instead of joining a team that is set aside for girls completely or a multi-sex league, they try to change the rules for men's teams. But that's ok, they just want to be included and we should be forced to include them.

At the same time if the men (groupers) were to go to the multi-sex leagues (soloers) and try to get them changed so they seperated the teams they'd be complete tools.

I know a lot of people are going to have a hard time to wrap their head around that analogy but basically it goes something like this. There are games out there for everyone's playstyle, nobody's play style is wrong.  Find a game that suits your playstyle. Dont buy a game that doesn't suit your playstyle and then beg and beg for people to change it so you can have more fun or feel more equal, or more powerful.  If there aren't games out there that do not suit your playstyle,, ask for developers to make them. But in almost any given situation real life or game you're not going to be included 100%  so you need to get over yourself and find games that give you as much as they can.

    There should be incentive for all players, group or solo shouldn't really matter the way some people are pushing one way or the other.  There should be something for everyone.  Those who prefer solo, can.  Those who prefer to group, will group.  There are games already out that allow good experiences on both accounts, such as WoW.  In the case of WoW, those who group and raid are better off due to the gear that can be achieved.  Sure you can solo all the way to 80, but I wouldn't recommend it. 

    A game should not revolve around one party or the other, it should be made for entertainment and enjoyment.  Games are a form of art now and just like art, everyone has different opinions on it.  Why are some labeling?  Calling people out?  We are gamers, brothers and sisters of a sort.  We should learn to accept others for what they enjoy, small differences is all I see and some people are trying to put a canyon between each other. 

    I agree with what the developer that was quoted several pages back said about how games shouldn't be made for a single group of players.  They should be designed with a broader audience in mind.  I'm not saying to simplify to the point of "ease for a caveman", but rather going back to saying what I've been thinking for a long time.  MMO's and the rest of the genres should have a little something for everyone.  Not solo'ers, not groupers but gamers in general.

Originally posted by Cereo

What Ihmotepp is trying to say is that Doubles Tennis is harder, it deserves more attention, and its more fun and better. You have to talk to your partner you see, and sometimes he has to go to the bathroom and you have to wait, making tennis more challenging. Singles you only have to worry about 2 people showing up and not having to leave or go to the bathroom, doubles you have to worry about 4 people!

These sports analogies are really idiotic, but I'll shred this one for you.

Doubles tennis is no more inherently harder than singles tennis.  In fact, as you point out, you have to do a lot less work in doubles tennis than you do otherwise.  You seem to think that talking to people is challenging, that's pathetic.  The reality is, if you've got trouble talking to people, you've got bigger problems than grouping in a game.  And for all intents and purposes, if one person has to go to the bathroom, the game gets paused until they get back, whether it's a person hitting a ball against a wall by themselves or 4 people playing on a court.  With 4 people, however, there are 4x as many breaks necessary, the game stops 4x as often.  You think this makes for a better game?

And as for the game itself, with 2 people, you only have to cover half the court and hit the ball half the time, so it makes it more difficult because you have to decide on the fly who should hit it and what part to cover. In conclusion, Doubles players should get more money, more recognition, and they should remove the possibility to even play Singles from tennis, as it is inferior and less fun, and that is a fact.

There's an agreement before the game stars which areas are whose responsibility, just like in an MMO.  Tanks tank.  Healers heal.  People who actually know how to play the game don't go running into each other because they made the wrong call and tried to intercept a ball that someone else had.  Further, whether you have one player, four players or ten players on the court, the only thing you have to keep track of is the ball.  The goal is exactly the same in every case, to put the ball over the net so it cannot be returned.

So please explain why you want someone who only does half the work to get paid more than someone who does it all themselves and is successful at it?  There is no logic whatsoever in that position.

Originally posted by Asmiroth20

    There should be incentive for all players, group or solo shouldn't really matter the way some people are pushing one way or the other.  There should be something for everyone.  Those who prefer solo, can.  Those who prefer to group, will group.  There are games already out that allow good experiences on both accounts, such as WoW.  In the case of WoW, those who group and raid are better off due to the gear that can be achieved.  Sure you can solo all the way to 80, but I wouldn't recommend it. 

    A game should not revolve around one party or the other, it should be made for entertainment and enjoyment.  Games are a form of art now and just like art, everyone has different opinions on it.  Why are some labeling?  Calling people out?  We are gamers, brothers and sisters of a sort.  We should learn to accept others for what they enjoy, small differences is all I see and some people are trying to put a canyon between each other. 

    I agree with what the developer that was quoted several pages back said about how games shouldn't be made for a single group of players.  They should be designed with a broader audience in mind.  I'm not saying to simplify to the point of "ease for a caveman", but rather going back to saying what I've been thinking for a long time.  MMO's and the rest of the genres should have a little something for everyone.  Not solo'ers, not groupers but gamers in general.

You mean a game that somehow got singles and groups to mingle together? A good idea. I also have an example I can tell that Greenie once said (and I seriously hope that idea becomes a game soon).

In this scenerio, there is an evil castle that needs to be destroyed. The castle can be destroyed by placing explosives at key structure foundations whose annihilation would destroy the castle. The problem is that the underground strucutres doesn't have alot of moving space, so a group can't traverse it. And there's so many guards running around, a single person wouldn't be able to do the job. So, a group has to storm the castle and cause havoc, thus attracting the attention of the majority of the guards. Then, the solo person could slip into the underground areas of the castle with only facing minimal (but challenging) resistance by any remaining guards. The soloist activate the explosives, the group notices the castle starting to collapse, and everyone escapes the castle.

That would be an excellent game in which soloists and groups had to work together, yet they follow their own playstyle so the gaming content isn't watered down to appeal to both parties.