When you compare the community of group centered games to solo centered games, it's either ignorant or intellectually dishonest to claim that there is no difference.
Simple answers, complex questions.
It's very possible that both sides of this argument are presenting answers that are far too simple for the complexity of the issue.
Is it possible that the difference is (at least in part) a generational one? The old guys who grew up playing coops like PnP games, vs the younger guys who grew up on consoles? Guys raised before the internet as children (cowboys and indians, army, kick the can, etc) vs guys who've always had the internet in their lives?
I can offer a dozen more possible explanations that do not include "forced grouping required to go beyond level X." Any or all of them may be pieces to the 'sociability" puzzle.
But when you oversimplify and bifurcate the issue down to "A/B" choices? You're both wrong. Or at best, only partially right.
Is it the developers fault / Is it the players fault... It's neither (entirely).
The first place to look is at your own habits. How have they changed in the last 15 years?
First of all, there is a right or wrong answer. There is either a difference between game communities that highly encourage grouping, or there isn't. There is no "partially right." If there is a difference, you could truthfully claim that it is because of x, but not that there is no difference at all.
Secondly, I appreciate the thoughtful post. But I would appreciate it more - if you addressed the argument people in favor of group centered games are trying to make. Instead, you ran with the strawman argument made by the OP.
No one is arguing "no solo beyond level x," (there are no levels btw). The point of contention is how effective grouping should be. WoW for example, has highly effective soloing until the level cap, which includes that vast majority of the content that the game has.
When someone comes at me with "WoW has community too," I get the impression they are defending this type of system; where soloing is optimal for most of the game. So I'm going to argue why I think it is a bad direction for EQN. I think there's a limited future in MMORPGs that highly incentivize soloing.
As for how I've changed in 15 years... well for one, I understand the concept of delayed reward better. I also know myself a lot better, and why I do things. Perhaps most importantly, I have more money to spend on a game, if I so desire.
I agree that "force, encouraged grouping mechanics" or whatever people called it... is definitely a bad thing and need to go asap. If you group it should because you want to, not because you can even level up without doing so.
That been say, they still need to sorta make people do different things in the group combat situations like dungeons and raids, or else it's just boring as hell. Not necessarily a Trinity system, but SOMETHING!!!
People talk shit about GW2, but do you know that GW2 has it's own version of trinity! It's dps, utility and support. While it sounded like a good idea(go see their blog posts before launch) and actually might be great, it just so happened that Anet have failed to adjust and balance it so that everyone can be dps, utility and support if they so desire and still make an effective team. It's not the lack of trinity that caused gw2's combat a zergfest, it's the fact that you can be much more effective if you go with dps and just not die.
I love that people make up these buzzwords like "Forced Grouping".
It wasnt "Forced grouping" when EQ1 came out because MMO's were designed to be played with multiple people at a time.
The enemies were more difficult so you needed a strong group dynamic to continue, in the sense of a true Roleplaying experiance, it was neccesary to have friends that assumed the role of other Party Members, similar to what you would find in a single player RPG where NPC's acted as your party members.
Needed = Forced
Strong Group = Grouping
'Needed a strong group' = Forced grouping.
It's not a made up term. it's the reality of what it is. Just because you used a synonym doesn't make the term inapplicable.
Forced grouping makes people that don't want to group, group. That makes them unfun to be with as they ignore your conversation and rush through the content to get to their goal as fast as possible and dump the extra people that they wanted nothing to do with and were forced to interact with so they could get full value out of the money they spent on the game.
Let those people solo, even raid content tuned down to solo instances, and let the people who like meeting people and adventuring together group up. Don't mix the two or you will just have a group of unhappy players.
If you can't group up on your own, and you need to force others to play the game YOUR WAY, then not only are you selfish and intolerant, but you must have some innate inability to attract companions.
And just because you gave a single example of a bad group doesnt mean thats how it always is. And it is not applicable as I said because MMO's were built on the idea of Multiplayer. Im sorry that the sudden switch is now in favor of the solo player but that doesnt mean grouping was forced to begin with.
Forced grouping means literally "An Involuntary set of people with a common purpose". That doesnt make any logical sense, how can you involuntarily force people to come to a common purpose in an MMO wen your purchasing the game, fully understanding its content to begin with? If solo is the new focus then why keep calling them MMO's, why not online multiplayer?
Think of it this way, if someone put you and a random person on an island where your only way of survival was to work with them daily to mine a giant rock wall to get the food buried behind it. That would be Forced grouping.
But this is a video game not real life, in a video game you can cheat the system and live off 1 health point a day chipping away for years until you finally solo'd the giant rock wall and got the food all for yourself (BTW you killed the other guy in this scneario because there's FFA PVP). Thus in an MMO or any video game its impossible to have FORCED GROUPING, because you can still do the content it will just take years and years to complete.
Ahh, I see your error. You think MMO means Many Moochers Online. Where people mooching off of each other is the point of the game.
Well, I am here to tell you it actually means Massively Multiplayer Online, which means there are a massive amount of players online simultaneously. It doesn't imply ANYTHING about being cooperative.
Try standing on your own two feet and stop expecting everyone else in the game to carry you to the fun.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire: Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
people need the correct environment to socialise, most people run by each other on a busy street, while in a train you might talk to the person next to you
OMG, you're not one of those people are you? I hate those people on trains or planes that sit next to you and feel the need to talk to you because they're bored. I know you think this example proves your point about how great forced grouping is...but it in fact proves the opposite.
If I want to socialize, I'll go to a party where socializing is expected. I'll go to a networking event where socializing is expected. I'll go on a date, or speed dating, or a club to dance where socializing is expected.
Originally posted by supertouchme Some of you are advocating solo play in an MMO. Think about how stupid that sounds.
They should lock solo players characters in a jail cell and they can only leave the jail if they are in a group. Eventually they will learn that playing solo is dumb and group play is the only one true way to play an MMO.
First of all, there is a right or wrong answer. There is either a difference between game communities that highly encourage grouping, or there isn't. There is no "partially right." If there is a difference, you could truthfully claim that it is because of x, but not that there is no difference at all.
IMO the bottom-line is what players want and care about, do they want community? DO they care about community? If they both want and care about it, they form a community. If they don't they don't form a community. There's plenty of content in Themepark MMO's that requires grouping, does that in anyway help the community aspect in these games? Does it bring players together, or does it push them apart? Look at most peoples opinion of PUgs as an example, most hate them, why is that?
You can't form a community when the players look at each other as a hindrance or competition. Which is something that's quite common today. No one wants that guy that's not that great at his role yet, no one wants that guy that doesn't have the best gear yet, no one wants the guy that just started playing. This is the attitude of many of todays gamers I think that's what hurts the community the most in these games.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Is anyone actually advocating for the two extremes?
All group content
or
All solo content
?
I don't see that but a lot of the arguments here seem to be framed as though that's what's being said. If you really an MMO to give you choice it must have both. I should be able to solo my way up with enough fresh content AND be able to group my way up with enough fresh content. Group content should not be packed away solely in dungeons. The world has to be big though and luckily from the sounds of it EQN will be.
Is anyone actually advocating for the two extremes?
All group content
or
All solo content
?
I don't see that but a lot of the arguments here seem to be framed as though that's what's being said. If you really an MMO to give you choice it must have both. I should be able to solo my way up with enough fresh content AND be able to group my way up with enough fresh content. Group content should not be packed away solely in dungeons. The world has to be big though and luckily from the sounds of it EQN will be.
Good point, most games have group related world content, even TOR does. Those areas were always dead though.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I have no problem with solo content as long as it doesn't comprise most of the game. If you want to kill your little frogs on the outskirts of town that's fine, but you shouldn't be able to advance through the entire game by yourself. And limiting group content and expecting people to group to tackle trivial objectives is completely unreasonable.
Is anyone actually advocating for the two extremes?
All group content
or
All solo content
?
I don't see that but a lot of the arguments here seem to be framed as though that's what's being said. If you really an MMO to give you choice it must have both. I should be able to solo my way up with enough fresh content AND be able to group my way up with enough fresh content. Group content should not be packed away solely in dungeons. The world has to be big though and luckily from the sounds of it EQN will be.
The only people advocating those two extremes are the ones who either don't want to, or aren't comfortable enough, doing what the rest of the world does when it comes to meeting new people. They think it's entirely 100% up to the game to make friends for them. And thus are shocked that they can't make friends anymore.
Furthermore, they then assume that anyone who actually goes out and talks to people, is friendly towards others, helps others, actively joins guilds, actively makes / maintains guilds, is somehow demanding an 'all solo content' game. And by extrapolation, the only solution is an 'all group content' game, like they had back in the day.
It's typical ignorance, 'i had fun back in 1998, so therefor all things should be like they were back in 1998'. No bearing in actual reality, and no mind paid towards how the world has changed since then.
You're absolutely right, it's stupid to have a game based around only 1 of those dynamics. And every decent or better MMO designer knows this.
Forced grouping only brings up forced friendships... which aren't true friendships.
Nothing like people who actually stay with you because they enjoy your company, and not only because you're a tool for them to get better "epic" gear.
I've met 4 people (of many) through "forced grouping" in Lineage 2 who went on to become real world friends. Two of them I met in 2005 with Chronicle 3, am still friends with them to this day and have spent two Thanksgivings with them, as well as other visits. I've been there for them through some pretty heavy real-life situations. And yes, I met them in a video game. The 4th one became my girlfriend - in real life, not long-distance or online only - for a while.
Another I met around 2008 and am still friends with them as well, though we haven't had the opportunity to meet up in person yet (distance and schedules make it difficult).
I have several friends I met in FFXI around 2006 or 2007 and I still talk to to this day. I'll be getting together with 2 of them in NYC in the near future. Again,k distance and schedules/lives makes it difficult to meet up more often.
I have friends I've met in other MMOs, again through "forced grouping", that I still keep in touch with and stalk to on a regular basis.
None of those are "forced friendships". None of them were built on being "tools to get better epic gear".
Don't generalize about people you know nothing about.
Originally posted by supertouchme Some of you are advocating solo play in an MMO. Think about how stupid that sounds.
You are advocating for forced grouping from the time you log on until you log off? I'm sure all those in favor of "forced grouping" never ever run around solo in games. They need a buddy to go to the bathroom with them to I suppose?
So silly how many only think in the black and white. Life and gaming is all grey.
The most solo oriented mmos still allow people to group and interact. If people choose to go solo for their own selfish needs, how does that hurt those that want to group and socialize?
I've yet to play a single MMO (in 17 years) that wasn't more entertaining with friends and guild mates, regardless of how the solo/grouping was handled.
So sad that many of you can't work up the courage to interact with others naturally and need the game mechanics to force you into those situations.
Probably same people that advocate "play dates" for kids because they think kids can't naturally make friends and interact anymore. Need parents dictating when and who they can play with...sad sad world.
Originally posted by supertouchme I have no problem with solo content as long as it doesn't comprise most of the game. If you want to kill your little frogs on the outskirts of town that's fine, but you shouldn't be able to advance through the entire game by yourself. And limiting group content and expecting people to group to tackle trivial objectives is completely unreasonable.
Except, by your post, you DO have problems with solo content.
Anyhow...
I am a die hard soloer and even I want there to be group content and "real" group content. Not making players group up for one quest and then they no longer need to be grouped.
I will also admit that even though I am predominantly a solo player (however will always group with guildmates/friends ) and NEVER log in and seek a group, I did find that I grouped quite a lot in SWToR at launch despite people shouting that it was a "single player game".
Therefore I think there is something to what the OP says.
Pick up groups nowadays usually suck. My last pickup group sucked. I really would much rather group with the few good people I know, occasionally helping someone who needs it but in the end will stay with soloing.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Applying real life psychological or social deficiencies to a group or not group playstyle in an MMO is absolutely absurd.
By the same token I could say that those wanting to solo can't handle engaging in social situations because they are scared of rejection. Which may be true here or there but how could I possibly know?
None of you do either so stop trying to make your point by slandering a group of people you don't even know exists. If you can't make points without doing so maybe don't post?
Originally posted by Aelious Applying real life psychological or social deficiencies to a group or not group playstyle in an MMO is absolutely absurd.
By the same token I could say that those wanting to solo can't handle engaging in social situations because they are scared of rejection. Which may be true here or there but how could I possibly know?
None of you do either so stop trying to make your point by slandering a group of people you don't even know exists. If you can't make points without doing so maybe don't post?
One group is advocating choice in terms of progression means ( being only easier if you're in a group otherwise equal) while the other group is not advocating choice (either forced group or forced solo), the latter group can be reasonably characterized as having some sort of deficiency in their day to day life such that they cannot empathize with anyone else but themselves.
Originally posted by Aelious Applying real life psychological or social deficiencies to a group or not group playstyle in an MMO is absolutely absurd.
By the same token I could say that those wanting to solo can't handle engaging in social situations because they are scared of rejection. Which may be true here or there but how could I possibly know?
None of you do either so stop trying to make your point by slandering a group of people you don't even know exists. If you can't make points without doing so maybe don't post?
And yet several times in this thread groupers were doing just that before I showed up.
Which means, you're not here to preach civility, you just don't like it when the group you are opposed to use your tactics against you. Nice try, but you're not trying to raise the level of the conversation, you're just crying uncle.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire: Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
That's not true. I'm at least one person that thinks content should be split between group content and solo as long as there is enough of both. Solo players should not have to group to progress and group players should not have to solo to progress.
This seems fair right?
Well for the most part solo is the majority of content in today's MMOs. That's why you see a forward response to group content and it's seen as though ALL of the game must be that way. I'd look back and see how many posts actually call for all group gameplay.
I'm not crying anything. I'm not going to read through the entire thread and if I had seen the "other side" slandering instead of actually making points I would have said that same thing.
There's nothing to "quit". Using slander doesn't make a point at all.
I'm not crying anything. I'm not going to read through the entire thread and if I had seen the "other side" slandering instead of actually making points I would have said that same thing.
There's nothing to "quit". Using slander doesn't make a point at all.
What point is there to make with a group of people that preach that their way to play is not only best (which both sides of this argument advocate) but in addition, decide that the other ways must be stricken from the game. (Which only the groupers advocate).
Once faced with such inflexible intolerance, there is no point in trying to change their minds, all you can do is expose their intolerance and selfishness.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire: Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
Originally posted by Aelious That's not true. I'm at least one person that thinks content should be split between group content and solo as long as there is enough of both. Solo players should not have to group to progress and group players should not have to solo to progress.
This seems fair right?
Well for the most part solo is the majority of content in today's MMOs. That's why you see a forward response to group content and it's seen as though ALL of the game must be that way. I'd look back and see how many posts actually call for all group gameplay.
True to a degree but if you want to see what's coming in terms of content allocation look at Firefall which isn't a 50-50 split, it's a choice based game (you can do everything solo and in some cases it's even better to do it solo than with anyone else but by the same token everything in the game can be done with a group fast and efficiently so it is really up to the player to choose how they want to play, personally I go with both play styles depending on the time I have available to play and how many people I run into constantly doing that activity).
Comments
First of all, there is a right or wrong answer. There is either a difference between game communities that highly encourage grouping, or there isn't. There is no "partially right." If there is a difference, you could truthfully claim that it is because of x, but not that there is no difference at all.
Secondly, I appreciate the thoughtful post. But I would appreciate it more - if you addressed the argument people in favor of group centered games are trying to make. Instead, you ran with the strawman argument made by the OP.
No one is arguing "no solo beyond level x," (there are no levels btw). The point of contention is how effective grouping should be. WoW for example, has highly effective soloing until the level cap, which includes that vast majority of the content that the game has.
When someone comes at me with "WoW has community too," I get the impression they are defending this type of system; where soloing is optimal for most of the game. So I'm going to argue why I think it is a bad direction for EQN. I think there's a limited future in MMORPGs that highly incentivize soloing.
Even WoW has been losing subscriptions, correlated with how solo/matchmaking based that game has gotten. In my thread: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/392882/EQN-has-an-ideal-layout-for-forced-grouping.html, I make the argument for how efficient solo progression impacted WoW.
As for how I've changed in 15 years... well for one, I understand the concept of delayed reward better. I also know myself a lot better, and why I do things. Perhaps most importantly, I have more money to spend on a game, if I so desire.
I agree that "force, encouraged grouping mechanics" or whatever people called it... is definitely a bad thing and need to go asap. If you group it should because you want to, not because you can even level up without doing so.
That been say, they still need to sorta make people do different things in the group combat situations like dungeons and raids, or else it's just boring as hell. Not necessarily a Trinity system, but SOMETHING!!!
People talk shit about GW2, but do you know that GW2 has it's own version of trinity! It's dps, utility and support. While it sounded like a good idea(go see their blog posts before launch) and actually might be great, it just so happened that Anet have failed to adjust and balance it so that everyone can be dps, utility and support if they so desire and still make an effective team. It's not the lack of trinity that caused gw2's combat a zergfest, it's the fact that you can be much more effective if you go with dps and just not die.
Ahh, I see your error. You think MMO means Many Moochers Online. Where people mooching off of each other is the point of the game.
Well, I am here to tell you it actually means Massively Multiplayer Online, which means there are a massive amount of players online simultaneously. It doesn't imply ANYTHING about being cooperative.
Try standing on your own two feet and stop expecting everyone else in the game to carry you to the fun.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire:
Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
OMG, you're not one of those people are you? I hate those people on trains or planes that sit next to you and feel the need to talk to you because they're bored. I know you think this example proves your point about how great forced grouping is...but it in fact proves the opposite.
If I want to socialize, I'll go to a party where socializing is expected. I'll go to a networking event where socializing is expected. I'll go on a date, or speed dating, or a club to dance where socializing is expected.
They should lock solo players characters in a jail cell and they can only leave the jail if they are in a group. Eventually they will learn that playing solo is dumb and group play is the only one true way to play an MMO.
IMO the bottom-line is what players want and care about, do they want community? DO they care about community? If they both want and care about it, they form a community. If they don't they don't form a community. There's plenty of content in Themepark MMO's that requires grouping, does that in anyway help the community aspect in these games? Does it bring players together, or does it push them apart? Look at most peoples opinion of PUgs as an example, most hate them, why is that?
You can't form a community when the players look at each other as a hindrance or competition. Which is something that's quite common today. No one wants that guy that's not that great at his role yet, no one wants that guy that doesn't have the best gear yet, no one wants the guy that just started playing. This is the attitude of many of todays gamers I think that's what hurts the community the most in these games.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Uhg, people are advocating the freedom of choice to not be locked into one option of play.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Is anyone actually advocating for the two extremes?
All group content
or
All solo content
?
I don't see that but a lot of the arguments here seem to be framed as though that's what's being said. If you really an MMO to give you choice it must have both. I should be able to solo my way up with enough fresh content AND be able to group my way up with enough fresh content. Group content should not be packed away solely in dungeons. The world has to be big though and luckily from the sounds of it EQN will be.
No we are advocating the option to have both solo and group play in an mmo.
Good point, most games have group related world content, even TOR does. Those areas were always dead though.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The only people advocating those two extremes are the ones who either don't want to, or aren't comfortable enough, doing what the rest of the world does when it comes to meeting new people. They think it's entirely 100% up to the game to make friends for them. And thus are shocked that they can't make friends anymore.
Furthermore, they then assume that anyone who actually goes out and talks to people, is friendly towards others, helps others, actively joins guilds, actively makes / maintains guilds, is somehow demanding an 'all solo content' game. And by extrapolation, the only solution is an 'all group content' game, like they had back in the day.
It's typical ignorance, 'i had fun back in 1998, so therefor all things should be like they were back in 1998'. No bearing in actual reality, and no mind paid towards how the world has changed since then.
You're absolutely right, it's stupid to have a game based around only 1 of those dynamics. And every decent or better MMO designer knows this.
I've met 4 people (of many) through "forced grouping" in Lineage 2 who went on to become real world friends. Two of them I met in 2005 with Chronicle 3, am still friends with them to this day and have spent two Thanksgivings with them, as well as other visits. I've been there for them through some pretty heavy real-life situations. And yes, I met them in a video game. The 4th one became my girlfriend - in real life, not long-distance or online only - for a while.
Another I met around 2008 and am still friends with them as well, though we haven't had the opportunity to meet up in person yet (distance and schedules make it difficult).
I have several friends I met in FFXI around 2006 or 2007 and I still talk to to this day. I'll be getting together with 2 of them in NYC in the near future. Again,k distance and schedules/lives makes it difficult to meet up more often.
I have friends I've met in other MMOs, again through "forced grouping", that I still keep in touch with and stalk to on a regular basis.
None of those are "forced friendships". None of them were built on being "tools to get better epic gear".
Don't generalize about people you know nothing about.
You are advocating for forced grouping from the time you log on until you log off? I'm sure all those in favor of "forced grouping" never ever run around solo in games. They need a buddy to go to the bathroom with them to I suppose?
So silly how many only think in the black and white. Life and gaming is all grey.
The most solo oriented mmos still allow people to group and interact. If people choose to go solo for their own selfish needs, how does that hurt those that want to group and socialize?
I've yet to play a single MMO (in 17 years) that wasn't more entertaining with friends and guild mates, regardless of how the solo/grouping was handled.
So sad that many of you can't work up the courage to interact with others naturally and need the game mechanics to force you into those situations.
Probably same people that advocate "play dates" for kids because they think kids can't naturally make friends and interact anymore. Need parents dictating when and who they can play with...sad sad world.
Except, by your post, you DO have problems with solo content.
Anyhow...
I am a die hard soloer and even I want there to be group content and "real" group content. Not making players group up for one quest and then they no longer need to be grouped.
I will also admit that even though I am predominantly a solo player (however will always group with guildmates/friends ) and NEVER log in and seek a group, I did find that I grouped quite a lot in SWToR at launch despite people shouting that it was a "single player game".
Therefore I think there is something to what the OP says.
Pick up groups nowadays usually suck. My last pickup group sucked. I really would much rather group with the few good people I know, occasionally helping someone who needs it but in the end will stay with soloing.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
By the same token I could say that those wanting to solo can't handle engaging in social situations because they are scared of rejection. Which may be true here or there but how could I possibly know?
None of you do either so stop trying to make your point by slandering a group of people you don't even know exists. If you can't make points without doing so maybe don't post?
One group is advocating choice in terms of progression means ( being only easier if you're in a group otherwise equal) while the other group is not advocating choice (either forced group or forced solo), the latter group can be reasonably characterized as having some sort of deficiency in their day to day life such that they cannot empathize with anyone else but themselves.
And yet several times in this thread groupers were doing just that before I showed up.
Which means, you're not here to preach civility, you just don't like it when the group you are opposed to use your tactics against you. Nice try, but you're not trying to raise the level of the conversation, you're just crying uncle.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire:
Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
This seems fair right?
Well for the most part solo is the majority of content in today's MMOs. That's why you see a forward response to group content and it's seen as though ALL of the game must be that way. I'd look back and see how many posts actually call for all group gameplay.
I'm not crying anything. I'm not going to read through the entire thread and if I had seen the "other side" slandering instead of actually making points I would have said that same thing.
There's nothing to "quit". Using slander doesn't make a point at all.
What point is there to make with a group of people that preach that their way to play is not only best (which both sides of this argument advocate) but in addition, decide that the other ways must be stricken from the game. (Which only the groupers advocate).
Once faced with such inflexible intolerance, there is no point in trying to change their minds, all you can do is expose their intolerance and selfishness.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire:
Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
For the record, I usually solo when leveling. I prefer to play the game instead of standing around looking for a groups.
True to a degree but if you want to see what's coming in terms of content allocation look at Firefall which isn't a 50-50 split, it's a choice based game (you can do everything solo and in some cases it's even better to do it solo than with anyone else but by the same token everything in the game can be done with a group fast and efficiently so it is really up to the player to choose how they want to play, personally I go with both play styles depending on the time I have available to play and how many people I run into constantly doing that activity).