Loke666

I am a Swedish RPG fan who sometime make pen and paper stuff for roleplaying conventions. I love RPGs, MMOs and turned based strategy games, listens to metal and work as a CNC coder/industrial worker.  I currently live in Malmö (next to Coopenhagen) but will be moving to Öland soon. And for the moment I work weekends so I have plenty of spare time on weekdays but will be unavaliable saturdays and sundays. And I know stuff about history that makes people stare very strangely at me, just love to read about the past without any specific favorite period. I can use a sword, have a good one as well (hand made copy with the original from about year 1000) as a chainmail and helmet but I wouldn't call myself good with it. My favorite beverage is Guiness.

About

Username
Loke666
Location
Kalmar
Joined
Visits
1,600
Last Active
Roles
Member
Points
2,470
Rank
Epic
Favorite Role
DPS
Currently Playing
Gw2
Posts
20,387
Badges
47
  • Forced grouping is actually for anti-social players

    I've never seen an MMO force solo content
    Neither have I.
    Unlike forced group content, solo content can be done in groups too.
    We level often with a group of friends in WoW.

    Actually, doing solo content in a small group permits way more of that sacred "socialization" people talk about in this thread than fighting bosses in a 20+ man raid which requires concentration and therefore limits conversations.
    Well, if an MMORPG doesn't have any group content until a specific level it is kinda true. But that is more about games only giving access to certain types of content at certain level ranges. It is not a good thing. You can group on casual solo content and it can be fun but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be appropriate content for groups as well that gives a bit more challenge.

    And smaller groups certainly have more time to chat then a huge raid group focused on a tough raid, however is a dungeon run rather social, particularly with voice chat and at least as much as running some solo quests together.

    The whole thing comes down to that a good MMORPG needs to offer different types of content, too much solo content and the game loses much of it's fun just as too much group content does. Todays MMOs have moved almost all it's group content to the endgame and all solo content is before it. Raid content is almost un-existing before the endgame.

    I do think most people agree with me that the content need far better pacing, We are very close to have a game with only this set up:
    LvL to max: Solo questing. After that until good gear: group content. Once you have that: raiding.
    Even if you only play one type of gameplay you should realize that this is not a good set up. Many MMO players still play a bit of the other types of play and no matter what you enjoy most you will only get that content at certain times as you play.

    Then you add difficulty. Some smart guy decided that solo content should be the easiest, followed by grouping and last raids. That also sucks, a good MMORPG should mix that up as well, and slowly raising the general difficulty means we actually becomes better and learn tricks as we play.

    Few groupers think MMORPGs shouldn't have any solo content and if any of you soloers don't think MMORPGs should have group content you should consider that.

    We could of course discuss what is the right amount of any kind of content but I think that when a game get over 50% of one type it will loose on it. A good MMORPG might not be able to have all types of content in it, raiding and FFA full loot PvP for instance just don't work but if it can't have all types of PvE content in it it will be a poorer game and miss out on many dedicated players.

    The premise of this thread seems to be that if we interact as little as possible the community will be better for it and I disagree with that but bow this thread seems to be more about people only wanting the game to have the content they like.

    Me, I solo, I do group content, now and then I raid and I PvP. I am hardly the only one here that does so and I certainly don't go around trolling people or try do make the community "toxic". There will always be some morons but I don't think they are so common as many hear thinks, they are just very loud and one moron sounds more then 100 normal people. 
    cameltosis
  • Forced grouping is actually for anti-social players

    SEANMCAD said:
    my hunch to be completely frank and blunt I think in reality people just do not want to play with people who suggest forced grouping is a good idea on game forums, those are not the kind of people most people want to socialize with.

    That is putting it crass and somewhat unfairly but I do so to illustrate my core point. I think the reason developers have mostly solo game content is because people dont really want to play together as much as we think here. or they have their own well established social groups already and are not looking for left overs.
    Eh, I have not advocated forced grouping at all, what I said was that grouping should be encouraged.

    But if you consider that any group content is forced content (ignoring that dungeons and a like usually is optional content) then fine. 

    I don't really see why anyone who never groups would bother playing a MMO when single player games like TES and Witcher does a better work at it.

    MMOs strength is that they are social games and cutting any content designed for more then one player is a really stupid decision, if that is what you want then the only thing needed is a single player game that have a trading post.

    Why would anyone make a massive online game with no group content? What's the point?

    I think MMOs should have solo-content, totally fine but that solocontent must like all other content be rewarded after the risk. Do you disagree with that?
    cameltosisConstantineMerusPhryKyleran
  • Is Free For All PvP a Myth? - MMORPG.com

    @BitterClinger - Right.  I meant if there were mobs that would actually roam around and hunt players.
    Well, roaming OP mobs were not that uncommon in the early games, even games like EQ2 had some initially. But they were still very stupid and with a limited aggro range so they were never in the same league as a hostile player.

    They usually moved slowly so unless you have problem looking around you now and then they were rarely a problem. Still, if you got caught in a fight it happened you just see them slowly getting nearer and nearer until they spot you and join the battle.

    But roaming mobs were rare if you stayed on a road in most games so newbies usually used them (which PvPers on PvP server knew well). 

    There was one thing as dangerous as hostile players back then and it was trains. A train is when someone run through a whole bunch of mobs and back then they didn't release the aggro until you left the zone or went into stealth. Sometimes people ran 3 rounds around the zone amassing great trains and ended by running into a party and use stealth while all the mobs started to gank the players. Everquest were famous for this, particularly in the beginning when piranhas followed people on land (probably due to a bug)!

    Nowadays that don't happen since mobs loose interest fast and run back to their original position.
    Cazriel
  • Will Warhammer Fantasy ever get another MMO?

    Lets not, they would just mess it up once again.

    Warhammer fantasy RPG have my favorite campaign ever: The enemy within. The game is full of grit and dark humor, it uses a low powergap with interesting and tactical combat (talking about the original game, not Fantasy flight games fail of a new edition). I love Warhammer fantasy RPG, and I still use the 1st edition.

    I don't think I can take another crappy version made by someone who never played the P&P game. Warhammers world is not child friendly, filled with dark horror, drugs, gore, violence and corruption. Whenever someone wants to turn an IP like that into a MMO they take away that stuff.

    It would be better to use an IP like Dragonlance, it is kid friendlier, made to work with levels and easier to get for a none fan.
    AethaerynRelampago
  • I am going to buy a new game!

    Torval said:
    I've never played TF. How is it different?

    From the FPS games I've there are 2 main things that seem to differentiate combat mechanics - hits to die and physics. Games like Rainbox Six Siege where you die in a couple of hits compared to Division which is bullet spongey. Or Battlefield 1 where physics are a serious factor and Destiny where they're not.

    I get that some FPS are just about the guns and some have roles and others classes is that what you mean when comparing them?
    TF is more of a arenastyled game while regular FPS games are more of a war simulator. Also, TF styled games tend to be more cartoon violence then more realistic games like R6: Siege (which I BTW like as well). 

    Then there are also far more realistic games like some of the Ghost recon and the ARMA games, they are more Mil sim FPS.

    So basically, TF and Overwatch are more of a cartoony sport instead of simulated war. Not all of these games have classes or like OW characters with specific powers, but they have a similar feeling to it. Games like battlefield 1 have a totally different feel as you play.

    Yeah, not the best explanation...
    Torval