Originally posted by Ihmotepp What's the point? City of Heroes was a solo game, where lots of people grouped. It's still not a satisfying group game, because the grouping is largely unnecessary. Just because you CAN group and sometimes do, doesn't mean it's a good grouping game.
See, the problem is that you're defining any game where you even have the ability to solo as a solo game and then dismissing it as a bad game, while in any game that you're forced, either by mechanics or design, to be in a group all the time, is a group game. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of games out there are *BOTH* and you don't want to sully your precious "grouping games" by actually sharing. That's your right, I suppose. I just find it pathetic that you have to control what everyone else does in order to feel good about your style of play.
And Ihmotepp, just because you find City of Heroes an unsatisfying group game, doesn't mean the rest of us do. I group in that game all the time, cause it's fun. I could, if I wanted, get the exact same chance at drops without soloing in that game, but like many I enjoy grouping there.
Personally I think Ihmotepp is way off base in this thread. His basketball analogy was picked apart (just like in the last big group/solo thread.)
And COH is very much a grouping game, having the same type of balance I described in my post early in this thread: a skilled player playing the best solo classes in COH will break even in XP/hr with an average group. With a skilled group, that player will just outright make better XP. And less skilled players break even even faster.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
No, the solution is balanced gameplay - the problem is that everyone only wants a game for their style. Who says that should be true. The point was that there are group games and nobody much plays them.
No, the solution is to make different games for different people.
There are group games and they have a huge playerbase, at least get your facts straight.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
you however seemed to be afraid that someone can solo a game you can only group in - why is that?
Community becomes sh*t. I've seen it happen, I'm not talking out of my ass here.
BUT I see the advantages of allowing solo play of some kind- I'm not some extremist, but in the game I envision soloing takes a backseat and works as a 'waiting room' for until you get grouping. So some sacrifices need be made.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
nope, it wasn't - my suggestion was for that individual to whom I was replying make his/her own game, not companys. Companys should make a balanced game - their main concern is profit and making a game for a vocal minority like those who only want group content is not real profitable. there are already 2 games that are for mostly group players - DDO and Guild Wars, DDO just went free to play with item stores - Why not go play those? Leave balanced games alone, they give the most to all styles of gameplay.
Yeah and the company can't have people with similar vision about the game? You only need that many developers that share the same idea with this guy, and you're telling them all to make a grouping game... sure, sounds good to me.
All they need is a niche to fill to make profit and you don't need to appeal to masses to do that.
why not play those? a) PvP can gtfo b) f2p can gtfo.
Why is there Guild Wars 2 coming by the way? If it was profitable, they'll make a sequel. Seems that it was. What was your point again?
He didn't seem to have much a of a point honestly. Guild Wars was always f2p and DDO wasn't a great game (imo) so maybe that's why it went f2p lol. Again, it's this state of mind that if a game doesn't have 11 milion subs it's a failure. There are plenty of "forced grouping" games out there with subs of 500k+ which is better than 99% of MMOs subs numbers...except for WoW which again is the exception, not the rule.
I'll say it again...the solution is two different types of games. One for those who like the traditional group based gameplay. what they would call "forced grouping" and one where you can solo the content and have the option to group.
No, the solution is balanced gameplay - the problem is that everyone only wants a game for their style. Who says that should be true. The point was that there are group games and nobody much plays them.
Read my other posts chief. There are plenty of group based games that have high sub numbers. FFXI and Lineage 2 are just two examples. FFXI has had 500k+ since it's been out and Lineage 2 has had more than 500K as well (a lot more from what ive seen but I don't know exact numbers). These are both heavily group based. So, there's definitely a market for it just like there's a market for a heavily solo based game. Balanced gameplay is another style which doesn't necessairly please everyone like it sounds like it would in theory. Different styles of gameplay is certainly the solution. Why do you think there's different genres of games? Not everyone likes playing the same type of game. Sub-genres (what i'm refering to here) are not uncommon either. !st person vs. 3rd person shooter anyone?
No, the solution is balanced gameplay - the problem is that everyone only wants a game for their style. Who says that should be true. The point was that there are group games and nobody much plays them.
No, the solution is to make different games for different people.
There are group games and they have a huge playerbase, at least get your facts straight.
you first - most of the group only games I know of are not possesing of a Huge plaer base.
Read my other posts chief. There are plenty of group based games that have high sub numbers. FFXI and Lineage 2 are just two examples. FFXI has had 500k+ since it's been out and Lineage 2 has had more than 500K as well (a lot more from what ive seen but I don't know exact numbers). These are both heavily group based. So, there's definitely a market for it just like there's a market for a heavily solo based game. Balanced gameplay is another style which doesn't necessairly please everyone like it sounds like it would in theory. Different styles of gameplay is certainly the solution. Why do you think there's different genres of games? Not everyone likes playing the same type of game. Sub-genres (what i'm refering to here) are not uncommon either. !st person vs. 3rd person shooter anyone?
And remember that FFXI is as hardcore as it gets- if they remade it but as casual instead, I'm sure they'd get subscriptions in multimillions.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
you however seemed to be afraid that someone can solo a game you can only group in - why is that?
Community becomes sh*t. I've seen it happen, I'm not talking out of my ass here.
BUT I see the advantages of allowing solo play of some kind- I'm not some extremist, but in the game I envision soloing takes a backseat and works as a 'waiting room' for until you get grouping. So some sacrifices need be made.
I've seen grouping turn the community to sh*t also - I think balanced is the only answer. Now we seem to have argued this to a stanstill between us? You play LOTRO or CoX?
the thing that you dont seem to be catching on to.. is that they DO make differnt games for differnt people.. as i stated earler 1player/solo games.. if you want to chat or talk to other people talk on vent/teamspeak wile you play it... maybe you could even get a friend with the same game to play with ya and then you would both be playing the same game and could talk about it.. and the game would be designed for you to solo and stay away from the MMO's.. .just a sugestion... that or play mmo's solo and take them as they are like i tend to do most the time.. .and quit wineing about that its not fair that you cant solo in it.. where i can solo the vast majority of it... i even solo'ed my hunter in wow clear up to lv 70 and a deathknight to 72 before i quit playing.. so stop with the it cant be done crap
I've seen grouping turn the community to sh*t also - I think balanced is the only answer. Now we seem to have argued this to a stanstill between us? You play LOTRO or CoX?
I found LOTRO quite fun actually, but I never played it past the trial. What about them?
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
I've seen grouping turn the community to sh*t also - I think balanced is the only answer. Now we seem to have argued this to a stanstill between us? You play LOTRO or CoX?
I found LOTRO quite fun actually, but I never played it past the trial. What about them?
Was offering an olive branch - if you played we could play together and test each others views rather than waste time arguing in a forum. I will be on the Firefoot server of LOTRO at aprx 3:30pm EST today as a burglar named Buxom. If you still have a trial look me up.
never mentioned WoW - have not played it in years and have no idea if it is slanted towards solo or group.
Oh just thought so, because the gap between other balanced MMO's and group based MMO's isn't that big. It's mostly because of their hardcore nature that makes them fall behind the more successful games (FFXI, The group based game, is #5 in terms of subscriptions.. behind Aion, L1 & 2 and I think Runescape?).
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Was offering an olive branch - if you played we could play together and test each others views rather than waste time arguing in a forum. I will be on the Firefoot server of LOTRO at aprx 3:30pm EST today as a burglar named Buxom. If you still have a trial look me up.
If I can make another trial account might as well join you =P
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Was offering an olive branch - if you played we could play together and test each others views rather than waste time arguing in a forum. I will be on the Firefoot server of LOTRO at aprx 3:30pm EST today as a burglar named Buxom. If you still have a trial look me up.
If I can make another trial account might as well join you =P
My biggest gripe with grouping - and what made me go SOLO to begin with - is that my past experience was with people who advertise for group members for a quest and then when we get to the quest they take all of the goodies and when they achieve their goals they just bail out and leave me in the midst of deep S**T.
Exactly. As I've pointed out before, the group dynamic in just about every MMO exists for using others for your own ends. Every member of the group is after their own XP, their own loot, their own uber-gear, they're just using the other group members to have a better chance at getting it faster and easier. There's no commitment to the group itself, only to your own wants and desires, when you stop getting what you want, what's the point of sticking around to help others?
I like to see other solo players in the mmo's .. you can always count on a fellow solo'er to help you out or you can help them out knowing that they are there for the same reason that you are... and can even develp friendships ... my guild in wow when i played was made up mostly of solo players... we would chat in guild.. .or help each other out when needed.. other then that we perty much did our own thing... what i cant stand is crybabies... be they solo/raid/group/class based... the game was ment to be injoyed.. not cried about every time you turn around over noncence
It is simple. I will play a single player game offline if I want all solo. I play online to play with others and a game where you can solo to kill and get everything in the game ruins that for me. Why group when the game is designed to be soloed? All of a sudden that dragon you are killing doesn't seem as dangerous when you walk up with your party and see one person killing it. If they have some solo options in game, I am okay with that. I am not okay with them turning an online game I pay monthly for into a singleplayer game. Why bother playing?
The problem is, you're confusing a massively-multiplayer game with a massively-teaming game. The two are not one and the same. Even if you're playing solo, there are lots of things you want other people around for. You can get buffs and tradeskilling from them. You can buy gear and supplies from them. You can ask for advice for whatever particular quest you're on. You can actually just talk to people. I know that's hard to believe for the more anti-social people who just want to run around killing indiscriminately and raping the corpses, but normal people actually TALK to each other. Imagine that.
All you, and most of the pro-grouping advocates seem to be saying is "that guy over there is making us feel bad because we need a group and he doesn't, therefore we want to ban him from being solo so he doesn't hurt our feelings! Boo Hoo!"
My point is that there are balanced games and group only games and if you are so poor a player that you need to be in a group and are helpless otherwise play one of the group games and stop whining about balanced games, now what was your point - the top of your head? 8).
Ah, I forgot we can't have our favorite playstyle and wish for a company to cater to that specific playstyle- that just means that I 'need to be in a group' and can't function alone. Lol.
You absolutely can, but you have to be realistic and realize that no company is going to throw away 95% of their potential playerbase to please the 5% that can't stand to watch someone play alone. You can either deal with that or you can just sit around and whine, but in either case, it's not likely to change any time soon.
never mentioned WoW - have not played it in years and have no idea if it is slanted towards solo or group.
Oh just thought so, because the gap between other balanced MMO's and group based MMO's isn't that big. It's mostly because of their hardcore nature that makes them fall behind the more successful games (FFXI, The group based game, is #5 in terms of subscriptions.. behind Aion, L1 & 2 and I think Runescape?).
The majority of their subscriptions come from the East, not the West. Westerners are much more fond of soloing / casual content than their Eastern counterparts. Therefore, companies that are primarily interested in the Western market, should be emphasizing that casual content over hardcore. We also know that there is a huge base of players who haven't gotten into MMOs specifically because they feel like jobs and are ridiculously tedious. You sure as hell can't appeal to them if they stick with the current forced grouping, grindy, raid or die crap that has dominated the market since it's inception.
You think the genre is becoming too casual now? They haven't nearly become casual enough to really draw in the millions of new players who would consider playing if they were truly casual games.
With PvE raiding, it has never been a question of being "good enough". I play games to have fun, not to be a simpering toady sitting through hour after hour of mind numbing boredom and fawning over a guild master in the hopes that he will condescend to reward me with shiny bits of loot. But in games where those people get the highest progression, anyone who doesn't do that will just be a moving target for them and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay money for the privilege. - Neanderthal
My biggest gripe with grouping - and what made me go SOLO to begin with - is that my past experience was with people who advertise for group members for a quest and then when we get to the quest they take all of the goodies and when they achieve their goals they just bail out and leave me in the midst of deep S**T.
Exactly. As I've pointed out before, the group dynamic in just about every MMO exists for using others for your own ends. Every member of the group is after their own XP, their own loot, their own uber-gear, they're just using the other group members to have a better chance at getting it faster and easier. There's no commitment to the group itself, only to your own wants and desires, when you stop getting what you want, what's the point of sticking around to help others?
which is why I usually look for a good guild/kin/corp/etc to belong to - I can solo as I want, group to help others, aand when I need help ask in the kin. Usually you get to know those in the kin and group play becomes less selfish. Random grouping is often akin to playing Russiaqn Roulette.
It is simple. I will play a single player game offline if I want all solo. I play online to play with others and a game where you can solo to kill and get everything in the game ruins that for me. Why group when the game is designed to be soloed? All of a sudden that dragon you are killing doesn't seem as dangerous when you walk up with your party and see one person killing it. If they have some solo options in game, I am okay with that. I am not okay with them turning an online game I pay monthly for into a singleplayer game. Why bother playing?
The problem is, you're confusing a massively-multiplayer game with a massively-teaming game. The two are not one and the same. Even if you're playing solo, there are lots of things you want other people around for. You can get buffs and tradeskilling from them. You can buy gear and supplies from them. You can ask for advice for whatever particular quest you're on. You can actually just talk to people. I know that's hard to believe for the more anti-social people who just want to run around killing indiscriminately and raping the corpses, but normal people actually TALK to each other. Imagine that.
All you, and most of the pro-grouping advocates seem to be saying is "that guy over there is making us feel bad because we need a group and he doesn't, therefore we want to ban him from being solo so he doesn't hurt our feelings! Boo Hoo!"
Seriously, are people that shallow and pathetic?
That sounds goood. I would love to play some massively-teaming games. I look forward to seeing some of those released instead of all the solo games we have now.
Exactly. As I've pointed out before, the group dynamic in just about every MMO exists for using others for your own ends. Every member of the group is after their own XP, their own loot, their own uber-gear, they're just using the other group members to have a better chance at getting it faster and easier. There's no commitment to the group itself, only to your own wants and desires, when you stop getting what you want, what's the point of sticking around to help others?
which is why I usually look for a good guild/kin/corp/etc to belong to - I can solo as I want, group to help others, aand when I need help ask in the kin. Usually you get to know those in the kin and group play becomes less selfish. Random grouping is often akin to playing Russiaqn Roulette.
Generally speaking, yes, but not always. I've been in some really awful in-clan teams where people are just running wild, not working as a team, they just want as much XP as fast as they can get it, and unless you're their tank or healer, they don't care if you live or die. That actually seems to be the norm rather than the exception, judging on other people I've talked to.
Me, I'm the slow, methodical type, I kill 100% and I loot 100% before I move on. But I seem to be in the minority so it's easier to solo than deal with the spastic chihuahua type.
Comments
Personally I think Ihmotepp is way off base in this thread. His basketball analogy was picked apart (just like in the last big group/solo thread.)
And COH is very much a grouping game, having the same type of balance I described in my post early in this thread: a skilled player playing the best solo classes in COH will break even in XP/hr with an average group. With a skilled group, that player will just outright make better XP. And less skilled players break even even faster.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
No, the solution is to make different games for different people.
There are group games and they have a huge playerbase, at least get your facts straight.
Community becomes sh*t. I've seen it happen, I'm not talking out of my ass here.
BUT I see the advantages of allowing solo play of some kind- I'm not some extremist, but in the game I envision soloing takes a backseat and works as a 'waiting room' for until you get grouping. So some sacrifices need be made.
Yeah and the company can't have people with similar vision about the game? You only need that many developers that share the same idea with this guy, and you're telling them all to make a grouping game... sure, sounds good to me.
All they need is a niche to fill to make profit and you don't need to appeal to masses to do that.
why not play those? a) PvP can gtfo b) f2p can gtfo.
Why is there Guild Wars 2 coming by the way? If it was profitable, they'll make a sequel. Seems that it was. What was your point again?
He didn't seem to have much a of a point honestly. Guild Wars was always f2p and DDO wasn't a great game (imo) so maybe that's why it went f2p lol. Again, it's this state of mind that if a game doesn't have 11 milion subs it's a failure. There are plenty of "forced grouping" games out there with subs of 500k+ which is better than 99% of MMOs subs numbers...except for WoW which again is the exception, not the rule.
I'll say it again...the solution is two different types of games. One for those who like the traditional group based gameplay. what they would call "forced grouping" and one where you can solo the content and have the option to group.
No, the solution is balanced gameplay - the problem is that everyone only wants a game for their style. Who says that should be true. The point was that there are group games and nobody much plays them.
Read my other posts chief. There are plenty of group based games that have high sub numbers. FFXI and Lineage 2 are just two examples. FFXI has had 500k+ since it's been out and Lineage 2 has had more than 500K as well (a lot more from what ive seen but I don't know exact numbers). These are both heavily group based. So, there's definitely a market for it just like there's a market for a heavily solo based game. Balanced gameplay is another style which doesn't necessairly please everyone like it sounds like it would in theory. Different styles of gameplay is certainly the solution. Why do you think there's different genres of games? Not everyone likes playing the same type of game. Sub-genres (what i'm refering to here) are not uncommon either. !st person vs. 3rd person shooter anyone?
No, the solution is to make different games for different people.
There are group games and they have a huge playerbase, at least get your facts straight.
you first - most of the group only games I know of are not possesing of a Huge plaer base.
And remember that FFXI is as hardcore as it gets- if they remade it but as casual instead, I'm sure they'd get subscriptions in multimillions.
Just remember that WoW is an exception, not an average.
Community becomes sh*t. I've seen it happen, I'm not talking out of my ass here.
BUT I see the advantages of allowing solo play of some kind- I'm not some extremist, but in the game I envision soloing takes a backseat and works as a 'waiting room' for until you get grouping. So some sacrifices need be made.
I've seen grouping turn the community to sh*t also - I think balanced is the only answer. Now we seem to have argued this to a stanstill between us? You play LOTRO or CoX?
the thing that you dont seem to be catching on to.. is that they DO make differnt games for differnt people.. as i stated earler 1player/solo games.. if you want to chat or talk to other people talk on vent/teamspeak wile you play it... maybe you could even get a friend with the same game to play with ya and then you would both be playing the same game and could talk about it.. and the game would be designed for you to solo and stay away from the MMO's.. .just a sugestion... that or play mmo's solo and take them as they are like i tend to do most the time.. .and quit wineing about that its not fair that you cant solo in it.. where i can solo the vast majority of it... i even solo'ed my hunter in wow clear up to lv 70 and a deathknight to 72 before i quit playing.. so stop with the it cant be done crap
I found LOTRO quite fun actually, but I never played it past the trial. What about them?
Just remember that WoW is an exception, not an average.
never mentioned WoW - have not played it in years and have no idea if it is slanted towards solo or group.
I found LOTRO quite fun actually, but I never played it past the trial. What about them?
Was offering an olive branch - if you played we could play together and test each others views rather than waste time arguing in a forum. I will be on the Firefoot server of LOTRO at aprx 3:30pm EST today as a burglar named Buxom. If you still have a trial look me up.
Oh just thought so, because the gap between other balanced MMO's and group based MMO's isn't that big. It's mostly because of their hardcore nature that makes them fall behind the more successful games (FFXI, The group based game, is #5 in terms of subscriptions.. behind Aion, L1 & 2 and I think Runescape?).
If I can make another trial account might as well join you =P
If I can make another trial account might as well join you =P
ok, hope you can.
Now, I am off to solo in CoV for awhile - it can be done, though once you hit lvl 30-35 it gets extremely challenging.
It's absolutely impossible because one crowd will only be happy if the other crowd vanishes off of their games entirely.
It's utterly idiotic.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Exactly. As I've pointed out before, the group dynamic in just about every MMO exists for using others for your own ends. Every member of the group is after their own XP, their own loot, their own uber-gear, they're just using the other group members to have a better chance at getting it faster and easier. There's no commitment to the group itself, only to your own wants and desires, when you stop getting what you want, what's the point of sticking around to help others?
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
I like to see other solo players in the mmo's .. you can always count on a fellow solo'er to help you out or you can help them out knowing that they are there for the same reason that you are... and can even develp friendships ... my guild in wow when i played was made up mostly of solo players... we would chat in guild.. .or help each other out when needed.. other then that we perty much did our own thing... what i cant stand is crybabies... be they solo/raid/group/class based... the game was ment to be injoyed.. not cried about every time you turn around over noncence
The problem is, you're confusing a massively-multiplayer game with a massively-teaming game. The two are not one and the same. Even if you're playing solo, there are lots of things you want other people around for. You can get buffs and tradeskilling from them. You can buy gear and supplies from them. You can ask for advice for whatever particular quest you're on. You can actually just talk to people. I know that's hard to believe for the more anti-social people who just want to run around killing indiscriminately and raping the corpses, but normal people actually TALK to each other. Imagine that.
All you, and most of the pro-grouping advocates seem to be saying is "that guy over there is making us feel bad because we need a group and he doesn't, therefore we want to ban him from being solo so he doesn't hurt our feelings! Boo Hoo!"
Seriously, are people that shallow and pathetic?
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Ah, I forgot we can't have our favorite playstyle and wish for a company to cater to that specific playstyle- that just means that I 'need to be in a group' and can't function alone. Lol.
You absolutely can, but you have to be realistic and realize that no company is going to throw away 95% of their potential playerbase to please the 5% that can't stand to watch someone play alone. You can either deal with that or you can just sit around and whine, but in either case, it's not likely to change any time soon.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Oh just thought so, because the gap between other balanced MMO's and group based MMO's isn't that big. It's mostly because of their hardcore nature that makes them fall behind the more successful games (FFXI, The group based game, is #5 in terms of subscriptions.. behind Aion, L1 & 2 and I think Runescape?).
The majority of their subscriptions come from the East, not the West. Westerners are much more fond of soloing / casual content than their Eastern counterparts. Therefore, companies that are primarily interested in the Western market, should be emphasizing that casual content over hardcore. We also know that there is a huge base of players who haven't gotten into MMOs specifically because they feel like jobs and are ridiculously tedious. You sure as hell can't appeal to them if they stick with the current forced grouping, grindy, raid or die crap that has dominated the market since it's inception.
You think the genre is becoming too casual now? They haven't nearly become casual enough to really draw in the millions of new players who would consider playing if they were truly casual games.
With PvE raiding, it has never been a question of being "good enough". I play games to have fun, not to be a simpering toady sitting through hour after hour of mind numbing boredom and fawning over a guild master in the hopes that he will condescend to reward me with shiny bits of loot. But in games where those people get the highest progression, anyone who doesn't do that will just be a moving target for them and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay money for the privilege. - Neanderthal
Exactly. As I've pointed out before, the group dynamic in just about every MMO exists for using others for your own ends. Every member of the group is after their own XP, their own loot, their own uber-gear, they're just using the other group members to have a better chance at getting it faster and easier. There's no commitment to the group itself, only to your own wants and desires, when you stop getting what you want, what's the point of sticking around to help others?
which is why I usually look for a good guild/kin/corp/etc to belong to - I can solo as I want, group to help others, aand when I need help ask in the kin. Usually you get to know those in the kin and group play becomes less selfish. Random grouping is often akin to playing Russiaqn Roulette.
The problem is, you're confusing a massively-multiplayer game with a massively-teaming game. The two are not one and the same. Even if you're playing solo, there are lots of things you want other people around for. You can get buffs and tradeskilling from them. You can buy gear and supplies from them. You can ask for advice for whatever particular quest you're on. You can actually just talk to people. I know that's hard to believe for the more anti-social people who just want to run around killing indiscriminately and raping the corpses, but normal people actually TALK to each other. Imagine that.
All you, and most of the pro-grouping advocates seem to be saying is "that guy over there is making us feel bad because we need a group and he doesn't, therefore we want to ban him from being solo so he doesn't hurt our feelings! Boo Hoo!"
Seriously, are people that shallow and pathetic?
That sounds goood. I would love to play some massively-teaming games. I look forward to seeing some of those released instead of all the solo games we have now.
which is why I usually look for a good guild/kin/corp/etc to belong to - I can solo as I want, group to help others, aand when I need help ask in the kin. Usually you get to know those in the kin and group play becomes less selfish. Random grouping is often akin to playing Russiaqn Roulette.
Generally speaking, yes, but not always. I've been in some really awful in-clan teams where people are just running wild, not working as a team, they just want as much XP as fast as they can get it, and unless you're their tank or healer, they don't care if you live or die. That actually seems to be the norm rather than the exception, judging on other people I've talked to.
Me, I'm the slow, methodical type, I kill 100% and I loot 100% before I move on. But I seem to be in the minority so it's easier to solo than deal with the spastic chihuahua type.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None