Trending Games | Trove | Elder Scrolls Online | Guild Wars 2 | Shroud of the Avatar

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,767,935 Users Online:0
Games:720  Posts:6,186,534
Recent forum postsRSS
Active threads
Cloud view
List all forums
General Forums
Developers Corner General Discussion
Popular Game Forums
Click a status to find game forum
Game Forums
Click a letter to find game forum
A-C
2029 Online 2112: Revolution 2Moons 4Story 8BitMMO 9 Dragons A Mystical Land A Tale in the Desert III A3 ACE Online ARGO Online Aberoth Absolute Force Online Absolute Terror Achaea Adellion Aerrevan Aetolia, the Midnight Age Age of Armor Age of Conan Age of Empires Online Age of Mourning Age of Wulin Age of Wushu Aida Arenas Aika Aion Albion Online Alganon All Points Bulletin (APB) Allods Online Altis Gates Amazing World Anarchy Online Ancients of Fasaria Andromeda 5 Angels Online Anime Trumps Anmynor Anno Online Applo Arcane Hearts Arcane Legends ArchLord ArcheAge Archeblade Archlord X Asda 2 Asda Story Ashen Empires Asheron's Call Asheron's Call 2 Astera Online Astonia III Astro Empires Astro Lords: Oort CLoud Asura Force Atlantica Online Atriarch Aura Kingdom Aurora Blade Auto Assault Avatar Star Battle Dawn Battle Dawn Galaxies Battle for Graxia Battle of 3 Kingdoms Battle of the Immortals Battlecruiser Online Battlestar Galactica Online Battlestar Reloaded Beyond Protocol Black Aftermath Black Desert Black Gold Black Prophecy Black Prophecy Tactics: Nexus Conflict Blacklight Retribution Blade & Soul Blade Hunter Blade Wars Blazing Throne Bless Blitz 1941 Blood and Jade Bloodlines Champions Bounty Bay Online Brain Storm Brawl Busters. Brick-Force Bright Shadow Bullet Run Business Tycoon Online CTRacer Cabal Online Caesary Call of Camelot Call of Gods Call of Thrones Camelot Unchained Canaan Online Cardmon Hero Cartoon Universe CasinoRPG Castle Empire Castlot Celtic Heroes Champions Online Champions of Regnum Chaos Online Chrono Tales Citadel of Sorcery CitiesXL Citizen Zero City of Decay City of Heroes City of Steam City of Transformers City of Villains Civilization Online Clan Lord Clash of Clans Cloud Nine Club Penguin Colony of War Command & Conquer: Tiberium Alliances Company of Heroes Online Conquer Online Conquer Online 3 Continent of the Ninth (C9) Core Blaze Core Exiles Corum Online Craft of Gods Crimecraft Crimelife 2 Cronous Crota II Crusaders of Solaris Cultures Online Cyber Monster 2 Céiron Wars
D-F
D&D Online DC Universe DK Online DOTA DOTA 2 DUST 514 DV8: Exile Dalethaan Dance Groove Online Dark Age of Camelot Dark Ages Dark Legends Dark Orbit Dark Relic: Prelude Dark Solstice Dark and Light DarkEden Online DarkSpace Darkblood Online Darkest Dungeon Darkfall Darkfall: Unholy Wars Darkwind: War on Wheels Das Tal Dawn of Fantasy Dawntide DayZ Dead Earth Dead Frontier Deco Online Deepworld Defiance Deicide Online Dekaron Demons at the Horizon Desert Operations Destiny Diablo 3 Diamonin Digimon Battle Dino Storm Disciple Divergence Divina Divine Souls Dofus Dominus Online Dragon Ball Online Dragon Born Online Dragon Crusade Dragon Empires Dragon Eternity Dragon Nest Dragon Oath Dragon Pals Dragon Raja Dragon's Call Dragon's Call II Dragon's Prophet DragonSky DragonSoul Dragona Dragonica Dragons and Titans Dream of Mirror Online Dreamland Online Dreamlords: The Reawakening Drift City Duels Dungeon Blitz Dungeon Fighter Online Dungeon Overlord Dungeon Party Dungeon Rampage Dungeon Runners Dynastica Dynasty Warriors Online Dynasty of the Magi EIN (Epicus Incognitus) EVE Online Earth Eternal Earth and Beyond Earthrise Eclipse War Ecol Tactics Online Eden Eternal Edge of Space Einherjar - The Viking's Blood Elder Scrolls Online Eldevin Elf Online Elite: Dangerous Embers of Caerus Emil Chronicle Online Empire Empire & State Empire Craft Empire Universe 3 EmpireQuest Empires of Galldon End of Nations Endless Ages Endless Blue Moon Online Endless Online Entropia Universe EpicDuel Erebus: Travia Reborn Eredan Eternal Blade Eternal Lands Eternal Saga Ether Fields Ether Saga Online Eudemons Online EuroGangster EverEmber Online EverQuest Next EverQuest Online Adventures Evernight Everquest Everquest II Evony Exarch Exorace F.E.A.R. Online Face of Mankind Fairyland Online Fall of Rome Fallen Earth Fallen Sword Fallout Online Family Guy Online Fantage Fantasy Earth Zero Fantasy Realm Online Fantasy Tales Online Fantasy Worlds: Rhynn Faunasphere Faxion Online Ferentus Ferion Fiesta Online Final Fantasy XI Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn Firefall Fists of Fu Florensia Flyff Football Manager Live Football Superstars Force of Arms Forge Forsaken World Fortnite Fortuna Forum for Discussion of Everlight Freaky Creatures Free Realms Freesky Online Freeworld Fung Wan Online Furcadia Fury Fusion Fall
G-L
GalaXseeds Galactic Command Online Game of Thrones: Seven Kingdoms Gameglobe Gate To Heavens Gates of Andaron Gatheryn Gauntlet Gekkeiju Online Ghost Online Ghost Recon Online Gladiatus Glitch Global Agenda Global Soccer Gloria Victis Glory of Gods GoGoRacer Goal Line Blitz Gods and Heroes GodsWar Online Golemizer Golf Star GoonZu Online Graal Kingdoms Granado Espada Online Grand Chase Grand Fantasia Grepolis Grimlands Guild Wars Guild Wars 2 Guild Wars Factions Guild Wars Nightfall H1Z1 Habbo Hotel Hailan Rising HaloSphere2 Haven & Hearth Hawken Hearthstone: Heroes of Warcraft Helbreath Hellgate Hellgate: London Hello Kitty Online Hero Online Hero Zero Hero's Journey Hero: 108 Online HeroSmash Heroes & Generals Heroes in the Sky Heroes of Bestia Heroes of Gaia Heroes of Might and Magic Online Heroes of Thessalonica Heroes of Three Kingdoms Heroes of the Storm Hex Holic Online Hostile Space Hunter Blade Huxley Illutia Illyriad Immortals USA Imperator Imperian Inferno Legend Infestation: Survivor Stories Infinite Crisis Infinity Infinity Iris Online Iron Grip: Marauders Irth Worlds Island Forge Islands of War Istaria: Chronicles of the Gifted Jade Dynasty Jagged Alliance Online Juggernaut Jumpgate Jumpgate Evolution KAL Online Kakele Online Kaos War Karos Online Kartuga Kicks Online King of Kings 3 Kingdom Heroes Kingdom Under Fire II Kingdom of Drakkar Kingory Kings and Legends Kings of the Realm KingsRoad Kitsu Saga Kiwarriors Knight Age Knight Online Knights of Dream City Kothuria Kung Foo! Kunlun Online L.A.W. LEGO Universe La Tale Land of Chaos Online Landmark Lands of Hope: Phoenix Edition LastChaos League of Angels League of Legends - Clash of Fates Legend of Edda: Vengeance Legend of Golden Plume Legend of Katha Legend of Mir 2 Legend of Mir 3 Legendary Champions Lego Minifigures Online Life is Feudal Light of Nova Lime Odyssey Line of Defense Lineage Lineage Eternal: Twilight Resistance Lineage II Linkrealms Loong Online Lord of the Rings Online Lords Online Lost Saga Lucent Heart Lunia Lusternia: Age of Ascension Luvinia World
M-Q
MU Online Mabinogi Maestia: Rise of Keledus MagiKnights Magic Barrage Magic World Online Manga Fighter MapleStory Martial Heroes Marvel Heroes Marvel Super Hero Squad Online Marvel: Avengers Alliance MechWarrior Online Megaten Meridian 59 : Evolution Merlin MetalMercs Metaplace Metin 2 MicroVolts Midkemia Online Might & Magic Heroes: Kingdoms MilMo Minecraft Mini Fighter Minions of Mirth Ministry of War Monato Esprit Monkey King Online Monkey Quest Monster & Me Monster Madness Online MonsterMMORPG Moonlight Online: Tales of Eternal Blood Mordavia Mortal Online Mourning My Lands Myst Online: URU Live Myth Angels Online Myth War Myth War 2 Mytheon Mythic Saga Mythos N.E.O Online NIDA Online Nadirim Naviage: The Power of Capital Navy Field Need for Speed World Nemexia Neo's Land NeoSteam Neocron Nether Neverwinter Nexus: The Kingdom Of The Winds NinjaTrick NosTale Novus Aeterno Oberin Odin Quest Odyssey RPG Ogre Island Omerta 3 Online Boxing Manager Onverse Order & Chaos Online Order of Magic Original Blood Origins Return Origins of Malu Orion's Belt Otherland Forums OverSoul Overkings Oz Online Oz World Pandora Saga Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen Panzar Parabellum Parallel Kingdom Parfait Station Path of Exile Pathfinder Online Perfect World Perpetuum Online Phantasy Star Online 2 Phantasy Star Universe Phoenix Dynasty Online Phylon Pi Story Picaroon Pirate Galaxy Pirate Storm Pirate101 PirateKing Online Pirates of the Burning Sea Pirates of the Caribbean Online Pixie Hollow Planeshift Planet Arkadia Planet Calypso PlanetSide 2 Planetside Planets³ Playboy Manager Pocket Legends Pockie Ninja Pockie Pirates Pockie Saints PoxNora Prime World Prime: Battle for Dominus Priston Tale Priston Tale II Prius Online Project Blackout Project Powder Project Titan Forums Project Wiki Puzzle Pirates Quickhit Football
R-S
R2 Online RAN Online RF Online ROSE Online Rage of 3 Kingdoms Ragnarok Online Ragnarok Online II RaiderZ Rakion Rappelz RappelzSEA Ravenmarch Realm Fighter Realm of the Mad God Realm of the Titans Realms Online Reclamation Red Stone Red War: Edem's Curse Regnum Online Remnant Knights Renaissance Repulse Requiem: Memento Mori Rift RiotZone Rise Rise of Dragonian Era Rise of Empire Rise of the Tycoon Rising of King Risk Your Life Rivality Rockfree Rohan: Blood Feud Role Play Worlds Roll n Rock Roma Victor Romadoria Rosh Online Roto X Rubies of Eventide Ruin Online Rumble Fighter Runes of Magic Runescape Rust Rusty Hearts Ryzom S4 League SAGA SD Gundam Capsule Fighter Online SMITE SUN Sagramore Salem SaySayGirls Scarlet Blade Scions of Fate Seal Online: Evolution Second Life Secret of the Solstice Seed Serenia Fantasy Seven Seas Saga Seven Souls Online Sevencore Shadow of Legend Shadowbane Shadowrun Online Shaiya Shards Online Shattered Galaxy Sho Online Shot Online Shroud of the Avatar SideQuest Siege on Stars Sigonyth: Desert Eternity Silkroad Online Skyblade Skyforge SmashMuck Champions Smoo Online Soldier Front Soul Master Soul Order Online Soul of Guardian Space Heroes Universe Sparta: War of Empires Spellcasters Sphere Spiral Knights Spirit Tales Splash Fighters Squad Wars Star Citizen Star Sonata 2 Star Stable Star Supremacy Star Trek Online Star Trek: Infinite Space Star Wars Galaxies Star Wars: Clone Wars Adventures Star Wars: The Old Republic StarQuest Online Stargate Worlds Starlight Story Starpires State of Decay SteelWar Online Stone Age 2 Stormfall: Age of War Storybricks Stronghold Kingdoms Sudden Attack Supremacy 1914 Supreme Destiny Sword Girls Sword of Destiny: Rise of Aions SwordX Swords of Heavens Swordsman
T-Z
TERA TS Online Tabula Rasa Tactica Online Tales Runner Tales of Fantasy Tales of Pirates Tales of Pirates II Tales of Solaris Talisman Online Tamer Saga Tank Ace Tantra Online Tatsumaki: Land at War Terra Militaris TerraWorld Online Thang Online The 4th Coming The Agency The Aurora World The Black Watchmen The Chronicle The Chronicles of Spellborn The Crew The Division The Hammers End The Legend of Ares The Lost Titans The Matrix Online The Mighty Quest for Epic Loot The Missing Ink The Mummy Online The Myth of Soma The Pride of Taern The Realm Online The Repopulation The Secret World The Sims Online The Strategems The West Theralon There Therian Saga Thrones of Chaos Tibia Tibia Micro Edition Tiger Knight Titan Siege Titans of Time Toontown Online Top Speed Topia Online Torchlight Total Domination Transformers Universe Traveller AR Travia Online Travian Trials of Ascension Tribal Hero Tribal Wars Tribes Universe Trickster Online Trove Troy Online True Fantasy Live Online Turf Battles Twelve Sky Twelve Sky 2 Twilight War Tynon U.B. Funkeys UFO Online URDEAD Online Ultima Forever: Quest for the Avatar Ultima Online Ultima X: Odyssey Ultimate Naruto Ultimate Soccer Boss Uncharted Waters Online Undercover 2: Merc Wars Underlight Unification Wars Universe Online Utopia Valkyrie Sky Vampire Lord Online Vanguard: Saga of Heroes Vanquish Space Vector City Racers Vendetta Online Victory - Age of Racing Vindictus Virtonomics Vis Gladius Visions of Zosimos VoidExpanse Voyage Century Online W.E.L.L. Online WAR (Warhammer Online) WAR2 Glory WYD Global Wakfu War Thunder War of 2012 War of Angels War of Legends War of Mercenaries War of Thrones War of the Immortals WarFlow Waren Story Wargame1942 Warhammer 40,000: Eternal Crusade Warhammer 40K: Dark Millennium Online Warhammer Online: Wrath of Heroes Warkeepers Warrior Epic Wartune WebLords Wild West Online WildStar Wind of Luck WindSlayer 2 Wings of Destiny Wish Wizard101 Wizardry Online Wizards and Champions Wonder King Wonderland Online World Golf Tour World of Battles World of Darkness World of Heroes World of Kung Fu World of Pirates World of Speed World of Tanks World of Tanks Generals World of Warcraft World of Warplanes World of Warships World of the Living Dead WorldAlpha Wurm Online Xenocell Xiah Xsyon Xulu YS Online Yitien ZU Online Zentia Zero Online Zero Online: The Andromeda Crisis Zodiac Online Zombies Ate My Pizza eRepublik

MMORPG.com Discussion Forums

General Discussion

General Discussion 

The Pub at MMORPG.COM  » The 'Group Play vs Solo Play in an MMO' Thread

105 Pages First « 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 » Last Search
2099 posts found
  Cephus404

Elite Member

Joined: 2/27/08
Posts: 3604

1/05/10 6:52:00 PM#201
Originally posted by SwampRob

This will never work.

  " grouper has their incentives as well- typically in the form of superior quantifiable rewards ",  Once grouping only gets the best loot, or the soloers will never be happy.

  Once soloers are able to achieve something that was slated as group,"  alone; impossible: together; possible but difficult!  ",  the groupers are not happy because they feel their accomplishments are diminished because it's soloable.

I'm not saying one playstyle is better than the other.   I'm saying the incentives you mention for soloing will NEVER be sufficient as long as group-only gets the best loot.

 

That's the one thing that's always kind of amused me.  The pro-groupers, instead of actually coming up with reasons why grouping is better/more fun than soloing to attract more people to group, they have to bribe and/or threaten people to force them to group, then they act like wow, everyone wants to group!

If you have to offer additional reward, that's bribery.

If you have to up the difficulty to make it too dangerous not to group, that's a threat and coersion.

Can't you people come up with reasons, entirely on the basis of grouping itself, why people ought to give it a shot?

Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None

  SwampRob

Apprentice Member

Joined: 9/05/07
Posts: 1010

1/05/10 7:47:33 PM#202
Originally posted by Silvermink
Originally posted by SwampRob
Originally posted by pojung

@ Cephus404
 

 'We need to take down the behemoth! It's razing the town!' <~ alone; impossible: together; possible but difficult! This is even before talking about quantifiable rewards, this is just talking pure experience alone. A solo'er operates with the incentive of simplicity and the lack of needing to compromise (they call all the shots). A grouper has their incentives as well- typically in the form of superior quantifiable rewards mostly reflected through gear.


 

This will never work.

  " grouper has their incentives as well- typically in the form of superior quantifiable rewards ",  Once grouping only gets the best loot, or the soloers will never be happy.

  Once soloers are able to achieve something that was slated as group,"  alone; impossible: together; possible but difficult!  ",  the groupers are not happy because they feel their accomplishments are diminished because it's soloable.

I'm not saying one playstyle is better than the other.   I'm saying the incentives you mention for soloing will NEVER be sufficient as long as group-only gets the best loot.

 

But group-only doesn't get the best rewards. Raid-only do. You can accept better rewards for raids but not groups?

 

Not in the least.   Raiding = grouping.     I'm saying it's impossible to satisfy the majority of either group in an MMO.    I think many of the posters have it right in that MMOs need to decide which they are and support it all the way to the end-game.

*Sorry about the large font, my eyes aren't what they used to be.

  SuperXero89

Advanced Member

Joined: 8/16/09
Posts: 2606

1/05/10 11:02:56 PM#203
Originally posted by Cephus404
Originally posted by SuperXero89

It's an overused excuse I'd wager because many players, like me, have seen the effects of increased soloability in a game which was once dominated by heroic content -- for better or worse, we're not here to decide that.  You can ignore what I've witnessed with my own eyes, all you want, and quite frankly it's all too convenient.  I do agree that the purpose of these games is to have fun, and much of the fun (though not all) that I personally get from MMORPGs is the ability to take on heroic content.  Now, if I could get what would be basically the exact same rewards for soloing something, I would have absolutely no reason to go through the pains of finding a group.  It simply doesn't make sense why I would waste time finding 5 other players to take down mobs that take a single player five seconds to kill, and it makes even less sense that players would be willing to go through content which is markedly more difficult and time consuming when the reward is largely the same as anything that players can obtain through solo quests.  Sure, theoretically I "could" still group with players in a dungeon somewhere, but the fact that players have zero reason to go into a dungeon for any reason other than intrinsic satisfaction only impeeds my ability to start a group in the first place.

If you've seen that change it's because the market has changed and you're trying to live in the past.  That's the problem.  Any genre, like it or not, is going to change and evolve over time and you can either evolve with it or you can sit and complain about how you miss the good old days.  But the "good old days" are gone and they're not coming back, like it or not.  This is true of every genre that goes from niche to mainstream, be it gaming, movies, TV shows, etc.  That's the way it is, you have to deal with it.  Unfortunately, it looks like you're trying to have fun by playing games that are not fun for you and then complaining about it.  Not having fun with modern MMOs?  Get another hobby.  It's that simple.

I wasn't arguing "why" such a change took place.  I was arguing the effects of such effects.  Effects you cannot deny but choose to ignore or to confuse the issue.  It has nothing at all to do with "the good old days."  If you actually had a clue as to what my stance on the issue actually is, you'd realize that I think the "good old days" flat out sucked in more ways than one.  I'm proud most MMORPGs are allowing players more avenues of soloing, but no, I don't believe  In my own personal opinion, there's absolutely nothing wrong with EQ2 of 2009, and I actually enjoy the EQ2 I'm playing now moreso than the game I played at launch.  It's a much more casual experience, and I feel as if I can advance through the game much more easily given my limited schedule than I ever good if the game was the same as it ever had been.  You can save your speech about "you're trying to have fun by playing games that are not fun for you" for someone it actually applies to.  I think on my first post, I mentioned how I thought EQ2 had a good balance between content to satisfy soloers and content to satisfy group members.  It's the game I'm playing now, and I'm 100% happy with the game in regards to ability to solo or group.


As I said, there's no point in doing heroic content when the rewards are largely the same as solo content, which is what you seem to be advocating.  Typically, the rewards are higher, and that's as I personally believe an MMORPG should be.  Generally, MMORPGs with significant rewards for heroic content are MMORPGs that see more players grouping together, which is exactly the point.  The reward has to be there in order to get players to go through the effort of finding a group.  I love grouping with people, but it simply isn't feasible to form groups to obtain items that can be obtained by the actions of a single individual.  

Why not?  Are you that desperate to compete with others, or do you have to feel that you are somehow better than others?  Can't you just go have a good time and not worry about what everyone else is doing?  Does it really matter?  See, you keep disproving your own argument.  You say that nobody wants to group if they can get rewards through soloing, yet you, yourself, want to group regardless!  Are you suggesting that you're the only person who feels that way, or are you using it as an excuse to suggest that there are more groupers hiding out there somewhere and the reason you can't find them is that they can solo?  The fact is, there may not be as many groupers as you wish there was.  Groupers who want to group will find a way to group and all the effort in the world isn't going to stop them.  I think you're just hoping that there are more out there, if only you could force them or bribe them to stop playing solo and I just don't think you're right.

Eh, what?  This is where you confuse the issue.  There is absolutely no corellation between incentives for group content and desperation to compete with others.  I think it's the other way around honestly.  Why do you care what sort of gear I, as a group player, have? Why do you care what gear my college roommate (a WoW raider) has?  You're a solo player.  As someone who enjoys "soloing" AND "heroic content" as a playstyle I could care less what sort of gear my roommate has.  If I played WoW, he would easily do more DMG than I would in any sort of a group, but I could care less because I don't care about raiding or raid gear.  I want the best gear for my playstyle.  Because I enjoy heroics in addition to solo content, I want the best gear I can get for the heroic content, but I believe I've said that already.  If you had read my post, I can't believe you didn't realize that. You're the one who wants what the other guys have, not me.

Interestingly, you even say, "yet you, yourself, want to group regardless!"  What, is that your automated response to anyone who has ever argued with you about the ability to group in an MMORPG?  I never once said I cared about grouping when the rewards weren't there.  I'm not going to group unless I have a reason to group.  If I'm not enticed to group, if I can get the same sort of rewards for putting forth the same amount of effort by soloing, there's simply no sense in forming a group.  Groups are formed by players with the interest of a common goal.  If there's no common goal there's no group.  Don't give me BS about "bribing players" because that argument could be made about anything.  I'm playing Dragon Age, and this boss is really BRIBING me to use my heal potions because I wouldn't use them otherwise.  I'm playing Assasssin's Creed II, and this mission is BRIBING me into opening the gate for my allies because the game won't allow me to take them on by myself. Darn it all I'm playing WoW and the developers are BRIBING me into running this scripted boss encounter when I would rather just tank and spank. 

Yes, even in video games, we have to step outside our little box and play the game the way the developers intend for us to play.  In current MMORPGs, the rewards are greater because the time and effort spent to achieve the rewards are greater than that of a solo player.   The carrot dangling from a stick takes us out of our comfort zones.  It places us in a position to where we have to rely on others.  We have to fall into our various roles (all mainstream MMORPGs are balanced for roles within a group) to achieve a common goal, and that's the beauty of MMORPGs -- players forming together for various reasons to achieve a common goal.  If there is no common goal, players will not band together, and if your idea of meaningful social interaction is simply a random buy/sell session or a public buff service then have at it.   I have done long solo quests where I have received better loot than anything I could have ever gotten in a group, but those quests are long, rare, and require  a great deal of time investment.


You say "my playstyle has nothing whatsoever to do with yours," which is laughably false.  I have given you examples of the contrary, and I can't help that you continue to ignore them.  If you want to get cute and say that the "ability" to form a group is simply having an /invite command, build into the game, you have a point, but I would hope you understand my meaning behind my usage of the word "ability."  Increased focus on solo content, impedes my "ability" to form a group.  Equal rewards all but destroys it.  As has been proven countless times, players will not group unless they have solid reason to do so. I can form a group if I so choose, but there's no reason to go through the effort to fight through difficult content for rewards that can be obtained by soloing, nor is there a reason to group up for the solo quests themselves.  My ability to group with other players has little effect on your ability to solo.  Unless you're playing the original Everquest, most every MMORPG of note allows you to solo and solo fairly well, which has no bearing on the group content.   Group content in modern MMORPGs is mostly all tucked away into dungeons and specific quest instances. What does affect group content, however, is rewards.  I cannot advocate your ability to obtain the same gear as someone who runs heroics any more than I can advocate myself to be given raid gear for running dungeons repeatedly.  

No, you keep saying that somehow soloing is stopping you from grouping, which it absolutely isn't.  The only thing that impedes your ability to form a  group is finding other people who want to group with you and that's not a problem with soloing, it's a problem with you wanting to take part in a minority playstyle.  Like it or not, that's your problem.  You picked a minority playstyle, you deal with the consequences of your choice.  Just like permadeath players or full loot PvP players, they can only play with people who share their playstyle by choice and in most games, those aren't even options, they have to be agreed to outside of the game and artificially imposed.  You have a grouping system in place in every game, you *CAN* group, you're just complaining that it's too hard or you can't find enough people to do it with.  Deal with the reality you've chosen.

 

Either you're thick, or you're ignoring the issue, and as I write this, I grow tired of repeating myself.  This exchange will not last much longer because it's simply going nowhere. It's cute of you to say that soloing does not shop me from grouping.  In a sheepish sort of way, I have an /invite ability so that's all I need right?  right?  Wrong.  Soloing in and of itself, does not stop players from grouping.  As long as players have the ability to solo, they will solo, but again, as long as players have a reason to join into groups with one another they will do that as well.  That's why I love Everquest 2.  I can solo to 80 if I want, but when I get tired of soloing, I have every reason to go into a dungeon to group.  The quests are good.  The rewards are great.  The XP is amazing. It has nothing to do with grouping being to hard or the fact that I can't find people.  It has everything to do with the fact that I have a REASON to go through the effort to form a group.  What you want is equal rewards for everyone -- except raiders because you have no beef with them.  Raid gear doesn't concern you, but for some strange, unholy reason, it burns your skin to think that I could get better rewards by finding five other people to run a dungeon for an hour or two.

 

You talk about accepting consquences of playstyle.  I'm fully aware that many MMORPGs have an increased focus on solo content, and I'm not entirely opposed to solo content.  The days of having nothing to do in an MMORPG other than run in circles while flashing your LFG tag are thankfully long gone, but I realize that the efficiency of playstyles largely hinge on game mechanics.  MMORPG developers have to give players a "reason" to take part in all aspects of the game's content.  It's the player's own choice to decide what aspects of the game to delve into.  Theoretically, the only players who get 100% out of what they put into MMORPGs are the raiders, but as you say, there are consequences to every playstyle.  Just as I accept the fact that I will never have the gear of a raider or even that I will be constantly compared to raid toons (as many raiders run heroic content and post their DPS in group chat), you must accept one addition consequence of your own playstyle, that being that you may not be able to obtain the same rewards as an indivual who runs heroic content or a raider who raids.  As a player who participates in heroic content, I understand I will never see most raid gear, and to make up for it, I surround myself with like minded players, so gear is never an issue.  In the environment I surround myself within, I'm not expected to find the best gear for my toon.  I'm not expected to raid five days a week.  I'm simply expected to log in, chat, and be helpful to my guild mates (most of them lower level) in any way that I can given that I'm one of the few members of the guild at the level cap.

No, they don't have to give a reason to do anything.  The inclusion of game mechanics is based on the ability to draw players to the game.  If there aren't enough paying players to make inclusion of a particular mechanic worthwhile, they don't typically include it.  Everything in that  game, from the developer point of view, is there to make money, if it doesn't increase revenue, it's a waste of their time to create and maintain it.  The only people who really get 100% out of the game are people who not only raid, but who maintain alts of every single race, class and conceivable combination of both (I was speaking in terms of game content not class/race variety).  That means basically nobody unless they're a complete loser who desperately needs to get a life.

 

Simply not true.  Developers certainly cater to a casual market to draw in subscribers, but no MMORPG focuses on soloing and soloing alone.  Even WoW, which is far too devoid of grouping ability at the lower levels, has grouping at the end game -- tons of it.  WoW, with its burning audacity to give raiders and group players better rewards, is currently the most popular MMORPG in the world today.  Champions Online, a game which gives no incentive whatsoever for players to group with one another, is not doing so hot.  

The point you fail to grasp is casual players like variety in their gameplay just like I do.  Heck, I AM a casual player.  I don't like games which require forced grouping because I don't have time to stand around LFG all day.  I get two days a week to play my game of choice, and when I play, I like to actually do something meaningful.  I don't believe looking for a group all day is a meaningful use of my time, and as such, I don't play games which require a full group all the time.  I will say that I find soloing ALL the time to be quite boring.  I like to mix up my soloing with a bit of group play, and the only way to entice players to group is to give them a reward for doing so.  The only reason to entice players to raid is to give players a reason to do so.  Do you think all those hardcore raid guilds raid just for the fun of it?  If so, when's the last time you heard of a max level raid guild raiding a level 20 zone where, in my game, they would get absolutely no loot.  No, raiding, just like grouping, is predicated on reward.  There's no reason whatsoever, and in fact it is counterproductive to assemble masses of players whether it be 6 or 60 for anything that can be obtained by simply following a chain of solo quests.  


SWG dead?  Really, I could have sworn I logged into that game just last wek.  Wow, it went down fast.  Seriously, SWG is nowhere near where it was population wise even in the dark days leading towards the CU and the NGE, but it's far from dead.  Other games in SOE's station access pass such as Pirates of the Burning Sea, and Vanguard are doing far worse than SWG right now.  My point in bringing up SWG was to hopefully illustrate how players don't like having their achievements cheapened by allowing other players access to the same abilities with nowhere near as much effort. SWG is an extreme example, but there was a time even in EQ2 where it once took far more effort to complete various quests and conquer various content than it does now.  It didn't work well for EQ2 either.  In fact,  I can't think of a single instance in MMORPG history where such a shift has actually proven beneficial to the game.

Functionally, it's dead.  It's a mere shadow of what it once was, it certainly hasn't kept up with the times and maintained itself as a front-running AAA title.  I honestly think this is yet another case of e-peen waving.  It's impossible to "cheapen" someone's achievements if one isn't out there trying to act like hot shit against other people in the first place.  I don't give a damn what anyone else does, I'm there to play the game.  If I'm ahead of someone or behind someone, so what?

Well, if you worked for ten years to get an increased paycheck at your job of choice, and finally did so by your own blood, sweat, and tears, but one week later, your boss raises everyone's paycheck to the same level as yours.  How would that make you feel?  It has nothing to do with "e-peen" waving.  It has to do with being rewarded for effort.  If a player is given the ability to obtain the same thing another player worked himself to death over with little to no effort, the player who put forth the effort to obtain the item is going to feel cheated.  Perhaps many players of the original jedi population of pre-NGE SWG put forth the effort for the respect and admiration (which was well deserved), while others simply did it because they enjoyed the lore of playing as a jedi or thought of the jedi grind as yet another piece of content to conquer.  I can't speak for those people, and neither can you, but what I can tell you is that for my own personal interest, I only care about doing the best that I can do within the confines of my playstyle.  You say that you, yourself, don't care about what anyone else does.  You say you're there to play the game.  What game are you playing?  In your current game can you achieve EVERYTHING than I could?  Can you achieve EVERYTHING my college roommate can (making you read to find out what my roommate is)?  No, you cannot.  You say you don't care of you're ahead of someone or behind someone, so why on earth are you so hell bent on equal rewards for all content?  As a solo player, your concern is how well you take on the content yourself.  Unless you're unable to take on a certain area on your own, you have no use for a gear grind.  You have no one else to compare to.  Even if you're doing horrible DPS or even if you may be a paper tank, if you're defeating the content you set out to defeat you should be happy.  On the flip side, if you're doing amazing DPS or even if you have 25k HP, you're focus is defeating content  on your own.  If you're able to do so, why do you care that I have better gear that you? Do you not see how paradoxical your own argument is? In one instance you say you could care less what gear someone else has then you say there's not a chance you would ever support a group player having the ability to be a more effecient soloer.  Where do you think that efficiency comes from?  It comes from gear.  I have gear that makes me more resistant to group mobs, which are 5 times stronger than solo mobs.  You have gear from solo quests which is efficient for solo mobs.  Naturally because I'm wearing gear that will protect me from the stronger group oriented encounters, I will fare better in a fight with a solo mob, same as a raider would do.

The fact is, you can't accept this.  You want to solo, but you want to solo with the same ability as someone who tackles heroic content -- just not raiders though because you have no interest in them.  You are the one with the jealous envy here not me.

Throught this little verbal exchange though, I can't help but feel as if I'm beeing forced into the hardcore groupers camp, which I'm not.  If anything, I'm advocating a balance.  I believe in solo content, but I also believe in instances where players should be given reason to form groups.  I realize that more and more MMORPGs are catering more and more to the solo player, and for good reason, but again, there's no reason why there can't be a sizable portion of meaningful group content within the game as well.  As I said, a "soloer" can be many things and as much as I'm sure you assume every soloer shares your playstyle, you cannot really prove that as much as I cannot really prove they do not.  In that regard, we can only assume to what degree individuals solo in MMORPGs, but I will say this.  Not even WoW gives equal rewards for soloing.  Not even WoW is a game where soloing is just as rewarding as running heroic dungeons or raiding.   A player can go from the beginning to max level without ever grouping with a single player, but they're still at a disadvantage to players who are equiped with dungeon loot.  The only problem is outside of loot and mediocre quest rewards, there's little reason to group before 80, and given the vast majority of players are at the cap, the primary concern of the overwhelming populace at least seems to be geared towards the most efficient way to reach the max level, which dungeon grinding certainly isn't.  The appeal to WoW, aside from the fact that it can run on almost any modern PC, is that it has something to offer every sort of player.  It isn't a forced grouping game like Everquest.  It isn't a PvP only game like DAoC.  It isn't a solo fest like Champions Online.  It has content for every type of player and is approachable to a wide audience.  It really has nothing to do with keeping players "happy," but it has everything to do with finding aspects which appeal to a wider audience.  If a game was revolved around nothing but soloing -- no grouping, no raiding -- I believe a sizable portion of it's innitial playerbase would largely disappear.  Players like options.  Players like the freedom and ability to play the game they want to play it.  In WoW, they can do so.  In EQ2, they can do so.  In LoTRO, they can do so.  In your vision of the perfect MMORPG, players would be forced into one style of play and one style of play only -- whichever style of play someone deems will make the company the most money.  In reality, all MMORPGs are "geared" toward one style of play or another (some moreso than others), but none of them are mutually exclusive to one playstyle.  What I hope you learn from this is by allowing everyone access to the same gear, there's no reason to obtain that gear in any such way than whatever is deemed the easiest method.  You present your MMORPG as an MMORPG which appeals to everyone, but in reality,  by allowing everyone immediate access to everything, you appeal to one segment of the audience -- large or not, such a narrowly focused MMORPG has not yet been proven to work in the MMORPG industry and most likely never will.

I'm all for balance, but it's got to be a balance between equal forces and that's just not the case here.  You can't balance a see-saw with 1000 people on one side and 10 million on the other and it feels like that's what you're trying to do.  Like it or not, there are more soloers by a huge degree than there are groupers.  Trying to say that groupers deserve the same amount of consideration as soloers is absolutely ludicrous, it's like trying to give permadeathers the same consideration as non-permadeathers.  If you want to compete with soloers, then you need to come up with  an equivalent number of groupers, to which the developers will give weight to their financial and numberical strength.  Unfortunately, you're saying "I want to do X, therefore I want to be catered to even though I am vastly outnumbered by the people who want to do Y".

I'm all in favor of making grouping mechanics more seamless and easier, maybe even making group-heavy instances or servers where mobs are better balanced for groups, but if you're talking about making groups perform better on the same mobs than soloers can do, no, not a chance.  If that rains on your parade, too bad.  You're still responsible for bringing your own people to the party without bribery or coersion and if you can't fill the server with enough people who are willing to group, solely for the sake of grouping, then you're out of luck.

Sorry, that's reality.  Sometimes reality isn't fair.

Again, you're constantly viewing things in black and white.  If I enjoy grouping, I must hate to solo.  if I enjoy raiding, I must hate to group or to solo.  If I like to solo, I must never EVER want to group or raid.  Right?  Fact is, players like having options.  There is not one single game on the market right now that allows inviduals who play by themselves to achieve the same rewards as those who raid or spend time in heroic instances, and for good reason.  The reason is players appreciate the ability to solo, but may find out that they seek other ways to advance their character.  The crux of the decisions of every player generally revolves around self improvement.  That's simply the world we live in.  Not that players loath the interaction.  It's simply that players will take the path of least resistance (there's that darn phrase again) by taking the quickest path to the end result -- the quickest path to self improvement.  Some players loath grouping with strangers.  Some don't.  Many players (myself included) loath the work that goes into forming a group but sometimes find the end is worth the means both in terms of loot and in social interaction.  No modern MMORPG on the market places the focus on grouping, so you have your solo game, but all I ask is there be reasons for players to band together into groups -- that there be reasons for strangers to work together towards a common goal.  Most MMORPGs have this to varying degrees, but you want more than that.  

I enjoy the way MMOs are at the present time, but you would have the soloing aspect taken further, in a way which would completely destroy all reason to band together to do anything.  Yes, humans are selfish animals who only care about themselves, but that's simply human nature.  There's nothing wrong with players working together for a common goal, even if that common goal is self improvement.  A lot of work goes into forming a group and working a group.  This is work that simply isn't worth the effort if the rewards are the same as something I can do all by myself.  

 

 

 

  User Deleted
1/06/10 10:29:37 AM#204

@ Cephus404
 

I find little interest in lore for the same reason I don't give a damn about the backstory of Master Chief when I'm playing Halo. It's just not relevant to the actual gameplay and I'm not pretending to be Master Chief anyhow, he's just a stand-in avatar while I blast things. The reality for most players is they don't have to rationalize taking down the behemoth in game terms, they're doing it for the XP and the gold, nothing more, nothing less. My incentive to play Halo is to kill things and waste free time. That's it. My incentive to play MMOs is exactly the same.

This is the problem with your 'reasoning'. You use personal experience and point of view, and expand it to cover potentials that are external to self. Just because you, Cephus404, have zero desire for elements outside of your lane of play, does NOT MEAN IN THE SLIGHTEST that Soloer_503 doesn't care about lore, or that Grouper_241 necessarily cares about xp or gold. You told me a couple posts back that I was 'trying desperately' to make opinion fact. I refuted that statement with examples and reasoning. Perhaps now it is time for you to try on your own words.

Reason? How about interaction with other players, which is usually #1 on the grouper hit parade when they lament soloing in MMOs. Oh no, nobody ever interacts! Go play a single-player game so we can all interact! What&apos;s the point of grouping? INTERACTION! Some people want to interact that way, some people do not.

You bring up one incentive to group, *of which there are many*. *Just like* there exist many incentives for a soloist to solo. Don't attempt to limit the scope of the other camp to justify personal stance. However, it does not elude me that you failed to provide a rebuttal for my dismantling of your coersion statement of before. Perhaps you've conceded on the issue?

Except groupers will always tend to be able to get superior gear faster, something I&apos;ve *ALWAYS* said and usually gets ignored. More people gives you the ability to take on harder content, which gives higher XP, more gold, better armor and weapon drops, etc. I&apos;ve got zero problem with that, I can only take on level 10 mobs at level 10, a group of level 10 characters can take on level 15 mobs. Great, good for them. When I&apos;m level 15, I&apos;ll go take on those level 15 mobs for myself. Identical content, identical reward, different consumption rate. No need to change the game for anyone.

Ah... time- the delta between maximum potential and challenge minimum. You know, you really should have made good on my offer to provide you links to where other conversations between solo:group were concerned. Your paragraph would have been spared.

When something is not adequately tailored (to a soloist or a group, regardless), and it is too easy, you have the 'zerg factor'. You simply steamroll. It's not properly tailored, nothing more, nothing less. But because of how rewards are handed out (in your example, gear), the reward meets the challenge. This meets your example of being able to consume at a given rate based on your disposition. HOWEVER, the second you introduce a concept where people themselves are the asset, you introduce different rewards because the stakes are different. This is outside of your example, but mention it as an aside because there are other influences that deem there to be challenges that incur a need for people to use each other as assets.

I'm not impeding anyone's preference of play, I'm putting forward a single standard that everyone plays by, some people consume the content a little faster, get faster rewards but might have a minor inconvenience doing it, other people may get the content slower, still have eventual access to the same rewards and have other inconveniences to deal with. Mob X is always worth a certain XP whether one person kills it or 10 do. The benefit of the group is that you can access that content sooner and plow through it faster than one person alone. That's already the case in most games.

The single standard is the game and the story to which it belongs. Gameplay, challenge, all that is derived after. Your standard is biased to your camp as a solo advocate, not to a universal camp that incorporates and balances gameplay based on their own merits. Your common proposal ignores the needs of other MMORPG gamers based on their playstyles. I can only imagine your point of view is entirely skewed by too many laundry list quests, which is either the cause or effect for no desire for lore, which has promoted a means to an end style of thinking, which you apply to any and every-one's play experience. All I can say is: it doesn't work that way. There needs to be depth and variety, but with both come different outcomes, some of which will be unattainable without stepping outside of a given playstyle: crafting, storytelling, pvp, pve, solo, group etc etc. Your desire to make lore meaningless by making all content belong to everyone infringes on the storytellers and the groupers, amongst other groups. We're all sitting in this bus together, and taking up the whole back seat is a bit selfish.

You keep talking about identical mobs with time being the difference. That's precisely like reading an identical book- some are speed readers while others not so much. You have presented in your statements that you ignore what 'equal' means, probably because you insist so heavily on 'identical'. Because you can't have 'identical' the second you have a difference in game style and taste, the goal needs to be 'equality'. Equality encompasses identical natures, but the inverse isn't true.

Nope, not a damn bit. No computer game has ever had anything to do with actual roleplaying, the only reason the RPG label has stuck is because games like Final Fantasy used it wrongly to begin with. Final Fantasy single-player games are absolutely not roleplaying, they're adopting an on-screen avatar, one that you cannot affect in any meaningful way, you cannot change it's personality, you cannot change it's style, you're dragged by the nose through an overblown story that you have absolutely no choice but to follow, with minor sidelines before you're dragged back to the main pre-programmed story.

If you think that's roleplaying, then you're the one who has never had a decent experience with real roleplaying.

Let's take a step back on this one: roleplaying. Let's introduce our friends Merriam and Webster. So: 'role'- character assigned or assumed. Now: 'play&'- to engage in, to toy or fiddle around with. Ok, so, in the most literal, foundation sense possible: 'roleplaying'; is to toy with an assigned or assumed character. So, now that we've established the definition, where, again, is Player_523 putting on a pirate suit and talking in scalawag *not* roleplay? And, here's the kicker, because a character is 'assumed', that means the definition in all cases hinges on the person who claims the activity- NOT the outsider. Hint: you are the outsider. Just because you see your computer games as nothing more than an interface to working game mechanics does not mean that others don't see more, might relate more to avatars, with the world etc. Furthermore, RPG was not a term for video games that was derived from FF, and nor did they misuse the term. Lastly, for someone who has no desire to explore lore, because it is 'meaningless', how would your singular definition of what roleplaying might be carry any weight whatsoever? I'm establishing my definitions based on common terms, not on perceived interactions that others have or might have.

There is no game with a story, virtually no MMO has a lore that means jack shit. It's a lot of backstory that just doesn't come into play on a day-to-day basis. We can go back to my Halo example, which is similar. Does any of the Halo backstory, told through numerous cutscenes, actually impact gameplay whatsoever? Does knowing the reason for the Covenant's war make them any easier or harder to shoot? Would knowing more about the Flood make them too sympathetic to exterminate? Of course not.

Who says the lore needs to provide a direct and linear impact on the game where combat is concerned? Lore provides *depth*. *Why* is this NPC big and tearing up the town? *Why* am I killing these dwarfs? Oh snap, now I've just introduced this neat little concept called 'purpose'. Now, because there's 'purpose', I can entertain 'immersion'. Let's use your example: Halo. You didn't feel like you were surrounded by an alien flood, with certain enemies having stark differences in personalities, group tactics, and the like? Did the lore not only bring you further into the game, which provided seperate encounters and variance even inside the linear storyline? If you answer 'no' to either question, then why bother with lore at all? Take away the lore, and the whole genre falls apart. Why do I need 'experience'? Why do I need to kill orcs? If you answer 'yes', then you must concede that lore is necessary. Furthermore, because MMORPGs are by definition shared experiences (common world and all), the common denom involved is going to be lore. So lore in all cases should be preserved.

There ought not be an incentive making one side or the other look more rewarding, that's the thing. People ought to play whatever way they want to play, for that playstyle alone, not because they get more of X or better Y because they do it. Individuals (or groups) ought to get rewarded for what they actually do in-game, not compensated because they choose a more complex or troublesome playstyle. A guy who chooses to use only his fists, not any weapon, doesn't deserve to have his inherently slower advancement compensated because of what he chooses to do. He picked it, he deals with it. Either his playstyle is important to him for whatever reason he picked it or it is not. He accepts the consequences of his actions regardless, just like soloers do (less specialization/slower advancement/no backup), groupers do (slow group formation/potential for lots of AFK), etc. You take what you get when you choose. If you don't like what you get, make another choice.

But there are incentives and will always be incentives. We touched on this. Soloing is more rewarding on its own merits, as is grouping. *It comes as a derivative of 'choice'*. You're unhappy that groupers can (and rightfully should) recieve certain rewards that don't come as a derivative of the choice you make, all while enjoying the rewards that you have chosen. Or, the flipside of the same coin, you enjoy what you got and don't wish to be part of what others don't. You want your cake and want to eat it too. That's all it boils down to. You keep trying to push 'identical' but keep mentioning 'choice'. The two are exclusive. We've touched on this as well. Your last sentence, I hope you can agree, should be applied to soloists as well.

I'm not sure how much clearer I can make it.

I'm reading you like a liquid crystal display. You advocate soloing, and nothing you do or the way you enjoy games promotes any sort of 'meaningful' interaction between both the game and its other players. If we would clone you, being an outspoken soloist advocate, we would absolutely have horrible community. Community being the topic I had first touched on when entering the thread, your portrayal of self as a solo advocate provides a microcasm that would be only confirmation of the claim that 'group mechanic games have better communities than solo mechanic games'.

 

Edit: apostrophes glitched.

  Cephus404

Elite Member

Joined: 2/27/08
Posts: 3604

1/06/10 12:07:40 PM#205

Originally posted by SuperXero89
I wasn't arguing "why" such a change took place.  I was arguing the effects of such effects.  Effects you cannot deny but choose to ignore or to confuse the issue.  It has nothing at all to do with "the good old days."  If you actually had a clue as to what my stance on the issue actually is, you'd realize that I think the "good old days" flat out sucked in more ways than one.  I'm proud most MMORPGs are allowing players more avenues of soloing, but no, I don't believe  In my own personal opinion, there's absolutely nothing wrong with EQ2 of 2009, and I actually enjoy the EQ2 I'm playing now moreso than the game I played at launch.  It's a much more casual experience, and I feel as if I can advance through the game much more easily given my limited schedule than I ever good if the game was the same as it ever had been.  You can save your speech about "you're trying to have fun by playing games that are not fun for you" for someone it actually applies to.  I think on my first post, I mentioned how I thought EQ2 had a good balance between content to satisfy soloers and content to satisfy group members.  It's the game I'm playing now, and I'm 100% happy with the game in regards to ability to solo or group.Again, you're constantly viewing things in black and white.  If I enjoy grouping, I must hate to solo.  if I enjoy raiding, I must hate to group or to solo.  If I like to solo, I must never EVER want to group or raid.  Right?  Fact is, players like having options.  There is not one single game on the market right now that allows inviduals who play by themselves to achieve the same rewards as those who raid or spend time in heroic instances, and for good reason.  The reason is players appreciate the ability to solo, but may find out that they seek other ways to advance their character.  The crux of the decisions of every player generally revolves around self improvement.  That's simply the world we live in.  Not that players loath the interaction.  It's simply that players will take the path of least resistance (there's that darn phrase again) by taking the quickest path to the end result -- the quickest path to self improvement.  Some players loath grouping with strangers.  Some don't.  Many players (myself included) loath the work that goes into forming a group but sometimes find the end is worth the means both in terms of loot and in social interaction.  No modern MMORPG on the market places the focus on grouping, so you have your solo game, but all I ask is there be reasons for players to band together into groups -- that there be reasons for strangers to work together towards a common goal.  Most MMORPGs have this to varying degrees, but you want more than that.  

I'm not ignoring the effects, I'm recognizing why they happened and acknowledging that they were inevitable.  The idea that somehow these effects had to be "fair" to all involved is silly, the fundamental makeup of the MMO marketplace has changed over the past decade, for good or ill, and that's the situation we all find ourselves in today.  It's like gravity.  You may not like it but you cannot deny that it's reality.  If you haven't kept up on the formerly endless string of threads regarding grouping vs. soloing, what I've said about group-advocates is absolutely true.  They are, by and large, people living in the past, wishing that MMOs could go back to the "good old days" when they were made by nerds with no lives, for nerds with no lives.  They don't want "their" hobby to be mainstream, they don't want WoW to exist, they don't want "casuals" to be able to play "their" games.  But regardless of what they want, that's not the world we all live in today.  We have to deal with that world, not with their wishful thinking.  I'm not accusing you of being the same way, just that this is the typical argument that MMORPG.com has seen.

I think there are plenty of negative effects that have come of the mainstreaming of MMOs, but good or bad, that's reality.  Now we deal with what actually is.


Eh, what?  This is where you confuse the issue.  There is absolutely no corellation between incentives for group content and desperation to compete with others.  I think it's the other way around honestly.  Why do you care what sort of gear I, as a group player, have? Why do you care what gear my college roommate (a WoW raider) has?  You're a solo player.  As someone who enjoys "soloing" AND "heroic content" as a playstyle I could care less what sort of gear my roommate has.  If I played WoW, he would easily do more DMG than I would in any sort of a group, but I could care less because I don't care about raiding or raid gear.  I want the best gear for my playstyle.  Because I enjoy heroics in addition to solo content, I want the best gear I can get for the heroic content, but I believe I've said that already.  If you had read my post, I can't believe you didn't realize that. You're the one who wants what the other guys have, not me.

I really think there is a lot of e-peen waving.  I don't care what your roommate has.  I don't care what you have.  I only care what *I* have because *I* am the one playing the game and paying for my subscription.  The idea that someone ought to magically get better gear, just because of who they hang out with seems patently unfair.  Now if you're talking about gear that is designed specifically for a single playstyle and has little application elsewhere, go for it.  You can have your gear, I can have my gear, raiders can have their gear, etc.  If we all have equivalent gear built for our particular styles of play, I'm entirely fine with that.  I'm not find with the idea that one group, during the leveling process, ought to have superior gear, not because of the content they beat, but because of the company they keep.

Interestingly, you even say, "yet you, yourself, want to group regardless!"  What, is that your automated response to anyone who has ever argued with you about the ability to group in an MMORPG?  I never once said I cared about grouping when the rewards weren't there.  I'm not going to group unless I have a reason to group.  If I'm not enticed to group, if I can get the same sort of rewards for putting forth the same amount of effort by soloing, there's simply no sense in forming a group.  Groups are formed by players with the interest of a common goal.  If there's no common goal there's no group.  Don't give me BS about "bribing players" because that argument could be made about anything.  I'm playing Dragon Age, and this boss is really BRIBING me to use my heal potions because I wouldn't use them otherwise.  I'm playing Assasssin's Creed II, and this mission is BRIBING me into opening the gate for my allies because the game won't allow me to take them on by myself. Darn it all I'm playing WoW and the developers are BRIBING me into running this scripted boss encounter when I would rather just tank and spank. 

Sure there is, if you enjoy playing in a group, that is incentive enough to play in a group.  I don't play solo because of external rewards, I do it because that's what I enjoy doing, full stop.  If I enjoyed grouping, I would group, regardless of reward.  If I enjoyed raiding, I would raid.  If I enjoyed PvP, I would engage in PvP.  I'm not doing any of it because I'm getting paid off, I'm doing it because it's fun.  In MMOs, the common goal is progression, the same as every individual player in the game.  If you don't want to progress, you don't play the game.  The point of the game, the very mechanics of the game, dictate killing stuff, getting XP, going up in level (or getting skill points, depending on the game), lather, rinse, repeat.  Groupers already have the potential to get extra rewards by facing harder content, they don't need, nor do they deserve, anything above and beyond that.

Yes, even in video games, we have to step outside our little box and play the game the way the developers intend for us to play.  In current MMORPGs, the rewards are greater because the time and effort spent to achieve the rewards are greater than that of a solo player.   The carrot dangling from a stick takes us out of our comfort zones.  It places us in a position to where we have to rely on others.  We have to fall into our various roles (all mainstream MMORPGs are balanced for roles within a group) to achieve a common goal, and that's the beauty of MMORPGs -- players forming together for various reasons to achieve a common goal.  If there is no common goal, players will not band together, and if your idea of meaningful social interaction is simply a random buy/sell session or a public buff service then have at it.   I have done long solo quests where I have received better loot than anything I could have ever gotten in a group, but those quests are long, rare, and require  a great deal of time investment.

You have to ultimately play the way the developers intend because they write the "rules" and you cannot do anything they don't allow you to do.  No matter how much you might want a rocket-propelled grenade in a fantasy game, you're not going to get one because the developers haven't coded it.  You *WANT* us to have to rely on others, there is no requirement whatsoever that we actually do so and many people play their entire MMO lives without ever having to rely on anyone.  I've been in grouping situations where the whole point of doing it was to make absurd amounts of XP.  Kill big  bad monster with ridiculous amounts of firepower, rake in the XP, run to next monster and repeat the process, get to the end of the line, run back to the beginning and wait for a mass respawn.  Keep it up and do 3-5 levels per hour without breaking a sweat.  That's not rare, it's very common, very easy and also very boring.  If your goal, as it is with so many, is just to click over those level numbers and increase the size of your bank account until you have more money than you could ever spend, I guess that's fine, but that's something I'm utterly bored with.  That is, however, how many groups run.

Either you're thick, or you're ignoring the issue, and as I write this, I grow tired of repeating myself.  This exchange will not last much longer because it's simply going nowhere. It's cute of you to say that soloing does not shop me from grouping.  In a sheepish sort of way, I have an /invite ability so that's all I need right?  right?  Wrong.  Soloing in and of itself, does not stop players from grouping.  As long as players have the ability to solo, they will solo, but again, as long as players have a reason to join into groups with one another they will do that as well.  That's why I love Everquest 2.  I can solo to 80 if I want, but when I get tired of soloing, I have every reason to go into a dungeon to group.  The quests are good.  The rewards are great.  The XP is amazing. It has nothing to do with grouping being to hard or the fact that I can't find people.  It has everything to do with the fact that I have a REASON to go through the effort to form a group.  What you want is equal rewards for everyone -- except raiders because you have no beef with them.  Raid gear doesn't concern you, but for some strange, unholy reason, it burns your skin to think that I could get better rewards by finding five other people to run a dungeon for an hour or two.

 Then stop repeating yourself and think about what it is that you're saying.  I keep pointing out that it makes no logical sense but you keep saying it over and over and over again.  You keep asserting that the ability to solo stops people who, you claim, would otherwise group from grouping.  You have not demonstrated that to be the case.  You haven't shown that your average MMO player, given a choice between soloing and grouping, all things being equal, would pick grouping over soloing and I don't think that you can.  The fact is, it doesn't bother me a bit that you can get better rewards for running higher level content for an hour in a group.  More power to you.  It bothers me when pro-gropers say they deserve more reward, above and beyond that gained by running higher level content, just because they found five other people.  You can have extra stuff for doing harder content.  You cannot have extra stuff for putting your name on a list.

Simply not true.  Developers certainly cater to a casual market to draw in subscribers, but no MMORPG focuses on soloing and soloing alone.  Even WoW, which is far too devoid of grouping ability at the lower levels, has grouping at the end game -- tons of it.  WoW, with its burning audacity to give raiders and group players better rewards, is currently the most popular MMORPG in the world today.  Champions Online, a game which gives no incentive whatsoever for players to group with one another, is not doing so hot.  

No, none do, but most cater primarily to solo-friendly content, with grouping thrown in as a secondary playstyle.

The point you fail to grasp is casual players like variety in their gameplay just like I do.  Heck, I AM a casual player.  I don't like games which require forced grouping because I don't have time to stand around LFG all day.  I get two days a week to play my game of choice, and when I play, I like to actually do something meaningful.  I don't believe looking for a group all day is a meaningful use of my time, and as such, I don't play games which require a full group all the time.  I will say that I find soloing ALL the time to be quite boring.  I like to mix up my soloing with a bit of group play, and the only way to entice players to group is to give them a reward for doing so.  The only reason to entice players to raid is to give players a reason to do so.  Do you think all those hardcore raid guilds raid just for the fun of it?  If so, when's the last time you heard of a max level raid guild raiding a level 20 zone where, in my game, they would get absolutely no loot.  No, raiding, just like grouping, is predicated on reward.  There's no reason whatsoever, and in fact it is counterproductive to assemble masses of players whether it be 6 or 60 for anything that can be obtained by simply following a chain of solo quests.  

Personally, I find most groups, especially PUGs to be extremely boring and frustrating, simply because I've tended to run into the most self-centered, egotistical asshats there who are just using people to get their own personal rewards and honestly don't care who knows it.  The vast majority of groups I ever get into run like spastic chihuahuas through the content, killing anything that moves in a wild quest for the most XP per minute they can achieve.  I don't play like that.  I work methodically.  I kill what's there, loot it fully, search for hidden stuff, move on.  That's not something that most groups are willing to accept.  Therefore, I don't play in many groups.  It's not worth the frustration.

Well, if you worked for ten years to get an increased paycheck at your job of choice, and finally did so by your own blood, sweat, and tears, but one week later, your boss raises everyone's paycheck to the same level as yours.  How would that make you feel?  It has nothing to do with "e-peen" waving.  It has to do with being rewarded for effort.  If a player is given the ability to obtain the same thing another player worked himself to death over with little to no effort, the player who put forth the effort to obtain the item is going to feel cheated.  Perhaps many players of the original jedi population of pre-NGE SWG put forth the effort for the respect and admiration (which was well deserved), while others simply did it because they enjoyed the lore of playing as a jedi or thought of the jedi grind as yet another piece of content to conquer.  I can't speak for those people, and neither can you, but what I can tell you is that for my own personal interest, I only care about doing the best that I can do within the confines of my playstyle.  You say that you, yourself, don't care about what anyone else does.  You say you're there to play the game.  What game are you playing?  In your current game can you achieve EVERYTHING than I could?  Can you achieve EVERYTHING my college roommate can (making you read to find out what my roommate is)?  No, you cannot.  You say you don't care of you're ahead of someone or behind someone, so why on earth are you so hell bent on equal rewards for all content?  As a solo player, your concern is how well you take on the content yourself.  Unless you're unable to take on a certain area on your own, you have no use for a gear grind.  You have no one else to compare to.  Even if you're doing horrible DPS or even if you may be a paper tank, if you're defeating the content you set out to defeat you should be happy.  On the flip side, if you're doing amazing DPS or even if you have 25k HP, you're focus is defeating content  on your own.  If you're able to do so, why do you care that I have better gear that you? Do you not see how paradoxical your own argument is? In one instance you say you could care less what gear someone else has then you say there's not a chance you would ever support a group player having the ability to be a more effecient soloer.  Where do you think that efficiency comes from?  It comes from gear.  I have gear that makes me more resistant to group mobs, which are 5 times stronger than solo mobs.  You have gear from solo quests which is efficient for solo mobs.  Naturally because I'm wearing gear that will protect me from the stronger group oriented encounters, I will fare better in a fight with a solo mob, same as a raider would do.

Honestly, if you were proud of yourself for your accomplishments 5 minutes before your boss raised everyone else's pay, then why shouldn't you be just as proud of your accomplishments 5 minutes after unless you're really competing with others?  Your accomplishments and hard work haven't changed, you earned what you got rather than just being handed it on a silver platter, I fail to see why you would care what anyone else was getting paid unless accomplishment isn't what you're paying attention to in the first place.

I don't care if you have better quality gear if you've done harder content to get it.  I do care that you think you deserve better quality gear because you sat on an LFT list for a couple of minutes.  One is actual accomplishment, one is less than busywork.

The fact is, you can't accept this.  You want to solo, but you want to solo with the same ability as someone who tackles heroic content -- just not raiders though because you have no interest in them.  You are the one with the jealous envy here not me.

No, I want to solo with *MY* ability.  And you can play in a group with *YOUR* ability.  And people can raid with *THEIR* ability.  And people ought to get "paid", for lack of a better word, based on what they do, not on who they do it with.  If you're level 10 and you want to take on level 50 mobs in a group, you deserve level 50 XP and level 50 drops, which is likely far, far ahead of anything I can get at level 10 by myself.  Your reward is taking on the high-level content that soloers cannot touch.  There's your epic, heroic content.  But thinking that you deserve even more, just because you hooked up with a couple of random idiots along the way, is ludicrous.  You've still not justified why you deserve more when you're functionally doing no more.

I enjoy the way MMOs are at the present time, but you would have the soloing aspect taken further, in a way which would completely destroy all reason to band together to do anything.  Yes, humans are selfish animals who only care about themselves, but that's simply human nature.  There's nothing wrong with players working together for a common goal, even if that common goal is self improvement.  A lot of work goes into forming a group and working a group.  This is work that simply isn't worth the effort if the rewards are the same as something I can do all by myself.  

It's not human nature, it's the way MMOs are designed.  There isn't a single MMO out there that I'm aware of that actually gives you "grouping gear" that is only useful when in a group.  There's no such thing as group XP, group loot, group gear, group weapons, etc.  Every individual in a group is only there to improve their personal character.  There's no incentive to stay with the same group of people in the long-term, it's just institutionalized using of other people to get new stuff for yourself.  You keep saying the rewards are the same as being on your own and I've shown, over and over, that they are not.  You can take on harder, higher-level content and get better rewards, simply because you have more damage dealing potential than an individual would have.  Why can't you be satisfied with that instead of wanting something above and beyond what killing harder prey brings?  That's what I just don't get.

 

 

 


 

Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None

  Silvermink

Novice Member

Joined: 6/07/07
Posts: 289

1/06/10 1:57:42 PM#206

"Except groupers will always tend to be able to get superior gear faster, something I've *ALWAYS* said and usually gets ignored. More people gives you the ability to take on harder content, which gives higher XP, more gold, better armor and weapon drops, etc. I've got zero problem with that, I can only take on level 10 mobs at level 10, a group of level 10 characters can take on level 15 mobs. Great, good for them. When I'm level 15, I'll go take on those level 15 mobs for myself. Identical content, identical reward, different consumption rate. No need to change the game for anyone."

 

I in a way agree with the premise of this. I disagree with it's implementation both yours and how current dev's have. I believe a single level 10 character should have a challenge killing a single level 10 mobs. This mob should drop gear, money, consumables useful to that level 10 character. There should be champion, elite, and boss level 10 mobs that a single character can't solo (in the case of champions, with excellent tactics or gear maybe). These should also drop gear, money, etc suitable to a level 10 character. If someone wants to come back at level 15 and own these mobs solo, I see no problem with that. I do think that at level 15, you'd be better rewarded killing level 15s though, except for the satisfaction of the kill. I don't want artificial blocks stopping a soloer from ever killing an elite or boss, I just don't think it should be done at the same level. If a group of level 10s want to hunt level 15s for more exp, or loot they can use in the future, that is a possibility. There just has to be mobs in large enough population to make this possible. This is usually where dungeons come in; they concentrate spawns to benefit groups. Again, if a soloer wants to go into a crowded dungeon,  at a higher level and lay waste; I have no problem with that either.

 

I just don't like the current trend of soloers killing crowds of mobs 3 levels higher than themselves. I also don't like the devs making mobs give subpar loot because a soloer can kill mobs higher in level than they are. This hurts both the soloer and the grouper. When wow was released I thought the idea of gearing up from quests to be a great idea. Now I find it hurts overall gameplay, and restricts communities. There should be quest chains and special quests that give rewards of gear, but not all of them, and not the kill 10 mob and return ones. Gear should come from multiple sources. Some pieces from select quests, some from soloing, some from trading with other people (crafters or groupers or just other soloers that got what you need).

 

  Cephus404

Elite Member

Joined: 2/27/08
Posts: 3604

1/07/10 3:14:17 PM#207
Originally posted by Silvermink

I in a way agree with the premise of this. I disagree with it's implementation both yours and how current dev's have. I believe a single level 10 character should have a challenge killing a single level 10 mobs. This mob should drop gear, money, consumables useful to that level 10 character. There should be champion, elite, and boss level 10 mobs that a single character can't solo (in the case of champions, with excellent tactics or gear maybe). These should also drop gear, money, etc suitable to a level 10 character. If someone wants to come back at level 15 and own these mobs solo, I see no problem with that. I do think that at level 15, you'd be better rewarded killing level 15s though, except for the satisfaction of the kill. I don't want artificial blocks stopping a soloer from ever killing an elite or boss, I just don't think it should be done at the same level. If a group of level 10s want to hunt level 15s for more exp, or loot they can use in the future, that is a possibility. There just has to be mobs in large enough population to make this possible. This is usually where dungeons come in; they concentrate spawns to benefit groups. Again, if a soloer wants to go into a crowded dungeon,  at a higher level and lay waste; I have no problem with that either.

Seriously, is there a difference between a champion level 10 mob and a level 15 mob?  If not, why make three times the work for the developers?  It doesn't make any sense to me to make up new names for essentially the same type of mob just to make players feel emotional fuzzies about it.  If you've got a level 10 group, go kill level 15 mobs, get more XP, get better loot, feel good about yourself.  It's simple and if the game you're in doesn't allow it for some reason, that's something that ought to be taken up with the developers, not posted endlessly on a forum.

I just don't like the current trend of soloers killing crowds of mobs 3 levels higher than themselves. I also don't like the devs making mobs give subpar loot because a soloer can kill mobs higher in level than they are. This hurts both the soloer and the grouper. When wow was released I thought the idea of gearing up from quests to be a great idea. Now I find it hurts overall gameplay, and restricts communities. There should be quest chains and special quests that give rewards of gear, but not all of them, and not the kill 10 mob and return ones. Gear should come from multiple sources. Some pieces from select quests, some from soloing, some from trading with other people (crafters or groupers or just other soloers that got what you need).

 3 levels nothing, back when I was playing Anarchy Online, my twinked fixer, at around level 150-160, could take on general mobs 50 levels higher with little problem.  He'd pull level 210 missions and wipe them out in short order, that kind of thing wasn't an issue at all.  Of course, that game doesn't put same-level mobs on the same plateau of difficulty as the player, you're expected to easily wipe those out.  Green mobs are things you sleep through. It's the yellow, orange and red mobs you have to worry about, but as I said, if you know how to build your character right, those don't represent much of a challenge either.

 

Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None

  spades07

Apprentice Member

Joined: 6/14/08
Posts: 844

1/07/10 5:01:30 PM#208

as an side-jack post. If a game has grouping it should be designed for grouping not feel like a lame 5 soloers in one place with mediocre teamwork ability.

  Cephus404

Elite Member

Joined: 2/27/08
Posts: 3604

1/08/10 1:12:56 AM#209
Originally posted by spades07

as an side-jack post. If a game has grouping it should be designed for grouping not feel like a lame 5 soloers in one place with mediocre teamwork ability.

 

Yet that's exactly what most games have.  So long as you follow the holy trinity and make your character generic (ie. all tanks have to have the same minimum characteristics, all healers have to be the same, etc.), you can move from one group to another without any problem.  There's no reward for team loyalty.

Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None

  Silvermink

Novice Member

Joined: 6/07/07
Posts: 289

1/08/10 1:58:23 PM#210
Originally posted by Cephus404

Seriously, is there a difference between a champion level 10 mob and a level 15 mob?  If not, why make three times the work for the developers?  It doesn't make any sense to me to make up new names for essentially the same type of mob just to make players feel emotional fuzzies about it.  If you've got a level 10 group, go kill level 15 mobs, get more XP, get better loot, feel good about yourself.  It's simple and if the game you're in doesn't allow it for some reason, that's something that ought to be taken up with the developers, not posted endlessly on a forum.


 

 

The idea is level 10 mobs drop level 10 loot. Level 15 mobs drop level 15 loot. This is something devs have departed from so that the level 160 has to kill level 210 mobs to get gear that's useful.

  Cephus404

Elite Member

Joined: 2/27/08
Posts: 3604

1/08/10 2:17:10 PM#211
Originally posted by Silvermink
Originally posted by Cephus404

Seriously, is there a difference between a champion level 10 mob and a level 15 mob?  If not, why make three times the work for the developers?  It doesn't make any sense to me to make up new names for essentially the same type of mob just to make players feel emotional fuzzies about it.  If you've got a level 10 group, go kill level 15 mobs, get more XP, get better loot, feel good about yourself.  It's simple and if the game you're in doesn't allow it for some reason, that's something that ought to be taken up with the developers, not posted endlessly on a forum.


 

 

The idea is level 10 mobs drop level 10 loot. Level 15 mobs drop level 15 loot. This is something devs have departed from so that the level 160 has to kill level 210 mobs to get gear that's useful.

 

I never said anything about gear one way or the other, just ability.  Some of the gear that got dropped were things I couldn't use because it was level-locked above my level.  It was useful to sell, that's about it.  The only real attraction of killing level 210 mobs was the XP I got for it.

Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None

  Bookkeeper

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 1/04/10
Posts: 60

1/09/10 12:58:01 AM#212

An MMO is a persistent world, an escapist world, but a persistent world. What this means is that unlike other kinds of games (solo RPGs or whatever) this kind of game represents an alternate reality.

I note this because it is pertinent to the discussion of Solo or Group play.

Being an alternate reality it is fundamentally different than playing a solo RPG which has a limited world and a very narrow focus (solo play only). I cannot do what I want since I only have one choice. This is the entire reason for playing an online MMO, so that I CAN choose what I want to do when I want to do it.


So, since an MMO is the only way I can play a persistent alternate world, and since it is simulating a ‘real’ world, then I can easily compare it to the real world.

In the real world I get together with my friends on occasion to do something fun. But there are lots of times when my friends are not available. I do not then (personally) run down to the mall or the park or wherever, to look for some strangers. I just do my own thing until such time as I feel like getting together with friends or perhaps on rare occasion, meet some new people. What does NOT happen is some weird Gestapo stopping by my house to tell me that I MUST go out and find some strangers and interact. I choose when to be on my own or hanging out with others.

This is EXACTLY the same situation (or should be) in an online world, an MMORPG. I enter this kind of game because I want a persistent world, and at times I’m going to want to hang out with people, and at times I’m going to want to do my own thing. This is as natural as real life, and therefore, exactly what the game world should offer. Choice. My choice of what I want to do when I want to do it. Anything else is annoying because it isn’t letting me do what I want when I want. I want everyone in the world to be able to do what they want when they want. Anything else is catering to one group and not everyone. Forced grouping is ridiculous, in the real world, in a fantasy world, in any world.
 

  GrumpyMel2

Advanced Member

Joined: 3/24/09
Posts: 1789

1/09/10 1:55:31 PM#213
Originally posted by Bookkeeper

An MMO is a persistent world, an escapist world, but a persistent world. What this means is that unlike other kinds of games (solo RPGs or whatever) this kind of game represents an alternate reality.

I note this because it is pertinent to the discussion of Solo or Group play.

Being an alternate reality it is fundamentally different than playing a solo RPG which has a limited world and a very narrow focus (solo play only). I cannot do what I want since I only have one choice. This is the entire reason for playing an online MMO, so that I CAN choose what I want to do when I want to do it.


So, since an MMO is the only way I can play a persistent alternate world, and since it is simulating a ‘real’ world, then I can easily compare it to the real world.

In the real world I get together with my friends on occasion to do something fun. But there are lots of times when my friends are not available. I do not then (personally) run down to the mall or the park or wherever, to look for some strangers. I just do my own thing until such time as I feel like getting together with friends or perhaps on rare occasion, meet some new people. What does NOT happen is some weird Gestapo stopping by my house to tell me that I MUST go out and find some strangers and interact. I choose when to be on my own or hanging out with others.

This is EXACTLY the same situation (or should be) in an online world, an MMORPG. I enter this kind of game because I want a persistent world, and at times I’m going to want to hang out with people, and at times I’m going to want to do my own thing. This is as natural as real life, and therefore, exactly what the game world should offer. Choice. My choice of what I want to do when I want to do it. Anything else is annoying because it isn’t letting me do what I want when I want. I want everyone in the world to be able to do what they want when they want. Anything else is catering to one group and not everyone. Forced grouping is ridiculous, in the real world, in a fantasy world, in any world.
 

Well that would be quite true if what you were doing in a fantasy world was the equivalent of going down to the grocery store to buy some carrots or read a book, etc. However we aren't talking such mundane tasks as that being represented. In a fantasy world you are doing heroic things..... the equivalent of turning back a raging flood, fighting off a hostile army, putting out a forest fire....or fighting a 2,000 lb grizzley bear with nothing but a spear. In the real world, if you tried any of those things by yourself you'd be A) Stupid and B) Dead quicker then you can blink an eye.

In the real world, people (often strangers) band together out of neccesity to take on tasks that are far too difficult for one person to handle. This is the basis for most heroic fantasy tales as well. There may be a central hero who is the "main character" but he almost always has companions on who he must rely to get things done. Arthur has his knights, Jason has his argonauts, Robin Hood has his band.  Almost all the great hero's of myth and legend still need to work with others to get things done. That IS classic fantasy.


 

 

 

  Brif

Novice Member

Joined: 1/07/09
Posts: 559

1/09/10 1:57:21 PM#214
Originally posted by DiSpLiFF
Originally posted by Hyanmen
Originally posted by DiSpLiFF

 i'll say what i've said before, I personally think WoW did it best. Theres group play and solo play, but you won't get nearly as good quality gear just by soloing. I would never play a game that forced me to group 24/7, on the other hand i'd never play an mmo that was just solo play. Of course i'm a casual player (i guess? 2 hours a day) sometimes I don't have an hour to wait to join  a group i'll probably leave 40 mins into it. 

 

WoW did it in the worst possible way.

i love when people make statements with no examples of why they think that way. 

 

Cus it's common knowledge.

  Bookkeeper

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 1/04/10
Posts: 60

1/10/10 11:51:07 AM#215
Originally posted by GrumpyMel2
Originally posted by Bookkeeper

An MMO is a persistent world, an escapist world, but a persistent world. What this means is that unlike other kinds of games (solo RPGs or whatever) this kind of game represents an alternate reality.

I note this because it is pertinent to the discussion of Solo or Group play.

Being an alternate reality it is fundamentally different than playing a solo RPG which has a limited world and a very narrow focus (solo play only). I cannot do what I want since I only have one choice. This is the entire reason for playing an online MMO, so that I CAN choose what I want to do when I want to do it.


So, since an MMO is the only way I can play a persistent alternate world, and since it is simulating a ‘real’ world, then I can easily compare it to the real world.

In the real world I get together with my friends on occasion to do something fun. But there are lots of times when my friends are not available. I do not then (personally) run down to the mall or the park or wherever, to look for some strangers. I just do my own thing until such time as I feel like getting together with friends or perhaps on rare occasion, meet some new people. What does NOT happen is some weird Gestapo stopping by my house to tell me that I MUST go out and find some strangers and interact. I choose when to be on my own or hanging out with others.


This is EXACTLY the same situation (or should be) in an online world, an MMORPG. I enter this kind of game because I want a persistent world, and at times I’m going to want to hang out with people, and at times I’m going to want to do my own thing. This is as natural as real life, and therefore, exactly what the game world should offer. Choice. My choice of what I want to do when I want to do it. Anything else is annoying because it isn’t letting me do what I want when I want. I want everyone in the world to be able to do what they want when they want. Anything else is catering to one group and not everyone. Forced grouping is ridiculous, in the real world, in a fantasy world, in any world.
 

Well that would be quite true if what you were doing in a fantasy world was the equivalent of going down to the grocery store to buy some carrots or read a book, etc. However we aren't talking such mundane tasks as that being represented. In a fantasy world you are doing heroic things..... the equivalent of turning back a raging flood, fighting off a hostile army, putting out a forest fire....or fighting a 2,000 lb grizzley bear with nothing but a spear. In the real world, if you tried any of those things by yourself you'd be A) Stupid and B) Dead quicker then you can blink an eye.

In the real world, people (often strangers) band together out of neccesity to take on tasks that are far too difficult for one person to handle. This is the basis for most heroic fantasy tales as well. There may be a central hero who is the "main character" but he almost always has companions on who he must rely to get things done. Arthur has his knights, Jason has his argonauts, Robin Hood has his band.  Almost all the great hero's of myth and legend still need to work with others to get things done. That IS classic fantasy.

 

Certainly people in the real world people banded together to do something heroic, but that was their choice.  It is always your choice what you do.  There is no forced grouping in the real world.  Can somethings only be accomplished if you get together with others?  Of course, but you do not have to choose to take on those things if you don't want to.  Forced grouping in a game means that you cannot progress through the entire game without grouping.  I have no problem with challenges that require a group as long as those challenges are not required.  As for a fantasy world having challenges that are not true in the real world, I'm not sure what planet you live on, but in the history of this world, there have been heroes and challenges aplenty, with may a person dying for real quite heroically.  It doesn't take a computer game to make heroes.  In fact, most MMO games are the ones sending you to the grocery store and calling it a 'quest'.  Fetch me ten rat tails is a grocery list, no matter what else you call it.  But that's a discussion for another thread.


Edit: I should also note, that there were plenty of heroes from fantasy who went it alone most of the time: Conan, Gilgamesh, Elric, and many more. Heroic action does not require a group.
 

  SuperXero89

Advanced Member

Joined: 8/16/09
Posts: 2606

1/10/10 6:18:28 PM#216
Originally posted by Bookkeeper
Originally posted by GrumpyMel2
Originally posted by Bookkeeper

An MMO is a persistent world, an escapist world, but a persistent world. What this means is that unlike other kinds of games (solo RPGs or whatever) this kind of game represents an alternate reality.

I note this because it is pertinent to the discussion of Solo or Group play.

Being an alternate reality it is fundamentally different than playing a solo RPG which has a limited world and a very narrow focus (solo play only). I cannot do what I want since I only have one choice. This is the entire reason for playing an online MMO, so that I CAN choose what I want to do when I want to do it.


So, since an MMO is the only way I can play a persistent alternate world, and since it is simulating a ‘real’ world, then I can easily compare it to the real world.

In the real world I get together with my friends on occasion to do something fun. But there are lots of times when my friends are not available. I do not then (personally) run down to the mall or the park or wherever, to look for some strangers. I just do my own thing until such time as I feel like getting together with friends or perhaps on rare occasion, meet some new people. What does NOT happen is some weird Gestapo stopping by my house to tell me that I MUST go out and find some strangers and interact. I choose when to be on my own or hanging out with others.


This is EXACTLY the same situation (or should be) in an online world, an MMORPG. I enter this kind of game because I want a persistent world, and at times I’m going to want to hang out with people, and at times I’m going to want to do my own thing. This is as natural as real life, and therefore, exactly what the game world should offer. Choice. My choice of what I want to do when I want to do it. Anything else is annoying because it isn’t letting me do what I want when I want. I want everyone in the world to be able to do what they want when they want. Anything else is catering to one group and not everyone. Forced grouping is ridiculous, in the real world, in a fantasy world, in any world.
 

Well that would be quite true if what you were doing in a fantasy world was the equivalent of going down to the grocery store to buy some carrots or read a book, etc. However we aren't talking such mundane tasks as that being represented. In a fantasy world you are doing heroic things..... the equivalent of turning back a raging flood, fighting off a hostile army, putting out a forest fire....or fighting a 2,000 lb grizzley bear with nothing but a spear. In the real world, if you tried any of those things by yourself you'd be A) Stupid and B) Dead quicker then you can blink an eye.

In the real world, people (often strangers) band together out of neccesity to take on tasks that are far too difficult for one person to handle. This is the basis for most heroic fantasy tales as well. There may be a central hero who is the "main character" but he almost always has companions on who he must rely to get things done. Arthur has his knights, Jason has his argonauts, Robin Hood has his band.  Almost all the great hero's of myth and legend still need to work with others to get things done. That IS classic fantasy.

 

Certainly people in the real world people banded together to do something heroic, but that was their choice.  It is always your choice what you do.  There is no forced grouping in the real world.  Can somethings only be accomplished if you get together with others?  Of course, but you do not have to choose to take on those things if you don't want to.  Forced grouping in a game means that you cannot progress through the entire game without grouping.  I have no problem with challenges that require a group as long as those challenges are not required.  As for a fantasy world having challenges that are not true in the real world, I'm not sure what planet you live on, but in the history of this world, there have been heroes and challenges aplenty, with may a person dying for real quite heroically.  It doesn't take a computer game to make heroes.  In fact, most MMO games are the ones sending you to the grocery store and calling it a 'quest'.  Fetch me ten rat tails is a grocery list, no matter what else you call it.  But that's a discussion for another thread.


Edit: I should also note, that there were plenty of heroes from fantasy who went it alone most of the time: Conan, Gilgamesh, Elric, and many more. Heroic action does not require a group.
 

 

What is "required?"  Unless a game forces you to join into a group in order to literally level up your character, nothing is "required" of you, and you're very well able to do whatever you want in the virtual world; however, just as it is in the real world, we are sometimes required to do certain things we may not want to do *IF* we desire the end result.

  Anofalye

Advanced Member

Joined: 11/19/03
Posts: 7442

The enemy is so dumb! They believe that WE are the enemy! - A famous orc commander.

1/10/10 6:30:16 PM#217

Why VS?

 

Why can't you just make everyone progress and be the best at what they do?  You solo, you are progressing in a way that only soloers would out-solo you.  You group, you are progressing in a way that only groupers would out-group you.

 

See, peoples care mostly about 1-thing, to be good at what they do.  It is natural.  So, if someone solo all the time, who would seriously care if he solo better than anyone not soloing?  I wouldn't, nor would anybody who is a tadbit logical, he has fun owning his pixelised areas alone, why not, give us a few interactions which benefit us BOTH, either trades, or attacking an area simulteneously or whatever, and we would ALL be happy sharing the same world.  The thing is, his soloing must not hinder my grouping, and my grouping must not hinder his soloing and so on...so we all benefit from co-existing.  I hardly care if I am not as good as he is when I solo, because when I do solo, I have my LFG tag on, I do that, until I have something more interesting to do.

 

An intelligent design would either rewards every gameplay equally, or separetedly.

- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - René Levesque about the denial NO on the poll to his dream, project and goal. (Free translation)

  Bookkeeper

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 1/04/10
Posts: 60

1/10/10 7:29:47 PM#218
Originally posted by SuperXero89
Originally posted by Bookkeeper
Originally posted by GrumpyMel2
Originally posted by Bookkeeper

An MMO is a persistent world, an escapist world, but a persistent world. What this means is that unlike other kinds of games (solo RPGs or whatever) this kind of game represents an alternate reality.

I note this because it is pertinent to the discussion of Solo or Group play.

Being an alternate reality it is fundamentally different than playing a solo RPG which has a limited world and a very narrow focus (solo play only). I cannot do what I want since I only have one choice. This is the entire reason for playing an online MMO, so that I CAN choose what I want to do when I want to do it.


So, since an MMO is the only way I can play a persistent alternate world, and since it is simulating a ‘real’ world, then I can easily compare it to the real world.

In the real world I get together with my friends on occasion to do something fun. But there are lots of times when my friends are not available. I do not then (personally) run down to the mall or the park or wherever, to look for some strangers. I just do my own thing until such time as I feel like getting together with friends or perhaps on rare occasion, meet some new people. What does NOT happen is some weird Gestapo stopping by my house to tell me that I MUST go out and find some strangers and interact. I choose when to be on my own or hanging out with others.


This is EXACTLY the same situation (or should be) in an online world, an MMORPG. I enter this kind of game because I want a persistent world, and at times I’m going to want to hang out with people, and at times I’m going to want to do my own thing. This is as natural as real life, and therefore, exactly what the game world should offer. Choice. My choice of what I want to do when I want to do it. Anything else is annoying because it isn’t letting me do what I want when I want. I want everyone in the world to be able to do what they want when they want. Anything else is catering to one group and not everyone. Forced grouping is ridiculous, in the real world, in a fantasy world, in any world.
 

Well that would be quite true if what you were doing in a fantasy world was the equivalent of going down to the grocery store to buy some carrots or read a book, etc. However we aren't talking such mundane tasks as that being represented. In a fantasy world you are doing heroic things..... the equivalent of turning back a raging flood, fighting off a hostile army, putting out a forest fire....or fighting a 2,000 lb grizzley bear with nothing but a spear. In the real world, if you tried any of those things by yourself you'd be A) Stupid and B) Dead quicker then you can blink an eye.

In the real world, people (often strangers) band together out of neccesity to take on tasks that are far too difficult for one person to handle. This is the basis for most heroic fantasy tales as well. There may be a central hero who is the "main character" but he almost always has companions on who he must rely to get things done. Arthur has his knights, Jason has his argonauts, Robin Hood has his band.  Almost all the great hero's of myth and legend still need to work with others to get things done. That IS classic fantasy.

 

Certainly people in the real world people banded together to do something heroic, but that was their choice.  It is always your choice what you do.  There is no forced grouping in the real world.  Can somethings only be accomplished if you get together with others?  Of course, but you do not have to choose to take on those things if you don't want to.  Forced grouping in a game means that you cannot progress through the entire game without grouping.  I have no problem with challenges that require a group as long as those challenges are not required.  As for a fantasy world having challenges that are not true in the real world, I'm not sure what planet you live on, but in the history of this world, there have been heroes and challenges aplenty, with may a person dying for real quite heroically.  It doesn't take a computer game to make heroes.  In fact, most MMO games are the ones sending you to the grocery store and calling it a 'quest'.  Fetch me ten rat tails is a grocery list, no matter what else you call it.  But that's a discussion for another thread.


Edit: I should also note, that there were plenty of heroes from fantasy who went it alone most of the time: Conan, Gilgamesh, Elric, and many more. Heroic action does not require a group.
 

 

What is "required?"  Unless a game forces you to join into a group in order to literally level up your character, nothing is "required" of you, and you're very well able to do whatever you want in the virtual world; however, just as it is in the real world, we are sometimes required to do certain things we may not want to do *IF* we desire the end result.

OK, an example.  LOTRO features an Epic storyline, but you cannot do this without grouping.  This is forced grouping and the reason I no longer subscribe to that game.  Now, if they had offered content that required grouping, but alternate ways I could experience the Epic Storyline solo... that would have been fine.  I want the choice, not one or the other forced on me in order to go through the game.

  SuperXero89

Advanced Member

Joined: 8/16/09
Posts: 2606

1/10/10 8:23:34 PM#219
Originally posted by Bookkeeper
Originally posted by SuperXero89
Originally posted by Bookkeeper
Originally posted by GrumpyMel2
Originally posted by Bookkeeper

An MMO is a persistent world, an escapist world, but a persistent world. What this means is that unlike other kinds of games (solo RPGs or whatever) this kind of game represents an alternate reality.

I note this because it is pertinent to the discussion of Solo or Group play.

Being an alternate reality it is fundamentally different than playing a solo RPG which has a limited world and a very narrow focus (solo play only). I cannot do what I want since I only have one choice. This is the entire reason for playing an online MMO, so that I CAN choose what I want to do when I want to do it.


So, since an MMO is the only way I can play a persistent alternate world, and since it is simulating a ‘real’ world, then I can easily compare it to the real world.

In the real world I get together with my friends on occasion to do something fun. But there are lots of times when my friends are not available. I do not then (personally) run down to the mall or the park or wherever, to look for some strangers. I just do my own thing until such time as I feel like getting together with friends or perhaps on rare occasion, meet some new people. What does NOT happen is some weird Gestapo stopping by my house to tell me that I MUST go out and find some strangers and interact. I choose when to be on my own or hanging out with others.


This is EXACTLY the same situation (or should be) in an online world, an MMORPG. I enter this kind of game because I want a persistent world, and at times I’m going to want to hang out with people, and at times I’m going to want to do my own thing. This is as natural as real life, and therefore, exactly what the game world should offer. Choice. My choice of what I want to do when I want to do it. Anything else is annoying because it isn’t letting me do what I want when I want. I want everyone in the world to be able to do what they want when they want. Anything else is catering to one group and not everyone. Forced grouping is ridiculous, in the real world, in a fantasy world, in any world.
 

Well that would be quite true if what you were doing in a fantasy world was the equivalent of going down to the grocery store to buy some carrots or read a book, etc. However we aren't talking such mundane tasks as that being represented. In a fantasy world you are doing heroic things..... the equivalent of turning back a raging flood, fighting off a hostile army, putting out a forest fire....or fighting a 2,000 lb grizzley bear with nothing but a spear. In the real world, if you tried any of those things by yourself you'd be A) Stupid and B) Dead quicker then you can blink an eye.

In the real world, people (often strangers) band together out of neccesity to take on tasks that are far too difficult for one person to handle. This is the basis for most heroic fantasy tales as well. There may be a central hero who is the "main character" but he almost always has companions on who he must rely to get things done. Arthur has his knights, Jason has his argonauts, Robin Hood has his band.  Almost all the great hero's of myth and legend still need to work with others to get things done. That IS classic fantasy.

 

Certainly people in the real world people banded together to do something heroic, but that was their choice.  It is always your choice what you do.  There is no forced grouping in the real world.  Can somethings only be accomplished if you get together with others?  Of course, but you do not have to choose to take on those things if you don't want to.  Forced grouping in a game means that you cannot progress through the entire game without grouping.  I have no problem with challenges that require a group as long as those challenges are not required.  As for a fantasy world having challenges that are not true in the real world, I'm not sure what planet you live on, but in the history of this world, there have been heroes and challenges aplenty, with may a person dying for real quite heroically.  It doesn't take a computer game to make heroes.  In fact, most MMO games are the ones sending you to the grocery store and calling it a 'quest'.  Fetch me ten rat tails is a grocery list, no matter what else you call it.  But that's a discussion for another thread.


Edit: I should also note, that there were plenty of heroes from fantasy who went it alone most of the time: Conan, Gilgamesh, Elric, and many more. Heroic action does not require a group.
 

 

What is "required?"  Unless a game forces you to join into a group in order to literally level up your character, nothing is "required" of you, and you're very well able to do whatever you want in the virtual world; however, just as it is in the real world, we are sometimes required to do certain things we may not want to do *IF* we desire the end result.

OK, an example.  LOTRO features an Epic storyline, but you cannot do this without grouping.  This is forced grouping and the reason I no longer subscribe to that game.  Now, if they had offered content that required grouping, but alternate ways I could experience the Epic Storyline solo... that would have been fine.  I want the choice, not one or the other forced on me in order to go through the game.

Besides the fact that many of those quests have now been made soloable, that's really the point though..  As a current LoTRO player, I understand that the epic storyline isn't required, that it only gives nice rewards which cannot be obtained through other means.  As such, you're still perfectly able to advance your character towards the level cap.  Whether or not your character is well geared as a result of bypassing the epic quests is largely irrelevant, as you still have the choice to choose not to do any of those quests.  In real life, if I want a decent paying job, I'm probably going to want to see about getting a college degree, which is the same concept as my willingness to do LoTRO's epic quests.  If I want the gear for my character, I will do the epic quests regardless of whether or not I seriously enjoy grouping with other players.  That said, I'm not required to get a college degree nor am I required to get the gear from the epic quests.  I do so "willingly" because I want the end result.  Your desire for the gear is what is driving you to do quests which you may not want to do, not the game itself.
 

 

  SwampRob

Apprentice Member

Joined: 9/05/07
Posts: 1010

1/10/10 9:48:54 PM#220
Originally posted by SuperXero89

What is "required?"  Unless a game forces you to join into a group in order to literally level up your character, nothing is "required" of you, and you're very well able to do whatever you want in the virtual world; however, just as it is in the real world, we are sometimes required to do certain things we may not want to do *IF* we desire the end result.

 

If a character reaches the top level, and then wants to progress further, by improving his gear, most games force the player to group in the sense that they offer no other alternative to acquiring that gear.    Therefore, for top level characters, such games offer you two choices:  group or forget about improving that character.   That is, for all intents and purposes, forced grouping.

*Sorry about the large font, my eyes aren't what they used to be.

105 Pages First « 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 » Last Search