Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Ultimate Group Vs Solo solution.
Ihmotepp
Member Posts: 14,495
I think there is only one solutions that works for the group vs solo conundrum.
First of all, let me explain the problem for groupers to the solo crowd. I am never, ever, ever, not ever, asking you to LET me group in a game. I really do not care if i CAN group if I want to. Grouping for no reason is pointless, not fun, and IMO retarded.
What I want to make grouping fun is a challenge. So the difficultly level has to be set up high to make it a challenge for a group. If you set the difficulty low enough so it can be done solo, the challenge is gone for grouping, which makes the grouping no fun, because it's like doing 50 extra laps at Nascar after you win the race. Why? Sure you COULD do it, and no one is going to stop you, they will LET you do it. But why would you if you've already won the trophy? Makes no sense, would not in any way be challenging or fun.
So if I can solo the content and get the xp and gear, sure I COULD group, and you will LET me group, but why would I if I've already got the xp and the gear soloing? Makes no sense, would not in any way be fun or challenging, just like riding around the track and extra 50 laps in a Nascar race after you win the trophy would be pointless. They will LET you do it, but now you've got the trophy, seems rather silly.
So I'm asking for a 100 lap race. NOT a race that is 50 laps, and you will LET me ride another 50 laps after I get the trophy just because it's "fun". It's not fun anymore, because you've made it a 50 lap race, NOT a 100 lap race any longer. I actually want to have a 100 lap race, with no short cuts.
Now, what if you say, but I don't have time to run 100 laps. That's not fair! Let's make it a 50 lap race, and you CAN do the extra 50 laps if you want to, and we'll both get the same trophy. THERE! Now there's a choice, so you should be happy!
Uh, no, now we have a 50 lap race, and you'll let me ride around the track an extra 50 times like an idiot for no reason. I'm not happy with that, never will be.
So, how to we make you happy and give you a 50 lap race, and make me happy and give me a 100 lap race in the same game?
Only way to do it is separate servers. You get tons of solo content on your server, and can easily solo to the cap if you want, and you CAN group if you feel like it, but never have to group if you don't feel like it.
On my server, solo play will be a long hard difficult struggle, at least 4x longer than taking on the content in a group.
There, now I'm happy because your solo content hasn't ruined my grouping game, and I'm not "forcing" you to group. Only way to do it and make both of us happy.
Comments
Depending on how the difficulty is scaled, there could be some technical issues, but overall - I like this idea very much.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Would be no different than a Roleplay Server, or an FFA PvP server. It would be a Grouping server. You would know right off the bat this server is NOT solo friendly, and it will be HARD to solo.
Best part? You get the best of both worlds. Can't find a group on the Grouping server? Go log on to one the solo friendly servers and wack mobs by your self all you want to, then come back and try to find a group again.
But, on the group server, there won't be anyone there that just skipped the hard grouping content, because no one can without putting serious solo time into it. And I'm sure some people would do that too.
Some mmo's are solo friendly and group unfriendly, some other mmo's are teambased and solo unfriendly. We need enough good mmo's in both types, rather than a few mmo's that split their focus too widely like you suggest.
Or you groupers could grow up and address your personality flaws that are limiting you from enjoying a game while allowing others to play the game in the way they wish.
I like that idea. I would like to know that i am on a server where people like to play a massive roleplaying game with mulitiple players. I really dont like soloing because to me thats what consoles are for. The thing about your way, both types of players can enjoy the same game. Spectacular idea!
There just AREN'T that many GOOD MMOs. Dividing them into a group for soloing and a group for grouping is just going to limit the quality available to all players.
The OP's idea is a good one.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Translation: If you don't like to play solo games like me, then something is wrong with you.
Seriously, if somone doesn't like to play a game solo like madeux does they are flawed? Everyone in the whole world must play video games like madeux likes them to be played or they are flawed?
Get help. Fast.
Or..
You can do what AoC did and have two "copies" of the world; a group based one and a solo based one.
The idea of segregating group and solo servers is silly.
The vast majority of people don't solo or group exclusively; most of us enjoy a mix of both (to varying degrees). All your "solution" does is force people to have two entirely separate characters on two different servers in order to enjoy a varied playstyle.
Daft.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
They're not happy with that though.... they want everyone to have to be forced to group. You must conform, or go away.
My opinion..
Let people (the players) play the way they want.
Personally, I have fun playing solo or with a group...either way I think games that are nothing but strickly fighting and/or quest grinding to get to a "Max level" are stale anyway. Player created content, sandbox, and the like is what pulls me to a game more than if you can solo the whole game or not.
Translation: If you don't like to play solo games like me, then something is wrong with you.
Seriously, if somone doesn't like to play a game solo like madeux does they are flawed? Everyone in the whole world must play video games like madeux likes them to be played or they are flawed?
Get help. Fast.
Where do you get the impression that I play games solo? I group up. I've ran my own guild.
Do you have to make up imaginary characteristics about me in order to try to win an argument? Try harder.
Well, first off - even a group-oriented server would ALLOW solo play. It would just be much more difficult (and possibly less rewarding). So, you could play both types of characters on one server.
Also - AoC is very heavily-instanced - which allows the group/solo settings to work. A lot of people (not me) hate instancing.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
It's not silly because the characters will be in the same world.
The point of separate servers is all the characters on that server will have accomplished the goals in the game the same way, with no short cuts avaialble to them.
That is very different than the characters are in the same world, and there are short cuts to advancement, and some took those short cuts and some did not.
And it solves your "forced grouping" complaint. You will not be forced to group, you can play on the solo friendly servers.
I'm only asking for ONE server that has the difficulty level cranked up enough to be considered a good grouping game, along the lines of the early DAoC or EQ.
You can have all the rest of the servers that will be solo friendly.
This would even work for WoW. One server that was a good group game all the way to the level cap. You can have the other thousand solo friendly servers.
And you STILL don't want me to have even one good group server? Why not?
Translation: If you don't like to play solo games like me, then something is wrong with you.
Seriously, if somone doesn't like to play a game solo like madeux does they are flawed? Everyone in the whole world must play video games like madeux likes them to be played or they are flawed?
Get help. Fast.
Where do you get the impression that I play games solo? I group up. I've ran my own guild.
Do you have to make up imaginary characteristics about me in order to try to win an argument? Try harder.
I don't care if you group up. Doesn't make any contribution to the discussion.
Why do you think I'm asking for a game to allow me to group, when all games already allow that?
I have never asked for a game to allow me to form a group. I have no interest in that at all.
Translation: If you don't like to play solo games like me, then something is wrong with you.
Seriously, if somone doesn't like to play a game solo like madeux does they are flawed? Everyone in the whole world must play video games like madeux likes them to be played or they are flawed?
Get help. Fast.
Where do you get the impression that I play games solo? I group up. I've ran my own guild.
Do you have to make up imaginary characteristics about me in order to try to win an argument? Try harder.
I don't care if you group up. Doesn't make any contribution to the discussion.
Why do you think I'm asking for a game to allow me to group, when all games already allow that?
I have never asked for a game to allow me to form a group. I have no interest in that at all.
right, you're only interested in games that force other people to group with you. Yes, we get it.
There just AREN'T that many GOOD MMOs. Dividing them into a group for soloing and a group for grouping is just going to limit the quality available to all players.
The OP's idea is a good one.
I agree that there ain't enough good mmo's out there, but that is besides the point entirely.
The reason I don't like this idea is because mmo's will go the same route as AoC just turning it into different servers instead of a different instance. What I mean is they just give the mobs more health and have them hit harder. This does not make a game any better for teamplay, but if you want a game in which teamplay just means mobs with more health and more dps, go for it, you found your solution. I however prefer teambased mmo's to be about tactical differences instead and that means an entirely different game, not just a different ruleset server since it would take way too much time AKA spreads them too thin resulting in crap gameplay for both solo and teamplayers.
Because you are acting like a child.
You ask for a game where 100% of all mobs are designed for groups; that's fine .. I'm cool with you having a different playstyle than me. I consider that a reasonable request. 100% grouping is a very niche playstyle, but if it's incorporated into modern MMOs as an optional aspect then I am all for it. More variety is seldom bad.
But asking that all soloers be banished from "your" server so that you never have to see someone with a different playstyle than you? .. that ain't reasonable, it's just elitist as hell. Elitism deserves no consideration.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
sure you don't want to also throw in some subscription numbers as well??? just to round out the plug? oh, and WoW is THE reason, we have posts like this... prior to WoW, mmos were hard, dramatically so if you loved to solo. is there actually an easier to cap and grind great gear solo then WoW?
Dont forget the anti-grouping and anti-raiding crowd involved here too. I dont understand why there cant be something for everyone. Ive been playing MMOs since 1999 when EQ launched and even they had solo, group and raid content in one game. Being a grouper or a soloer is not like making the decision to play on a FFA PvP server or PvE server. Just because you start out soloing then decide later on that you want something more, you shouldnt be forced to reroll on a different server. EVERY MMO I have played offers something different for your chosen playstyle (solo/group/raid) so why should we shun one playstyle just to make another one happy?
Imhotep, if you put half as much effort into interacting with other players as you put into finding ways to force other players to play with you your problem would have been long since solved.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Those two examples you are using are too different extremes that work well for their games but would not work at all if you switched them around.
WoWs cross-realm instances work great for that game but would have killed WAR off even sooner than MJ did. Even with all the issues WAR had, the sense of community at launch was huge compared to WoW years after launch. Battling the same guilds and alliances week after week, IMO, is 100 times more fun than fighting 50 random guys from 20 different servers. The same goes for EVE, people poor their heart and soul into alliance and territory disputes but if they were just queing up for some 20 minute PvP instance it wouldnt be the same.
Now if they all went the single server option, that would be awesome, but some games cant handle the server loads they have now. Dalaran lags with a couple of hundred people in it, I cant imagine how bad it would be with millions.
Which is exactly true. That's why they want to ramp up the difficulty so that *NO ONE* can solo, or why they want to bribe everyone with excessive rewards so *EVERYONE* will want to group. They're just not honest about it. If they want challenge, like they claim they do, then why don't they just go after challenging content? Take their level 10 group up against level 50 mobs. That'll be a challenge! They'll get a huge amount of XP, a massive amount of loot and a ton of cool gear drops that no one else has access to at level 10.
But no... they'd rather whine about how unfair it is.
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
Which is exactly true. That's why they want to ramp up the difficulty so that *NO ONE* can solo, or why they want to bribe everyone with excessive rewards so *EVERYONE* will want to group. They're just not honest about it. If they want challenge, like they claim they do, then why don't they just go after challenging content? Take their level 10 group up against level 50 mobs. That'll be a challenge! They'll get a huge amount of XP, a massive amount of loot and a ton of cool gear drops that no one else has access to at level 10.
But no... they'd rather whine about how unfair it is.
Yes because a guild of 100 people at lvl 10 can easily take on a a lvl 50 mob, pull your head out from between your legs. If there is a game where players can actually do that then it should be taken off the market now. My Question for all the solo players and solo content defender is this, why do you need things handed to you on a planter? Whyare you affraid to work hard for what you want? You know the funny thing is, these questions can even be asked about people in RL.
The difficulty is not matched by the rewards the game offers for pushing the difficulty envelope. Not to mention the inconvenience of putting and holding a group together.
Soloers don't know about those aspects, of course.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
WoW and WARs imbalance issues stem from having 2 factions instead of 3+. We never had the problems in DAoC or PS that WoW and WAR do when it comes to open world PvP. Most fights in EVE are more unbalanced and spread out than WAR ever could be, but due to the one server system, the side that is the underdog changes from minute to minute.