If the vast majority of people are still soloing, I would say the compensation for grouping is not adequate in that game.
Which is why you are elitist.
You're not content to respect that other people have their own preferences.
All you see is "if we increase group (or decrease solo) rewards, then they'll eventually all have to group in order to progress at a reasonable rate!" .. i.e. "screw everyone else as long as I get what I want".
it has nothing to do with Elitism.
It is simple math, more effort should equate to greater reward.
Forming a group take more effort than playing solo.
Coordinating your Game play with others in your group requires more effort .
The risks are higher in properly scaled group content since the mistake of a single group member and cause failure for all group members.
The additonal effort deservers greater reward. So a proper system would yeild greater rewards for Grouping than playing solo.
It is a common ideal, imagine if your Boss started to reward people more for putting in less Effort. than those people.
If I hire you to paint my house and agree that the job is worth $300, and you show up with all of your friends and paint my house, you're still only going to get the $300.00. I'm not going to pay you more because you took the time to pick up a few guys, then had to sit and Denny's and wait for the other guys to show up, and then you had to walk around with your hands in your pockets while handing out orders to everyone and not actually accomplishing anything.
You shouldn't feel obligated to reward a group of people more for doing a single person task.
But.... Group content by design can not be achived by a single person, hence the name "Group".
So you may pay $ 300.00 dollar for a single painter to paint your house, but if you need to paint a shopping mall in a single day then you would have to pay for a Group of people to paint and the Supervision of the solo painters to ensure they work together as a team.
The problem with solo friendly games, in my opinion, is NOT finding groups, or getting in groups, or being invited to groups, or starting a group. I have NEVER had a problem playing in groups in solo friendly games. I had no problem getting in group after group, or starting groups, in games like WoW, and City of Heroes, which I consider solo friendly games.
I would like a game that has good group content, like DAoC before all the expansions, and the original EQ. If you can understand I am not complaining about finding groups, I am not trying to force anyone to group with me because I can't find groups, we can continue the debate. But it's impossible to debate with someone that avoids the real issue. It's like I'm saying my steak is over cooked, and the chef says, well it's not to spicy at all! Yes, I know, the spice is fine, I said it's over cooked. And then the chef says, why don't you like spicy steak? It's really good? I keep saying, I want different sort of game play. And the solo advocate says, why are you having trouble finding groups? Is that your fault that you can't find a group. I HAVE NO TROUBLE FINDING GROUPS IN SOLO GAMES! And the solo advocate says, Why do you need to force me to group with you. Is it because can't find anyone to group with you? I HAVE NO TROUBLE FINDING GROUPS IN SOLO GAMES! My point about group vs solo is NOT about finding groups in solo friendly games. I can find groups in solo friendly games, that has never been a problem, that is not why I want a good grouping game. I'm not saying I can't find groups, so I need people to be forced to group so I can get in a group. I can find groups in WoW and CoH, but after I do the game play is NOT as good as a group based game, in my opinion. But I dont' think the solo advocate will get it. They will still counter all my points, with well you CAN find a group in these solo games you know! These games dont' stop you from grouping if you try! YES I KNOW! I CAN ALWAYS FIND GROOUPS IN SOLO GAMES< That's NOT THE PROBLEM!
Not sure from your post what it is you want. Even wow has dungeons that require groups, and if players dont play it right you can wipe. That is, unless you went when everyone else had already out geared it and they were just kind of power leveling you through. Then it would be easy, yea.
He said nothing about soloing having better rewards. He said there should be solo content with appropriate rewards. It is you that want better stuff, not us. We just want things to do, places to go, people to see. All you want is people to help you get phat loot.
LoL, that is quite an assumption to proclaim.
Actually if you had asked me what I wanted, I would have been happy to tell you.
I want rewards that are based on effort for both solo and group play and I want group content that challenges the players and rewards them for the effort and risk.
Ive been trying to figure out what Imho is debating for as well and being a person who played EQ for many years I think I have an idea of what he is after. In EQ you could group or solo, neither was mandatory. Some classes could solo easier than others but every class was capable of soloing up to max level cap. The really fun content was group oriented and you were rewarded well for it. Solo content was fun, exp was typically better, but the top of the line gear drops came from grouping. Sounds a lot like WoW so far right?
The main difference and one that drives me crazy in WoW is that the majority of group content was not instanced in EQ. You could jump into a group, camp a spot, do a dungeon crawl or just hang out and socialize for hours. WoW killed that fun for me and many people who liked grouping in EQ by adding instanced dungeons with lockout timers. WoWs heroic dungeons are the closest content in regards to challenge to the old EQ dungeons. Now a lot of people love WoWs dungeons, they made the groups smaller so it easier to get a group going, they made them shorter so more people could accomplish them without making time commitments, they made them less challenging so players of all levels can participate, they give away purple epic gear like candy and tokens to buy raid gear, but they added the 24 hour lockout timer.
Now I understand why the lockout timer is in place, people would farm dungeons over and over but the lockout timer causes other issues. In EQ if I got home early from work I could hop on, head to my favorite dungeon and get a group going. When my GF or guildmates got online I could drop out and form a group with them and continue along in my favorite dungeon. With WoWs design, if I log on and want to do a dungeon Im stuck until my GF and guildies log on. I could go do my favorite heroic dungeon before my friends logon, it only takes 20 minutes, but then I would be locked out until the next day. So because I had a little extra time today, I can choose to solo or I can say screw my friends and go do a heroic dungeon, I guess im soloing again...and to make things even worse, while I am soloing I get 10 random invites to go tank dungeon X and have to explain 10 times why Im not being a rude soloer, I just want to run the instance later with my friends.
So I dont blame soloers for screwing up my group content, I blame developers for giving away so much gear, so easily that they have to put lockout timers on it to control the flow.
AND THATS THE WIN argument of this thread.
/thread
Its the lack of mecanics & gear centric games.
now: GW2 (11 80s). Dark Souls 2. future: Mount&Blade 2 BannerLord. "Bro, do your even fractal?" Recommends: Guild Wars 2, Dark Souls, Mount&Blade: Warband, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning.
In my opinion you are misunderstanding all my statements. Your perception is skewed because from your point of view if the game has good group content, then the only reason you can perceive to do that, is to FORCE someone to group with others. Perhaps this will open your eyes. In all the solo friendly games I've played, including WoW, I've never had a problem getting in groups. If that is the case, what would be the point in me wanting to force others to group with me, if all I'm after is being in a group? I could log onto WoW, LOTRO, WAR, or any of the solo friendly pre-raid games and get in a group in probably less that 15 minutes, and have done so on many occaisions. So, if that's the case, why in your opinion would I need to force anyone to group with me?
This is another post where your "I'm not saying that" post directly contradicts everything that you have been saying.
"So, if that's the case, why in your opinion would I need to force anyone to group with me?"
Dude, I have no clue. You're the one saying you want forced grouping, not me.
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
If you can't conceive of any other reason to want good group content than to force people to group with you, it will be unlikely you will understand any of the concepts in this thread.
I do not want forced grouping.
Your statement above indicates you cannot conceive of any reason someone would want good group content other than to force you to group with them.
If that concept is beyond your comprehension, there is no reason to discuss the issue with you. You have made up your mind that the only reason anyone would ever want good group content is to force people to group with them, and that's that.
Every time I say, I want good group content, you can't get it, and have to change it to I want to force you to group with me. That's the only way you can understand it, but that has nothing to do with what I am advocating.
I played City of Heroes, and almost ALWAYS grouped. However, although a fun game, I thought it had VERY poor grouping content.
Now, explain how that can be the case, if ALL I am advocating is forcing people to group with me? If you can't get that concept, you can't really participate in the debate.
If the vast majority of people are still soloing, I would say the compensation for grouping is not adequate in that game.
Which is why you are elitist.
You're not content to respect that other people have their own preferences.
All you see is "if we increase group (or decrease solo) rewards, then they'll eventually all have to group in order to progress at a reasonable rate!" .. i.e. "screw everyone else as long as I get what I want".
it has nothing to do with Elitism.
It is simple math, more effort should equate to greater reward.
Forming a group take more effort than playing solo.
Coordinating your Game play with others in your group requires more effort .
The risks are higher in properly scaled group content since the mistake of a single group member and cause failure for all group members.
The additonal effort deservers greater reward. So a proper system would yeild greater rewards for Grouping than playing solo.
It is a common ideal, imagine if your Boss started to reward people more for putting in less Effort. than those people.
Forming a group doesn't take effort just time, and rarely takes much. I always seen guilds as the ideal thing to join, become social, meet new people, grouping becomes rather easy after that.
Coordination can work for both areas, solo and grouping.
Risking having an idiot in the group is "your" problem, in my opinion, so being rewarded over choosing to deal with morons shouldn't gimp solo players. You also have the option of asking "have you done this before and can you give me a run down so I know you have a clue". But I guess the effort of asking should buy you greater rewards to.
Why insist that grouping always takes more effort then soloing? Other soloers might not agree, but I can't understand what buys you the right to something better if that solo player put just as much effort alone into something, and he received a reward half as good as the one you received from having multiple people help you do the work.
I think the problem here, is groupers don't want solo players to match them in gear, even if soloing required just as much effort.
Hmm, my bad. I guess we haven't established the definiton of Effort yet.
According to Webster, Effort is the conscious exertion of power, a serious attempt, something produced by exertion or trying.
Ok now that we have that out of the way lets look at your statements.
1. Forming a group doesn't take effort just time, and rarely takes much.
The act of building a group requires conscious exerition of power, it is something that is attempted and is produced.
The amount of EFFORT building a group may not be obvious it still exists.
2. Coordination can work for both areas, solo and grouping.
True, but the amount of coordination while Grouping is greater.
3. Risking having an idiot in the group is "your" problem, in my opinion, so being rewarded over choosing to deal with morons shouldn't gimp solo players. You also have the option of asking "have you done this before and can you give me a run down so I know you have a clue". But I guess the effort of asking should buy you greater rewards to.
All assumptions and emotions aside, you acknowledged my previous point that Grouping has more risks. So it is no suprise that it should yield greater rewards than an activity with less risk, like solo play.
4. Why insist that grouping always takes more effort then soloing?
I am just stating the fact, Grouping takes more effort, how much more hasn't been established but it is more.
5. what buys you the right to something better if that solo player put just as much effort alone into something, and he received a reward half as good as the one you received from having multiple people help you do the work.
I believe that the amount of effort and risk should dictate rewards for all forms of play (solo and group).
Until we can determine the amount of additonal effort and risk associate with properly balanced Group content I can't predict if the rewards for solo play would be half as good but it would be safe to assume they would not be 100% as good.
Grouping takes more effort than soloing. Done. Agreed.
That puts us at:
Solo = 100% advancement rate
Grouping = 110% advancement rate
Notice how they're still really damn close, and solo is viable?
Ihmotepp doesn't want this balance, where everyone can choose to play the game type they enjoy. He wants grouping to be drastically superior.
(As usual, these rates are based on the assumption that content is designed to be equally challenging for solo and group players (the solo player soloing mobs has just as much margin for error as he would if he was in a group.) Note that this is significantly different from the difficulty balance found in WOW, where solo content is far easier on average than group content.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Hmm, my bad. I guess we haven't established the definiton of Effort yet. According to Webster, Effort is the conscious exertion of power, a serious attempt, something produced by exertion or trying. Love when people fall back to dictionaries. Ok now that we have that out of the way lets look at your statements.
1. Forming a group doesn't take effort just time, and rarely takes much. The act of building a group requires conscious exerition of power, it is something that is attempted and isn't automatic and is produced. Grouping without being social, requires effort. My advice was to get to know people, some people have real life friends, some join guilds, and by doing this I have cleared any form of effort in looking for a group. Would you consider effort to be "/guild: Hey guys anybody want to group for <random quest/dungeon>?" and get it instantly? I'll say it again, I gave advice to remove the effort. The amount of EFFORT building a group may not be obvious it still exists. Right, thanks, "little" effort is still a big problem. 2. Coordination can work for both areas, solo and grouping. True, but the amount of coordination while Grouping is greater. Depends greatly. 3. Risking having an idiot in the group is "your" problem, in my opinion, so being rewarded over choosing to deal with morons shouldn't gimp solo players. You also have the option of asking "have you done this before and can you give me a run down so I know you have a clue". But I guess the effort of asking should buy you greater rewards to. All assumptions and emotions aside, you acknowledged my previous point that Grouping has more risks. So it is no suprise that it should yield greater rewards than an activity with less risk, like solo play. I acknowledge the risk, I also acknowledge how to avoid the risk, which everybody is capable of. 4. Why insist that grouping always takes more effort then soloing? I am just stating the fact, Grouping takes more effort, how much more hasn't been established but it is more. As I said, it depends. Both can require the same amount of effort if designed properly. 5. what buys you the right to something better if that solo player put just as much effort alone into something, and he received a reward half as good as the one you received from having multiple people help you do the work.
I believe that the amount of effort and risk should dictate rewards for all forms of play (solo and group). Until we can determine the amount of additonal effort and risk associate with properly balanced Group content I can predict if the rewards for solo play would be half as good. With RMTs aside, I can't think of a game a solo player has an advantage in rewards. And to my knowledge this has been properly balanced. For me I believe the amount of effort and skill should dictate the rewards. I see nothing skillfull about having people constantly watching your back, it's my opinion.
For the game to be what is described by the OP it will be a forced grouping game with little or no solo content. Its my understanding that FF XI is like that which is one reason I declined to try the game. Solo content is very popular in MMO's these days and I do not see any game devs passing up 50% or more of possible subs to make an solo unfriendly game.
Grouping takes more effort than soloing. Done. Agreed. That puts us at:
Solo = 100% advancement rate Grouping = 110% advancement rate
Notice how they're still really damn close, and solo is viable? Ihmotepp doesn't want this balance, where everyone can choose to play the game type they enjoy. He wants grouping to be significantly superior. (As usual, these rates are based on the assumption that content is designed to be equally challenging for solo and group players (the solo player soloing mobs has just as much margin for error as he would if he was in a group.) Note that this is significantly different from the difficulty balance found in WOW, where solo content is far easier on average than group content.)
You were close, had to fix it a bit for you.
Yes, I think that's what he's asking for. Early DAOC was exactly this way. You could solo to level cap, some classes quite well, others not so much, but when people grouped up the rewards in terms of loot and experience were much superior for everyone vs any solo experience. (therefore people regularly grouped up with little prodding)
DAOC today isn't like this, they changed it to suit the desires of the soloers and its original mechanic has been lost to history.
Not sure we'll ever see a game designed like this again (FFXIV is probably the best hope) but its not unreasonable to ask for a game with this mechanic. There are those of us who would enjoy it, however we're not great enough in number to really interest a major developer.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
You were close, had to fix it a bit for you. Yes, I think that's what he's asking for. Early DAOC was exactly this way. You could solo to level cap, some classes quite well, others not so much, but when people grouped up the rewards in terms of loot and experience were much superior for everyone vs any solo experience. (therefore people regularly grouped up with little prodding) DAOC today isn't like this, they changed it to suit the desires of the soloers and its original mechanic has been lost to history. Not sure we'll ever see a game designed like this again (FFXIV is probably the best hope) but its not unreasonable to ask for a game with this mechanic. There are those of us who would enjoy it, however we're not great enough in number to really interest a major developer.
WoW is like this, people like to ignore this fact though. Soloing quests rewards crappy greens, and you can't solo instances near your level. Grouping for instances rewards blues, purples, and much more experience from related quests. The mechanic isn't lost to history.
You were close, had to fix it a bit for you. Yes, I think that's what he's asking for. Early DAOC was exactly this way. You could solo to level cap, some classes quite well, others not so much, but when people grouped up the rewards in terms of loot and experience were much superior for everyone vs any solo experience. (therefore people regularly grouped up with little prodding) DAOC today isn't like this, they changed it to suit the desires of the soloers and its original mechanic has been lost to history. Not sure we'll ever see a game designed like this again (FFXIV is probably the best hope) but its not unreasonable to ask for a game with this mechanic. There are those of us who would enjoy it, however we're not great enough in number to really interest a major developer.
WoW is like this, people like to ignore this fact though. Soloing quests rewards crappy greens, and you can't solo instances near your level. Grouping for instances rewards blues, purples, and much more experience from related quests. The mechanic isn't lost to history.
I'll agree, but for a couple of reasons its just not the same thing. I guess you had to be there to appreciate why.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
No, the problem is that when you're offered a game where you can level 100% of the time via group content, you refuse it on the grounds that other players can solo 100% of the time too. Your problem is that you want 100% developer commitment for a playstyle that less than 5% of the playerbase would find desirable. Your problem is that you're not just concerned about your own fun; you are also committed to ruining other peoples.
You are still saying I should be able to find a group in a solo friendly game.
I am not asking for a game where I can level 100% of the time in groups. I can do that in WoW just fine.
I am asking for a game with good group content.
I have no trouble finding groups in solo friendly games. Please re-read the original post.
I am concerned about MY fun, not yours. Please read the original post again.
Then you have NOTHING to complain about. WOW has excellent group content, 5/10/25 man .. particularly at the end game.
Plus, I am also concerned about MY fun, not yours. So if you can't find a game that you like, it is NOT my problem.
No, the problem is that when you're offered a game where you can level 100% of the time via group content, you refuse it on the grounds that other players can solo 100% of the time too. Your problem is that you want 100% developer commitment for a playstyle that less than 5% of the playerbase would find desirable. Your problem is that you're not just concerned about your own fun; you are also committed to ruining other peoples.
You are still saying I should be able to find a group in a solo friendly game.
I am not asking for a game where I can level 100% of the time in groups. I can do that in WoW just fine.
I am asking for a game with good group content.
I have no trouble finding groups in solo friendly games. Please re-read the original post.
I am concerned about MY fun, not yours. Please read the original post again.
Then you have NOTHING to complain about. WOW has excellent group content, 5/10/25 man .. particularly at the end game.
Plus, I am also concerned about MY fun, not yours. So if you can't find a game that you like, it is NOT my problem.
WoW has excellent group content for you. IMO the group content is very bad in WoW.
I am not discussing RAid content. That is a different subject than grouping.
No, the problem is that when you're offered a game where you can level 100% of the time via group content, you refuse it on the grounds that other players can solo 100% of the time too. Your problem is that you want 100% developer commitment for a playstyle that less than 5% of the playerbase would find desirable. Your problem is that you're not just concerned about your own fun; you are also committed to ruining other peoples.
You are still saying I should be able to find a group in a solo friendly game.
I am not asking for a game where I can level 100% of the time in groups. I can do that in WoW just fine.
I am asking for a game with good group content.
I have no trouble finding groups in solo friendly games. Please re-read the original post.
I am concerned about MY fun, not yours. Please read the original post again.
Then you have NOTHING to complain about. WOW has excellent group content, 5/10/25 man .. particularly at the end game.
Plus, I am also concerned about MY fun, not yours. So if you can't find a game that you like, it is NOT my problem.
WoW has excellent group content for you. IMO the group content is very bad in WoW.
I am not discussing RAid content. That is a different subject than grouping.
This thread reminds me of the old Abbott and Costello routine, "Who's on first?" For those that aren't familiar with it, google it and you will immediately understand. I think I understand what Imo is trying to say with "good group content", although he contradicts himself a lot. I'm going to boil it down a bit and say that by "good" he means more fun group content. He's not concerned with the reward at the end of the experience, or the xp and loot to be gained. He just wants grouping to be more fun on a content basis. He wants more quests and dungeons (not instanced, ok, calm down) that are designed with group play in mind that are more worthwhile and fun to do just for the sake of doing it.
I'm going to ignore all the negative comments aimed at gamers that like to solo because I think he went way off tangent when he went down that road. A lot of gamers will say well, this mmorpg or that one has good group content so what now. It's all subjective people. It's why Devs can't make us happy.
Basically what your doing is taking an RPG and putting race cars in It and turning It into a racing car game and still calling It an ""RPG'' and saying that people who like RPG's can still like It.
Turning this genre into an SPG experience is what is killing It's Soul.
But It's not like you care, you would rather make false claims like I'm insulting you and that you never threw out the first attack against that other guy.
You have a twisted veiw of the MMO genre dont you?
If anything MMOs are more alive today then they was 7-10 years ago. Your problem is you refuse to adapt. You seek out people to paint a target on, so you can claim they're the enemy. Currently I'm that target, but you have come unprepared, lacking knowledge and over all you have proven how childish you really are. If this "soul" you're talking about resembles what you are, I'm glad it's dying, thankfully I can adapt, I welcome new ideas.
You said I was "sick" as in I had mental problems due to a simple prefrence. That's indeed an insult. The first guy called every person to solo sick, please go back and read it.
Actually I'll save you the time since I'm a nice guy.
" Originally posted by masterbbb26
Anyone who plays MMO's solo is sick in the head. Seriously play a good single player game....there are alot of them out there. You sick sick sick people. Stop ruining my MMO's with your solo play."
I dont think you can blame WoWs group content being underwhelming for many of us solely on it being instanced. Instancing is one issue for me, but I also think the lack of challenge, the lack of replayability, the short time it takes to complete them all adds to my dissatisfaction.
Do the xp rewards in the group zone of AoC sufficiently compensate players for the non-combat time involved in grouping?
The XP rewards of questing in the group zone are higher than soloing, yup. Drops are more frequent too.
The vast majority of people still solo most of the time, of course.
This is an issue that many advocates of solo-play MMOs have.
And while I will never, for the life of me, understand why someone would pay a subscription to play a MMO all by their lonesome, I still don't have any real issue with the hermits of MMOs. If you want to play alone, eh... it's your prorogative.
However, the moment your solo-play begins to interfere with my preference to play alongside friends and allies (i.e. when the majority of a MMOG becomes primarily beneficial to the soloist); only then will I descend upon you like a Texas-sized meteor crashing into Rhode Island. Not only will I vanquish those who stand in the way of progressive, REAL MMOGing, but your families will fall too. Along with your friends and their families. THIS IS THE WILL OF THE TRUE MMOGer!!!
Bow, you whining toddlers (soloists). Bow to your masters and know that we will forever be your "daddys". MUAHAHAHAHAAA!!!
No, the problem is that when you're offered a game where you can level 100% of the time via group content, you refuse it on the grounds that other players can solo 100% of the time too. Your problem is that you want 100% developer commitment for a playstyle that less than 5% of the playerbase would find desirable. Your problem is that you're not just concerned about your own fun; you are also committed to ruining other peoples.
You are still saying I should be able to find a group in a solo friendly game.
I am not asking for a game where I can level 100% of the time in groups. I can do that in WoW just fine.
I am asking for a game with good group content.
I have no trouble finding groups in solo friendly games. Please re-read the original post.
I am concerned about MY fun, not yours. Please read the original post again.
Then you have NOTHING to complain about. WOW has excellent group content, 5/10/25 man .. particularly at the end game.
Plus, I am also concerned about MY fun, not yours. So if you can't find a game that you like, it is NOT my problem.
WoW has excellent group content for you. IMO the group content is very bad in WoW.
I am not discussing RAid content. That is a different subject than grouping.
Raid =/= group
Out of curiosity is it because it's "instanced"?
It is not solely because it's instanced, but that would be a factor.
I would refer to the thread what is good group content.
You will see that the content in WoW differs from that in EQ and DAoC in many respects, not just instancing.
Have you played DAoC or EQ? If so, you don't see a difference in grouping between those games and WoW?
Basically what your doing is taking an RPG and putting race cars in It and turning It into a racing car game and still calling It an ""RPG'' and saying that people who like RPG's can still like It.
Turning this genre into an SPG experience is what is killing It's Soul.
But It's not like you care, you would rather make false claims like I'm insulting you and that you never threw out the first attack against that other guy.
You have a twisted veiw of the MMO genre dont you?
If anything MMOs are more alive today then they was 7-10 years ago. Your problem is you refuse to adapt. You seek out people to paint a target on, so you can claim they're the enemy. Currently I'm that target, but you have come unprepared, lacking knowledge and over all you have proven how childish you really are. If this "soul" you're talking about resembles what you are, I'm glad it's dying, thankfully I can adapt, I welcome new ideas.
You said I was "sick" as in I had mental problems due to a simple prefrence. That's indeed an insult. The first guy called every person to solo sick, please go back and read it
You called him sick. And by the way your taking that ''sick in the head'' a little too literally. I was partly joking, don't you have any humor?
And I don't claim you are an enemy.
I just think your taking this genre in the wrong direction and killing what truly makes it come to life.
But you can't seem to accept or understand even a part of that.
It is not solely because it's instanced, but that would be a factor. I would refer to the thread what is good group content. You will see that the content in WoW differs from that in EQ and DAoC in many respects, not just instancing. Have you played DAoC or EQ? If so, you don't see a difference in grouping between those games and WoW?
No I have no had the pleasure of playing DAoC, was interested but could never get myself to buy it, EQ never appealed to me.
As for instanced group content, and that playing part of the factor. I understand the appeal to seeking out and and killing a boss in the open world, at the same time It has its own problems. Such as multiple groups zerging the boss trying to get first tag and trying to grief the other group into a trap to get them killed, may not happen all the time, but it's completely possible, and should be avoided.
After reading this entire thread (yes, it was long), I still have no idea what Imho actually wants out of his group content.
I'm not really a solo advocate, I like to group. But there are days when I don't have the time to actually wait around for a group. (it can be a long process sometimes) So I tend to solo on those days. CoH was a great grouping game (before the AE farming ruined it) It didn't take long to form a group, and once a team member reached the zone you could tp to the mission entrance. And it didn't matter if you were on a certain mission in an arc, everyone could help. (they didn't have to be on that mission)
Anyway, I think if games made grouping a bit easier and "faster", it would be better for those that just had a few minutes a day to run a few quests.
If the vast majority of people are still soloing, I would say the compensation for grouping is not adequate in that game. In EQ and DAoC I would say the vast majority grouped, because the compensation was adequate in those designs.
And that is EXACTLY your problem spelled out right there. You want such absurd rewards for grouping that NO ONE will solo! You are trying to bribe others to group, you're not interested in your own fun, you're interested in making everyone else do what you want to do!
The fact is, if you want to group, then you shouldn't require any compensation to group. It should be something you do regardless of the negative aspects because that's how you have fun. The fact that you want extra goodies for anyone who groups shows that you're not being honest about your argument. You don't want compensation because you enjoy grouping you want compensation because you're trying to force the majority of players to do it.
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.
My Colour Is Vomit green, I puke on the tards with stupid colour sigs. My symbol is ,,!, O ,!,, My enemies are any prat with a colour sig, a meaningless personality test, or a pointless list of games and classes.
Comments
Which is why you are elitist.
You're not content to respect that other people have their own preferences.
All you see is "if we increase group (or decrease solo) rewards, then they'll eventually all have to group in order to progress at a reasonable rate!" .. i.e. "screw everyone else as long as I get what I want".
it has nothing to do with Elitism.
It is simple math, more effort should equate to greater reward.
The additonal effort deservers greater reward. So a proper system would yeild greater rewards for Grouping than playing solo.
It is a common ideal, imagine if your Boss started to reward people more for putting in less Effort. than those people.
If I hire you to paint my house and agree that the job is worth $300, and you show up with all of your friends and paint my house, you're still only going to get the $300.00. I'm not going to pay you more because you took the time to pick up a few guys, then had to sit and Denny's and wait for the other guys to show up, and then you had to walk around with your hands in your pockets while handing out orders to everyone and not actually accomplishing anything.
You shouldn't feel obligated to reward a group of people more for doing a single person task.
But.... Group content by design can not be achived by a single person, hence the name "Group".
So you may pay $ 300.00 dollar for a single painter to paint your house, but if you need to paint a shopping mall in a single day then you would have to pay for a Group of people to paint and the Supervision of the solo painters to ensure they work together as a team.
Not sure from your post what it is you want. Even wow has dungeons that require groups, and if players dont play it right you can wipe. That is, unless you went when everyone else had already out geared it and they were just kind of power leveling you through. Then it would be easy, yea.
LoL, that is quite an assumption to proclaim.
Actually if you had asked me what I wanted, I would have been happy to tell you.
I want rewards that are based on effort for both solo and group play and I want group content that challenges the players and rewards them for the effort and risk.
AND THATS THE WIN argument of this thread.
/thread
Its the lack of mecanics & gear centric games.
now: GW2 (11 80s).
Dark Souls 2.
future: Mount&Blade 2 BannerLord.
"Bro, do your even fractal?"
Recommends: Guild Wars 2, Dark Souls, Mount&Blade: Warband, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning.
This is another post where your "I'm not saying that" post directly contradicts everything that you have been saying.
"So, if that's the case, why in your opinion would I need to force anyone to group with me?"
Dude, I have no clue. You're the one saying you want forced grouping, not me.
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
If you can't conceive of any other reason to want good group content than to force people to group with you, it will be unlikely you will understand any of the concepts in this thread.
I do not want forced grouping.
Your statement above indicates you cannot conceive of any reason someone would want good group content other than to force you to group with them.
If that concept is beyond your comprehension, there is no reason to discuss the issue with you. You have made up your mind that the only reason anyone would ever want good group content is to force people to group with them, and that's that.
Every time I say, I want good group content, you can't get it, and have to change it to I want to force you to group with me. That's the only way you can understand it, but that has nothing to do with what I am advocating.
I played City of Heroes, and almost ALWAYS grouped. However, although a fun game, I thought it had VERY poor grouping content.
Now, explain how that can be the case, if ALL I am advocating is forcing people to group with me? If you can't get that concept, you can't really participate in the debate.
Which is why you are elitist.
You're not content to respect that other people have their own preferences.
All you see is "if we increase group (or decrease solo) rewards, then they'll eventually all have to group in order to progress at a reasonable rate!" .. i.e. "screw everyone else as long as I get what I want".
it has nothing to do with Elitism.
It is simple math, more effort should equate to greater reward.
The additonal effort deservers greater reward. So a proper system would yeild greater rewards for Grouping than playing solo.
It is a common ideal, imagine if your Boss started to reward people more for putting in less Effort. than those people.
Forming a group doesn't take effort just time, and rarely takes much. I always seen guilds as the ideal thing to join, become social, meet new people, grouping becomes rather easy after that.
Coordination can work for both areas, solo and grouping.
Risking having an idiot in the group is "your" problem, in my opinion, so being rewarded over choosing to deal with morons shouldn't gimp solo players. You also have the option of asking "have you done this before and can you give me a run down so I know you have a clue". But I guess the effort of asking should buy you greater rewards to.
Why insist that grouping always takes more effort then soloing? Other soloers might not agree, but I can't understand what buys you the right to something better if that solo player put just as much effort alone into something, and he received a reward half as good as the one you received from having multiple people help you do the work.
I think the problem here, is groupers don't want solo players to match them in gear, even if soloing required just as much effort.
Hmm, my bad. I guess we haven't established the definiton of Effort yet.
According to Webster, Effort is the conscious exertion of power, a serious attempt, something produced by exertion or trying.
Ok now that we have that out of the way lets look at your statements.
1. Forming a group doesn't take effort just time, and rarely takes much.
The act of building a group requires conscious exerition of power, it is something that is attempted and is produced.
The amount of EFFORT building a group may not be obvious it still exists.
2. Coordination can work for both areas, solo and grouping.
True, but the amount of coordination while Grouping is greater.
3. Risking having an idiot in the group is "your" problem, in my opinion, so being rewarded over choosing to deal with morons shouldn't gimp solo players. You also have the option of asking "have you done this before and can you give me a run down so I know you have a clue". But I guess the effort of asking should buy you greater rewards to.
All assumptions and emotions aside, you acknowledged my previous point that Grouping has more risks. So it is no suprise that it should yield greater rewards than an activity with less risk, like solo play.
4. Why insist that grouping always takes more effort then soloing?
I am just stating the fact, Grouping takes more effort, how much more hasn't been established but it is more.
5. what buys you the right to something better if that solo player put just as much effort alone into something, and he received a reward half as good as the one you received from having multiple people help you do the work.
I believe that the amount of effort and risk should dictate rewards for all forms of play (solo and group).
Until we can determine the amount of additonal effort and risk associate with properly balanced Group content I can't predict if the rewards for solo play would be half as good but it would be safe to assume they would not be 100% as good.
Grouping takes more effort than soloing. Done. Agreed.
That puts us at:
Notice how they're still really damn close, and solo is viable?
Ihmotepp doesn't want this balance, where everyone can choose to play the game type they enjoy. He wants grouping to be drastically superior.
(As usual, these rates are based on the assumption that content is designed to be equally challenging for solo and group players (the solo player soloing mobs has just as much margin for error as he would if he was in a group.) Note that this is significantly different from the difficulty balance found in WOW, where solo content is far easier on average than group content.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
For the game to be what is described by the OP it will be a forced grouping game with little or no solo content. Its my understanding that FF XI is like that which is one reason I declined to try the game. Solo content is very popular in MMO's these days and I do not see any game devs passing up 50% or more of possible subs to make an solo unfriendly game.
You were close, had to fix it a bit for you.
Yes, I think that's what he's asking for. Early DAOC was exactly this way. You could solo to level cap, some classes quite well, others not so much, but when people grouped up the rewards in terms of loot and experience were much superior for everyone vs any solo experience. (therefore people regularly grouped up with little prodding)
DAOC today isn't like this, they changed it to suit the desires of the soloers and its original mechanic has been lost to history.
Not sure we'll ever see a game designed like this again (FFXIV is probably the best hope) but its not unreasonable to ask for a game with this mechanic. There are those of us who would enjoy it, however we're not great enough in number to really interest a major developer.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
WoW is like this, people like to ignore this fact though. Soloing quests rewards crappy greens, and you can't solo instances near your level. Grouping for instances rewards blues, purples, and much more experience from related quests. The mechanic isn't lost to history.
WoW is like this, people like to ignore this fact though. Soloing quests rewards crappy greens, and you can't solo instances near your level. Grouping for instances rewards blues, purples, and much more experience from related quests. The mechanic isn't lost to history.
I'll agree, but for a couple of reasons its just not the same thing. I guess you had to be there to appreciate why.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
You are still saying I should be able to find a group in a solo friendly game.
I am not asking for a game where I can level 100% of the time in groups. I can do that in WoW just fine.
I am asking for a game with good group content.
I have no trouble finding groups in solo friendly games. Please re-read the original post.
I am concerned about MY fun, not yours. Please read the original post again.
Then you have NOTHING to complain about. WOW has excellent group content, 5/10/25 man .. particularly at the end game.
Plus, I am also concerned about MY fun, not yours. So if you can't find a game that you like, it is NOT my problem.
You are still saying I should be able to find a group in a solo friendly game.
I am not asking for a game where I can level 100% of the time in groups. I can do that in WoW just fine.
I am asking for a game with good group content.
I have no trouble finding groups in solo friendly games. Please re-read the original post.
I am concerned about MY fun, not yours. Please read the original post again.
Then you have NOTHING to complain about. WOW has excellent group content, 5/10/25 man .. particularly at the end game.
Plus, I am also concerned about MY fun, not yours. So if you can't find a game that you like, it is NOT my problem.
WoW has excellent group content for you. IMO the group content is very bad in WoW.
I am not discussing RAid content. That is a different subject than grouping.
Raid =/= group
You are still saying I should be able to find a group in a solo friendly game.
I am not asking for a game where I can level 100% of the time in groups. I can do that in WoW just fine.
I am asking for a game with good group content.
I have no trouble finding groups in solo friendly games. Please re-read the original post.
I am concerned about MY fun, not yours. Please read the original post again.
Then you have NOTHING to complain about. WOW has excellent group content, 5/10/25 man .. particularly at the end game.
Plus, I am also concerned about MY fun, not yours. So if you can't find a game that you like, it is NOT my problem.
WoW has excellent group content for you. IMO the group content is very bad in WoW.
I am not discussing RAid content. That is a different subject than grouping.
Raid =/= group
Out of curiosity is it because it's "instanced"?
This thread reminds me of the old Abbott and Costello routine, "Who's on first?" For those that aren't familiar with it, google it and you will immediately understand. I think I understand what Imo is trying to say with "good group content", although he contradicts himself a lot. I'm going to boil it down a bit and say that by "good" he means more fun group content. He's not concerned with the reward at the end of the experience, or the xp and loot to be gained. He just wants grouping to be more fun on a content basis. He wants more quests and dungeons (not instanced, ok, calm down) that are designed with group play in mind that are more worthwhile and fun to do just for the sake of doing it.
I'm going to ignore all the negative comments aimed at gamers that like to solo because I think he went way off tangent when he went down that road. A lot of gamers will say well, this mmorpg or that one has good group content so what now. It's all subjective people. It's why Devs can't make us happy.
You have a twisted veiw of the MMO genre dont you?
If anything MMOs are more alive today then they was 7-10 years ago. Your problem is you refuse to adapt. You seek out people to paint a target on, so you can claim they're the enemy. Currently I'm that target, but you have come unprepared, lacking knowledge and over all you have proven how childish you really are. If this "soul" you're talking about resembles what you are, I'm glad it's dying, thankfully I can adapt, I welcome new ideas.
You said I was "sick" as in I had mental problems due to a simple prefrence. That's indeed an insult. The first guy called every person to solo sick, please go back and read it.
Actually I'll save you the time since I'm a nice guy.
" Originally posted by masterbbb26
Anyone who plays MMO's solo is sick in the head. Seriously play a good single player game....there are alot of them out there. You sick sick sick people. Stop ruining my MMO's with your solo play."
I dont think you can blame WoWs group content being underwhelming for many of us solely on it being instanced. Instancing is one issue for me, but I also think the lack of challenge, the lack of replayability, the short time it takes to complete them all adds to my dissatisfaction.
The XP rewards of questing in the group zone are higher than soloing, yup. Drops are more frequent too.
The vast majority of people still solo most of the time, of course.
This is an issue that many advocates of solo-play MMOs have.
And while I will never, for the life of me, understand why someone would pay a subscription to play a MMO all by their lonesome, I still don't have any real issue with the hermits of MMOs. If you want to play alone, eh... it's your prorogative.
However, the moment your solo-play begins to interfere with my preference to play alongside friends and allies (i.e. when the majority of a MMOG becomes primarily beneficial to the soloist); only then will I descend upon you like a Texas-sized meteor crashing into Rhode Island. Not only will I vanquish those who stand in the way of progressive, REAL MMOGing, but your families will fall too. Along with your friends and their families. THIS IS THE WILL OF THE TRUE MMOGer!!!
Bow, you whining toddlers (soloists). Bow to your masters and know that we will forever be your "daddys". MUAHAHAHAHAAA!!!
Seriously, though; play as you see fit.
THE Rooster Nash
You are still saying I should be able to find a group in a solo friendly game.
I am not asking for a game where I can level 100% of the time in groups. I can do that in WoW just fine.
I am asking for a game with good group content.
I have no trouble finding groups in solo friendly games. Please re-read the original post.
I am concerned about MY fun, not yours. Please read the original post again.
Then you have NOTHING to complain about. WOW has excellent group content, 5/10/25 man .. particularly at the end game.
Plus, I am also concerned about MY fun, not yours. So if you can't find a game that you like, it is NOT my problem.
WoW has excellent group content for you. IMO the group content is very bad in WoW.
I am not discussing RAid content. That is a different subject than grouping.
Raid =/= group
Out of curiosity is it because it's "instanced"?
It is not solely because it's instanced, but that would be a factor.
I would refer to the thread what is good group content.
You will see that the content in WoW differs from that in EQ and DAoC in many respects, not just instancing.
Have you played DAoC or EQ? If so, you don't see a difference in grouping between those games and WoW?
You have a twisted veiw of the MMO genre dont you?
If anything MMOs are more alive today then they was 7-10 years ago. Your problem is you refuse to adapt. You seek out people to paint a target on, so you can claim they're the enemy. Currently I'm that target, but you have come unprepared, lacking knowledge and over all you have proven how childish you really are. If this "soul" you're talking about resembles what you are, I'm glad it's dying, thankfully I can adapt, I welcome new ideas.
You said I was "sick" as in I had mental problems due to a simple prefrence. That's indeed an insult. The first guy called every person to solo sick, please go back and read it
You called him sick. And by the way your taking that ''sick in the head'' a little too literally. I was partly joking, don't you have any humor?
And I don't claim you are an enemy.
I just think your taking this genre in the wrong direction and killing what truly makes it come to life.
But you can't seem to accept or understand even a part of that.
I do not believe in styles. Only flowing.
No I have no had the pleasure of playing DAoC, was interested but could never get myself to buy it, EQ never appealed to me.
As for instanced group content, and that playing part of the factor. I understand the appeal to seeking out and and killing a boss in the open world, at the same time It has its own problems. Such as multiple groups zerging the boss trying to get first tag and trying to grief the other group into a trap to get them killed, may not happen all the time, but it's completely possible, and should be avoided.
After reading this entire thread (yes, it was long), I still have no idea what Imho actually wants out of his group content.
I'm not really a solo advocate, I like to group. But there are days when I don't have the time to actually wait around for a group. (it can be a long process sometimes) So I tend to solo on those days. CoH was a great grouping game (before the AE farming ruined it) It didn't take long to form a group, and once a team member reached the zone you could tp to the mission entrance. And it didn't matter if you were on a certain mission in an arc, everyone could help. (they didn't have to be on that mission)
Anyway, I think if games made grouping a bit easier and "faster", it would be better for those that just had a few minutes a day to run a few quests.
And that is EXACTLY your problem spelled out right there. You want such absurd rewards for grouping that NO ONE will solo! You are trying to bribe others to group, you're not interested in your own fun, you're interested in making everyone else do what you want to do!
The fact is, if you want to group, then you shouldn't require any compensation to group. It should be something you do regardless of the negative aspects because that's how you have fun. The fact that you want extra goodies for anyone who groups shows that you're not being honest about your argument. You don't want compensation because you enjoy grouping you want compensation because you're trying to force the majority of players to do it.
At least TRY to be honest here.
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
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.
My Colour Is Vomit green, I puke on the tards with stupid colour sigs. My symbol is ,,!, O ,!,, My enemies are any prat with a colour sig, a meaningless personality test, or a pointless list of games and classes.
Regards Hexcaliber