Originally posted by kalisti I think people should play how they like. But MMOs are skewed towards group play, and people like me who like to play solo a lot just need to accept that and move on.
Play a single-player game then. MMOs, by definition, are meant to be games to be played with other human controled characters.
And we do play with them, we just have no interest in grouping with them. Playing =/= grouping.
Play solo = play without them.
Unless you are fighting with human players instead of A.I characters when "solo playing".
Unless you are fighting with human players instead of A.I characters when "solo playing".
I don't PvP ever, regardless. I am playing a game with a bunch of other people. I don't have to be standing beside them, I don't have to be fighting the same mobs, the very fact that they are present in the game at the same time as I am means I am playing with them.
Unless you are fighting with human players instead of A.I characters when "solo playing".
I don't PvP ever, regardless. I am playing a game with a bunch of other people. I don't have to be standing beside them, I don't have to be fighting the same mobs, the very fact that they are present in the game at the same time as I am means I am playing with them.
Try again.
So why to play a mmo instead of a single-player game in this case?
In a mmo, the AI content are only a scenario or "stage" to the interactions between characters controled by the players. This AI content is far more dull, shallow and boring than of most modern single-player games, since the single-player games has more freedom degree than mmos to create a dinamic and rich enviroment, completely tangled with the story and player actions. So, to play a mmo only for the AI content is like to go to a strip club only for the music instead of going to a show or concert.
Originally posted by Adamai Its an mmo. Absolutely no solo play because you solo guys are a game breaking feature.
Ive said this before, but Ill say it again. Not everyone plays MMOs for the same reason. You might play for required grouping, but there are several reasons out there to play that have absolutely nothing to do with grouping or lack of it:
- Personally, I mainly play for PvP. Testing myself vs other human players rather than NPCs. Only MMOs and other types of online games offer this.
Other reasons people might play that require no grouping whatsoever:
- The ability to chat and socialize with people from all over the world while playing a game they enjoy.
- Economics and markets. Some people enjoy these aspects of games and playing the markets to maximize their profits.
- Playing in a persistant and ever changing world with new content and experiences added regularly. Something single player games generally dont offer
- The ability to have an impact on other people, or be impacted by them in various forms
- Attempting to become well known for something such as a great PvPer, great crafter, very knowledgable person, etc
- In the case of sandboxes especially, being able to show off your work to the world. Thinkof games like Xsyon, Wurm, etc where you can build all kinds of cool stuff, do terraforming, etc and other players can come and admire the things you have built
You can (PvP) in any shooter game Leage of legend or whatever you dont need an MMO for that reason.
Chatting and socializing is what grouping is all about because you will chat while grinding up your exp in your group. Grouping only compliments this.
Economics will not be hurt in any way if grouping would be required.
i dont call our world created of bg's dungeons etc persistent online worlds. a persitent online world would be imo a sandbox open to go wherever you want to. Again grouping has nothing to do with this.
you have an impact on people by grouping with them because as you adventure together you will befriend them, having a impact on eachother's lives.
grouping has nothing to do with becomign well know. well actually grouping will compliment this. because noboy will care about you or who you are if nobody ever sees you doing stuff.
so yeah too all the things wich can be done in an mmo or be a reason someone plays can all be done With required grouping.
So why to play a mmo instead of a single-player game in this case?
In a mmo, the AI content are only a scenario or "stage" to the interactions between characters controled by the players. This AI content is far more dull, shallow and boring than of most modern single-player games, since the single-player games has more freedom degree than mmos to create a dinamic and rich enviroment, completely tangled with the story and player actions. So, to play a mmo only for the AI content is like to go to a strip club only for the music instead of going to a show or concert.
Because there just aren't enough single-player games out there. I can complete, beginning to end, 3-4 of them a month. There isn't enough content available. The only thing MMOs really have going for them is a wealth of constantly updated content. Give me an infinite supply of high-quality single-player games like Skyrim or Fallout 3, I'll never play another MMO.
The solo vs group argument strikes me as completely ridiculous. Most modern MMOs do a good job of providing plenty of content for solo players and for group players. In fact, games like GW2 and Rift also do a good job of nudging solo players into automatic groups so they can get used to it.
My feeling is that those arguing for hard content that forces grouping just don't want to share. They don't want a game that provides both solo and group content. They want the WHOLE game to be their way. This is infantile.
The solo vs group argument strikes me as completely ridiculous. Most modern MMOs do a good job of providing plenty of content for solo players and for group players. In fact, games like GW2 and Rift also do a good job of nudging solo players into automatic groups so they can get used to it.
My feeling is that those arguing for hard content that forces grouping just don't want to share. They don't want a game that provides both solo and group content. They want the WHOLE game to be their way. This is infantile.
You are largely right. The fact is, lots of people who want hard content so everyone has to group are doing so for selfish reasons. They want to group, they want lots of people they can group with all the time. By forcing everyone else to group whether they want to or not, they're just increasing their own pool of potential group-mates.
You are largely right. The fact is, lots of people who want hard content so everyone has to group are doing so for selfish reasons. They want to group, they want lots of people they can group with all the time. By forcing everyone else to group whether they want to or not, they're just increasing their own pool of potential group-mates.
Wow, you go back to the same arguments every week, never listening to the other side at all. Being selfish is to think about 'me', but if you want other people to share content, to roll on loot with, to be able to heal allies or take the stress off the weaker characters, then surely you're thinking about the others rather than yourself?
The selfish person is the one who wants all content to be his, who wants all loot to be his, who wants to go through dungeons alone, who wants to fight boss monsters alone, who doesn't want to join other players or bring other people along. The selfish person is the soloer. Solo = Self.
You consider the idea of harder group content selfish because you alone wouldn't be able to access it, but the only person being selfish is you for not allowing people to do things you can't do. Oh, and, your 'forcing everyone to group whether they want to or not'. I'm sorry, did someone put a gun to your head and make you play? Because there's this thing called choice...
You are largely right. The fact is, lots of people who want hard content so everyone has to group are doing so for selfish reasons. They want to group, they want lots of people they can group with all the time. By forcing everyone else to group whether they want to or not, they're just increasing their own pool of potential group-mates.
Wow, you go back to the same arguments every week, never listening to the other side at all. Being selfish is to think about 'me', but if you want other people to share content, to roll on loot with, to be able to heal allies or take the stress off the weaker characters, then surely you're thinking about the others rather than yourself?
The selfish person is the one who wants all content to be his, who wants all loot to be his, who wants to go through dungeons alone, who wants to fight boss monsters alone, who doesn't want to join other players or bring other people along. The selfish person is the soloer. Solo = Self.
You consider the idea of harder group content selfish because you alone wouldn't be able to access it, but the only person being selfish is you for not allowing people to do things you can't do. Oh, and, your 'forcing everyone to group whether they want to or not'. I'm sorry, did someone put a gun to your head and make you play? Because there's this thing called choice...
The selfish person is the one who believes everyone should play their way and yes there are a great many people on this site that believe people are playing games wrong and games should be made a certain way.
There are also a great number of people on this site that like to throw strawmen around, and twist people's words to say something they didn't say, in order to validate some non-existance, erroneous and falacious point that only exists in their own mind.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
The option should be there for any way a person wants to play the game, however I don't think a multiplayer game should be crafted to cater to a single player base. As in reality, you shouldn't be able to conquer the world alone.
The ability to hit level cap and be able to safely get around most areas of the map by yourself should be there. I do like the ideas of some of the end game zones in GW2 that were difficult to navigate alone. Getting players to group for non instanced pve at end game level is pretty cool.
You are largely right. The fact is, lots of people who want hard content so everyone has to group are doing so for selfish reasons. They want to group, they want lots of people they can group with all the time. By forcing everyone else to group whether they want to or not, they're just increasing their own pool of potential group-mates.
Wow, you go back to the same arguments every week, never listening to the other side at all. Being selfish is to think about 'me', but if you want other people to share content, to roll on loot with, to be able to heal allies or take the stress off the weaker characters, then surely you're thinking about the others rather than yourself?
The selfish person is the one who wants all content to be his, who wants all loot to be his, who wants to go through dungeons alone, who wants to fight boss monsters alone, who doesn't want to join other players or bring other people along. The selfish person is the soloer. Solo = Self.
You consider the idea of harder group content selfish because you alone wouldn't be able to access it, but the only person being selfish is you for not allowing people to do things you can't do. Oh, and, your 'forcing everyone to group whether they want to or not'. I'm sorry, did someone put a gun to your head and make you play? Because there's this thing called choice...
You keep making the same mistake, although that's not unusual. Here's the reality. It doesn't matter what you, personally, want in a game. You, personally, are statistically irrelevant. What matters is what millions of MMO players want in a game, collectively. The majority is going to rule.
You keep making the same mistake, although that's not unusual. Here's the reality. It doesn't matter what you, personally, want in a game. You, personally, are statistically irrelevant. What matters is what millions of MMO players want in a game, collectively. The majority is going to rule.
You are not in the majority.
Deal with it.
What millions are these then? The millions in WoW? Because that's the only one with a high subscriber base. The other MMO's, the solo based MMO's that apparently millions of MMO players want, are failing one after the other, struggling to keep subscribers until they finally can't sustain themselves and move to a free to play model. So where are all these millions of players? Because they're not playing the games that you seem to approve of.
If that's the majority talking then I think it's quite evident they don't approve of the way MMO's have gone.
What millions are these then? The millions in WoW? Because that's the only one with a high subscriber base. The other MMO's, the solo based MMO's that apparently millions of MMO players want, are failing one after the other, struggling to keep subscribers until they finally can't sustain themselves and move to a free to play model. So where are all these millions of players? Because they're not playing the games that you seem to approve of.
If that's the majority talking then I think it's quite evident they don't approve of the way MMO's have gone.
The only reason MMOs are failing is because there are too damn many of them, there just aren't enough players to go around to make all of them financially viable. Developers need to stop making so many. It's like any other product, there is supply and demand and when the supply exceeds the demand, product lines die. Unfortunately, self-control and MMO development just don't go together at the moment.
And the millions are all the people who collectively play MMOs, whatever game they might play, if they play any at all at the moment. Grouping, especially forced grouping, is wholly out of fashion at the moment. If you want it back, prove to developers that a significant portion of the total community not only want it, but would pay to get it.
The whole point of an MMO is to interact with other people (which includes grouping). The reason grouping should be an important aspect of every MMO is because it expands the community, while bringing everyone closer together at the same time. Think of guild wars without guilds.. Pretty fucking dull if you ask me. While I have nothing against solo play; as I thoroughly enjoy soloing, due to the fact that I can AFK as I please, play at my own pace, etc. There should be many considerations taken into account when scaling group play vs solo play.
If the most efficient ways to gear up or farm in a game are through solo play, it will discourage players from participating in group play (as we've seen in Diablo 3). Even if solo play is on "par" with group play in terms of farming, players who opt to play in groups have to deal with conflicts in scheduling and finding compitent players; which ends up favoring solo play again.
On the other hand, group play is a very important aspect of every mmo as it can be much more dynamic than solo play (for example WoW raid bosses). Group play requires perks as long as the content is more challenging than solo play (BECAUSE IT REQUIRES US TO BE HUMAN). As much as we would like to deny the fact that bots exist in OUR game, we can not (bots are in EVERY game), this is another BIG reason game developers should favor group play. If a group of players can not out farm a bot, then group play will be discouraged. Those players will be pretty much FORCED to solo play if they want to farm "efficiently," but since they aren't bots and can't farm 24/7 we still have absolutely no encouragement to play legit. This is partially the reason we see SO MANY bots in games where group play is not encouraged. Take a look at Runescape & D3, both games actually discourage group play on many occasions and as a result, they are PLAGUED with bots. Not only are they abundant, but they actually out do their human counterparts.
If you seriously prefer solo > group play, these are just some of the considerations to take into account before complaining that group play has unfair advantages. There are PLENTY of single player RPGs to tackle before considering an MMO to be your single player time sink
TLDR; if you dislike grouping - stay the fuck away from MMOs, it's that simple.
All you are talking about is loot. So many of the "MMOs should only allow for grouping" crowd try to use community as their argument and how allowing for solo play defeats that. However, all you talk about is the most efficient way to get phat lewtz, so then whats the point of playing MMOs to get gear since you can get gear much more efficiently in a single player game anyways?
TLDR: Different people have different play styles, learn to deal with that.
All you are talking about is loot. So many of the "MMOs should only allow for grouping" crowd try to use community as their argument and how allowing for solo play defeats that. However, all you talk about is the most efficient way to get phat lewtz, so then whats the point of playing MMOs to get gear since you can get gear much more efficiently in a single player game anyways?
TLDR: Different people have different play styles, learn to deal with that.
Loot is not the only consideration I talked about. If you read and understood my argument entirely, you would notice that I talked about how group play allows for more DYNAMIC boss fights. Why the fuck would an MMO who caters from thousands to millions of players, create content that they specifically want you to beat SOLO. It's not possible to have a soloable boss that is as dynamic as a boss that requires a group. You can solo as much as you want, but the hardest content is always going to be in group play.
While single player feats can exist in MMOs, these games weren't made for us NOT to group.
If you are strictly looking for single player challenges, then play single player games, that's what they were made for. You can also attempt to solo group content, but it's not always possible to do. I'm not knocking solo play, I'm just saying that group play HAS to be more favorable.
Grouping, especially forced grouping, is wholly out of fashion at the moment. If you want it back, prove to developers that a significant portion of the total community not only want it, but would pay to get it.
And I have to do that, why, exactly? You're under the rather strange idea that developers only create what people want to have. If that were true we'd still be playing Space Invaders XXXVI because they would have never known Pacman was a good idea. People, after all, were happy playing Space Invaders so why create anything else?
If developers just continue to make the same games year in year out, then nothing is going to ever change. You can spout your crap about market research and all the rest, but at the end of the day, they're an entertainment industry, they need to create something that will entertain and creating the same game under a different name is just repetition. Entertainment and repetition are not good bedfellows.
Group play with a hint of solo ability. MMO's are about interacting and making friends. Not playing it like a console game you can go from begining to end with ease. People forgot what its means to work together, to work for something, and to make a difference. Its just zooooom zoooom to the end and whine on the forums the game sucks and has no content.
Yeah grouping is a pain sometimes, i admit that. But sure beats the alternative.
I like both and I think that solo and teamplay are important in an MMO. Obviously you might be fine if you go fight "a lone wolf_0" in the wilderness, but if you're going up against "a hill giant" and you're not a seasoned player then you should group. Nothing wrong with that. What I'd like to see though is some variety in group missions. Why are there no missions to infiltrate a facility through stealth and wit? Actually one game did have that, it was called 7 Million and it had by far the most interesting missions that I have ever played, it's just too bad that the company who owned it lacked any sense of vision and the game fell into nothingness.
The missions were all about infiltrating builings and bypassing security guards, locks and cameras. You and your buddies had to solve puzzles in 2 minutes or you'd get thrown out of the building and have to start over again. At the same time someone had to keep an eye out on the guard, or guards. Now that was some seriously fun teamwork!
I like both and I think that solo and teamplay are important in an MMO. Obviously you might be fine if you go fight "a lone wolf_0" in the wilderness, but if you're going up against "a hill giant" and you're not a seasoned player then you should group. Nothing wrong with that. What I'd like to see though is some variety in group missions. Why are there no missions to infiltrate a facility through stealth and wit? Actually one game did have that, it was called 7 Million and it had by far the most interesting missions that I have ever played, it's just too bad that the company who owned it lacked any sense of vision and the game fell into nothingness.
The missions were all about infiltrating builings and bypassing security guards, locks and cameras. You and your buddies had to solve puzzles in 2 minutes or you'd get thrown out of the building and have to start over again. At the same time someone had to keep an eye out on the guard, or guards. Now that was some seriously fun teamwork!
The fact that devs still haven't designed an MMO for soloers is mind boggling. They're completely ignoring what is the largest segment of their potential customer base on a continual basis.
No solo MMO's, no solo servers within existing MMO's, zero useful endgame gear for solo players in existing MMO's, superior performance for groupers vs soloable mobs in existing MMO's, solo players completely or partially locked out of end game content in existing MMO's.
There's millions of potential customers out there who would play MMO's, but the devs have basically said "we don't want your business".
The real irony for the group/raid oriented players who constantly complain on boards like this about how their game has been dumbed down, is if they'd gotten behind the idea of seperate solo MMO's or servers long ago, they would have had a much more enjoyable experience playing MMO's now, because the games or servers they play on would have been tailored more specifically towards their needs, instead of the diversified mush they're being fed now.
The fact that devs still haven't designed an MMO for soloers is mind boggling. They're completely ignoring what is the largest segment of their potential customer base on a continual basis.
No solo MMO's, no solo servers within existing MMO's, zero useful endgame gear for solo players in existing MMO's, superior performance for groupers vs soloable mobs in existing MMO's, solo players completely or partially locked out of end game content in existing MMO's.
There's millions of potential customers out there who would play MMO's, but the devs have basically said "we don't want your business".
The real irony for the group/raid oriented players who constantly complain on boards like this about how their game has been dumbed down, is if they'd gotten behind the idea of seperate solo MMO's or servers long ago, they would have had a much more enjoyable experience playing MMO's now, because the games or servers they play on would have been tailored more specifically towards their needs, instead of the diversified mush they're being fed now.
Might just be that the solo-only crowd is not big enough to warrant the massive funding needed to create a AAA MMO just for them. Could also be that MMO's are multiplayer games and soloing has nothing to do with multiplayer gameplay whatsoever. It is true that a lot of people who play MMO's spend a lot of that time soloing, but the amount of people who wants to do nothing else but soloing is most likely very small.
The thing I find the most mindboggling is that people who are looking for the perfect singleplayer game experience are looking for it in a genre based on multiplayer instead of going to the forums of the next big singleplayer game in the making and discuss such things over there.
Different servers is not a feasable sollution. Creating a AAA MMO requires an insane amount funds, creating both a AAA MMO and a AAA singleplayer game is just not a logical request. Resources are not infinite, the most probable thing to happen is a low quality game experience for everyone.
Comments
Play solo = play without them.
Unless you are fighting with human players instead of A.I characters when "solo playing".
I don't PvP ever, regardless. I am playing a game with a bunch of other people. I don't have to be standing beside them, I don't have to be fighting the same mobs, the very fact that they are present in the game at the same time as I am means I am playing with them.
Try again.
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
So why to play a mmo instead of a single-player game in this case?
In a mmo, the AI content are only a scenario or "stage" to the interactions between characters controled by the players. This AI content is far more dull, shallow and boring than of most modern single-player games, since the single-player games has more freedom degree than mmos to create a dinamic and rich enviroment, completely tangled with the story and player actions. So, to play a mmo only for the AI content is like to go to a strip club only for the music instead of going to a show or concert.
You can (PvP) in any shooter game Leage of legend or whatever you dont need an MMO for that reason.
Chatting and socializing is what grouping is all about because you will chat while grinding up your exp in your group. Grouping only compliments this.
Economics will not be hurt in any way if grouping would be required.
i dont call our world created of bg's dungeons etc persistent online worlds. a persitent online world would be imo a sandbox open to go wherever you want to. Again grouping has nothing to do with this.
you have an impact on people by grouping with them because as you adventure together you will befriend them, having a impact on eachother's lives.
grouping has nothing to do with becomign well know. well actually grouping will compliment this. because noboy will care about you or who you are if nobody ever sees you doing stuff.
so yeah too all the things wich can be done in an mmo or be a reason someone plays can all be done With required grouping.
Group play upsides:
Because there just aren't enough single-player games out there. I can complete, beginning to end, 3-4 of them a month. There isn't enough content available. The only thing MMOs really have going for them is a wealth of constantly updated content. Give me an infinite supply of high-quality single-player games like Skyrim or Fallout 3, I'll never play another MMO.
Until then, I've got to take what I can get.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
The solo vs group argument strikes me as completely ridiculous. Most modern MMOs do a good job of providing plenty of content for solo players and for group players. In fact, games like GW2 and Rift also do a good job of nudging solo players into automatic groups so they can get used to it.
My feeling is that those arguing for hard content that forces grouping just don't want to share. They don't want a game that provides both solo and group content. They want the WHOLE game to be their way. This is infantile.
You are largely right. The fact is, lots of people who want hard content so everyone has to group are doing so for selfish reasons. They want to group, they want lots of people they can group with all the time. By forcing everyone else to group whether they want to or not, they're just increasing their own pool of potential group-mates.
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
http://trialsofascension.com
Wow, you go back to the same arguments every week, never listening to the other side at all. Being selfish is to think about 'me', but if you want other people to share content, to roll on loot with, to be able to heal allies or take the stress off the weaker characters, then surely you're thinking about the others rather than yourself?
The selfish person is the one who wants all content to be his, who wants all loot to be his, who wants to go through dungeons alone, who wants to fight boss monsters alone, who doesn't want to join other players or bring other people along. The selfish person is the soloer. Solo = Self.
You consider the idea of harder group content selfish because you alone wouldn't be able to access it, but the only person being selfish is you for not allowing people to do things you can't do. Oh, and, your 'forcing everyone to group whether they want to or not'. I'm sorry, did someone put a gun to your head and make you play? Because there's this thing called choice...
The selfish person is the one who believes everyone should play their way and yes there are a great many people on this site that believe people are playing games wrong and games should be made a certain way.
There are also a great number of people on this site that like to throw strawmen around, and twist people's words to say something they didn't say, in order to validate some non-existance, erroneous and falacious point that only exists in their own mind.
The option should be there for any way a person wants to play the game, however I don't think a multiplayer game should be crafted to cater to a single player base. As in reality, you shouldn't be able to conquer the world alone.
The ability to hit level cap and be able to safely get around most areas of the map by yourself should be there. I do like the ideas of some of the end game zones in GW2 that were difficult to navigate alone. Getting players to group for non instanced pve at end game level is pretty cool.
http://thewordiz.wordpress.com/
You keep making the same mistake, although that's not unusual. Here's the reality. It doesn't matter what you, personally, want in a game. You, personally, are statistically irrelevant. What matters is what millions of MMO players want in a game, collectively. The majority is going to rule.
You are not in the majority.
Deal with it.
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
What millions are these then? The millions in WoW? Because that's the only one with a high subscriber base. The other MMO's, the solo based MMO's that apparently millions of MMO players want, are failing one after the other, struggling to keep subscribers until they finally can't sustain themselves and move to a free to play model. So where are all these millions of players? Because they're not playing the games that you seem to approve of.
If that's the majority talking then I think it's quite evident they don't approve of the way MMO's have gone.
The only reason MMOs are failing is because there are too damn many of them, there just aren't enough players to go around to make all of them financially viable. Developers need to stop making so many. It's like any other product, there is supply and demand and when the supply exceeds the demand, product lines die. Unfortunately, self-control and MMO development just don't go together at the moment.
And the millions are all the people who collectively play MMOs, whatever game they might play, if they play any at all at the moment. Grouping, especially forced grouping, is wholly out of fashion at the moment. If you want it back, prove to developers that a significant portion of the total community not only want it, but would pay to get it.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
The whole point of an MMO is to interact with other people (which includes grouping). The reason grouping should be an important aspect of every MMO is because it expands the community, while bringing everyone closer together at the same time. Think of guild wars without guilds.. Pretty fucking dull if you ask me. While I have nothing against solo play; as I thoroughly enjoy soloing, due to the fact that I can AFK as I please, play at my own pace, etc. There should be many considerations taken into account when scaling group play vs solo play.
If the most efficient ways to gear up or farm in a game are through solo play, it will discourage players from participating in group play (as we've seen in Diablo 3). Even if solo play is on "par" with group play in terms of farming, players who opt to play in groups have to deal with conflicts in scheduling and finding compitent players; which ends up favoring solo play again.
On the other hand, group play is a very important aspect of every mmo as it can be much more dynamic than solo play (for example WoW raid bosses). Group play requires perks as long as the content is more challenging than solo play (BECAUSE IT REQUIRES US TO BE HUMAN). As much as we would like to deny the fact that bots exist in OUR game, we can not (bots are in EVERY game), this is another BIG reason game developers should favor group play. If a group of players can not out farm a bot, then group play will be discouraged. Those players will be pretty much FORCED to solo play if they want to farm "efficiently," but since they aren't bots and can't farm 24/7 we still have absolutely no encouragement to play legit. This is partially the reason we see SO MANY bots in games where group play is not encouraged. Take a look at Runescape & D3, both games actually discourage group play on many occasions and as a result, they are PLAGUED with bots. Not only are they abundant, but they actually out do their human counterparts.
If you seriously prefer solo > group play, these are just some of the considerations to take into account before complaining that group play has unfair advantages. There are PLENTY of single player RPGs to tackle before considering an MMO to be your single player time sink
TLDR; if you dislike grouping - stay the fuck away from MMOs, it's that simple.
All you are talking about is loot. So many of the "MMOs should only allow for grouping" crowd try to use community as their argument and how allowing for solo play defeats that. However, all you talk about is the most efficient way to get phat lewtz, so then whats the point of playing MMOs to get gear since you can get gear much more efficiently in a single player game anyways?
TLDR: Different people have different play styles, learn to deal with that.
Loot is not the only consideration I talked about. If you read and understood my argument entirely, you would notice that I talked about how group play allows for more DYNAMIC boss fights. Why the fuck would an MMO who caters from thousands to millions of players, create content that they specifically want you to beat SOLO. It's not possible to have a soloable boss that is as dynamic as a boss that requires a group. You can solo as much as you want, but the hardest content is always going to be in group play.
While single player feats can exist in MMOs, these games weren't made for us NOT to group.
If you are strictly looking for single player challenges, then play single player games, that's what they were made for. You can also attempt to solo group content, but it's not always possible to do. I'm not knocking solo play, I'm just saying that group play HAS to be more favorable.
And I have to do that, why, exactly? You're under the rather strange idea that developers only create what people want to have. If that were true we'd still be playing Space Invaders XXXVI because they would have never known Pacman was a good idea. People, after all, were happy playing Space Invaders so why create anything else?
If developers just continue to make the same games year in year out, then nothing is going to ever change. You can spout your crap about market research and all the rest, but at the end of the day, they're an entertainment industry, they need to create something that will entertain and creating the same game under a different name is just repetition. Entertainment and repetition are not good bedfellows.
Group play with a hint of solo ability. MMO's are about interacting and making friends. Not playing it like a console game you can go from begining to end with ease. People forgot what its means to work together, to work for something, and to make a difference. Its just zooooom zoooom to the end and whine on the forums the game sucks and has no content.
Yeah grouping is a pain sometimes, i admit that. But sure beats the alternative.
I like both and I think that solo and teamplay are important in an MMO. Obviously you might be fine if you go fight "a lone wolf_0" in the wilderness, but if you're going up against "a hill giant" and you're not a seasoned player then you should group. Nothing wrong with that. What I'd like to see though is some variety in group missions. Why are there no missions to infiltrate a facility through stealth and wit? Actually one game did have that, it was called 7 Million and it had by far the most interesting missions that I have ever played, it's just too bad that the company who owned it lacked any sense of vision and the game fell into nothingness.
The missions were all about infiltrating builings and bypassing security guards, locks and cameras. You and your buddies had to solve puzzles in 2 minutes or you'd get thrown out of the building and have to start over again. At the same time someone had to keep an eye out on the guard, or guards. Now that was some seriously fun teamwork!
I miss that game.
GS
Check out The Secret World.
numbers should give a clue:
the right way: pandaland,,make most of the game solo friendly
and i know SWTOR is suffering from that effect too,,how fun is it to stand around, waiting for a group for a FP/heroic?
yes, i know i did that in wow too, but wow players was WAY more social back then,,now most people dont even answer
in group channels,,some of them dont answer at all,,not even a simple "hello"
as for casual groups,,well prolly see it going the same way as GW2,,at least that helps a little
The fact that devs still haven't designed an MMO for soloers is mind boggling. They're completely ignoring what is the largest segment of their potential customer base on a continual basis.
No solo MMO's, no solo servers within existing MMO's, zero useful endgame gear for solo players in existing MMO's, superior performance for groupers vs soloable mobs in existing MMO's, solo players completely or partially locked out of end game content in existing MMO's.
There's millions of potential customers out there who would play MMO's, but the devs have basically said "we don't want your business".
The real irony for the group/raid oriented players who constantly complain on boards like this about how their game has been dumbed down, is if they'd gotten behind the idea of seperate solo MMO's or servers long ago, they would have had a much more enjoyable experience playing MMO's now, because the games or servers they play on would have been tailored more specifically towards their needs, instead of the diversified mush they're being fed now.
Might just be that the solo-only crowd is not big enough to warrant the massive funding needed to create a AAA MMO just for them. Could also be that MMO's are multiplayer games and soloing has nothing to do with multiplayer gameplay whatsoever. It is true that a lot of people who play MMO's spend a lot of that time soloing, but the amount of people who wants to do nothing else but soloing is most likely very small.
The thing I find the most mindboggling is that people who are looking for the perfect singleplayer game experience are looking for it in a genre based on multiplayer instead of going to the forums of the next big singleplayer game in the making and discuss such things over there.
Different servers is not a feasable sollution. Creating a AAA MMO requires an insane amount funds, creating both a AAA MMO and a AAA singleplayer game is just not a logical request. Resources are not infinite, the most probable thing to happen is a low quality game experience for everyone.