Interesting content yes, challenging content? No. Annoying and time consuming? Sure, you can make an RPG annoying and time consuming. But challenging? How? I"ve played some puzzle games, action games, and FPS games that were very challenging, to the point where I couldn't beat them in fact. Can you ever lose an RPG? If a win is pre-determined, how is that challenging exactly? Was there ever a point when I didn't think I'd make it through KOTOR? No, not really.
Just because nobody has done it doesn't mean that it can't be done. You're starting to sound an awful lot like the people back in the day saying that it was impossible to break the sound barrier. Could it be that single player RPGs lack challenge because the developers feel that telling a story and having you progress through it is more important than making it near impossible to get past the first guard you meet in the game?
Anyway, I seem to remember Bard's Tale and Dungeon Master as being quite the challenge. Maps had to be made all by hand and you had no quest logs to help you remember. Very similar to EQ in the beginning. Just figuring out what you were supposed to do and find your way there was quite an accomplishment. There was also no google available to look up the answers. The best you could hope for was a cheat code or a walkthrough in a magazine. I got raped by the monsters in Dungeon Master more times than I can remember. I even resorted to throwing the bones and gear of my dead partymembers at the monsters while trying to kite them. I remember analyzing my save games in Bard's Tale with a hex editor and writing a program to edit them just so that I could complete it. Very good times indeed.
The original post states specifically we are discussing existing MMORPGs, not imiginary games that are not yet released.
Read your own post. You were making a response regarding single player RPGs. Trying to hide behind your initial post stating that we are discussing existing MMOs only isn't going to help you out of this one. If you set rules and expect others to follow them, you also have to follow the rules yourself. If you only want to discuss existing MMOs, then don't even bother bringing up anything else, nor respond to posts bringing it up. If you set rules and expect others to follow them, you also have to set an example and follow the rules yourself, otherwise it becomes impossible to take you serious... although... I think we already reached that point a while ago, didn't we?
I'm a big ol' fluffy carewolf. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Excluding difficulties in actually forming a group from consideration, I'd say that soloing is a much harder way to go. In a team, you can rely on others if you get into trouble. If you solo, you're entirely responsible for your own wellbeing. You also have to be a much more rounded character, you cannot be narrowly specialized in any area because it will limit your skills in others. You need to be good at what you do, whereas in a team, other members can make up for weaknesses in each member and still succeed.
Excluding difficulties in actually forming a group from consideration, I'd say that soloing is a much harder way to go. In a team, you can rely on others if you get into trouble. If you solo, you're entirely responsible for your own wellbeing. You also have to be a much more rounded character, you cannot be narrowly specialized in any area because it will limit your skills in others. You need to be good at what you do, whereas in a team, other members can make up for weaknesses in each member and still succeed.
I don't think it's possible to say which is easier from a general sense. If you're soloing content designed for your level or below, then it's not difficult at all (mind-numbingly easy, actually). If you're soloing content designed for players above your level and/or soloing content meant for groups, then it is certainly difficult. Similar situation with grouping: attempting encounters above your level range is difficult, while lower level encounters are very easy.
However, in specific games, I think it is certainly a fair question. Using EQ2 as my point of reference (haven't spent the most time in it), I would give the difficulty edge to grouping. It has been my experience (although I've not played much in nearly two years) that when facing content designed for a soloer at the appropriate level, there is typically very little challenge. When facing appropriate-level content designed for a group while grouping, there is often more challenge. Particularly in high-level scenarios, grouping is more difficult. I remember running through Unrest once or twice a week before the level cap increased and being distinctly aware of the fact that if any member of the group failed to do their part, we could easily die. When soloing, however (which I did a fair amount of), it seemed more difficult to fail. This could be due to no longer relying on others for my survival or due to the content just being easier, I can't say for sure.
I would agree with an above poster that organizing and maintaining a group doesn't exactly constitute difficulty. It's a necessary process that is almost always frustrating, but not difficult.
Anyway to sum up my viewpoint: In general, it is impossible to say whether grouping or soloing is easier. In specific games, there is more than likely one correct (but debatable) answer.
I think pretty much everything should be soloable at max skill, level, except a small percentage of mobs. Those can be solo'd using stradegy though. But you do it in groups to keep from getting PK'd and your stuff looted. No arguements about solo or grouping or who's got best gear. Appearently being killed by other players as opposed to mobs is the most horrendous thing ever for alot of people. I can understand i guess. When all there is to do in a game is quest, grind, level and loot..it's hard to make content for all that. Everyone begging the devs for theirs.
In swg alot of the soloers were happy just to do resource harvesting, or skinning animals, or crafting. Groupers sold their loot to them to make their craftables better. Everything was important. You could be the richest person on the server with all the best gear, and never grouped once. But swg was a fail they say. Begging for devs attention is better hehe.
I dont care much for the current model. So i say piss em all off so it goes away:)
See you in the dream.. The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
Soloing multiplayer dungeons is vastly more challenging than grouping. Soloing individual mobs is obviously not as challenging. You do realize that providing grouping and solo OPTIONS in really the key here. There is no right answer in the solo vs grouping debate. Beyond the fact that solo vs group is really a shade of gray rather than black and white, you simply have many different playstyles to deal with. Pigeonholing people into playstyles is retarded, and that's all these stupid debates ever try to do. Pigeonhole someone into your preferred playstyle. It will never work.
...providing grouping and solo OPTIONS in really the key here. There is no right answer in the solo vs grouping debate.
I agree with the quote above.
For me, there is no real difference in difficulty between grouping and soloing: as has been pointed out already, when soloing, I am wholly responsible for whatever goes wrong or right. When grouping, I may be in a group with the most obnoxious player ever to glance at a keyboard, a player who doesn't know the first bloody thing about their class and who causes a wipe from hell, but who thinks that they are the be-all and end-all of the MMO world. Either situation is equally difficult to me, but for different reasons. If I go into a group dungeon solo and I get my butt handed to me by the level 99999 Elite, well, that's on me and maybe I should have leveled up a bit more and used better tactics and strategy...but at least I learn from what I did wrong. When in the same instance/dungeon with a group full of folks, half of whom are AFK and 1/4 of whom are inept and have no idea how to play their class, not only does the group wipe, but very little is learned...except not to group with those people again.
Neither method of play is better or easier than the other in my opinion. There are difficulties inherent to each type of play. For me, the issue is that many games force me to do one or the other in order to advance or complete a quest or get a piece of armor/weapon that could potentially be useful to me, and that is where I have the problem. In my opinion, anything that can be gained by grouping should be obtainable by solo play (albeit with a great deal more time and effort expended) and vice-versa.
In my opinion, we're talking about video games here...it seems to me that players should be focused more on what is fun to them rather than focusing on who "works" harder on something that is designed to entertain.
"You are obviously confusing a mature rating with actual maturity." -Asherman
Maybe MMO is not your genre, go play Modern Warfare...or something you can be all twitchy...and rank up all night. This is seriously getting tired. -Ranyr
Grouping is easier, except for the tedium of forming up. For the tedium of grinding levels and skilling up solo is much more boring thus more difficult. And for the content obviously soloing is more difficult than grouping. For early content grouping it is trivially easy and soloing more difficult. For late game content soloing is mostly impossible.
If a mmorpg missed either solo play or group i dont think its worth the effort. Besides they people making that game that would be without one of them misses out on 50% of the people that would play it if they had it.
In my opinion, anything that can be gained by grouping should be obtainable by solo play (albeit with a great deal more time and effort expended) and vice-versa.
In theory I think everyone, solo players and groupers, will agree with this.
The problem is when you start to put in concrete rules to determine exactly how much more time and effort something takes to get solo as opposed to grouping.
The best solution would probably be something where the groupers think it's just slightly to easy for the solo player, but are willing to live with it, and the solo player thinks it's slightly to easy for the groupers, but is willing to live with it.
Some middle ground where neither is completely satisfied, but neitehr is completely upset either.
I still like the SWG set up where some materials can only be gained by grouping, but anyone can use those materials or buy any sort of gear so no one is stopped from getting any item in the game.
He is confusing the ease of playing as an individual with the difficulty of combat.
Logically it is easier to take down the same mob with multiple people than solo.
A soloer has to depend on their skillset only and there is no one to heal them or tank for them, or rez them if things go badly.
A soloer eats the experience loss penalty for dying every time.
Groups once formed, can take down mobs quicker and more efficiently with less downtime and risk of dying.
The trade off between grouping and solo is ease and it exists for a reason.
A soloer is their own boss and does what they want when they want and is self sufficient which is very attractive to some of us while grouping can be a pain in the arse, but the opportunity cost is that groups can defeat more difficult mobs and therefore get better rewards in every MMOG that exists.
Most soloers understand the trade off, we just don't want game mechanics created to deny the soloing option.
Artificial no-drop no-trade tags are one way developers pooh pooh soloers by trying to coerce them to group and raid.
If I am a soloer/crafter who has earned wealth legitimately in-game, then I should be allowed to trade for raid and high level group drops in an open marketplace.
Don't create dungeons or instances that refuse soloers to enter.
Don't link mobs together to make it impossible to pull them solo.
OP is a little confused. He is confusing the ease of playing as an individual with the difficulty of combat. Logically it is easier to take down the same mob with multiple people than solo. A soloer has to depend on their skillset only and there is no one to heal them or tank for them, or rez them if things go badly. A soloer eats the experience loss penalty for dying every time. Groups once formed, can take down mobs quicker and more efficiently with less downtime and risk of dying. The trade off between grouping and solo is ease and it exists for a reason. A soloer is their own boss and does what they want when they want and is self sufficient which is very attractive to some of us while grouping can be a pain in the arse, but the opportunity cost is that groups can defeat more difficult mobs and therefore get better rewards in every MMOG that exists. Most soloers understand the trade off, we just don't want game mechanics created to deny the soloing option. Artificial no-drop no-trade tags are one way developers pooh pooh soloers by trying to coerce them to group and raid. If I am a soloer/crafter who has earned wealth legitimately in-game, then I should be allowed to trade for raid and high level group drops in an open marketplace. Don't create dungeons or instances that refuse soloers to enter. Don't link mobs together to make it impossible to pull them solo.
I think you have to admit, that if the Devs dont' link mobs and let you pull everything solo, you have completely destroyed the grouping game.
It may not have been clear in the Original Post, but the comparision was never meant to be solo or group fighting the exact same MOb.
It was solo fighting the toughest mob they could handle without dieing, vs. Group fighting the toughest mob they could without dieing.
A group has no one to rez them in a party wipe. You've never grouped and had the party get wiped?
Groups once formed....
YOu act as if there is a magic "group" button, and all members of the party are magically transported to the exact location they need to be with no travel time, and requires no time to contact each other. This doesn't actually happen in any game.
Originally posted by Ihmotepp I think you have to admit, that if the Devs dont' link mobs and let you pull everything solo, you have completely destroyed the grouping game. It may not have been clear in the Original Post, but the comparision was never meant to be solo or group fighting the exact same MOb. It was solo fighting the toughest mob they could handle without dieing, vs. Group fighting the toughest mob they could without dieing. A group has no one to rez them in a party wipe. You've never grouped and had the party get wiped? Groups once formed.... YOu act as if there is a magic "group" button, and all members of the party are magically transported to the exact location they need to be with no travel time, and requires no time to contact each other. This doesn't actually happen in any game.
Could you stop with the hyperbole, please. Pulling solo mobs is just as big a part of the 'grouping game' as the 'solo game' so it can hardly be used to 'destroy the grouping game'.
I really do not see why you are so focusing on what are essentailly solo aspects of group play as making grouping so much harder. A soloer must spend time traveling to the zone where he/she wants to do content just as a grouper does. If a soloer wipes he/she takes a penalty and might have to do a corpse run. They are all essentially solo tasks that also apply to a group. Heck with something like summoning stones in WoW a group traveling to its destination actually has an easier time of it then a soloer.
Originally posted by Ihmotepp I think you have to admit, that if the Devs dont' link mobs and let you pull everything solo, you have completely destroyed the grouping game. It may not have been clear in the Original Post, but the comparision was never meant to be solo or group fighting the exact same MOb. It was solo fighting the toughest mob they could handle without dieing, vs. Group fighting the toughest mob they could without dieing. A group has no one to rez them in a party wipe. You've never grouped and had the party get wiped? Groups once formed.... YOu act as if there is a magic "group" button, and all members of the party are magically transported to the exact location they need to be with no travel time, and requires no time to contact each other. This doesn't actually happen in any game.
Could you stop with the hyperbole, please. Pulling solo mobs is just as big a part of the 'grouping game' as the 'solo game' so it can hardly be used to 'destroy the grouping game'.
I really do not see why you are so focusing on what are essentailly solo aspects of group play as making grouping so much harder. A soloer must spend time traveling to the zone where he/she wants to do content just as a grouper does. If a soloer wipes he/she takes a penalty and might have to do a corpse run. They are all essentially solo tasks that also apply to a group. Heck with something like summoning stones in WoW a group traveling to its destination actually has an easier time of it then a soloer.
The grouping game, IMO, is destroyed when you change the rules to make grouping irrelevant, simply an option but not in any way necessary.
You get a little "group" window, but there's really no reason you need to group.
That's not a good grouping game, just becase you have a little window open up that says "group".
You need an obstacle for the group to overcome.
Linking mobs together really has nothing to do with it.
What's the difference between 3 mobs level 3 linked together, and one level 9 mob? Same thing really. Either way, if you are level 2, you're not going to solo them. Not the 3 linked together, not the level 9 mob.
If you get high enough level, you can solo both the three level 3 mobs linked together, AND the level 9 mob.
In other words, the problem is the content is higher level than you are capable of, not that they are linked.
If you come back at max level, you'll be able to beat those linked mobs, right?
The grouping game, IMO, is destroyed when you change the rules to make grouping irrelevant, simply an option but not in any way necessary. It depends on what you mean by "relevant". Grouping allows an individual access to rewards that they would otherwise be hard-pressed to get at their current level. That's all it is. If you want more out of it, I guess you're out of luck. In other words, the problem is the content is higher level than you are capable of, not that they are linked. If you come back at max level, you'll be able to beat those linked mobs, right? Eventually, of course you will. Why is that a problem for you? If you come back at max level, you ought to be able to solo all the PvE content in the game.
The grouping game, IMO, is destroyed when you change the rules to make grouping irrelevant, simply an option but not in any way necessary. It depends on what you mean by "relevant". Grouping allows an individual access to rewards that they would otherwise be hard-pressed to get at their current level. That's all it is. If you want more out of it, I guess you're out of luck. In other words, the problem is the content is higher level than you are capable of, not that they are linked. If you come back at max level, you'll be able to beat those linked mobs, right? Eventually, of course you will. Why is that a problem for you? If you come back at max level, you ought to be able to solo all the PvE content in the game.
It's not a problem for me. I was responding to the OP that said no Mobs should ever be linked so solo players can always pull them one at a time.
The grouping game, IMO, is destroyed when you change the rules to make grouping irrelevant, simply an option but not in any way necessary. It depends on what you mean by "relevant". Grouping allows an individual access to rewards that they would otherwise be hard-pressed to get at their current level. That's all it is. If you want more out of it, I guess you're out of luck. In other words, the problem is the content is higher level than you are capable of, not that they are linked. If you come back at max level, you'll be able to beat those linked mobs, right? Eventually, of course you will. Why is that a problem for you? If you come back at max level, you ought to be able to solo all the PvE content in the game.
It's not a problem for me. I was responding to the OP that said no Mobs should ever be linked so solo players can always pull them one at a time.
Personally, I don't give a damn if they're linked or not, I tend to play classes where a ton of mobs together are still not an issue for soloing. I can take on a boss 50 levels above me, along with all of it's defensive mobs with no problem whatsoever and I don't need a team to do it. Other classes very well might.
1. Whether one or the other is "harder" isn't terribly important. What matters is which one is more fun (and even that isn't too useful, since different players will like one or the other, so it's not like you could take the data and say "okay we should only make a grouping game.")
2. Grouping obviously requires some overhead in terms of forming/joining the group and getting people to work as a team. And playing in a team means you no longer represent 100% of the equation.
If you're a bad player, it will make things easier if you no longer represent 100% of the equation (because you'll likely group with better players.)
If you're skilled, grouping makes things harder.
3. But that's not the end of it. Because each individual game balances the difficulty of its solo vs. group content in a different way.
If soloing mobs is extremely difficult, it won't matter that grouping made things slightly harder for the good player -- it'll still be way easier to group.
So it's a little silly to poll players about this, as it varies by game and by player skill level, and in the end doesn't really matter.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Many tasks are made easier by applying more people to it. There is always managerial and coordination overhead.
But first that is not hard, it is annoying. Not the same thing. Second off that is often not enough of a downside to make up for the fact that being in a group makes things easier to do.
For example in DDO if you solo a dungeon and die you have to respawn and would get an xp penalty. In a group you have the added cushion of other players to rely in the case of something going bad.
Similarly I was playing Aion Beta this weekend as an Asmodean. At level 18-ish you basically only have group quests so I did the last camnpaign quest where you kill the main bad guy. We went at it with 5 people and had 3 chanters (hybrid healers) I was on heal duty and had to chain heal the MT, I couldn't keep the other guys up and a couple spike AOEs killed everyone with the boss about 8% left. I chained healed the tank and we pulled through. 60% losses yet we still all recovered. In a solo situation you have no backup. You mess up you are screwed.
There are pros and cons to both sides. Solo has no social or managerial overhead. But group means you get the advantage of others people knowlesge. You simply cannot, in any serious way, claim that a solo guy who knows nothing about some instance is not better off in a group of 5 where the other 4 have been there often versus when he is solo. This clearly disadvantagous for the player in the solo situation than the group.
For PURE difficutly solo IS harder in some sense because all problem solving must come from yourself. Group play is often more hectic with more stuff going on, but does not have to be that way. Grouping is more unpredictable because you have to react to actions by real people.
If you have a great leader with a great crew the fact is group play as a follower will most likely be more easy than going it solo. Everyone knows this is true. Does that mean that being a great leader is easier than being in a solo situation? No but that is not the same question is it?
Anyway the OP is pretty typical take one thing in isolation type stuff.
Many tasks are made easier by applying more people to it. There is always managerial and coordination overhead. But first that is not hard, it is annoying. Not the same thing. Second off that is often not enough of a downside to make up for the fact that being in a group makes things easier to do.
For example in DDO if you solo a dungeon and die you have to respawn and would get an xp penalty. In a group you have the added cushion of other players to rely in the case of something going bad. Similarly I was playing Aion Beta this weekend as an Asmodean. At level 18-ish you basically only have group quests so I did the last camnpaign quest where you kill the main bad guy. We went at it with 5 people and had 3 chanters (hybrid healers) I was on heal duty and had to chain heal the MT, I couldn't keep the other guys up and a couple spike AOEs killed everyone with the boss about 8% left. I chained healed the tank and we pulled through. 60% losses yet we still all recovered. In a solo situation you have no backup. You mess up you are screwed.
There are pros and cons to both sides. Solo has no social or managerial overhead. But group means you get the advantage of others people knowlesge. You simply cannot, in any serious way, claim that a solo guy who knows nothing about some instance is not better off in a group of 5 where the other 4 have been there often versus when he is solo. This clearly disadvantagous for the player in the solo situation than the group.
For PURE difficutly solo IS harder in some sense because all problem solving must come from yourself. Group play is often more hectic with more stuff going on, but does not have to be that way. Grouping is more unpredictable because you have to react to actions by real people.
If you have a great leader with a great crew the fact is group play as a follower will most likely be more easy than going it solo. Everyone knows this is true. Does that mean that being a great leader is easier than being in a solo situation? No but that is not the same question is it?
Anyway the OP is pretty typical take one thing in isolation type stuff.
Except that the mob you took on had it been a solo quest might have been one maybe two levels above you at best. At which point you could level one more time and finish the quest if you couldn't kill it outright already. The mob you did take on was significantly harder with 5 people and you still died,, had you not done your job well or you had the proper classes there would have been no recovery right?
I don't consider grouping that difficult, unless your referring to raiding specific boss fights that require timing, cooperation and skill. Your example for claiming grouping is difficult ala finding players, meeting up, waiting on bio breaks etc does not make a strong argument for difficulty. To me, these are annoyances. I consider these a waste of my time.
I don't find soloing or grouping particularly hard. One is simply more irritating than the other.
Comments
Just because nobody has done it doesn't mean that it can't be done. You're starting to sound an awful lot like the people back in the day saying that it was impossible to break the sound barrier. Could it be that single player RPGs lack challenge because the developers feel that telling a story and having you progress through it is more important than making it near impossible to get past the first guard you meet in the game?
Anyway, I seem to remember Bard's Tale and Dungeon Master as being quite the challenge. Maps had to be made all by hand and you had no quest logs to help you remember. Very similar to EQ in the beginning. Just figuring out what you were supposed to do and find your way there was quite an accomplishment. There was also no google available to look up the answers. The best you could hope for was a cheat code or a walkthrough in a magazine. I got raped by the monsters in Dungeon Master more times than I can remember. I even resorted to throwing the bones and gear of my dead partymembers at the monsters while trying to kite them. I remember analyzing my save games in Bard's Tale with a hex editor and writing a program to edit them just so that I could complete it. Very good times indeed.
The original post states specifically we are discussing existing MMORPGs, not imiginary games that are not yet released.
Read your own post. You were making a response regarding single player RPGs. Trying to hide behind your initial post stating that we are discussing existing MMOs only isn't going to help you out of this one. If you set rules and expect others to follow them, you also have to follow the rules yourself. If you only want to discuss existing MMOs, then don't even bother bringing up anything else, nor respond to posts bringing it up. If you set rules and expect others to follow them, you also have to set an example and follow the rules yourself, otherwise it becomes impossible to take you serious... although... I think we already reached that point a while ago, didn't we?
I'm a big ol' fluffy carewolf. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
None is easy, none is hard, all depends on your playstyle/motivation/gamespirit.
Excluding difficulties in actually forming a group from consideration, I'd say that soloing is a much harder way to go. In a team, you can rely on others if you get into trouble. If you solo, you're entirely responsible for your own wellbeing. You also have to be a much more rounded character, you cannot be narrowly specialized in any area because it will limit your skills in others. You need to be good at what you do, whereas in a team, other members can make up for weaknesses in each member and still succeed.
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 don't think it's possible to say which is easier from a general sense. If you're soloing content designed for your level or below, then it's not difficult at all (mind-numbingly easy, actually). If you're soloing content designed for players above your level and/or soloing content meant for groups, then it is certainly difficult. Similar situation with grouping: attempting encounters above your level range is difficult, while lower level encounters are very easy.
However, in specific games, I think it is certainly a fair question. Using EQ2 as my point of reference (haven't spent the most time in it), I would give the difficulty edge to grouping. It has been my experience (although I've not played much in nearly two years) that when facing content designed for a soloer at the appropriate level, there is typically very little challenge. When facing appropriate-level content designed for a group while grouping, there is often more challenge. Particularly in high-level scenarios, grouping is more difficult. I remember running through Unrest once or twice a week before the level cap increased and being distinctly aware of the fact that if any member of the group failed to do their part, we could easily die. When soloing, however (which I did a fair amount of), it seemed more difficult to fail. This could be due to no longer relying on others for my survival or due to the content just being easier, I can't say for sure.
I would agree with an above poster that organizing and maintaining a group doesn't exactly constitute difficulty. It's a necessary process that is almost always frustrating, but not difficult.
Anyway to sum up my viewpoint: In general, it is impossible to say whether grouping or soloing is easier. In specific games, there is more than likely one correct (but debatable) answer.
I think pretty much everything should be soloable at max skill, level, except a small percentage of mobs. Those can be solo'd using stradegy though. But you do it in groups to keep from getting PK'd and your stuff looted. No arguements about solo or grouping or who's got best gear. Appearently being killed by other players as opposed to mobs is the most horrendous thing ever for alot of people. I can understand i guess. When all there is to do in a game is quest, grind, level and loot..it's hard to make content for all that. Everyone begging the devs for theirs.
In swg alot of the soloers were happy just to do resource harvesting, or skinning animals, or crafting. Groupers sold their loot to them to make their craftables better. Everything was important. You could be the richest person on the server with all the best gear, and never grouped once. But swg was a fail they say. Begging for devs attention is better hehe.
I dont care much for the current model. So i say piss em all off so it goes away:)
See you in the dream..
The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
Soloing multiplayer dungeons is vastly more challenging than grouping. Soloing individual mobs is obviously not as challenging. You do realize that providing grouping and solo OPTIONS in really the key here. There is no right answer in the solo vs grouping debate. Beyond the fact that solo vs group is really a shade of gray rather than black and white, you simply have many different playstyles to deal with. Pigeonholing people into playstyles is retarded, and that's all these stupid debates ever try to do. Pigeonhole someone into your preferred playstyle. It will never work.
I agree with the quote above.
For me, there is no real difference in difficulty between grouping and soloing: as has been pointed out already, when soloing, I am wholly responsible for whatever goes wrong or right. When grouping, I may be in a group with the most obnoxious player ever to glance at a keyboard, a player who doesn't know the first bloody thing about their class and who causes a wipe from hell, but who thinks that they are the be-all and end-all of the MMO world. Either situation is equally difficult to me, but for different reasons. If I go into a group dungeon solo and I get my butt handed to me by the level 99999 Elite, well, that's on me and maybe I should have leveled up a bit more and used better tactics and strategy...but at least I learn from what I did wrong. When in the same instance/dungeon with a group full of folks, half of whom are AFK and 1/4 of whom are inept and have no idea how to play their class, not only does the group wipe, but very little is learned...except not to group with those people again.
Neither method of play is better or easier than the other in my opinion. There are difficulties inherent to each type of play. For me, the issue is that many games force me to do one or the other in order to advance or complete a quest or get a piece of armor/weapon that could potentially be useful to me, and that is where I have the problem. In my opinion, anything that can be gained by grouping should be obtainable by solo play (albeit with a great deal more time and effort expended) and vice-versa.
In my opinion, we're talking about video games here...it seems to me that players should be focused more on what is fun to them rather than focusing on who "works" harder on something that is designed to entertain.
Firebrand Art
"You are obviously confusing a mature rating with actual maturity." -Asherman
Maybe MMO is not your genre, go play Modern Warfare...or something you can be all twitchy...and rank up all night. This is seriously getting tired. -Ranyr
Grouping is easier, except for the tedium of forming up. For the tedium of grinding levels and skilling up solo is much more boring thus more difficult. And for the content obviously soloing is more difficult than grouping. For early content grouping it is trivially easy and soloing more difficult. For late game content soloing is mostly impossible.
If a mmorpg missed either solo play or group i dont think its worth the effort. Besides they people making that game that would be without one of them misses out on 50% of the people that would play it if they had it.
In theory I think everyone, solo players and groupers, will agree with this.
The problem is when you start to put in concrete rules to determine exactly how much more time and effort something takes to get solo as opposed to grouping.
The best solution would probably be something where the groupers think it's just slightly to easy for the solo player, but are willing to live with it, and the solo player thinks it's slightly to easy for the groupers, but is willing to live with it.
Some middle ground where neither is completely satisfied, but neitehr is completely upset either.
I still like the SWG set up where some materials can only be gained by grouping, but anyone can use those materials or buy any sort of gear so no one is stopped from getting any item in the game.
OP is a little confused.
He is confusing the ease of playing as an individual with the difficulty of combat.
Logically it is easier to take down the same mob with multiple people than solo.
A soloer has to depend on their skillset only and there is no one to heal them or tank for them, or rez them if things go badly.
A soloer eats the experience loss penalty for dying every time.
Groups once formed, can take down mobs quicker and more efficiently with less downtime and risk of dying.
The trade off between grouping and solo is ease and it exists for a reason.
A soloer is their own boss and does what they want when they want and is self sufficient which is very attractive to some of us while grouping can be a pain in the arse, but the opportunity cost is that groups can defeat more difficult mobs and therefore get better rewards in every MMOG that exists.
Most soloers understand the trade off, we just don't want game mechanics created to deny the soloing option.
Artificial no-drop no-trade tags are one way developers pooh pooh soloers by trying to coerce them to group and raid.
If I am a soloer/crafter who has earned wealth legitimately in-game, then I should be allowed to trade for raid and high level group drops in an open marketplace.
Don't create dungeons or instances that refuse soloers to enter.
Don't link mobs together to make it impossible to pull them solo.
I think you have to admit, that if the Devs dont' link mobs and let you pull everything solo, you have completely destroyed the grouping game.
It may not have been clear in the Original Post, but the comparision was never meant to be solo or group fighting the exact same MOb.
It was solo fighting the toughest mob they could handle without dieing, vs. Group fighting the toughest mob they could without dieing.
A group has no one to rez them in a party wipe. You've never grouped and had the party get wiped?
Groups once formed....
YOu act as if there is a magic "group" button, and all members of the party are magically transported to the exact location they need to be with no travel time, and requires no time to contact each other. This doesn't actually happen in any game.
Could you stop with the hyperbole, please. Pulling solo mobs is just as big a part of the 'grouping game' as the 'solo game' so it can hardly be used to 'destroy the grouping game'.
I really do not see why you are so focusing on what are essentailly solo aspects of group play as making grouping so much harder. A soloer must spend time traveling to the zone where he/she wants to do content just as a grouper does. If a soloer wipes he/she takes a penalty and might have to do a corpse run. They are all essentially solo tasks that also apply to a group. Heck with something like summoning stones in WoW a group traveling to its destination actually has an easier time of it then a soloer.
Could you stop with the hyperbole, please. Pulling solo mobs is just as big a part of the 'grouping game' as the 'solo game' so it can hardly be used to 'destroy the grouping game'.
I really do not see why you are so focusing on what are essentailly solo aspects of group play as making grouping so much harder. A soloer must spend time traveling to the zone where he/she wants to do content just as a grouper does. If a soloer wipes he/she takes a penalty and might have to do a corpse run. They are all essentially solo tasks that also apply to a group. Heck with something like summoning stones in WoW a group traveling to its destination actually has an easier time of it then a soloer.
The grouping game, IMO, is destroyed when you change the rules to make grouping irrelevant, simply an option but not in any way necessary.
You get a little "group" window, but there's really no reason you need to group.
That's not a good grouping game, just becase you have a little window open up that says "group".
You need an obstacle for the group to overcome.
Linking mobs together really has nothing to do with it.
What's the difference between 3 mobs level 3 linked together, and one level 9 mob? Same thing really. Either way, if you are level 2, you're not going to solo them. Not the 3 linked together, not the level 9 mob.
If you get high enough level, you can solo both the three level 3 mobs linked together, AND the level 9 mob.
In other words, the problem is the content is higher level than you are capable of, not that they are linked.
If you come back at max level, you'll be able to beat those linked mobs, right?
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
It's not a problem for me. I was responding to the OP that said no Mobs should ever be linked so solo players can always pull them one at a time.
It's not a problem for me. I was responding to the OP that said no Mobs should ever be linked so solo players can always pull them one at a time.
Personally, I don't give a damn if they're linked or not, I tend to play classes where a ton of mobs together are still not an issue for soloing. I can take on a boss 50 levels above me, along with all of it's defensive mobs with no problem whatsoever and I don't need a team to do it. Other classes very well might.
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
This thread is silly.
1. Whether one or the other is "harder" isn't terribly important. What matters is which one is more fun (and even that isn't too useful, since different players will like one or the other, so it's not like you could take the data and say "okay we should only make a grouping game.")
2. Grouping obviously requires some overhead in terms of forming/joining the group and getting people to work as a team. And playing in a team means you no longer represent 100% of the equation.
If you're a bad player, it will make things easier if you no longer represent 100% of the equation (because you'll likely group with better players.)
If you're skilled, grouping makes things harder.
3. But that's not the end of it. Because each individual game balances the difficulty of its solo vs. group content in a different way.
If soloing mobs is extremely difficult, it won't matter that grouping made things slightly harder for the good player -- it'll still be way easier to group.
So it's a little silly to poll players about this, as it varies by game and by player skill level, and in the end doesn't really matter.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Many tasks are made easier by applying more people to it. There is always managerial and coordination overhead.
But first that is not hard, it is annoying. Not the same thing. Second off that is often not enough of a downside to make up for the fact that being in a group makes things easier to do.
For example in DDO if you solo a dungeon and die you have to respawn and would get an xp penalty. In a group you have the added cushion of other players to rely in the case of something going bad.
Similarly I was playing Aion Beta this weekend as an Asmodean. At level 18-ish you basically only have group quests so I did the last camnpaign quest where you kill the main bad guy. We went at it with 5 people and had 3 chanters (hybrid healers) I was on heal duty and had to chain heal the MT, I couldn't keep the other guys up and a couple spike AOEs killed everyone with the boss about 8% left. I chained healed the tank and we pulled through. 60% losses yet we still all recovered. In a solo situation you have no backup. You mess up you are screwed.
There are pros and cons to both sides. Solo has no social or managerial overhead. But group means you get the advantage of others people knowlesge. You simply cannot, in any serious way, claim that a solo guy who knows nothing about some instance is not better off in a group of 5 where the other 4 have been there often versus when he is solo. This clearly disadvantagous for the player in the solo situation than the group.
For PURE difficutly solo IS harder in some sense because all problem solving must come from yourself. Group play is often more hectic with more stuff going on, but does not have to be that way. Grouping is more unpredictable because you have to react to actions by real people.
If you have a great leader with a great crew the fact is group play as a follower will most likely be more easy than going it solo. Everyone knows this is true. Does that mean that being a great leader is easier than being in a solo situation? No but that is not the same question is it?
Anyway the OP is pretty typical take one thing in isolation type stuff.
Except that the mob you took on had it been a solo quest might have been one maybe two levels above you at best. At which point you could level one more time and finish the quest if you couldn't kill it outright already. The mob you did take on was significantly harder with 5 people and you still died,, had you not done your job well or you had the proper classes there would have been no recovery right?
I don't consider grouping that difficult, unless your referring to raiding specific boss fights that require timing, cooperation and skill. Your example for claiming grouping is difficult ala finding players, meeting up, waiting on bio breaks etc does not make a strong argument for difficulty. To me, these are annoyances. I consider these a waste of my time.
I don't find soloing or grouping particularly hard. One is simply more irritating than the other.