0/10 Halfwit, adverts are streamed by an independent ad company quantserve.com, not mmorpg, you fail go soak your head

Don’t waste your time training shields if you choose Gallente or Amar, their focus is armour tanking and you will find those skills as sub sets of mechanic. Also do not fall into the trap of rushing to get the next class of ship, many newbs rush to battleship, do not have the skills to fit it correctly and cry like babies, when their first one dies quickly leaving them no money to get another. Also, never fly ships you cannot afford to lose, a little hard starting out but something you should always bear in mind, Eve can be harsh for some players as its unlike others due to the heavy death penalty.

Oh almost forgot, will save someone having to say it ingame, "FINISH THE DAMN TUTORIAL" :)

Originally posted by Sensai

HUGE CUT

So you can enjoy your smugness as much as you want, but you sir fail as you failed to invalidate anything I posted.  So try harder next time champ and becareful with your wise assumptions.  Oh, and being a douche irl does come through online as well, just fyi.

 You make groundless and unsubstantiated claims that a gamers attitude towards others predicates his gaming style, which is simply asinine and absurd. You also suffer an overly romanticised view of early mmo’s, where solo content was always available alongside group content. You infer that grouping is essential to community and socialising within mmo’s. You also make the mistake of assuming that I stand on one side of the fence or the other having a set play style . You are also the one who uses language in an attempt to infer he has some sort of statistical insight into gaming culture. And you are the one who is reduced to insults and demeaning language when referring to gamers with other preferences. Moreover, it is you that would seek to pigeonhole gamers, based on nothing more than your bias and preference. You are the only one being pompous and arrogant, little man.

Had you bothered to read the contents of the thread before trying to jump on the bandwagon, you may not have made quite so many mistakes with your comprehension. I had no need to debunk your original arguments, as they had no merit in the first place.

All I, and others who would support the solo argument wish for is equality for all, it is the pro group camp that mistakenly believes it is somehow superior or more deserving, while paying no more for subscriptions than a solo gamer. The one thing that was not balanced in early mmo’s was the reward system, where groups were rewarded with greater items and experience over solo play, while the scaled content was no harder for the group than that of the solo content for the soloers. The pro group camp are the ones whining now that they cannot enjoy their elite raid items to further their epeens, and accelerated levelling. You claim to play predominantly solo while your use of language and general attitude scream otherwise.

“Oh, and being a douche irl does come through online as well” this is about the only thing you got right. Must be damned hard getting through life, with that chip on your shoulder nagging in your ear all the time.
 

Originally posted by Sensai

One of the reason there are so many rude/inconsiderate/annoying players these days is because of the overly heavy focus on soloing.  Most of these people think that because they can solo something that they are automatically an elite player and thus need not be bothered with things like groups.  There will always be good players and bad players, but to think most mmorpgs require such skill to play that there is somehow a subpopulation of elite players is laughable. 

Just about any mmorpg I can think of is presented in terms of a faction, a realm, or some other type of unifying classification.  In many games this means nothing and has no bearing on gameplay.  In some, it does.  Nevertheless, the fact that these unifying factors exist suggest that it is intended for players to work together towards a common goal.  This is much easier to see in games like DAoC, WoW, etc, not so much in others.  So by the very design of mmorpgs, grouping and cooperation is implied at the very least.

That being said, there always should be a solo option.  The market is saturated with so many casual and non-traditional gamers that a solo option is required.  But just because the option exists doesnt mean that all games should focus on soloability and worse yet, make it the clearly superior path for advancement and playability.

The attitude of the rude and inconsiderate has absolutely nothing to do with a preferred play style, and everything to do with the anonymity proffered by the internet and a wider example of society today as a whole. The idea it could be tied in any way, shape, or form, to someone simply because they choose to play alone for a while is complete hogwash and garbage.

You also present the idea that social interaction begins and ends with grouping and co operation, nothing could be further from the truth, one is not exclusive to the other. I have met many anti social players in groups; those who would grab all they can, are inconsiderate and put at risk an entire group, solely for personal satisfaction. Along with far too many groups to count, that would zerg solo content and deliberately grief others, so you can take that idea and shove it too.

Most of those arguing the solo corner seek only equality, regardless of play style, and happily accept and take part in both styles of play regularly. It is the group only crowd, who look to set themselves apart, as somehow being more deserving of reward and satisfaction, simply for having played with friends or god forbid even pugs.

Your real agenda for posting, is so thinly veiled it is transparent, you do not even warrant 1/10 for effort, quite frankly, your entire post is full of facile nonsense; that is my way of saying your talking out of your arse.
 

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

Originally posted by Bakgrind

Originally posted by elderotter

Originally posted by Bakgrind

Originally posted by Ravanos

So let me ask you soloers this .... if say a game like WoW (since many have played that) added a group exp bonus code. so where as .....

before the patch.

soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 1200xp

after the patch.

soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 2000xp

 

mind you this is soloer fighting solo mobs and grouper fighting group oriented mobs with a full group.

would you be against something like this? and if so why? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income?

Sorry but lower xp is not the answer since most of the quests can be soloed and are more challenging with better rewards to the soloer  in WOW than doing most of the quests in a group in WOW. The only answer to the Solo/Group is for developers to change the mechanics of the game to recognize how big the party is that is doing the quest and to increasie the toughness of the mob and give out better rewards for the number of players in a group ( after all why should 2 or more people split the same amount of coin that a soloer gets as a reward for killing the same mob).  EQ II came up with a great idea of risk vs reward  for the Solo/Group players with  the Splitpaw Saga Expansion. The person that soloed could experience the same content as the grouper even if they had to go into a zone 100 times to get what  they need where as  a group could get the reward in less time. Currently there isn't an incentive to group except to complete 5% of the quests in WOW ( excluding dungeons  and raid content  of course)

 To add to my comment if WOW made it to forced grouping it would not be a successful as it currently is. LOTR is a good example of a good game gone bad by having forced grouping to complete quests. One can literally spend hours trying to get a group to help them complete a quest that is in their log book.

actually, in my opinion, the answer is to leave it alone, it isn't broken - much to the contrary of Imho.  The market for group centric games is not that high.
 

 

Actually you are correct in your opinion that if it isn't broken don't fix it. One gets tired of reading the dribble about how soloing is ruining MMO's and is forced to comment in a more constructive manner. If you like to solo do so. If you like to group do that as well. If the game isn't hardcore enough that where it doesn't have a good death penalty for you delete you toon and start over so you can be more  hardcore than the game allows.

 

So the top ranked Kenyan runner could enter a race with 6 year olds, and all he needs to do is tie a rope between his legs, and that would be the same thing as running the Boston marathon.

Riiiiiight.

WTF are you on! Your current analogy makes as much sense as your last about cars in the other thread, for future reference that would be “bugger all” sense. Perhaps I will take up bungee jumping using neckties, because it is completely unlike climbing the Eifel tower using only my toenails.

Taaaake that.

What I really wanted to say would probably see my account banned; I rue the day halfwits started buying computers for entertainment, instead of using their sisters.

Originally posted by Ravanos

Originally posted by Bakgrind

Actually you are correct in your opinion that if it isn't broken don't fix it. One gets tired of reading the dribble about how soloing is ruining MMO's and is forced to comment in a more constructive manner. If you like to solo do so. If you like to group do that as well. If the game isn't hardcore enough that where it doesn't have a good death penalty for you delete you toon and start over so you can be more  hardcore than the game allows.

 

what about the "dribble" about how a game should be soloable, but a game that also completely encourages group with exp bonuses for working together and tackling tougher mobs.

Tougher group mobs are by their very nature tougher as you so eloquently point out, as groups bring far more to the fight than any soloer can hope, However, the effort by each individual member of the group is very often far less than that exerted by a solo’er, and very very seldom greater. For every raid or group boss, it is possible to point to a solo npc that is equally as hard to solo.

Try addressing my arguments, that of cost to play as opposed to how you chose to play; can you in any way shape or form put forth a reasonable argument as to why an individual in a group, should expect more for his money than an individual playing solo in a game catering to both. No, of course you cannot, and it is at the very core of the argument, yet a topic every single pro group proponent skips and avoids like the plague.

Neither demographics money carries more value, the content taken in context no tougher or difficult. As a result, the idea that simply playing as PART of group should offer benefits greater than those already inherent in playing as a unit, is simply elitist horseshit with no solid reasoning behind it.

Every group is dependent on the individuals that are part of it, and those people as individuals have no more sway than any other, regardless of how one or the other side may choose to spend their free time in an arena open to all.

I can imagine the outcry from this elitist brigade, should we propose that mmo's start offering greater rewards to those with multiple accounts; after all, they pay far more for continued development than an individual member of a group paying for one. Shall we also tackle the groups who zerg solo content, effectively stealing from and shutting out the target audience?

Originally posted by Scot

 

But a 100% group game is not what I am after, more balance and a separation of rewards is the key. What about items that you can only get in a group that only give you an additional bonus when you are in a group? In other words Mr Solo completes a quest on his own and gets a +10 ring, Mr Group does the same quest and gets a +20 ring with an additional +5 if he is in a group.

Until "Mr. solo" subs are 150% less by your calculation, he has every right to expect similar rewards be available from the content he enjoys.

Mmo’s charge the same subscription rates regardless of preferred play style, any game that claims to cater to both playstyles, had better well offer comparable content. For what it's worth, it could equally be argued, as "mr solo" cannot cover all his bases with healing, cc, tanking, dps, off tanking, in the same way a group can, and never hope to compete with group’s zerging solo content. He should be the one getting the extra stats; it is no more preposterous an idea than the one you propose.

Content is scaled based on the target demographic, solo content when soloed is of comparable difficulty to group content when tackled by groups, and neither should be rewarded differently as a result. I would also argue, there is typically more risk of dying, when playing solo than there is grouped, because, as already mentioned the solo’er goes with what he has, and will most certainly not be able to heal,tank,dps and cc all in the same instant.

Before some muttonhead attempts to classify me, to suit his own agenda. I enjoy solo and group content equally, and have run very successful guilds with numbers running into triple figures. However, I understand neither play style has any more validity than the other, and both sides have every right to expect comparable, reward, content and experience while continuing to pay exactly the same subscription for a service.
 

This was already argued to death, until content is accessed based on subscription rate, deal with it, MMO != group, never has been, never will be, no matter how much you flog the old nag. Any one arguing about D&D, can piss off and play it then, one has nothing to do with the other, mmo’s were born from the old MUDs which had an RPG focus but were never group centric, regardless of how much you wish it were not the case.

If there were a market for your elitist horseshit, it would already be out there, that is the thing about market economies, the majority and their fatter wallets rule. Oh that’s right, DDO based on your blessed rule set and a group dynamic was a huge bloody flop, ---> doors that way, goodbye.
 

Originally posted by tro44_1
Useless wall of text

Guess what, it is the same for everyone, deal with it.

This is not the first game to have this “feature” and it certainly will not be the last, even some of wow's animations suffer the same problem, you should have seen some of them at launch.
 

Why on earth do people keep insisting this is a new game, with the exception of the language changes it has been available in exactly the same form for over a year in the Far East, and the west’s version is only a little behind in terms of the content coming its way. Nor are NCsoft responsible for writing it, only translating, publishing and hosting in the west.

Gm's have not been banning IP blocks, they have been actively banning anyone spamming chat (gold sellers and idiots), the halfwits who believe they can get away with botting, and players griefing by deliberate kill stealing. There may have been one or two mistakes but I believe most bans have been warranted.

It is certainly not for everyone, while grinding does not bother me, it’s very linear nature bored me silly, in some areas it really is a case of grind one level on spot a, then spot b and so on. Do not expect to find too many dungeons and group instances, they are available, but thin on the ground.

PVP too, has been designed with group focus in mind, leading to one or two classes who really dominate the others; having ranged attacks combined with snares and other CC has never worked in pvp. Many pve'rs are also disillusioned as they did not realise the endgame focus is primarily PVP in the abyss, and regardless of where they choose to play, post level 20ish, pvp is never too far away and cannot be completely avoided.

The best advice is suck it and see, while it is very polished it’s not every ones cup of tea.
 

Originally posted by Sovrath

I don't think they go far enough.

Le'ts take Aion as that is the game I am now playing as my main game.

The 1-10 areas have, for the most part, no group quests or challenges. There is a cave in either side that "could" possibly be construed as requiring a group under certain circumstances.

However, once you leave that area into the next new player area there are places that clearly a group is required. Add a few more of those I think the pro group people might be happy. Especially because the xp is generally very good.

Every area should have 2 or 3 places that are just group centric or lead to group centric content with appropriate challenges and rewards

And quest lines that maintain the group. Because otherwise the problem is that a group will get together for one part of the quest and quickly dissolve as that is the only thing that demanded a group. This has happened to me quite a bit in LOTRO.

If a questline is group centric then it should remain group centric to the end of that quest. The quest line should not be mandatory for players to enjoy the game but it should allow for those who desire to constantly group a chance to group up and to see an evening's play within that group.

 

Lol, sorry I am not having a pop at you, but I was soloing in BCO at 16 with my chanter, an area typically done by groups at or about level 20. My initial reaction reading your post was, good god don't use Aions group content as an example.

However, onto the "pro- groupers”, having read this thread the only side that is being elitist and looking to set its self apart believing it is in some way better and demanding more reward than others, are the "pro-groupers". You will find most people arguing the solo point of view, are happy enjoying both styles of play and understand that neither style is more valid or carries more weight, and certainly neither should be penalised or rewarded differently.

Most mmo's with only a few exceptions have no playstyle focus and cater to many styles of play, grow up and deal with it, or go find another way to spend your time. For good or bad, solo and group play will continue to go hand in hand, if you don't like it, tough shit, it is what it is. Thankfully, developers now realise that in catering for both styles, they cannot offer substantially more rewards to one group of paying customers to the detriment of others.

Instead let me derail this thread and demand that I get !!!11eleventy billion credits every time one my characters from multiple accounts kills group content while playing solo. After all, I do pay more than these one account groupies. It’s an argument that carries more weight than group rewards being better than solo rewards; after all, am I not funding development of the game to a higher level than a player who has a single account.
 

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

MMORPGs don't work the way you are describing.

You kill Mob X all by yourself. You get 10 xp.

I spend a lot of time getting together a group, and we kill Mob X. You're saying we shouldn't get more than 10 xp DIVIDED UP BETEEN US.

And I agree.

But if I spend time getting a group together, we dont' go kill solo Mob X. We go kill group Mob Z. We should get 40 xp each, because we have done something you cannot.

Ergo you want imbalanced rewards based simply on the numbers participating in a kill, it doesn't matter if the soloer took an hour to kill his mob, played the game displaying superior skill and timing, your group killed it's in 10 minutes while paying for the same product, of course you should get more.

Games DONT work your way either, content is SCALED in mmo’s, in well balanced games, solo mobs take no more or less effort for the soloer, than group ones do a well balanced group, solo bosses take no more or less effort than group bosses.

Could you be anymore asinine and blinkered?
 

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

You're willing to pay 14.95 a month for a solo friendly game. I'm not.

I'm willing to pay 14.95 a month for a group friendly game. You are not.

What does the subscription price have to do with the fact that I'm looking for a different game than you are?

I'm not asking for a toyota at the same price you are paying for a different car, let's say a Honda.

I'm asking for a toyota, and don't mind that you want to pay for a Honda. You'll be happy with your car, and I'll be happy with mine.

You can pay 14.95 for a solo friendly game you like, and I'll pay 14.95 for a group friendly game I like.

What's the problem there? Does it somehow bother you if a developer makes a game I like to play and am willing to pay for?

I am not the one asking for one type of gameplay over the other, don't ever think to tar me with your brush. You are the one bothered with group content and crying about it publicly, don't expect everyone to come here, hold your hand and say there there.

However, perhaps you would like to point me in the direction of an mmo that tells it’s customers, we are group only/ solo only, we only accept subscriptions from one side or the other.

Your usless analogy is akin to buying <anymmo (Honda)> over <anymmo(Toyota)> thats the choice the market offers you, the number of people paying for a single item changes not a single penny. The Honda family A buy, is exactly the same Honda as  single parent b purchases, and student c. Meanwhile, Family d's toyota is eactly the same as single parent E's toyota and so it goes on.

The idea that grouping takes more effort, than running solo is complete and utter nonsense, content in any well balanced mmo is scaled according to the target audience. As for the risk being greater, that too is laughable, In any group dynamic you cover all needs, healing, dps, tanking, off tanking, CC; solo you go with what you’ve got. Again, it is about scaling the content based on the audience; the idea that a "group" be rewarded greater gear for simply having done "group" content is ludicrous, the subscription rate for both player archetypes is the same. Effort for both solo and group play can carry the same risk and effort but the rewards should never scale based on the numbers participating, this is simply an antiquated idea. Grouping already carries many more benefits not available to pure solo chars.

In the past I have run guilds with numbers in the hundreds and yet equally enjoyed solo and grouping, each has its own challenges and merits, but one play style is not superior to the other in any way, shape, or form. Until subscription models change, with soloers paying less than those taking part in group content, the ultimate rewards, challenge and content should be balanced rewarding each EQUALLY.

If I am a family man buying a hatch back, I do not expect to get more extras with the car than a single person buying it at the same cost. If I want more, I expect to pay more; the numbers participating have shag all to do with it One customers money carries no more value and weight than another’s, this is something the group only advocates cannot get into their thick heads.

Socialising, interaction and friendship are not exclusive to group only gamers, nor should they affect or influence gameplay one iota beyond the benefits that are inherent to structured group interaction.
 

DDO is <--- that way and Darkfall ---> that way. Both newer games, where grouping is the preferred play style. If you do not like the current market, go and design your own game, suck it up and live with it, or find a new hobby.

The majority will always lead market forces and WOW had nothing whatsoever to do with solo content/group content or a change in mmo's focus. Why does some nub always have to blame wow for the demise of the world as we know it; wow did nothing original, it simply copied what other mmos had already done. Long before wow, I was soloing group content in eq, daoc, Neocron et al, and having a blast working out new ways to do so, so perhaps you should blame me.

However, Ihmotepp what you are trying to advocate, weather you say it aloud or by inference, is that you believe games should have limited content for soloing while pandering to your desire to group and have all the content you wish offering greater reward and faster advancement. Those games are out there and are still being made, if you do not like them, tough, that is all you are getting at the moment. If something else comes along, rejoice, if not deal with it, but stop trying to push your preferred play style onto others games. Unless of course you wish to advocate that grouping carry a higher monthly subscription for all the extra content and faster leveling... Did not think so.
 

It has been widely reported that the devs have been looking at micro transactions as one of MANY different billing methods; both Bioware and Lucas arts said they were exploring different approaches but nothing is concrete.

Op, if you didn’t spend your entire life in Mum and dad’s basement playing games, and got out once and a while you might meet more female gamers. For what it's worth I am considerably older than you, can guarantee I have been playing computer games longer, unless you too played noughts and crosses with punched cards on an old Burroughs mainframe, and since that  time women have been involved in gaming.

Perhaps your bigoted attitude stops them from revealing they are female, knowing you will only start drooling on your keyboard and pester them like a bad stink.

If you and your wife were thinking of working in there as a duo, you could be in for a very hard time. However, should you both team up with others it can be good fun, if a little dull if all you want to do is just grind. Personally I would rather grind elsewhere, as you tend to face fewer interruptions and have access to more varied content.

Just be prepared for the occasional steamrolling zerk if you happen to be in the way of enemy legions on their way to attack a fortress. Always make sure you have a kisk set up as well as stones to res yourself should you get ganked, if they body camp then res at your kisk or wait for reinforcements and have fun.
 

HexCaliber was born years ago when playing as a spellsword in a BBS Mud using an old acoustic coupler. It is obviously a play on words, Hex as in placing a curse, caliber speaks for its self, and combined, sounding not unlike a sword from English Mythology.

It is really annoying that more and more frequently I see others using the name and having used it for more than 20 years and almost certainly being the original, it's a character name I have become attached to.
 

Originally posted by schawo

Originally posted by Wraithone

Originally posted by schawo

... no real sci-fi game.

 

Then how do you explain WoW? The death penalty there is minor. Yet it has 11.5 million players and still growing, coming up on 5 years. There very much IS a market for limited death penalty games. It just depends on what else the game has. Eve has niched itself because of the harsh death penalty, as well as the learning *wall* involved in starting up.  But that doesn't seem to bother CCP, so they just keep on going.

wow != sci-fi

I know plenty of games without death penalty going down the drain very fast. I don't know any games with death penalty collapsing in 6 months. "I Feel a Strange Disturbance in The Force."

OK I don't want to say, that death penalty makes a game successful, but I want to say, that no-death-penalty doesn't make an mmo successful by default.

 

Yeah Darkfall is a sterling success and landmark title.

“I don't know any games with death penalty collapsing in 6 months.” That is because the majority of games released have limited loss on death, and so the number of these games failing will naturally be higher.

There are far more mmo gamers who prefer limited death penalty than not, or had you not noticed the overwhelming number of limited loss mmo’s on the shelves; market forces prevail and majority rules once again. Even eve online which has the harshest of death penalties has a greater number of accounts in high sec than low (by ccp’s own admission), and is the reason CCP are trying different approaches to get players into low/null sec.

I am not arguing for one corner or the other, simply stating a fact that all developers know only too well, “harsh death penalties do not attract as many paying customers”.