Howdy, Stranger!

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

Why is everyone crying about Solo stuff.

12357

Comments

  • IhmoteppIhmotepp Member Posts: 14,495
    Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

    Originally posted by Ihmotepp

    Originally posted by Ilvaldyr


    GROUPING  up to grind out exp on mobs.
    you would get better exp and equal equipment from just grindign away at camps


     Today, no downtime, just fight, fight, fight, loot, kthxbye.

    Forced Grouping, XP grinding, downtime..

    It staggers me that some people would still want these mechanics in an MMO.

     These are the only elements that make an MMO fun and immersive, IMO.

    This is a perspective that you and I will not agree on.

    Most RPGs, especially MMORPGs, can be played by a monkey. Press button, level, or level skills, press button.

    Without the forced grouping, xp grinding, and downtime, you might as well play solitaire, both require just as much effort and attention.

    I disagree. I once spent several hours in a 40 man raid instance during which my entire "effort and attention" consisted of spending 2 minutes binding "cast fireball" to my mousewheel then repeatedly flicking it while watching TV. I ended up 3rd on the "damage done" meter.

     

     

    I was referring to grouping, like in EQ nad DAoC, not raiding.

    Also, you failed to give an example of how solo play in an MMORPG is so much more complex and engaging.

    image

  • PalebanePalebane Member RarePosts: 3,919
    Originally posted by Ihmotepp

    Originally posted by Ilvaldyr


    GROUPING  up to grind out exp on mobs.
    you would get better exp and equal equipment from just grindign away at camps


     Today, no downtime, just fight, fight, fight, loot, kthxbye.

    Forced Grouping, XP grinding, downtime..

    It staggers me that some people would still want these mechanics in an MMO.

     

    These are the only elements that make an MMO fun and immersive, IMO.

    Most RPGs, especially MMORPGs, can be played by a monkey. Press button, level, or level skills, press button.

    Without the forced grouping, xp grinding, and downtime, you might as well play solitaire, both require just as much effort and attention.

    I agree.

    Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.

  • IlvaldyrIlvaldyr Member CommonPosts: 2,142
    Originally posted by Ihmotepp
    I was referring to grouping, like in EQ nad DAoC, not raiding.

    There's really not that much difference.

    Group levelling has always been easier than solo levelling; every class has strengths and weaknesses. Tanks can't heal and healers can't tank, but group a healer with a tank and you already have a group with far less vulnerabilities. Add a nuker to that group and you effectively have no vulnerabilities at all resulting in the individual gameplay becoming narrower.

    The tank just tanks, the healer just heals and the nuker just nukes.

    When you solo, you have to use more of the abilities of your character to address the vulnerabilities of your class.

    image
    Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
  • IhmoteppIhmotepp Member Posts: 14,495
    Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

    Originally posted by Ihmotepp
    I was referring to grouping, like in EQ nad DAoC, not raiding.

    There's really not that much difference.

    Group levelling has always been easier than solo levelling; every class has strengths and weaknesses. Tanks can't heal and healers can't tank, but group a healer with a tank and you already have a group with far less vulnerabilities. Add a nuker to that group and you effectively have no vulnerabilities at all resulting in the individual gameplay becoming narrower.

    The tank just tanks, the healer just heals and the nuker just nukes.

    When you solo, you have to use more of the abilities of your character to address the vulnerabilities of your class.

     

    Actually there is a HUGE difference. Compare it, if you will, to a conversation.

    Imagine a conversation between two people. Or, imagine a conversation between 8 people.

    Now, imagine a conversation between 40 people.

    Somewhat different don't you think?

    Using more abilities is still just clicking the buttons.

    Instead of clicking tank, tank, tank, you're clicking tank, attack, special attack, tank, attack, special attack, rinse repeat. If your abilities compensate for the vulnerabilities of your class, then they aren't vullnerabilities are they?

    Still not any more engaging that solitaire. Red goes on black, 7 goes on 8, Jack goes on Queen, rinse repeat.

    You're saying it's so much more engaging and immersive playing solo because you get to click some different buttons?

    IN group play, if you don't pay attention, you get the party wiped. That's fun, playing solo in an MMORPG is like watching grass grow, and requires just as much effort, IMO. It's ridiculously easy. A 5 year old can do it, literally. But get a 5 year old to play in a group when you pull the absolute toughest mob the group can handle. Not so easy then.

    image

  • thexratedthexrated Member UncommonPosts: 1,368

    Human have inherently selfish nature. However, there are cultural differences in this.

    In the US, in particular, there is the achiever mentality. Just look at the whole popularity thing. People who are successful in sports are most likely popular in schools. The society honors and respects individual achievements above all else. This is somewhat different in Europe, but also here we tend to value individuals achievements above that of a group.

    Just looking at Chinese versus Americans for example:.

      Chinese Americans
    Conception Of the Self Collectivist: Higher value placed on group cooperation and individual modesty.

    Individualist: Higher value placed on self-reliance. Self-promotion is more accepted. High value placed on "freedom" from externally imposed constraints.

     
    Social Relationships Formal, hierarchical. People most comfortable in the presence of a hierarchy in which they know their position and the customs/rules for behavior in the situation. Informal, egalitarian. People most comfortable with their social equals; importance of social rankings minimized.
    Friendship Small number of close, lifelong friends who feel deeply obligated to give each other whatever help might seem required. Large collection of "friends" and acquaintances which changes over time and involves only limited mutual obligations.
    Obligation Relationships with other people involve reciprocal obligations. People avoid interdependent relationships and situations that might entail long-term obligations.
    Task vs. Relationship Orientation Relationship-oriented: Maintaining a harmonious relationship has priority over accomplishing tasks. Task-oriented. Relationships are less important than getting the work done.
    Harmony vs.

    "Truth"
    Avoid direct confrontation, open criticism, and controversial topics. Concern maintaining harmony and with "face." Willing to confront directly, criticize, discuss controversial topics, press personal opinions about what they consider "the truth. Little concern with "face."
    Role of laws, rules, and regulations More faith in personal relationships than in written rules and procedures for structuring interactions. Written rules presumably apply to everyone and are assumed to produce fair, reasonable procedures and decisions.
    Time Consciousness Relatively more attention to the past and to the longer-term future. Less interested in the past; eye on near-term future.
    Ascribed vs. Achieved Statu Traditionally, a person's status in the society was based importantly on inherited characteristics such as age, gender, and family. This is changing. People's status is based mainly on their own achievements, including education obtained and level of success realized in their line of work.

     

    Sources: Aguilar, Leslie, and Linda Stokes 1996. Multicultural Customer Service: Providing Outstanding Service Across Cultures. Chicago: Times Mirror Higher Education Group, Inc., Li Qing 1995. "Face, Guanxi, Houmen(r) & Elastic Rules: Insight into the Chinese Culture.” Presentation at conference of NAFSA: Association of International Educators.

    "The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."

  • IlvaldyrIlvaldyr Member CommonPosts: 2,142
    Originally posted by Ihmotepp
    Instead of clicking tank, tank, tank, you're clicking tank, attack, special attack, tank, attack, special attack, rinse repeat. If your abilities compensate for the vulnerabilities of your class, then they aren't vullnerabilities are they?
    You asked for an example of how solo play is more complex than group play and clearly "tank, attack, special attack, tank, attack, special attack" is more complex than "tank, tank, tank" and the point is that you have to consciously compensate for your own vulnerabilities when soloing. It adds complexity.


    You're saying it's so much more engaging and immersive playing solo because you get to click some different buttons?
    I'm saying that it's more complex. Whether it's more immersive or engaging is dependant on the preferences of the player and is too subjective to be debated without bias.
    IN group play, if you don't pay attention, you get the party wiped. That's fun, playing solo in an MMORPG is like watching grass grow, and requires just as much effort, IMO. It's ridiculously easy. A 5 year old can do it, literally. But get a 5 year old to play in a group when you pull the absolute toughest mob the group can handle. Not so easy then.
    Likewise, the 5 year old couldn't handle the toughest soloable mob in the game. Again, you're stating your opinions on what is and isn't fun. People have different views, different preferences and different opinions on what is and isn't fun.

     

     

    image
    Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
  • elderotterelderotter Member Posts: 651
    Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

    Originally posted by Ihmotepp
    I was referring to grouping, like in EQ nad DAoC, not raiding.

    There's really not that much difference.

    Group levelling has always been easier than solo levelling; every class has strengths and weaknesses. Tanks can't heal and healers can't tank, but group a healer with a tank and you already have a group with far less vulnerabilities. Add a nuker to that group and you effectively have no vulnerabilities at all resulting in the individual gameplay becoming narrower.

    The tank just tanks, the healer just heals and the nuker just nukes.

    When you solo, you have to use more of the abilities of your character to address the vulnerabilities of your class.

     

    I agree - you learn more about your class soloing then grouping where you have a role and use only a portion of your skills.

  • KhaunsharKhaunshar Member UncommonPosts: 349
    Originally posted by elderotter

    Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

    Originally posted by Ihmotepp
    I was referring to grouping, like in EQ nad DAoC, not raiding.

    There's really not that much difference.

    Group levelling has always been easier than solo levelling; every class has strengths and weaknesses. Tanks can't heal and healers can't tank, but group a healer with a tank and you already have a group with far less vulnerabilities. Add a nuker to that group and you effectively have no vulnerabilities at all resulting in the individual gameplay becoming narrower.

    The tank just tanks, the healer just heals and the nuker just nukes.

    When you solo, you have to use more of the abilities of your character to address the vulnerabilities of your class.

     

    I agree - you learn more about your class soloing then grouping where you have a role and use only a portion of your skills.

     

    Yeah right, cause in all those modern MMOs you need more than what, 2-3 skills tops to kill the average underpowered solo mob? Every class has more solo centric and more group centric skills. Not learning how to use the group centric skills is a big failure.

    Stop trying to sell off auto-attack/afk as great skill. Solo Mobs in all the newer MMOs (meaning 5 years or less) are such a joke, you often dont even need to press more than your primary attack skill to win.

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 35,403
    Originally posted by elderotter

    Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

    Originally posted by Ihmotepp
    I was referring to grouping, like in EQ nad DAoC, not raiding.

    There's really not that much difference.

    Group levelling has always been easier than solo levelling; every class has strengths and weaknesses. Tanks can't heal and healers can't tank, but group a healer with a tank and you already have a group with far less vulnerabilities. Add a nuker to that group and you effectively have no vulnerabilities at all resulting in the individual gameplay becoming narrower.

    The tank just tanks, the healer just heals and the nuker just nukes.

    When you solo, you have to use more of the abilities of your character to address the vulnerabilities of your class.

     

    I agree - you learn more about your class soloing then grouping where you have a role and use only a portion of your skills.

     

    I disagree. Games that permit effective soling do so by not designing vulnerabilities into a character.  In a true group game, the tank needs the healer who needs the tank who needs the crowd control who needs the dps who needs them all to survive.

    Alone each class is too vulnerable to efficiently solo, therefore they are strongly encouraged to group.

    By making sure every class can survive and thrive solo, you actually make the game easier, not more difficult.

     

    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing FO76 at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • IlvaldyrIlvaldyr Member CommonPosts: 2,142
    Originally posted by Kyleran
    Games that permit effective soling do so by not designing vulnerabilities into a character.  In a true group game, the tank needs the healer who needs the tank who needs the crowd control who needs the dps who needs them all to survive.
    Alone each class is too vulnerable to efficiently solo, therefore they are strongly encouraged to group.
    By making sure every class can survive and thrive solo, you actually make the game easier, not more difficult.

    Requiring more people to kill a mob doesn't make it more "difficult" if the invidual gameplay (i.e. what each player is actually doing within the group) is considerably simplified.

    If doesn't matter how many people you "need" to kill a mob, if all the players are just repeatedly spamming a tiny percentage of their skillset then a 100 man raid encounter can be "easier" (i.e. require less player aptitude) than a solo mob that is a bugger to kill.

    image
    Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
  • LynxJSALynxJSA Member RarePosts: 3,190
    Originally posted by Kyleran




    I disagree. Games that permit effective soling do so by not designing vulnerabilities into a character.

     

    Can you give a few examples?  If you look at the evolution of the archer, rogue and priest/healer in the group-focused MMOs, each one has been 'corrected' to insure they can solo. However, in the MMOs that are designed around offering both solo and cooperative gaming (not temporary solo play, like WOW), players are usually offered ways to build their character such that they can try to compensate for vulnerability but cannot remove it.

  • faxnadufaxnadu Member UncommonPosts: 940
    Originally posted by Wolfenpride


    Cause soloers are sucking the "MMO" out of mmorpg's.
    Seriously i play these games for the sole purpose of playing with others,
    but when you start gearing mmo's towards the solo crowd, your left with another bland, uninteresting, trashy mmo (more like single player rpg) that belongs in a shitter hole.

    singple player games have programmed " friends foes whatever " inside, mmos have real people operating the toon.

    thats the difference either you solo or not the only importance is that world i alive and not full of only programmed stuff.

  • DubaVampeDubaVampe Member Posts: 35
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Originally posted by elderotter

    Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

    Originally posted by Ihmotepp
    I was referring to grouping, like in EQ nad DAoC, not raiding.

    There's really not that much difference.

    Group levelling has always been easier than solo levelling; every class has strengths and weaknesses. Tanks can't heal and healers can't tank, but group a healer with a tank and you already have a group with far less vulnerabilities. Add a nuker to that group and you effectively have no vulnerabilities at all resulting in the individual gameplay becoming narrower.

    The tank just tanks, the healer just heals and the nuker just nukes.

    When you solo, you have to use more of the abilities of your character to address the vulnerabilities of your class.

     

    I agree - you learn more about your class soloing then grouping where you have a role and use only a portion of your skills.

     

    I disagree. Games that permit effective soling do so by not designing vulnerabilities into a character.  In a true group game, the tank needs the healer who needs the tank who needs the crowd control who needs the dps who needs them all to survive.

    Alone each class is too vulnerable to efficiently solo, therefore they are strongly encouraged to group.

    By making sure every class can survive and thrive solo, you actually make the game easier, not more difficult.

     

     

    This.

     

    Plus, I don't really understand what all these solo fanatics are going on about. The whole idea seems really diluted and simple, like I'm gonna be able to run through one of these new solo games in a couple of days, then sit on my $15 a month poking the devs for new content.

     

    Why don't we just port an IRC or chat channel into a new single-player MMO? From what I'm getting, the socializing that most of the casual community enjoys doing is in guild chat and whatnot. Well, shit. Stick a server-wide (though the people on the server would technically be unable to react with eachother otherwise, but that's not big deal) chat box at the bottom of the screen and call it a day. Then, I can go back to my raid without worrying if I'm doing it for nothing because the next expansion will just toss my gear away without any kind of group mechanic in sight.

  • IlvaldyrIlvaldyr Member CommonPosts: 2,142
    Originally posted by DubaVampe 
    Why don't we just port an IRC or chat channel into a new single-player MMO?

    You might want to read through some of the other replies; we've already covered the whole "grouping/raiding is not the only way to interact with other people in an MMO" thing.

    image
    Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
  • DubaVampeDubaVampe Member Posts: 35
    Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

    Originally posted by DubaVampe 
    Why don't we just port an IRC or chat channel into a new single-player MMO?

    You might want to read through some of the other replies; we've already covered the whole "grouping/raiding is not the only way to interact with other people in an MMO" thing.

     

    Fine, fine. Fair enough. Why are you always typing in italics, anyways? Weird.

     

    Regardless, the main idea is that I don't just want to see people, or text in a chat box, or craft with them beside me or something like that. I want to work with them towards a common goal. As we've already established, but as the solo community is having so much fun completely ignoring is that:

     

    If you make solo content as effective and rewarding as group-based content, nobody will group up.

     

    Meaning, you will be taking a major social aspect out of MMORPGs. Nobody will be working together anymore, it'll just be a bunch of people working against/apart from eachother to meet their own needs. Now, I'm not saying that doesn't happen in raids now, where people do them only for their own gear; but honestly.

     

    Let's take WoW, for example, since I imagine that's what most people are familiar with end-game, and also since it idealized the soloer's gripe. Now, the first time I did Kara was the most fun I had in that whole, entire game. I didn't even get anything, we wiped twice (lawlz, in kara, lawlz) and had to replace our healer three times. Do you know what that means? I had more fun in a 2-3 hour span of a fail at kara than I did through the entire countless levels of solo content on my way to cap, and even the solo content at cap. This is why the groupers are so against this change, because they can see what I see:

     

    A game where everybody is there, and everybody can do things together; but nobody does. Why bother, right? It's much easier and faster to do it solo. And don't give me that usual "BAWWWW IT WONT BE EASIER BAWWWW" Crap, because it will. It'll be easier and faster. No time taken to get a group together, no time taken to explain strategies or talk amongst one another; or to compete for loot. I hate the idea.

  • local93bclocal93bc Member Posts: 353

    I think 95% of the population is a twit.

    Thats my generic anser to everything.

    image

  • DubaVampeDubaVampe Member Posts: 35
    Originally posted by local93bc


    I think 95% of the population is a twit.
    Thats my generic anser to everything.

     

    Brilliant, now go back to living under that bridge you just love so much.

  • IlvaldyrIlvaldyr Member CommonPosts: 2,142
    Originally posted by DubaVampe 
    Fine, fine. Fair enough. Why are you always typing in italics, anyways? Weird.
    I quote a lot, it's to differentiate my ramblings from the ramblings of my quotee. Sometimes I go orange too, it's really just a matter of visual facilitation.
    Regardless, the main idea is that I don't just want to see people, or text in a chat box, or craft with them beside me or something like that. I want to work with them towards a common goal. As we've already established, but as the solo community is having so much fun completely ignoring is that:
    If you make solo content as effective and rewarding as group-based content, nobody will group up.
    See what you did, you went italics. This was a point also addressed higher in the thread; if there is a choice between grouping and soloing and no-one chooses to group up, why try to force them to do something that they clearly would prefer not to do?
    Meaning, you will be taking a major social aspect out of MMORPGs. Nobody will be working together anymore, it'll just be a bunch of people working against/apart from eachother to meet their own needs. Now, I'm not saying that doesn't happen in raids now, where people do them only for their own gear; but honestly.
    Grouping with 1-39 other people in an instance isn't particularly "social" in my experience. Certainly less so than participating in RP events, chatting on guild channels, or just being part of the economy by providing resources, help and/or crafting services to other players. All of which can be done without being in a group/raid.
    Let's take WoW, for example, since I imagine that's what most people are familiar with end-game, and also since it idealized the soloer's gripe. Now, the first time I did Kara was the most fun I had in that whole, entire game. I didn't even get anything, we wiped twice (lawlz, in kara, lawlz) and had to replace our healer three times. Do you know what that means? I had more fun in a 2-3 hour span of a fail at kara than I did through the entire countless levels of solo content on my way to cap, and even the solo content at cap. This is why the groupers are so against this change, because they can see what I see:
    You're talking about your own fun here; clearly that is a subjective opinion based on what you do/don't enjoy in an MMO. My idea of fun is different. The next guys idea of fun is different again. Debating the concept of "fun" content is futile since it cannot be done without bias.
    A game where everybody is there, and everybody can do things together; but nobody does. Why bother, right? It's much easier and faster to do it solo. And don't give me that usual "BAWWWW IT WONT BE EASIER BAWWWW" Crap, because it will. It'll be easier and faster. No time taken to get a group together, no time taken to explain strategies or talk amongst one another; or to compete for loot. I hate the idea.
    It's neither easier nor faster to solo, even in a solo-friendly game. That's a myth perpetuated by the groupers/raiders to explain away why grouping should be more rewarding.
    I raided (yes, in WoW) for 4 years and my group experience consisted of logging on at a prearranged time, going to a prearranged destination, spamhealing my raid through waves of dull trashmobs, completing a boss fight that we had done a dozen times using a predetermined strategy then going /afk while muppets argued over the loot.
    All raiding requires is a basic level of administrative ability along the lines of "We raid at 7pm every night" and the infinately more challenging sourcing of 24 other people with 5 hours free per night and the literary ability to read a strategy.
    Raiding. It ain't big and it ain't clever.

     

    image
    Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
  • DubaVampeDubaVampe Member Posts: 35

    Fine, fine. I'm done trying to explain why this is a bad idea to all of you. "Something they would rather not do", what a crock of shit. "It's neither easier nor faster to solo, even in a solo-friendly game." Isn't that JUST as subjective as my opinion? In my time playing WoW (since beta, quit at WOTLK), I had only met a handful of players who outright said they hated raiding, minus all the whining on the forums. Now, of course, since my "subjective" "opinions" aren't worth much compared to yours, obviously,  I'll leave it at that. This whole fight is just a repeat over what people should have to go through to get gear. Though I know you'll make some cheeky reply and deny all that, saying you only want what's fair, that's exactly what it is.

     

    In the words of the late George Carlin:

     

    "It's just a prick waving dick fight."

  • IlvaldyrIlvaldyr Member CommonPosts: 2,142
    Originally posted by DubaVampe


    Fine, fine. I'm done trying to explain why this is a bad idea to all of you. "Something they would rather not do", what a crock of shit.
    You said it yourself; if people are given a choice between soloing/grouping (with no significant benefit either way) and they all choose to solo, then your argument that they secretly all want to group but are what .. just too shy to use a LFG mechanic?
    "It's neither easier nor faster to solo, even in a solo-friendly game." Isn't that JUST as subjective as my opinion?
    Nope, that's not a subjective opinion. I'll use WoW for simplicity sake:
    Priest vs 5 mobs.

    Warrior + Priest vs 10 mobs.

    Which is the group less likely to die and/or have the lowest downtime at the end of the fight?

    image
    Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
  • GregtheexconGregtheexcon Member Posts: 203

     Heres the thing, I have a wife, 2 kids and friends. I don't have all the time in the world to play games like some people.

    Hardcore gamers, I mean hardcore, ruin the genre. The ones who play 12 hours a day and juice themselves up so fast that most people are playing catch up.

    Games like WoW, I understand working to get the best gear possible. But when a raid, 1 raid takes like 4,5 even 6 hours to complete, wth? Really thats a second job. Now some might come on here saying oh, you can do it in parts. Yea if you have a set schedule. I don't, my friends don't, my friends firends don't, my family don't, my boss don't. Sure I can make arrangements every few weeks or whatever. 

    But the reason "solo friendly" casual games are being released is because thats the bigger cash cow. There is by far, I mean by far more demand for relaxed games opposed to hardcore games. Thats where the genre is going.

    Over time everything changes, nothing stays the same, evolution anyone? The genre is fine, you don't like the way its goin make your own damn game. Make  a game without the purpose of trying to make the most money possible, cause that makes so much sense.

    Anyone complaining about casual games needs to shake there head. Lets cater to the minority in a billion dollar industry,  yea cause thats smart. 

    Enjoy : )

  • DubaVampeDubaVampe Member Posts: 35
    Originally posted by Ilvaldyr
    Originally posted by DubaVampe

    Fine, fine. I'm done trying to explain why this is a bad idea to all of you. "Something they would rather not do", what a crock of shit.

    You said it yourself; if people are given a choice between soloing/grouping (with no significant benefit either way) and they all choose to solo, then your argument that they secretly all want to group but are what .. just too shy to use a LFG mechanic?

    No, but nice job sticking words in my mouth. My argument was that if solo and group play offered the same rewards, then it would just be faster to do it solo. Why bother grouping if it takes more time and offers the same rewards?

    "It's neither easier nor faster to solo, even in a solo-friendly game." Isn't that JUST as subjective as my opinion?

    Nope, that's not a subjective opinion. I'll use WoW for simplicity sake:

    Priest vs 5 mobs.

    Warrior + Priest vs 10 mobs.

    Which is the group less likely to die and/or have the lowest downtime at the end of the fight?

    Two can play at that. Which is faster? A warrior and priest questing together, or seperately?

    I'll give you a big hint towards that riddle, it's the latter. You may, overall, get more exp more the first one in the long run, but then you have to depend on somebody else. You have to coordinate playtime and socialize. God forbid. In terms of WoW, solo is already more efficient for 79 levels, and even more the starting part of 80 (getting your greenz).

     

    So my question is: What do you really want? I don't think you want solo play, I think you just want to get rid of group play. Which is sad, really. Ruin what a lot of people find fun just for your sake. I know you'll turn that around on me, but hey. How about you just go play with yourself and be happy whilst leaving the rest of us alone?

     

    /thread I've got a raid to do. 8D

  • DubaVampeDubaVampe Member Posts: 35
    Originally posted by Gregtheexcon


     Heres the thing, I have a wife, 2 kids and friends. I don't have all the time in the world to play games like some people.
    Hardcore gamers, I mean hardcore, ruin the genre. The ones who play 12 hours a day and juice themselves up so fast that most people are playing catch up.
    Games like WoW, I understand working to get the best gear possible. But when a raid, 1 raid takes like 4,5 even 6 hours to complete, wth? Really thats a second job. Now some might come on here saying oh, you can do it in parts. Yea if you have a set schedule. I don't, my friends don't, my friends firends don't, my family don't, my boss don't. Sure I can make arrangements every few weeks or whatever. 
    But the reason "solo friendly" casual games are being released is because thats the bigger cash cow. There is by far, I mean by far more demand for relaxed games opposed to hardcore games. Thats where the genre is going.
    Over time everything changes, nothing stays the same, evolution anyone? The genre is fine, you don't like the way its goin make your own damn game. Make  a game without the purpose of trying to make the most money possible, cause that makes so much sense.
    Anyone complaining about casual games needs to shake there head. Lets cater to the minority in a billion dollar industry,  yea cause thats smart. 

     

    You know what? Forget it. These forums are useless. I'ma go play some BF1943 now, and ya'll can keep praying that they release a game that is even MORE solo oriented than the ones that are out now. The one way that's really possible, though, is if they make it so you can get the best gear in the game by 5 minute quests. "Because that makes so much sense."

  • Jimmy_ScytheJimmy_Scythe Member CommonPosts: 3,586
    Originally posted by Gregtheexcon


     Heres the thing, I have a wife, 2 kids and friends. I don't have all the time in the world to play games like some people.
    Hardcore gamers, I mean hardcore, ruin the genre. The ones who play 12 hours a day and juice themselves up so fast that most people are playing catch up.
    Games like WoW, I understand working to get the best gear possible. But when a raid, 1 raid takes like 4,5 even 6 hours to complete, wth? Really thats a second job. Now some might come on here saying oh, you can do it in parts. Yea if you have a set schedule. I don't, my friends don't, my friends firends don't, my family don't, my boss don't. Sure I can make arrangements every few weeks or whatever. 
    But the reason "solo friendly" casual games are being released is because thats the bigger cash cow. There is by far, I mean by far more demand for relaxed games opposed to hardcore games. Thats where the genre is going.
    Over time everything changes, nothing stays the same, evolution anyone? The genre is fine, you don't like the way its goin make your own damn game. Make  a game without the purpose of trying to make the most money possible, cause that makes so much sense.
    Anyone complaining about casual games needs to shake there head. Lets cater to the minority in a billion dollar industry,  yea cause thats smart. 

     

    Hooray for common sense!!!

    Here, have a cookie.

  • IlvaldyrIlvaldyr Member CommonPosts: 2,142
    Originally posted by DubaVampe
    No, but nice job sticking words in my mouth. My argument was that if solo and group play offered the same rewards, then it would just be faster to do it solo. Why bother grouping if it takes more time and offers the same rewards?



    Because it doesn't, as has already been explained (a couple of times).

    Two can play at that. Which is faster? A warrior and priest questing together, or seperately?



    Let's see.. a quest to kill 10 x Woodpaw Gnolls and a group mechanic where all group members get credit for each kill. Well, that's a no-brainer .. the group wins again because they will complete the quest faster. Arranging a time is difficult? I don't think so.

    So my question is: What do you really want?



    I want scaling content so that I can choose whether I solo/group rather than have that choice forced upon me by a tiny minority of the playerbase who are pampered by the content developers.

     

    image
    Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
Sign In or Register to comment.