The more I can do solo in any mmo, the better. I have an entire life of relationships and responsibilities and friends and co-workers, etc. Doing some group content is fine occasionally and I believe that it must be designed for groups to be decent. RL can never just be all about me and I wouldn’t want it to be. But online, oh yeah, it’s mostly about me. And no, a single player game isn’t the same. Being among others is good in an mmo. I randomly help stangers all the time. Kinda like the Lone Ranger sans Tanto. What I seek is an experience pretty much devoid of responsibilities.
Raid schedules are right out for me as I already have a job. Besides, I let RL activities trump my online play all the time. If the wife asks "Wanna do dinner and a movie?" I'm out the door and my guild appearence gets cancelled. Guilds are OK until members get demanding as they inevitably will. Fail to run enough instances with people who can’t bear to play alone for even 10 minutes and you soon get a rep for being unhelpful, as if I log on to be at anyone’s beck and call.
And another thing. I will never understand the whole “hanging out” thing. I hang out in RL with friends but never in an MMO. When I played WoW people would hang out in Orgrimar for hours doing nothing but flooding trade chat. What a lousy way to spend time! I log to play damn it! OK, if some like it, more power to them. I still think it's weird though. I have no intention of chatting about my RL and have no desire to hear anyone’s problems. Or even their triumphs such as new jobs or children stories. Guild chat was full of this sort of thing. Turn guild chat off and you become any enemy of the state. I don’t want a new friend for life online! For me, other online players can never ever be real friends because they are strangers pure and simple. I treat people the same way in an mmo as I do in the grocery store. I’m pleasant and might even chat while in line but no relationships will begin there. I do my shopping and I get out. In an mmo I play and log off. The last thing I want from an mmo is someone or some gang who expects me to tank or heal for them on a regular basis.
As a paying solo player of any mmo, I expect access to the same level of gear as anyone else can get. Regardless of whether I pvp, raid or solo. Don’t tell me the best stuff should be found only in raid instances. It should make no difference to anyone what sort of gear any player gets or if they soloed it. The end game content should be reward enough for those who want to do it. I concede that good group content must be tailored. But that fact has nothing whatsoever to do with rewards.
This is a tired arguement and full of selfishness.
Everytime someone brings up grouping, you see this argument, like we are lonely desperate people who need someone to talk too, and we dont want you to ever log off, please dont go out with your wife!!! pleaseeee!!!!!!!! LOL... seriously, it's the worst strawman arguement, becaues it's very demeaning.
When I group, I usually dont talk much about RL, and I am certainly NOT hanging out. I'm playing a GROUP based game, hacking and slashing my way around the game world. The dynamics work very much like being on a sports team, you can do more as a group, and it should be that way.
Your arguement reeks of that selfish attitude I have talked about a lot here. You see grouping as a "responsibility", which is just dumb. You join a guild, and then get annoyed when they want to game with you, or talk to you! (gasp!). When you log in and someone wants to group with you, its like being at thier "beck and call"?? I really dont understand how you can think that. Why even join a guild, why even play an MMO, why not play Skrym or something. Do you like torturing yourself???
Then to wrap it all up, you want access to all the same gear and items that any group can get, only you want to do it solo. Selfish, selfish, selfish! This is why so many games are solo friendly all the way up to end game, there are no more grouping mechanics outside of raiding. And I blame players like you.
Why dont you just admit it, what you really want, is a single player game with a BIG chat room, because your lonely.
Since I turn chat off, that's wrong. I don't want a chat room. I want a living, growing world that is ever-changing, where I can, if I choose, play with other people or talk to other people, but I'm not forced to. Virtually no single player games can offer that. That's what most MMO players want and since that's where most of the money in the MMO genre comes from, of course that's who is going to get catered to.
Since I turn chat off, that's wrong. I don't want a chat room. I want a living, growing world that is ever-changing, where I can, if I choose, play with other people or talk to other people, but I'm not forced to. Virtually no single player games can offer that. That's what most MMO players want and since that's where most of the money in the MMO genre comes from, of course that's who is going to get catered to.
I don't think you'll see those two things in an MMO, unless developers can stop themselves following this whole themepark design. You will never see a living, growing, ever-changing world in a themepark. It's all static mobs, static quests, instanced zones, etc. Also, themeparks cater more to the solo player until end game, which confuses the heck out of me, talk about confusing priorities there. So in most themeparks you're not going to be able to choose to play with other people.. well, you can choose to play with them, but they also make the same choice and 9 times out of 10 the solo player will be doing exactly that. Soloing.
So with that said, you're actually looking for a sandbox game with group content that you want to be able to solo. Good luck finding that one! Oh, and if you do, drop me a line, I'll come join you.
Usual S, having other people around is a great reason to play MMOs of course. I do interact with others. Especially via the auction house (which I bet you disapprove of if for no other reason than it encourages certain solo player types). But no, chat channels filled with personal stuff that is no concern of mine bugs me. I enter the MMO world to play the game not to extend my social life (Even saying “MMO” and “social life” in the same sentence gives me the creeps but I know this is not so for many.)
We want radically different experiences. Silence is no deterrent to me at all. If I’m playing a game I don’t need to be talking because I’m concentrating on what I’m doing. In fact, I find the solitude refreshing. MMO worlds are generally far larger than solo game worlds providing many quiet places to escape from the wacky cities with their revolting chatter. I play MMOs months after the release of new content with the expressed intent to miss the teaming masses as they move through new areas.
You want challenges that require a group to overcome. I appreciate that and accept that the content needs to be built with that sort of difficulty in mind. But it also sounds like challenging content isn’t all you desire. You want pals and buddies and relationships too. Perhaps you like the theory crafting and tactics and such as well. Are you a guild leader/officer type? Some players need to be the boss to have what for them is an optimal experience. There’s nothing wrong with that. Groups need to have structure. Most leaders know that they need to have loot conscripts to reinforce their groups. I know it would be best for you to have content loving, jovial “Ain’t we all having fun!” players all the time who are not loot motivated but you seem to know that COMPULTION is in fact required for you to get the numbers you need on a regular basis. These numbers can be guaranteed by inhibiting the best loot and thus creating the good old “Only groups get the best loot” deal. This is where my complaint concerning group content is grounded. It isn’t with group dynamics per se. It’s that crafting materials and other loot often get placed where I can never see them without being a card carrying guild/fellowship/ Teamster Union member complete with 5 hour schedules and regular meetings. Ay caramba!
Adalwullf, you sound angry old bean! No cause for that. Am I selfish indeed? I think not. Are you such an altruist that you sublimate yourself a collective whenever you play an MMO? I doubt it. You don’t chat about RL much? Me neither. But plenty of folks do. You don’t whine for help with the simplest of quests when all you really want is a chat buddy for company? Plenty of folks do that, too. My comment about going out with the wife was an attempt to illustrate my point about the evils (for me) of raid schedules. The content is such that you NEED such schedules to get the damn things accomplished. Cancel your raid sign ups repeatedly and see how often you EVER get to raid. This is fact of life in MMOs, chief. I can’t do it and don’t want to. That doesn’t make me selfish. It makes me a realist who doesn’t care to disappoint other players. You don’t think grouping is a responsibility when you are in a raid guild? What games have you played? If you are the main tank, geared in large part by the efforts of your guild, and you don’t show up on raid night, there will be trouble. This is not “just dumb”. It is a “RESPONSIBILTY”. You need to be there or you hurt the team. I eschew this responsibility in the interests of being independent, self-reliant and carefree. So sue me. I have assisted guildies on countless occasions. But when some players (and every large guild has them) expect you do stop whatever you are doing whenever they want company, yes, I feel like they see me as being at their beck and call. I am not. Sue me again. All of these experiences of mine are true many times over. I won’t pretend to know what your experiences have been but apparently no one in your guilds have been very demanding. I don’t play with any RL friends so perhaps that makes a big difference.
I don’t want or expect to do group content solo. I do expect gear that is as powerful as any in the game to be craft-able or some other way within my grasp. If there are no grouping mechanics outside of raiding, how is that my fault? Because I don’t’ want to do them? (I actually would be interested in sensible pick up style group world events) Now who is selfish? Who’s the one bemoaning the majority getting what they seem to want, as Cephus points out? You group centric people already have the whole enchilada in as much as you can get any gear and see all content.
Different server types can be the answer. I don’t know why there can’t be group content servers where the entire non-instanced world is too dangerous to be alone in. There could also be servers where anyone can get any gear be any means. The games themselves would not need to change that much.
MMOs should be flexible and cater to both types of content. Both for group and for solo. One is not more important than the other. MMO is not synonomous with grouping but an aspect of it. I like to solo but also enjoy the community of a game, perhaps buying merchandise from another player who is a crafter.
I am in complete agreement with SpliceMan. I dont play MMOs for social interaction and grouping, I play MMOs for their dynamic worlds and ever expanding content. Its fustrating when you can't do a particular dungeon because you need four people to do it. Im not saying remove that requirement Im saying add the flexibility of allowing me to do it alone, let me challenge myself. Why is choice so difficult to accept.
If I want to solo play I play a solo game. Interesting how that works.
The problem with only playing group oriented games, I've found, is that you become limited only to the newest games or oldest games.
What I mean is, if you want to play, say Everquest starting a lvl 1 toon right now, it would be relatively impossible to find groups to help you with all the group combat. You can play EQ as intended, just as long as you have a max lvl toon in a guild and your gear is approximate to those who play regularly. If you are lucky in EQ you will have rl friends with max lvl toons who will pl you through all that group content, but I hardly call that 'grouping'. So EQ, unarguably a grouping game = fine for max toons who have spent years in the game, impossible for a new player.
So, the other alternative is to play a game in its first year of release, and play it at the median curve of everyone else (and 17 year olds level quick), so that there are always plenty of people your lvl lfg. But after that first year, and now its more like within the first 6 months, the mass of the population is passed the group content and there you are stuck at a lvl 18 newbie dungeon /shouting LFG. God help you if you are dps lfg and not a tank or healer in that situation.
In rl, I have a job that takes me away from my comp for weeks or months. It is relatively impossible for me to stay with the lvling herd. I come back home and my friends are max lvl. So I sit there /shouting LFG for hours and hours while they raid and adventure. The game may be 90% grouping - but is that how I am spending 90% of my time in the game? Nope, the game that is 90% grouping, means you will spend 90% of your time trying to get that group together - if you are behind the level curve.
On those nights it is hard for me to stomach 90% of the content being for groups, when I paid the same for my box and the same for my sub - the content should be made to cater to all our play styles. So, in the absence of being able to find a group for the lvl 25 dungeon in a game that's 3 years old, I'd like some solo content please, so I can max my toon and actually get to play with groups. Which, imo, isn't necessarily 90% of the content, but should be 90% of the fun.
So with that said, you're actually looking for a sandbox game with group content that you want to be able to solo. Good luck finding that one! Oh, and if you do, drop me a line, I'll come join you.
Usual S, having other people around is a great reason to play MMOs of course. I do interact with others. Especially via the auction house (which I bet you disapprove of if for no other reason than it encourages certain solo player types). But no, chat channels filled with personal stuff that is no concern of mine bugs me. I enter the MMO world to play the game not to extend my social life (Even saying “MMO” and “social life” in the same sentence gives me the creeps but I know this is not so for many.)
<snip - too long>
Different server types can be the answer. I don’t know why there can’t be group content servers where the entire non-instanced world is too dangerous to be alone in. There could also be servers where anyone can get any gear be any means. The games themselves would not need to change that much.
You have a weird opinion of MMO's, as if they're some massive social club where the soloer sits on the sidelines watching people interact, while grumbling about not wanting to join in. At its most basic level, an MMO is no different to a game like Counterstrike. People log on to the server, chat, shoot each other, have a laugh, log out again. The only difference with MMO's is that instead of shooting each other you're fighting computer controlled mobs, instead of the game being in short turns, it's a persistent world, instead of clans you get guilds. That's all it boils down to. Everything else is generated by the players with only the tools put in place by the developers.
This is the thing that confuses me, why people seem to think that soloing should be a large part of MMO's. As I said, at its most basic level an MMO is a multiplayer game akin to Counterstrike, hell the multiplayer is in the description, "Massively Multiplayer", so why people expect to be able to solo every aspect of the game is just mind boggling. It goes against the core design. That's the problem with a lot of the newly released MMO's, they're catering to the solo crowd, and as can be seen, none of them are holding subscribers for long. People don't really want an online single player game, especially one they have to pay monthly for. Argue if you like but the subscription numbers say otherwise.
That said, MMO's do need a part that is soloable, even in Counterstrike you could run around on your own shooting people. If you were facing an organized team, of course, you'd last 10 seconds at best, but on a random server it was pretty much a free for all and you could mostly get away with it. But at its core, an MMO is a multiplayer game and needs to focus more on that side of the gameplay than worrying about Joe from Kansas who wants to be able to solo Boss Mob #1657.
Which brings me to your other point about the gear in game being available to the soloer, either through crafting or some other way. Now, for me, loot has always just been a pleasant by-product of doing group content, it's not something I long for or even aim for. As long as the game is fun then loot is just a reward for doing well. So I'm not bothered either way, however, I would argue on some areas of that depending on where that loot came from. For example, if you expect to be crafting the equivalent of a breastplate that dropped from the God of Thunder, then.. um. No. It's a God. He has better stuff than you can make. End of story.
If all solo players really want is an expanding world, then the increase in DLC these days should suffice, right? Like original Mass Effect 2, that game expanded quite heavily over time with all the DLC that came out. If it's a chat room or people around you that you like, then why are you complaining if they're asshats or demanding or petty. People are people, there are good ones and there are bad ones. Do you hate going out into the world because of all the asshats out there? Or do you just ignore them and focus on the good ones? Why would things be any different in an MMO? If you can't handle the fact that people are going to be in the game and some aren't going to be to your liking, what are you doing there in the first place?
Expanding on my previous post. I got to thinking about what caused all this solo in MMO nonsense and thought about World of Warcraft. Every developer since its release has tried copying the WoW formula, with soloable to level cap, but didn't look at what the actual players were doing in WoW.
Every time I read a post about WoW it's along the lines of, "People are just sitting in cities queueing up for dungeons all day.", or, "People are rushing to level cap.", or, "People are just doing warzones over and over again.". So what they're actually doing is ignoring all the solo content and participating in the group content. And despite all the posts from soloers saying a group-centric game wouldn't work, this is actually working on a massive scale to the number of 10 million people logging in.
You think they've held 10 million subscibers purely on their solo questing? That people have remade alt after alt to follow that awesome path to max level, only to do it all over again? No. People like the multiplayer dungeons, the pvp content, the massive raids, they don't even bother with the solo content anymore.
And this is despite the fact that the multiplayer content is the same thing over and over again, the same raid, the same dungeon. It reminds me of my previous post, regarding Counterstrike. I remember a map on there which I think was called Dust. It was so popular that some servers hosted only that map and nothing else. Why? Because when you throw in the players it opens up into some interesting gameplay, with multiple choke points, multiple lines of attack, objectives to reach, and so on.
This is what appeals with repeated dungeon or raid runs. Every one is going to be different, even if only slightly, it's enough difference to make each run unique. This is the complete opposite to content developed for solo players, as it has to be perfectly honed to make it possible for the single character to go through it. Every encounter has to be prepared, every path predetermined.
And that's my point. As much as the newly released games are catering to soloers, it's not what the vast majority of MMO players want. The WoW subscriber numbers speak for themselves.
Expanding on my previous post. I got to thinking about what caused all this solo in MMO nonsense and thought about World of Warcraft. Every developer since its release has tried copying the WoW formula, with soloable to level cap, but didn't look at what the actual players were doing in WoW.
Every time I read a post about WoW it's along the lines of, "People are just sitting in cities queueing up for dungeons all day.", or, "People are rushing to level cap.", or, "People are just doing warzones over and over again.". So what they're actually doing is ignoring all the solo content and participating in the group content. And despite all the posts from soloers saying a group-centric game wouldn't work, this is actually working on a massive scale to the number of 10 million people logging in.
You think they've held 10 million subscibers purely on their solo questing? That people have remade alt after alt to follow that awesome path to max level, only to do it all over again? No. People like the multiplayer dungeons, the pvp content, the massive raids, they don't even bother with the solo content anymore.
And this is despite the fact that the multiplayer content is the same thing over and over again, the same raid, the same dungeon. It reminds me of my previous post, regarding Counterstrike. I remember a map on there which I think was called Dust. It was so popular that some servers hosted only that map and nothing else. Why? Because when you throw in the players it opens up into some interesting gameplay, with multiple choke points, multiple lines of attack, objectives to reach, and so on.
This is what appeals with repeated dungeon or raid runs. Every one is going to be different, even if only slightly, it's enough difference to make each run unique. This is the complete opposite to content developed for solo players, as it has to be perfectly honed to make it possible for the single character to go through it. Every encounter has to be prepared, every path predetermined.
And that's my point. As much as the newly released games are catering to soloers, it's not what the vast majority of MMO players want. The WoW subscriber numbers speak for themselves.
Those are some excellent points, and when I think about it, the WoW players always talk about raids, never the solo content. The other thing I hear about are BG's, which is also group play.
I just got an idea, what if the solo content was instanced, instead of the other way around?!
We could have raids, world pvp, invasions from NPC hordes, all kinds of action. The soloers, who dont like to be bothered, can go do instance dungeons, and instance quests, kinda like CoH.
Now that seems fair to me, why build a whole world for a soloer, give them instances and keep them away from us...HAH!
Expanding on my previous post. I got to thinking about what caused all this solo in MMO nonsense and thought about World of Warcraft. Every developer since its release has tried copying the WoW formula, with soloable to level cap, but didn't look at what the actual players were doing in WoW.
Every time I read a post about WoW it's along the lines of, "People are just sitting in cities queueing up for dungeons all day.", or, "People are rushing to level cap.", or, "People are just doing warzones over and over again.". So what they're actually doing is ignoring all the solo content and participating in the group content. And despite all the posts from soloers saying a group-centric game wouldn't work, this is actually working on a massive scale to the number of 10 million people logging in.
You think they've held 10 million subscibers purely on their solo questing? That people have remade alt after alt to follow that awesome path to max level, only to do it all over again? No. People like the multiplayer dungeons, the pvp content, the massive raids, they don't even bother with the solo content anymore.
And this is despite the fact that the multiplayer content is the same thing over and over again, the same raid, the same dungeon. It reminds me of my previous post, regarding Counterstrike. I remember a map on there which I think was called Dust. It was so popular that some servers hosted only that map and nothing else. Why? Because when you throw in the players it opens up into some interesting gameplay, with multiple choke points, multiple lines of attack, objectives to reach, and so on.
This is what appeals with repeated dungeon or raid runs. Every one is going to be different, even if only slightly, it's enough difference to make each run unique. This is the complete opposite to content developed for solo players, as it has to be perfectly honed to make it possible for the single character to go through it. Every encounter has to be prepared, every path predetermined.
And that's my point. As much as the newly released games are catering to soloers, it's not what the vast majority of MMO players want. The WoW subscriber numbers speak for themselves.
The underlying problem is the structure of (current) MMOs. The whole 'solo' just to get to max level so you can group/raid is broken. People who like to solo get to max and become bored because they MAY not like to raid/group (depends on the player) and those who prefer grouping complain they have to trog through solo content to get to raid/grouping (again depends on the player).
It makes more logical sense to just have content and give players the option to play it how they want. Someone wanting to solo a zone should have no bearing on someone who wants to group. To say an MMO is one over the other based on the fact that its in the name is naive, it doesnt cover the experience given. Devs need to figure this out.
In terms of groups, I never understood why they dont allow players to START at max level. What is the point of making someone go through 'level' content if they dont want to or enjoy it?
MMOs need to change their structure to attempt to meet the various playstyles that are nearly impossible to predict. As long as they develop something that is fun and involving on all levels, it could very well paint a path to success.
The question is who is willing to take that risk, especially considering how fickle we are as a genre ;-) (myself included).
Expanding on my previous post. I got to thinking about what caused all this solo in MMO nonsense and thought about World of Warcraft. Every developer since its release has tried copying the WoW formula, with soloable to level cap, but didn't look at what the actual players were doing in WoW.
Every time I read a post about WoW it's along the lines of, "People are just sitting in cities queueing up for dungeons all day.", or, "People are rushing to level cap.", or, "People are just doing warzones over and over again.". So what they're actually doing is ignoring all the solo content and participating in the group content. And despite all the posts from soloers saying a group-centric game wouldn't work, this is actually working on a massive scale to the number of 10 million people logging in.
You think they've held 10 million subscibers purely on their solo questing? That people have remade alt after alt to follow that awesome path to max level, only to do it all over again? No. People like the multiplayer dungeons, the pvp content, the massive raids, they don't even bother with the solo content anymore.
And this is despite the fact that the multiplayer content is the same thing over and over again, the same raid, the same dungeon. It reminds me of my previous post, regarding Counterstrike. I remember a map on there which I think was called Dust. It was so popular that some servers hosted only that map and nothing else. Why? Because when you throw in the players it opens up into some interesting gameplay, with multiple choke points, multiple lines of attack, objectives to reach, and so on.
This is what appeals with repeated dungeon or raid runs. Every one is going to be different, even if only slightly, it's enough difference to make each run unique. This is the complete opposite to content developed for solo players, as it has to be perfectly honed to make it possible for the single character to go through it. Every encounter has to be prepared, every path predetermined.
And that's my point. As much as the newly released games are catering to soloers, it's not what the vast majority of MMO players want. The WoW subscriber numbers speak for themselves.
The underlying problem is the structure of (current) MMOs. The whole 'solo' just to get to max level so you can group/raid is broken. People who like to solo get to max and become bored because they MAY not like to raid/group (depends on the player) and those who prefer grouping complain they have to trog through solo content to get to raid/grouping (again depends on the player).
It makes more logical sense to just have content and give players the option to play it how they want. Someone wanting to solo a zone should have no bearing on someone who wants to group. To say an MMO is one over the other based on the fact that its in the name is naive, it doesnt cover the experience given. Devs need to figure this out.
In terms of groups, I never understood why they dont allow players to START at max level. What is the point of making someone go through 'level' content if they dont want to or enjoy it?
MMOs need to change their structure to attempt to meet the various playstyles that are nearly impossible to predict. As long as they develop something that is fun and involving on all levels, it could very well paint a path to success.
The question is who is willing to take that risk, especially considering how fickle we are as a genre ;-) (myself included).
First, I think you misunderstood UsualSuspect, and I think your new to MMO's, in fact you MUST be.
You cannot "just let players play it how they want", because there are system mechanics involved. Mobs that are soloable, will be steamrolled by groups, which creates imbalance.
How would you make quests viable to both the soloer and the group? You cant, it is impossible, that is the problem.
Heh , why are people so selfish now a days in the MMO world? Seriously if you think a Dev should work and publish a MMO solely on what you like , then I got news for you buddy , don't play any freaking MMO's and stick to consoles or standalone games.
WoW did a good job with balancing group Vs Solo , but Atlantica Online is alot better with the guild/alliance oriented instances (Just a shame it's cash shop intensive , otherwise this game would of been off the charts).
MMO population changed alot in recent years , it's all about the loot and selfish personal fame , it's so foolish that it's pathetic to watch.
Probably why nothing appeals to me besides EVE-Online and some upcoming releases like PlanetSide 2 and End of Nations , where coop is key to heavy advancement but where solo play can advance you a little.
Ironic that in the 90's with Ultima Online , Nexus TK , and a few others ,were the fathers of the MMO world and I can still remember being the age of 14 and people learning me the ropes and as time went by in that game I showed them tactics on how to kill bosses and such. Everyone acted mature back in the 90's , braggers/smack talkers were almost non existent , the communities back then were to die for , it felt like you were actually part of something special. Alot of good memories that seems like a lifetime ago , such a pity.
Expanding on my previous post. I got to thinking about what caused all this solo in MMO nonsense and thought about World of Warcraft. Every developer since its release has tried copying the WoW formula, with soloable to level cap, but didn't look at what the actual players were doing in WoW.
Every time I read a post about WoW it's along the lines of, "People are just sitting in cities queueing up for dungeons all day.", or, "People are rushing to level cap.", or, "People are just doing warzones over and over again.". So what they're actually doing is ignoring all the solo content and participating in the group content. And despite all the posts from soloers saying a group-centric game wouldn't work, this is actually working on a massive scale to the number of 10 million people logging in.
You think they've held 10 million subscibers purely on their solo questing? That people have remade alt after alt to follow that awesome path to max level, only to do it all over again? No. People like the multiplayer dungeons, the pvp content, the massive raids, they don't even bother with the solo content anymore.
And this is despite the fact that the multiplayer content is the same thing over and over again, the same raid, the same dungeon. It reminds me of my previous post, regarding Counterstrike. I remember a map on there which I think was called Dust. It was so popular that some servers hosted only that map and nothing else. Why? Because when you throw in the players it opens up into some interesting gameplay, with multiple choke points, multiple lines of attack, objectives to reach, and so on.
This is what appeals with repeated dungeon or raid runs. Every one is going to be different, even if only slightly, it's enough difference to make each run unique. This is the complete opposite to content developed for solo players, as it has to be perfectly honed to make it possible for the single character to go through it. Every encounter has to be prepared, every path predetermined.
And that's my point. As much as the newly released games are catering to soloers, it's not what the vast majority of MMO players want. The WoW subscriber numbers speak for themselves.
The underlying problem is the structure of (current) MMOs. The whole 'solo' just to get to max level so you can group/raid is broken. People who like to solo get to max and become bored because they MAY not like to raid/group (depends on the player) and those who prefer grouping complain they have to trog through solo content to get to raid/grouping (again depends on the player).
It makes more logical sense to just have content and give players the option to play it how they want. Someone wanting to solo a zone should have no bearing on someone who wants to group. To say an MMO is one over the other based on the fact that its in the name is naive, it doesnt cover the experience given. Devs need to figure this out.
In terms of groups, I never understood why they dont allow players to START at max level. What is the point of making someone go through 'level' content if they dont want to or enjoy it?
MMOs need to change their structure to attempt to meet the various playstyles that are nearly impossible to predict. As long as they develop something that is fun and involving on all levels, it could very well paint a path to success.
The question is who is willing to take that risk, especially considering how fickle we are as a genre ;-) (myself included).
First, I think you misunderstood UsualSuspect, and I think your new to MMO's, in fact you MUST be.
You cannot "just let players play it how they want", because there are system mechanics involved. Mobs that are soloable, will be steamrolled by groups, which creates imbalance.
How would you make quests viable to both the soloer and the group? You cant, it is impossible, that is the problem.
Perhaps and I appologize for that. Good catch that I am new to MMOs, I am fresh blood ;-) I come from the console side of the house and heavy RPG player... but being older I like the complexity and challenge MMOs present. Console RPGs (today) are too simple and straight forward for my tastes. I love the deep mechanisms of crafting, skill building, and tactical combat as well as the fact that MMOs give the experience of being in a 'dynamic' world. I believe that is why people who like to solo, dont 'just want to play solo RPGs' Been there and done that. I'm just asking for an option.
Understand and agree with the problem. Mobs (or enemies hanging around in groups) I dont think is the right approach. I solo group content all the time, the issue is I cant handle 6 people at once (at current level) - and yes I like the uncanny challenging odds of survival. Its what I play for.
Why not change how mobs operate in MMOs? Have them perform actions or execute some repeatable task. A group goes in, they tackle them head on...taking what comes at them. Solo goes in, I take them one by one slowly thinning them out.
This is just a suggestion, perhaps naive, but at least paints a scenario or potential new direction to take MMOs in. I still stand behind the fact that people should have the option to play how they want. Forcing players either way isnt going to be viable in the long term.
My thoughts about grouping (its not an issue) have been said many times before in this great thread. Its not that I am OPPOSED to it (i.e. get rid of it all together), its how its conducted (at least in the games) Im playing now. I enjoy the combat. But when you group with strangers you get all sorts of playstyles including those who want to rush to get to the end boss. Right now there is no way (that I am aware of) to mitigate this. I either have to follow (or lead) the group or not do the content. Or looking for group mates at lower levels because you started the game later than most. There are no tools to help deal with this adding to fustration.
Perhaps the issue has more to do with a particular community than the mechanics or theory behind grouping. On paper it sounds great "Team up with your friends and tackle great creatures of Evil!" When it works (mindset, schedule, etc) its great... but more times than not the experience is disappointing.
I doubt either side of this debate is 'right' but do hope it allows the developers to think about new ways to produce and deliver content that can at least appeal to more than one side at a time. That just sounds limiting giving the amount of time MMOs have had to mature up until this point.
It is so much work expressing oneself adequately via text. A pub would be way better!
It is unreasonable to compare RL to any game. RL is real, games are not. The suggestion that I should expect to group in an MMO because I must deal with others every day in RL is just silly. The comparison in fact is backwards. I can perform almost every task I do every day without a retinue despite the fact that I am constantly interacting with others in the massive real world. How often do you group centric folks lfg before you leave your home to do anything?
Comparing shooters to MMO’s is also troublesome. The two genres are way too different. The tactical chatter on a team is there and I bet that is what is enjoyed the most hence the analogy. Shooter maps are indeed popular when they allow and enable interesting tactics. The instances in MMOs vary little and are just that, instances. They are restrictive and anything but massive but I will concede that they can do a great job challenging a team of players. For this instances are ideal.
I want what Cephus wants. And I think I know what US wants, namely a game where one person can’t accomplish anything important by himself, not because he especially wants to prevent it but because if one player can do things then groups would find the same tasks too easy and he wants to experience challenging group dynamics at all times.
Solo players understand why people like to group. WE GET IT! BUT, if people can’t grasp why anyone would like to play a game like WoW without having to lfg all the time then they haven’t followed this thread or they are REALLY thick. I know why people like to group. Sometimes I do too. But usually not.
It’s the formal grouping mechanics that bother me if I have to subject myself to them when I don’t feel like comiting so much time. It’s not group, team or social efforts per se. If a big dinosaur comes out of the woods in the world somewhere and everyone nearby has to go fight it to defend the town I’d be all for that every time. Help down the dinosaur and collect points to cash in somewhere. I would enjoy collective play of this sort. Have battle lines where I can join the fight for as long as I like (pvp or pve) and I would be there. I could partake of all these things without having to give orders or take orders. It’s the freedom I want. There is no requirement upon developers to demand formal groups in order to engage in collective activities. It is the constant requirement to enter formal groups and then enter an instance that I reject. Not the cooperation.
It is so much work expressing oneself adequately via text. A pub would be way better!
Mmmm... beer...
It is unreasonable to compare RL to any game. RL is real, games are not. The suggestion that I should expect to group in an MMO because I must deal with others every day in RL is just silly. The comparison in fact is backwards. I can perform almost every task I do every day without a retinue despite the fact that I am constantly interacting with others in the massive real world. How often do you group centric folks lfg before you leave your home to do anything?
You're not expected to group because you deal with others every day, that's not the point. What I'm trying to say is that we deal with people every day, for good and bad, so why is it such a task when it comes to doing the same in an MMO? I understand you might just want to log in and do your own thing for a while, avoiding people, but I ask.. why log into a multiplayer game to do that? If you want a bit of solitude then play.. solitaire? It comes down to choice, sometimes I don't want to group up with people and don't want to hear inane chatter, so I just go play some Mass Effect 2 or something. Why make an MMO a single player experience simply because you want to play it without the other players around? There are plenty of single player games, why do we need to make a multiplayer game have the same options?
Comparing shooters to MMO’s is also troublesome. The two genres are way too different. The tactical chatter on a team is there and I bet that is what is enjoyed the most hence the analogy. Shooter maps are indeed popular when they allow and enable interesting tactics. The instances in MMOs vary little and are just that, instances. They are restrictive and anything but massive but I will concede that they can do a great job challenging a team of players. For this instances are ideal.
Instances suck. I hate them. I hate their invention. I hate their consistent use in every MMO since WoW. EverQuest had it right with dungeons - make the places huge and a maze of corridors and let the players carry on. There was no mad rush through a dungeon back then, because the boss was a rare spawn anyway, so he might be there.. or he might spawn in twelve hours time. People enjoyed the dungeons as dungeons, not some out of the way, instanced, rush to the boss mob, piece of crap that they design now. Oh, did I mention, I hate instances?
I want what Cephus wants. And I think I know what US wants, namely a game where one person can’t accomplish anything important by himself, not because he especially wants to prevent it but because if one player can do things then groups would find the same tasks too easy and he wants to experience challenging group dynamics at all times.
I grew up with RPG's, the table top kind, from basic D&D to Vampire The Masquerade, Shadowrun and Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. In all of them, nobody was a hero, nobody was the one person who could do everything, RPG's were built on people aiding each other against hopeless odds. Look at games like Neverwinter Nights or similar titles. You never play the game alone, you always have a group of computer controlled team mates with you. That's how RPG's should be, if you want to be the ultimate badass then play some single player game such as God of War.
Yes, you do know what I want.
Solo players understand why people like to group. WE GET IT! BUT, if people can’t grasp why anyone would like to play a game like WoW without having to lfg all the time then they haven’t followed this thread or they are REALLY thick. I know why people like to group. Sometimes I do too. But usually not.
Look back through my posts, I've never said soloing should be completely eradicated from MMO's, there should always be an option to solo. However, that option should be very limited. Even in original EverQuest you could solo, but only on low difficulty mobs, in out of the way places, or with specific classes. The Necromancer and Druid did quite well soloing.
What I don't agree with is changing the whole basis of MMO's so people can solo freely as much as they want. At their heart, MMO's are multiplayer games, people play them for the multiplayer aspect, even the soloers do. The MMO's released now, though, are 90% soloing to 10% multiplayer, especially in the levelling game. After that it does tend to switch the other way. Which again is stupid.
Look at the backlash on SW:TOR. That game is the current pinnacle of the solo MMO and people are hating it. I know, some people enjoy it, but almost every one who says they're enjoying it is doing so because of the story or single player feel, rather than the fact it's an MMO. Is it really that hard to see that MMO players don't want their genre to be just another single player game , but with a chat room?
It’s the formal grouping mechanics that bother me if I have to subject myself to them when I don’t feel like comiting so much time. It’s not group, team or social efforts per se. If a big dinosaur comes out of the woods in the world somewhere and everyone nearby has to go fight it to defend the town I’d be all for that every time. Help down the dinosaur and collect points to cash in somewhere. I would enjoy collective play of this sort. Have battle lines where I can join the fight for as long as I like (pvp or pve) and I would be there. I could partake of all these things without having to give orders or take orders. It’s the freedom I want. There is no requirement upon developers to demand formal groups in order to engage in collective activities. It is the constant requirement to enter formal groups and then enter an instance that I reject. Not the cooperation.
Did I mention I hate instances? From what you describe, that sounds like something Guild Wars 2 is going to be trying. People teaming together to fight something large, rather than 'officially' grouping up and entering an instance or whatever. I tend not to follow MMO's until they're released, so I only know the basics, but I remember seeing a video of some massive elemental that people were joining in to fight. I'm actually really curious as to how that's going to work, actually. What if you come in late when the thing is on 10 hitpoints? Does it respawn at some point? Does your game change to reflect the fact you killed it, despite only needing to remove 10 hitpoints - I hear there's a lot of phasing in that game.
To sum up: I'd like to keep MMO's as multiplayer games. Not exclusively, soloing should be a limited option, but groups and teams should be a major focus. There are thousands of single player games to every MMO created, there are plenty of options for the 'soloer', let's not allow MMO's to become just another single player game with a chatroom. I'm sure I speak for us all when I say we play MMO's because they offer something that single player games can't, and that's created by the players. Isolate the players, put them all in their own single player hamster ball, and I can't see any of us being happy with the outcome.
I am subbed to SWTOR (Havent logged on since January 12th). We are not hating SWTOR because there is no grouping (grouping does exist though its limited). We (or maybe I) am disappointed (not complaining) about SWTOR because it left nothing to the imagination. Granted I only made it to Nar Shardaa, but up until that point each planet was literally a litany of corridors with excellent story content. It was amazing, but at some point typically in the mid 20s you start to recognize the pattern and it becomes boring. There is no crafting (you send a NPC out and they return - and you have to PAY COIN for it!), There is no housing, There is world you can randomly explore, there is no cantina where you can hang and talk with other players. Essentially you get story and thats it. I honestly believe BioWare was trying to create their own 'version' of an MMO - which has attracted a specific audience, most of which I would say are new to MMOs. Growing the genre. Its just not for me and a bunch of others.
Kingdom of Amular has more exploration and MMO playstyle than SWTOR, unfortunately the S.A. Salvatore story doesnt fit well with the combat and world they created, but I digress...
I also would like to say, telling someone to go 'play single player games' is moot. We are obviously playing and enjoying MMOs for a reason, and most likely cannot be done with single player games. The experience no matter how you paint it is different than an MMO. Single player console RPGs dont have the same maturity, depth, and complexity that can be found (more) in MMOs. The social aspects are an added benefit. God of War or even Mass Effect 2 cannot compare to say Everquest as an RPG. The latter offers WAY more in terms of content and customization.
To set the records straight, I too do not want a single player MMO with social interaction. If I had to request I want more dynamic grouping mechanic that happens naturally and automatically.
And I pose one question. What does one do when they are low level and want to do content that requires a group but no one will either group or there is no one there? In this instance I would assume the player would have to miss the content, and its situations like that which I would look to remove or at least reduce.
And I am following Guild Wars 2 :-) I cant wait. And yes, they are trying to change the MMO formula (and I am thankful for the attempt) where there is no 'oranized' grouping. If you are fighting and someone else shows up the enemies get stronger and harder. This has the possibility of triggering a 'dynamic event' where something major happens to all invovled. Again, I havent seen this in action, but leans towards a better way to group than what we currently have. I'll definitely let you know as I will be there day 1.
I grew up with RPG's, the table top kind, from basic D&D to Vampire The Masquerade, Shadowrun and Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. In all of them, nobody was a hero, nobody was the one person who could do everything, RPG's were built on people aiding each other against hopeless odds. Look at games like Neverwinter Nights or similar titles. You never play the game alone, you always have a group of computer controlled team mates with you. That's how RPG's should be, if you want to be the ultimate badass then play some single player game such as God of War.
I was looking at this comment and came up with an idea that might pacify both sides. How about an MMO that has the usual trinity, difficult mobs, raids, dungeons, lots of group content very little solo content, etc.. basically a group-centric game. But then have a character class that is made purely for soloing. So with this character class the group mobs will be soloable, dungeons will be soloable but difficult, and so on. However, that class would never be able to group with other people, so would literally be a solo only class for those who enjoy it.
The class would also be very customizable, so you could select from the group classes and mix two or three of them, so you could have a fighter/cleric/wizard or something along those lines. Would that work? I'd imagine people would create two characters or more, one for the grouping side and one for the soloing side. Would people just solo it 'because they can', or would you find people jumping into the grouping game?
It would actually be a pretty nice experiment to see how the players gravitate to one side or the other, to truly find out what the players are looking for.
I grew up with RPG's, the table top kind, from basic D&D to Vampire The Masquerade, Shadowrun and Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. In all of them, nobody was a hero, nobody was the one person who could do everything, RPG's were built on people aiding each other against hopeless odds. Look at games like Neverwinter Nights or similar titles. You never play the game alone, you always have a group of computer controlled team mates with you. That's how RPG's should be, if you want to be the ultimate badass then play some single player game such as God of War.
I was looking at this comment and came up with an idea that might pacify both sides. How about an MMO that has the usual trinity, difficult mobs, raids, dungeons, lots of group content very little solo content, etc.. basically a group-centric game. But then have a character class that is made purely for soloing. So with this character class the group mobs will be soloable, dungeons will be soloable but difficult, and so on. However, that class would never be able to group with other people, so would literally be a solo only class for those who enjoy it.
The class would also be very customizable, so you could select from the group classes and mix two or three of them, so you could have a fighter/cleric/wizard or something along those lines. Would that work? I'd imagine people would create two characters or more, one for the grouping side and one for the soloing side. Would people just solo it 'because they can', or would you find people jumping into the grouping game?
It would actually be a pretty nice experiment to see how the players gravitate to one side or the other, to truly find out what the players are looking for.
I like the idea. It’s the flip side of my earlier thought to have a server with beefed up mobs that no single player could deal with (level for level of course).
However, I think you would need separate servers to prevent the super solo toons from influencing the activities of the grouping players as would surely happen if they were in the same world. “Hey superman, can you lend us a hand?” Not everyone would care but plenty would.
I also would like to say, telling someone to go 'play single player games' is moot. We are obviously playing and enjoying MMOs for a reason, and most likely cannot be done with single player games. The experience no matter how you paint it is different than an MMO. Single player console RPGs dont have the same maturity, depth, and complexity that can be found (more) in MMOs. The social aspects are an added benefit. God of War or even Mass Effect 2 cannot compare to say Everquest as an RPG. The latter offers WAY more in terms of content and customization.
To set the records straight, I too do not want a single player MMO with social interaction. If I had to request I want more dynamic grouping mechanic that happens naturally and automatically.
And I pose one question. What does one do when they are low level and want to do content that requires a group but no one will either group or there is no one there? In this instance I would assume the player would have to miss the content, and its situations like that which I would look to remove or at least reduce.
Too right about solo play. If the games cater to to solo play there is a reason. I left WoW for 2 years after playing it for 3 and soloing it was more fun when I returned because I could do more on my own. No one knows more about how people play an MMO than Blizzard. They never offer more than a glimpse into what their stats tell them but the data would be facinating to study.
Grouping in a lonely area can be a real issue absolutely. I ran into it in LOTRO trying to do the Fellowship group quests. I never blamed players though for not dropping their own objectives and racing to join me. This is a design problem. Pleasing everyone is downright impossible.
Grouping in a lonely area can be a real issue absolutely. I ran into it in LOTRO trying to do the Fellowship group quests. I never blamed players though for not dropping their own objectives and racing to join me. This is a design problem. Pleasing everyone is downright impossible.
I think the design problem with things like LOTRO fellowship quests were more to do with the quest chains than people not wanting to do them. The whole quest chain design is horribly flawed, it's like waiting for stars to align to get groups for them. You have to be on the right quest in the chain, someone else has to be on the same quest in the chain, if a group needs four or six then another few people need to be on the same quest in the chain, then those people need to be able to dedicate the time at that point, be the right classes to be able to progress through the quest (can't go without a healer!), be of appropriate level, etc, and those are just off the top of my head!
Quest chains are just another lean towards single player gaming that has no real place in an MMO.
I was looking at this comment and came up with an idea that might pacify both sides. How about an MMO that has the usual trinity, difficult mobs, raids, dungeons, lots of group content very little solo content, etc.. basically a group-centric game. But then have a character class that is made purely for soloing. So with this character class the group mobs will be soloable, dungeons will be soloable but difficult, and so on. However, that class would never be able to group with other people, so would literally be a solo only class for those who enjoy it.
The class would also be very customizable, so you could select from the group classes and mix two or three of them, so you could have a fighter/cleric/wizard or something along those lines. Would that work? I'd imagine people would create two characters or more, one for the grouping side and one for the soloing side. Would people just solo it 'because they can', or would you find people jumping into the grouping game?
It would actually be a pretty nice experiment to see how the players gravitate to one side or the other, to truly find out what the players are looking for.
I bet you'd find the majority of players going for the solo character.
Comments
This is a tired arguement and full of selfishness.
Everytime someone brings up grouping, you see this argument, like we are lonely desperate people who need someone to talk too, and we dont want you to ever log off, please dont go out with your wife!!! pleaseeee!!!!!!!! LOL... seriously, it's the worst strawman arguement, becaues it's very demeaning.
When I group, I usually dont talk much about RL, and I am certainly NOT hanging out. I'm playing a GROUP based game, hacking and slashing my way around the game world. The dynamics work very much like being on a sports team, you can do more as a group, and it should be that way.
Your arguement reeks of that selfish attitude I have talked about a lot here. You see grouping as a "responsibility", which is just dumb. You join a guild, and then get annoyed when they want to game with you, or talk to you! (gasp!). When you log in and someone wants to group with you, its like being at thier "beck and call"?? I really dont understand how you can think that. Why even join a guild, why even play an MMO, why not play Skrym or something. Do you like torturing yourself???
Then to wrap it all up, you want access to all the same gear and items that any group can get, only you want to do it solo. Selfish, selfish, selfish! This is why so many games are solo friendly all the way up to end game, there are no more grouping mechanics outside of raiding. And I blame players like you.
Since I turn chat off, that's wrong. I don't want a chat room. I want a living, growing world that is ever-changing, where I can, if I choose, play with other people or talk to other people, but I'm not forced to. Virtually no single player games can offer that. That's what most MMO players want and since that's where most of the money in the MMO genre comes from, of course that's who is going to get catered to.
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
I don't think you'll see those two things in an MMO, unless developers can stop themselves following this whole themepark design. You will never see a living, growing, ever-changing world in a themepark. It's all static mobs, static quests, instanced zones, etc. Also, themeparks cater more to the solo player until end game, which confuses the heck out of me, talk about confusing priorities there. So in most themeparks you're not going to be able to choose to play with other people.. well, you can choose to play with them, but they also make the same choice and 9 times out of 10 the solo player will be doing exactly that. Soloing.
So with that said, you're actually looking for a sandbox game with group content that you want to be able to solo. Good luck finding that one! Oh, and if you do, drop me a line, I'll come join you.
Usual S, having other people around is a great reason to play MMOs of course. I do interact with others. Especially via the auction house (which I bet you disapprove of if for no other reason than it encourages certain solo player types). But no, chat channels filled with personal stuff that is no concern of mine bugs me. I enter the MMO world to play the game not to extend my social life (Even saying “MMO” and “social life” in the same sentence gives me the creeps but I know this is not so for many.)
We want radically different experiences. Silence is no deterrent to me at all. If I’m playing a game I don’t need to be talking because I’m concentrating on what I’m doing. In fact, I find the solitude refreshing. MMO worlds are generally far larger than solo game worlds providing many quiet places to escape from the wacky cities with their revolting chatter. I play MMOs months after the release of new content with the expressed intent to miss the teaming masses as they move through new areas.
You want challenges that require a group to overcome. I appreciate that and accept that the content needs to be built with that sort of difficulty in mind. But it also sounds like challenging content isn’t all you desire. You want pals and buddies and relationships too. Perhaps you like the theory crafting and tactics and such as well. Are you a guild leader/officer type? Some players need to be the boss to have what for them is an optimal experience. There’s nothing wrong with that. Groups need to have structure. Most leaders know that they need to have loot conscripts to reinforce their groups. I know it would be best for you to have content loving, jovial “Ain’t we all having fun!” players all the time who are not loot motivated but you seem to know that COMPULTION is in fact required for you to get the numbers you need on a regular basis. These numbers can be guaranteed by inhibiting the best loot and thus creating the good old “Only groups get the best loot” deal. This is where my complaint concerning group content is grounded. It isn’t with group dynamics per se. It’s that crafting materials and other loot often get placed where I can never see them without being a card carrying guild/fellowship/ Teamster Union member complete with 5 hour schedules and regular meetings. Ay caramba!
Adalwullf, you sound angry old bean! No cause for that. Am I selfish indeed? I think not. Are you such an altruist that you sublimate yourself a collective whenever you play an MMO? I doubt it. You don’t chat about RL much? Me neither. But plenty of folks do. You don’t whine for help with the simplest of quests when all you really want is a chat buddy for company? Plenty of folks do that, too. My comment about going out with the wife was an attempt to illustrate my point about the evils (for me) of raid schedules. The content is such that you NEED such schedules to get the damn things accomplished. Cancel your raid sign ups repeatedly and see how often you EVER get to raid. This is fact of life in MMOs, chief. I can’t do it and don’t want to. That doesn’t make me selfish. It makes me a realist who doesn’t care to disappoint other players. You don’t think grouping is a responsibility when you are in a raid guild? What games have you played? If you are the main tank, geared in large part by the efforts of your guild, and you don’t show up on raid night, there will be trouble. This is not “just dumb”. It is a “RESPONSIBILTY”. You need to be there or you hurt the team. I eschew this responsibility in the interests of being independent, self-reliant and carefree. So sue me. I have assisted guildies on countless occasions. But when some players (and every large guild has them) expect you do stop whatever you are doing whenever they want company, yes, I feel like they see me as being at their beck and call. I am not. Sue me again. All of these experiences of mine are true many times over. I won’t pretend to know what your experiences have been but apparently no one in your guilds have been very demanding. I don’t play with any RL friends so perhaps that makes a big difference.
I don’t want or expect to do group content solo. I do expect gear that is as powerful as any in the game to be craft-able or some other way within my grasp. If there are no grouping mechanics outside of raiding, how is that my fault? Because I don’t’ want to do them? (I actually would be interested in sensible pick up style group world events) Now who is selfish? Who’s the one bemoaning the majority getting what they seem to want, as Cephus points out? You group centric people already have the whole enchilada in as much as you can get any gear and see all content.
Different server types can be the answer. I don’t know why there can’t be group content servers where the entire non-instanced world is too dangerous to be alone in. There could also be servers where anyone can get any gear be any means. The games themselves would not need to change that much.
MMOs should be 90% group content.
If I want to solo play I play a solo game. Interesting how that works.
MMOs should be flexible and cater to both types of content. Both for group and for solo. One is not more important than the other. MMO is not synonomous with grouping but an aspect of it. I like to solo but also enjoy the community of a game, perhaps buying merchandise from another player who is a crafter.
I am in complete agreement with SpliceMan. I dont play MMOs for social interaction and grouping, I play MMOs for their dynamic worlds and ever expanding content. Its fustrating when you can't do a particular dungeon because you need four people to do it. Im not saying remove that requirement Im saying add the flexibility of allowing me to do it alone, let me challenge myself. Why is choice so difficult to accept.
The problem with only playing group oriented games, I've found, is that you become limited only to the newest games or oldest games.
What I mean is, if you want to play, say Everquest starting a lvl 1 toon right now, it would be relatively impossible to find groups to help you with all the group combat. You can play EQ as intended, just as long as you have a max lvl toon in a guild and your gear is approximate to those who play regularly. If you are lucky in EQ you will have rl friends with max lvl toons who will pl you through all that group content, but I hardly call that 'grouping'. So EQ, unarguably a grouping game = fine for max toons who have spent years in the game, impossible for a new player.
So, the other alternative is to play a game in its first year of release, and play it at the median curve of everyone else (and 17 year olds level quick), so that there are always plenty of people your lvl lfg. But after that first year, and now its more like within the first 6 months, the mass of the population is passed the group content and there you are stuck at a lvl 18 newbie dungeon /shouting LFG. God help you if you are dps lfg and not a tank or healer in that situation.
In rl, I have a job that takes me away from my comp for weeks or months. It is relatively impossible for me to stay with the lvling herd. I come back home and my friends are max lvl. So I sit there /shouting LFG for hours and hours while they raid and adventure. The game may be 90% grouping - but is that how I am spending 90% of my time in the game? Nope, the game that is 90% grouping, means you will spend 90% of your time trying to get that group together - if you are behind the level curve.
On those nights it is hard for me to stomach 90% of the content being for groups, when I paid the same for my box and the same for my sub - the content should be made to cater to all our play styles. So, in the absence of being able to find a group for the lvl 25 dungeon in a game that's 3 years old, I'd like some solo content please, so I can max my toon and actually get to play with groups. Which, imo, isn't necessarily 90% of the content, but should be 90% of the fun.
Tired City of Heros/Villians/Going Rogue?
You have a weird opinion of MMO's, as if they're some massive social club where the soloer sits on the sidelines watching people interact, while grumbling about not wanting to join in. At its most basic level, an MMO is no different to a game like Counterstrike. People log on to the server, chat, shoot each other, have a laugh, log out again. The only difference with MMO's is that instead of shooting each other you're fighting computer controlled mobs, instead of the game being in short turns, it's a persistent world, instead of clans you get guilds. That's all it boils down to. Everything else is generated by the players with only the tools put in place by the developers.
This is the thing that confuses me, why people seem to think that soloing should be a large part of MMO's. As I said, at its most basic level an MMO is a multiplayer game akin to Counterstrike, hell the multiplayer is in the description, "Massively Multiplayer", so why people expect to be able to solo every aspect of the game is just mind boggling. It goes against the core design. That's the problem with a lot of the newly released MMO's, they're catering to the solo crowd, and as can be seen, none of them are holding subscribers for long. People don't really want an online single player game, especially one they have to pay monthly for. Argue if you like but the subscription numbers say otherwise.
That said, MMO's do need a part that is soloable, even in Counterstrike you could run around on your own shooting people. If you were facing an organized team, of course, you'd last 10 seconds at best, but on a random server it was pretty much a free for all and you could mostly get away with it. But at its core, an MMO is a multiplayer game and needs to focus more on that side of the gameplay than worrying about Joe from Kansas who wants to be able to solo Boss Mob #1657.
Which brings me to your other point about the gear in game being available to the soloer, either through crafting or some other way. Now, for me, loot has always just been a pleasant by-product of doing group content, it's not something I long for or even aim for. As long as the game is fun then loot is just a reward for doing well. So I'm not bothered either way, however, I would argue on some areas of that depending on where that loot came from. For example, if you expect to be crafting the equivalent of a breastplate that dropped from the God of Thunder, then.. um. No. It's a God. He has better stuff than you can make. End of story.
If all solo players really want is an expanding world, then the increase in DLC these days should suffice, right? Like original Mass Effect 2, that game expanded quite heavily over time with all the DLC that came out. If it's a chat room or people around you that you like, then why are you complaining if they're asshats or demanding or petty. People are people, there are good ones and there are bad ones. Do you hate going out into the world because of all the asshats out there? Or do you just ignore them and focus on the good ones? Why would things be any different in an MMO? If you can't handle the fact that people are going to be in the game and some aren't going to be to your liking, what are you doing there in the first place?
Expanding on my previous post. I got to thinking about what caused all this solo in MMO nonsense and thought about World of Warcraft. Every developer since its release has tried copying the WoW formula, with soloable to level cap, but didn't look at what the actual players were doing in WoW.
Every time I read a post about WoW it's along the lines of, "People are just sitting in cities queueing up for dungeons all day.", or, "People are rushing to level cap.", or, "People are just doing warzones over and over again.". So what they're actually doing is ignoring all the solo content and participating in the group content. And despite all the posts from soloers saying a group-centric game wouldn't work, this is actually working on a massive scale to the number of 10 million people logging in.
You think they've held 10 million subscibers purely on their solo questing? That people have remade alt after alt to follow that awesome path to max level, only to do it all over again? No. People like the multiplayer dungeons, the pvp content, the massive raids, they don't even bother with the solo content anymore.
And this is despite the fact that the multiplayer content is the same thing over and over again, the same raid, the same dungeon. It reminds me of my previous post, regarding Counterstrike. I remember a map on there which I think was called Dust. It was so popular that some servers hosted only that map and nothing else. Why? Because when you throw in the players it opens up into some interesting gameplay, with multiple choke points, multiple lines of attack, objectives to reach, and so on.
This is what appeals with repeated dungeon or raid runs. Every one is going to be different, even if only slightly, it's enough difference to make each run unique. This is the complete opposite to content developed for solo players, as it has to be perfectly honed to make it possible for the single character to go through it. Every encounter has to be prepared, every path predetermined.
And that's my point. As much as the newly released games are catering to soloers, it's not what the vast majority of MMO players want. The WoW subscriber numbers speak for themselves.
If somebody wants to play solo in mmo, let it be. Same goes for people who like group play. It should be freedom of choice.
That is stupid. That implies that the choice is made in a vacuum. Its not.
Those are some excellent points, and when I think about it, the WoW players always talk about raids, never the solo content. The other thing I hear about are BG's, which is also group play.
I just got an idea, what if the solo content was instanced, instead of the other way around?!
We could have raids, world pvp, invasions from NPC hordes, all kinds of action. The soloers, who dont like to be bothered, can go do instance dungeons, and instance quests, kinda like CoH.
Now that seems fair to me, why build a whole world for a soloer, give them instances and keep them away from us...HAH!
The underlying problem is the structure of (current) MMOs. The whole 'solo' just to get to max level so you can group/raid is broken. People who like to solo get to max and become bored because they MAY not like to raid/group (depends on the player) and those who prefer grouping complain they have to trog through solo content to get to raid/grouping (again depends on the player).
It makes more logical sense to just have content and give players the option to play it how they want. Someone wanting to solo a zone should have no bearing on someone who wants to group. To say an MMO is one over the other based on the fact that its in the name is naive, it doesnt cover the experience given. Devs need to figure this out.
In terms of groups, I never understood why they dont allow players to START at max level. What is the point of making someone go through 'level' content if they dont want to or enjoy it?
MMOs need to change their structure to attempt to meet the various playstyles that are nearly impossible to predict. As long as they develop something that is fun and involving on all levels, it could very well paint a path to success.
The question is who is willing to take that risk, especially considering how fickle we are as a genre ;-) (myself included).
First, I think you misunderstood UsualSuspect, and I think your new to MMO's, in fact you MUST be.
You cannot "just let players play it how they want", because there are system mechanics involved. Mobs that are soloable, will be steamrolled by groups, which creates imbalance.
How would you make quests viable to both the soloer and the group? You cant, it is impossible, that is the problem.
Heh , why are people so selfish now a days in the MMO world? Seriously if you think a Dev should work and publish a MMO solely on what you like , then I got news for you buddy , don't play any freaking MMO's and stick to consoles or standalone games.
WoW did a good job with balancing group Vs Solo , but Atlantica Online is alot better with the guild/alliance oriented instances (Just a shame it's cash shop intensive , otherwise this game would of been off the charts).
MMO population changed alot in recent years , it's all about the loot and selfish personal fame , it's so foolish that it's pathetic to watch.
Probably why nothing appeals to me besides EVE-Online and some upcoming releases like PlanetSide 2 and End of Nations , where coop is key to heavy advancement but where solo play can advance you a little.
Ironic that in the 90's with Ultima Online , Nexus TK , and a few others ,were the fathers of the MMO world and I can still remember being the age of 14 and people learning me the ropes and as time went by in that game I showed them tactics on how to kill bosses and such. Everyone acted mature back in the 90's , braggers/smack talkers were almost non existent , the communities back then were to die for , it felt like you were actually part of something special. Alot of good memories that seems like a lifetime ago , such a pity.
Perhaps and I appologize for that. Good catch that I am new to MMOs, I am fresh blood ;-) I come from the console side of the house and heavy RPG player... but being older I like the complexity and challenge MMOs present. Console RPGs (today) are too simple and straight forward for my tastes. I love the deep mechanisms of crafting, skill building, and tactical combat as well as the fact that MMOs give the experience of being in a 'dynamic' world. I believe that is why people who like to solo, dont 'just want to play solo RPGs' Been there and done that. I'm just asking for an option.
Understand and agree with the problem. Mobs (or enemies hanging around in groups) I dont think is the right approach. I solo group content all the time, the issue is I cant handle 6 people at once (at current level) - and yes I like the uncanny challenging odds of survival. Its what I play for.
Why not change how mobs operate in MMOs? Have them perform actions or execute some repeatable task. A group goes in, they tackle them head on...taking what comes at them. Solo goes in, I take them one by one slowly thinning them out.
This is just a suggestion, perhaps naive, but at least paints a scenario or potential new direction to take MMOs in. I still stand behind the fact that people should have the option to play how they want. Forcing players either way isnt going to be viable in the long term.
My thoughts about grouping (its not an issue) have been said many times before in this great thread. Its not that I am OPPOSED to it (i.e. get rid of it all together), its how its conducted (at least in the games) Im playing now. I enjoy the combat. But when you group with strangers you get all sorts of playstyles including those who want to rush to get to the end boss. Right now there is no way (that I am aware of) to mitigate this. I either have to follow (or lead) the group or not do the content. Or looking for group mates at lower levels because you started the game later than most. There are no tools to help deal with this adding to fustration.
Perhaps the issue has more to do with a particular community than the mechanics or theory behind grouping. On paper it sounds great "Team up with your friends and tackle great creatures of Evil!" When it works (mindset, schedule, etc) its great... but more times than not the experience is disappointing.
I doubt either side of this debate is 'right' but do hope it allows the developers to think about new ways to produce and deliver content that can at least appeal to more than one side at a time. That just sounds limiting giving the amount of time MMOs have had to mature up until this point.
I look forward to what Guild Wars 2 has to offer.
It is so much work expressing oneself adequately via text. A pub would be way better!
It is unreasonable to compare RL to any game. RL is real, games are not. The suggestion that I should expect to group in an MMO because I must deal with others every day in RL is just silly. The comparison in fact is backwards. I can perform almost every task I do every day without a retinue despite the fact that I am constantly interacting with others in the massive real world. How often do you group centric folks lfg before you leave your home to do anything?
Comparing shooters to MMO’s is also troublesome. The two genres are way too different. The tactical chatter on a team is there and I bet that is what is enjoyed the most hence the analogy. Shooter maps are indeed popular when they allow and enable interesting tactics. The instances in MMOs vary little and are just that, instances. They are restrictive and anything but massive but I will concede that they can do a great job challenging a team of players. For this instances are ideal.
I want what Cephus wants. And I think I know what US wants, namely a game where one person can’t accomplish anything important by himself, not because he especially wants to prevent it but because if one player can do things then groups would find the same tasks too easy and he wants to experience challenging group dynamics at all times.
Solo players understand why people like to group. WE GET IT! BUT, if people can’t grasp why anyone would like to play a game like WoW without having to lfg all the time then they haven’t followed this thread or they are REALLY thick. I know why people like to group. Sometimes I do too. But usually not.
It’s the formal grouping mechanics that bother me if I have to subject myself to them when I don’t feel like comiting so much time. It’s not group, team or social efforts per se. If a big dinosaur comes out of the woods in the world somewhere and everyone nearby has to go fight it to defend the town I’d be all for that every time. Help down the dinosaur and collect points to cash in somewhere. I would enjoy collective play of this sort. Have battle lines where I can join the fight for as long as I like (pvp or pve) and I would be there. I could partake of all these things without having to give orders or take orders. It’s the freedom I want. There is no requirement upon developers to demand formal groups in order to engage in collective activities. It is the constant requirement to enter formal groups and then enter an instance that I reject. Not the cooperation.
To sum up: I'd like to keep MMO's as multiplayer games. Not exclusively, soloing should be a limited option, but groups and teams should be a major focus. There are thousands of single player games to every MMO created, there are plenty of options for the 'soloer', let's not allow MMO's to become just another single player game with a chatroom. I'm sure I speak for us all when I say we play MMO's because they offer something that single player games can't, and that's created by the players. Isolate the players, put them all in their own single player hamster ball, and I can't see any of us being happy with the outcome.
Great comments...
I am subbed to SWTOR (Havent logged on since January 12th). We are not hating SWTOR because there is no grouping (grouping does exist though its limited). We (or maybe I) am disappointed (not complaining) about SWTOR because it left nothing to the imagination. Granted I only made it to Nar Shardaa, but up until that point each planet was literally a litany of corridors with excellent story content. It was amazing, but at some point typically in the mid 20s you start to recognize the pattern and it becomes boring. There is no crafting (you send a NPC out and they return - and you have to PAY COIN for it!), There is no housing, There is world you can randomly explore, there is no cantina where you can hang and talk with other players. Essentially you get story and thats it. I honestly believe BioWare was trying to create their own 'version' of an MMO - which has attracted a specific audience, most of which I would say are new to MMOs. Growing the genre. Its just not for me and a bunch of others.
Kingdom of Amular has more exploration and MMO playstyle than SWTOR, unfortunately the S.A. Salvatore story doesnt fit well with the combat and world they created, but I digress...
I also would like to say, telling someone to go 'play single player games' is moot. We are obviously playing and enjoying MMOs for a reason, and most likely cannot be done with single player games. The experience no matter how you paint it is different than an MMO. Single player console RPGs dont have the same maturity, depth, and complexity that can be found (more) in MMOs. The social aspects are an added benefit. God of War or even Mass Effect 2 cannot compare to say Everquest as an RPG. The latter offers WAY more in terms of content and customization.
To set the records straight, I too do not want a single player MMO with social interaction. If I had to request I want more dynamic grouping mechanic that happens naturally and automatically.
And I pose one question. What does one do when they are low level and want to do content that requires a group but no one will either group or there is no one there? In this instance I would assume the player would have to miss the content, and its situations like that which I would look to remove or at least reduce.
And I am following Guild Wars 2 :-) I cant wait. And yes, they are trying to change the MMO formula (and I am thankful for the attempt) where there is no 'oranized' grouping. If you are fighting and someone else shows up the enemies get stronger and harder. This has the possibility of triggering a 'dynamic event' where something major happens to all invovled. Again, I havent seen this in action, but leans towards a better way to group than what we currently have. I'll definitely let you know as I will be there day 1.
I was looking at this comment and came up with an idea that might pacify both sides. How about an MMO that has the usual trinity, difficult mobs, raids, dungeons, lots of group content very little solo content, etc.. basically a group-centric game. But then have a character class that is made purely for soloing. So with this character class the group mobs will be soloable, dungeons will be soloable but difficult, and so on. However, that class would never be able to group with other people, so would literally be a solo only class for those who enjoy it.
The class would also be very customizable, so you could select from the group classes and mix two or three of them, so you could have a fighter/cleric/wizard or something along those lines. Would that work? I'd imagine people would create two characters or more, one for the grouping side and one for the soloing side. Would people just solo it 'because they can', or would you find people jumping into the grouping game?
It would actually be a pretty nice experiment to see how the players gravitate to one side or the other, to truly find out what the players are looking for.
I like the idea. It’s the flip side of my earlier thought to have a server with beefed up mobs that no single player could deal with (level for level of course).
However, I think you would need separate servers to prevent the super solo toons from influencing the activities of the grouping players as would surely happen if they were in the same world. “Hey superman, can you lend us a hand?” Not everyone would care but plenty would.
Too right about solo play. If the games cater to to solo play there is a reason. I left WoW for 2 years after playing it for 3 and soloing it was more fun when I returned because I could do more on my own. No one knows more about how people play an MMO than Blizzard. They never offer more than a glimpse into what their stats tell them but the data would be facinating to study.
Grouping in a lonely area can be a real issue absolutely. I ran into it in LOTRO trying to do the Fellowship group quests. I never blamed players though for not dropping their own objectives and racing to join me. This is a design problem. Pleasing everyone is downright impossible.
I think the design problem with things like LOTRO fellowship quests were more to do with the quest chains than people not wanting to do them. The whole quest chain design is horribly flawed, it's like waiting for stars to align to get groups for them. You have to be on the right quest in the chain, someone else has to be on the same quest in the chain, if a group needs four or six then another few people need to be on the same quest in the chain, then those people need to be able to dedicate the time at that point, be the right classes to be able to progress through the quest (can't go without a healer!), be of appropriate level, etc, and those are just off the top of my head!
Quest chains are just another lean towards single player gaming that has no real place in an MMO.
I bet you'd find the majority of players going for the solo character.
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