Howdy, Stranger!

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

Soloing is ruining MMOs today,

1568101119

Comments

  • WSIMikeWSIMike Member Posts: 5,564
    Originally posted by Tedly224


    Your original post was a bit of a rant, but I have to agree with you. I think the real problem with grouping in popular MMORPG's lay at the feet of the Devs who create the game while lacking a clear concise list of reasons for people to group, and the benefits they get from it.
     
    Well.. actually... there have been good reasons to group - more difficult quests, difficult encounters, etc. etc. Thing is, over time, the "solo only" crowd has become more and more vocal in speaking out about how unfair the group-focused content is... because it "forces" them to do the worst thing it seems some of them could imagine... grouping up with other players.



    Here's how I see it...



    Once upon a time, people complained because there was hardly *any* soloable content in MMOs and believed that more should be added - for much the same reason as we see in this thread... short-term play sessions, etc. They didn't want group content gone, they just wanted more solo content as well. I think they had a valid concern and developers came around and added more solo content.



    However.. it didn't stop there... after a while, having gotten the "more soloable content" they asked for, they started to feel it was "unfair" that some of the other content that they wanted to do required a group... and they didn't want to have to group. So... now, even though they had originally said they'd be fine with group content so long as they also had solo content, they decided that any group content was bad... because it "forced" them to group if they wanted to do it.



    Lo and behold, we got to the point where a player could pretty much solo effectively clear through the game, do everything there is to do, and never need to group up with a single other person if they didn't want to.  They practically got their wish on that - MMOs are more soloable and conducive to "lone-wolf" behavior than I've ever seen them in my time playing them (7-ish years now).



    The solo-centric players should have been happy... and everyone should have lived happily ever after...



    ... except...



    There's these nagging things called "raids"... they require groups - often large groups - to take on and complete. And they can take days to get through. These became the newest thorn in the solo-only players' sides, since they *forced* grouping, and that just *wasn't* fair... Annnnnd so you've started to see people (I know I have now, across a few games... LoTRO and WoW to name a couple) who are demanding soloable raid encounters... because they shouldn't be "forced" to group... ever, at all, for anything.



    Frankly, I think it's only a matter of time before we see soloable, instanced "raid" encounters (probably named something else) as well.

    So... my current final thought on this topic is that while I would have once said the pendulum was swung too far in the "group" side of things... It has now swung too far to the "solo" side of things... and has changed the overall "feel" of MMOs, especially in the area of community and cooperation - and it hasn't been for the better.

     

    "If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road,
    and the cash shop selling asphalt..."
    - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops

    image

  • SulioSulio Member Posts: 7

    Wall-o-text crits your for 125,265,425 damage.  You are dead.

    Personally I love the idea of both aspects.  However one has no inherent benefit over the other.  Groupers talk about trivializing content, well anyone that has done any real progression raiding knows that once enough people in your raid with gear from the content you are currently on, it quicky becomes trivial for them.  You can see this by devs including new and higher level dungeons all the time.  So take warcraft for instance, I was the progression tank for Kara.  It took my guild about 3 weeks of raiding 2 nights a week to be able to clear it in a single pass without any trouble what so ever with our core raiders.  When we moved on we still would raid Kara, one for badges of justice(currency that dropped off of bosses that could be used to buy gear), and for our newer members who where way undergeared even for that content.  We made it easy for them to get geared very quickly without much work.  How is this any different than including some really long ass quests for someone who is soloing to get some decent gear?  The badges alone could get us gear way higher than our current progression and would therefore quickly trivialize that content more so than the previous.  Take Naxx another warcraft dungeon, at level 80, the ten man can be cleared in 1-2 nights with a group thats well coordinated and has a "down to business" attitude.  Its not only in warcraft either, just about any MMO with progression raiding is like this.  So the arguement that solo content should not match up is not only faulty in nature, but just so damned lame. 

    On the other hand I don't think anyon should just be handed <insert uber epic item here> for going and killing 10 <insert lame form of rat, or space rat>.  It is dumb to even ask for it.  Its the same as playing a game with cheats at that point.  I remember a quest line back in my warcraft days that was awesome.  It took hours to do it.  It was BC and in a zone called Shadowmoon Valley.  It had you running all over the place killing and gathering stuff.  At the end of the quest I got an axe for my warrior that was considered one of the best one's in the game for a tank pre-raiding and heroics.  That is totally acceptable to me.

    The last thing both groupers and soloers need to think about is that you are on a forum that has 1,082,319 members at the time of this post, you are a minority of MMO gamers, and your are both seperate groups within that minority.  I hate to say but I really don't think devs and going to be listening to what you have to say without any serious numbers behind it.

    Sorry for the wall-o-text.

  • CypryssCypryss Member Posts: 84

    Here is what i get from all of this. Some people have adapted the roll that if a Mmorpg isn't powered toward groupers that enjoy this sort of content and if it isn't the only cutting edge progression in the game it will be a shitty mmorpg.

    People that enjoy soloing mostly feel unsatisfied with the top current mmorpg out there right now do to the fact that the only was to progress on cutting edge progression is with group content and because, the reward isn't that rewarding and the trip to those rewards are empty and just flat out boring.

    Groupers are so scared that solo content on a equal scale would destroy the mmorpg to the point that if it was in the current mmorpgs they are playing it would end up being garbage.

    Soloers feel that group content is still a must to have in a mmorpg and no company should remove this aspect of mmorpgs but, want more effort and choices placed towards soloable content that holds value.

    Frankly i believe both can reside in the same game and just be as equally valued by both types of people. We have seen it done in GW by taking npcs with you into missions and later on getting heroes to play along side you that the player controls. Also if you wish you can make a pvp only character. This proves that both types of content can live together and do very well.

    In UO posters have proved that you could of played the game and just of been a crafter/farmer the whole time for your guild while still being a teamplayer and support those that enjoy grouping.

    In Swg the same thing that  UO did with their crafting.

    In Eve i found i never really needed a corp and the only reason why i joined one was because i thought human interaction would of enhanced my enjoyment of the game which it did when i wanted to go out and pvp.

    All those games i mentioned gave the power of play to gamer and not the mmorpg.

    Lets be frank here. Wow is a bad game for giving individuals power of that game. It's really good for limiting a player's experience with lockouts and progression by assigning loot to the group. The game also punishes the player for playing the game on many levels and gives power to the player over other players at no extra cost.

    What makes the game so good is the Storyline, Artwork and animations. Hardly anyone cries over lore and the only time someone really cries about the artwork is when they make tier gear look like utter shit. The boss fights are like that of which can be found in Zelda and who doesn't like Zelda ? However overall there are way more bad things about this game then there is good and for that reason alone i will not be buying Blizzard's new mmorpg when it comes out. The company just don't get what mmorpgs are about and imho it just became a FOTMER in the group of mmorpgs out there with a microsoft attitude. Anyways that's just how i feel about Wow so, take it as you will.

    However i believe both soloers and groupers can get what they want with future mmorpgs if the Devs understand that mmorpg are in need of a evolution instead of a copy and paste clone of one that did well before them. 

     

     

     

     

     

  • ThrageThrage Member Posts: 200

    You know, not being able to play through Oblivion with multiple people is just as frustrating for me as not being able to level up by myself in Final Fantasy XI.  Fancy that.

     

    Maybe I'm just into options.

  • NeosaiNeosai Member Posts: 401

    No, not really.

    Soloing cannot ruin MMORPG.  Yes, it is fun to group and do something, but there are also fun in solo.  This entirely depend on the game you play and your point of view.  Some people use MMORPG as if it is a chat program that let you socialize with people, but realize that it is also a game which means it is meant to be played.  However, I shall refrain from telling people which way they should play because that is just immature.

    On the solo questing issue.  Players are usually indifferent about other players, and most only associate with each other simply out of necessity.  Not everyone can meet someone that they enjoy hanging out with in game, which is a problem about heavy group questing.  Also, not everyone have family and friends that are willing to play with them.

     

  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 19,912

    A lot of people are talking about a balance of play and how we can all get along, well we already do. I do think solo play is relied on too much in most modern MMO’s, but we have to have a sizable chunk of such play.

    The real issue is where do we go from here? Solo play is, for a gamer who has done this for years ultimately a bit boring. Does the MMO industry rely on the never ending supply of new teenagers, or does it say, hey we can come up with something new. Introducing a mix of solo, grouping, small groups, raids, realm versus realm, massive brawls, guild versus guild, city building, diplomacy etc.

    The way we are going solo gaming will make MMO’s the online home of teenagers new to gaming. I say new, been playing ten years, since you were nine? You are still new mate. :)

    This is the real challenge, formulaic linear solo games or MMO’s that open doors for varied kinds of play. More of the same is rarely a recipe for quality and innovation. :)

  • CypryssCypryss Member Posts: 84
    Originally posted by Scot


    A lot of people are talking about a balance of play and how we can all get along, well we already do. I do think solo play is relied on too much in most modern MMO’s, but we have to have a sizable chunk of such play.
    The real issue is where do we go from here? Solo play is, for a gamer who has done this for years ultimately a bit boring. Does the MMO industry rely on the never ending supply of new teenagers, or does it say, hey we can come up with something new. Introducing a mix of solo, grouping, small groups, raids, realm versus realm, massive brawls, guild versus guild, city building, diplomacy etc.
    The way we are going solo gaming will make MMO’s the online home of teenagers new to gaming. I say new, been playing ten years, since you were nine? You are still new mate. :)
    This is real challenge, formulaic linear solo games or MMO’s that open doors for varied kinds of play. More of the same is rarely a recipe for quality and innovation. :)

     

    If soloable play is so boring why play any video games for that matter. Games are designed directly to one individual so they can interact with the game on their terms. The two biggest problems in mmorpg at this time is how players progress and how epic the content really is. Mmorpgs are not irc programs you only use to socialize. Even though socializing does play a large roll in mmorpgs it should never be the main focus for a player to increase their effectiveness of their character.

    Don't get me wrong. I like grouping and being part of a guild. I love helping others and working as a team in Pve and Pvp content. If i didn't i would just end up playing single player console games. However i am a strong believer that my interaction with others shouldn't effect the out come to my progression in mmorpgs unless it's directed to a Pvp environment. If i act like a jerk i should expect that someone will take my stuff. The same should of never applied to Pve content but, now here we are dealing with this age old problem that has been going on for about nearly 9 years. 

  • bigtime102bigtime102 Member UncommonPosts: 176

    What bugs me about the whole solo vs grouping thing is the devs who want to reward grouping as if its some noble activity that deserves some extra rewards and incentives ontop of the inherit advantages grouping already gives you which is an easier game. Thats the whole point of teamwork , to get things done EASIER, not with more rewards infact the more people you bring into the job the less the reward should be, the exact opposite of how mmoo's ive played treat grouping. For example guild wars rewards 8 man parties with the same drop rates as solo players. So an everyone in the 8 man team is getting the same loots as if they were soloing that mob but with the added benefit of having 7 others with them.

    A simple analogy I can think of would be lets say you hire someone to cut you lawn for $20. Say he wants to bring a friend to help him with the job are you then expected to pay both of them $20 each? Of course not, the job is still worth $20, anymore people added to the job will make the job easier not more rewarding. Well try telling that to the devs in some of these games that would have you believe you should pay everyone equally, and the more people come in they have to get paid too, and in some cases they wont let you start the lawnmower unless you bring a friend. Dumb.

    Personally I dont care , word of mouth will tell me if the game is solo friendly or not which like or not is make or break factor for many of us when determining whether to invest in a game.

  • Addt4Addt4 Member Posts: 99

    If you want to solo, dont pay £10 a month to do it online imo.

  • CypryssCypryss Member Posts: 84
    Originally posted by bigtime102


    What bugs me about the whole solo vs grouping thing is the devs who want to reward grouping as if its some noble activity that deserves some extra rewards and incentives ontop of the inherit advantages grouping already gives you which is an easier game. Thats the whole point of teamwork , to get things done EASIER, not with more rewards infact the more people you bring into the job the less the reward should be, the exact opposite of how mmoo's ive played treat grouping. For example guild wars rewards 8 man parties with the same drop rates as solo players. So an everyone in the 8 man team is getting the same loots as if they were soloing that mob but with the added benefit of having 7 others with them.
    A simple analogy I can think of would be lets say you hire someone to cut you lawn for $20. Say he wants to bring a friend to help him with the job are you then expected to pay both of them $20 each? Of course not, the job is still worth $20, anymore people added to the job will make the job easier not more rewarding. Well try telling that to the devs in some of these games that would have you believe you should pay everyone equally, and the more people come in they have to get paid too, and in some cases they wont let you start the lawnmower unless you bring a friend. Dumb.
    Personally I dont care , word of mouth will tell me if the game is solo friendly or not which like or not is make or break factor for many of us when determining whether to invest in a game.

    Bingo !

    I believe what EQ and Wow did for us all is make us more aware of this and i can't thank then enough for it. If the next mmorpg copies EQ or Wow in this aspect i won't be buying it.

    Thank you so very much Blizzard and SOE

  • Addt4Addt4 Member Posts: 99
    Originally posted by Cypryss

    Originally posted by bigtime102


    What bugs me about the whole solo vs grouping thing is the devs who want to reward grouping as if its some noble activity that deserves some extra rewards and incentives ontop of the inherit advantages grouping already gives you which is an easier game. Thats the whole point of teamwork , to get things done EASIER, not with more rewards infact the more people you bring into the job the less the reward should be, the exact opposite of how mmoo's ive played treat grouping. For example guild wars rewards 8 man parties with the same drop rates as solo players. So an everyone in the 8 man team is getting the same loots as if they were soloing that mob but with the added benefit of having 7 others with them.
    A simple analogy I can think of would be lets say you hire someone to cut you lawn for $20. Say he wants to bring a friend to help him with the job are you then expected to pay both of them $20 each? Of course not, the job is still worth $20, anymore people added to the job will make the job easier not more rewarding. Well try telling that to the devs in some of these games that would have you believe you should pay everyone equally, and the more people come in they have to get paid too, and in some cases they wont let you start the lawnmower unless you bring a friend. Dumb.
    Personally I dont care , word of mouth will tell me if the game is solo friendly or not which like or not is make or break factor for many of us when determining whether to invest in a game.

    Bingo !

    I believe what EQ and Wow did for us all is make us more aware of this and i can't thank then enough for it. If the next mmorpg copies EQ or Wow in this aspect i won't be buying it.

    Thank you so very much Blizzard and SOE



     

    Dont ever compare EQ1 to WOW!!!!!!!!!!!

  • CypryssCypryss Member Posts: 84
    Originally posted by Addt4

    Originally posted by Cypryss

    Originally posted by bigtime102


    What bugs me about the whole solo vs grouping thing is the devs who want to reward grouping as if its some noble activity that deserves some extra rewards and incentives ontop of the inherit advantages grouping already gives you which is an easier game. Thats the whole point of teamwork , to get things done EASIER, not with more rewards infact the more people you bring into the job the less the reward should be, the exact opposite of how mmoo's ive played treat grouping. For example guild wars rewards 8 man parties with the same drop rates as solo players. So an everyone in the 8 man team is getting the same loots as if they were soloing that mob but with the added benefit of having 7 others with them.
    A simple analogy I can think of would be lets say you hire someone to cut you lawn for $20. Say he wants to bring a friend to help him with the job are you then expected to pay both of them $20 each? Of course not, the job is still worth $20, anymore people added to the job will make the job easier not more rewarding. Well try telling that to the devs in some of these games that would have you believe you should pay everyone equally, and the more people come in they have to get paid too, and in some cases they wont let you start the lawnmower unless you bring a friend. Dumb.
    Personally I dont care , word of mouth will tell me if the game is solo friendly or not which like or not is make or break factor for many of us when determining whether to invest in a game.

    Bingo !

    I believe what EQ and Wow did for us all is make us more aware of this and i can't thank then enough for it. If the next mmorpg copies EQ or Wow in this aspect i won't be buying it.

    Thank you so very much Blizzard and SOE



     

    Dont ever compare EQ1 to WOW!!!!!!!!!!!

     

    Wow is pretty much the same deal as EQ just more friendly. If you wish i could compare EQ to Knight Online which is closer related then Wow if you like.

  • Addt4Addt4 Member Posts: 99

    In a thread talking about Soloing, your comparing EQ1 to WOW.......

    99% of time in EQ1 was spent grouping, you couldnt get to the highest level without it. Where as WOW, you could hit the top level without even interacting with another player. Plain dumb to compare the 2.

  • CypryssCypryss Member Posts: 84
    Originally posted by Addt4


    In a thread talking about Soloing, your comparing EQ1 to WOW.......
    99% of time in EQ1 was spent grouping, you couldnt get to the highest level without it. Where as WOW, you could hit the top level without even interacting with another player. Plain dumb to compare the 2.

     

    When talking about leveling. Yes it's dumb to compare both. Thank god most of us are not only talking about leveling and like i said i could compare EQ closer to KO if you wish in regards to leveling. Solo content doesn't just mean leveling. It plays a large roll in some mmorpgs like Wow but it isn't the only thing mentioned here when talking about solo content.

    Don't be so closed minded.

  • Addt4Addt4 Member Posts: 99
    Originally posted by Cypryss

    Originally posted by Addt4


    In a thread talking about Soloing, your comparing EQ1 to WOW.......
    99% of time in EQ1 was spent grouping, you couldnt get to the highest level without it. Where as WOW, you could hit the top level without even interacting with another player. Plain dumb to compare the 2.

     

    When talking about leveling. Yes it's dumb to compare both. Thank god most of us are not only talking about leveling and like i said i could compare EQ closer to KO if you wish in regards to leveling. Solo content doesn't just mean leveling. It plays a large roll in some mmorpgs like Wow but it isn't the only thing meantioned here when talking about solo content.

    Don't be so closed minded.



     

    I haven't play EQ1 for since LDON(I think that was the last expansion i played). But at that time, only a few classes could truely solo, most people just couldnt kill a similar level mob on their own, at that point a few more could in there own way, but only easier mobs and mobs that the rewards were not worth doing it. But certainly in early EQ1, you only soloed for the first few levels, the game was built round the idea of grouping.

    Now WoW, I didnt play much of the end game, but certainly getting there i dont remember grouping much at all. I know they've got raid content and the like at end game, but nothing on the scale of grouping requirements EQ1, or the consquences of death that also pushed players together.

    I never played KO to comment.

     

    But really, comparing anything about EQ1 and WOW, other than their both mmorpg's is just silly.

  • CypryssCypryss Member Posts: 84
    Originally posted by Addt4

    Originally posted by Cypryss

    Originally posted by Addt4


    In a thread talking about Soloing, your comparing EQ1 to WOW.......
    99% of time in EQ1 was spent grouping, you couldnt get to the highest level without it. Where as WOW, you could hit the top level without even interacting with another player. Plain dumb to compare the 2.

     

    When talking about leveling. Yes it's dumb to compare both. Thank god most of us are not only talking about leveling and like i said i could compare EQ closer to KO if you wish in regards to leveling. Solo content doesn't just mean leveling. It plays a large roll in some mmorpgs like Wow but it isn't the only thing meantioned here when talking about solo content.

    Don't be so closed minded.



     

    I haven't play EQ1 for since LDON(I think that was the last expansion i played). But at that time, only a few classes could truely solo, most people just couldnt kill a similar level mob on their own, at that point a few more could in there own way, but only easier mobs and mobs that the rewards were not worth doing it. But certainly in early EQ1, you only soloed for the first few levels, the game was built round the idea of grouping.

    Now WoW, I didnt play much of the end game, but certainly getting there i dont remember grouping much at all. I know they've got raid content and the like at end game, but nothing on the scale of grouping requirements EQ1, or the consquences of death that also pushed players together.

    I never played KO to comment.

     

    But really, comparing anything about EQ1 and WOW, other than their both mmorpg's is just silly.

    In regards to what you have mentioned yes i agree. However it is even noted by Jeff Kaplan that wow was in fact a copy of EQ.

    3 of the major devs that worked on Wow where hardcore EQ players.

    http://ve3d.ign.com/videos/50748/PC/EverQuest/Trailer/Jace-Hall-Presents-EverCracked-The-Phenomenon-Of-EverQuest-Trailer

    Are you saying what SOE did with EQ didn't have a direct impact on what's in Wow and shouldn't ever be compared ? 

    Intresting. Well I'm done debating if EQ and Wow should or shouldn't be compared.

     

     

  • Addt4Addt4 Member Posts: 99
    Originally posted by Cypryss

    Originally posted by Addt4

    Originally posted by Cypryss

    Originally posted by Addt4


    In a thread talking about Soloing, your comparing EQ1 to WOW.......
    99% of time in EQ1 was spent grouping, you couldnt get to the highest level without it. Where as WOW, you could hit the top level without even interacting with another player. Plain dumb to compare the 2.

     

    When talking about leveling. Yes it's dumb to compare both. Thank god most of us are not only talking about leveling and like i said i could compare EQ closer to KO if you wish in regards to leveling. Solo content doesn't just mean leveling. It plays a large roll in some mmorpgs like Wow but it isn't the only thing meantioned here when talking about solo content.

    Don't be so closed minded.



     

    I haven't play EQ1 for since LDON(I think that was the last expansion i played). But at that time, only a few classes could truely solo, most people just couldnt kill a similar level mob on their own, at that point a few more could in there own way, but only easier mobs and mobs that the rewards were not worth doing it. But certainly in early EQ1, you only soloed for the first few levels, the game was built round the idea of grouping.

    Now WoW, I didnt play much of the end game, but certainly getting there i dont remember grouping much at all. I know they've got raid content and the like at end game, but nothing on the scale of grouping requirements EQ1, or the consquences of death that also pushed players together.

    I never played KO to comment.

     

    But really, comparing anything about EQ1 and WOW, other than their both mmorpg's is just silly.

    In regards to what you have mentioned yes i agree. However it is even noted by Jeff Kaplan that wow was in fact a copy of EQ.

    3 of the major devs that worked on Wow where hardcore EQ players.

    http://ve3d.ign.com/videos/50748/PC/EverQuest/Trailer/Jace-Hall-Presents-EverCracked-The-Phenomenon-Of-EverQuest-Trailer

    Are you saying what SOE did with EQ didn't have a direct impact on what's in Wow and shouldn't ever be compared ? 

    Intresting. Well I'm do debating if EQ and Wow should or shouldn't be compared.

     

     



     

    There just nothing to compare. I cannot think of 1 feature that is in anyway similar.

    As for Dev's I bet most dev's of any game have played EQ1, if not all the other titles for R+D work atleast. For them to be in the industry EQ1 probably had some affect, after all it was released in 99, its one the first mmorpg's. Its hard not to say Dev's have been influenced in some way by EQ1/UO etc.. but to say that makes EQ1 in some way related to the later developed WOW is cluching at straws.

  • LynxJSALynxJSA Member RarePosts: 3,320
    Originally posted by Nessin




    Just out of pure curiousity, can you elaborate?  Its one thing to state "choose to take the easy way out and bump the mobs damage" but I'd like to see some sort of concrete example of how you could improve difficulty.  Especially with your single-player comment, as the difference between scaling a game around one player versus any number of players is significantly different.

     

    It's not that devs cannot make mobs smarter and more tactical, it's that players would get their asses handed to them if they did. Most players dislike mobs that require them to act outside of their standard pattern of behavior in combat, let alone smart mobs that react to player behavior. Now give the mobs access to the spells and tools that players have, and the slaughter will be ridiculous. There's only a small batshit crazy bunch that likes that kind of a challenge and they're usually PvPing to get their fix.

     

    -- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG 
    RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? 
    FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?  
  • LynxJSALynxJSA Member RarePosts: 3,320
    Originally posted by Addt4

    Originally posted by Cypryss

    Originally posted by Addt4

    Originally posted by Cypryss

    Originally posted by Addt4


    In a thread talking about Soloing, your comparing EQ1 to WOW.......
    99% of time in EQ1 was spent grouping, you couldnt get to the highest level without it. Where as WOW, you could hit the top level without even interacting with another player. Plain dumb to compare the 2.

     

    When talking about leveling. Yes it's dumb to compare both. Thank god most of us are not only talking about leveling and like i said i could compare EQ closer to KO if you wish in regards to leveling. Solo content doesn't just mean leveling. It plays a large roll in some mmorpgs like Wow but it isn't the only thing meantioned here when talking about solo content.

    Don't be so closed minded.



     

    I haven't play EQ1 for since LDON(I think that was the last expansion i played). But at that time, only a few classes could truely solo, most people just couldnt kill a similar level mob on their own, at that point a few more could in there own way, but only easier mobs and mobs that the rewards were not worth doing it. But certainly in early EQ1, you only soloed for the first few levels, the game was built round the idea of grouping.

    Now WoW, I didnt play much of the end game, but certainly getting there i dont remember grouping much at all. I know they've got raid content and the like at end game, but nothing on the scale of grouping requirements EQ1, or the consquences of death that also pushed players together.

    I never played KO to comment.

     

    But really, comparing anything about EQ1 and WOW, other than their both mmorpg's is just silly.

    In regards to what you have mentioned yes i agree. However it is even noted by Jeff Kaplan that wow was in fact a copy of EQ.

    3 of the major devs that worked on Wow where hardcore EQ players.

    http://ve3d.ign.com/videos/50748/PC/EverQuest/Trailer/Jace-Hall-Presents-EverCracked-The-Phenomenon-Of-EverQuest-Trailer

    Are you saying what SOE did with EQ didn't have a direct impact on what's in Wow and shouldn't ever be compared ? 

    Intresting. Well I'm do debating if EQ and Wow should or shouldn't be compared.

     

     



     

    There just nothing to compare. I cannot think of 1 feature that is in anyway similar.

    As for Dev's I bet most dev's of any game have played EQ1, if not all the other titles for R+D work atleast. For them to be in the industry EQ1 probably had some affect, after all it was released in 99, its one the first mmorpg's. Its hard not to say Dev's have been influenced in some way by EQ1/UO etc.. but to say that makes EQ1 in some way related to the later developed WOW is cluching at straws.

     

    You really can't argue this one. They were exEQers, designed the game specifically for EQ raiders, and even made it part of their strategy and development to get in contact with the major EQ guild leaders to bring them into beta, build the community around them and get their input.

    You may not want to see the similarity, but that doesn't change that WOW was explicitly designed by exEQers with the EQ raid player in mind as a target audience.

    -- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG 
    RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? 
    FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?  
  • WSIMikeWSIMike Member Posts: 5,564
    Originally posted by bigtime102


    What bugs me about the whole solo vs grouping thing is the devs who want to reward grouping as if its some noble activity that deserves some extra rewards and incentives ontop of the inherit advantages grouping already gives you which is an easier game. Thats the whole point of teamwork , to get things done EASIER, not with more rewards infact the more people you bring into the job the less the reward should be, the exact opposite of how mmoo's ive played treat grouping. For example guild wars rewards 8 man parties with the same drop rates as solo players. So an everyone in the 8 man team is getting the same loots as if they were soloing that mob but with the added benefit of having 7 others with them.



    Well, if there are Devs who are rewarding more just because you're in a group, then they need their heads fixed.



    The idea of grouping is to take on more difficult challenges that require the cooperation of a well organized collection of players to overcome. The reward is, ideally, scaled to the difficulty of the encounter itself.



    I've never personally played a MMO that gave better rewards simply because you grouped up... I hope I never do.
    That said, from reading some posts in this thread, and in others with a similar topic, it seems to me that there are many people who approach MMOs as strictly a single-player, soloable experience and think there's something wrong with the game if it isn't, or doesn't amply support it. While people are entitled to their preferred playstyle and, of course, their opinions... I think those people have come to the genre with the wrong idea.



    The mentality of some would be like a devout meat-eater walking into a vegetarian restaurant, looking at the menu and complaining, "you don't have enough meat items on this menu... I prefer red meat in my diet, and I expect you to serve it". When asked why they're eating at a vegetarian restaurant if they're not a vegetarian, they would say "I want to eat here, and since I'm a customer, I expect you to provide me the menu options I want". 



    It makes no more sense to go to a genre founded in groups playing together and complaining that you can't solo enough.



    MMOs are derived from MUDs... which in turn were derived from table-top RPGs... which were centered around a group of players getting together and taking their characters through an on-going series of adventures. A single group of players could last for months, even years, working on the same characters.



    When's the last time you heard of someone running a solo table-top RPG campaign?



    When's the last time you heard of friends getting together to each sit at their own table, running their own solo campaigns?



    That's the equivalent of what many gamers are looking for with MMOs... They want to play *among* other people... but not *with* them.





     

    "If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road,
    and the cash shop selling asphalt..."
    - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops

    image

  • LynxJSALynxJSA Member RarePosts: 3,320
    Originally posted by WSIMike



    I've never personally played a MMO that gave better rewards simply because you grouped up... I hope I never do.
     



     

    You didn't play AC or DAoC?

    -- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG 
    RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? 
    FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?  
  • WSIMikeWSIMike Member Posts: 5,564
    Originally posted by LynxJSA

    Originally posted by WSIMike



    I've never personally played a MMO that gave better rewards simply because you grouped up... I hope I never do.
     



     

    You didn't play AC or DAoC?

     

    I played DAoC... But I don't remember getting a better reward simply because I was in a party. If I got a better reward it was because we overcame a more difficult challenge than any of us would have been able to solo. The challenge resulted in the better reward.. not simply the fact that I was in a  group.

    "If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road,
    and the cash shop selling asphalt..."
    - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops

    image

  • LynxJSALynxJSA Member RarePosts: 3,320
    Originally posted by WSIMike

    Originally posted by LynxJSA

    Originally posted by WSIMike



    I've never personally played a MMO that gave better rewards simply because you grouped up... I hope I never do.
     



     

    You didn't play AC or DAoC?

     

    I played DAoC... But I don't remember getting a better reward simply because I was in a party. If I got a better reward it was because we overcame a more difficult challenge than any of us would have been able to solo. The challenge resulted in the better reward.. not simply the fact that I was in a  group.

     

    A solo player received no bonus for killing adds. A group did, which is funny because a group can handle adds much easier than a solo player can in DAoC.

     

    -- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG 
    RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? 
    FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?  
  • WSIMikeWSIMike Member Posts: 5,564
    Originally posted by LynxJSA

    Originally posted by WSIMike

    Originally posted by LynxJSA

    Originally posted by WSIMike



    I've never personally played a MMO that gave better rewards simply because you grouped up... I hope I never do.
     



     

    You didn't play AC or DAoC?

     

    I played DAoC... But I don't remember getting a better reward simply because I was in a party. If I got a better reward it was because we overcame a more difficult challenge than any of us would have been able to solo. The challenge resulted in the better reward.. not simply the fact that I was in a  group.

     

    A solo player received no bonus for killing adds. A group did, which is funny because a group can handle adds much easier than a solo player can in DAoC.

     

     

    Interesting... I'd never noticed that while playing, though I didn't play DAoC for that long, so maybe I would have if I'd stuck around longer. I don't even understand having bonuses for adds anyway... getting the normal xp per kill isn't enough?



    Weird.

     

     

     

    "If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road,
    and the cash shop selling asphalt..."
    - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops

    image

  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 19,912

    Arguments about xp and fairness miss the point, we need an incentive to group, otherwise we never would. That incentive does not have to be xp, but it has to be there. Because people are so damn lazy and the early part of MMO's is quite rightly all solo.



    Giving someone a reward for doing the simplest thing, i.e. soloing will mean that’s all anyone ever does. MMO's can be so much more, let’s not be content with second best.

Sign In or Register to comment.