From a skill standpoint, you can't contribute to a group well enough if you haven't figured your class out on your own.
From a personal standpoint, I would never play a game that I would have to sit around to wait on people with no solo content to pass the time or be forced to log in and be stuck using my time to play with random children. It's just ridiculous.
I play games a lot (especially during the summer months) and most of my time is solo just because I like it that way. Having to depend on yourself lets you get things done in a timely fashion, keeps things orderly and you don't have to deal with children.
What's ruining group gameplay is the kids with no lives with superiority complexes who think that everyone else should stay locked in their bedrooms like them.
That's a pretty narrow vision and a stretch argument. Most groupers do not want group only game play. Most groupers do not want to kill off solo play. There were good group based games where solo's progressed solo, still had the ability to get any item in game and everyone was happy.
Many gamers are anything but children. Your attitude is a perfect example of why I do want solo's to be able to play by themselves. I wouldn't want you in my group.
after sitting for 2 hours!(I was eating dinner and doing other stuff to pass the time) in FFXI and NOT getting one invite to a party(yes, I had my flag up) I realize that any and all arguments AGAINST solo play need to be thrown out the window.
the reason WoW is so popular is because it made soloing to level cap viable and fun and crushed all other mmo's at the time who were so group oriented.
Now, I like to party in groups, even in FFXI, but I DO NOT like to sit on my laurels until a group does form. FFXI isn't the only game to do this either. EQ and the early days of EQ2 do/did this. Why do you think FFXIV is trying to mimic some of the more solo aspects of today's games? Because SE realizes solo play is what people want. And will keep people logged in as opposed to sitting in a city for 2 hours hoping someone will invite in order to level up.
I think the real issue, is that how the solo play is implemented is where the problems lie. We need more innovation in this area, making solo play less of a game killer(i.e. Warhammer, AoC) and more of a way to level up in order to do the party based stuff, missions, story lines, raids, dungeons, boss hunting, named hunting etc. Get rid of the barriers in mmorpgs and we might see more quality games.
MMO should be about grouping otherwise there is no reason for them to online. Thats why I loved FFXI.
So if you were alone for a period of time in real life would you log out? (kill yourself basicly).
I don't even begin to grasp this concept. Real life (again) is the biggest MMO on the planet (in the universe matter of fact)... some people are anti social. Being online does not equate to some alternate reality where people are suddenly all wanting to be together.. dance around naked and sing 60's songs.
That's really the thing I don't understand... I have friends I do things with in real life. Yet its like going into a game with a pre-made gruop/guild. I'm still NEVER going to group with *you* ... just like real life.
Group size might be helpful. As for the poppycock i guess when you log in you get a group right away? Ive never been that fortunate unless its a guild thing and preplanned, and as for guilds i have my ideas about them as well but thats another discussion.
No, groups are not right there anymore because of the solo play. This argument has gone on for weeks now on these forums though. As games continually design themselves around solo play less and less groups will be found.
Except for the most important portion of the game: the endgame--where it's all group content, right?
I want choice. I want to group with my friends but I also want to be able to have fun alone if I'm in the mood. What I don't want is grouping with idiots and group only games force me to do just that.
It's funny when people say that soloing ruins MMOs and then bring up WoW as being mostly solo. How can a game that has introduced 11 million people to MMOs be ruining the genre? Before WoW, MMOs were considered fringe gaming. Now, everyone has at least heard about it. WoW is solely responsible for the popularity of MMOs and being that it's "solo oriented" I think it's safe to assume that maybe the majority of people do not want to group with you or those they do not know.
Maybe, just maybe, these 11 million people play because of the social aspect of MMOs? You know, trading, chatting, interacting fighting and yes, grouping with their friends. Not all people are interested in the most efficient way to level and max out your character and those people do not need incentives to group. Surprisingly enough, there are people who play these games for fun.
That's what games are about: fun. If grouping is fun for you, get a few friends together and go for it. But don't assume that just because you prefer grouping that it's somehow the only proper way to play MMOs. It isn't.
after sitting for 2 hours!(I was eating dinner and doing other stuff to pass the time) in FFXI and NOT getting one invite to a party(yes, I had my flag up) I realize that any and all arguments AGAINST solo play need to be thrown out the window. the reason WoW is so popular is because it made soloing to level cap viable and fun and crushed all other mmo's at the time who were so group oriented. Now, I like to party in groups, even in FFXI, but I DO NOT like to sit on my laurels until a group does form. FFXI isn't the only game to do this either. EQ and the early days of EQ2 do/did this. Why do you think FFXIV is trying to mimic some of the more solo aspects of today's games? Because SE realizes solo play is what people want. And will keep people logged in as opposed to sitting in a city for 2 hours hoping someone will invite in order to level up. I think the real issue, is that how the solo play is implemented is where the problems lie. We need more innovation in this area, making solo play less of a game killer(i.e. Warhammer, AoC) and more of a way to level up in order to do the party based stuff, missions, story lines, raids, dungeons, boss hunting, named hunting etc. Get rid of the barriers in mmorpgs and we might see more quality games.
So you sat on your ass for 2 hours waiting for a group. Maybe you should have tried to form one?? I saw the same thing in City of Heroes CONSTANTLY. People spamming looking for team over and over again,, all of them about the same level and until someone finally came in that would start inviting people they'd just sit there waitting, waiting, and spamming, and bitchin how there were no groups.
I joined a new SG near the end of my time and the SG leader and myself were talking about this and he found it to be a problem. Nobody would do anything until he logged on and then he'd get spammed wiht invites,, you gonna do a Task force run? Hey let's run AE now , can you make a group? Hey man let's pvp you gonna start a group? Gamers are so used to shit being handed to them they think groups should be handed to them as well.
Maybe if people wouldn't play solo so much they wouldn't piss in their pants at the idea of actually leading/forming a group.
You can add solo content without having to make the game 90% soloable. Quest based leveling is almost all soloable from lvl 1-max in most games.
Except for the most important portion of the game: the endgame--where it's all group content, right?I want choice. I want to group with my friends but I also want to be able to have fun alone if I'm in the mood. What I don't want is grouping with idiots and group only games force me to do just that.It's funny when people say that soloing ruins MMOs and then bring up WoW as being mostly solo. How can a game that has introduced 11 million people to MMOs be ruining the genre? Before WoW, MMOs were considered fringe gaming. Now, everyone has at least heard about it. WoW is solely responsible for the popularity of MMOs and being that it's "solo oriented" I think it's safe to assume that maybe the majority of people do not want to group with you or those they do not know.Maybe, just maybe, these 11 million people play because of the social aspect of MMOs? You know, trading, chatting, interacting fighting and yes, grouping with their friends. Not all people are interested in the most efficient way to level and max out your character and those people do not need incentives to group. Surprisingly enough, there are people who play these games for fun.That's what games are about: fun. If grouping is fun for you, get a few friends together and go for it. But don't assume that just because you prefer grouping that it's somehow the only proper way to play MMOs. It isn't.
Come on heartless, you know by now I'm not against solo play. You know I solo. You know I prefer groups. YOu know I want playercrafted gear to be the best in game so soloer's and grouper alike are on fair ground. You know I would like to see games designed for all playstyles and games that are designed with mixes of them.
What I don't want to see is games turned into SRPGS so everyone can solo on their own and teamwork is shot out the window. With the amount of heal-tanks and heal-caster hybrids being put into games it's headed that direction. Don't put words into my mouth you know aren't true.
Originally posted by Greenie Originally posted by elocke after sitting for 2 hours!(I was eating dinner and doing other stuff to pass the time) in FFXI and NOT getting one invite to a party(yes, I had my flag up) I realize that any and all arguments AGAINST solo play need to be thrown out the window. the reason WoW is so popular is because it made soloing to level cap viable and fun and crushed all other mmo's at the time who were so group oriented. Now, I like to party in groups, even in FFXI, but I DO NOT like to sit on my laurels until a group does form. FFXI isn't the only game to do this either. EQ and the early days of EQ2 do/did this. Why do you think FFXIV is trying to mimic some of the more solo aspects of today's games? Because SE realizes solo play is what people want. And will keep people logged in as opposed to sitting in a city for 2 hours hoping someone will invite in order to level up. I think the real issue, is that how the solo play is implemented is where the problems lie. We need more innovation in this area, making solo play less of a game killer(i.e. Warhammer, AoC) and more of a way to level up in order to do the party based stuff, missions, story lines, raids, dungeons, boss hunting, named hunting etc. Get rid of the barriers in mmorpgs and we might see more quality games.
So you sat on your ass for 2 hours waiting for a group. Maybe you should have tried to form one?? I saw the same thing in City of Heroes CONSTANTLY. People spamming looking for team over and over again,, all of them about the same level and until someone finally came in that would start inviting people they'd just sit there waitting, waiting, and spamming, and bitchin how there were no groups. I joined a new SG near the end of my time and the SG leader and myself were talking about this and he found it to be a problem. Nobody would do anything until he logged on and then he'd get spammed wiht invites,, you gonna do a Task force run? Hey let's run AE now , can you make a group? Hey man let's pvp you gonna start a group? Gamers are so used to shit being handed to them they think groups should be handed to them as well. Maybe if people wouldn't play solo so much they wouldn't piss in their pants at the idea of actually leading/forming a group. You can add solo content without having to make the game 90% soloable. Quest based leveling is almost all soloable from lvl 1-max in most games.
Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot to mention trying to form one. I figured that was A GIVEN. I did searches every 15 minutes or so. Didn't find enough people seeking in order to farm a PT. You're damn right I want the game to give me a system that makes forming a group a piece of cake. That's why the public quests in WAR are so popular. That's why an lfg system like WoW sort of has is a great idea, I can queue up for what I am looking for.
Usually in cases like that I"ll group the 1 or 2 people that are willing and find content our level and go from there hopefully picking up people along the way.
But yea, aside from your situation trying to form a group, I stil run into that problem I mentioned in city of heroes more often than not.
Ive never played a game besides Shadowrun for xbox 360 & pc that was 100% group only in design. Although it did have a bot mode for offline use, but that was just afterthought. 100% grouping is probably similar to the full death players out there, population-wise. I already made reference to Fort Knox money. We do not disagree. I however cannot concede that a very large, even equal, yet maybe not 'massive', contingent doesnt exist. I'd say that demonstrates a distinct lack of credible evidence that grouping-only fans can keep a game alive since nobody seems willing to make one. I don't think that you can make a credible case for the group being very large, certainly not equal and nowhere near massive. There is a very small group of people who pop up in every thread (or start the majority of them) and they get shouted down by a huge throng (as huge as throngs get around here anyhow) every time they try it.
This debate has been enthusiastically, and at times vehemently, continuing for quite awhile now across many sites, forums, and blogs. This speaks loudly for how much discussion and point taking needs to be done to know what the real outcome can be. Neither side is a vocal minority, I beleive. I can count the number of people who always pop up on the pro-grouping side on one hand. It's a tiny number of people who want to group to the exclusion of all else. 1. If you create a solo focused title, then throw in equal amount of grouping to obtain greater progression, that undermines the structure of the game. Hardly. The point of any game, from the dev's point of view, is to make money and attract as many subscribers as they can. That's why modern games are the way they are. I won't argue that appealing to the lowest common denominator certainly hasn't caused some problems, but the mainstream success of MMOs today is because they are catering to the largest number of potential players and those players are soloers.
2. Now create a group focused title and throw in an equal amount of solo ability and it allows for the focus to be completely avoided, therby undermining the structure. No, you just get all the group-only people whining that the very existence of solo content ruins their ability to enjoy the game. It isn't that they want group-focused, it's that they want group-only. The place has to be so deadly that at no time can you ever go out by yourself or you'll die. That's what makes them happy, apparently, but they represent a tiny minority of the overall market.
I have no problem with the soloer or choices. I have a problem when it comes to playing to the game focus and finding no one playing it, cause they can avoid that focus for the same outcome. Progression. Please dont wrap me up in the gear debate cause its pointless while progressing through any title to need group earned rewards to progress effectively. I can play pretty much any game out now with greens and common drop 'junk' and make the tasks seem like a leisurly game of solitaire. That goes to the difficulty also, but again thats another debate. In virtually all games, FFIX might be the only exception, most people are soloing. If they couldn't solo, most people wouldn't play at all. Now personally, I think progression is entirely overrated, the mindless grind to get to that next level so you can feel good about yourself is incredibly shallow and stupid, but it's what most people seem to like about MMOs.
What research does a new developer do today? Look at WoW numbers(highly inflated) and drool? I think the tests are out there. We need to understand this isnt a medium that has been in practice for 40, 50, or 100yrs. We have a decade worth of history using a massive online game platform. MMO's are similar so far to consoles. They need an update to current tech. and quality every few years to stay appealing. If EQ, DaoC, even UO would have tech. updates and adaption to creative principles by todays standards, I think they would still appeal to us as games, not just structures for recreation. We have more than a decade, MUDs, which are just non-graphical MMOs in a lot of ways, have been around for decades and they're almost entirely soloable too. This isn't something that just popped out of the blue, there's been a lot of experience out there that says soloing is the majority playstyle.
Except for the most important portion of the game: the endgame--where it's all group content, right?I want choice. I want to group with my friends but I also want to be able to have fun alone if I'm in the mood. What I don't want is grouping with idiots and group only games force me to do just that.It's funny when people say that soloing ruins MMOs and then bring up WoW as being mostly solo. How can a game that has introduced 11 million people to MMOs be ruining the genre? Before WoW, MMOs were considered fringe gaming. Now, everyone has at least heard about it. WoW is solely responsible for the popularity of MMOs and being that it's "solo oriented" I think it's safe to assume that maybe the majority of people do not want to group with you or those they do not know.Maybe, just maybe, these 11 million people play because of the social aspect of MMOs? You know, trading, chatting, interacting fighting and yes, grouping with their friends. Not all people are interested in the most efficient way to level and max out your character and those people do not need incentives to group. Surprisingly enough, there are people who play these games for fun.That's what games are about: fun. If grouping is fun for you, get a few friends together and go for it. But don't assume that just because you prefer grouping that it's somehow the only proper way to play MMOs. It isn't.
Come on heartless, you know by now I'm not against solo play. You know I solo. You know I prefer groups. YOu know I want playercrafted gear to be the best in game so soloer's and grouper alike are on fair ground. You know I would like to see games designed for all playstyles and games that are designed with mixes of them.
What I don't want to see is games turned into SRPGS so everyone can solo on their own and teamwork is shot out the window. With the amount of heal-tanks and heal-caster hybrids being put into games it's headed that direction. Don't put words into my mouth you know aren't true.
Bro, I'm not singling you out. I just quoted you in regards to the first part of my post about the endgame. Following which, I kind of got carried away a bit.
If there is anything I have learned from my time in UO, is that grouping will not have an effect on how the community is. These games didn't start out as "teamwork" games. They started out as virtual worlds where people made their own content with the tools that developers provided. These tools allowed people to interact not just by killing each other or with each other but by relying on each other for more basic needs, just like in real life. Things like crafting and trading, fixing items, stealing, making food and potions, mining, etc. UO is the only game where I know of a guy who made an in-game living just by taming horses and selling them at the Britain bank or where people actually waited in line to get their weapons fixed by a grandmaster blacksmith. Because of this, the community was great and in UO's case still there, 11 years later.
Now, these new MMOs are nothing more than theme park rides which herd you from one quest hub to the next and one instance to the other. Of course we're going to run into problems with people not wanting to interact with each other. When I'm at Six Flags, I want to enjoy the ride, not hang out with some guy I don't know.
So the problem we're facing is much deeper than this solo vs grouping dilemma which has been discussed ad nauseam. The problem is that the current MMO design, which is centered around quests and combat, is detrimental to not only building a proper community but interacting with other players altogether.
MMOs need to go back to their roots of creating worlds for people to play and live in, not theme parks. That will fix this whole "solo is ruining my MMOs" nonsense.
Now, these new MMOs are nothing more than theme park rides which herd you from one quest hub to the next and one instance to the other. Of course we're going to run into problems with people not wanting to interact with each other. When I'm at Six Flags, I want to enjoy the ride, not hang out with some guy I don't know. So the problem we're facing is much deeper than this solo vs grouping dilemma which has been discussed ad nauseam. The problem is that the current MMO design, which is centered around quests and combat, is detrimental to not only building a proper community but interacting with other players altogether. MMOs need to go back to their roots of creating worlds for people to play and live in, not theme parks. That will fix this whole "solo is ruining my MMOs" nonsense.
Yep, even with combat I still feel that you can bridge that gap. Combat is fun for me, but the problem is developers just don't get it. They're so wrapped up in their own egos, money, power, that they forget what makes games fun and what makes communities.
You and I are on the same page. Still crossing my fingers for Earthrise.......
I have always felt that solo players deserve rewards as much as raiders. I do not however feel those rewards should be on par with the rewards a players would get from raiding.
I work nights and can usually, if so inclined, put in a good 5 hours of gametime a night, most spent solo.
If I am putting in 25+ hours a week that is a big chunk of my time, comparable to some of the raiders that are out there. I think I should be rewarded for questing as much as the next guy, but like I stated before, I don't need some awesome slap the baby gear for my rewards.
Anyway, when the people that are so up in arms about other peoples playing style decide to start paying for my subs, well then raid away!
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
I'm the kind of person that prefers to group, because, in my opinion, it is more fun. That said, I don't always have 4 hours to play a night.
Most people who prefer solo play use this as an argument for why solo play is better -- it doesn't take as much time. I contend that solo play is just one way to solve that problem, though.
The problem is that grouping takes too much time in many games. So instead of making things much easier for solo play, why not just make grouping easier. If I'm running around killing a bunch of mobs near the starting zone, and I see a bunch of other people doing the same thing, the game mechanics should make me want to group with them. As it is now, you might see 20 people all doing the same thing, and no one will offer to group. A lot of that is due to laziness. To cure it, you need to give a reason for the grouping to occur.
If grouping was easier (as it should be, you have more people) then when you saw another person nearby doing the same things as you, you'd try and group up with them. Some people (myself included) already do this. But, in solo based games, it seems like a lot of people just want to be left to their own devices. There's nothing wrong with that intrinsically, but you should be able to see why that would be frustrating to others who want to group. Even when you are right next to someone doing the same thing as you, you still choose to stay alone? Why is that?
Because the game makes it seem tedious to group -- and that is where people who like group play have issues. It should not be tedious to group. It should be very simple, and it should be something people like to do, even if for just 20 minutes. See someone in the same area as you killing mobs? Group up. If you're done in 20 minutes, so what? The problem with games, as I've already stated, is that people feel like they can't group if they don't have 3 hours to set aside. Make it easy and normal to group for 10 minutes, and you solve that.
Something that makes this easy to do is to make zones that contain a wide spectrum of monsters, and make it easy to switch between solo and group play. You should be able to be in an area soloing one minute, and find groups in the same area the next. Instead of basing how hard the mobs are based on area (and proximity to starting towns), make it so the distance from paths within the area do the same thing. So if you're next to the path, as a level 20 you can kill stuff solo. As you go further into the woods, you'll need a group. Not only do you make grouping easier, but you make running through zones a bit more interesting.
I guess my point is that solo play shouldn't be the way of choice just because people think getting a group takes too long. Why not just make getting a group easier? Solo play has it's place, but group play is often more fun, and almost always more rewarding. You might practice basketball by yourself outside one day, but you'll feel a whole lot better winning a 5 on 5 tournament than you will making 10 straight threes.
MMO should = built around group play. Why the hell play a multi-player game to play alone? That is like logging on to multiplay a RTS and just playing the computer opponents.
There are hundreds of great single player RPGs if you must play with yourself. Games with much better immersion, storyline and feel, and many less morons, gold spamming, and beggars.
MMO should be about grouping otherwise there is no reason for them to online. Thats why I loved FFXI.
So if you were alone for a period of time in real life would you log out? (kill yourself basicly).
What does RL have to do with my comment. When I dont want to play online games I play offline games, simple. Also, its pointless to pay a monthly fee for an MMO just to show and most mmos are not pvp only.
MMO should = built around group play. Why the hell play a multi-player game to play alone? That is like logging on to multiplay a RTS and just playing the computer opponents. There are hundreds of great single player RPGs if you must play with yourself. Games with much better immersion, storyline and feel, and many less morons, gold spamming, and beggars.
Ahh but single player RPG's are going online now which is what the solo mmorpg crowd is after. Take a look a demons Soul for PS3 Co-op and PvP I am glad some single player rpg's are making the hop, that way we can rid the cancer of the MMO genre.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore) Now Playing: N/A Worst MMO: FFXIV Favorite MMO: FFXI
MMO should = built around group play. Why the hell play a multi-player game to play alone? That is like logging on to multiplay a RTS and just playing the computer opponents. There are hundreds of great single player RPGs if you must play with yourself. Games with much better immersion, storyline and feel, and many less morons, gold spamming, and beggars.
Same reason why people played Starcraft alone against computer AI. Practice for when they need to play against others players on battlenet.
Even in real life, if you put ten people in the same waiting room, they won't necessarily talk to each other. two might talk to each other, three are reading magazines, two are busy talking on the phone, one will pretend to talk on the phone, one went to the bathroom long ago, and one simply stare at the clock.
The point is you can't force someone to play with you just because you are in the same game. Some will be friendly and team up and some are lone wolves that just want to get things done. Individualism is not a hard concept, the game world might be virtual, but the players are still real life people.
Ive never played a game besides Shadowrun for xbox 360 & pc that was 100% group only in design. Although it did have a bot mode for offline use, but that was just afterthought. 100% grouping is probably similar to the full death players out there, population-wise. I already made reference to Fort Knox money. We do not disagree. I however cannot concede that a very large, even equal, yet maybe not 'massive', contingent doesnt exist.
I'd say that demonstrates a distinct lack of credible evidence that grouping-only fans can keep a game alive since nobody seems willing to make one. I don't think that you can make a credible case for the group being very large, certainly not equal and nowhere near massive. There is a very small group of people who pop up in every thread (or start the majority of them) and they get shouted down by a huge throng (as huge as throngs get around here anyhow) every time they try it.
Come off it Cephus. This thread is staring you in the face. You cannot tell me that there is anything near this indisputable imbalance in pro-groupers vs. anti-groupers present in this thread. Let alone the multiple(at least 5, here, Massively(that led to 3 more)) sites I visited within the last week. I suppose it was the same person with 100+ different accounts to all these sites just posing that they were pro-group? Dont piss on my leg Cephus. How about go back through all the pages of this thread alone, and count each person by reading thier response. I have. I know who is on what side and just how anti of the other side they are. Pro-group vs. Anti-group. You are a flat out lier if you see no more than a handful.
Shouted down...yeah, you shouting nonsense and dodging every point made is really having an effect. You might shake the script from other posters here, but I stick to the point. Wise up. Its 40/60 at worst Pro/Anti. Hell most of you arent even arguing pro-solo anymore, your so anti-group you've let go your own cause. Its pathetic.
This debate has been enthusiastically, and at times vehemently, continuing for quite awhile now across many sites, forums, and blogs. This speaks loudly for how much discussion and point taking needs to be done to know what the real outcome can be. Neither side is a vocal minority, I beleive.
I can count the number of people who always pop up on the pro-grouping side on one hand. It's a tiny number of people who want to group to the exclusion of all else.
Nonsense. You've not bothered to read any posts from me or many others. Exclusion is false and you know it. Ive read hundreds of pro-group sentiment across the few sites ive visited lately. You think this site has had a rise in group vs. solo debate lately just by chance? The planets aligned right? No. Its missing from games and its absence is cause of soloing.
There are 100's of thousands of gamers out there, not playing the supposed holy grail of MMO's, seeking an alternative with pro-group focus. If the game created is good, the holy grail of MMO's will have an exodus of 100's of thousands from it too, I believe. They are just hoping someone gets it right before packing their bags, mark my words. This debate was spurred by so many across the spectrum of gaming sites. Why? Simple, Its important to clear some of this up and find the common ground. Id like to see the next game that takes this seriously to make the game with a foundation rooted in one or the other properly and im far from being in a tiny group.
1. If you create a solo focused title, then throw in equal amount of grouping to obtain greater progression, that undermines the structure of the game.
Hardly. The point of any game, from the dev's point of view, is to make money and attract as many subscribers as they can. That's why modern games are the way they are. I won't argue that appealing to the lowest common denominator certainly hasn't caused some problems, but the mainstream success of MMOs today is because they are catering to the largest number of potential players and those players are soloers.
Evade the point. The largest number of potential players are playing whats popular. It has commercials on TV. Pissing on my leg again. Young kids make up how many of those? Fort Knox arguement again? We know, but we also know that reaching and copying isnt working out very good, recent history. This thread is full of players that are pissed due to this exact point. Groupers and Raiders fucking up their equality.
2. Now create a group focused title and throw in an equal amount of solo ability and it allows for the focus to be completely avoided, therby undermining the structure.
No, you just get all the group-only people whining that the very existence of solo content ruins their ability to enjoy the game. It isn't that they want group-focused, it's that they want group-only. The place has to be so deadly that at no time can you ever go out by yourself or you'll die. That's what makes them happy, apparently, but they represent a tiny minority of the overall market.
Dodging again. When you create with focus, somehow you fall down into a pit of nonsense and run from the point. Does this, or does this not, propose a reasonable point? You're really not very good at discussion. The place has to be so deadly, blah, blah, blah, just vomit in fear of the point making sense. You so desperately must evade, nearly disintegrating cause of your zealotry.
When you get ahold of yourself, try to re-evaluate the points made.
I have no problem with the soloer or choices. I have a problem when it comes to playing to the game focus and finding no one playing it, cause they can avoid that focus for the same outcome. Progression. Please dont wrap me up in the gear debate cause its pointless while progressing through any title to need group earned rewards to progress effectively. I can play pretty much any game out now with greens and common drop 'junk' and make the tasks seem like a leisurly game of solitaire. That goes to the difficulty also, but again thats another debate.
In virtually all games, FFIX might be the only exception, most people are soloing. I dont believe that. There is no fact to that statement. Not surprising coming from you Cephus. Cephus you need a job in Obama's cabinet of shame, MMO Czar, since you're a self-claimed know-it-all.
If they couldn't solo, most people wouldn't play at all. BS! Maybe YOU wouldnt play, but you're pretty much a zealot, so it doesnt suprise me. If the game is good, people will fall over themselves to play it. Most of those people have probably never grouped before cause they had no reason to see what it was like. Given the chance they'll likely question why they never played that way before.
Now personally, I think progression is entirely overrated, the mindless grind to get to that next level so you can feel good about yourself is incredibly shallow and stupid, but it's what most people seem to like about MMOs. Why even debate this topic at all then? Not that you've really debated, more appropriately, argued like a bucket with no bottom. All progression in gaming is overrated and midless to you. Dont let me leave out shallow and stupid. You wont be playing the game focused for pro-groupers anyway. Let it happen Cephus, just let this tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny group of 1 person with 100's of registrations be. Glad you have an opinion, however dopey I think it is.
What research does a new developer do today? Look at WoW numbers(highly inflated) and drool? I think the tests are out there. We need to understand this isnt a medium that has been in practice for 40, 50, or 100yrs. We have a decade worth of history using a massive online game platform. MMO's are similar so far to consoles. They need an update to current tech. and quality every few years to stay appealing. If EQ, DaoC, even UO would have tech. updates and adaption to creative principles by todays standards, I think they would still appeal to us as games, not just structures for recreation.
We have more than a decade, MUDs, which are just non-graphical MMOs in a lot of ways, have been around for decades and they're almost entirely soloable too. This isn't something that just popped out of the blue, there's been a lot of experience out there that says soloing is the majority playstyle.
I guess with this logic, board games, pen and paper games, and tabletops are left out of the fold, cause...oh yeah they almost all required a group to play and many were big, big hits??!!? I know I always enjoyed breaking out that board game to solo it!! OH Yeah! FUN!
Im not gonna make a statement that im not fully informed on. I will seek some within the community of MUD's though and return my findings. Mainly ill be seeking the impact and interaction of grouping and when these additions were founded. When grouping was possible and what technology was needed to complete such tasks. Its interesting to realize how far from mainstream computers were to the household back in the 80's. I think its pretty fair to say, MUD players are probably spoiled with todays ability in technology.
MUD's is not something that im aware having 100's of millions of dollars involved and 10's of millions of people, but im curious to find out some serious input from the veterans. That statement does not disqualify their importance, so dont try it. What is worth saying though is that non-graphical MUDs deserves its own legacy, as I think MMOs is creating theirs today as well. Slightly disrespectful to throw MUD's under the bus though, Cephus.
Calculating how many current MMO players are MUD veterans(actual vets, not one timers) of the late 70's creation - net boom. Also, how many pre-mmo MUD players there were back in the heyday. I appreciate their creativity and imagination, growing up in that time myself it is important to remember, but what can and cannot be gleaned from their behavior is probably wide.
Pardon me for not being as informed about MUD's, I wasnt even 1 when they hit the scene, during their rise I was learning how to respect and be honest, and when the net boom hit, I was probably partyin or somethin like that. Although I still played games of all types on many platforms throughout those times...hmm weird I didnt play em, but I did love me some Quest for Glory. :P
Originally posted by linren Originally posted by ViewDoo MMO should = built around group play. Why the hell play a multi-player game to play alone? That is like logging on to multiplay a RTS and just playing the computer opponents. There are hundreds of great single player RPGs if you must play with yourself. Games with much better immersion, storyline and feel, and many less morons, gold spamming, and beggars.
Same reason why people played Starcraft alone against computer AI. Practice for when they need to play against others players on battlenet. Even in real life, if you put ten people in the same waiting room, they won't necessarily talk to each other. two might talk to each other, three are reading magazines, two are busy talking on the phone, one will pretend to talk on the phone, one went to the bathroom long ago, and one simply stare at the clock. The point is you can't force someone to play with you just because you are in the same game. Some will be friendly and team up and some are lone wolves that just want to get things done. Individualism is not a hard concept, the game world might be virtual, but the players are still real life people.
Lmao! Come on Linren...a waiting room? Nothing says comfortable, fun, and social like a waiting room. Gotta be honest, im not looking to make friends and share pleasantries with random waiting room strangers. Funny though.
If you play to get away from people, then why even bother with an MMO in the first place? Doesn't the MM in MMO stand for Massively Multiplayer? Why not just play an offline single player game if you want to be by yourself?
Comments
That's a pretty narrow vision and a stretch argument. Most groupers do not want group only game play. Most groupers do not want to kill off solo play. There were good group based games where solo's progressed solo, still had the ability to get any item in game and everyone was happy.
Many gamers are anything but children. Your attitude is a perfect example of why I do want solo's to be able to play by themselves. I wouldn't want you in my group.
after sitting for 2 hours!(I was eating dinner and doing other stuff to pass the time) in FFXI and NOT getting one invite to a party(yes, I had my flag up) I realize that any and all arguments AGAINST solo play need to be thrown out the window.
the reason WoW is so popular is because it made soloing to level cap viable and fun and crushed all other mmo's at the time who were so group oriented.
Now, I like to party in groups, even in FFXI, but I DO NOT like to sit on my laurels until a group does form. FFXI isn't the only game to do this either. EQ and the early days of EQ2 do/did this. Why do you think FFXIV is trying to mimic some of the more solo aspects of today's games? Because SE realizes solo play is what people want. And will keep people logged in as opposed to sitting in a city for 2 hours hoping someone will invite in order to level up.
I think the real issue, is that how the solo play is implemented is where the problems lie. We need more innovation in this area, making solo play less of a game killer(i.e. Warhammer, AoC) and more of a way to level up in order to do the party based stuff, missions, story lines, raids, dungeons, boss hunting, named hunting etc. Get rid of the barriers in mmorpgs and we might see more quality games.
So if you were alone for a period of time in real life would you log out? (kill yourself basicly).
I don't even begin to grasp this concept. Real life (again) is the biggest MMO on the planet (in the universe matter of fact)... some people are anti social. Being online does not equate to some alternate reality where people are suddenly all wanting to be together.. dance around naked and sing 60's songs.
That's really the thing I don't understand... I have friends I do things with in real life. Yet its like going into a game with a pre-made gruop/guild. I'm still NEVER going to group with *you* ... just like real life.
next thing these people are going to want are being forced to group to tradeskill/harvest
groupers are just cry babies
No, groups are not right there anymore because of the solo play. This argument has gone on for weeks now on these forums though. As games continually design themselves around solo play less and less groups will be found.
Except for the most important portion of the game: the endgame--where it's all group content, right?
I want choice. I want to group with my friends but I also want to be able to have fun alone if I'm in the mood. What I don't want is grouping with idiots and group only games force me to do just that.
It's funny when people say that soloing ruins MMOs and then bring up WoW as being mostly solo. How can a game that has introduced 11 million people to MMOs be ruining the genre? Before WoW, MMOs were considered fringe gaming. Now, everyone has at least heard about it. WoW is solely responsible for the popularity of MMOs and being that it's "solo oriented" I think it's safe to assume that maybe the majority of people do not want to group with you or those they do not know.
Maybe, just maybe, these 11 million people play because of the social aspect of MMOs? You know, trading, chatting, interacting fighting and yes, grouping with their friends. Not all people are interested in the most efficient way to level and max out your character and those people do not need incentives to group. Surprisingly enough, there are people who play these games for fun.
That's what games are about: fun. If grouping is fun for you, get a few friends together and go for it. But don't assume that just because you prefer grouping that it's somehow the only proper way to play MMOs. It isn't.
So you sat on your ass for 2 hours waiting for a group. Maybe you should have tried to form one?? I saw the same thing in City of Heroes CONSTANTLY. People spamming looking for team over and over again,, all of them about the same level and until someone finally came in that would start inviting people they'd just sit there waitting, waiting, and spamming, and bitchin how there were no groups.
I joined a new SG near the end of my time and the SG leader and myself were talking about this and he found it to be a problem. Nobody would do anything until he logged on and then he'd get spammed wiht invites,, you gonna do a Task force run? Hey let's run AE now , can you make a group? Hey man let's pvp you gonna start a group? Gamers are so used to shit being handed to them they think groups should be handed to them as well.
Maybe if people wouldn't play solo so much they wouldn't piss in their pants at the idea of actually leading/forming a group.
You can add solo content without having to make the game 90% soloable. Quest based leveling is almost all soloable from lvl 1-max in most games.
Come on heartless, you know by now I'm not against solo play. You know I solo. You know I prefer groups. YOu know I want playercrafted gear to be the best in game so soloer's and grouper alike are on fair ground. You know I would like to see games designed for all playstyles and games that are designed with mixes of them.
What I don't want to see is games turned into SRPGS so everyone can solo on their own and teamwork is shot out the window. With the amount of heal-tanks and heal-caster hybrids being put into games it's headed that direction. Don't put words into my mouth you know aren't true.
So you sat on your ass for 2 hours waiting for a group. Maybe you should have tried to form one?? I saw the same thing in City of Heroes CONSTANTLY. People spamming looking for team over and over again,, all of them about the same level and until someone finally came in that would start inviting people they'd just sit there waitting, waiting, and spamming, and bitchin how there were no groups.
I joined a new SG near the end of my time and the SG leader and myself were talking about this and he found it to be a problem. Nobody would do anything until he logged on and then he'd get spammed wiht invites,, you gonna do a Task force run? Hey let's run AE now , can you make a group? Hey man let's pvp you gonna start a group? Gamers are so used to shit being handed to them they think groups should be handed to them as well.
Maybe if people wouldn't play solo so much they wouldn't piss in their pants at the idea of actually leading/forming a group.
You can add solo content without having to make the game 90% soloable. Quest based leveling is almost all soloable from lvl 1-max in most games.
Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot to mention trying to form one. I figured that was A GIVEN. I did searches every 15 minutes or so. Didn't find enough people seeking in order to farm a PT. You're damn right I want the game to give me a system that makes forming a group a piece of cake. That's why the public quests in WAR are so popular. That's why an lfg system like WoW sort of has is a great idea, I can queue up for what I am looking for.
Usually in cases like that I"ll group the 1 or 2 people that are willing and find content our level and go from there hopefully picking up people along the way.
But yea, aside from your situation trying to form a group, I stil run into that problem I mentioned in city of heroes more often than not.
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
Come on heartless, you know by now I'm not against solo play. You know I solo. You know I prefer groups. YOu know I want playercrafted gear to be the best in game so soloer's and grouper alike are on fair ground. You know I would like to see games designed for all playstyles and games that are designed with mixes of them.
What I don't want to see is games turned into SRPGS so everyone can solo on their own and teamwork is shot out the window. With the amount of heal-tanks and heal-caster hybrids being put into games it's headed that direction. Don't put words into my mouth you know aren't true.
Bro, I'm not singling you out. I just quoted you in regards to the first part of my post about the endgame. Following which, I kind of got carried away a bit.
If there is anything I have learned from my time in UO, is that grouping will not have an effect on how the community is. These games didn't start out as "teamwork" games. They started out as virtual worlds where people made their own content with the tools that developers provided. These tools allowed people to interact not just by killing each other or with each other but by relying on each other for more basic needs, just like in real life. Things like crafting and trading, fixing items, stealing, making food and potions, mining, etc. UO is the only game where I know of a guy who made an in-game living just by taming horses and selling them at the Britain bank or where people actually waited in line to get their weapons fixed by a grandmaster blacksmith. Because of this, the community was great and in UO's case still there, 11 years later.
Now, these new MMOs are nothing more than theme park rides which herd you from one quest hub to the next and one instance to the other. Of course we're going to run into problems with people not wanting to interact with each other. When I'm at Six Flags, I want to enjoy the ride, not hang out with some guy I don't know.
So the problem we're facing is much deeper than this solo vs grouping dilemma which has been discussed ad nauseam. The problem is that the current MMO design, which is centered around quests and combat, is detrimental to not only building a proper community but interacting with other players altogether.
MMOs need to go back to their roots of creating worlds for people to play and live in, not theme parks. That will fix this whole "solo is ruining my MMOs" nonsense.
Yep, even with combat I still feel that you can bridge that gap. Combat is fun for me, but the problem is developers just don't get it. They're so wrapped up in their own egos, money, power, that they forget what makes games fun and what makes communities.
You and I are on the same page. Still crossing my fingers for Earthrise.......
why do groups cry so much? every game has group content
let the soloers solo and the groupers group
That makes two of us. Also, SWTOR.
That makes two of us. Also, SWTOR.
Assassins...
I have always felt that solo players deserve rewards as much as raiders. I do not however feel those rewards should be on par with the rewards a players would get from raiding.
I work nights and can usually, if so inclined, put in a good 5 hours of gametime a night, most spent solo.
If I am putting in 25+ hours a week that is a big chunk of my time, comparable to some of the raiders that are out there. I think I should be rewarded for questing as much as the next guy, but like I stated before, I don't need some awesome slap the baby gear for my rewards.
Anyway, when the people that are so up in arms about other peoples playing style decide to start paying for my subs, well then raid away!
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
I'm the kind of person that prefers to group, because, in my opinion, it is more fun. That said, I don't always have 4 hours to play a night.
Most people who prefer solo play use this as an argument for why solo play is better -- it doesn't take as much time. I contend that solo play is just one way to solve that problem, though.
The problem is that grouping takes too much time in many games. So instead of making things much easier for solo play, why not just make grouping easier. If I'm running around killing a bunch of mobs near the starting zone, and I see a bunch of other people doing the same thing, the game mechanics should make me want to group with them. As it is now, you might see 20 people all doing the same thing, and no one will offer to group. A lot of that is due to laziness. To cure it, you need to give a reason for the grouping to occur.
If grouping was easier (as it should be, you have more people) then when you saw another person nearby doing the same things as you, you'd try and group up with them. Some people (myself included) already do this. But, in solo based games, it seems like a lot of people just want to be left to their own devices. There's nothing wrong with that intrinsically, but you should be able to see why that would be frustrating to others who want to group. Even when you are right next to someone doing the same thing as you, you still choose to stay alone? Why is that?
Because the game makes it seem tedious to group -- and that is where people who like group play have issues. It should not be tedious to group. It should be very simple, and it should be something people like to do, even if for just 20 minutes. See someone in the same area as you killing mobs? Group up. If you're done in 20 minutes, so what? The problem with games, as I've already stated, is that people feel like they can't group if they don't have 3 hours to set aside. Make it easy and normal to group for 10 minutes, and you solve that.
Something that makes this easy to do is to make zones that contain a wide spectrum of monsters, and make it easy to switch between solo and group play. You should be able to be in an area soloing one minute, and find groups in the same area the next. Instead of basing how hard the mobs are based on area (and proximity to starting towns), make it so the distance from paths within the area do the same thing. So if you're next to the path, as a level 20 you can kill stuff solo. As you go further into the woods, you'll need a group. Not only do you make grouping easier, but you make running through zones a bit more interesting.
I guess my point is that solo play shouldn't be the way of choice just because people think getting a group takes too long. Why not just make getting a group easier? Solo play has it's place, but group play is often more fun, and almost always more rewarding. You might practice basketball by yourself outside one day, but you'll feel a whole lot better winning a 5 on 5 tournament than you will making 10 straight threes.
MMO should = built around group play. Why the hell play a multi-player game to play alone? That is like logging on to multiplay a RTS and just playing the computer opponents.
There are hundreds of great single player RPGs if you must play with yourself. Games with much better immersion, storyline and feel, and many less morons, gold spamming, and beggars.
So if you were alone for a period of time in real life would you log out? (kill yourself basicly).
What does RL have to do with my comment. When I dont want to play online games I play offline games, simple. Also, its pointless to pay a monthly fee for an MMO just to show and most mmos are not pvp only.
Ahh but single player RPG's are going online now which is what the solo mmorpg crowd is after. Take a look a demons Soul for PS3 Co-op and PvP I am glad some single player rpg's are making the hop, that way we can rid the cancer of the MMO genre.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI
Same reason why people played Starcraft alone against computer AI. Practice for when they need to play against others players on battlenet.
Even in real life, if you put ten people in the same waiting room, they won't necessarily talk to each other. two might talk to each other, three are reading magazines, two are busy talking on the phone, one will pretend to talk on the phone, one went to the bathroom long ago, and one simply stare at the clock.
The point is you can't force someone to play with you just because you are in the same game. Some will be friendly and team up and some are lone wolves that just want to get things done. Individualism is not a hard concept, the game world might be virtual, but the players are still real life people.
Originally posted by Cephus404
Originally posted by Demonshank
Ive never played a game besides Shadowrun for xbox 360 & pc that was 100% group only in design. Although it did have a bot mode for offline use, but that was just afterthought. 100% grouping is probably similar to the full death players out there, population-wise. I already made reference to Fort Knox money. We do not disagree. I however cannot concede that a very large, even equal, yet maybe not 'massive', contingent doesnt exist.
I'd say that demonstrates a distinct lack of credible evidence that grouping-only fans can keep a game alive since nobody seems willing to make one. I don't think that you can make a credible case for the group being very large, certainly not equal and nowhere near massive. There is a very small group of people who pop up in every thread (or start the majority of them) and they get shouted down by a huge throng (as huge as throngs get around here anyhow) every time they try it.
Come off it Cephus. This thread is staring you in the face. You cannot tell me that there is anything near this indisputable imbalance in pro-groupers vs. anti-groupers present in this thread. Let alone the multiple(at least 5, here, Massively(that led to 3 more)) sites I visited within the last week. I suppose it was the same person with 100+ different accounts to all these sites just posing that they were pro-group? Dont piss on my leg Cephus. How about go back through all the pages of this thread alone, and count each person by reading thier response. I have. I know who is on what side and just how anti of the other side they are. Pro-group vs. Anti-group. You are a flat out lier if you see no more than a handful.
Shouted down...yeah, you shouting nonsense and dodging every point made is really having an effect. You might shake the script from other posters here, but I stick to the point. Wise up. Its 40/60 at worst Pro/Anti. Hell most of you arent even arguing pro-solo anymore, your so anti-group you've let go your own cause. Its pathetic.
This debate has been enthusiastically, and at times vehemently, continuing for quite awhile now across many sites, forums, and blogs. This speaks loudly for how much discussion and point taking needs to be done to know what the real outcome can be. Neither side is a vocal minority, I beleive.
I can count the number of people who always pop up on the pro-grouping side on one hand. It's a tiny number of people who want to group to the exclusion of all else.
Nonsense. You've not bothered to read any posts from me or many others. Exclusion is false and you know it. Ive read hundreds of pro-group sentiment across the few sites ive visited lately. You think this site has had a rise in group vs. solo debate lately just by chance? The planets aligned right? No. Its missing from games and its absence is cause of soloing.
There are 100's of thousands of gamers out there, not playing the supposed holy grail of MMO's, seeking an alternative with pro-group focus. If the game created is good, the holy grail of MMO's will have an exodus of 100's of thousands from it too, I believe. They are just hoping someone gets it right before packing their bags, mark my words. This debate was spurred by so many across the spectrum of gaming sites. Why? Simple, Its important to clear some of this up and find the common ground. Id like to see the next game that takes this seriously to make the game with a foundation rooted in one or the other properly and im far from being in a tiny group.
1. If you create a solo focused title, then throw in equal amount of grouping to obtain greater progression, that undermines the structure of the game.
Hardly. The point of any game, from the dev's point of view, is to make money and attract as many subscribers as they can. That's why modern games are the way they are. I won't argue that appealing to the lowest common denominator certainly hasn't caused some problems, but the mainstream success of MMOs today is because they are catering to the largest number of potential players and those players are soloers.
Evade the point. The largest number of potential players are playing whats popular. It has commercials on TV. Pissing on my leg again. Young kids make up how many of those? Fort Knox arguement again? We know, but we also know that reaching and copying isnt working out very good, recent history. This thread is full of players that are pissed due to this exact point. Groupers and Raiders fucking up their equality.
2. Now create a group focused title and throw in an equal amount of solo ability and it allows for the focus to be completely avoided, therby undermining the structure.
No, you just get all the group-only people whining that the very existence of solo content ruins their ability to enjoy the game. It isn't that they want group-focused, it's that they want group-only. The place has to be so deadly that at no time can you ever go out by yourself or you'll die. That's what makes them happy, apparently, but they represent a tiny minority of the overall market.
Dodging again. When you create with focus, somehow you fall down into a pit of nonsense and run from the point. Does this, or does this not, propose a reasonable point? You're really not very good at discussion. The place has to be so deadly, blah, blah, blah, just vomit in fear of the point making sense. You so desperately must evade, nearly disintegrating cause of your zealotry.
When you get ahold of yourself, try to re-evaluate the points made.
I have no problem with the soloer or choices. I have a problem when it comes to playing to the game focus and finding no one playing it, cause they can avoid that focus for the same outcome. Progression. Please dont wrap me up in the gear debate cause its pointless while progressing through any title to need group earned rewards to progress effectively. I can play pretty much any game out now with greens and common drop 'junk' and make the tasks seem like a leisurly game of solitaire. That goes to the difficulty also, but again thats another debate.
In virtually all games, FFIX might be the only exception, most people are soloing. I dont believe that. There is no fact to that statement. Not surprising coming from you Cephus. Cephus you need a job in Obama's cabinet of shame, MMO Czar, since you're a self-claimed know-it-all.
If they couldn't solo, most people wouldn't play at all. BS! Maybe YOU wouldnt play, but you're pretty much a zealot, so it doesnt suprise me. If the game is good, people will fall over themselves to play it. Most of those people have probably never grouped before cause they had no reason to see what it was like. Given the chance they'll likely question why they never played that way before.
Now personally, I think progression is entirely overrated, the mindless grind to get to that next level so you can feel good about yourself is incredibly shallow and stupid, but it's what most people seem to like about MMOs. Why even debate this topic at all then? Not that you've really debated, more appropriately, argued like a bucket with no bottom. All progression in gaming is overrated and midless to you. Dont let me leave out shallow and stupid. You wont be playing the game focused for pro-groupers anyway. Let it happen Cephus, just let this tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny group of 1 person with 100's of registrations be. Glad you have an opinion, however dopey I think it is.
What research does a new developer do today? Look at WoW numbers(highly inflated) and drool? I think the tests are out there. We need to understand this isnt a medium that has been in practice for 40, 50, or 100yrs. We have a decade worth of history using a massive online game platform. MMO's are similar so far to consoles. They need an update to current tech. and quality every few years to stay appealing. If EQ, DaoC, even UO would have tech. updates and adaption to creative principles by todays standards, I think they would still appeal to us as games, not just structures for recreation.
We have more than a decade, MUDs, which are just non-graphical MMOs in a lot of ways, have been around for decades and they're almost entirely soloable too. This isn't something that just popped out of the blue, there's been a lot of experience out there that says soloing is the majority playstyle.
I guess with this logic, board games, pen and paper games, and tabletops are left out of the fold, cause...oh yeah they almost all required a group to play and many were big, big hits??!!? I know I always enjoyed breaking out that board game to solo it!! OH Yeah! FUN!
Im not gonna make a statement that im not fully informed on. I will seek some within the community of MUD's though and return my findings. Mainly ill be seeking the impact and interaction of grouping and when these additions were founded. When grouping was possible and what technology was needed to complete such tasks. Its interesting to realize how far from mainstream computers were to the household back in the 80's. I think its pretty fair to say, MUD players are probably spoiled with todays ability in technology.
MUD's is not something that im aware having 100's of millions of dollars involved and 10's of millions of people, but im curious to find out some serious input from the veterans. That statement does not disqualify their importance, so dont try it. What is worth saying though is that non-graphical MUDs deserves its own legacy, as I think MMOs is creating theirs today as well. Slightly disrespectful to throw MUD's under the bus though, Cephus.
Calculating how many current MMO players are MUD veterans(actual vets, not one timers) of the late 70's creation - net boom. Also, how many pre-mmo MUD players there were back in the heyday. I appreciate their creativity and imagination, growing up in that time myself it is important to remember, but what can and cannot be gleaned from their behavior is probably wide.
Pardon me for not being as informed about MUD's, I wasnt even 1 when they hit the scene, during their rise I was learning how to respect and be honest, and when the net boom hit, I was probably partyin or somethin like that. Although I still played games of all types on many platforms throughout those times...hmm weird I didnt play em, but I did love me some Quest for Glory. :P
Same reason why people played Starcraft alone against computer AI. Practice for when they need to play against others players on battlenet.
Even in real life, if you put ten people in the same waiting room, they won't necessarily talk to each other. two might talk to each other, three are reading magazines, two are busy talking on the phone, one will pretend to talk on the phone, one went to the bathroom long ago, and one simply stare at the clock.
The point is you can't force someone to play with you just because you are in the same game. Some will be friendly and team up and some are lone wolves that just want to get things done. Individualism is not a hard concept, the game world might be virtual, but the players are still real life people.
Lmao! Come on Linren...a waiting room? Nothing says comfortable, fun, and social like a waiting room. Gotta be honest, im not looking to make friends and share pleasantries with random waiting room strangers. Funny though.
if you wanna play with others go get a job
i use mmos to get away from people
If you play to get away from people, then why even bother with an MMO in the first place? Doesn't the MM in MMO stand for Massively Multiplayer? Why not just play an offline single player game if you want to be by yourself?