They would, but I'll use a real example for this. An average joe decides he wants to go into the NFL, even though it's unlikely he would make it there. However, he is good at golf (amateur, but is getting close to pro level). How that applies to FF XI subscriptions is this. 500k is alot of money, and it's apparently enough to profit SE, stay afloat for 8 years, and give SE the green light to creating another mmorpg. Is that the 8+ million subscriptions that WOW has? No, but FF XI has lasted for so long. Setting the standards to WOW is a balsy move, but so far the only game that seems to be able to compare to WOW may be Aion. So, it's quite too steep a goal to try to reach WOW standards. I'm trying to cut down on the massive walls of text, sorry. Cutting down to just reply material. You have to remember that Square-Enix has a lot going on, FFXI isn't their sole or even primary means of income, therefore so long as it pays for itself and maybe makes a small profit, I'm sure they're happy to keep it going. However, for a software company that has to make it's entire living off of it's products, making a small profit isn't acceptable, either to the people working there or to the shareholders who demand a good return on their investment. They have to find enough people who are willing to pay the monthly subscription fee to make all their work and time and financial investment worthwhile over the long haul.
Now granted, there are a lot of companies out there who jump on bandwagons and try to make a buck off of someone else's hard work and that brings us tons of WoW clones. But you notice there aren't any FFXI clones out there. Apparently, nobody thinks that's such a good idea, such a money-making idea, that they ought to copy it and try to steal away players. That ought to tell you something. Ah, so you did get what I meant by "depressed." I just had to type that to make sure. I'm not sure what you mean by "entitlement," but if you're talking about what I stated about FF XIV in the previous paragraph, then I shall see you on the FF XIV threads for more discussion.
Also, the MMO genre does seem like it's in a slump right now. Hopefully, Earthrise and FF XIV changes that. You keep claiming it's in a slump because it doesn't have anything *YOU* want to play. That doesn't change the fact that the MMO market is the most successful today, by the only objective metrics you can measure, that it's ever been in it's entire history. I don't know, a cleric is a group centric type of character usually. And inside Silkroad Online, that was an indefinite case (though you could work on it as a subclass, but then it wouldn't be nearly as effective as a main cleric). So, when a cleric that could res people decides to ignore someone in need, that just doesn't give me a good impression about soloists in group-centric games. Yeah, the cleric didn't have to do a thing. But all she had to sacrifice was a few mana points, yet she decided to give a stranger in need the cold shoulder. When you're a cleric inside that game, it's pretty much an unspoken law that a cleric should at all times try to help someone out (unless his corspe is in the middle of an angry mob, but the dead person would understand and just go back to town). You're still asserting that they owe you something and they don't. I don't care if you were getting your legs hacked off at the knees, nobody owes you anything, period.
I usually buff all comers, anyone who asks for something, I give it to them but there are plenty of times when I just get sick of the constant harassment. It wouldn't surprise me at all that someone like a cleric who almost certainly gets bothered constantly for healing and resurrections, might say the hell with it, leave me alone. Can't say I haven't felt the same in many cases.
There is a fundamental difference between mine and Cephus’s views on this, which goes beyond the issues. Just because the majority are happy to do something one way does not make it right. He consistently uses the argument that’s the way MMO’s are as if that shows they are perfect. There was a time before we had social networking, then innovation occurred, things can and do change. Yes and now, social networking is just another way to make money. Come on, you don't seriously think that all of these social networking sites do things out of the goodness of their hearts, do you? You're stuck on "right" and "wrong" as if they have any objective meaning. They don't mean a damn thing. MMOs are the way they are because they make money that way, that's it. They work to attract the largest number of paying subscribers, or in the case of F2Ps, the greatest number of people using the item malls. They don't exist to make you happy, they exist to make money. While I understand the importance of the business model in MMO’s he seems to have a slavish devotion to it. I don’t know if he has noticed or not, but this is not the internal forum of a MMO company and he is not the head of our finance department. Thinking outside that box may give your views some of the freedom you laud about so much. It doesn't matter where you are, the fact remains that MMO companies exist to make a profit. Ignoring that fact, no matter where you do it, doesn't change the fact. You can argue that car companies ought to sell their cars for $5 and make all kinds of beautiful rationalizations why that would be a good thing, but in the end, the car companies can't make a profit doing it, they're not going to do it. Gamers in MMO’s do not have true freedom, nor would I expect them to be able to. It is your use of value weighted words like this that obscures the issues. If people are being forced into soloing by the structure of the game where is the freedom in that? This is a question of design choice and what play styles gamers want. You can either call it what it is, or ramp up the rhetoric as you seem to be doing. Depends on what you mean by freedom. In a real sense, none of us has true freedom, we cannot choose to do anything we want to do, we can only pick from a select number of available choices. But you keep arguing that people are being forced to solo when the reality is, people are choosing to solo. There is the option to group, people are simply not choosing that option. You can rationalize whatever you wish to explain it, it comes down to player choice. You just don't like the choices they've made. I was asked to give a detailed analysis of my assertion that soloing takes up so much of our gaming time that any benefits to grouping would have a marginal impact. Oh please, get real, do I ask you to write a dissertation about every statement you make? And as virtually the lone voice for soloing here on this thread you have made quite a few! That said, I would not want this to be just a one view thread, we need an alternative view. If you're going to make absurd assertions, yes you do. The fact is, people could choose to group every second of every day in every game. In most cases, they'd make more XP, get more loot and make more gold than if they spent the same time soloing. So please tell us why they don't do it when the benefit is so clear? Of course the validity of my statement is not consistent over all MMO’s. I ask readers to think back over their play experience of the last five years. Do you think anyone was grouping enough to get a serious advantage over solo’s? If you do Cephus give me an example. Raids are a special case, here part of a MMO was designed for teamwork, an anathema to you soloers I know. So here you could say you are disadvantaged. But in the rest of the MMO, which is designed for soloing, grouping is not at a disadvantage? How much more one sided an argument could you get for soloing than that? I can only speak for myself, I can't judge on what anyone else is doing or how much anyone else is grouping because I'm not playing their characters. I can say that when I group, I absolutely make much, much, much more XP than when I solo. If that was all I cared about, I'd be grouping all the time. It isn't, however. Cephus can you stop going on about how you understand business models. Just because some of us disagree with the current crop of MMO's does not mean we can't see the industry is still making money. What is being proposed is a rebalancing, many of the ideas are already out there and won’t cost anything to incorporate. Try to get your business head around this; customers respond to choice, it invigorates sales. MMO’s are increasingly as you say yourself becoming clones. Where is the good business model in that? How long do you think players are going to be expected to pay to play a game which is far more expensive than a solo game for no extra functionality? It's not a matter of "can't see it", it's a matter of backing it up with evidence. You have to prove to an MMO company that following a different model would make them significant money. Can you do that? You say that customers respond to choice, but in every game on the market, customers have a choice between soloing and grouping and overwhelmingly, customers have chosen soloing and you just don't like it! What you're really talking about is removing choice, making a solo-only game or a group-only game. That's not choice. A few posters have mentioned how people in surveys say they prefer soling, well in a MMO set up to solo, grouping is hardly going to be your first choice is it? I am sure I would find grouping a pain there too. Grouping is a pain in every game, bar none. Maybe not just the mechanics, which can be finessed and made easier, but the elements of grouping are a pain in the ass unless you find the perfect group with the perfect members every time. Most times, I walk away from a group saying "I'll never group with most of them again". Another poster mentioned the other ways we interact in MMO’s, lets try to put this in context. I do not think that grouping is the best or only way we should be interacting. It has been the most exciting part of my MMO play, so I want to see more of it obviously. When it comes to interaction, grouping is a good tool for that; but so are a sound economy, good chat channels and places where people can build their own home. But the soloer’s mentality is to avoid interaction and get on levelling. I really doubt that many soloers out there are building homes, becoming expert at their craft or hobby, learning a race language by being around when it is spoken and so on. It just interferes too much with the leveling. It's been the most exciting part of *YOUR* play, which is fine, but you're assuming that makes it the most exciting part of *OTHER PEOPLE'S* play as well. You're also asserting that soloers avoid interaction when that's exactly opposite to my experience. Soloers *NEED* that interaction because they don't have fully-functional buff engines standing around them constantly. They have to seek out and give buffs to others. They have to ask and give advice in the chat channels. They have to buy and sell loot at auctions. They have to do all these things because they are on their own and MMOs are not built to be entirely self-sufficient.
In fact, in my experience, it's the groupers who are running around trying to level as fast as they can. Under most cases where I've been part of a group quest, everyone in the group is running as fast as they can from target to target, kill, run, kill, run... get to the end as fast as you can so you can get all the XP you can get. Most soloers I talk to take their time, go through a dungeon, loot every body, open every chest, search for hidden doors, actually consume the content rather than race past it in a desire to get it all right now.
That's just my experience, but from discussions with others, it seems commonplace.
Idiots who sit on forums, quote whoring, and spending more time bitching over useless shit above actually contributing to any in game play is ruining not just mmos, but all games today. Your not a critic, you are however a piss ant from the middle of no where. Shut up and play or go outside already.
When did you start playing "old school" MMO's. World Of Warcraft?
Idiots who sit on forums, quote whoring, and spending more time bitching over useless shit above actually contributing to any in game play is ruining not just mmos, but all games today. Your not a critic, you are however a piss ant from the middle of no where. Shut up and play or go outside already.
They would, but I'll use a real example for this. An average joe decides he wants to go into the NFL, even though it's unlikely he would make it there. However, he is good at golf (amateur, but is getting close to pro level). How that applies to FF XI subscriptions is this. 500k is alot of money, and it's apparently enough to profit SE, stay afloat for 8 years, and give SE the green light to creating another mmorpg. Is that the 8+ million subscriptions that WOW has? No, but FF XI has lasted for so long. Setting the standards to WOW is a balsy move, but so far the only game that seems to be able to compare to WOW may be Aion. So, it's quite too steep a goal to try to reach WOW standards. I'm trying to cut down on the massive walls of text, sorry. Cutting down to just reply material. You have to remember that Square-Enix has a lot going on, FFXI isn't their sole or even primary means of income, therefore so long as it pays for itself and maybe makes a small profit, I'm sure they're happy to keep it going. However, for a software company that has to make it's entire living off of it's products, making a small profit isn't acceptable, either to the people working there or to the shareholders who demand a good return on their investment. They have to find enough people who are willing to pay the monthly subscription fee to make all their work and time and financial investment worthwhile over the long haul.
Now granted, there are a lot of companies out there who jump on bandwagons and try to make a buck off of someone else's hard work and that brings us tons of WoW clones. But you notice there aren't any FFXI clones out there. Apparently, nobody thinks that's such a good idea, such a money-making idea, that they ought to copy it and try to steal away players. That ought to tell you something. I'm not saying FF XI should be the company's focus, it shouldn't right now. That focus must be put on FF XIV, their next big project (until the FF XIII series comes out).
Plus...considering how many WOW clones die might also tell that the idea might be dying soon. The new trend of games coming out seem to be deviating from this idea (everyone's looking for that WOW killer). FF XIV is one example, SE has stated they are going to try to stay away from making the game a WOW clone. Earthrise looks interesting, not sure where that'll go, but player controlled community that one person could make an extreme difference in the game is cool. I'm not too keen on this, but I think Warhammer tried being like WOW, and a result, the head developer got fired when the game started turning out with negative results. If anything, I believe the new thing is that everyone is trying to create their own new separate experience away from WOW. There may be many companies creating WOW clones, but I don't see too many that are successful, and Warhammer shows that it's not exactly a good idea to try to make a game "like WOW." The trend of WOW clones is still around, but for how long is a real question. Ah, so you did get what I meant by "depressed." I just had to type that to make sure. I'm not sure what you mean by "entitlement," but if you're talking about what I stated about FF XIV in the previous paragraph, then I shall see you on the FF XIV threads for more discussion.
Also, the MMO genre does seem like it's in a slump right now. Hopefully, Earthrise and FF XIV changes that. You keep claiming it's in a slump because it doesn't have anything *YOU* want to play. That doesn't change the fact that the MMO market is the most successful today, by the only objective metrics you can measure, that it's ever been in it's entire history. Alright, I'll admit I didn't exactly elaborate on what I mean by slump. Notice the various casual vs. hardcore and solo vs. group wars that go on? Of all the game fanbases of their game genres, we seem to be the most divided of them all. We are the slowest changing gaming genre, and mmorpg companies are the most afraid to take chances and innovate. That is what I define a slump. We have so many civil wars within our genre, we are the slowest to innovate and try new ideas, we are simply not in a glorious time. Plus, in my opinion, many mmorpgs are sucking currently. That is my opinion. I don't know, a cleric is a group centric type of character usually. And inside Silkroad Online, that was an indefinite case (though you could work on it as a subclass, but then it wouldn't be nearly as effective as a main cleric). So, when a cleric that could res people decides to ignore someone in need, that just doesn't give me a good impression about soloists in group-centric games. Yeah, the cleric didn't have to do a thing. But all she had to sacrifice was a few mana points, yet she decided to give a stranger in need the cold shoulder. When you're a cleric inside that game, it's pretty much an unspoken law that a cleric should at all times try to help someone out (unless his corspe is in the middle of an angry mob, but the dead person would understand and just go back to town). You're still asserting that they owe you something and they don't. I don't care if you were getting your legs hacked off at the knees, nobody owes you anything, period.
I usually buff all comers, anyone who asks for something, I give it to them but there are plenty of times when I just get sick of the constant harassment. It wouldn't surprise me at all that someone like a cleric who almost certainly gets bothered constantly for healing and resurrections, might say the hell with it, leave me alone. Can't say I haven't felt the same in many cases. Well, I just don't know what to say. Back when Silkroad Online was good (trustworthy GMs, no real threat from bots), clerics were nice. I don't know what experiences you had with clerics inside gaming, but mine was overall positive. Plus, when you're a cleric, you're going to have to expect others will ask of your services often. Being a cleric, yet refusing to help others, that just totally kills the aspect of being a cleric.
Overall, I just believe that soloists should not be in group-centric games. Silkroad Online in its glory days was group-centric. The people of that time were nice, clerics were almost always helpful, and a soloist cleric that acts like a jerk to someone in need really didn't have the best of times. This is reason why I love hardcore group games. If you're a cleric, yet you act like an ass to someone, then you really were going to get burned (word gets around, people see you as an asshat, you don't get invited often). So I guess both of our takes applies to different gaming. Your take on the cleric would probably associate with non-group centric games or casual group games, mine would work with the hardcore group.
Still hacking out extraneous quotes to keep things small.
I'm not saying FF XI should be the company's focus, it shouldn't right now. That focus must be put on FF XIV, their next big project (until the FF XIII series comes out).
Plus...considering how many WOW clones die might also tell that the idea might be dying soon. The new trend of games coming out seem to be deviating from this idea (everyone's looking for that WOW killer). FF XIV is one example, SE has stated they are going to try to stay away from making the game a WOW clone. Earthrise looks interesting, not sure where that'll go, but player controlled community that one person could make an extreme difference in the game is cool. I'm not too keen on this, but I think Warhammer tried being like WOW, and a result, the head developer got fired when the game started turning out with negative results. If anything, I believe the new thing is that everyone is trying to create their own new separate experience away from WOW. There may be many companies creating WOW clones, but I don't see too many that are successful, and Warhammer shows that it's not exactly a good idea to try to make a game "like WOW." The trend of WOW clones is still around, but for how long is a real question. But MMOs at all are not Square-Enix's focus. It's one part of a much larger picture, FFXI and not even FFXII, isn't going to bring them all that much money, certainly not compared to other things that they do.
Lots of WoW clones do die because they're crappy games, not because they're WoW clones. When you take crappy mechanics, bad graphics and an awful gameplay experience, but you just make it LOOK like WoW, people aren't going to stick around. WoW, for as much as I dislike the game, it's got all the components put together right, it attracts millions of players and most of them stick around for a long, long time. That's golden for MMO developers. Alright, I'll admit I didn't exactly elaborate on what I mean by slump. Notice the various casual vs. hardcore and solo vs. group wars that go on? Of all the game fanbases of their game genres, we seem to be the most divided of them all. We are the slowest changing gaming genre, and mmorpg companies are the most afraid to take chances and innovate. That is what I define a slump. We have so many civil wars within our genre, we are the slowest to innovate and try new ideas, we are simply not in a glorious time. Plus, in my opinion, many mmorpgs are sucking currently. That is my opinion. And you're welcome to your opinion, as anyone is. That doesn't mean that your opinion demonstrably means anything or that it's demonstrably right, you just hold it and that's fine. You are making the mistake of thinking anything that's said on MMORPG.com means a damn thing. This is a minuscule minority of players with vocal opinions spouting off. The overwhelming majority of players don't read it and the overwhelming majority of players are who the developers are trying to attract. What happens here means absolutely nothing in the big picture. Well, I just don't know what to say. Back when Silkroad Online was good (trustworthy GMs, no real threat from bots), clerics were nice. I don't know what experiences you had with clerics inside gaming, but mine was overall positive. Plus, when you're a cleric, you're going to have to expect others will ask of your services often. Being a cleric, yet refusing to help others, that just totally kills the aspect of being a cleric.
You're taking a specific experience and demanding that it ought to be like all other experiences you've had, then you're painting a massively broad brush to apply what one person did to all soloers. If you can't see the illogic behind that, I don't know what else to say.
And while you didn't say what level any of the people involved were, and not having played Silkroad Online myself, I can only assume that said cleric was at least mid-level, based on the ability to resurrect at all. Apparently it didn't kill anything about being a cleric for the person playing it. Overall, I just believe that soloists should not be in group-centric games. Silkroad Online in its glory days was group-centric. The people of that time were nice, clerics were almost always helpful, and a soloist cleric that acts like a jerk to someone in need really didn't have the best of times. This is reason why I love hardcore group games. If you're a cleric, yet you act like an ass to someone, then you really were going to get burned (word gets around, people see you as an asshat, you don't get invited often). So I guess both of our takes applies to different gaming. Your take on the cleric would probably associate with non-group centric games or casual group games, mine would work with the hardcore group. That's easy, most of them don't. But most games are not group-centric games as is continually pointed out.
Besides, I could make the same argument that *YOU* were acting like a jerk by expecting someone to take time out of their day to do you a favor, just because you wanted them to. For all you know, he was late getting somewhere, he was trying to do something before he had to log off, etc. You have no place whatsoever to demand that someone bow to your every whim, just because you think they ought to.
I have an eye on FF myself. My big issue is that their current game has no western servers and nvida drivers perform poorly on it. It was lag that stopped me continuing the game. I think FF does show a way grouping can move forward in modern MMO’s but I do not regard it as some kind of panacea. As mentioned before I don’t just advocate wholesale grouping, instead a rebalancing of the where and when it is done may be all that's needed.
I have to agree also that everything from Agency to Earthrise shows some hope of people trying something new on the horizon. And yes this is the slowest changing genre, but understandably so considering the huge resource and company commitment needed for a MMO. My main concern is that we have had a drift to soloing over the last ten years and are now starting a drift to F2P. I don’t think we are having a civil war, I think it is good our views are aired and countered by those who oppose them. That is for the good of us all.
The question of does what we say here matter? This has been raised on these forums many times. Industry staffers do read these forums, but I doubt they would get to the end of this thread, if they have my hat is off to them .
Back to the main beef:
Maybe I have not made myself clear enough on the ‘majority makes right’ issue. I do not think of this as a matter of right or wrong, I do think that it is a mistake to think that because something is the biggest seller now, that is the best way to play or the only way.
I would hope most of us here understand the importance that making profit is for any company. That’s a given. But look at solo games, the range of play styles is far wider and they make a serious profit. I advocate that range of play styles in MMO’s not talking about just grouping here. The diversity of solo game play styles indicates the potential revenue that such diversity in MMOs could bring in. We have WoW, EvE, FF, LotR as a examples that we do not all have to play the same way.
To me if you are prepared to put the work in that’s needed to form and maintain a group some extra reward is well deserved. But I was not saying that in most MMOs we don’t get that much reward for grouping, just that people don’t group enough to make it a huge difference these days. Yes such a view is subjective, which is why I asked for others experiences in their MMO’s.
I would be happy to see grouping only servers and so on. But I would not want to force grouping on those who don’t want it. I would ask them not to dismiss it because they are in a MMO which was never designed for grouping. In that situation it is hardly surprising they all only want to solo and find the idea of grouping a chore.
Yes I have had bad groups, even from those in guilds. But have you never had a bad time soloing? You are making it sound as if anyone can solo to top level without a hitch in any MMO. I am not going to pretend grouping cannot be a time wasting disaster. But when it works, it gives a far better play style than soloing. We do soloing in solo games, surely we should try for more in MMOs?
I defy anyone to take part in a AoC siege, a DAOC army, a LotR multi group mini raid and not say that’s was better than two hours of solo quests. I like my soloing too, but it just does not compare to winning as a team.
I certainly agree that there can be a ‘seen that, next!’ attitude to grouping. Most players don’t realise that MMO companies spend over 90% of their time on the pre endgame experience. That’s the content they are rushing through, to play the section the company has devoted the least development time to. But when in that situation, I have asked people to slow down. If it’s a guild group people are happy to do so, if not the reception can be less warm.
But I think it is reverse logic to say that soloers interact more because they are on their own. Join a group, a guild, fight for your realm, you will interact so much more if you do.
Thanks for cutting out the extra quotes. Of course, I hate massive walls of text as much as the next guy, unfortunately, this site has a really crappy quote system. Maybe I have not made myself clear enough on the ‘majority makes right’ issue. I do not think of this as a matter of wrong or right. I do think that it is a mistake to think that because something is the biggest seller now, that is the best way to play or the only way. I've never said best way or only way, I've said most profitable way. "Best" is a purely subjective term, like "right" and therefore has no place in a rational discussion. Obviously, since virtually every game provides for both solo and group play, "only" doesn't enter into it. I would hope most of us here understand the importance that making profit is for any company. That’s a given. But look at solo games, the range of play styles is far wider and they make a serious profit. I advocate that range of play styles in MMO’s not talking about just grouping here. The diversity of solo game play styles indicates the potential revenue that such diversity in MMOs could bring in. We have WoW, EvE, FF, LotR as a examples that we do not all have to play the same way. But you're talking about two fundamentally different products. Solo games are written, packaged and put on store shelves and then the programmers largely move on to other projects. There isn't an expensive, long-term need to keep supporting the product and give it constant attention. MMOs not only have to be written, then they have to be hosted on servers, supported by a ton of people, constantly updated, patched, fixed and expanded so that the company gets long-term revenue. It's not a one-time purchase, it's a monthly fee that makes the product worthwhile to produce in the first place.
However, even if you're going to advocate a range of playstyles, you're still missing the point that some playstyles are more profitable than others. If you want to make money, your game is going to cater to solo play, period. Every game out there is going to, or isn't going to be making as much money as they could otherwise. So saying you want a game without solo play is saying you want a game that's not going to bring in much of a profit. To me if you are prepared to put the work in that’s needed to form and maintain a group some extra reward is well deserved. But I was not saying that in most MMOs we don’t get that much reward for grouping, just that people don’t group enough to make it a huge difference these days. Yes such a view is subjective, which is why I asked for others experiences in their MMO’s. I entirely disagree. If you're going to pick a playstyle that is inherently more difficult to maintain, you shouldn't be rewarded for picking a harder playstyle, any more than, as in a previous example, the person who chose the rocket-fuel-powered car ought to get extra rewards because they chose, of their own free will, something that is going to be harder to find fuel for. You make your choices, you deal with the consequences. Besides, as I've already pointed out, groups inherently get extra rewards already as a consequence of their makeup. That's plenty. I would be happy to see grouping only servers and so on. But I would not want to force grouping on those who don’t want it. I would ask them not to dismiss it because they are in a MMO which was never designed for grouping. In that situation it is hardly surprising they all only want to solo and find the idea of grouping a chore. That part is entirely fine, if you can convince companies to do it. So long as players have a choice of servers and the company is willing to make specialty grouping/PvP/RPing servers, more power to them. I'm all in favor of it. The problem comes in when people don't go and ask companies to make these servers, they sit on these forums and complain that they don't exist.
Whining never got anything done. Yes I have had bad groups, even from those in guilds. But have you never had a bad time soloing? You are making it sound as if anyone can solo to top level without a hitch in any MMO. I am not going to pretend grouping cannot be a time wasting disaster. But when it works, it gives a far better play style than soloing. We do soloing in solo games, surely we should try for more in MMOs? Sure, I've had a bad time soloing and if I do, I have no one to blame but myself. When I have a bad group, when I die because the people in my group are self-centered douches, that's not my fault. If I'm playing alone and screw up, I can only take full responsibility for it. I defy anyone to take part in a AoC siege, a DAOC army, a LotR multi group mini raid and not say that’s was better than two hours of solo quests. I like my soloing too, but it just does not compare to winning as a team. I'd take your challenge but I don't play any of those games. I have been in sieges and raids though on other games and I'll tell you that you're wrong. I don't have as much fun. I certainly agree that there can be a ‘seen that, next!’ attitude to grouping. Most players don’t realise that MMO companies spend over 90% of their time on the pre endgame experience. That’s the content they are rushing through, to play the section the company has devoted the least development time to. But when in that situation, I have asked people to slow down. If it’s a guild group people are happy to do so, if not the reception can be less warm. Whether or not companies spend a lot of time on it is irrelevant if it all looks the same. When you've got the same mob with a different skin and a different name, what difference does it make? I agree that people need to slow down, but I get outvoted every time, which is why a lot of the content I prefer to solo through because I'm actually in control of the speed at which it is consumed. But I think it is reverse logic to say that soloers interact more because they are on their own. Join a group, a guild, fight for your realm, you will interact so much more if you do. You don't need to interact in that setting, most group settings are very pre-programmed. Healers heal, tanks tank, there's no reason to hash out the details because everyone understands their roles or they don't last long in a group setting. I can't tell you the last time I was in a group where much, if anything was said beyond mindless pleasantries, usually while we're all sitting around waiting for someone to get there so we can start. It might happen for some people, but for me, it never does.
So I heard from a couple people that post here on their ideas of soloing I heard that people who raid should not be allowed gear that gives them huge benefits over those who solo I also hear a lot that there should be solo dungeons where people go through dungeons solo and get loot on par to those who go in group dungeons.
Why? Soloing is easy, if it was hard you would need more than one person. and if everything can be soloed and not grouped what does that say for classes that have it harder to solo than those who dont IE pet classes vs healing classes. Should people who play pet classes be allowed to plow through content and get gear easier and faster than those who have harder jobs/classes?
Why do people like soloing in a mmorpg? You plow through content no matter how slow you take it, its still fast when soloing, you solo and beat all the content then what? You want for a new patch to come a long when can take months for more content. Soloing is what is killing mmorpgs now a days. Even single player RPGS do not have soloing, you are always grouped with other characters or NPCs. Any so called solo rpg IE legend of zelda is classified as an adeventure game or hack and slash or dungeon crawler not a RPG. Companys today are trying their hardest to balance soloing and group play that it will always hurt group play. The easier you make solo the less people want to group, the less content there will be to group. Lets take WoW for example after you solo all the way to 80 there are what 7 small man dungeons and 4 raids, before content patch there were three PVE raids.
Now take those numbers and what % of the content is that? Especially for raiders they have to see the same four raids over and over and over again just to get loot. Solo players have many different sites and quest to go by alone. The instances now a days even for any new mmorpg are just that fast instansted content, group play does not even have options we are told to go here if we want to group.
Yes we can group in solo content but why? we are hit hard for exp if we invite some one, the quest are longer, not kill quest but definately loot quest are much longer. It is much more of a pain in the ass to group than to solo in the solo aspect of the game. and even if we did group it just makes the game 100x more easier than it already is, grouping is supposed to be a challenge, overcoming challenges with others not plow through content asap. Should there be some soloing in games, yes there should be, should soloing be the main aspect of mmorpgs like it is today? No
I agree, the so-called soloing problem was caused my developers putting too many barriers to teaming. When i want to team up, i don't want to look for hours to find a group. You should be able to team with anyone at any time. Levels, distance, different servers, none of these should stop someone from teaming.
No, whats killing games today is the fact you can't socialize without someone holding your hand. It's not hard to walk up to someone and just say "hello" and build communication and friendships. No ones fault but your own if your a knuckle dragger who cares more about grunting.
When did you start playing "old school" MMO's. World Of Warcraft?
I agree, the so-called soloing problem was caused my developers putting too many barriers to teaming. When i want to team up, i don't want to look for hours to find a group. You should be able to team with anyone at any time. Levels, distance, different servers, none of these should stop someone from teaming.
Except that makes no sense whatsoever. You're setting up a system that can be ridiculously abused. No level limits? Then you'll get low-level characters being artificially leveled by high-level alts. Stick them in a party, have them stand out of the way, let the high-level alts wipe out the dungeon and they get tons of XP for doing nothing. Distance? How do you form a team when no one is in the same area? That doesn't even make sense. Now certainly I have no problem with people joining a team and then GOING to the zone where they're going to play, that's fine, but joining a team a continent away and then getting XP for what they do even thought you stay a continent away?
The one I will agree with is different servers, but that's technically challenging to say the least, especially since you can't see the other members of your party because they simply don't exist on your server. I'm not sure how to overcome that without just making everyone on every server exist on every other server, which really makes multiple servers irrelevant to begin with.
Couple generalized truths regarding this topic: * When solo play in an MMORPG becomes the norm, that game design is broken. * Solo play is a symptom, not the disease. * Nobody truly WANTS to be alone. Everybody wants to group. Most of the time. Solo players are not happy players. * Mechanically, solo play can never achieve the heights of group play. This is a simple matter of potential.
We need: 1. Games that gives us good group play. 2. Games that allow us to filter and even seperate players types and ages from eachother with certainty. 3. Games that enforce accountability.
I am so glad we have you here to tell us all what we want and how we feel. How would we ever know without your infinite wisdom to explain it to us?
I can only stress that you're about as wrong as you could possibly be and leave it at that.
A few posters have mentioned how people in surveys say they prefer soling, well in a MMO set up to solo, grouping is hardly going to be your first choice is it? I am sure I would find grouping a pain there too.
Still. Data is data. Plus, the reason WOW is so solo-friendly is because EQ is such a pain to solo. So people do play group centric games first because there is no choice. It is obviously that solo-content is a demand in the market place, no matter how you want to spin it.
Another poster mentioned the other ways we interact in MMO’s, lets try to put this in context. I do not think that grouping is the best or only way we should be interacting. It has been the most exciting part of my MMO play, so I want to see more of it obviously. When it comes to interaction, grouping is a good tool for that; but so are a sound economy, good chat channels and places where people can build their own home. But the soloer’s mentality is to avoid interaction and get on levelling. I really doubt that many soloers out there are building homes, becoming expert at their craft or hobby, learning a race language by being around when it is spoken and so on. It just interferes too much with the leveling.
That is YOUR interpretation. Many soloers I know are playing the economy significantly because that is a way to get ahead. And if soloers don't want to interact, that is their perogative. It is their $15 per month. And if you believe there are a lot of them, it further highlight the need for solo content.
Couple generalized truths regarding this topic: * When solo play in an MMORPG becomes the norm, that game design is broken. * Solo play is a symptom, not the disease. * Nobody truly WANTS to be alone. Everybody wants to group. Most of the time. Solo players are not happy players. * Mechanically, solo play can never achieve the heights of group play. This is a simple matter of potential.
We need: 1. Games that gives us good group play. 2. Games that allow us to filter and even seperate players types and ages from eachother with certainty. 3. Games that enforce accountability.
LOL ... i am glad developers are ignoring these kind of crap posted by people who don't understand what most players want.
Couple generalized truths regarding this topic: * When solo play in an MMORPG becomes the norm, that game design is broken. * Solo play is a symptom, not the disease. * Nobody truly WANTS to be alone. Everybody wants to group. Most of the time. Solo players are not happy players. * Mechanically, solo play can never achieve the heights of group play. This is a simple matter of potential.
We need: 1. Games that gives us good group play. 2. Games that allow us to filter and even seperate players types and ages from eachother with certainty. 3. Games that enforce accountability.
I would rather say just the oppossite:
* When group play in an MMORPG becomes the only way to play, that game design is broken.
* Not everybody truly CAN or WANT to always group up. Solo play is an option as good as group play.
* It should be much harder for a solo player to achieve the heights of group play. But not totally imposible.
We need:
1. Games that gives us good group AND solo play.
2. Games that do NOT make use of players real-life data like player age or type.
3. Games that give freedom and do not enforce anything.
I don't like soloing, but I don't like epic gear either.
There are not many choices for players like me
If you are interested in subscription or PCU numbers for MMORPG's, check out my site : http://mmodata.blogspot.be/ Favorite MMORPG's : DAoC pre ToA-NF, SWG Pre CU-NGE, EVE Online
Couple generalized truths regarding this topic: * When solo play in an MMORPG becomes the norm, that game design is broken. * Solo play is a symptom, not the disease. * Nobody truly WANTS to be alone. Everybody wants to group. Most of the time. Solo players are not happy players. * Mechanically, solo play can never achieve the heights of group play. This is a simple matter of potential.
We need: 1. Games that gives us good group play. 2. Games that allow us to filter and even seperate players types and ages from eachother with certainty. 3. Games that enforce accountability.
I would rather say just the oppossite:
* When group play in an MMORPG becomes the only way to play, that game design is broken.
* Not everybody truly CAN or WANT to always group up. Solo play is an option as good as group play.
* It should be much harder for a solo player to achieve the heights of group play. But not totally imposible.
We need:
1. Games that gives us good group AND solo play.
2. Games that do NOT make use of players real-life data like player age or type.
3. Games that give freedom and do not enforce anything.
seriously if i'm forced to group to level up in my game... i'm not playing it
and having only group content would kill the game in the long run cause no one will want to start late in the game
I really like this post by one of the LotrO devs, Vastin:
"Well, from a dev perspective I've never found the labels 'hardcore' or 'casual' to be particularly useful, save as a useful shorthand for starting flamewars between players.
When I'm making a piece of content, I'm generally thinking of more specifc, objective concepts like 'group', 'soloist', 'combat-heavy', 'roleplaying/story', 'challenging', 'easy', 'grindy', 'short', 'long', etc, and mixing those tags up in various combinations.
NONE of those tags package and apply readily to as broad (and ultimately meaningless) a category as hardcore or casual. I've seen 'soloists' who are absurdly 'hardcore' by any reasonable interpretation of the word, and decidedly casual players who only ever play with their kins. The distinction is useless for determining what KIND of content a player likes.
The only place where I find a very broad approach useful is in convenience of play. What is a player's overall tolerance for inconvenience and delay of any sort? In that one regard I do tend to think in terms of casual and hardcore I suppose. A hardcore player will put up with less refined UI, buggier content, long travel times, and other things that basically delay or degrade the play experience. A casual player will quit after fairly little irritation of that sort.
From that standpoint, there are vastly - VASTLY - more casual players than hardcore ones, and yes, I try to build my content to cater to those players, because there's really nothing about that distinction that should prevent a hardcore player from enjoying my work as well.
Now, believe it or not, grouping is incredibly inconvenient. More fun, IMHO, but definitely inconvenient. Even forming a small group represents a considerable outlay of additional time and risk for its members. I've done stopwatch trials myself, and the cost/reward ratio compared with just running out and soloing content is quite bad unless you can form a group fairly quickly and run with it for a considerable amount of time once it is formed. Many players realize this, conciously or not, and don't like to form groups if they can't commit a lot of time to them."
If WoW = The Beatles and WAR = Led Zeppelin Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
Shhh, they're paying subscription for a single player plus lobby and they LIKE it.
Software devs love it too! Its easier to create solo content, casuals pay as much but eat far less resources, and if instancing is enabled correctly, there's fewer in-game hassles between players so much less for GMs to deal with.
It brings us back to the question of "is this evolution or decay in the MMO genre?" If you like it, it's evolution. If not, it's decay.
Ken
www.ActionMMORPG.com One man, a small pile of money, and the screwball idea of a DIY Indie MMORPG? Yep, that's him. ~sigh~
Wouldn't it be cool, if you could play the way you wanted and the time invested = the reward.
If you do more PVP, you get more PVP gear. The only way to get it, is to engage in pvp.
If you do raids, you get "Raid Gear" which is mostly useful in raids and grouped instances.
If you solo, you get "Solo Gear" which is primarily useful for when you solo and need to fill many roles. More general purpose gear.
Then no one could say "well I played for 30 hours, but I did grouping which is a big pain in the butt, so I should get more than you did for the same time investment, because you played the game soloing which is what you enjoy."
I enjoy Soloing. To me, the idea my time is worth less than your time because it is "Easier" is ludicrous. It is difficult to solo an instance, you usulaly are relegated to classes like a Defender or a Paladin, or pet classes so you can do them. I like to play when I have the time, so trying to set up a "Raid" and coordinate time is impossible if I don't have a flexible schedule. Why should I be penalized for having a life outside of MMOs?
Here is another idea, if rewarding you with gear relative to how you play is too difficult;
Make all challenges relatively equal.
If solo content is so "Easy", then make it more challenging (yet do-able). You don't have to increase the HP of all monsters to do this, you could however take a page from DDO and scale the dungeon to the player.
Another way is to simulate the raid experience for a Soloer, by creating Bots that will endlessly yammer/whine about nerfing, then ninja loot all the good gear or hearth half-way through the instance saying "NEed moar bagspace, Lol" or whatever usually causing a party wipe, so we too can "enjoy" the game, the way you do, without having to recruit the people to play the raid when we have the time to do it.
Now, believe it or not, grouping is incredibly inconvenient. More fun, IMHO, but definitely inconvenient. Even forming a small group represents a considerable outlay of additional time and risk for its members. I've done stopwatch trials myself, and the cost/reward ratio compared with just running out and soloing content is quite bad unless you can form a group fairly quickly and run with it for a considerable amount of time once it is formed. Many players realize this, conciously or not, and don't like to form groups if they can't commit a lot of time to them."
As someone who soloes as much as I group, this paragraph describes my feelings nearly verbatim.
I quit FFXI for example, not only because I was pretty much forced to group, but because the time involved in organizing a group, getting to the campsite and finally starting would take *so* long that I was already tired of sitting in my chair by the time we were ready to start.
Also, to touch on another earlier point, the only way to create a higher-difficulty solo challenge in an MMO right now is to use instances. Otherwise your highly-challenging solo quest becomes a fairly easy group quest and, obviously because we're conditioned to be results-oriented in MMOs, you'll wind up doing it in a small pick-up group.
But then developers get slammed for using instances, so they're damned either way.
Comments
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
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
Idiots who sit on forums, quote whoring, and spending more time bitching over useless shit above actually contributing to any in game play is ruining not just mmos, but all games today. Your not a critic, you are however a piss ant from the middle of no where. Shut up and play or go outside already.
When did you start playing "old school" MMO's. World Of Warcraft?
/golfclap
I salute your mastabatorical skills.
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
Thanks for cutting out the extra quotes.
I have an eye on FF myself. My big issue is that their current game has no western servers and nvida drivers perform poorly on it. It was lag that stopped me continuing the game. I think FF does show a way grouping can move forward in modern MMO’s but I do not regard it as some kind of panacea. As mentioned before I don’t just advocate wholesale grouping, instead a rebalancing of the where and when it is done may be all that's needed.
I have to agree also that everything from Agency to Earthrise shows some hope of people trying something new on the horizon. And yes this is the slowest changing genre, but understandably so considering the huge resource and company commitment needed for a MMO. My main concern is that we have had a drift to soloing over the last ten years and are now starting a drift to F2P. I don’t think we are having a civil war, I think it is good our views are aired and countered by those who oppose them. That is for the good of us all.
The question of does what we say here matter? This has been raised on these forums many times. Industry staffers do read these forums, but I doubt they would get to the end of this thread, if they have my hat is off to them
.
Back to the main beef:
Maybe I have not made myself clear enough on the ‘majority makes right’ issue. I do not think of this as a matter of right or wrong, I do think that it is a mistake to think that because something is the biggest seller now, that is the best way to play or the only way.
I would hope most of us here understand the importance that making profit is for any company. That’s a given. But look at solo games, the range of play styles is far wider and they make a serious profit. I advocate that range of play styles in MMO’s not talking about just grouping here. The diversity of solo game play styles indicates the potential revenue that such diversity in MMOs could bring in. We have WoW, EvE, FF, LotR as a examples that we do not all have to play the same way.
To me if you are prepared to put the work in that’s needed to form and maintain a group some extra reward is well deserved. But I was not saying that in most MMOs we don’t get that much reward for grouping, just that people don’t group enough to make it a huge difference these days. Yes such a view is subjective, which is why I asked for others experiences in their MMO’s.
I would be happy to see grouping only servers and so on. But I would not want to force grouping on those who don’t want it. I would ask them not to dismiss it because they are in a MMO which was never designed for grouping. In that situation it is hardly surprising they all only want to solo and find the idea of grouping a chore.
Yes I have had bad groups, even from those in guilds. But have you never had a bad time soloing? You are making it sound as if anyone can solo to top level without a hitch in any MMO. I am not going to pretend grouping cannot be a time wasting disaster. But when it works, it gives a far better play style than soloing. We do soloing in solo games, surely we should try for more in MMOs?
I defy anyone to take part in a AoC siege, a DAOC army, a LotR multi group mini raid and not say that’s was better than two hours of solo quests. I like my soloing too, but it just does not compare to winning as a team.
I certainly agree that there can be a ‘seen that, next!’ attitude to grouping. Most players don’t realise that MMO companies spend over 90% of their time on the pre endgame experience. That’s the content they are rushing through, to play the section the company has devoted the least development time to. But when in that situation, I have asked people to slow down. If it’s a guild group people are happy to do so, if not the reception can be less warm.
But I think it is reverse logic to say that soloers interact more because they are on their own. Join a group, a guild, fight for your realm, you will interact so much more if you do.
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
100% agree!
Couple generalized truths regarding this topic:
* When solo play in an MMORPG becomes the norm, that game design is broken.
* Solo play is a symptom, not the disease.
* Nobody truly WANTS to be alone. Everybody wants to group. Most of the time. Solo players are not happy players.
* Mechanically, solo play can never achieve the heights of group play. This is a simple matter of potential.
We need:
1. Games that gives us good group play.
2. Games that allow us to filter and even seperate players types and ages from eachother with certainty.
3. Games that enforce accountability.
I agree, the so-called soloing problem was caused my developers putting too many barriers to teaming. When i want to team up, i don't want to look for hours to find a group. You should be able to team with anyone at any time. Levels, distance, different servers, none of these should stop someone from teaming.
No, whats killing games today is the fact you can't socialize without someone holding your hand. It's not hard to walk up to someone and just say "hello" and build communication and friendships. No ones fault but your own if your a knuckle dragger who cares more about grunting.
When did you start playing "old school" MMO's. World Of Warcraft?
Except that makes no sense whatsoever. You're setting up a system that can be ridiculously abused. No level limits? Then you'll get low-level characters being artificially leveled by high-level alts. Stick them in a party, have them stand out of the way, let the high-level alts wipe out the dungeon and they get tons of XP for doing nothing. Distance? How do you form a team when no one is in the same area? That doesn't even make sense. Now certainly I have no problem with people joining a team and then GOING to the zone where they're going to play, that's fine, but joining a team a continent away and then getting XP for what they do even thought you stay a continent away?
The one I will agree with is different servers, but that's technically challenging to say the least, especially since you can't see the other members of your party because they simply don't exist on your server. I'm not sure how to overcome that without just making everyone on every server exist on every other server, which really makes multiple servers irrelevant to begin with.
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
I am so glad we have you here to tell us all what we want and how we feel. How would we ever know without your infinite wisdom to explain it to us?
I can only stress that you're about as wrong as you could possibly be and leave it at that.
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
A few posters have mentioned how people in surveys say they prefer soling, well in a MMO set up to solo, grouping is hardly going to be your first choice is it? I am sure I would find grouping a pain there too.
Still. Data is data. Plus, the reason WOW is so solo-friendly is because EQ is such a pain to solo. So people do play group centric games first because there is no choice. It is obviously that solo-content is a demand in the market place, no matter how you want to spin it.
Another poster mentioned the other ways we interact in MMO’s, lets try to put this in context. I do not think that grouping is the best or only way we should be interacting. It has been the most exciting part of my MMO play, so I want to see more of it obviously. When it comes to interaction, grouping is a good tool for that; but so are a sound economy, good chat channels and places where people can build their own home. But the soloer’s mentality is to avoid interaction and get on levelling. I really doubt that many soloers out there are building homes, becoming expert at their craft or hobby, learning a race language by being around when it is spoken and so on. It just interferes too much with the leveling.
That is YOUR interpretation. Many soloers I know are playing the economy significantly because that is a way to get ahead. And if soloers don't want to interact, that is their perogative. It is their $15 per month. And if you believe there are a lot of them, it further highlight the need for solo content.
LOL ... i am glad developers are ignoring these kind of crap posted by people who don't understand what most players want.
I would rather say just the oppossite:
* When group play in an MMORPG becomes the only way to play, that game design is broken.
* Not everybody truly CAN or WANT to always group up. Solo play is an option as good as group play.
* It should be much harder for a solo player to achieve the heights of group play. But not totally imposible.
We need:
1. Games that gives us good group AND solo play.
2. Games that do NOT make use of players real-life data like player age or type.
3. Games that give freedom and do not enforce anything.
I don't like soloing, but I don't like epic gear either.
There are not many choices for players like me
If you are interested in subscription or PCU numbers for MMORPG's, check out my site :
http://mmodata.blogspot.be/
Favorite MMORPG's : DAoC pre ToA-NF, SWG Pre CU-NGE, EVE Online
I would rather say just the oppossite:
* When group play in an MMORPG becomes the only way to play, that game design is broken.
* Not everybody truly CAN or WANT to always group up. Solo play is an option as good as group play.
* It should be much harder for a solo player to achieve the heights of group play. But not totally imposible.
We need:
1. Games that gives us good group AND solo play.
2. Games that do NOT make use of players real-life data like player age or type.
3. Games that give freedom and do not enforce anything.
seriously if i'm forced to group to level up in my game... i'm not playing it
and having only group content would kill the game in the long run cause no one will want to start late in the game
I really like this post by one of the LotrO devs, Vastin:
"Well, from a dev perspective I've never found the labels 'hardcore' or 'casual' to be particularly useful, save as a useful shorthand for starting flamewars between players.
When I'm making a piece of content, I'm generally thinking of more specifc, objective concepts like 'group', 'soloist', 'combat-heavy', 'roleplaying/story', 'challenging', 'easy', 'grindy', 'short', 'long', etc, and mixing those tags up in various combinations.
NONE of those tags package and apply readily to as broad (and ultimately meaningless) a category as hardcore or casual. I've seen 'soloists' who are absurdly 'hardcore' by any reasonable interpretation of the word, and decidedly casual players who only ever play with their kins. The distinction is useless for determining what KIND of content a player likes.
The only place where I find a very broad approach useful is in convenience of play. What is a player's overall tolerance for inconvenience and delay of any sort? In that one regard I do tend to think in terms of casual and hardcore I suppose. A hardcore player will put up with less refined UI, buggier content, long travel times, and other things that basically delay or degrade the play experience. A casual player will quit after fairly little irritation of that sort.
From that standpoint, there are vastly - VASTLY - more casual players than hardcore ones, and yes, I try to build my content to cater to those players, because there's really nothing about that distinction that should prevent a hardcore player from enjoying my work as well.
Now, believe it or not, grouping is incredibly inconvenient. More fun, IMHO, but definitely inconvenient. Even forming a small group represents a considerable outlay of additional time and risk for its members. I've done stopwatch trials myself, and the cost/reward ratio compared with just running out and soloing content is quite bad unless you can form a group fairly quickly and run with it for a considerable amount of time once it is formed. Many players realize this, conciously or not, and don't like to form groups if they can't commit a lot of time to them."
If WoW = The Beatles
and WAR = Led Zeppelin
Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
I soloed today, for about four hours in World of Warcraft, further contributing to the decline of the MMO genre.
You're welcome.
Shhh, they're paying subscription for a single player plus lobby and they LIKE it.
Software devs love it too! Its easier to create solo content, casuals pay as much but eat far less resources, and if instancing is enabled correctly, there's fewer in-game hassles between players so much less for GMs to deal with.
It brings us back to the question of "is this evolution or decay in the MMO genre?" If you like it, it's evolution. If not, it's decay.
Ken
www.ActionMMORPG.com
One man, a small pile of money, and the screwball idea of a DIY Indie MMORPG? Yep, that's him. ~sigh~
Yawn.
Wouldn't it be cool, if you could play the way you wanted and the time invested = the reward.
If you do more PVP, you get more PVP gear. The only way to get it, is to engage in pvp.
If you do raids, you get "Raid Gear" which is mostly useful in raids and grouped instances.
If you solo, you get "Solo Gear" which is primarily useful for when you solo and need to fill many roles. More general purpose gear.
Then no one could say "well I played for 30 hours, but I did grouping which is a big pain in the butt, so I should get more than you did for the same time investment, because you played the game soloing which is what you enjoy."
I enjoy Soloing. To me, the idea my time is worth less than your time because it is "Easier" is ludicrous. It is difficult to solo an instance, you usulaly are relegated to classes like a Defender or a Paladin, or pet classes so you can do them. I like to play when I have the time, so trying to set up a "Raid" and coordinate time is impossible if I don't have a flexible schedule. Why should I be penalized for having a life outside of MMOs?
Here is another idea, if rewarding you with gear relative to how you play is too difficult;
Make all challenges relatively equal.
If solo content is so "Easy", then make it more challenging (yet do-able). You don't have to increase the HP of all monsters to do this, you could however take a page from DDO and scale the dungeon to the player.
Another way is to simulate the raid experience for a Soloer, by creating Bots that will endlessly yammer/whine about nerfing, then ninja loot all the good gear or hearth half-way through the instance saying "NEed moar bagspace, Lol" or whatever usually causing a party wipe, so we too can "enjoy" the game, the way you do, without having to recruit the people to play the raid when we have the time to do it.
As someone who soloes as much as I group, this paragraph describes my feelings nearly verbatim.
I quit FFXI for example, not only because I was pretty much forced to group, but because the time involved in organizing a group, getting to the campsite and finally starting would take *so* long that I was already tired of sitting in my chair by the time we were ready to start.
Also, to touch on another earlier point, the only way to create a higher-difficulty solo challenge in an MMO right now is to use instances. Otherwise your highly-challenging solo quest becomes a fairly easy group quest and, obviously because we're conditioned to be results-oriented in MMOs, you'll wind up doing it in a small pick-up group.
But then developers get slammed for using instances, so they're damned either way.