Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Will we ever see a non-solo oriented mmo again?

2456710

Comments

  • VengerVenger York, PAPosts: 1,318Member

    When they stop using the broke ass holy trinity formula for grouping, punishing people that aren't withing a few levels, get rid of group cap, stop making grouping such an elitest "learn to play" douche bag fest I'm sure we will see more group oriented games.

     

    I'd like playing with people but the way grouping is set up no thank I'll stick with the solo friendly games.

  • RebelScum99RebelScum99 Mesa, AZPosts: 1,090Member
    Originally posted by Venger

    When they stop using the broke ass holy trinity formula for grouping, punishing people that aren't withing a few levels, get rid of group cap, stop making grouping such an elitest "learn to play" douche bag fest I'm sure we will see more group oriented games.

     

    I'd like playing with people but the way grouping is set up no thank I'll stick with the solo friendly games.

    There's nothing wrong with the holy trinity formula.  Some of the best group-oriented games have used it.  The problem is the current incarnation of it has been dumbed down because they've done away with the "control" part of the dps arm of the trinity.  There used to be a time when crowd control specialists were as important to the group as healers and tanks...you simply couldn't function effectively without one. 

  • arctarusarctarus nilPosts: 2,570Member Uncommon

    1) We wont, because those times happens when we were young,  we have the time to spend hours per day on mmo.

    Now? all grown up and having real life that requires more and more of our time, and we being the generations that start mmo, and now have the spending power but no time, only way the devs gona grap our money is to make games thats able to cater to our timetable.

    Thus more solo centric , easiler end-game mmo is being make.

    2) New generations also demand more instant gratifications, thats why we have things like fast food, faster connections etc..

    So another No.

     

    Ultimately, imo,  for a mmo to be able to survive, it needs not only to break free from the countless of drones we've seen and yet be able to balance between solo and easy grouping, yet at the saem time brings back those sandbox elements .

    I.E a themepark/sandbox mmo...

     

     

    RIP Orc Choppa

  • GrumpyMel2GrumpyMel2 Catskills, NYPosts: 1,832Member
    Hopefully, as I'm far more interested in Group/Cooperative based play. I certainly think we will AT SOME POINT....as tastes seem to go in cycles. I'm sure at some point a significant title will decided to try to appeal to those that enjoy group/cooperative oriented play more....the simple question is WHEN.
  • KraylorKraylor Chandler, AZPosts: 94Member

    Check out The Repopulation

     

    It is an Indie game, and I know there are a lot of people who don't believe an Indie developer can create anything good, but at least check out the videos and the forums. 

     

    1.  Open world, only instancing is the starting tutorial.  No BGs, no instanced dungeons.  There will be open world dungeons.

    2.  Open world Housing with city sieges

    3.  Player economy, not a gear treadmill.  People can be full time crafters if they want to.

     

    I can't say for certain how solo friendly it will be, but the developers have old school MMO in mind and taking many many design cues from those games.

    Waiting on: The Repopulation

  • tixylixtixylix gfff, TNPosts: 1,208Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by RebelScum99
    Originally posted by Venger

    When they stop using the broke ass holy trinity formula for grouping, punishing people that aren't withing a few levels, get rid of group cap, stop making grouping such an elitest "learn to play" douche bag fest I'm sure we will see more group oriented games.

     

    I'd like playing with people but the way grouping is set up no thank I'll stick with the solo friendly games.

    There's nothing wrong with the holy trinity formula.  Some of the best group-oriented games have used it.  The problem is the current incarnation of it has been dumbed down because they've done away with the "control" part of the dps arm of the trinity.  There used to be a time when crowd control specialists were as important to the group as healers and tanks...you simply couldn't function effectively without one. 

     

    Thing is I never remembered any of that in MMOs I played because I don't do high level raid content. Every MMO I've played in the past gear never mattered, your class combo never really mattered as long as you had at least one tank and one healer and your spec never mattered. Even in PVP when I play I never feel like I need the uber purples to compete or my class sucks.

    The only people who seem to complain are whiners who will always complain about PVP balance even though there might not be anything wrong and raiders. I just think if you don't like raiding then don't raid lol. I've done one or two in the past and had a blast but I've never felt like I've missed out by not doing one because if I don't have the will or the time to do it then it's down to me and I get over it.

    Dev's shouldn't listen to forum whiners because they just want everything right away and not have to play the game achieve something. I bet most players don't care if they're not raiding, they never get to that point to even care. 

  • NadiaNadia Canonsburg, PAPosts: 11,866Member Common
    Originally posted by tixylix

    Before EQ2 got turned into another SOE WoW clone you couldn't progress through that game solo. Even from the Starter Isle they got you to group up several times and then the last quest objective you needed a group. Then once you got into the city quest zones half the mobs were grouped and you needed to group for most of it. Once you got to CL and Antonica you needed a group, unless you liked grinding for days waiting for solo mobs to get one level then you HAD to group. It was an amazing experience and one of the best grouping games out there and most of the quests were more than just "kill 10 rats" which for it's time when WoW basically invented quest based levelling, that was a really kool thing.

    i agree w you that EQ2 should have stayed more "group orientated" for fun

    I still enjoy EQ2 but i miss the Launch version of the game

  • rungardrungard st. john''s, NFPosts: 1,035Member

    groupsize is the problem.

    change it to 3 from 6-8 and youll find this highly agreeable to players these days.

    it also doesnt hurt that 2-3 man content could probbally be soloed by skilled players.

     

  • Ban_KhaerosBan_Khaeros Panmington, NDPosts: 27Member

    LF QL8 tank for Hell Fallen, pst

     

    Necro MM 4/4 t1 w/ t1 weapon for AM

     

    r7 LF r-spike

     

    Need healer for vault, be geared, pst

     

    3 dps for NM Ankh be 2000 ap+

     

     

    Now take that, and multiply it by however many quests you have in your game.

     

    Then answer the title question.

     

    inb4 'But the trinity is causing it!'  Wrong.  I'll just switch my requirement to having a certain amount of attack power, or [insert stat here].

     

    inb4 'But gear disparity is causing it!'  Then I'll base it around some value that determines someone's experience with the content.  Link achievement, what tier / quality level / level / skill level / whatever.

  • GrumpyMel2GrumpyMel2 Catskills, NYPosts: 1,832Member

    I'll also note something "Group Oriented/Cooperative Play" does NOT have to equal the same way that EQ or WoW have traditionaly done Group Content.

    "Group Oriented" does NOT mean you have to take a specific limited number of players out of the main world and off into thier own little world to "do content". It does NOT even mean you have to have a mechanical association of players in the game called a "group"...one that you are invited to and exclude other people from participating in.

    It simply means that in order to succeed in the game and do well, you must coordinate your activities with other players and work/interact with them.

    If you look at them, most multi-player FPS (Battlefield, etc) games are actualy highly "Group Oriented". To the point that they even have vehicles that require multiple players to fully control. Sure you can spawn in, ignore everyone else on your side,  don't communicate with anyone and go off and do your own thing.  However, if most of the people on your side are doing that and the other side isn't...you are going to get rolled and rolled badly.

    In order to do well, you have to play as a team, communicate with those on your side and work together to achieve common goals (defeating the enemy). The more you communicate, coordinate your actions and work together...the better you are likely to do. Even if you aren't part of a "squad" or any such thing in the game and aren't actively communicating with other players, you are generaly basing your own actions off what your team-mates are doing and trying to work with them to some degree in an unspoken fashion. The guys who actively communicate, do even better. The guys who try to coordinate so they have a good mix of soldier types and equipment for the situation do even better. The guys who actualy play together on a repeated basis so they know how each other reacts and possibly even have some sort of formal organization (guild, clan, etc) do yet even better.

    Guess what multi-player FPS games ARE widely popular....probably even more so then MMO's. Thier players seem to have no problem with the idea that teamwork and playing cooperatively with others is an important key to success in those games. Many of them do it on a regular basis and they have alot of fun doing so. An MMO which emulated those aspects of group oriented play from FPS games definately has the potential to do well.

    The idea that "group oriented" play can't be popular or mass market is pure bunk. It's sold based on a particular concept or style of "group oriented" play that people have come to associated with traditional MMO's.....a style that isn't even all that "group oriented" or "cooperative" to begin with in fact. It's also sold because it's FAR EASIER for developers to design solo based games rather then work out good mechanisms for cooperative play...so it's what they try to push, whats EASY FOR THEM TO MAKE.

    It'll be interesting to see what the future holds for MMO's in terms of cooperative play....especialy ones that feature significant PvP. Clearly games like EvE or PS2 can have an effect on the gamespace.

     

  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Manchester, NHPosts: 2,926Member Uncommon

    huh?

     

    Solo friendly is not the same as solo oriented.  The only solo oriented content of GW2 is the story mode. 

     

    All I know is if someone makes an MMO that doesn't let me reach the end level through solo play, I almost certainly won't try or buy it.  It would have a huge population with quick group finders, otherwise I'm not wasting my time sitting in a game waiting for a group.  

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,641Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by GrumpyMel2

    Guess what multi-player FPS games ARE widely popular....probably even more so then MMO's. Thier players seem to have no problem with the idea that teamwork and playing cooperatively with others is an important key to success in those games. Many of them do it on a regular basis and they have alot of fun doing so. An MMO which emulated those aspects of group oriented play from FPS games definately has the potential to do well.

    Classes and level disparity are the two walls to achieving such a goal. GW removes both in their PVP.

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • KostKost Vancouver, BCPosts: 1,975Member
    God I hope not.
  • TibernicusTibernicus Fall River, MAPosts: 433Member

    Sadly, GW2 is probably as close as we'll get to seeing a AAA MMORPG embrace being an MMO again.

    Even though all singleplayer styled MMOs have failed over the years, more publishers will keep trying them.

    Vanguard was the last AAA MMO to embrace it.

     

    Originally posted by Kost
    God I hope not.

    Go play a singleplayer game, troll.

     

    Originally posted by maji
    MMORPGs are for the masses. The masses don't want to be forced to look for other people to team up with.

    You say that, but games like SWTOR, Rift, AoC, are all horrible failures mainly BECAUSE they're solo oriented.

  • GrumpyMel2GrumpyMel2 Catskills, NYPosts: 1,832Member
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by GrumpyMel2

    Guess what multi-player FPS games ARE widely popular....probably even more so then MMO's. Thier players seem to have no problem with the idea that teamwork and playing cooperatively with others is an important key to success in those games. Many of them do it on a regular basis and they have alot of fun doing so. An MMO which emulated those aspects of group oriented play from FPS games definately has the potential to do well.

    Classes and level disparity are the two walls to achieving such a goal. GW removes both in their PVP.

    I'm not sure I agree with the "classes and level disparity" thing. All FPS games have classes...they just call them "kits" instead. In most you can change between spawns (assuming you've unlocked the kit)....but many have built-in limitations on that as well...depending upon control of specific objectives or using up of certain tickets or equipment, you may be limited into what you can spawn into...but you generaly still find some way to be usefull.

    In terms of "levels" that's not much different then players of different skill level...or players who haven't unlocked the most  advanced equipment. Sure, they may not contribute as much to a sides efforts...but as long as they try to work with you, they generaly contribute something.

    So I don't neccesarly see either as a hard stop to group oriented play for MMO's.

     

     

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,641Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by GrumpyMel2
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by GrumpyMel2

    Guess what multi-player FPS games ARE widely popular....probably even more so then MMO's. Thier players seem to have no problem with the idea that teamwork and playing cooperatively with others is an important key to success in those games. Many of them do it on a regular basis and they have alot of fun doing so. An MMO which emulated those aspects of group oriented play from FPS games definately has the potential to do well.

    Classes and level disparity are the two walls to achieving such a goal. GW removes both in their PVP.

    I'm not sure I agree with the "classes and level disparity" thing. All FPS games have classes...they just call them "kits" instead. In most you can change between spawns (assuming you've unlocked the kit)....but many have built-in limitations on that as well...depending upon control of specific objectives or using up of certain tickets or equipment, you may be limited into what you can spawn into...but you generaly still find some way to be usefull.

    In terms of "levels" that's not much different then players of different skill level...or players who haven't unlocked the most  advanced equipment. Sure, they may not contribute as much to a sides efforts...but as long as they try to work with you, they generaly contribute something.

    So I don't neccesarly see either as a hard stop to group oriented play for MMO's.

    All FPS games have classes? That's news to me, but I'll pretend that's true and move on to the next part.

    Of the popular FPS games, players can switch class when and if needed. Show up to a raid with your healer/medic when the group already has plenty and you're SOL unless you also went and levelled up another character... remotely nearby... on that server. In an FPS, you usually click three or four buttons and you're back in the game with a different class.

    I'm also curious what FPS games you play that level has ever been an issue. Likewise, which MMOs you've played where level isn't an issue. In some MMOs, level isn't an issue, but that certainly is not the norm by any stretch. In MMOs, the level disparity is so horrendous that often a difference of 6 levels could make someone useless to the group. Devs have acknowledged the level disparity and have often added the band-aid solution of mentor or sidekick systems to compensate for it. Are you confusing leveling with level disparity? I'm trying to figure out how you reached those rather odd conclusions.

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • MephsterMephster Tyria, NJPosts: 1,188Member
    Really hope we do. Solo content is for single player rpgs not mmos.

    Grim Dawn, the next great action rpg!

    http://www.grimdawn.com/

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,641Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Mephster
    Really hope we do. Solo content is for single player rpgs not mmos.

    That thinking is why we will probably never see a mainstream UO or EVE again.

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member

    Why is 'giving players the choice' considered a bad thing?

    Nothing is stopping people from being 'nice' or 'form groups' in most MMOs and most MMOs reward that behaviour.

    WoW / SWTOR /RIFT etc all reward the player with better exp/items/gold etc.

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • PsychowPsychow SF Giants Territory, CAPosts: 1,784Member

    Why is having both a problem again?

     

    Solo: I am going to go hunt in the forest and explore the deserted mine. (quests)

    Group: We are going to storm the castle or challenge the mighty dragon. (Dungeons/instances)

    Group: We are going to hunt in the forest and explore the deserted mine. A strong troll lives at the end of the mine. (quests/group quests)

  • maplestonemaplestone Ottawa, ONPosts: 3,099Member
    Originally posted by Psychow

    Why is having both a problem again?

    The Loremaster Feat.  (to use WoW as an example)

    This is where the conflict arises.  It creates a logical end-goal for the solo player to explore the story ... but they then get brick-walled by elite mobs until they can either overpower them or beg for groups quest-by-quest.  This in tern leads to cascade of conflicts between world design and story design and forces developers to choose between supporting solo play and supporting group play.

  • GrootGroot OKC, OKPosts: 87Member
    Classic DAoC R.I.P.
  • Muerte_XMuerte_X ventura, CAPosts: 104Member

    You can really tell from the replies who has played old games and who has not... A lfg finder does not make a game less solo centric. It puts you in with random strangers whom usually do not talk to each other and most likely will never see each other again because it pulls from across servers. In older games, group play had a different connotation. You would find some buddies, get in or form a guild together, and would develop long lasting relationships with them through playing and socializing. In most everything prewow, there were no quests so the burden of being on different rails in questing was not there. It freed people up to group and socialize.

    I pose this question: if you want play almost entirely solo, why are you playing an MMO? They have worse graphics and storyline than SPRPGs. So you are playing an inferior product to not capture the only strength of that product... does not make sense to me.

    To the OP: We will have to wait and see. The Repop might be, but it does have a questing system that might discourage group play in the "leveling" (no actual levels, skill system) process, but afterwards with city building/sieges will be the social aspect.  I have the same thoughts on AA; I think it will be a solo run to cap then castle building/warfare fun at the end.

    Edit: sp

    Often lurking, rarely posting

  • maplestonemaplestone Ottawa, ONPosts: 3,099Member
    Originally posted by Muerte_X

    I pose this question: if you want play almost entirely solo, why are you playing an MMO?

    *points to the group-vs-solo sticky thread attached permanently to the top the forum*

    This question is asked a lot and answered a lot.

  • coretex666coretex666 PraguePosts: 1,934Member Uncommon

    I would suggest that you check out ArcheAge.

    I am not saying that in order to promote a game which I am personally waiting for as you can see in my sig. Maybe you check it out and hate it which would be perfectly fine.

    In a recent review done by a person with first hand experience, he claimed that there are exp bonuses for party levelling. Also there are longterm goals such as creating a faction, building a city, castle, ships, make sieges, etc, which is obviously only possible in group / guild.

    Take a look at it if it sounds interesting for you. If not, then feel free to ignore me.

    Waiting for L2 EU Classic

Sign In or Register to comment.