It's annoying, I agree, but a simple result of the fact that we the consumers let them get away with it. We are as much at fault as the companies doing it, we know that, but are not really willing to do anything about it. I know that even though it bugs me that they release unfinished games, I am still too impatient to not buy at release. Is it stupid of me? Definately! Will I stop doing it? I wish, but I know I will keep buying games the moment they get released out of sheer curiosity and impatience.

Originally posted by laokoko

The ultimate solution is don't play the mmorpg if it don't have the content which satisfy you(either solo or group content).

Like I don't play FFXI because I'm forced to play with group, and I don't play darkfall because I don't like the death penalty.

I'd like every single mmorpg created to centered around my playstyle too, but it just dont' happen.

 

 

That is indeed the ultimate solution we as players can choose, we will have to untill some developer comes with a better solution and gets the cash to make it happen.  Even then I expect both sides to keep going for eachothers throats though. :)

Originally posted by Wizardry

Those type of games are in the F2P genre,they have no mechanics,they are pretty much one dimensional games,that fit perfectly to a  solo player.

Wow, just wow... elitist much?

Originally posted by rutaq

Originally posted by madeux

It is simply ridiculous to assume that because there is a group that there is inherently more risk and/or challenge.  All that you guarantee is more time putting up with other idiots in the game.

You may not like grouping, you may not respect the playstyle, you may deem it a waste of time but that doesn't change the fact that its is more challenging.

 

1.  Group Content is certainly more of a challenge hence the simple fact that it requires more than a single person to complete.  If it wasn't more challenging than a solo player could complete it.

2.  The Logisitics required to form a group is more complex than just playing by yourself unless you have multiple personalities or some other mental disorder.

3.  Coordinating the activities of a group of players that have to work together to achive a goal is more challenging and has higher risk of failure due to mistakes made by any member of the group.

 

 if spending time with other players in a game bothers you then perhaps you should look up the definiiton of Mulitplayer.   It sounds like you would be much happier playing a nice RPG.

 

1. You and I have a different opinion on what is considered challenging gameplay. The mob that has to be killed may be too strong for an individual to kill, but is the individual challenge inside that group any higher? The fact that you need a group to get something done does not increase the individual's challenge, it just means you need more people. Yes the mob is harder, no the challenge is not automaticly also harder because of this. A good example is the standard tank&spank bosses, they are so easy you have trouble staying awake, yet they require a full raid to kill, hardly challenging content in my eyes.
 

2. Agreed, it takes more time to get a group together than it is to just go in solo. Do you consider making a team a challenge though? I know I don't., but okay takes some effort.

3. Yes coordinating a full team would indeed be far more c hallenging than soloing when encounters require it and yes the risk is higher because of the moron-factor. However I consider it a gameplay choise that should be with the player and not enforced on you.

Basicly all you are proving is that grouping takes some extra effort, but that does not automaticly make the encounters more challenging.

I love grouping with friends, it can be great fun and well worth the time gathering up groups like that, but still I solo most of my time in mmo's since endgame is mostly doing the same thing over and over to get some nice goodies. It is fun for a while, but gets boring fast. While leveling up I usually can't team up with friends because of the lvl differences Luckily I love soloing as much as grouping. In a group oriented game I would be forced to pug and maybe you love pugging, however I hate it because too often they are terrible, no fun and a waste of time. The few good pugs don't make up for the bad ones for me.

I think you should reconsider your definition of multiplayer because there is a difference between teambased and multiplayer.

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

Hmm. Hypothetically speaking would you then be happy having a difficult solo encounter be more rewarding than a pish-easy tank and spank 25-man raid boss? Assuming both required equal levels of preparation.

If you could guarantee it would be soloed, yup. Absolutely.

Huzzah, an accord!

There was a quest like this in WoW; only available to Hunters. We had to solo 4 elite mobs using a variety of different skills and tactics available to the class. Interference of any form caused the elites to immediately despawn.

Need more challenging solo content is all.

Indeed. There are ways to do it, they just prefer to focus mainly on raiding, or so far at least. I think that will change though, as mmo's become more solofriendly they need to add challenging solo content sooner or later. :)
 

Originally posted by Murashu

Originally posted by Fyendiar

Originally posted by Murashu

Originally posted by Fyendiar

As for your question towards the solo players and solo content defenders: Since when does soloplay automaticly mean easier gameplay? The bigger the group, the less important the individual's skills often are. There is hardmode in many singleplayer games, do you really consider that needing things handed on a silver platter? Soloplay  does NOT have to mean easymode. You can have soloplay as hard or harder than any currently available groupcontent.

Stop trying to make out as if the teambased players are looking for a challenge and the soloplayers are trying to avoid it. It's nonsense, both are looking for a fun challenge within their prefered playstyle.

 

That is a matter of opinion. It is up to the game designers to decide how important each member of a group is or is not. In every MMO I have played, it takes less effort/skill to complete appropriate level solo content than it does to complete appropriate level group/raid content. This doesnt mean soloers have less skill or groupers/raiders have more skill, its just the way the devs made the game.

It is real easy for the makers of single player games to make easy/hard mode for their games but it would be a nightmare for Blizzard to make easy/hard mode single player content in WoW. Each piece of solo content would have to be balanced for 30 variations unless you think making content challenging for a Ret Paly would be fair to a Holy Priest? You have some games that have 20+ classes so for each one of them the devs would have to design single player content specifically for them and what company has the time or money to do that?

 

It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of experience. I added the word "often" for a reason and that is because sometimes a group encounter is indeed made in a way that each member matters as much as the next, however those encounters are rare, extremely rare. Most often they pretend every member counts by making it so that a total moron can screw it up for the entire raid. Encounters like that don't reward skill, they punish moronic behaviour. If such an encounter is made for 20 players, it is easier to do with 15 average players than 19 skilled ones and 1 idiot.

Your second remark however I agree with, it is much easier to balance an encounter for 20 people. You know why it is easier? Yes you gave some excellent reasons why and I agree with those, but I will give you one very important extra reason: in solo encounters the abilities of that class are far more important than in group encounters. It is easier to balance things out for a big group because the skills of the individual are less important and I use skill in the broadest meaning here, playerskills and characterskills.

I agree that it is harder to do, it is much harder to make good challenging content for soloplayers than it is for teams, but does that mean we should stop asking for it? Does that mean it can't be done? Making an mmo is much harder than making Pong, yet somehow we managed to get there, didn't we?

I have no problem with people asking for challenging solo content, I wouldnt mind seeing it myself. Im just against the blanket comments of solo requiring more skill or grouping takes less skill. Each one has its pros and cons. Have you ever solo'd a really really hard mob, then had someone come along to "help" with that same mob and you wipe? It happened a lot in EQ. Ive duo'd 5 man content in WoW then turned around and wiped with a full group on the same content. Grouping and soloing each have different skill sets and use different abilities so saying one is more difficult than the other is absurd unless the devs actually designed it to be easier.

I'm not saying that raiding is always easier than soloing or vice versa, in fact both are way too easy atm. Both can be very challenging and I hope future mmo's will make that happen. :)

Originally posted by Romuluas

Originally posted by Fyendiar

Originally posted by Romuluas

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by madeux

They're not happy with that though.... they want everyone to have to be forced to group.  You must conform, or go away.

Which is exactly true.  That's why they want to ramp up the difficulty so that *NO ONE* can solo, or why they want to bribe everyone with excessive rewards so *EVERYONE* will want to group.  They're just not honest about it.  If they want challenge, like they claim they do, then why don't they just go after challenging content?  Take their level 10 group up against level 50 mobs.  That'll be a challenge!  They'll get a huge amount of XP, a massive amount of loot and a ton of cool gear drops that no one else has access to at level 10.

But no... they'd rather whine about how unfair it is.

 

Yes because a guild of 100 people at lvl 10 can easily take on a a lvl 50 mob, pull your head out from between your legs. If there is a game where players can actually do that then it should be taken off the market now. My Question for all the solo players and solo content defender is this, why do you need things handed to you on a planter? Whyare you affraid to work hard for what you want? You know the funny thing is, these questions can even be asked about people in RL.

 

His example may be too extreme since current game mechanics don't allow for such a huge lvl difference, however that does not mean that when you form a group you can't make it more challenging by finding a mob higher lvl than you that the mechanics do allow for.

As for your question towards the solo players and solo content defenders: Since when does soloplay automaticly mean easier gameplay? The bigger the group, the less important the individual's skills often are. There is hardmode in many singleplayer games, do you really consider that needing things handed on a silver platter? Soloplay  does NOT have to mean easymode. You can have soloplay as hard or harder than any currently available groupcontent.

Stop trying to make out as if the teambased players are looking for a challenge and the soloplayers are trying to avoid it. It's nonsense, both are looking for a fun challenge within their prefered playstyle.

 

I would love nothing less then to beleive what you are saying, except for one little flaw in what you say. Even back in EQ days soloers complained they couldnt get the same gear that groups got and it wasnt fair. I dont mean to say that all soloers are this way, as I know they arent being a soloer myself. But lets face facts, soloers have always wanted to get the same amount of xp as a group without having to group, they wanted the same rewards without the same risk, say what you want, spin it how you want but thanks to WoW soloers have gotten what they cried about not having for years and now that isnt even good enough for them anymore. They wanted to be able to do quests solo, they can, but now they complain that quests are boring.

Well guess kids (figure of speach) you cant have your cake and eat it too. This is how you wanted the genre to go and this is how it went. Personnally I still play EQ most of the time because Im not being handed anything. Hell I even remeber when getting epic actually ment something, can you say the same about epic gear in WoW or any game since? I know I cant.

You make the same mistake in my eyes that many before you have made. Many of those complaining that they can't get the same rewards without raiding are not asking for free handouts, they are asking for equally challenging ways within their playstyle to get rewards of equal quality.
 

Your example of what WoW did is flawed, yes everyone can get epics now, but no soloplayer can get as good gear as a raider does in any way still. Blizzard has not listened to those asking for equal rewards through challenging solo content, they added easy to get "catch up" gear for starting raiders.

Originally posted by Murashu

Originally posted by Fyendiar

As for your question towards the solo players and solo content defenders: Since when does soloplay automaticly mean easier gameplay? The bigger the group, the less important the individual's skills often are. There is hardmode in many singleplayer games, do you really consider that needing things handed on a silver platter? Soloplay  does NOT have to mean easymode. You can have soloplay as hard or harder than any currently available groupcontent.

Stop trying to make out as if the teambased players are looking for a challenge and the soloplayers are trying to avoid it. It's nonsense, both are looking for a fun challenge within their prefered playstyle.

 

That is a matter of opinion. It is up to the game designers to decide how important each member of a group is or is not. In every MMO I have played, it takes less effort/skill to complete appropriate level solo content than it does to complete appropriate level group/raid content. This doesnt mean soloers have less skill or groupers/raiders have more skill, its just the way the devs made the game.

It is real easy for the makers of single player games to make easy/hard mode for their games but it would be a nightmare for Blizzard to make easy/hard mode single player content in WoW. Each piece of solo content would have to be balanced for 30 variations unless you think making content challenging for a Ret Paly would be fair to a Holy Priest? You have some games that have 20+ classes so for each one of them the devs would have to design single player content specifically for them and what company has the time or money to do that?

It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of experience. I added the word "often" for a reason and that is because sometimes a group encounter is indeed made in a way that each member matters as much as the next, however those encounters are rare, extremely rare. Most often they pretend every member counts by making it so that a total moron can screw it up for the entire raid. Encounters like that don't reward skill, they punish moronic behaviour. If such an encounter is made for 20 players, it is easier to do with 15 average players than 19 skilled ones and 1 idiot.

Your second remark however I agree with, it is much easier to balance an encounter for 20 people. You know why it is easier? Yes you gave some excellent reasons why and I agree with those, but I will give you one very important extra reason: in solo encounters the abilities of that class are far more important than in group encounters. It is easier to balance things out for a big group because the skills of the individual are less important and I use skill in the broadest meaning here, playerskills and characterskills.

I agree that it is harder to do, it is much harder to make good challenging content for soloplayers than it is for teams, but does that mean we should stop asking for it? Does that mean it can't be done? Making an mmo is much harder than making Pong, yet somehow we managed to get there, didn't we?

Originally posted by Romuluas

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by madeux

They're not happy with that though.... they want everyone to have to be forced to group.  You must conform, or go away.

Which is exactly true.  That's why they want to ramp up the difficulty so that *NO ONE* can solo, or why they want to bribe everyone with excessive rewards so *EVERYONE* will want to group.  They're just not honest about it.  If they want challenge, like they claim they do, then why don't they just go after challenging content?  Take their level 10 group up against level 50 mobs.  That'll be a challenge!  They'll get a huge amount of XP, a massive amount of loot and a ton of cool gear drops that no one else has access to at level 10.

But no... they'd rather whine about how unfair it is.

 

Yes because a guild of 100 people at lvl 10 can easily take on a a lvl 50 mob, pull your head out from between your legs. If there is a game where players can actually do that then it should be taken off the market now. My Question for all the solo players and solo content defender is this, why do you need things handed to you on a planter? Whyare you affraid to work hard for what you want? You know the funny thing is, these questions can even be asked about people in RL.

His example may be too extreme since current game mechanics don't allow for such a huge lvl difference, however that does not mean that when you form a group you can't make it more challenging by finding a mob higher lvl than you that the mechanics do allow for.

As for your question towards the solo players and solo content defenders: Since when does soloplay automaticly mean easier gameplay? The bigger the group, the less important the individual's skills often are. There is hardmode in many singleplayer games, do you really consider that needing things handed on a silver platter? Soloplay  does NOT have to mean easymode. You can have soloplay as hard or harder than any currently available groupcontent.

Stop trying to make out as if the teambased players are looking for a challenge and the soloplayers are trying to avoid it. It's nonsense, both are looking for a fun challenge within their prefered playstyle.

Originally posted by Kenaoshi

sorry, but how can this be? the purpouse of quest is give rewards (xp or/and itens), since RPG (pen &paper) has born. Unless i really missed the point, and  would gladly accept and exemple, u want the change of the gameplay, meaning in those quests, with is also a reward, in long terms.

I consider the rewards a byproduct that took over the main goal which is having a fun adventure.

Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

Originally posted by Fyendiar

Some mmo's are solo friendly and group unfriendly, some other mmo's are teambased and solo unfriendly. We need enough good mmo's in both types, rather than a few mmo's that split their focus too widely like you suggest.

There just AREN'T that many GOOD MMOs. Dividing them into a group for soloing and a group for grouping is just going to limit the quality available to all players.

The OP's idea is a good one.

I agree that there ain't enough good mmo's out there, but that is besides the point entirely.

The reason I don't like this idea is because mmo's will go the same route as AoC just turning it into different servers instead of a different instance. What I mean is they just give the mobs more health and have them hit harder. This does not make a game any better for teamplay, but if you want a game in which teamplay just means mobs with more health and more dps, go for it, you found your solution. I however prefer teambased mmo's to be about tactical differences instead and that means an entirely different game, not just a different ruleset server since it would take way too much time AKA spreads them too thin resulting in crap gameplay for both solo and teamplayers.

Some mmo's are solo friendly and group unfriendly, some other mmo's are teambased and solo unfriendly. We need enough good mmo's in both types, rather than a few mmo's that split their focus too widely like you suggest.

First of all we ofc have that "been there, done that" feeling when it comes to leveling up yet another character because the difference between mmorpg's ain't that big and a lot of players don't even read the quests anymore since those are more often than not, very badly written.

Second and I think the more important reason is the competition. In a game where gear and lvl means everything the leveling up becomes a chore instead of the main fun. I really think that there should be a seperation between pvp and pve more than there is now. I know many may see this as a carebear solution, but I think that if they removed the gear and lvl part from pvp that the leveling up becomes more fun again because it is optional. There is no longer a "lvl up fast or get left behind and ganked" feeling to games then.

In singleplayer rpg's the leveling up is still fun, you take time to read the stories and enjoy the journey instead of constantly looking at that far away endgame you need to reach. In mmorpg's you constantly have people running by that are ahead of you, if it's a pvp game you know that you don't stand a chance against them unless you lvl faster, get stronger, get better gear fast.

Singleplayer rpg means relaxing, enjoying the journey while mmorpg's means rushing to endgame if you want to be able to compete.

In a game like Lord of the Rings Online you see less players rushing through the content, more players actually reading and enjoying the storyline because there is no reason to rush. Remove the lvl and gear rush from pvp and you remove the rush.

I know many pvpers would hate this, but to be perfectly honest I don't care for gankers anyway. In a game like this the moment you enter pvp the game would see you as same strength as your enemy making it skillbased, more challenging pvp and by removing the need to rush the leveling part... more fun leveling.

The problem then becomes the pve endgame, it would still have that pull and make you rush through the content. I am not a big fan of raiding so I wouldn't mind if a game had no raiding endgame at all, but I know many do love it so a game needs it. Maybe the same thing I suggest for pvp would work for raiding as well, make the itemfarm about the looks of gear instead of the stats. Say a raidinstance is created with the difficulty fitting for people at lvl 55, the moment a raid enters that instance they all become lvl 55 no matter if your character is lvl 1 or 76. Raiding would become about fun, getting better looking gear, titles or whatever without making people want to rush through the leveling process.

Okay enough rambling from me for now. :)

It may not technically be the best pvp of any mmo out there, but the pvp I had most fun in even with all its flaws and extreme overuse of crowdcontrol was lotro.'The reason for this is simple: mentality.

The thing that ruins the fun for me in most mmo's is the general mentality in pvp, it's all about pwning, lolling, badmouthed bullies etc. Players like that make me want to quit playing simply because I don't fit in with that type of crowd. Lotro's pvp ain't the best by a longshot, but the mentality is what made it the most enjoyable for me.

It's the reason I am already bored with Aion, not because it's a bad game, but because the community is as bad as you'd expect from a modern pvp game. What is it about pvp and it's attraction of total idiots?  (not talking about ganking btw, but about the way they act in chat)

So the best type of pvp/rvr for me is one with a more friendly mature crowd, one that wants to work together instead of a mass of chilidish individuals trying to "pwn" others. Sadly I think I won't find that type of pvp in any game anymore.

The mmo we are told to get vs the one we actually get:

Any other comparison with food fails. :D

As the site grows older, so do we. The mmo's that were our first loves have for the most part died out and many of the posters here are searching for that feeling again. However you can't have first experiences more than once so that search will be neverending untill we either decide to give up or adept. I think the massive negativity on these forums is the result of most of us refusing to give up and not yet ready enough to truly adept our search. As the search continues the disappointments add up. Over time it gets harder to remain positive about the mmo scene simply because of this.

Originally posted by lukaszkam

animations, mounts...

come on

it is the storyline, landscapes, the whole world which makes this game one of the best mmos

It's the animations that prevent me from enjoying the storyline, landscapes and the whole world which indeed would have made this THE best mmo for me. I just can't enjoy myself in that game because I get too annoyed over the fact that for a game that looks and feels so freakin awesome, the animations seem to be done by a total newb. The only 3d game I can think of that is as bad as lotro when it comes to character animations is, no surprise, DDO. What makes it even worse is that the npc's do move as they should, yet the player characters don't. So yup, it's the main reason, if not the only one, that drove me away from the game.

Fix the animations and I have a feeling quite a lot of new subscribers would be the result. I know I would be back the moment they implemented it.

I cant speak for others and definately dont speak for those crying that a game is not worth their money, I will  only speak about why I sometimes dive into a new mmo without doing the research first.

First of all even if the mmo in question is not as good as I had hoped I would still be spending, and enjoying more time in it than most singleplayer games out there at the same cost. Lets use the latest big released mmo as an example. I am mostly a PvE based player that plays alone more than grouped, and I bought Aion. The first 20 lvls fit perfectly into my type of play and as long as you dont race through it, you get about as much gameplay value from it as the average singleplayer game gives. Sure around that moment the game starts to get worse if PvE and soloplay would be my only goals. Yet even after 20 my gameplay value and time spend enjoying myself will be far greater than most singleplayer games out there. Yet buying a singleplayer game without doing research first is not as frowned upon.

Secondly and the more important reason for me is the fact that the research is made impossible by all the missinformation out there. Who to believe? Who can we truly trust? We all know that the marketing for games is full of lies and disinformation, we all know that forums like this one cant be simply trusted. To use Aion as the example again this forum had 2 groups talking about the grind. One group told us there would be a lot of grinding and the other group said there would not be any grinding at all unless you call questing grinding. We now know which group was correct, but before we could check for ourselves there was no way of knowing who told the truth. Same thing about the game being pve with pvp or a pvp game with a few mobs thrown in and calling it pvpve.

Researching an mmo is made nearly completely impossible because of the false information, so why even try? Sure all the correct information is out there, but for every correct info there are more lies and since we cant see for oursleves untill we bought and played the game we cant know who is telling the truth.

Third...I sometimes just want something new and buy the moment I see a new game just to try it out, a spur of the moment thing.

Originally posted by ghaiana

Originally posted by drbaltazar

 mm i suggest you reroll on another server 

because this game will get way more popular then now 

most store dont have time card yet when time card gets avil in masse 

dont be surprised with the wave of new player

 

lol, rerolling on a new server in Europe at this moment is pointless, because they're all filled till the top.

I"m waiting for the new servers to arrive, I will reroll the moment they come online! :) Untill then it's goofing around.

Originally posted by tentimes

Originally posted by VoIgore

Yes, makes sence. Let's just hope that they'll get this queu-thing solved. As of now, it looks like they are rather waiting until it solves itself. In some way or another, this might even be the case - because if the queues remain long enough, there'll be tons of people which won't sub after the initial 30 days = problem solved.

 

Sense.

There is no such word as sence.

 

Hehe I make that mistake myself often.