Originally posted by Jimmy_Scythe

 

I don't want you to take this the wrong way...

But your post just kinda makes me think that you get all of your insights about society exclusively from the media. The real world isn't that big and bad. Any employer that pits employees against one another is going to have bigger problems than a possible union.

<shrugs> Maybe you're just not from the States. I live in America and I can tell you, truthfull, that life here is not the same as an episode of Survivor or Desperate Housewives.

Nope 38 years been an American citizen, spent 4 of them in the marines.  I can tell you right now when people have power they'll do anything they can to keep it.

If you don't think companies spend big bucks on anti-union training for high end managers, you're kidding yourself.

Also, if you think people don't take care of number one, ,how many times you seen  a news report and watched someone get beat up in a pizza parlor or mcdonalds and everyone just stands there? I"m not talking about when two people are arguing and getting into a fight, but when one person clearly assualts someone unprovoked.

This country has been in a tailspin for a long time, thankfully other countries have lent us plenty of money so we can keep our spending habits up.

Originally posted by Greenie

Originally posted by Jimmy_Scythe

 

Nope 38 years been an American citizen, spent 4 of them in the marines.  I can tell you right now when people have power they'll do anything they can to keep it.

Those that are immature enough to believe that they actually have power you mean. As an American you must realize that power lies only the hands of those that choose to follow.

If you don't think companies spend big bucks on anti-union training for high end managers, you're kidding yourself.

Yeah, but that's a world away from divide and conquer. In the military I'm sure you had experience with cat herding. In business it's no different.

Also, if you think people don't take care of number one, ,how many times you seen  a news report and watched someone get beat up in a pizza parlor or mcdonalds and everyone just stands there? I"m not talking about when two people are arguing and getting into a fight, but when one person clearly assualts someone unprovoked.

Actually there's a deep psychological reason for this. It's called The Matrix of Responsibility. Violence is just like any other natural disaster. If you're in a room full of people and you all smell smoke at the same time, everyone freezes and watches everyone else. They're waiting for someone to take charge. Same thing when fights break out.

This country has been in a tailspin for a long time, thankfully other countries have lent us plenty of money so we can keep our spending habits up.

And you damn kids need to GET OFF MY LAWN!!!

Seriously, it seems like once people make it past 30 they lose all hope for humanity and start sounding just like their parents. I know, I catch myself doing the same thing. I have to keep telling myself that all change isn't bad and most of the scarey shit they tell us is new, really isn't new at all. Serial killers go back to the Jack The Ripper. School shooting can be traced as far back as the 1930's. And murder is far less common than it was in the middle ages. You may not see it, but the world is improving.

Anyway....

This has all been really tangental. I'll leave you guys to your topic now.

Originally posted by toddze

Originally posted by Vrazule

You need to realize that as more and more non-traditional MMO gamers come into the market, we're going to see a more dramatic shift from "social experiments" to actual games.  People with fulfilling social lives aren't looking for a virtual replacement, they're looking for entertainment.  Forced grouping is a necessary tool for shy or socially inept nerds.  That's why it was so popular back in the day when MMOs were as far from mainstream as you could possibly get.

Now that the genre is being flooded by regular gamers and mainstreamers, this model is distinctly less appealing and rather sophomoric.  Then there are some of us that started with the old MMOs, but are  no longer content to play school yard simulators.

 

I could put forth a strong argument that the soloist are the selfhish basement dwellers with no social skills, But I will take the high road and not do that.

You taking the high road?  That would be a first.  It certainly isn't the case in several of the other solo vs group threads on this board where you, Greenie and Imhotepp are on the warpath and making all kinds of assumptions about the social and gaming skills of soloers.

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

Uh no, actually I want a good grouping game, and a little window that says "group" doesn't really do that. There actaully needs to be soome GAME MECHANICS that make grouping fun, BESIDES a little window that says "group" on it.

LOVE IT!!!!  Yeah, adding grouping to a single player game without addressing the needs / desires of grouped players is like adding 2 more wheels to a bicycle and calling it a car.  NOT the same thing.

Ken

Originally posted by Jimmy_Scythe

Originally posted by Greenie

Nope 38 years been an American citizen, spent 4 of them in the marines.  I can tell you right now when people have power they'll do anything they can to keep it.Those that are immature enough to believe that they actually have power you mean. As an American you must realize that power lies only the hands of those that choose to follow.If you don't think companies spend big bucks on anti-union training for high end managers, you're kidding yourself.Yeah, but that's a world away from divide and conquer. In the military I'm sure you had experience with cat herding. In business it's no different.

Also, if you think people don't take care of number one, ,how many times you seen  a news report and watched someone get beat up in a pizza parlor or mcdonalds and everyone just stands there? I"m not talking about when two people are arguing and getting into a fight, but when one person clearly assualts someone unprovoked.

Actually there's a deep psychological reason for this. It's called The Matrix of Responsibility. Violence is just like any other natural disaster. If you're in a room full of people and you all smell smoke at the same time, everyone freezes and watches everyone else. They're waiting for someone to take charge. Same thing when fights break out.

This country has been in a tailspin for a long time, thankfully other countries have lent us plenty of money so we can keep our spending habits up.

 And you damn kids need to GET OFF MY LAWN!!!

Seriously, it seems like once people make it past 30 they lose all hope for humanity and start sounding just like their parents. I know, I catch myself doing the same thing. I have to keep telling myself that all change isn't bad and most of the scarey shit they tell us is new, really isn't new at all. Serial killers go back to the Jack The Ripper. School shooting can be traced as far back as the 1930's. And murder is far less common than it was in the middle ages. You may not see it, but the world is improving.

Anyway....

This has all been really tangental. I'll leave you guys to your topic now.

Actually I like this discussion hehe. Next time you think you hold the power to follow or not,, try not paying your taxes. Tell me how that works out for you.

  Murder is not less common or are you forgetting  Darfur? Now if you take out wars over centuries the totals might be skewed, but we're talking centuries. Murder rates over the last hundred years have been fluctuating depending on a variety of issues.

Unions,, Reagan crushed those with the pilot's strike in the 80's. I"ve personally seen first hand what lengths a company will go to in order to avoid a union, they put 100 people out of a job and closed the distribution center for a year until they could reopen under the name of their sister company. FYI, I live in the South, Union is a dirty word down here thanks to ignorance.

Yes people will wait for someone to take charge but you ever notice nobody takes charge anymore? There is also the fear of being sued, and the overall pussification of America. We're taught not to fight back at every turn unless it's puffing our chest out at other countries. Something got lost in the last 20 or so years of this country. With education becoming more and more of a joke it's no wonder we've been surpassed by so many other countries.

And lastly my experience in the military pretty much involved you either kiss ass to the right people or you do your job and keepyour mouth shut.  So many people pull rank when they hear a dissenting opinion, or they lose a debate whether your at your job or in a bar or the gym working out. The Military is nothing more than volunteered slavery. Some volunteer for national pride and a sense of duty, others for the GI bill, others for healthcare for their families, but generally it feeds it's enlistment ranks off of lower income citizens that see it as a viable reason to earn money and a career.

Originally posted by Vrazule

Originally posted by toddze

 

I could put forth a strong argument that the soloist are the selfhish basement dwellers with no social skills, But I will take the high road and not do that.

You taking the high road?  That would be a first.  It certainly isn't the case in several of the other solo vs group threads on this board where you, Greenie and Imhotepp are on the warpath and making all kinds of assumptions about the social and gaming skills of soloers.

No I'm not making assumptions about anything. You're also assuming that I don't solo on a regular basis. If that were true I wouldn't have spent 3 hours today in the Aion beta running quests by myself. I solo'd a champ from 48-50 in daoc back in the old days before SI, most of his levels from 1-40 were done in duo's and trios. I solo'd a NS most of the way from 45-50 after SI. Anyone who remembers the old xp system for daoc will know that took an assload of time.

But at the same time, I don't expect the phattest loot for a solo playstyle.

I do think games that are overly solo friendly such as wow, warhammer help screw community over and grouping aspects of the game.

I also think soloer's will make every lame excuse about why they solo and condemn groupers with ridiculous generalities of nerdism and anti-social skills,, despite many solo-advocates on this very forum stating comments of anti-social skills in games with their lack of patience with other players or desire not to listen to people speak in group instead of just getting the damn xp. That is straight out of the soloer's fingertips to the keyboard, not me making it up.

I hear soloer's say they want a challenge in their game, but the truth is solo play really provides no challenge. You do all the content that is at your level, which the game has designed for you to be able to do with little effort and heartache.

Basically I see soloers saying a lot but contradicting themselves often. I see a bunch of different posters who defend solo play and yet it seems many of these do not agree on much about solo play or why they want to do it, what rewards they want from it.

The only people I see who tend to agree more often than not are the groupers, because really all we want is to group with other people, some sort of reward for epic encounters, and for games to stop advertising games as MMO"s with group gamplay when they're just cleverly disguised SRPGS for every level until endgame with a group mechanic attached.

Maybe if you actually brought some points to the discussion you could change my opinion somewhat slightly or educate me with your knowledge.

I haven't played a MMO that allowed soloers to run dungeons by themselves... but if they did so what?  I don't see how this ruins grouping.  As long as the dungeon is difficult when grouped, and you're having fun, who cares?  If your enjoyment comes from the fact that grouping allows you to do what soloers can't, then I guess it makes sense.  I would just assume that being in a group would be enough.

IMO there should be something for everyone, and everyone should be happy, because it's a game.

Originally posted by Greenie

Originally posted by Vrazule

Originally posted by toddze

 

I could put forth a strong argument that the soloist are the selfhish basement dwellers with no social skills, But I will take the high road and not do that.

You taking the high road?  That would be a first.  It certainly isn't the case in several of the other solo vs group threads on this board where you, Greenie and Imhotepp are on the warpath and making all kinds of assumptions about the social and gaming skills of soloers.

 

No I'm not making assumptions about anything. You're also assuming that I don't solo on a regular basis. If that were true I wouldn't have spent 3 hours today in the Aion beta running quests by myself. I solo'd a champ from 48-50 in daoc back in the old days before SI, most of his levels from 1-40 were done in duo's and trios. I solo'd a NS most of the way from 45-50 after SI. Anyone who remembers the old xp system for daoc will know that took an assload of time.

But at the same time, I don't expect the phattest loot for a solo playstyle.

I do think games that are overly solo friendly such as wow, warhammer help screw community over and grouping aspects of the game.

I also think soloer's will make every lame excuse about why they solo and condemn groupers with ridiculous generalities of nerdism and anti-social skills,, despite many solo-advocates on this very forum stating comments of anti-social skills in games with their lack of patience with other players or desire not to listen to people speak in group instead of just getting the damn xp. That is straight out of the soloer's fingertips to the keyboard, not me making it up.

I hear soloer's say they want a challenge in their game, but the truth is solo play really provides no challenge. You do all the content that is at your level, which the game has designed for you to be able to do with little effort and heartache.

Basically I see soloers saying a lot but contradicting themselves often. I see a bunch of different posters who defend solo play and yet it seems many of these do not agree on much about solo play or why they want to do it, what rewards they want from it.

The only people I see who tend to agree more often than not are the groupers, because really all we want is to group with other people, some sort of reward for epic encounters, and for games to stop advertising games as MMO"s with group gamplay when they're just cleverly disguised SRPGS for every level until endgame with a group mechanic attached.

Maybe if you actually brought some points to the discussion you could change my opinion somewhat slightly or educate me with your knowledge.

 

I am merely voicing my opinion, just like you.  I could care less about changing your mind and I certainly haven't seen any points made by you and your groupie compatriots that have any basis in fact, but are gasp, merely opinion or preference.  The only point of debating on these forums is in the hope that the powers that be might pay attention and realize that integrating play styles and giving preference to one over the other is not a good way to design an MMO.

MMOs have been evolving, slowly but surely and I can guarantee that bulletin board discussions play a significant part in that.

Originally posted by Vrazule

I am merely voicing my opinion, just like you.  I could care less about changing your mind and I certainly haven't seen any points made by you and your groupie compatriots that have any basis in fact, but are gasp, merely opinion or preference.  The only point of debating on these forums is in the hope that the powers that be might pay attention and realize that integrating play styles and giving preference to one over the other is not a good way to design an MMO.

MMOs have been evolving, slowly but surely and I can guarantee that bulletin board discussions play a significant part in that.

And I haven't seen you provide any post  other than to tell people they're wrong. 

What I have at least done is read through every post and seen what soloer's are posting and based what I say about the attitudes of soloer's from those comments. I'm not adding to or taking away from their content or opinions they've provided. You either have not read these posts and taken them in objectively or you are refusing to.

---

The only point of debating on these forums is in the hope that the powers that be might pay attention and realize that integrating play styles and giving preference to one over the other is not a good way to design an MMO.

---

Actually, it is. The differences are so fundamental that a good design in the future will have to focus/specialize on a certain segment in the market or risk losing customers from many segments. There are numerous examples like this in the real life. MMOs as a business are following the very same pattern.

pioneers > imitators/innovators > consolidation > specialization

We have seen a lot consolidation and also starting to see a lot more specialization. Different products for different type of customers. Which for us customers, is a good thing.

Originally posted by Nessin

Edit:

Or, think of it this way.  If you want a game to be changed such that it makes it more beneficial to group, just so you can get groups, then what do you want?  You obviously don't want to group for the social benefits, because that is already in the game.  You obviously don't want to group to access content you need a group for, because that is already in the game.

Instead, you want a mechanic which will allow you some bonus you wouldn't otherwise get.  Grouping has no say in the matter.

This has been answered a hundred times, yet you fail to listen to the answer.

People that advocate a good group game are not doing so to make you group. They are doing so because they want a challenge to overcome with team play, because team work is fun.

If you can avoid the challenge, it is no longer a challenge. You need to do this dungeon with a group. BUT you can avoid that dungeon and do a solo dungeon and get the same thing. Group play is now destroyed, the challenge no longer exists.

A challenge that can be avoided, is not a challenge, and destroys the fun of team play.

You answer your own question almost, and then stop short of the reality. You're right, no one needs to group for social benefits. You can chat all day without grouping.

Then what are groupers asking for? You continually refuse to see the answer, and then say it must be so we can force you to group with us. We don't want you to play the game with us. We want you to go play a solo game. We want a challenge that cannot be avoided.

Now, can you design a challenge for me that requires team work, where you can solo it but I cannot so it cannot be avoided?

If you can do that, then we can play the same game. If not, then you destroy my fun by changing the rules so the challenge can be avoided easily.

Here's a trophy if you finish a marathon. Not win, just finish. Here's the exact same trophy if you take two steps and quit. I no longer want to finish the marathon, the trophy is now worthless to me. Anyone that takes two steps can get it, I might as well take to steps and get the trophy. I will go enter a marathon where you MUST finish, or you don't get the trophy. That trophy will actually mean something, because the challenge cannot be avoided for the same reward.

Originally posted by bleyzwun

I haven't played a MMO that allowed soloers to run dungeons by themselves... but if they did so what?  I don't see how this ruins grouping.  As long as the dungeon is difficult when grouped, and you're having fun, who cares?  If your enjoyment comes from the fact that grouping allows you to do what soloers can't, then I guess it makes sense.  I would just assume that being in a group would be enough.

IMO there should be something for everyone, and everyone should be happy, because it's a game.

See above, being able avoid a challenge means there is no real challenge.

Being able to avoid group content by doing something solo destroys the group content.

The enjoyment does NOT come from the fact you have a little window that says "group".

The enjoyment comes from forming a team, and using team work to overcome a real challenge. A real challenge cannot be avoided.

When you can design a game that has a real challenge that requires team work, AND you can solo BUT I cannot easily avoid the group content by soloing also, let me know your design.

The only real challenge in grouping is putting up with the rest of the group without ripping your hair out... difficult in my case as I'm bald.

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

See above, being able avoid a challenge means there is no real challenge.

Being able to avoid group content by doing something solo destroys the group content.

The enjoyment does NOT come from the fact you have a little window that says "group".

The enjoyment comes from forming a team, and using team work to overcome a real challenge. A real challenge cannot be avoided.

When you can design a game that has a real challenge that requires team work, AND you can solo BUT I cannot easily avoid the group content by soloing also, let me know your design.

/facepalm

The only reason why you think you might have a point is because there are currently no MMOs built with challenging solo content in mind (although you might find the odd challenge at times). Solo content of that kind of difficulty as we see it today would, as you put it, destroy the more difficult group content... if the rewards are the same that is. Let's not forget that a lot people do it more for the rewards than the challenge, and are thus willing to put up with some things they wouldn't ordinarily choose, so challenge alone is not the holy grail in solving this matter. Anyway, all this does not mean it's impossible to make challenging solo content. If it was, there would be no challenging single player games either and nobody would play them because you can just revert to your last save game, right?

No, I'll tell you what. The reason why solo content destroys group content is because most people deep down don't enjoy holding hands all the time just to get things done and reap the rewards. They just currently don't have much of a choice really. So if solo content turns out to have similar rewards and difficulty, they'll nearly always do the solo content instead because getting a group of coherently speaking individuals who can read and follow directions is just too much of a hassle these days. Maybe these people are just lazy or maybe they just want to have fun on their own terms... or something completely different... depending on how you view it and who you ask, but that's the sad generalized truth.

Anyway, I say it would be awesome if some developers would dare pick up the gauntlet and make that challenging forced grouping game with no solo content that you speak of. Kinda like an old school EQ/FFXI hybrid on stereoids I suppose? Even though I would never play such a game, it would nevertheless be very interesting to see just how well it would do and maybe it would put an end to all this. But... you know... for a while it looked like VG would be that kind of game, but they sure did an epic moonwalk out of that one for some reason (then horribly died because it was simply too unfinished and buggy). EQ2 also had some of that attitude in the beginning, then did a complete 180 and even introduced a solo instance that became so insanely popular to the point where they had to nerf it into oblivion. I wonder why? What did they suddenly realize to take such drastic measures?

Anyway... there - I said it. Now light up that afterburner and turn the exhaust towards me. It's not like I care lol.

 I used to group in the lower levels of Anarchy Online. It was fun to PUG when there were many fresh players just wanting to play a game. Most things were easier to manage in a group, or you could tackle higher stuff. I didn' even mind to wipe a few times till the group pulled itself together and worked more efficiently. Then came the high level stuff. Everything was about efficiency. Kill, move, kill, DPS meters and so on. People reduced to numbers, no chat, besides downtimes. Heck... Missions were rushed so dast to get the most xp/h I got physically exhausted and dizzy. That's when the fun left. You didn't have the best equip? Gimp! You didn't want to rush? Holdup! Most groupers I met after that (even in other games) were just looking to rush through the game and get the most as fast as possible. I'm in no run, I'm playing a game. Most groups weren't about challende or sicialisation, but ust there to get the max efficiency and if possible just as much challende as needed to get it.

 I couldn't get any group for the stuff I found fun (in most games), like just venturing around seeing the scenery, killing a mob and check how far I could go. WHile being 107 in AO I soloed my first Heck. Orgmates told me it wouldn't be possible, but it took me 7 minutes with my Fixer of snare, hope, near deaths and I pulled it off. That was a challenge and fullfilling. Rushing through Inf-missions in breathtaking pace was NOT. It was grind, no challenge and no social stuff. Most fun I had when an orgmate and me just wandered around in Sheol or Ely in semi-RP exploring the mobs and region, or when we were trying to pull of stuff others said we couldn't do. We died... So what? We did our best and did it for fun. Same as this orgmate and me put together a team with other orgmate and went down the tower in Ely. We went as far as we could, someone did a bad pull or agrroed a 2nd mob and we died deep down there, but still we had fun, though it wasn't efficient.

 Unfortunatly those are expeirences of the past. After taht time (when those people left) I never had that feeling again. People just seem to group for efficiency, reducing me to numbers, DPS and so on, rushing through to get to the endgame. Most games I tried didn't even have a vast area to explore anymore, or dungeons to try to get though, or if they had those were overcrowded and no challenge. Everything has a purpose nowadays it seems to me. Nothing is there just to be explored and if it is... It's not used, since it is not "efficient" to go there. Only if you have something to camp down there for gear.

 So where is my incentive to group? To be reduced to numbers and a role in the team? To run through the games as fast as possible (zerg-raids being the pinnalcle of boredome. Assist, attack, assist attack... Having to repeat that stuff x times to gather some stupid points till I'm able to get my stuff? Ummm... Naaahhh...) and leaving most of the content out? I never minded to group and did have blast in those "good" groups, but finding those is just way too hard nowadays it seems to me. Groupers that just check your equip and go for the max-efficient setup leaving people out, because they coudl lower speed/ DPS is what turns many people away from grouping to soloing it seems to me. Also the mechanics are way too unproductive. Setting up a group could take an hour or longer if you were unlucky. MOst people don't have that time now anymore. Make alternative setups work to get more people to group, also make things easier to accsess. The mission generator in AO was fine for that. Gather a group pull some missions and run to them. You could start at any mission terminal and travel together. One person pulled, others all went to the destination from where they were and got going. I didn't see anything like that later.

 So now I like some solo content too... Not because I mind grouping, I actually like to play with nice people and have a good chit-chat, some fun, pulling some jokes and achieve somthing together, but most people don't group for that anymore. It's all goal orientated. Get together, achieve all goals, cash in reward/ drops, go on. Partially it's the peoples fault (who likes to group with people that reduce you to numbers or treat you like shit?), partially the game mechanics faults. Grouping takes way too long most of the times, till you are able to get going.

Just my 2 cents

Originally posted by Greenie

Originally posted by Jimmy_Scythe

Originally posted by Greenie

 

Actually I like this discussion hehe.

That's fine but this should really be moved out of this thread on to the Off Topic board. At any rate, I'll reply to this one post, but after that you'll have to open a new thread in Off Topic. Just don't expect much feedback from me today since I'm busier than fuck.

 Next time you think you hold the power to follow or not,, try not paying your taxes. Tell me how that works out for you.

I don't know, it didn't work out to bad for the nation's forefathers...

Seriously though, I know of at least one college professor that didn't pay taxes during the entire Vietnam war. He just put all the money he was supposed to pay into escrow and informed the government that they could have their money when they got out of Vietnam. The IRS never pushed issue with this guy since they figured the publicity would cause more people to follow suite.

It all depends on how many people you have with you and you go about things.

  Murder is not less common or are you forgetting  Darfur? Now if you take out wars over centuries the totals might be skewed, but we're talking centuries. Murder rates over the last hundred years have been fluctuating depending on a variety of issues.

Exhibit A

Genocide and war crimes are nothing new. Roman soldiers literally killed every man, woman and child in Carthage. Viking raiders used to throw babies into the air and catch them on end of their swords. A move that was later copied by the Japanese during WWII in a city called Nan King. Hell, the Romans killed 10,000 people A DAY in the coloseum just for entertainment.

Want something more recent? Check out the war in the Congo which has been going on since the 1960's, at least.

Unions,, Reagan crushed those with the pilot's strike in the 80's. I"ve personally seen first hand what lengths a company will go to in order to avoid a union, they put 100 people out of a job and closed the distribution center for a year until they could reopen under the name of their sister company. FYI, I live in the South, Union is a dirty word down here thanks to ignorance.

Yeah, Regan did weaken the unions, but it's not like he didn't have plenty of help from unions themselves. You know what happens when you have union? You pay dues so that the union bosses can fuck you over. At one factory I worked at, every time the union was going to negotiate a new contract, the company would fly all the union big wigs out to Vegas for a week. When they got back, we had a new contract that had obviously been negotiated between lap dances body shots in a Vegas titty bar. Oh yeah, and both our health insurance and union dues increased which official made us worse off than before the negotiations. X- (

Yes people will wait for someone to take charge but you ever notice nobody takes charge anymore?

You do realize that in the late 60's a whole neighborhood in New York watched a young woman get raped and killed over a four hour period right? The more intense the violence the more likely people are to assume that someone, surely someone, will do something about this. It's an exponential cycle.

There is also the fear of being sued, and the overall pussification of America. We're taught not to fight back at every turn unless it's puffing our chest out at other countries. Something got lost in the last 20 or so years of this country. With education becoming more and more of a joke it's no wonder we've been surpassed by so many other countries.

Other countries base their education on standardized tests which have been widely criticized over the last few decades. Other countries tend to value rote memorization whereas we value creativity, flexibility and resourcefulness.

And lastly my experience in the military pretty much involved you either kiss ass to the right people or you do your job and keepyour mouth shut.  So many people pull rank when they hear a dissenting opinion, or they lose a debate whether your at your job or in a bar or the gym working out. The Military is nothing more than volunteered slavery. Some volunteer for national pride and a sense of duty, others for the GI bill, others for healthcare for their families, but generally it feeds it's enlistment ranks off of lower income citizens that see it as a viable reason to earn money and a career.

 Yep, that's pretty much coporate America to a tee.

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

See above, being able avoid a challenge means there is no real challenge.

Being able to avoid group content by doing something solo destroys the group content.

The enjoyment does NOT come from the fact you have a little window that says "group".

The enjoyment comes from forming a team, and using team work to overcome a real challenge. A real challenge cannot be avoided.

When you can design a game that has a real challenge that requires team work, AND you can solo BUT I cannot easily avoid the group content by soloing also, let me know your design.

This is the same argument you used against xp boosts being allowed in an MMO. You said that if there is an easier route you would take it because one would have to be a fool to not do so.

You've stated that your main concerns in an MMO is the leveling speed and that there should be a caste system to loot distribution.

You've stated that if there are easier routes to max level or best loot you would take them.

You've stated that you do not find those easier routes fun.

It seems like you are looking to create ways to create server mechanics to compensate for your own playstyle and those mechanics include forcing others who would rather play alone to play with you.

IMO, the answer to your game issues don't lie in game mechanics.

OK, Ihmo, we've done this dance a few times.

You keep saying that grouping should be all about groups working together to overcome challenges a soloer can't.

I get that.   But is that the real meat of it?

The rewards from those group encounters?   Should it be possible for a soloer to get them thru soloing?

This is what the soloer's real complaint is, that only thru grouping (ie favoring one playstyle over another) can the best loot be obtained.

Offer a reasonable, soloable alternative to acquiring the same rewards, and you and you're friends can group til the cows come home.    Hell, I might even join you from time to time.     But FFS, stop giving one playstyle the better prize and saying "Just come over to our way of thinking and you can get it too!".   Because once you do that, you are no longer arguing for a quality grouping experience, you are arguing for a two-tiered loot system, where groupers get their shinies from the A list of goodies, and soloers get their shinies from the B list.

/sarcasm on:  Cause obviously, grouping is always harder content and it deserves the best rewards.   And it's impossible to create solo content that is difficult enough to be deserving of those same rewards.  /sarcasm off

Originally posted by LynxJSA

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

See above, being able avoid a challenge means there is no real challenge.

Being able to avoid group content by doing something solo destroys the group content.

The enjoyment does NOT come from the fact you have a little window that says "group".

The enjoyment comes from forming a team, and using team work to overcome a real challenge. A real challenge cannot be avoided.

When you can design a game that has a real challenge that requires team work, AND you can solo BUT I cannot easily avoid the group content by soloing also, let me know your design.

 

This is the same argument you used against xp boosts being allowed in an MMO. You said that if there is an easier route you would take it because one would have to be a fool to not do so.

 

You've stated that your main concerns in an MMO is the leveling speed and that there should be a caste system to loot distribution.

You've stated that if there are easier routes to max level or best loot you would take them.

You've stated that you do not find those easier routes fun.

It seems like you are looking to create ways to create server mechanics to compensate for your own playstyle and those mechanics include forcing others who would rather play alone to play with you.

 

IMO, the answer to your game issues don't lie in game mechanics.

 

 

Are you saying that my playstyle works with games like EQ and DAoC, but not solo friendly games like WoW? Isn't that the same thing as saying I like to play good grouping games like EQ and DAoC, which I"ve said repeatedly, but not solo friendly games like WoW?

EQ and DAoC had the right mix of allowing solo play which was hard and slow, and encouraging grouping, making it challenging, and rewarding groupers for overcoming those challenges.

I think LOTRO, WoW, WAR are to solo friendly.

Now, how is this some psychological problem you seem to think I have and not a simple matter of game mechanics?

I don't want to force you to play a game like EQ or DAoC, anymore than I'm sure you don't want to force me to play WoW or LOTRO. How could I possibly benefit from forcing you to play a game like DAoC or EQ? Go play WoW, EVE, or any solo friendly game you like. I"m absolutely fine with that. Really.

I don't care about any "caste system" for loot distribution. I care about a challenge that rewards team play, that cannot be avoided. You can get rid of loot altogether if you like, I would have no problem with that.

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

Now, how is this some psychological problem you seem to think I have and not a simple matter of game mechanics?

Whoa there. I said it was a playstyle thing, not some kind of psychosis.