Wasn't that vanguards claim to fame. Remind me again how did that do? Tank and spank grouping is dead.
Vanguard crashed for completely unrelated reasons to this. If thats your argument, there are plenty of games that were perfectly soloable that have failed as well.
If I had a nickel, yes a single nickel, for every time I've heard (insert your point of view) had nothing to do with the down fall of (insert game) it was (insert this bug or that flaw). I'd be pretty rich.
Static tank and spank grouping is dead. Dynamic events that bring people together are the future.
If I had a nickel for every time someone said "a duck is a bird" I'd be rich too. Funny how often the truth goes around.
Duck is the common name for a large number of species in the Anatidaefamily ofbirds, which also includes swans and geese.
If the question is, "Why don't developers do this?" the answer is pretty simple. Investors, developers and publishers have reason to believe they'll get more return on their investment by developing the games they are developing. The return is money, or satisfaction in the game they've made.
As far as failing hard, most MMORPG today lose the bulk of their lost subs when the next new MMO comes out. So the reason they are failing is that they are making enough money to attract more development in the same genre of games. There are certainly more games than ever releasing. I don't think this is a bad thing, regardless of the focus on single player or group game play.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
It's called Final Fantasy 11, dude. And it's not as popular are more solo-oriented games for a reason. It does have a decent-sized niche audience, or at least it did at one point. I haven't really kept up with it so I don't know how well it aged, if well at all. But FF14 was heavy on parties as well, and that was one of its many criticisms.
Perhaps drowned out by all it's other issues, it's easy to forget that. But that the new revamp of it is made to be more solo-friendly should clue you in on one of the bones of contention people have had with its systems, regardless of the vocal minority still clamouring for the "good old days" when you couldn't piss without 4 other people to help.
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
The real reason forced grouping is gone is because the gamers have changed. Think about it back when MMO's first started the average gamer for mmo's was 25 plus now its 12+ and the count has gone from 10 to 900+ so the amount of gamers has changed the forced grouping. To me tho the thing that killed forced grouping was the Tank/Healer needed for al groups this is not gaming if all you need is a tank and healer and what ever else yes in WoW a group just needs a good tank and healer the rest can be what ever and I have seen this done cause I have played alot of WoW.
But to me let people make there groups of what ever class and go play I hate always being a tank or healer but anytime I am anything else I cant get a group for nothing if I am a Tank or HEaler you always get groups. This to me is a major turn off cause my favorite class sense pen and paper was a bard and when EQ1 came out and had a bard I was happy my wife played a cleric I was a bard we duoed alot of content and when it came to groups I was left standing around while she was off doing more content. Later I roled a tank a Shadowknight and my wife contenuied to paly her cleric when I got to her lvl I always had groups. See this is wrong I think to many people have this mind set that to do content you have to have a tank and healer and thats not true except the games dev's make them this way so thats why they are so do away with this tank healer crap and let us play what we want.
Sherman's Gaming
Youtube Content creator for The Elder Scrolls Online
If you as a player dont want to be forced to group...go play a different game and a different genre. MMO's as a genre are meant to have worlds and adversaries much larger than you. If you dont like that you cant defeat something alone...too bad so sad. MMO's have taken a horrible turn in the last 8 years focusing on solo players....this is a useless endeavor that has seen nothing but failure and has warped the MMO Genre into something that does not even resemble what it truly is or is meant to be. You want a Good Solo game go play skyrim, you want to reach the End fast 200 hours or less go play any Single player RPG. If you want to make friends, Defeat foes Many times stronger than you, Live and interact in a world that is truly virtual, and actually have a leveling experience that takes Months or Years, not days. Then Play a real MMO. The last Real MMO that way was Everquest, and something was lost since then, something that needs to come back into the MMO space to make it great again.
It's great that you're able to enjoy a shallow experience, but most of us see right through how shallow MMORPG travel is and want our games to be filled with deeper content.
As always, more shallow than running a dungeon for 100th time for tokens?
But seriosly, it boils down to what you expect "gameplay" to be and how it is implemented in a particular game.
As of expectations, it is quite bold to assume that the majority experiences gameplay the way you do, no offense
Blanket statements that killing a monster is gameplay, but getting from A to B is not, do not help...
As for implementation, that is a huge issue, riding s not a huge achievment it was before, there are no 10 minute corpse runs you have to be afraid of and know the map, teleports everywhere, zones are small an crowded (in Rift in particular the travelling issue devolved into host of lowlevel monsters dismounting and slowing you down...).
Compare that to say Runescape, where inventory limitations and distance you have to travel and teleport plays a huge role in the game, shortcuts and teleports are rewarded from quests, achievments and minigame rewards, and can save you literally MONTHS in the long run
So if you were reading a book, and the Cliff Notes were available. Would you just read the cliff notes? After all by your logic it removes all the uncessary fluff from the story. I mean who wants to experience a world that was crafted from someones imagination, lets just get to the nitty gritty action parts...
Coming soon. The Lord of the Rings The Abridged version.
Page 1, "Frodo gets the Ring",
Page 2: Frodo drops the ring into Mt. Doom saving the world.
Is LOTR a trilogy which forces you to read about every single moment of every single day of the trip to Mordor?
No.
Because that would be dumb.
Only the events which have narrative significance -- which provide content -- are written when the author writes the book.
(Although with LOTR in particular I do feel there are many "filler" scenes which fail to have much narrative significance which could have been removed to make the trilogy better.)
But yes, I do read books the same way I play games in that regard. Empty "filler" content is considered bad writing in books and bad game design in games. In neither situation is it desirable.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
As always, more shallow than running a dungeon for 100th time for tokens?
But seriosly, it boils down to what you expect "gameplay" to be and how it is implemented in a particular game.
As of expectations, it is quite bold to assume that the majority experiences gameplay the way you do, no offense
Blanket statements that killing a monster is gameplay, but getting from A to B is not, do not help...
As for implementation, that is a huge issue, riding s not a huge achievment it was before, there are no 10 minute corpse runs you have to be afraid of and know the map, teleports everywhere, zones are small an crowded (in Rift in particular the travelling issue devolved into host of lowlevel monsters dismounting and slowing you down...).
Compare that to say Runescape, where inventory limitations and distance you have to travel and teleport plays a huge role in the game, shortcuts and teleports are rewarded from quests, achievments and minigame rewards, and can save you literally MONTHS in the long run
Yes of course it's shallower than running a dungeon! Traveling just involves avoiding mobs. Dungeoning involves multiple group members working in concert, managing threat, healing, maximizing a rotation of abilities, knowing when to use cooldowns, dealing with specific mob mechanics -- and also still worrying about mob aggro radius.
So yes, travel is shallower. By far. It has the single trivial element of skill/mastery that travel involves, and many more.
You're the only one using blanket statements that monster killing is gameplay but traveling isn't. I specifically went out of my way not to use false absolutes when I conceded that travel involves a trivial speck of gameplay. It's not zero gameplay, but it's clearly much shallower than other types of gameplay which exist in MMORPGs.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
why not have an etherial world where you portal into...sometimes theres something in there..waiting for you.. and sometimes not...you hit the other portal and you are where you wanted to go or you die.
The argument that someone doesn't belong in an MMO because they don't group is really bad I feel. Those people still often enjoy the company of others in zone chat or guild chat or like the feeling of being in a world with other people.
Sometimes I'm working on a project on the job or doing something on my own, that doesn't mean I need to be cast away to a deserted island because I'm not in everyone else's face, it also doesn't mean I don't like people around me. It just means I'm doing something on my own.
Yes of course it's shallower than running a dungeon! Traveling just involves avoiding mobs. Dungeoning involves multiple group members working in concert, managing threat, healing, maximizing a rotation of abilities, knowing when to use cooldowns, dealing with specific mob mechanics -- and also still worrying about mob aggro radius.
So yes, travel is shallower. By far. It has the single trivial element of skill/mastery that travel involves, and many more.
You're the only one using blanket statements that monster killing is gameplay but traveling isn't. I specifically went out of my way not to use false absolutes when I conceded that travel involves a trivial speck of gameplay. It's not zero gameplay, but it's clearly much shallower than other types of gameplay which exist in MMORPGs.
You once again read only the first part of my post, let me counter with a blanket statement
Originally posted by Axehilt
As for walking a minute to a dungeon? That has nothing to do with gamers being lazy and everything to do with not wanting to waste their time with non-gameplay.
Anyways, the way you descibe raiding, which is the favored facet of current games, travel and exploration can be described too, but the game system has to support it, like i mentioned, not sideline it on purpose so some blokes can get angry that they have to spend a minute extra before getting epic lootz
I mean where does this sense of unfairness come from, that we see "overaggroing" as a part of the gameplay, skill and deep, but forgetting you key and having to travel 5 minutes to town-bank as filler and waste of time?
The argument that someone doesn't belong in an MMO because they don't group is really bad I feel. Those people still often enjoy the company of others in zone chat or guild chat or like the feeling of being in a world with other people.
Sometimes I'm working on a project on the job or doing something on my own, that doesn't mean I need to be cast away to a deserted island because I'm not in everyone else's face, it also doesn't mean I don't like people around me. It just means I'm doing something on my own.
Someone who doesn't Group doesn't belong in an MMO. You, sometimes working on a project or doing something on your own doesn't mean you don't group. It means sometimes you like some "me" time. That is acceptable. But people who don't like to group and don't group don't belong in an MMO because that is the basis of the genre to begin with. However that isn't what the genre has become in recent years, but what it is truly meant to be. In a post on another thread i stated that MMO's by a standard should be 90% Group content, even having to kill most of the mobs, and 10% Solo Content. Have that content there for your "me" time but the name of the game is meant to be Play with everyone don't just observe them in passing 24/7. I would even venture to say a more acceptable ratio would be 75% grouping and 25% Solo. Its not Massive Solo World it is Massive Multiplayer world after all.
The argument that someone doesn't belong in an MMO because they don't group is really bad I feel. Those people still often enjoy the company of others in zone chat or guild chat or like the feeling of being in a world with other people.
Sometimes I'm working on a project on the job or doing something on my own, that doesn't mean I need to be cast away to a deserted island because I'm not in everyone else's face, it also doesn't mean I don't like people around me. It just means I'm doing something on my own.
Someone who doesn't Group doesn't belong in an MMO.
I guess EQ isn't an MMO then. Because many classes solo'd back then, including me on my druid and necro. We even got spells and mobs specifically targeted at soloing. Even the description of classes in EQ mentioned if they could solo or group well. There was never a need to group if you didn't want to, many classes could solo to max level.
The argument that someone doesn't belong in an MMO because they don't group is really bad I feel. Those people still often enjoy the company of others in zone chat or guild chat or like the feeling of being in a world with other people.
Sometimes I'm working on a project on the job or doing something on my own, that doesn't mean I need to be cast away to a deserted island because I'm not in everyone else's face, it also doesn't mean I don't like people around me. It just means I'm doing something on my own.
Someone who doesn't Group doesn't belong in an MMO.
I guess EQ isn't an MMO then. Because many classes solo'd back then, including me on my druid and necro. We even got spells and mobs specifically targeted at soloing.
If you are gonna respond, respond to the whole post, making a post against a small portion is like reviewing a movie in the first 5 minutes. The whole post explained the reasoning and it was just.
I too played a Druid in EQ, and While I could Solo Effectively and even Quad Kite, I grouped plenty with people along the way because for even the classes that could solo effectively the game was still more difficult Alone than together. And that is the way it should be.
If you are gonna respond, respond to the whole post, making a post against a small portion is like reviewing a movie in the first 5 minutes. The whole post explained the reasoning and it was just.
I to played a Druid in EQ, and While I could Solo Effectively and even Quad Kite, I grouped plenty with people along the way because for even the classes that could solo effectively the game was still more difficult Alone than together. And that is the way it should be.
I picked out the part that was not just, the idea that someone who solos doesn't belong in an MMO is not just at all. Let people decide for themselves what they want to do, I have never ever heard a developer say that someone who solos doesn't belong in their MMO, what gives you the authority to do so? Because you group doesn't mean everyone should, it's not your call to decide what others should or shouldn't do, leave that to the peoople who created the world in the first place and the people who paid for their game. The minute you pay for other people's game and gametime is the time you can decide how others should play, until then you shouldn't decide how others should or shouldn't play.
Hopefully I'm not reiterating too much - I only browsed the first page and skipped the rest.
My problem with the current popular paradigm is that developers are splitting the game content down content lines. Questing and crafting are solo, pve instances and pvp are grouped. The vast majority of the games I've played use this model. What I would prefer to see is that while all four of these content types can be solo'd, it's highly inefficient when compared to doing them in a group (including crafting).
If you are gonna respond, respond to the whole post, making a post against a small portion is like reviewing a movie in the first 5 minutes. The whole post explained the reasoning and it was just.
I to played a Druid in EQ, and While I could Solo Effectively and even Quad Kite, I grouped plenty with people along the way because for even the classes that could solo effectively the game was still more difficult Alone than together. And that is the way it should be.
I picked out the part that was not just, the idea that someone who solos doesn't belong in an MMO is not just at all. Let people decide for themselves what they want to do, I have never ever heard a developer say that someone who solos doesn't belong in their MMO, what gives you the authority to do so? Because you group doesn't mean everyone should, it's not your call to decide what others should or shouldn't do, leave that to the peoople who created the world in the first place.
The players who forced MMO's down the path of Solo Catering are a plague. And for your information a Developer Has gone on record saying that "MMO's are for playing WITH people and that if you want to Solo there are better Solo games. While this may seem very obvious to most players you find that too many companies try to be everything to everyone including a great single player experience and end up missing the mark on being a good MMO."
His name is Dave Georgeson Creative Director of the Entire EQ Franchise.
Mind you at no point do i say there should be NO Solo content, I stated that Group oriented content should make up the majority of the game, and have far less solo content but still HAVE IT. People who dont play with others, dont belong in an MMO, that is what an MMO is for to PLAY WITH OTHERS not just around or near, or relatively close or safely distant.
His name is Dave Georgeson Creative Director of the Entire EQ Franchise.
Mcquaid was the developer in charge of EQ, and his team decided soloing was a viable mechanic, that's why we had spells and abilities to do so. Again, it's not your call to decide how people should enjoy their game, you're not paying for their game. It's their money and they decide how they want to use it.
Hopefully I'm not reiterating too much - I only browsed the first page and skipped the rest.
My problem with the current popular paradigm is that developers are splitting the game content down content lines. Questing and crafting are solo, pve instances and pvp are grouped. The vast majority of the games I've played use this model. What I would prefer to see is that while all four of these content types can be solo'd, it's highly inefficient when compared to doing them in a group (including crafting).
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Because most people dont want to rely on other people from a progressing perspective.
When I look back into my soloing PvP history in any MMO, going battlegrounds with random people - no offense but its fact that you could throw at least 90% in the garbage.
And imagine people with this mentality in your group and then the content would be ONLY progressable if anybody does his part? You can not really combine anyonymity (people out of a guild for example) and team-based gameplay.
Too many egos out there. Way too many.
Nononono, precious freetime no thanks.
PS: Forcing somebody leads only to the counterpart - people let go of something over a longer time period.
His name is Dave Georgeson Creative Director of the Entire EQ Franchise.
Mcquaid was the developer in charge of EQ, and his team decided soloing was a viable mechanic, that's why we had spells and abilities to do so. Again, it's not your call to decide how people should enjoy their game, you're not paying for their game. It's their money and they decide how they want to use it.
Mcquaid is a hasbeen, he developed EQ along with a team of many other folks, EQ did not have Soloing as a truly viable mechanic as you said, Only certain classes could even do it well. The game was more than 80% Group oriented as an MMO should be. And Mcquaid has NOT worked for SOE in Forever Dave Georgeson has been Creative Director for EQ and EQ2 since Mcquaid left and He is the Creative Director and developer for the entire Franchise, Go do some research. And you are wrong it is my call to say that people should group, because it was the solo whiners that forced devs down the path in the first place, My voice is to counteract them and bring MMO's back to glory. Pay close attention to any SOLO oriented MMO that has come out in the last 8 years....ALL Failures. MMO's are not meant for Solo catering plain and simple.
A little after 9 minutes Dave Georgeson states that MMO Devs go after the single player experience and he doesnt know why. And states MMO's are not about that!
Its not forced but do Try TERA, grouping is so important in that game to the point that leveling in a group from level 1 to 60 Is a lot faster, be it a group of 2 people or more. Almost everyone in TERA groups up to do even the normal quests which is pretty nice to see.
You once again read only the first part of my post, let me counter with a blanket statement
Anyways, the way you descibe raiding, which is the favored facet of current games, travel and exploration can be described too, but the game system has to support it, like i mentioned, not sideline it on purpose so some blokes can get angry that they have to spend a minute extra before getting epic lootz
I mean where does this sense of unfairness come from, that we see "overaggroing" as a part of the gameplay, skill and deep, but forgetting you key and having to travel 5 minutes to town-bank as filler and waste of time?
Well I ignored the "expectations" bit because expectations have zero bearing on whether Feature A is deeper or shallower than Feature B.
I'm not making blanket statements, except in discussing typical MMORPGs (where travel is quite obviously shallower (by a lot) than dungeon/raid gameplay.)
If we start talking about non-typical MMORPGs like Puzzle PIrates where the very act of travel involves deep gameplay systems, then we can agree that travel is not automatically shallow by definition. But typical MMORPGs are what's being discussed, and in all the existing major MMORPGs the travel system(s) are shallower than the combat system(s).
There's no sense of "unfairness" being discussed here. It's very simple: gamers want gameplay and depth. Travel fails to provide much gameplay or depth. Combat provides considerably more, due to so many different systems being involved. Could it be even deeper? Absolutely! But A+B+C+D (combat) is clearly going to be deeper than A alone (travel).
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Comments
They're also delicious!
If the solo crowd was winning, we wouldn't see dungeons and raids. Just saying.
If the question is, "Why don't developers do this?" the answer is pretty simple. Investors, developers and publishers have reason to believe they'll get more return on their investment by developing the games they are developing. The return is money, or satisfaction in the game they've made.
As far as failing hard, most MMORPG today lose the bulk of their lost subs when the next new MMO comes out. So the reason they are failing is that they are making enough money to attract more development in the same genre of games. There are certainly more games than ever releasing. I don't think this is a bad thing, regardless of the focus on single player or group game play.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
It's called Final Fantasy 11, dude. And it's not as popular are more solo-oriented games for a reason. It does have a decent-sized niche audience, or at least it did at one point. I haven't really kept up with it so I don't know how well it aged, if well at all. But FF14 was heavy on parties as well, and that was one of its many criticisms.
Perhaps drowned out by all it's other issues, it's easy to forget that. But that the new revamp of it is made to be more solo-friendly should clue you in on one of the bones of contention people have had with its systems, regardless of the vocal minority still clamouring for the "good old days" when you couldn't piss without 4 other people to help.
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
The real reason forced grouping is gone is because the gamers have changed. Think about it back when MMO's first started the average gamer for mmo's was 25 plus now its 12+ and the count has gone from 10 to 900+ so the amount of gamers has changed the forced grouping. To me tho the thing that killed forced grouping was the Tank/Healer needed for al groups this is not gaming if all you need is a tank and healer and what ever else yes in WoW a group just needs a good tank and healer the rest can be what ever and I have seen this done cause I have played alot of WoW.
But to me let people make there groups of what ever class and go play I hate always being a tank or healer but anytime I am anything else I cant get a group for nothing if I am a Tank or HEaler you always get groups. This to me is a major turn off cause my favorite class sense pen and paper was a bard and when EQ1 came out and had a bard I was happy my wife played a cleric I was a bard we duoed alot of content and when it came to groups I was left standing around while she was off doing more content. Later I roled a tank a Shadowknight and my wife contenuied to paly her cleric when I got to her lvl I always had groups. See this is wrong I think to many people have this mind set that to do content you have to have a tank and healer and thats not true except the games dev's make them this way so thats why they are so do away with this tank healer crap and let us play what we want.
Sherman's Gaming
Youtube Content creator for The Elder Scrolls Online
Channel:http://https//www.youtube.com/channel/UCrgYNgpFTRAl4XWz31o2emw
Because people these days are douchebags and like to ruin everything for the others.
If you as a player dont want to be forced to group...go play a different game and a different genre. MMO's as a genre are meant to have worlds and adversaries much larger than you. If you dont like that you cant defeat something alone...too bad so sad. MMO's have taken a horrible turn in the last 8 years focusing on solo players....this is a useless endeavor that has seen nothing but failure and has warped the MMO Genre into something that does not even resemble what it truly is or is meant to be. You want a Good Solo game go play skyrim, you want to reach the End fast 200 hours or less go play any Single player RPG. If you want to make friends, Defeat foes Many times stronger than you, Live and interact in a world that is truly virtual, and actually have a leveling experience that takes Months or Years, not days. Then Play a real MMO. The last Real MMO that way was Everquest, and something was lost since then, something that needs to come back into the MMO space to make it great again.
As always, more shallow than running a dungeon for 100th time for tokens?
But seriosly, it boils down to what you expect "gameplay" to be and how it is implemented in a particular game.
As of expectations, it is quite bold to assume that the majority experiences gameplay the way you do, no offense
Blanket statements that killing a monster is gameplay, but getting from A to B is not, do not help...
As for implementation, that is a huge issue, riding s not a huge achievment it was before, there are no 10 minute corpse runs you have to be afraid of and know the map, teleports everywhere, zones are small an crowded (in Rift in particular the travelling issue devolved into host of lowlevel monsters dismounting and slowing you down...).
Compare that to say Runescape, where inventory limitations and distance you have to travel and teleport plays a huge role in the game, shortcuts and teleports are rewarded from quests, achievments and minigame rewards, and can save you literally MONTHS in the long run
Flame on!
Is LOTR a trilogy which forces you to read about every single moment of every single day of the trip to Mordor?
No.
Because that would be dumb.
Only the events which have narrative significance -- which provide content -- are written when the author writes the book.
(Although with LOTR in particular I do feel there are many "filler" scenes which fail to have much narrative significance which could have been removed to make the trilogy better.)
But yes, I do read books the same way I play games in that regard. Empty "filler" content is considered bad writing in books and bad game design in games. In neither situation is it desirable.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Yes of course it's shallower than running a dungeon! Traveling just involves avoiding mobs. Dungeoning involves multiple group members working in concert, managing threat, healing, maximizing a rotation of abilities, knowing when to use cooldowns, dealing with specific mob mechanics -- and also still worrying about mob aggro radius.
So yes, travel is shallower. By far. It has the single trivial element of skill/mastery that travel involves, and many more.
You're the only one using blanket statements that monster killing is gameplay but traveling isn't. I specifically went out of my way not to use false absolutes when I conceded that travel involves a trivial speck of gameplay. It's not zero gameplay, but it's clearly much shallower than other types of gameplay which exist in MMORPGs.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
rather than fast travel or no fast travel...
why not have an etherial world where you portal into...sometimes theres something in there..waiting for you.. and sometimes not...you hit the other portal and you are where you wanted to go or you die.
all problems solved.
The argument that someone doesn't belong in an MMO because they don't group is really bad I feel. Those people still often enjoy the company of others in zone chat or guild chat or like the feeling of being in a world with other people.
Sometimes I'm working on a project on the job or doing something on my own, that doesn't mean I need to be cast away to a deserted island because I'm not in everyone else's face, it also doesn't mean I don't like people around me. It just means I'm doing something on my own.
You once again read only the first part of my post, let me counter with a blanket statement
Anyways, the way you descibe raiding, which is the favored facet of current games, travel and exploration can be described too, but the game system has to support it, like i mentioned, not sideline it on purpose so some blokes can get angry that they have to spend a minute extra before getting epic lootz
I mean where does this sense of unfairness come from, that we see "overaggroing" as a part of the gameplay, skill and deep, but forgetting you key and having to travel 5 minutes to town-bank as filler and waste of time?
Flame on!
Someone who doesn't Group doesn't belong in an MMO. You, sometimes working on a project or doing something on your own doesn't mean you don't group. It means sometimes you like some "me" time. That is acceptable. But people who don't like to group and don't group don't belong in an MMO because that is the basis of the genre to begin with. However that isn't what the genre has become in recent years, but what it is truly meant to be. In a post on another thread i stated that MMO's by a standard should be 90% Group content, even having to kill most of the mobs, and 10% Solo Content. Have that content there for your "me" time but the name of the game is meant to be Play with everyone don't just observe them in passing 24/7. I would even venture to say a more acceptable ratio would be 75% grouping and 25% Solo. Its not Massive Solo World it is Massive Multiplayer world after all.
I guess EQ isn't an MMO then. Because many classes solo'd back then, including me on my druid and necro. We even got spells and mobs specifically targeted at soloing. Even the description of classes in EQ mentioned if they could solo or group well. There was never a need to group if you didn't want to, many classes could solo to max level.
If you are gonna respond, respond to the whole post, making a post against a small portion is like reviewing a movie in the first 5 minutes. The whole post explained the reasoning and it was just.
I too played a Druid in EQ, and While I could Solo Effectively and even Quad Kite, I grouped plenty with people along the way because for even the classes that could solo effectively the game was still more difficult Alone than together. And that is the way it should be.
I picked out the part that was not just, the idea that someone who solos doesn't belong in an MMO is not just at all. Let people decide for themselves what they want to do, I have never ever heard a developer say that someone who solos doesn't belong in their MMO, what gives you the authority to do so? Because you group doesn't mean everyone should, it's not your call to decide what others should or shouldn't do, leave that to the peoople who created the world in the first place and the people who paid for their game. The minute you pay for other people's game and gametime is the time you can decide how others should play, until then you shouldn't decide how others should or shouldn't play.
Hopefully I'm not reiterating too much - I only browsed the first page and skipped the rest.
My problem with the current popular paradigm is that developers are splitting the game content down content lines. Questing and crafting are solo, pve instances and pvp are grouped. The vast majority of the games I've played use this model. What I would prefer to see is that while all four of these content types can be solo'd, it's highly inefficient when compared to doing them in a group (including crafting).
The players who forced MMO's down the path of Solo Catering are a plague. And for your information a Developer Has gone on record saying that "MMO's are for playing WITH people and that if you want to Solo there are better Solo games. While this may seem very obvious to most players you find that too many companies try to be everything to everyone including a great single player experience and end up missing the mark on being a good MMO."
His name is Dave Georgeson Creative Director of the Entire EQ Franchise.
Mind you at no point do i say there should be NO Solo content, I stated that Group oriented content should make up the majority of the game, and have far less solo content but still HAVE IT. People who dont play with others, dont belong in an MMO, that is what an MMO is for to PLAY WITH OTHERS not just around or near, or relatively close or safely distant.
Mcquaid was the developer in charge of EQ, and his team decided soloing was a viable mechanic, that's why we had spells and abilities to do so. Again, it's not your call to decide how people should enjoy their game, you're not paying for their game. It's their money and they decide how they want to use it.
Would you prefer solo pvp?
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Because most people dont want to rely on other people from a progressing perspective.
When I look back into my soloing PvP history in any MMO, going battlegrounds with random people - no offense but its fact that you could throw at least 90% in the garbage.
And imagine people with this mentality in your group and then the content would be ONLY progressable if anybody does his part? You can not really combine anyonymity (people out of a guild for example) and team-based gameplay.
Too many egos out there. Way too many.
Nononono, precious freetime
no thanks.
PS: Forcing somebody leads only to the counterpart - people let go of something over a longer time period.
Mcquaid is a hasbeen, he developed EQ along with a team of many other folks, EQ did not have Soloing as a truly viable mechanic as you said, Only certain classes could even do it well. The game was more than 80% Group oriented as an MMO should be. And Mcquaid has NOT worked for SOE in Forever Dave Georgeson has been Creative Director for EQ and EQ2 since Mcquaid left and He is the Creative Director and developer for the entire Franchise, Go do some research. And you are wrong it is my call to say that people should group, because it was the solo whiners that forced devs down the path in the first place, My voice is to counteract them and bring MMO's back to glory. Pay close attention to any SOLO oriented MMO that has come out in the last 8 years....ALL Failures. MMO's are not meant for Solo catering plain and simple.
A little after 9 minutes Dave Georgeson states that MMO Devs go after the single player experience and he doesnt know why. And states MMO's are not about that!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97YF1GoD3sg&feature=player_embedded#!
Its not forced but do Try TERA, grouping is so important in that game to the point that leveling in a group from level 1 to 60 Is a lot faster, be it a group of 2 people or more. Almost everyone in TERA groups up to do even the normal quests which is pretty nice to see.
Well I ignored the "expectations" bit because expectations have zero bearing on whether Feature A is deeper or shallower than Feature B.
I'm not making blanket statements, except in discussing typical MMORPGs (where travel is quite obviously shallower (by a lot) than dungeon/raid gameplay.)
If we start talking about non-typical MMORPGs like Puzzle PIrates where the very act of travel involves deep gameplay systems, then we can agree that travel is not automatically shallow by definition. But typical MMORPGs are what's being discussed, and in all the existing major MMORPGs the travel system(s) are shallower than the combat system(s).
There's no sense of "unfairness" being discussed here. It's very simple: gamers want gameplay and depth. Travel fails to provide much gameplay or depth. Combat provides considerably more, due to so many different systems being involved. Could it be even deeper? Absolutely! But A+B+C+D (combat) is clearly going to be deeper than A alone (travel).
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver