Having a MMO where 100% of the content can be done solo is not a great idea, then you could just make a singleplayer game instead which will do that far better.
You certainly need some solocontent but I think 50/50 would be a rather good ratio.
You need some content to be meant for groups for sure. It's more a question of should that content be so prominent it's near mandatory to play it, or should it be more like EVE where you never really have to do group content if you don't want to?
Having a MMO where 100% of the content can be done solo is not a great idea, then you could just make a singleplayer game instead which will do that far better.
You certainly need some solocontent but I think 50/50 would be a rather good ratio.
Group contents will become solo contents when player get more power in progress . That is why good ratio is 10 to 20 (solo)/ 80 to 90 (group) . It mean at level 1 you will have 10 to 20 solo contents and at max level you will have around 80 to 90 solo contents
Most wow generation MMORPG punish or don't reward player when doing higher level contents (that can be finish with group , so it can be count as group contents) so it kind of forced player to do solo contents .
100% solo contents MMORPG wasn't mean a singleplayer , for example in old console game , you can finish the game solo , but play with 2 player wasn't bad .
IMO What matter is make content "group friendly" (solo content or not) . For me , MMORPG design wasn't mean to make things hard/haste and force player to group up to play , but about make it friendly so player can chose how they want to play the game .
The game should not be friendly - it should be challenging, immersive, competitive and cooperative. Friendly games are not very popular in general.
The entire gaming market would like to disagree with you.
Making games friendly - i.e. easier and more accessible - has been the market trend for over 20 years and has resulted in the games industry becoming bigger than the film and tv industry. You may not like it, but the masses love it. Friendly games are extremely popular.
I wont say FFXI executed group-centric play perfectly but it did in a way that made solo seem like a poor choice. You could obviously solo stuff (some playstyles were better at it than others like beastmaster) but being in a group just made things faster thus gave more incentive to do it most of the time, which I feel games should go with. People are playing a massive multiplayer online game so they really should not expect to do 80% of the game solo. Its about striking a balance between those that have and those that do not have the time.
Not only that the game was balanced around parties, other than very few jobs, most jobs couldn't solo a same level enemy without a ton of downtime after it. I'm all for the game being hard as balls and grouping for most aspects being pretty much required. Its what made FF11 great when it had a level 75 cap. Then Abbysea came and such and they removed most of its diffculty, since you can have a party of npcs with you now. Best MMO I played was FF11 when the lv cap was 75, I've not played another game that was as proper of a mmorpg as FF11 was since. The genre is pretty much dead these days.
MMORPGS today are in actually: piss-poorly made single player games. With pointless endgame grinds for gear that you have no more use for. The fact you don't need anyone for most mmo's these days till level cap is a bad sign for the genre, this crap started after wow's 1st expansion when they made the game easy mode.
As for the time thing, I can see that being an issue, but the problem is mmorpgs are far FAR too soloable today, to the point you can hit lv cap just by following the quest hubs. Its completly brainless, and its also boring, but sadly this is what casuals eat up today so thats what its all that is made anymore as the money is where casuals are today.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
I believe the OP is referring mostly to the fact that at least traditionally in many MMOs you had to participate in raids or at least group dungeons to get the best gear in the game. Progression caps out short of your full potential if you are running solo content. Hence the idea of "forced multiplayer".
I can agree with the OP that is crap.
I don't agree that it's crap. I think it's common sense.
Not even sure what your point or the OP's point is supposed to be.
The gear treadmill is probably singlehandedly keeping half of MMORPG players on the genre, otherwise what is the point of the game? To play like it's single player out of the time, but say "wow... so amazing look there are other people on the server with me!" ???
Soloable/Quest gear should be << Group Dungeon Gear <<< Raid Gear
If you want the better gear, then organize a group or guild/raid to get it. It's really that simple.
If you are playing an MMORPG you should expect to be grouping with people. I am not talking about FFXI type grouping but grouping like you had to in Vanilla WOW. Otherwise you should play a single player game. MSORPG which is what we have today is why the genera is crap. There are tons of single player games for players who dont ever want to play with people.
The genre is crap because:
1. Repetitive grinding has been accepted as a suitable substitute for engaging content. 2. 99% of the genre are clones of the same model.
Giving people the choice to participate it solo content enjoyably has done nothing but good for the genre.
It has done lots of good for the genre, economically. However, it has completely destroyed the social side of the genre as well. Guilds don't matter as much. Players do not interact nearly as much, or to nearly the same extent as before. Interdependence is way down. Content is designed in an "a la carte" manner. It isn't as good, is incredibly disposable, and doesn't last long (so frequent content droughts and complaints about content release schedules).
Yes, making the games easier and more accessible has done well for bringing in more casual players with money to burn on subscriptions/etc. into the genre... But that's largely an economic issue. That has nothing to do with the actual quality of the games.
Graphics has improved. That's the only non-debatable part of this trend that has brought good and nothing else (and many games suicided due to developers focusing too much on graphics).
@Darksworm - You are obviously coming from a WoW clone perspective here.
"The gear treadmill is probably singlehandedly keeping half of MMORPG players on the genre, otherwise what is the point of the game?"
I don't know? Fun??? Why do people sink so much time into games like League, Minecraft, and Starcraft where character bound gear is not a thing? How has EVE done so well over the years?
Sure. Baiting people in to your game and then keeping them around with the idea "You've invested so much into this character, how can you quit now?" may work for some people. For a lot of people though this doesn't work anymore, and there are plenty of games fighting over the market it does work on already.
Content droughts are a problem with scripted content common to WoW clones. Good sandboxes never suffer this problem because the unpredictability of players and emergent gameplay make simple reusable content types constantly interesting and unpredictable.
A good medium is what needs to be found. Back in old EQ days where grouping was necessary, yes it forged bonds that made it seem like a second home, but time has changed.
You make something so easy that it becomes casual you may as well just be playing it as a single player game with optional multiplayer content.
Making it so hard that you need to find other people to do it with has its own problems, especially when the game gets some age on it and most of the ones that stuck around are end game.
Neither of the extremes will make a good game but to find a good balance i would lean more towards 'forced group'. The whole point of MMORPG is to play together with others. If you can solo everything the game becomes more or less a single player game.
For the player the whole point of the game is to have fun. Most games that do the best tend to be the most flexible.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
@Darksworm - You are obviously coming from a WoW clone perspective here.
"The gear treadmill is probably singlehandedly keeping half of MMORPG players on the genre, otherwise what is the point of the game?"
I don't know? Fun??? Why do people sink so much time into games like League, Minecraft, and Starcraft where character bound gear is not a thing? How has EVE done so well over the years?
Sure. Baiting people in to your game and then keeping them around with the idea "You've invested so much into this character, how can you quit now?" may work for some people. For a lot of people though this doesn't work anymore, and there are plenty of games fighting over the market it does work on already.
Content droughts are a problem with scripted content common to WoW clones. Good sandboxes never suffer this problem because the unpredictability of players and emergent gameplay make simple reusable content types constantly interesting and unpredictable.
I started playing MMORPGs with EQ in 2000. I don't even play WoW right now, or really much of anything MMO-related. The games simply aren't that good and they don't have the "stick" that a player like me is looking for, due to poor social experiences. If you're into PvP or want something that plays more like Diablo III, then I'm sure something like FFXIV, ESO, GW2, etc. would scratch your casual, solo-friendly itch...
It has nothing to do with WoW clones, unless you've only been playing MMOs for a few years and tend to think that WoW literally defines this genre. Telling me that I am coming from a "WoW Clone" perspective simply because you identify everything you disagree with as being related to WoW, due to you believing that WoW somehow defines the genre for everyone, does not make it so.
You're actually doing nothing but projecting, here.
There is no point in playing an MMORPG if all you do is log in and kill random things, and there are basically no rewards that scale appropriate to the difficulty of the content (Solo, Group, Raid), the difficulty rating of that content (Normal, Heroic, Mythic), or the time requirements for that content (i.e. Raid Weapons vs. Epic Weapons from long, difficult quests).
People will simply ignore the stuff that is harder, and then complain that there isn't enough content because content that is not worth doing (rewards out of line with requirements) mind as well not exist to players.
There has to be all of this in there, and players need that carrot to chase, otherwise the game is relegated to nothing other than a glorified, 3D chat box.
And I'm certainly not going to pay for that.
If you don't like grouping or raiding, then don't group or raid.
But don't complain that your gear sucks compared to those people who put in the time and effort to do so. You have to deal with your own decisions, not expect developers to dumb down the games just so you can feel "equal" when you're actually just lazy or have different preferences from other people.
It's a role playing game. If all you want to do is kill elpies, then enjoy your elpy drops. Want better? Do better.
This has nothing to do with WoW. In EQ, we didn't complain that Mr. Joe Schmoe Wizard had a cool Najena robe. We put together a group, went wipe 50 times in the dungeon and got one for ourselves.
In any case, this isn't an issue because in games like EQ many classes could solo. No, you weren't getting great gear doing so, but you also had the option to group and should have been exercising that option where appropriate. That's the whole point: choices.
The issue we're seeing these days is that games are being designed to cater to one crowd to the exclusion of another. Therefore, you end up with games that have really bad balance in terms of solo and group content, and often the gameplay is designed with a bias for one which affect that aspect of the game, as well.
Games like WoW and EQ2 weren't as faceroll as people make it out to be. The reason why games are designed the way they are is because the players asked for it. Game developers develop games to make money. It's a business model. Developing for niche forum cliques is not the best way to build a viable business. You go where the money is.
Games like EQ were made more softcore over time because even their own player bases demanded it. This isn't a new phenomenon. EQ got stupid easy well before WoW entered the market. It got daily quests and easy vendor/token gears WAY before WoW released.
Neither of the extremes will make a good game but to find a good balance i would lean more towards 'forced group'. The whole point of MMORPG is to play together with others. If you can solo everything the game becomes more or less a single player game.
The game being singleplayer not because player can solo everything but because it was made as singleplayer . There are many reason that make player don't want to group up , for example: Player get punished for group up .
Low level player can't join high level quests and high level can't join low level quests because they ready done them . And if you force to group up , low level player get punish and don't have EXP from killing mob (that's half of exp from quests) . In some game , they don't allow power level so even lowbie join high level , they don't get EXP .
In short , you get punish by group up with people that not same levels as you .
Hard game forced group in fact do not help to group up . Because to do contents , it require players need group have a level of progression . For example if you need to kill level 60 boss , you can't call a level 30 in because they will get 1 shoot by boss . So it limited the range of player that allow to join the contents .
The problem with WOW generation aka 2008 to 2018 MMORPG is developer don't want you to group up when doing quests because it will ruin they design , they want you to play as they want , and punish you if you don't play as they wanted . They want player to solo quests and then have to group up for raid . They want to sell singleplayer game with MMO laber .
Also , being solo thing wasn't make it easy . For example you need 5 to 10 minutes and lots of potions , scrolls , items to solo a thing , yes it solo able but group up still prefer since it faster and less cost . Though the reward is half if you group up , but it more enjoy able than solo .
WoW was released in 2005, not 2008. Why the odd range of dates? Did Quest-to-Level suddenly get added to WoW in the second expansion? This has nothing to do with WoW. Most quests in MMORPGs are solo, and this design predates WoW by many years. EQ had these quests over a year before WoW was released... and by then they had become commonplace and part of the players' "Daily Rotation." This included solo instances for some quests, even. And yes, they were done for XP and tokens to buy items off a vendor.
The problem is not the quests, it's the leveling experienced tied to predominantly to questing.
The reason why this is the case is because players complained about games lacking immersion and people skipping the story to rush through levels. Tying the leveling to questing forces the players to experience the story/lore as they level up. Casual players prefer this. More hardcore players hate it. FFXIV has a mixed reaction predominantly due to this design, which it takes much further than WoW ever has (gating everything behind the MSQ).
You can always ask people to grind their XP killing MOBs, but we know how that usually turns out... Complaints, Bots, Power-Leveling Services, Account Selling, Shift Leveling, etc.
I actually think WoW strikes a decent balance between the two. I think EQ2 actually struck a better balance.
If the game is good, and the content is good, then it doesn't matter because people will do it, anyways. The only time this becomes an issue is when you are rolling alternate characters, and this is a non-issue for veterans in most MMORPGs as giving Character Boosts with Expansion purchases has become a fairly commonplace marketing norm, these days.
You can actually group up and quest in WoW. The quests share progress and you don't have the same issues leveling together than you'd have in a game like Elder Scrolls Online, for example.
No one expects to be able to repeat non-repeatable quests, so I'm not sure why high level players not being able to do trivial low level quests with low level players [due to having already done them] is an issue. Low level players should be doing level-appropriate content with other low level players, not worrying about killing MOBs or bosses 30 levels over them. That is a complete non-factor.
If you want to quest with your lowbie friends, then start a toon with them and go quest with them. That's what I did when I got a friend to try Guild Wars 2.
Developers don't "not want you to group up for quests." What you're asking for just doesn't make any sense.
2008 because it's time when WOW start the 12 million subs BS and after that's the 5 year of WOW killer clone trend . 2004-2007 wow yet to start the clone trend .
And make alts just to play with other ? it more like punishment than enjoying .
I think an mmoRPG should allow both. But in group you level faster. For skills I'm totally for having skill levels that are separated into group and solo as it is something different to fight alone a have to watch out for friends while hitting that bad guy.
This way you can also play the lone wolf if you want to, but you aren't as good in a group as someone who does it all the time.
IMHO they shouldn't force the social aspect of games through grouping but with other design decisions instead. By being more a RPG than a coop game.
@Darkswom - While EQ is not a WoW clone strictly speaking, it falls into the same general category as WoW is an EQ clone.
WoW Clones AKA Themeparks always follow the same predictable patterns.
The primary focus of early game revolves around level grinding, generally primarily through quests. There are preset races and classes you choose upon character creation that cannot be changed. And once the level grinding is done the game shifts focus over to gear progression earned by running "endgame content".
These basic principles of a themepark/WoW-Clone and they cover every single game you mentioned in your posts. They are all the same game in a different skin with less meaningful variation then is found in any true genre. For instance within the RTS genre you can kind both Total War titles and Age of Empires / Starcraft / Warcraft / Halo Wars. The later all being close enough in format to be considered clones, but the former existing in the same genre while only sharing a few general principles with the later.
To understand what a truly different title is, you have to look at MMOs such as EVE, Planetside, Runescape or a whole score of indie MMOs such as Darkfall, Life is Feudal, Wurm Online, or upcoming titles such as Star Citizen and Crowfall that all completely reject the model of WoW clones and make game completely different in concept and form.
If you want to solo you play the solo game, you see no one else.
If you want forced grouping you are in the multiplayer game, where you see other players.
A person who had soloed up their avatar could join the grouping world, but there would have to be some checks and balances. Possibly they would not be able to buy, sell or craft anything, maybe not do quests or PvP.
It would depend how it was set up but at least they could join other players if they got lonely.
Another thing I'd like is something to prevent people from speed running everything, because honestly that kills the social aspect. FFXIV has a huge problem with nobody wanting to talk, skipping content and blitzing the heck out of everything. Cut it out!
If you want to solo you play the solo game, you see no one else.
If you want forced grouping you are in the multiplayer game, where you see other players.
A person who had soloed up their avatar could join the grouping world, but there would have to be some checks and balances. Possibly they would not be able to buy, sell or craft anything, maybe not do quests or PvP.
It would depend how it was set up but at least they could join other players if they got lonely.
This is basically how SotA works. Players can choose whether to go it solo, team up with friends in a group instance or join the full world of all players.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I think that is also how Squadron 42 and Star Citizen work. Squadron 42 is a single player or co-op game. Star Citizen MMO-like in nature. From what I understand after playing through Squadron 42 you'll be allowed to introduce that character into the Star Citizen universe with the money you earned in the campaign.
If you want to solo you play the solo game, you see no one else.
If you want forced grouping you are in the multiplayer game, where you see other players.
A person who had soloed up their avatar could join the grouping world, but there would have to be some checks and balances. Possibly they would not be able to buy, sell or craft anything, maybe not do quests or PvP.
It would depend how it was set up but at least they could join other players if they got lonely.
This is basically how SotA works. Players can choose whether to go it solo, team up with friends in a group instance or join the full world of all players.
I was wondering if someone would spot that.
It was one of the reasons why I think SotA is an innovative MMO, but way too early to even think about playing it now.
Various ways it can be done Eldurian, it is the either/or that the OP has framed this topic in that I don't think should be a given.
Comments
Most wow generation MMORPG punish or don't reward player when doing higher level contents (that can be finish with group , so it can be count as group contents) so it kind of forced player to do solo contents .
100% solo contents MMORPG wasn't mean a singleplayer , for example in old console game , you can finish the game solo , but play with 2 player wasn't bad .
IMO What matter is make content "group friendly" (solo content or not) . For me , MMORPG design wasn't mean to make things hard/haste and force player to group up to play , but about make it friendly so player can chose how they want to play the game .
Making games friendly - i.e. easier and more accessible - has been the market trend for over 20 years and has resulted in the games industry becoming bigger than the film and tv industry. You may not like it, but the masses love it. Friendly games are extremely popular.
MMORPGS today are in actually: piss-poorly made single player games. With pointless endgame grinds for gear that you have no more use for. The fact you don't need anyone for most mmo's these days till level cap is a bad sign for the genre, this crap started after wow's 1st expansion when they made the game easy mode.
As for the time thing, I can see that being an issue, but the problem is mmorpgs are far FAR too soloable today, to the point you can hit lv cap just by following the quest hubs. Its completly brainless, and its also boring, but sadly this is what casuals eat up today so thats what its all that is made anymore as the money is where casuals are today.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Either way, you can't lose! Try it out sometime!
Indeed, are we saying that raids are "forced" grouping?The issue is more nuanced than "Anything where I cannot solo is wrong".
Not even sure what your point or the OP's point is supposed to be.
The gear treadmill is probably singlehandedly keeping half of MMORPG players on the genre, otherwise what is the point of the game? To play like it's single player out of the time, but say "wow... so amazing look there are other people on the server with me!" ???
Soloable/Quest gear should be << Group Dungeon Gear <<< Raid Gear
If you want the better gear, then organize a group or guild/raid to get it. It's really that simple.
It has done lots of good for the genre, economically. However, it has completely destroyed the social side of the genre as well. Guilds don't matter as much. Players do not interact nearly as much, or to nearly the same extent as before. Interdependence is way down. Content is designed in an "a la carte" manner. It isn't as good, is incredibly disposable, and doesn't last long (so frequent content droughts and complaints about content release schedules).
Yes, making the games easier and more accessible has done well for bringing in more casual players with money to burn on subscriptions/etc. into the genre... But that's largely an economic issue. That has nothing to do with the actual quality of the games.
Graphics has improved. That's the only non-debatable part of this trend that has brought good and nothing else (and many games suicided due to developers focusing too much on graphics).
"The gear treadmill is probably singlehandedly keeping half of MMORPG players on the genre, otherwise what is the point of the game?"
I don't know? Fun??? Why do people sink so much time into games like League, Minecraft, and Starcraft where character bound gear is not a thing? How has EVE done so well over the years?
Sure. Baiting people in to your game and then keeping them around with the idea "You've invested so much into this character, how can you quit now?" may work for some people. For a lot of people though this doesn't work anymore, and there are plenty of games fighting over the market it does work on already.
Content droughts are a problem with scripted content common to WoW clones. Good sandboxes never suffer this problem because the unpredictability of players and emergent gameplay make simple reusable content types constantly interesting and unpredictable.
You make something so easy that it becomes casual you may as well just be playing it as a single player game with optional multiplayer content.
Making it so hard that you need to find other people to do it with has its own problems, especially when the game gets some age on it and most of the ones that stuck around are end game.
There needs to be a solid medium.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
I started playing MMORPGs with EQ in 2000. I don't even play WoW right now, or really much of anything MMO-related. The games simply aren't that good and they don't have the "stick" that a player like me is looking for, due to poor social experiences. If you're into PvP or want something that plays more like Diablo III, then I'm sure something like FFXIV, ESO, GW2, etc. would scratch your casual, solo-friendly itch...
It has nothing to do with WoW clones, unless you've only been playing MMOs for a few years and tend to think that WoW literally defines this genre. Telling me that I am coming from a "WoW Clone" perspective simply because you identify everything you disagree with as being related to WoW, due to you believing that WoW somehow defines the genre for everyone, does not make it so.
You're actually doing nothing but projecting, here.
There is no point in playing an MMORPG if all you do is log in and kill random things, and there are basically no rewards that scale appropriate to the difficulty of the content (Solo, Group, Raid), the difficulty rating of that content (Normal, Heroic, Mythic), or the time requirements for that content (i.e. Raid Weapons vs. Epic Weapons from long, difficult quests).
People will simply ignore the stuff that is harder, and then complain that there isn't enough content because content that is not worth doing (rewards out of line with requirements) mind as well not exist to players.
There has to be all of this in there, and players need that carrot to chase, otherwise the game is relegated to nothing other than a glorified, 3D chat box.
And I'm certainly not going to pay for that.
If you don't like grouping or raiding, then don't group or raid.
But don't complain that your gear sucks compared to those people who put in the time and effort to do so. You have to deal with your own decisions, not expect developers to dumb down the games just so you can feel "equal" when you're actually just lazy or have different preferences from other people.
It's a role playing game. If all you want to do is kill elpies, then enjoy your elpy drops. Want better? Do better.
This has nothing to do with WoW. In EQ, we didn't complain that Mr. Joe Schmoe Wizard had a cool Najena robe. We put together a group, went wipe 50 times in the dungeon and got one for ourselves.
The issue we're seeing these days is that games are being designed to cater to one crowd to the exclusion of another. Therefore, you end up with games that have really bad balance in terms of solo and group content, and often the gameplay is designed with a bias for one which affect that aspect of the game, as well.
Games like WoW and EQ2 weren't as faceroll as people make it out to be. The reason why games are designed the way they are is because the players asked for it. Game developers develop games to make money. It's a business model. Developing for niche forum cliques is not the best way to build a viable business. You go where the money is.
Games like EQ were made more softcore over time because even their own player bases demanded it. This isn't a new phenomenon. EQ got stupid easy well before WoW entered the market. It got daily quests and easy vendor/token gears WAY before WoW released.
There are many reason that make player don't want to group up , for example: Player get punished for group up .
Low level player can't join high level quests and high level can't join low level quests because they ready done them . And if you force to group up , low level player get punish and don't have EXP from killing mob (that's half of exp from quests) .
In some game , they don't allow power level so even lowbie join high level , they don't get EXP .
In short , you get punish by group up with people that not same levels as you .
Hard game forced group in fact do not help to group up . Because to do contents , it require players need group have a level of progression . For example if you need to kill level 60 boss , you can't call a level 30 in because they will get 1 shoot by boss . So it limited the range of player that allow to join the contents .
The problem with WOW generation aka 2008 to 2018 MMORPG is developer don't want you to group up when doing quests because it will ruin they design , they want you to play as they want , and punish you if you don't play as they wanted . They want player to solo quests and then have to group up for raid . They want to sell singleplayer game with MMO laber .
Also , being solo thing wasn't make it easy . For example you need 5 to 10 minutes and lots of potions , scrolls , items to solo a thing , yes it solo able but group up still prefer since it faster and less cost . Though the reward is half if you group up , but it more enjoy able than solo .
The problem is not the quests, it's the leveling experienced tied to predominantly to questing.
The reason why this is the case is because players complained about games lacking immersion and people skipping the story to rush through levels. Tying the leveling to questing forces the players to experience the story/lore as they level up. Casual players prefer this. More hardcore players hate it. FFXIV has a mixed reaction predominantly due to this design, which it takes much further than WoW ever has (gating everything behind the MSQ).
You can always ask people to grind their XP killing MOBs, but we know how that usually turns out... Complaints, Bots, Power-Leveling Services, Account Selling, Shift Leveling, etc.
I actually think WoW strikes a decent balance between the two. I think EQ2 actually struck a better balance.
If the game is good, and the content is good, then it doesn't matter because people will do it, anyways. The only time this becomes an issue is when you are rolling alternate characters, and this is a non-issue for veterans in most MMORPGs as giving Character Boosts with Expansion purchases has become a fairly commonplace marketing norm, these days.
You can actually group up and quest in WoW. The quests share progress and you don't have the same issues leveling together than you'd have in a game like Elder Scrolls Online, for example.
No one expects to be able to repeat non-repeatable quests, so I'm not sure why high level players not being able to do trivial low level quests with low level players [due to having already done them] is an issue. Low level players should be doing level-appropriate content with other low level players, not worrying about killing MOBs or bosses 30 levels over them. That is a complete non-factor.
If you want to quest with your lowbie friends, then start a toon with them and go quest with them. That's what I did when I got a friend to try Guild Wars 2.
Developers don't "not want you to group up for quests." What you're asking for just doesn't make any sense.
2004-2007 wow yet to start the clone trend .
And make alts just to play with other ? it more like punishment than enjoying .
This way you can also play the lone wolf if you want to, but you aren't as good in a group as someone who does it all the time.
IMHO they shouldn't force the social aspect of games through grouping but with other design decisions instead. By being more a RPG than a coop game.
1997 Meridian 59 'til 2019 ESO
Waiting for Camelot Unchained & Pantheon
WoW Clones AKA Themeparks always follow the same predictable patterns.
The primary focus of early game revolves around level grinding, generally primarily through quests. There are preset races and classes you choose upon character creation that cannot be changed. And once the level grinding is done the game shifts focus over to gear progression earned by running "endgame content".
These basic principles of a themepark/WoW-Clone and they cover every single game you mentioned in your posts. They are all the same game in a different skin with less meaningful variation then is found in any true genre. For instance within the RTS genre you can kind both Total War titles and Age of Empires / Starcraft / Warcraft / Halo Wars. The later all being close enough in format to be considered clones, but the former existing in the same genre while only sharing a few general principles with the later.
To understand what a truly different title is, you have to look at MMOs such as EVE, Planetside, Runescape or a whole score of indie MMOs such as Darkfall, Life is Feudal, Wurm Online, or upcoming titles such as Star Citizen and Crowfall that all completely reject the model of WoW clones and make game completely different in concept and form.
If you want to solo you play the solo game, you see no one else.
If you want forced grouping you are in the multiplayer game, where you see other players.
A person who had soloed up their avatar could join the grouping world, but there would have to be some checks and balances. Possibly they would not be able to buy, sell or craft anything, maybe not do quests or PvP.
It would depend how it was set up but at least they could join other players if they got lonely.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I was wondering if someone would spot that.
It was one of the reasons why I think SotA is an innovative MMO, but way too early to even think about playing it now.
Various ways it can be done Eldurian, it is the either/or that the OP has framed this topic in that I don't think should be a given.