Poll on soloing in MMOs

zethcarn · May 2006

How group or solo oriented do you like your MMOs?

ChaosKin · May 2006

Realistically, what would be the point of complete soloing.. that would be a stand alone game.. There would be no need or reason for the Massively Multiplayer part.. Just my opinion but that makes no sense.

katriell · May 2006

Depends on the MMO. I'm not opposed to mostly grouping if I've settled into the community. But I prefer to solo almost exclusively if I don't know anyone.

Fireburst · May 2006

It depends greatly upon the player. I have met lots who love to solo and rarely group whilst others who love to group and hate any solo play. I like to see games that don't force you to group but offer rewards for teamwork.

kovah · May 2006

I voted for "Mostly solo content for grinding, group content for raiding/ PvP, etc." with the stipulation that there is also solo PvP like random world encounters and such.

I think a game should have all aspects though. I realize that just because it's something that I want in a game, it might not be what somone else wants. Limiting a game to a certain group of players limits the game imo. I like the option to participate in a 40 person group against another 40 person group in PvP as well as 40 person PvE. I like having the option to participate in those styles of gameplay in an instanced situation or in a non-instanced, world event. I also like to head off on my own and grind up a few levels/mats/rank(faction or wtfever)...

That doesn't mean that every single time I log in that I want to do just one of those things over and over again. But, for example, I could never ever enjoy a game styled like DDO. Great game to those it caters too... /shrug

karter64 · May 2006

I believe any game that leans too far one way or the other is going to limit it's customer base. As the poster before me mentioned, I think a game needs enough content to keep the solo'ers happy while allowing some benefits to those that group. I think Asheron's Call did a good job of that, and World of Warcraft up to max level.

Slntasn · May 2006

Ugh, some people fail to understand the fact that someone (like myself) plays certain MMO's because you cannot play that exact game other than the MMO version. THAT is the reason i play solo most of the time.

Anofalye · May 2006

Solo should have it own end-game, it own hierarchy.

Solo should not allow you to reach everything for grouping purposes. Neither should grouping allow you to reach the best solo stuff.

Solo deserves a end-game of it own...solo should allow you to gain XP for the overall system and solo items, to actually rule the solo world...grouping should allow you to gain XP for the overall system and give you the group uberness items, never the solo uberness earned by grouping.

I am mostly a grouper myself. But why should I solo rather than log if I don't get a group? Gimme a reason to solo, else you are short of 1 grouper.

Group uberness should be earned in groups. Solo uberness earned while soloing. Both should give some XP for the overall system as well. Someone who never solo should not be better at soloing than a lone wolf. A lone wolf should not be better at grouping than a group junkie.

Once you covered those 2 basics, which is the real foundation of a MMO, you can consider minorities activities like PvP, raiding or tradeskill. Please the overwhelming majority first, this is groupers and soloers.

Nobody logical can complain that you request that someone does the activity he wants to be good in. You want to be solo-uber, than solo. You want to be group-uber, than group. You want to be raid-uber, than raid. Asking someone to play another gameplay is doomed from the start. If someone will not group because he just want to be good at soloing, trust me, it is better for everyone that this person only solo, eventually we might corrupt that persons to the joy of grouping positively, enforcing lead to hatred...and hatred hurt a game and a company a lot...Smed could testify even if he is to proud to admit it!

Elnator · May 2006

Poll is garbage. You didn't offer any of the most common answers.

THIS is a better poll which offers a better array of answers:

Slntasn · May 2006

Originally posted by Anofalye
Solo should have it own end-game, it own hierarchy.Solo should not allow you to reach everything for grouping purposes. Neither should grouping allow you to reach the best solo stuff.Solo deserves a end-game of it own...solo should allow you to gain XP for the overall system and solo items, to actually rule the solo world...grouping should allow you to gain XP for the overall system and give you the group uberness items, never the solo uberness earned by grouping.I am mostly a grouper myself. But why should I solo rather than log if I don't get a group? Gimme a reason to solo, else you are short of 1 grouper.Group uberness should be earned in groups. Solo uberness earned while soloing. Both should give some XP for the overall system as well. Someone who never solo should not be better at soloing than a lone wolf. A lone wolf should not be better at grouping than a group junkie.Once you covered those 2 basics, which is the real foundation of a MMO, you can consider minorities activities like PvP, raiding or tradeskill. Please the overwhelming majority first, this is groupers and soloers.Nobody logical can complain that you request that someone does the activity he wants to be good in. You want to be solo-uber, than solo. You want to be group-uber, than group. You want to be raid-uber, than raid. Asking someone to play another gameplay is doomed from the start. If someone will not group because he just want to be good at soloing, trust me, it is better for everyone that this person only solo, eventually we might corrupt that persons to the joy of grouping positively, enforcing lead to hatred...and hatred hurt a game and a company a lot...Smed could testify even if he is to proud to admit it!

Hmm, i have to say i dont agree with this.

It will create a forced "grouping or soloing" situation.

for Example:

I start out in an MMO and I don't know anyone. So i solo for a few levels, get some good items (for solo only according to you). Then i meet some people, and decide to team with them. Its hard for me to compete with them damage wise, since all of my items that i got were for solo only.

Yea, i could of tried grouping at first, but i dont want to be forced to do that just so i won't be left in the dust damage wise later on. Maybe I like soloing during the week since I only have an hour to play.

Your idea might work as long as the items are all balanced, but i dont like the idea of having items that only work good in groups or while solo.

I think getting items that work while soloing, grouping, raiding, etc. works just fine as long as there are uber yet balanced items that you can still get no matter how you get it.

nomadian · May 2006

My preferred mmo is a mmo that encourages grouping but also has solo content for when you can't find a group or when you don't want to group one day. A game that has too much solo content or makes it very easy to solo- aka WoW I think disencourages people to group.

Anofalye · May 2006

Originally posted by SLNTASN

Hmm, i have to say i dont agree with this.
It will create a forced "grouping or soloing" situation.
for Example:
I start out in an MMO and I don't know anyone. So i solo for a few levels, get some good items (for solo only according to you). Then i meet some people, and decide to team with them. Its hard for me to compete with them damage wise, since all of my items that i got were for solo only.
Yea, i could of tried grouping at first, but i dont want to be forced to do that just so i won't be left in the dust damage wise later on. Maybe I like soloing during the week since I only have an hour to play.

Your idea might work as long as the items are all balanced, but i dont like the idea of having items that only work good in groups or while solo.

I think getting items that work while soloing, grouping, raiding, etc. works just fine as long as there are uber yet balanced items that you can still get no matter how you get it.

Many nice points!

You could have 2 characters sheet to avoid all items swapping...it also double the 'achievement' feeling at the same time.

I never believe in balance myself. Best solo items should be earn solo...really. That way you have a reason to solo.

I humbly think a lot of soloers would be corrupted to a group loving setting that way, in the long run...as they master the soloing and grew bored, they would group and achieve stuff between expansions...and eventually they would prolly start favoring grouping over soloing and start enjoying groups more and more. Heck, such a setting might even be able to turn me into a raider (not at start, but with a LOT of time, a burned wild cat take time to domesticate).

'Forced grouping/soloing'? I dunno, can you really say someone is forced to group or solo if he already did this activity and didn't earn the other? I mean, he even start with all his levels and some items that help him a little even if they are not on par on the other activity...I see this as more achievement, but maybe I am wrong. I mean, if I reward you by been a good doctor after you studies medecines for years, can you say I enforced you to be a doctor? Nothing prevent you from learning how to drive a car, it is really up to you...no?

Slntasn · May 2006

Originally posted by Anofalye

Originally posted by SLNTASN
Hmm, i have to say i dont agree with this.
It will create a forced "grouping or soloing" situation.
for Example:
I start out in an MMO and I don't know anyone. So i solo for a few levels, get some good items (for solo only according to you). Then i meet some people, and decide to team with them. Its hard for me to compete with them damage wise, since all of my items that i got were for solo only.
Yea, i could of tried grouping at first, but i dont want to be forced to do that just so i won't be left in the dust damage wise later on. Maybe I like soloing during the week since I only have an hour to play.
Your idea might work as long as the items are all balanced, but i dont like the idea of having items that only work good in groups or while solo.
I think getting items that work while soloing, grouping, raiding, etc. works just fine as long as there are uber yet balanced items that you can still get no matter how you get it.Many nice points!You could have 2 characters sheet to avoid all items swapping...it also double the 'achievement' feeling at the same time.
I never believe in balance myself. Best solo items should be earn solo...really. That way you have a reason to solo.I humbly think a lot of soloers would be corrupted to a group loving setting that way, in the long run...as they master the soloing and grew bored, they would group and achieve stuff between expansions...and eventually they would prolly start favoring grouping over soloing and start enjoying groups more and more.'Forced grouping/soloing'? I dunno, can you really say someone is forced to group or solo if he already did this activity and didn't earn the other? I mean, he even start with all his levels and some items that help him a little even if they are not on par on the other activity...I see this as more achievement, but maybe I am wrong. I mean, if I reward you by been a good doctor after you studies medecines for years, can you say I enforced you to be a doctor? Nothing prevent you from learning how to drive a car, it is really up to you...no?

Hmm yea, i see what you have to say.

In my opinion, i still dont think getting items (some certain types of items would be ok) should be split into getting solo items, compared to group items. Maybe these items can have certain stats that are greatly more helpful in groups rather than soloing and vica versa. Also, it would be cool if some of the starts ONLY worked while you were in a group with nearby members. But i wouldnt enjoy getting an item that was only to be used in a group or while soloing. I like your idea, i really do, but i just think it needs some touching up on

Jackdog · May 2006

DAoC and EQII (current not launch) fit my idea of how it should be.

Svayvti · May 2006

My preferred MMO rewards and encourages group play, but still allows me to play the game and advance if I can't find a group.

zethcarn · May 2006

Originally posted by nomadian
My preferred mmo is a mmo that encourages grouping but also has solo content for when you can't find a group or when you don't want to group one day. A game that has too much solo content or makes it very easy to solo- aka WoW I think disencourages people to group.

I feel the same way. The example of WoW is a good one and the ease of soloing greatly outwieghs the benefits of grouping.

Svayvti · May 2006

Actually I personally consider WoW a bad example because of the endgame. Its fine up until 60 where you can solo, but get better gear and more exp from grouping generally. But endgame WoW is all about raiding and raiding only to advance, and raiding doesn't even exist till the endgame.

Early AO (pre-Shadowlands) is what I think of as a good example. You had solo and team missions. Team missions were always more beneficial, but for whatever reason you could choose to do a solo mission and get almost the same reward, just a bit less exp/loot. Ryzom at release (not now) was also good because you could solo and get decent xp and loot, but if a group came along you'd join it becasue you got better exp and higher quality (if less quantity) loot.

But what bugs me the most is set group size and consistency. Don't tell me I have to have exactly 4, 5, 6, or 40 people in a team. I want to be able to play with friends and whatever decent, fun people are around; and not be forced to team with lame people just to fill a necessary slot.

ChaosKin · May 2006

I see all of your points and agree with most. I just meant that I couldn't understand the option for FULL solo. I personally hated sitting around LFG for long periods of time because I played on a server that was very much not my timezone, so again, I understand the point for solo content. Good discussion and very little flames, wow :P Good luck and good gaming. Cheers!

Pantastic · May 2006

People like ChaosKin seem to miss the core concept of MMORPGs completely; what makes it a MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER ONLINE roleplaying game is that it has a massive number of players online at the same time. There's nothing about having lots of players online that says everything must be done in groups. Some people don't want to mess around with finding a group for PVE stuff (especially if they primarily play the game for PVP), others are only playing for a short time so can't really form a formal group like forced group stuff needs, and others just like the MMO part but not actually relying on other people for their fighting.

Forced grouping games actually seem to lose the MMO part of the game to me, since you go, wait around LFG/LFM until you get your group assembled, then go off in the world and spend several hours interacting only with that handfull of people. And no, I don't count 'oh, another group, better go a ways away to camp' and 'OK, lets get in the spawn-camp line' to be real interaction. If you're going to play a game where you have to make a group and keep it together for all of your gameplay, why bother with a world which everyone shares? Just go to a Diablo2-like system where each group gets their own instance of the entire game world. Share the marketplace and chat channels, then the only real difference in your gameplay is fewer lines at spawn spots.

Personally, I'd like a game where you could spend most of your time playing solo and do a good chunk of your advancement alon, but also would have lots of opportunity to spontaneously hook up with other players to hit a cave, take down a tough enemy, or deal with some wandering attackers. You could take on some tougher stuff together, or split up and go your seperate ways after one objective. That's a lot more Massive Multiplayer to me than forming a carefully calibrated group then staying with those same few people for hours on end. You could have specific dungeons that take a more organized group without making people spend al of there time LFG or fighting in a carefully picked group.

ChaosKin · May 2006

Actually, this deserves a rebuttal.

I did not miss the point. The core reason for MMO is to have lots of people online at once, so you can share the experience of the game and interact (not just group with) people in your game environment.

The core reason for mmoRPG"s is that you have lots of people online TO ROLEPLAY with, which means you interact with them in character.

I don't play any game to be force to do anything, I want my options just like everyone else.

Thanks for sharing. Good luck and good gaming. Cheers!

Jenuviel · May 2006

In some ways, I'm very surprised no "MMO" company has really embraced the idea of a singleplayer subscription service. Minions of Mirth comes the closest to it, but I'd actually love to play a single-player RPG that was updated each month by a professional staff in the same way MMOs are. I'd love the opportunity to actually play the heroine at the center of a variety of storylines rather than just another warrior or cleric among a sea of heroes, but do it in the ongoing way that only MMOs currently allow. I'd love to be the headliner of a continuing story, a campaign, that went on for a year or more and was available whenever I had time to log in.

When I first started playing online games (MUDs in the early 90s), I went into it hoping to find a replacement for tabletop gaming; none of my friends played tabletop games anymore, and it just seemed weird for a woman my age to go join a tabletop group at a comic book store or something. Still, I really missed that participation in an ongoing storyline that partially revolved around my character. After nearly fifteen years spent with online games, I've still never found anything that goes beyond simulating the game mechanics of tabletop gaming; actual evolving storylines remain the domain of singleplayer games, and those games rarely last more than a week or two.

I think there's a real opportunity for some innovative developers out there to tap into this market. I still play MMOs now, but I also tend to be "wired" in such a way that I like to do things on my own, accomplish things on my own, and basically be the sole determining factor in where my road takes me. I miss the stories, though, and I'd miss them even if I were more of a "group" person. Even if I were to go back to singleplayer roleplaying games, they really don't make that many of them these days, and they never have the persistent and continual nature that MMOs possess. I really wish they did, though, and I'd gladly pay $15 a month for the illusion.

M1sf1t · May 2006

        If I can't solo grind or solo quest in a MMORPG then I ain't paying a nickle for it. Seriously WTF are you going to do while LFG'ing ?? I am not going to wait hours on end just to form a group that will usually last at around 1 min to 2 hours. Any MMORPG that requires you to have a group to level or quest is not worth playing unless you have tons of time on your hand to form a groups.

        In Wow I grouped all the time when doing instances. Seriously people who say that WoW's solo'ing ability forces people not to group are plain dumb IMHO. No one forces you group or to solo all the time if you don't want too. If you need to force people to group in a game then it's usually a sign of a poor game mechanic IMHO.

        A MMORPG should give benifits to grouping but not hinder or hurt soloing at all. WoW got this idea correct except for the massive raiding end game that just is over the top and boring beyond description. I like grouping but grouping with 40 other people is a chore. Especially when it comes to getting everyone online and ready to go.

ChaosKin · May 2006

Jenuviel,

I love that idea. I too would pay for that type of experience. Thanks for bringing it up.

Good Luck and Good Gaming. Cheers!

Freedom1776 · May 2006

I really don't understand why some people care how other people choose to play a game, especially to the point of debating it. As long as there is plenty of content for all types of players -- solo, group, raid, etc -- the entire topic is moot. Don't worry about what anybody else is doing, just do your own thing and have fun.

M1sf1t · May 2006

Originally posted by zethcarn

Originally posted by nomadian
My preferred mmo is a mmo that encourages grouping but also has solo content for when you can't find a group or when you don't want to group one day. A game that has too much solo content or makes it very easy to solo- aka WoW I think disencourages people to group.

I feel the same way. The example of WoW is a good one and the ease of soloing greatly outwieghs the benefits of grouping.

If you only solo in WoW you won't have any shot at blue items. Sure you might get lucky and get a blue or purple world drop but the odds are freaking slim to the point of making it easier to just LFG in a city and do a instance.

Rattrap · May 2006

I think City of Villains have the best system so far

Every mission is fitting itself to the size of the party , plus you can chose how though you want mission to be.

So if you solo you can adjust the mission to be doable -
And the larger and thougher the group - thougher mission, and more reward.
And than you have world areas with mob , there you can just grind if you wish to grind and solo

This works perfect, because it works for people with no time, that want to solo and go.
But grouping is only way to acomplish some real progress

Howdy, Stranger!

Poll on soloing in MMOs

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Poll on soloing in MMOs

Comments