From start of game to level 20 , you solo questing .
Then at level 20 the game force you group to finish dungeon quests.
manage to get pass the level 20 dungeon after finish it 1 time and never look back
then after 10 level solo , another dungeon force player to group lol .
Then solo 10 more levels , another force group contents appear .
Then after 10 more solo levels .... after 10 more ... after ... 10 ... after ....
Okay , i don't know why they keep this retard design around .
If the game design total for solo , then why add group contents ? It feel like sweet candy with salt at core , seriously .
If they going to make solo MMORPGs from the start , never add forced group contents.
No trading (no bots lol) , no AH , no forced group . If they want to create solo (lol) MMORPGs.
Then how they disguised they game as MMORPGs to draw the crowd ?
Simple , the town are place where players see other ,
there are chat box for players to chat with other .
Players can make party at town
And when player join party , they become weaker so the contents become harder and more challenge . And the reward are same as solo playing.
They still Massively (at town and chat box ) multiplayer (optional) online (DRM lol) role-playing game
But build total for solo with multiplayer option.
No trading = no worry about bot , no worry about cheat , no more accounts hack .
Wonderful MMORPGs (lol) , so why keep (Forced) group contents when you build your MMORPG total for solo play ?
Yes! my question is
why keep (Forced) group contents when you build your MMORPG total for solo play ?
Seriously , who want sweet candy with salt at core ?
Not sure if a "solo mmorpg" exists but for the purpose of this post we will assume there is such a thing. The fact that you say some game has group content would automatically make that not a "solo mmorpg". /end
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?"
Even though it was said and then edited out by a mod ( for other reasons ) it still holds true. Forced grouping = more social games is a myth. The lack of social connection people suffer in modern mmos isn't from a lack of opportunity to group or even a lack of necessity. It comes from a lack of people who want to engage in it at all.
MMOs still have group content but still lack a social atmosphere. The groups are just a small number of people doing the same quest/dungeon that never speak unless they absolutely have to and most of the time when they do it's to call someone a name. Forcing those people into groups all the time, it's going to produce some magic solution and everyone will have a big party together.
If you want examples of what forced grouping in a modern mmo will really produce...log into world of tanks and see the way people talk to each other there. Is that really what you want your game communities to be like ?
If you want to be social in an mmo...go find the groups of people that play the game to be social. Put in the effort yourself and stop expecting the devs to hold your hands and lead you to it.
I think EQ1 was great for this, as a necro I could solo anything for the most part and it fit the lore in imo, that a necro was somewhat of a loner, or the druid could kit all day, or as a bard I could solo the island in the Oasis with those undead things and I mean all fifteen or how many there where, it did not matter. Even as I kited all them I would see a Giant then grab him and kit him, it did not matter how many. And I could watch a full group not be able to do it:)
Now that being said I could not go down in a dungeon and expect to kill anything by myself and I didn't expect I should. I would not have been first choice for a group. I had a blast out in the open world and left the grouping and dungeon crawls to those that wanted to do it.
The problem is there is no difference between class's anymore and everybody wants to be able to do the same thing, as a necro a warrior would not stand a chance against me, but could I lead a group, and keep them safe, no! But people want to play a necro and a warrior at the same time, and a healer, so who needs anybody anymore.
So in the old days you could role play and have a strong solo char and not care about some group, and still do stuff and have fun. And the key part nobody cared if you would crush them in pvp. Now every wants a fare chance and it has become boring:)
Originally posted by DamonVileEven though it was said and then edited out by a mod ( for other reasons ) it still holds true. Forced grouping = more social games is a myth. The lack of social connection people suffer in modern mmos isn't from a lack of opportunity to group or even a lack of necessity. It comes from a lack of people who want to engage in it at all.MMOs still have group content but still lack a social atmosphere. The groups are just a small number of people doing the same quest/dungeon that never speak unless they absolutely have to and most of the time when they do it's to call someone a name. Forcing those people into groups all the time, it's going to produce some magic solution and everyone will have a big party together.If you want examples of what forced grouping in a modern mmo will really produce...log into world of tanks and see the way people talk to each other there. Is that really what you want your game communities to be like ?If you want to be social in an mmo...go find the groups of people that play the game to be social. Put in the effort yourself and stop expecting the devs to hold your hands and lead you to it.
See here group content is not and should not equal "being social". I do think though if group content and grouping is encouraged there is more chance for socialization but I think it has becomes less common with the mechanics used to "force" people into it.
Like much else when someone feels forced into something it is less conducive to a good experience or social interaction.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Originally posted by DamonVile Even though it was said and then edited out by a mod ( for other reasons ) it still holds true. Forced grouping = more social games is a myth. The lack of social connection people suffer in modern mmos isn't from a lack of opportunity to group or even a lack of necessity. It comes from a lack of people who want to engage in it at all.MMOs still have group content but still lack a social atmosphere. The groups are just a small number of people doing the same quest/dungeon that never speak unless they absolutely have to and most of the time when they do it's to call someone a name. Forcing those people into groups all the time, it's going to produce some magic solution and everyone will have a big party together.If you want examples of what forced grouping in a modern mmo will really produce...log into world of tanks and see the way people talk to each other there. Is that really what you want your game communities to be like ?If you want to be social in an mmo...go find the groups of people that play the game to be social. Put in the effort yourself and stop expecting the devs to hold your hands and lead you to it.
I understand your sentiment, but I have to disagree. The fact that, in older MMOs, soloing meant really slowing down your progression or completely halting it at higher levels forced people to be social and establish they could play well with others. Being an incredibly awful and/or antisocial person meant you had a hard time finding groups to advance your character at best, or you were blacklisted by the most effective players on your server, at worst.
When you don't have to depend upon any other player for your own personal progression, you have no compelling reason to be friendly or "social" towards those other players. Interdependence breeds a friendly atmosphere where players want you around to experience content and progress with them.
This article, written in 2011, explains it perfectly.
To quote a specific portion which is directly applicable:
Wolfshead said:
The fact is that MMO companies have long neglected to design the need for player interdependence into their game worlds. When players don’t need each other it breeds anti-social behavior and it results in the devaluation of other players. Players become nothing more than advanced NPCs.
For some reason, the masters of the MMO universe just assumed that the community — much like oxygen in the real world — would always be there. They were wrong.
Some people are trying to rewrite history of MMOs and asserting that requiring community as part of the design was some kind of accident. I do not agree. Community and socialization were always the entire point of MMORPGs back then.
Breed a game that requires interdependence between players and you breed a friendly, socially adept playerbase.
EDIT- Further evidence supporting this case is the fact that, in older MMOs, piecing together a good group was much, much harder and more time-consuming than in today's MMOs. Yet the majority of the playerbase grouped on a regular basis, or whenever the opportunity presented itself, because it was by far the most effective way to experience content and progress efficiently. In today's MMO, grouping has never been easier, and there's never been more players who avoid it like the plague. You say the cause of this problem is antisocial and/or awful personalities. I say that's that's simply a symptom of the problem caused by a shift in the genre development paradigm for the worse in the interest of simply moving as many boxes as possible on launch day.
Even though it was said and then edited out by a mod ( for other reasons ) it still holds true. Forced grouping = more social games is a myth. The lack of social connection people suffer in modern mmos isn't from a lack of opportunity to group or even a lack of necessity. It comes from a lack of people who want to engage in it at all.
MMOs still have group content but still lack a social atmosphere. The groups are just a small number of people doing the same quest/dungeon that never speak unless they absolutely have to and most of the time when they do it's to call someone a name. Forcing those people into groups all the time, it's going to produce some magic solution and everyone will have a big party together.
If you want examples of what forced grouping in a modern mmo will really produce...log into world of tanks and see the way people talk to each other there. Is that really what you want your game communities to be like ?
If you want to be social in an mmo...go find the groups of people that play the game to be social. Put in the effort yourself and stop expecting the devs to hold your hands and lead you to it.
More like lack of common goal than opportunity to group or the necessity.
As some ready said , you can solo in old game , but people still willing to group because it faster way to progress (than solo) or because solo is boring .
Nowadays we mainly do quest hubs to progress and because of that there are no common goal between players. Everyone in they own quests .
Even if you are in same quest , grouping give less exp (from killing mobs)
Then there are difference between time of play and number of contents consumed .
In old game , because the natural of mobs grind , the party can have difference levels and still run well ,
But nowadays game , there are no place for difference .
Even in same level , if you ready do A,B,C quest then it impossible to have long time party (hours) with people wasn't do A,B,C quests but ready done D . E . F. G quests
ect...
So you gain less from group with other than do it solo . Unless the contents forced you to group , you will never want to group.
No reason to group beside you feel the game boring . But even you feel so , other may not .
And the difference of contents consume make it impossible to group
So ... no willing to group anymore ... let forced (lol)
Basically , the design of nowadays MMORPGs make people prefer solo , and group are like punishment.
It all because the environment change how player playing.
And of course we cant ignore the fact that nowadays, a lots players (teens and young adults) have pretty bad personality.
Originally posted by DamonVile Even though it was said and then edited out by a mod ( for other reasons ) it still holds true. Forced grouping = more social games is a myth. The lack of social connection people suffer in modern mmos isn't from a lack of opportunity to group or even a lack of necessity. It comes from a lack of people who want to engage in it at all.MMOs still have group content but still lack a social atmosphere. The groups are just a small number of people doing the same quest/dungeon that never speak unless they absolutely have to and most of the time when they do it's to call someone a name. Forcing those people into groups all the time, it's going to produce some magic solution and everyone will have a big party together.If you want examples of what forced grouping in a modern mmo will really produce...log into world of tanks and see the way people talk to each other there. Is that really what you want your game communities to be like ?If you want to be social in an mmo...go find the groups of people that play the game to be social. Put in the effort yourself and stop expecting the devs to hold your hands and lead you to it.
I understand your sentiment, but I have to disagree. The fact that, in older MMOs, soloing meant really slowing down your progression or completely halting it at higher levels forced people to be social and establish they could play well with others.
EQ isn't all older MMOs. It isn't even typical of older MMOs. Most older MMOs didn't have that issue, partially because leveling wasn't the focus of many of them. The scenario you describe is almost exclusively an issue of EQ and the MMOs that patterned themselves after it, including WOW.
We went from a diverse playfield of Furcadia, UO, AC, EQ, DAoC, AO, Second Life, Entropia, There, Puzzle Pirates, SWG, and EVE to a decade-long monoculture of EQ/WOW-style graphical dikuMUDs.
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
people put aside their differences when the goal is worth the effort to behave like human beings.
that's the long lost charm of MMOs.
Yep. Even if the interaction at face level is premature and bad, if the mechanics allow it, there will be many forms of positive interaction and ways for players to immerse and commit themselves.
If you want to cater to all, you should consider separating the lines of progression more; if you solo to max lvl, you can't be forced to do only group content all of a sudden. A separate server for most of the stuff being group content or simply more difficult? A hardcore server? Lol it would be rushed by all the people crying for NERFs and rebalancing. And then there would be your typical hc-guilds raping the content in a flash and demanding more content for them to trample.
Originally posted by Robokapppeople put aside their differences when the goal is worth the effort to behave like human beings.that's the long lost charm of MMOs.
Yep. Even if the interaction at face level is premature and bad, if the mechanics allow it, there will be many forms of positive interaction and ways for players to immerse and commit themselves.If you want to cater to all, you should consider separating the lines of progression more; if you solo to max lvl, you can't be forced to do only group content all of a sudden. A separate server for most of the stuff being group content or simply more difficult? A hardcore server? Lol it would be rushed by all the people crying for NERFs and rebalancing. And then there would be your typical hc-guilds raping the content in a flash and demanding more content for them to trample.
Precisely. There will always be bad eggs, people who just don't get along or personalities that clash. But if you give players a real reason to need one another consistently (not just for instanced, canned experiences, but consistently and intertwined throughout every facet of the game world), they'll quickly adapt to the situation and figure out treating other players like garbage is counter-productive to even their own selfish goals.
" A recent study from the University at Buffalo School of Management explores the age-old problem, and it has concluded that online games need to increase feelings of character ownership and player cooperation. Science says so."
(Bolding mine)
So yeah, devs think if they can find ways to get players to spend more time socializing, those players will stay and play and of course pay longer. What they don't get is that some of us are going to quit much quicker if we feel forced to interact with other players. Maybe that has something to do with that whole feeling of character ownership?
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
Originally posted by MadimorgaI think this study: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/120693-Research-Paper-Investigates-Gamer-Loyalty-to-MMOs has increasingly warped the minds of devs.It says: " A recent study from the University at Buffalo School of Management explores the age-old problem, and it has concluded that online games need to increase feelings of character ownership and player cooperation. Science says so." (Bolding mine)So yeah, devs think if they can find ways to get players to spend more time socializing, those players will stay and play and of course pay longer. What they don't get is that some of us are going to quit much quicker if we feel forced to interact with other players. Maybe that has something to do with that whole feeling of character ownership?
It's a fine line between encourage and force, but unless you are suggesting that all content, even endgame content, should be accessible to the solo player, they have to err on the side of socializing instead of soloing. It is, in the end, a multiplayer game. You and I discussed the viability and role of solo play in another thread, though, so we know where each other is coming from.
Originally posted by Quirhid Bwahah... Yeah, just look how friendly the community in League of Legends is.
You guys continue to mistake a symptom for the problem itself. The problem in League of Legends (and other MOBAs) is the lack of persistence between the players. You are randomly thrown onto teams of players. You have no control over those players, you know nothing about them until you're getting ready to start the match with no option to change them (you can quit, but most MOBAs have penalties for such actions). No one is the leader of such group and can kick the idiot who's making waves or not doing their job. You're stuck with what the game throws you into. MMOs are in a much better position to allow players to police their own groups due to the persistence of the game world.
Instead, MMOs have begun implementing these same "throw 5 random players together, 'cause ROLES!" and you see the same awful social situations. To say that it's just how humans are and nothing will change it is to write off multiplayer games completely. The only thing that keeps players in MMOs from acting like assholes is the same thing that keeps the majority of the population from doing so in public: reputation and ostracization. Can't get very far in the real world if everyone you run into on a daily basis thinks you're a complete tool (unless you're already at the top, in which case general rules don't apply). Simply removing any advantage or benefit to grouping and cooperating does nothing to solve the problem. It just avoids it.
Originally posted by MadimorgaI think this study: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/120693-Research-Paper-Investigates-Gamer-Loyalty-to-MMOs has increasingly warped the minds of devs.It says: " A recent study from the University at Buffalo School of Management explores the age-old problem, and it has concluded that online games need to increase feelings of character ownership and player cooperation. Science says so." (Bolding mine)So yeah, devs think if they can find ways to get players to spend more time socializing, those players will stay and play and of course pay longer. What they don't get is that some of us are going to quit much quicker if we feel forced to interact with other players. Maybe that has something to do with that whole feeling of character ownership?
It's a fine line between encourage and force, but unless you are suggesting that all content, even endgame content, should be accessible to the solo player, they have to err on the side of socializing instead of soloing. It is, in the end, a multiplayer game. You and I discussed the viability and role of solo play in another thread, though, so we know where each other is coming from.
Wildstar has plans for endgame solo content, but it also has huge raid content. So it isn't a choice between one or the other. Plus crafting, housing, and plenty of other things can be done and are done by solo players at end game or any point in a game.
I really don't care what other people do, they're welcome to 40 man line dance to kill the boss all they want to, but I'm not putting up with guild drama to join in. I was never a very good dancer anyway.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
Originally posted by Madimorga Wildstar has plans for endgame solo content, but it also has huge raid content. So it isn't a choice between one or the other. Plus crafting, housing, and plenty of other things can be done and are done by solo players at end game or any point in a game.I really don't care what other people do, they're welcome to 40 man line dance to kill the boss all they want to, but I'm not putting up with guild drama to join in. I was never a very good dancer anyway.
You and I have very different tastes for MMO. I can respect that. I'd like to see a new MMO released that creates an interdependence I personally haven't seen since my days in vanilla DAoC. I realize not everyone in the genre will flock to it, but I do feel it will foster a community of subscribers unlike any other on the market right now. Maybe even teach some folks how to dance. :P
If I can find such an MMO, I'll throw money at them. Just as you will throw money at Wildstar for providing you a lateral solo route. I won't lie: I had some fun playing Wildstar in the beta. The combat system is a blast in PvP. I just didn't find it enough to my tastes to buy and subscribe.
game play Interdepency + allow player interaction will create a good community IMO. A good community doesn't mean all kind and friendly players. It just means you will have reason to interact. I mean there were asshats but I even enjoyed making enemies and rivals.
Originally posted by Madimorga Wildstar has plans for endgame solo content, but it also has huge raid content. So it isn't a choice between one or the other. Plus crafting, housing, and plenty of other things can be done and are done by solo players at end game or any point in a game.I really don't care what other people do, they're welcome to 40 man line dance to kill the boss all they want to, but I'm not putting up with guild drama to join in. I was never a very good dancer anyway.
You and I have very different tastes for MMO. I can respect that. I'd like to see a new MMO released that creates an interdependence I personally haven't seen since my days in vanilla DAoC. I realize not everyone in the genre will flock to it, but I do feel it will foster a community of subscribers unlike any other on the market right now. Maybe even teach some folks how to dance. :P
If I can find such an MMO, I'll throw money at them. Just as you will throw money at Wildstar for providing you a lateral solo route. I won't lie: I had some fun playing Wildstar in the beta. The combat system is a blast in PvP. I just didn't find it enough to my tastes to buy and subscribe.
I hope you get your dream MMO just as much as I hope I get mine. It's when devs try to force us all into the same games that I start getting irritated. It never has worked and it never will.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
The ability to solo in MMO's is something that should never go away. Forced other-player grouping is a dead mechanic that a massive number of people, probably a majority, and probably even a sizable majority, can't stand. But the option to group should always be there, and group quests are indeed valuable.
There -is- an answer to this problem though; its just not one that a lot of companies have spent time on. Hirelings. AI-controlled group members of 'competent' level. Not nearly as skilled as full players, but enough such that, with a bit of effort, can be used to clear even full group content. DDO has been able to do it for years -- I personally used hirelings to solo up to level 18 with a couple of small exceptions (and even after beating those exceptions, I learned to duo them with the exception of a couple mid-level raids).
Hirelings have many advantages over other people: they don't need smoke breaks, they don't insist on stupid Vent or Teamspeak, they don't have schedules to keep, they don't eat chips into open mics or berate simple mistakes or talk in sexist, demeaning ways the entire run or take 20 minute 'bio' breaks or try to ninja the loot or...
Come to think of it, I'm having trouble finding one thing about another random player that's an advantage over a hireling. But their presence does mean that if and when I -do- want meaningful human interaction, I can have it. And when I don't, I can do whatever I want without having to make sure it meets the approval of the latest 4chan reject of the day. The first company that comes up with an improved hireling system will get all the monies.
The ability to solo in MMO's is something that should never go away. Forced other-player grouping is a dead mechanic that a massive number of people, probably a majority, and probably even a sizable majority, can't stand. But the option to group should always be there, and group quests are indeed valuable.
There -is- an answer to this problem though; its just not one that a lot of companies have spent time on. Hirelings. AI-controlled group members of 'competent' level. Not nearly as skilled as full players, but enough such that, with a bit of effort, can be used to clear even full group content. DDO has been able to do it for years -- I personally used hirelings to solo up to level 18 with a couple of small exceptions (and even after beating those exceptions, I learned to duo them with the exception of a couple mid-level raids).
Hirelings have many advantages over other people: they don't need smoke breaks, they don't insist on stupid Vent or Teamspeak, they don't have schedules to keep, they don't eat chips into open mics or berate simple mistakes or talk in sexist, demeaning ways the entire run or take 20 minute 'bio' breaks or try to ninja the loot or...
Come to think of it, I'm having trouble finding one thing about another random player that's an advantage over a hireling. But their presence does mean that if and when I -do- want meaningful human interaction, I can have it. And when I don't, I can do whatever I want without having to make sure it meets the approval of the latest 4chan reject of the day. The first company that comes up with an improved hireling system will get all the monies.
I really liked the mercenaries in Guild Wars. I was disappointed when GW2 didn't have them. Also, the crat pet and the ability to mez mobs and make them fight for you in Anarchy Online was great, as were MP pets.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
The ability to solo in MMO's is something that should never go away. Forced other-player grouping is a dead mechanic that a massive number of people, probably a majority, and probably even a sizable majority, can't stand. But the option to group should always be there, and group quests are indeed valuable.
There -is- an answer to this problem though; its just not one that a lot of companies have spent time on. Hirelings. AI-controlled group members of 'competent' level. Not nearly as skilled as full players, but enough such that, with a bit of effort, can be used to clear even full group content. DDO has been able to do it for years -- I personally used hirelings to solo up to level 18 with a couple of small exceptions (and even after beating those exceptions, I learned to duo them with the exception of a couple mid-level raids).
Hirelings have many advantages over other people: they don't need smoke breaks, they don't insist on stupid Vent or Teamspeak, they don't have schedules to keep, they don't eat chips into open mics or berate simple mistakes or talk in sexist, demeaning ways the entire run or take 20 minute 'bio' breaks or try to ninja the loot or...
Come to think of it, I'm having trouble finding one thing about another random player that's an advantage over a hireling. But their presence does mean that if and when I -do- want meaningful human interaction, I can have it. And when I don't, I can do whatever I want without having to make sure it meets the approval of the latest 4chan reject of the day. The first company that comes up with an improved hireling system will get all the monies.
I get you don't like dealing with other players. But, taken to that extreme, why even play an MMO? I feel like you would be better served playing a Borderlands with the option to take on AI team members, or playing Dragon Age in an open world with the option of playing it online.
I get that people don't want to be forced to group or deal with some folks. But if you're going to take it so far, it begs the question: why not just play a singleplayer RPG with multiplayer options?
Comments
Not sure if a "solo mmorpg" exists but for the purpose of this post we will assume there is such a thing. The fact that you say some game has group content would automatically make that not a "solo mmorpg". /end
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?"
Even though it was said and then edited out by a mod ( for other reasons ) it still holds true. Forced grouping = more social games is a myth. The lack of social connection people suffer in modern mmos isn't from a lack of opportunity to group or even a lack of necessity. It comes from a lack of people who want to engage in it at all.
MMOs still have group content but still lack a social atmosphere. The groups are just a small number of people doing the same quest/dungeon that never speak unless they absolutely have to and most of the time when they do it's to call someone a name. Forcing those people into groups all the time, it's going to produce some magic solution and everyone will have a big party together.
If you want examples of what forced grouping in a modern mmo will really produce...log into world of tanks and see the way people talk to each other there. Is that really what you want your game communities to be like ?
If you want to be social in an mmo...go find the groups of people that play the game to be social. Put in the effort yourself and stop expecting the devs to hold your hands and lead you to it.
I think EQ1 was great for this, as a necro I could solo anything for the most part and it fit the lore in imo, that a necro was somewhat of a loner, or the druid could kit all day, or as a bard I could solo the island in the Oasis with those undead things and I mean all fifteen or how many there where, it did not matter. Even as I kited all them I would see a Giant then grab him and kit him, it did not matter how many. And I could watch a full group not be able to do it:)
Now that being said I could not go down in a dungeon and expect to kill anything by myself and I didn't expect I should. I would not have been first choice for a group. I had a blast out in the open world and left the grouping and dungeon crawls to those that wanted to do it.
The problem is there is no difference between class's anymore and everybody wants to be able to do the same thing, as a necro a warrior would not stand a chance against me, but could I lead a group, and keep them safe, no! But people want to play a necro and a warrior at the same time, and a healer, so who needs anybody anymore.
So in the old days you could role play and have a strong solo char and not care about some group, and still do stuff and have fun. And the key part nobody cared if you would crush them in pvp. Now every wants a fare chance and it has become boring:)
Like much else when someone feels forced into something it is less conducive to a good experience or social interaction.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
The joy when you discover the cycle of solo and forced group ...
I understand your sentiment, but I have to disagree. The fact that, in older MMOs, soloing meant really slowing down your progression or completely halting it at higher levels forced people to be social and establish they could play well with others. Being an incredibly awful and/or antisocial person meant you had a hard time finding groups to advance your character at best, or you were blacklisted by the most effective players on your server, at worst.When you don't have to depend upon any other player for your own personal progression, you have no compelling reason to be friendly or "social" towards those other players. Interdependence breeds a friendly atmosphere where players want you around to experience content and progress with them.
This article, written in 2011, explains it perfectly.
To quote a specific portion which is directly applicable:
Breed a game that requires interdependence between players and you breed a friendly, socially adept playerbase.
EDIT- Further evidence supporting this case is the fact that, in older MMOs, piecing together a good group was much, much harder and more time-consuming than in today's MMOs. Yet the majority of the playerbase grouped on a regular basis, or whenever the opportunity presented itself, because it was by far the most effective way to experience content and progress efficiently. In today's MMO, grouping has never been easier, and there's never been more players who avoid it like the plague. You say the cause of this problem is antisocial and/or awful personalities. I say that's that's simply a symptom of the problem caused by a shift in the genre development paradigm for the worse in the interest of simply moving as many boxes as possible on launch day.
More like lack of common goal than opportunity to group or the necessity.
As some ready said , you can solo in old game , but people still willing to group because it faster way to progress (than solo) or because solo is boring .
Nowadays we mainly do quest hubs to progress and because of that there are no common goal between players. Everyone in they own quests .
Even if you are in same quest , grouping give less exp (from killing mobs)
Then there are difference between time of play and number of contents consumed .
In old game , because the natural of mobs grind , the party can have difference levels and still run well ,
But nowadays game , there are no place for difference .
Even in same level , if you ready do A,B,C quest then it impossible to have long time party (hours) with people wasn't do A,B,C quests but ready done D . E . F. G quests
ect...
So you gain less from group with other than do it solo . Unless the contents forced you to group , you will never want to group.
No reason to group beside you feel the game boring . But even you feel so , other may not .
And the difference of contents consume make it impossible to group
So ... no willing to group anymore ... let forced (lol)
Basically , the design of nowadays MMORPGs make people prefer solo , and group are like punishment.
It all because the environment change how player playing.
And of course we cant ignore the fact that nowadays, a lots players (teens and young adults) have pretty bad personality.
nah .. breed a game that requires interdependence between players and you breed drama, bad behavior and aggravation.
EQ isn't all older MMOs. It isn't even typical of older MMOs. Most older MMOs didn't have that issue, partially because leveling wasn't the focus of many of them. The scenario you describe is almost exclusively an issue of EQ and the MMOs that patterned themselves after it, including WOW.
We went from a diverse playfield of Furcadia, UO, AC, EQ, DAoC, AO, Second Life, Entropia, There, Puzzle Pirates, SWG, and EVE to a decade-long monoculture of EQ/WOW-style graphical dikuMUDs.
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
Yep. Even if the interaction at face level is premature and bad, if the mechanics allow it, there will be many forms of positive interaction and ways for players to immerse and commit themselves.
If you want to cater to all, you should consider separating the lines of progression more; if you solo to max lvl, you can't be forced to do only group content all of a sudden. A separate server for most of the stuff being group content or simply more difficult? A hardcore server? Lol it would be rushed by all the people crying for NERFs and rebalancing. And then there would be your typical hc-guilds raping the content in a flash and demanding more content for them to trample.
Precisely. There will always be bad eggs, people who just don't get along or personalities that clash. But if you give players a real reason to need one another consistently (not just for instanced, canned experiences, but consistently and intertwined throughout every facet of the game world), they'll quickly adapt to the situation and figure out treating other players like garbage is counter-productive to even their own selfish goals.
I think this study: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/120693-Research-Paper-Investigates-Gamer-Loyalty-to-MMOs has increasingly warped the minds of devs.
It says:
" A recent study from the University at Buffalo School of Management explores the age-old problem, and it has concluded that online games need to increase feelings of character ownership and player cooperation. Science says so."
(Bolding mine)
So yeah, devs think if they can find ways to get players to spend more time socializing, those players will stay and play and of course pay longer. What they don't get is that some of us are going to quit much quicker if we feel forced to interact with other players. Maybe that has something to do with that whole feeling of character ownership?
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
nah ... there is no long lost charm. Human nature takes over .. and drama ensures.
Put side their differences? This forum is the best example of that NOT happening.
Bwahah... Yeah, just look how friendly the community in League of Legends is.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
It's a fine line between encourage and force, but unless you are suggesting that all content, even endgame content, should be accessible to the solo player, they have to err on the side of socializing instead of soloing. It is, in the end, a multiplayer game. You and I discussed the viability and role of solo play in another thread, though, so we know where each other is coming from.
You guys continue to mistake a symptom for the problem itself. The problem in League of Legends (and other MOBAs) is the lack of persistence between the players. You are randomly thrown onto teams of players. You have no control over those players, you know nothing about them until you're getting ready to start the match with no option to change them (you can quit, but most MOBAs have penalties for such actions). No one is the leader of such group and can kick the idiot who's making waves or not doing their job. You're stuck with what the game throws you into. MMOs are in a much better position to allow players to police their own groups due to the persistence of the game world.
Instead, MMOs have begun implementing these same "throw 5 random players together, 'cause ROLES!" and you see the same awful social situations. To say that it's just how humans are and nothing will change it is to write off multiplayer games completely. The only thing that keeps players in MMOs from acting like assholes is the same thing that keeps the majority of the population from doing so in public: reputation and ostracization. Can't get very far in the real world if everyone you run into on a daily basis thinks you're a complete tool (unless you're already at the top, in which case general rules don't apply). Simply removing any advantage or benefit to grouping and cooperating does nothing to solve the problem. It just avoids it.
Wildstar has plans for endgame solo content, but it also has huge raid content. So it isn't a choice between one or the other. Plus crafting, housing, and plenty of other things can be done and are done by solo players at end game or any point in a game.
I really don't care what other people do, they're welcome to 40 man line dance to kill the boss all they want to, but I'm not putting up with guild drama to join in. I was never a very good dancer anyway.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
You and I have very different tastes for MMO. I can respect that. I'd like to see a new MMO released that creates an interdependence I personally haven't seen since my days in vanilla DAoC. I realize not everyone in the genre will flock to it, but I do feel it will foster a community of subscribers unlike any other on the market right now. Maybe even teach some folks how to dance. :P
If I can find such an MMO, I'll throw money at them. Just as you will throw money at Wildstar for providing you a lateral solo route. I won't lie: I had some fun playing Wildstar in the beta. The combat system is a blast in PvP. I just didn't find it enough to my tastes to buy and subscribe.
I hope you get your dream MMO just as much as I hope I get mine. It's when devs try to force us all into the same games that I start getting irritated. It never has worked and it never will.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
Of course there is.
Pvp between PD guild vs no-harsh-dp guild
Pvp between pvp ffa guild and everyone else.
Pvp between crafting guild and combat centric guild
......
The ability to solo in MMO's is something that should never go away. Forced other-player grouping is a dead mechanic that a massive number of people, probably a majority, and probably even a sizable majority, can't stand. But the option to group should always be there, and group quests are indeed valuable.
There -is- an answer to this problem though; its just not one that a lot of companies have spent time on. Hirelings. AI-controlled group members of 'competent' level. Not nearly as skilled as full players, but enough such that, with a bit of effort, can be used to clear even full group content. DDO has been able to do it for years -- I personally used hirelings to solo up to level 18 with a couple of small exceptions (and even after beating those exceptions, I learned to duo them with the exception of a couple mid-level raids).
Hirelings have many advantages over other people: they don't need smoke breaks, they don't insist on stupid Vent or Teamspeak, they don't have schedules to keep, they don't eat chips into open mics or berate simple mistakes or talk in sexist, demeaning ways the entire run or take 20 minute 'bio' breaks or try to ninja the loot or...
Come to think of it, I'm having trouble finding one thing about another random player that's an advantage over a hireling. But their presence does mean that if and when I -do- want meaningful human interaction, I can have it. And when I don't, I can do whatever I want without having to make sure it meets the approval of the latest 4chan reject of the day. The first company that comes up with an improved hireling system will get all the monies.
I really liked the mercenaries in Guild Wars. I was disappointed when GW2 didn't have them. Also, the crat pet and the ability to mez mobs and make them fight for you in Anarchy Online was great, as were MP pets.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
I get you don't like dealing with other players. But, taken to that extreme, why even play an MMO? I feel like you would be better served playing a Borderlands with the option to take on AI team members, or playing Dragon Age in an open world with the option of playing it online.
I get that people don't want to be forced to group or deal with some folks. But if you're going to take it so far, it begs the question: why not just play a singleplayer RPG with multiplayer options?