But a 100% group game is not what I am after, more balance and a separation of rewards is the key. What about items that you can only get in a group that only give you an additional bonus when you are in a group? In other words Mr Solo completes a quest on his own and gets a +10 ring, Mr Group does the same quest and gets a +20 ring with an additional +5 if he is in a group.
Until "Mr. solo" subs are 150% less by your calculation, he has every right to expect similar rewards be available from the content he enjoys.
Mmo’s charge the same subscription rates regardless of preferred play style, any game that claims to cater to both playstyles, had better well offer comparable content. For what it's worth, it could equally be argued, as "mr solo" cannot cover all his bases with healing, cc, tanking, dps, off tanking, in the same way a group can, and never hope to compete with group’s zerging solo content. He should be the one getting the extra stats; it is no more preposterous an idea than the one you propose.
Content is scaled based on the target demographic, solo content when soloed is of comparable difficulty to group content when tackled by groups, and neither should be rewarded differently as a result. I would also argue, there is typically more risk of dying, when playing solo than there is grouped, because, as already mentioned the solo’er goes with what he has, and will most certainly not be able to heal,tank,dps and cc all in the same instant.
Before some muttonhead attempts to classify me, to suit his own agenda. I enjoy solo and group content equally, and have run very successful guilds with numbers running into triple figures. However, I understand neither play style has any more validity than the other, and both sides have every right to expect comparable, reward, content and experience while continuing to pay exactly the same subscription for a service.
My Colour Is Vomit green, I puke on the tards with stupid colour sigs. My symbol is ,,!, O ,!,, My enemies are any prat with a colour sig, a meaningless personality test, or a pointless list of games and classes.
Original D&D, Basic D&D and AD&D 1, 2, 3, 3.5, 4.0 I count eight versions of the game. Where you made your mistake is saying that if someone varies the rules they are no longer playing D&D. GMs are expected to do this.
I am sorry but I can not and will not accept 3.5 as stanalone rule edition since it is revision of 3.0 rule set, also I would agree about original D&D, but it was blended with basic since basic was revision of original D&D, so I would not accept that as seperate rule set also. Which leaves us with 5 counting original one. If you want to count every revision they have done we could say that there are more than 12 which is not true and I just want to say that even with your OD&D, basic D&D, and AD&D 1,2,3,3.5,4 there are seven not eight.
GM are expected to do this yes but only for home play, in every D&D tournament there are no rules bending of any kind and GM are measured by their knowledge about rules not their improvisation, that is main reason we have so many revisions of rulesets, cause they are always trying to keep game in balance. GM bending rules as stated in dungeon master guide is for home casual play and exporing different types of possible play scenarios. Wizard support this but it will not publish any adventure which is not by the book, opposite of many published adventures which are made strictlly by ruleset. And I must also mention that it really takes experienced GM to bend rules and not having them go back at him like a boomerang, it happened me couple of times, than I learned to be very carefull.
or maybe its so obvious that no one would be stupid enough to ask Gary Gygax (RIP) if you could play D&D by yourself in fear they would be laughed at by him. because i don't know about you and maybe your that "special" but everytime i have played or seen someone play D&D its never by themselves.
Nicely said, good to see that there are still people who like to play D&D as originally designed.
So let me ask you soloers this .... if say a game like WoW (since many have played that) added a group exp bonus code. so where as ..... before the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 1200xp after the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 2000xp
mind you this is soloer fighting solo mobs and grouper fighting group oriented mobs with a full group. would you be against something like this? and if so why? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income?
What if groupers got 1200xp and soloers got 3000xp? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income? Oh, you mean it doesn't work both ways, it's only ok if it caters to YOUR playstyle? Ok, got it.
With a very skilled and imaginative DM, I've seen it done, and I've seen it done beautifully.
Somehow I doubt that very skilled GM would waste his time holding whole game session to only one person. But than again it's strange world we are living in.
So let me ask you soloers this .... if say a game like WoW (since many have played that) added a group exp bonus code. so where as ..... before the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 1200xp after the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 2000xp
mind you this is soloer fighting solo mobs and grouper fighting group oriented mobs with a full group. would you be against something like this? and if so why? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income?
Sorry but lower xp is not the answer since most of the quests can be soloed and are more challenging with better rewards to the soloer in WOW than doing most of the quests in a group in WOW. The only answer to the Solo/Group is for developers to change the mechanics of the game to recognize how big the party is that is doing the quest and to increasie the toughness of the mob and give out better rewards for the number of players in a group ( after all why should 2 or more people split the same amount of coin that a soloer gets as a reward for killing the same mob). EQ II came up with a great idea of risk vs reward for the Solo/Group players with the Splitpaw Saga Expansion. The person that soloed could experience the same content as the grouper even if they had to go into a zone 100 times to get what they need where as a group could get the reward in less time. Currently there isn't an incentive to group except to complete 5% of the quests in WOW ( excluding dungeons and raid content of course)
To add to my comment if WOW made it to forced grouping it would not be a successful as it currently is. LOTR is a good example of a good game gone bad by having forced grouping to complete quests. One can literally spend hours trying to get a group to help them complete a quest that is in their log book.
So let me ask you soloers this .... if say a game like WoW (since many have played that) added a group exp bonus code. so where as ..... before the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 1200xp after the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 2000xp
mind you this is soloer fighting solo mobs and grouper fighting group oriented mobs with a full group. would you be against something like this? and if so why? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income?
What if groupers got 1200xp and soloers got 3000xp? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income? Oh, you mean it doesn't work both ways, it's only ok if it caters to YOUR playstyle? Ok, got it.
whats the matter buddy? did i get you on that question so bad you have to dodge it? how typical.
your situation would actually hinder grouping, since it would make grouping even more worthless. these games are about risk vs reward, there is much more risk when leaning on other people fighting tougher mobs (in terms of HP and attack power) yet there is little reward.
So let me ask you soloers this .... if say a game like WoW (since many have played that) added a group exp bonus code. so where as ..... before the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 1200xp after the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 2000xp
mind you this is soloer fighting solo mobs and grouper fighting group oriented mobs with a full group. would you be against something like this? and if so why? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income?
Sorry but lower xp is not the answer since most of the quests can be soloed and are more challenging with better rewards to the soloer in WOW than doing most of the quests in a group in WOW. The only answer to the Solo/Group is for developers to change the mechanics of the game to recognize how big the party is that is doing the quest and to increasie the toughness of the mob and give out better rewards for the number of players in a group ( after all why should 2 or more people split the same amount of coin that a soloer gets as a reward for killing the same mob). EQ II came up with a great idea of risk vs reward for the Solo/Group players with the Splitpaw Saga Expansion. The person that soloed could experience the same content as the grouper even if they had to go into a zone 100 times to get what they need where as a group could get the reward in less time. Currently there isn't an incentive to group except to complete 5% of the quests in WOW ( excluding dungeons and raid content of course)
To add to my comment if WOW made it to forced grouping it would not be a successful as it currently is. LOTR is a good example of a good game gone bad by having forced grouping to complete quests. One can literally spend hours trying to get a group to help them complete a quest that is in their log book.
actually, in my opinion, the answer is to leave it alone, it isn't broken - much to the contrary of Imho. The market for group centric games is not that high.
So let me ask you soloers this .... if say a game like WoW (since many have played that) added a group exp bonus code. so where as ..... before the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 1200xp after the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 2000xp
mind you this is soloer fighting solo mobs and grouper fighting group oriented mobs with a full group. would you be against something like this? and if so why? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income?
Sorry but lower xp is not the answer since most of the quests can be soloed and are more challenging with better rewards to the soloer in WOW than doing most of the quests in a group in WOW. The only answer to the Solo/Group is for developers to change the mechanics of the game to recognize how big the party is that is doing the quest and to increasie the toughness of the mob and give out better rewards for the number of players in a group ( after all why should 2 or more people split the same amount of coin that a soloer gets as a reward for killing the same mob). EQ II came up with a great idea of risk vs reward for the Solo/Group players with the Splitpaw Saga Expansion. The person that soloed could experience the same content as the grouper even if they had to go into a zone 100 times to get what they need where as a group could get the reward in less time. Currently there isn't an incentive to group except to complete 5% of the quests in WOW ( excluding dungeons and raid content of course)
To add to my comment if WOW made it to forced grouping it would not be a successful as it currently is. LOTR is a good example of a good game gone bad by having forced grouping to complete quests. One can literally spend hours trying to get a group to help them complete a quest that is in their log book.
actually, in my opinion, the answer is to leave it alone, it isn't broken - much to the contrary of Imho. The market for group centric games is not that high.
LOL of course YOU don't think its broken.
ladies and gentlemen the elitist soloer in the flesh ... a round of applause.
So let me ask you soloers this .... if say a game like WoW (since many have played that) added a group exp bonus code. so where as ..... before the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 1200xp after the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 2000xp
mind you this is soloer fighting solo mobs and grouper fighting group oriented mobs with a full group. would you be against something like this? and if so why? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income?
Sorry but lower xp is not the answer since most of the quests can be soloed and are more challenging with better rewards to the soloer in WOW than doing most of the quests in a group in WOW. The only answer to the Solo/Group is for developers to change the mechanics of the game to recognize how big the party is that is doing the quest and to increasie the toughness of the mob and give out better rewards for the number of players in a group ( after all why should 2 or more people split the same amount of coin that a soloer gets as a reward for killing the same mob). EQ II came up with a great idea of risk vs reward for the Solo/Group players with the Splitpaw Saga Expansion. The person that soloed could experience the same content as the grouper even if they had to go into a zone 100 times to get what they need where as a group could get the reward in less time. Currently there isn't an incentive to group except to complete 5% of the quests in WOW ( excluding dungeons and raid content of course)
To add to my comment if WOW made it to forced grouping it would not be a successful as it currently is. LOTR is a good example of a good game gone bad by having forced grouping to complete quests. One can literally spend hours trying to get a group to help them complete a quest that is in their log book.
actually, in my opinion, the answer is to leave it alone, it isn't broken - much to the contrary of Imho. The market for group centric games is not that high.
Actually you are correct in your opinion that if it isn't broken don't fix it. One gets tired of reading the dribble about how soloing is ruining MMO's and is forced to comment in a more constructive manner. If you like to solo do so. If you like to group do that as well. If the game isn't hardcore enough that where it doesn't have a good death penalty for you delete you toon and start over so you can be more hardcore than the game allows.
Actually you are correct in your opinion that if it isn't broken don't fix it. One gets tired of reading the dribble about how soloing is ruining MMO's and is forced to comment in a more constructive manner. If you like to solo do so. If you like to group do that as well. If the game isn't hardcore enough that where it doesn't have a good death penalty for you delete you toon and start over so you can be more hardcore than the game allows.
what about the "dribble" about how a game should be soloable, but a game that also completely encourages group with exp bonuses for working together and tackling tougher mobs.
Actually you are correct in your opinion that if it isn't broken don't fix it. One gets tired of reading the dribble about how soloing is ruining MMO's and is forced to comment in a more constructive manner. If you like to solo do so. If you like to group do that as well. If the game isn't hardcore enough that where it doesn't have a good death penalty for you delete you toon and start over so you can be more hardcore than the game allows.
what about the "dribble" about how a game should be soloable, but a game that also completely encourages group with exp bonuses for working together and tackling tougher mobs.
Tougher group mobs are by their very nature tougher as you so eloquently point out, as groups bring far more to the fight than any soloer can hope, However, the effort by each individual member of the group is very often far less than that exerted by a solo’er, and very very seldom greater. For every raid or group boss, it is possible to point to a solo npc that is equally as hard to solo.
Try addressing my arguments, that of cost to play as opposed to how you chose to play; can you in any way shape or form put forth a reasonable argument as to why an individual in a group, should expect more for his money than an individual playing solo in a game catering to both. No, of course you cannot, and it is at the very core of the argument, yet a topic every single pro group proponent skips and avoids like the plague.
Neither demographics money carries more value, the content taken in context no tougher or difficult. As a result, the idea that simply playing as PART of group should offer benefits greater than those already inherent in playing as a unit, is simply elitist horseshit with no solid reasoning behind it.
Every group is dependent on the individuals that are part of it, and those people as individuals have no more sway than any other, regardless of how one or the other side may choose to spend their free time in an arena open to all.
I can imagine the outcry from this elitist brigade, should we propose that mmo's start offering greater rewards to those with multiple accounts; after all, they pay far more for continued development than an individual member of a group paying for one. Shall we also tackle the groups who zerg solo content, effectively stealing from and shutting out the target audience?
My Colour Is Vomit green, I puke on the tards with stupid colour sigs. My symbol is ,,!, O ,!,, My enemies are any prat with a colour sig, a meaningless personality test, or a pointless list of games and classes.
So let me ask you soloers this .... if say a game like WoW (since many have played that) added a group exp bonus code. so where as ..... before the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 1200xp after the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 2000xp
mind you this is soloer fighting solo mobs and grouper fighting group oriented mobs with a full group. would you be against something like this? and if so why? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income?
What if groupers got 1200xp and soloers got 3000xp? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income? Oh, you mean it doesn't work both ways, it's only ok if it caters to YOUR playstyle? Ok, got it.
whats the matter buddy? did i get you on that question so bad you have to dodge it? how typical.
your situation would actually hinder grouping, since it would make grouping even more worthless. these games are about risk vs reward, there is much more risk when leaning on other people fighting tougher mobs (in terms of HP and attack power) yet there is little reward.
Dodge it? By turning it around so you would see how ridiculous it was?
If my situation would hinder grouping, then your situation would just as equally hinder soloing.
My stance is that neither should be hindered, both should be allowed and treated equally.
Actually you are correct in your opinion that if it isn't broken don't fix it. One gets tired of reading the dribble about how soloing is ruining MMO's and is forced to comment in a more constructive manner. If you like to solo do so. If you like to group do that as well. If the game isn't hardcore enough that where it doesn't have a good death penalty for you delete you toon and start over so you can be more hardcore than the game allows.
what about the "dribble" about how a game should be soloable, but a game that also completely encourages group with exp bonuses for working together and tackling tougher mobs.
Actually that goes both ways for solo and group play. But mainly you read about how solo is ruining the MMO genre instead of the other way around. LOTR is a good example of a group play game that just doesn't cut it. While it's a very good game you can spend hours trying to get a group to complete quests and after you complete the quest it's k thanks bye rinse and repeat for the next quest ( at least the server I played on). Again their has to be an incentive for a person who doesn't even have the same quest as you or may have already completed the quest to join up with you in your party. To me that's where grouping fails.
So let me ask you soloers this .... if say a game like WoW (since many have played that) added a group exp bonus code. so where as ..... before the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 1200xp after the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 2000xp
mind you this is soloer fighting solo mobs and grouper fighting group oriented mobs with a full group. would you be against something like this? and if so why? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income?
Sorry but lower xp is not the answer since most of the quests can be soloed and are more challenging with better rewards to the soloer in WOW than doing most of the quests in a group in WOW. The only answer to the Solo/Group is for developers to change the mechanics of the game to recognize how big the party is that is doing the quest and to increasie the toughness of the mob and give out better rewards for the number of players in a group ( after all why should 2 or more people split the same amount of coin that a soloer gets as a reward for killing the same mob). EQ II came up with a great idea of risk vs reward for the Solo/Group players with the Splitpaw Saga Expansion. The person that soloed could experience the same content as the grouper even if they had to go into a zone 100 times to get what they need where as a group could get the reward in less time. Currently there isn't an incentive to group except to complete 5% of the quests in WOW ( excluding dungeons and raid content of course)
To add to my comment if WOW made it to forced grouping it would not be a successful as it currently is. LOTR is a good example of a good game gone bad by having forced grouping to complete quests. One can literally spend hours trying to get a group to help them complete a quest that is in their log book.
actually, in my opinion, the answer is to leave it alone, it isn't broken - much to the contrary of Imho. The market for group centric games is not that high.
Actually you are correct in your opinion that if it isn't broken don't fix it. One gets tired of reading the dribble about how soloing is ruining MMO's and is forced to comment in a more constructive manner. If you like to solo do so. If you like to group do that as well. If the game isn't hardcore enough that where it doesn't have a good death penalty for you delete you toon and start over so you can be more hardcore than the game allows.
So the top ranked Kenyan runner could enter a race with 6 year olds, and all he needs to do is tie a rope between his legs, and that would be the same thing as running the Boston marathon.
So let me ask you soloers this .... if say a game like WoW (since many have played that) added a group exp bonus code. so where as ..... before the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 1200xp after the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 2000xp
mind you this is soloer fighting solo mobs and grouper fighting group oriented mobs with a full group. would you be against something like this? and if so why? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income?
Sorry but lower xp is not the answer since most of the quests can be soloed and are more challenging with better rewards to the soloer in WOW than doing most of the quests in a group in WOW. The only answer to the Solo/Group is for developers to change the mechanics of the game to recognize how big the party is that is doing the quest and to increasie the toughness of the mob and give out better rewards for the number of players in a group ( after all why should 2 or more people split the same amount of coin that a soloer gets as a reward for killing the same mob). EQ II came up with a great idea of risk vs reward for the Solo/Group players with the Splitpaw Saga Expansion. The person that soloed could experience the same content as the grouper even if they had to go into a zone 100 times to get what they need where as a group could get the reward in less time. Currently there isn't an incentive to group except to complete 5% of the quests in WOW ( excluding dungeons and raid content of course)
To add to my comment if WOW made it to forced grouping it would not be a successful as it currently is. LOTR is a good example of a good game gone bad by having forced grouping to complete quests. One can literally spend hours trying to get a group to help them complete a quest that is in their log book.
actually, in my opinion, the answer is to leave it alone, it isn't broken - much to the contrary of Imho. The market for group centric games is not that high.
Actually you are correct in your opinion that if it isn't broken don't fix it. One gets tired of reading the dribble about how soloing is ruining MMO's and is forced to comment in a more constructive manner. If you like to solo do so. If you like to group do that as well. If the game isn't hardcore enough that where it doesn't have a good death penalty for you delete you toon and start over so you can be more hardcore than the game allows.
So the top ranked Kenyan runner could enter a race with 6 year olds, and all he needs to do is tie a rope between his legs, and that would be the same thing as running the Boston marathon.
Riiiiiight.
Interesting analogy. Not quit sure how that ties into MMO's though =P
So let me ask you soloers this .... if say a game like WoW (since many have played that) added a group exp bonus code. so where as ..... before the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 1200xp after the patch. soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 2000xp
mind you this is soloer fighting solo mobs and grouper fighting group oriented mobs with a full group. would you be against something like this? and if so why? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income?
Sorry but lower xp is not the answer since most of the quests can be soloed and are more challenging with better rewards to the soloer in WOW than doing most of the quests in a group in WOW. The only answer to the Solo/Group is for developers to change the mechanics of the game to recognize how big the party is that is doing the quest and to increasie the toughness of the mob and give out better rewards for the number of players in a group ( after all why should 2 or more people split the same amount of coin that a soloer gets as a reward for killing the same mob). EQ II came up with a great idea of risk vs reward for the Solo/Group players with the Splitpaw Saga Expansion. The person that soloed could experience the same content as the grouper even if they had to go into a zone 100 times to get what they need where as a group could get the reward in less time. Currently there isn't an incentive to group except to complete 5% of the quests in WOW ( excluding dungeons and raid content of course)
To add to my comment if WOW made it to forced grouping it would not be a successful as it currently is. LOTR is a good example of a good game gone bad by having forced grouping to complete quests. One can literally spend hours trying to get a group to help them complete a quest that is in their log book.
actually, in my opinion, the answer is to leave it alone, it isn't broken - much to the contrary of Imho. The market for group centric games is not that high.
Actually you are correct in your opinion that if it isn't broken don't fix it. One gets tired of reading the dribble about how soloing is ruining MMO's and is forced to comment in a more constructive manner. If you like to solo do so. If you like to group do that as well. If the game isn't hardcore enough that where it doesn't have a good death penalty for you delete you toon and start over so you can be more hardcore than the game allows.
So the top ranked Kenyan runner could enter a race with 6 year olds, and all he needs to do is tie a rope between his legs, and that would be the same thing as running the Boston marathon.
Riiiiiight.
WTF are you on! Your current analogy makes as much sense as your last about cars in the other thread, for future reference that would be “bugger all” sense. Perhaps I will take up bungee jumping using neckties, because it is completely unlike climbing the Eifel tower using only my toenails.
Taaaake that.
What I really wanted to say would probably see my account banned; I rue the day halfwits started buying computers for entertainment, instead of using their sisters.
My Colour Is Vomit green, I puke on the tards with stupid colour sigs. My symbol is ,,!, O ,!,, My enemies are any prat with a colour sig, a meaningless personality test, or a pointless list of games and classes.
This is an exerpt of a post I made on a game forum I play regarding Partying vs Solo. I think it says my feelings on this subject.
"Now, here's my problem with partying. I hate it, makes me uncomfortable 99% of the time. My personality?...a bit shy in RL could factor into it. But there's more. I've had quite a few covos with friends on this issue and we've thrashed out our thoughts, mostly in agreement. My brother and best friend both named this as their "final factor" in quitting WOW. That factor being the irritating plp they run across whiile being forced to party...lol
The internet is a huge huge place, be it international time zones, personal playing style whatever, most people's friends in RL often do not play the same games, much less at the same time or in the same manner. So you are left with strangers or cyber-friends. Factor in a game like this where the population has dropped so much and here we go with the list of problems in games that force party to play. How often can 3 people, age 50, 30 and 15 actually get along for an hour (now factor in personality types, playing styles, personal situations...blah blah.)
SO many times I've ran across problems, they play too slow, too fast, babble like they're on crack, get up for a coffee break, get dc'd, mommy's calling, wanna go this way, wanna go that way, i'm too slow, i'm too fast, get their drops and run gotta go turn it in, oops they're dead (what the hell were they doing in here anyway...lol), oops I'm dead (who's gonna wait), hello hello what quest you on?, damn no ones even here, I'm all alone on the whole floor, uhh sure I can party with ya but I only need 2 more...lol, do you speak english?, oh you died and now i've got to cuss you out....and the beat goes on and on and on.
Trying to force social interaction between strangers as a gameplay rule is not easy, to tell players that it is required is often a game killer. I don't mind partying occasionally with nice people, or even helping...seen many the same way. But overall, outside of some formed social clique, most noobs (and players in general) enter a game alone. True friendships, even in RL, take years of f2f understanding and bonding. To make an internet, international, mmo game too party dependant is just no fun. It is often thrown up as an excuse by some as an answer to the overpowered mobs in this game, when we know its never been about social stuff and all about the IM. (most often by those very hardcore leveling on crack speedsters that irritate me most...LOL) Games have to offer what suits their playerbase. AO is just not the game to be forcing constant parting after lvl 80..lol Some areas yeah, but everything? Just wont work. I think many miss the point, games are suppose to be fun...not irritating as hell on top of the game already having "going down in flames" issues..lol
I quote my best friend who recently quit wow " I feel so much better knowing i'll never be cussed out by a 13 year old party member again and have to feel that "feeling" of what I would do if I could stick my hand through the monitor and grab ahold of their throats"...LOL"
One of the reason there are so many rude/inconsiderate/annoying players these days is because of the overly heavy focus on soloing. Most of these people think that because they can solo something that they are automatically an elite player and thus need not be bothered with things like groups. There will always be good players and bad players, but to think most mmorpgs require such skill to play that there is somehow a subpopulation of elite players is laughable.
Just about any mmorpg I can think of is presented in terms of a faction, a realm, or some other type of unifying classification. In many games this means nothing and has no bearing on gameplay. In some, it does. Nevertheless, the fact that these unifying factors exist suggest that it is intended for players to work together towards a common goal. This is much easier to see in games like DAoC, WoW, etc, not so much in others. So by the very design of mmorpgs, grouping and cooperation is implied at the very least.
That being said, there always should be a solo option. The market is saturated with so many casual and non-traditional gamers that a solo option is required. But just because the option exists doesnt mean that all games should focus on soloability and worse yet, make it the clearly superior path for advancement and playability.
Comments
So let me ask you soloers this .... if say a game like WoW (since many have played that) added a group exp bonus code. so where as .....
before the patch.
soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 1200xp
after the patch.
soloer gets 1000xp
grouper gets 2000xp
mind you this is soloer fighting solo mobs and grouper fighting group oriented mobs with a full group.
would you be against something like this? and if so why? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income?
Which is why TSR officially released module B-Solo, Ghost of Lion Castle, which was a solo adventure.
Yup, no question, TSR never supported solo adventuring.
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
Until "Mr. solo" subs are 150% less by your calculation, he has every right to expect similar rewards be available from the content he enjoys.
Mmo’s charge the same subscription rates regardless of preferred play style, any game that claims to cater to both playstyles, had better well offer comparable content. For what it's worth, it could equally be argued, as "mr solo" cannot cover all his bases with healing, cc, tanking, dps, off tanking, in the same way a group can, and never hope to compete with group’s zerging solo content. He should be the one getting the extra stats; it is no more preposterous an idea than the one you propose.
Content is scaled based on the target demographic, solo content when soloed is of comparable difficulty to group content when tackled by groups, and neither should be rewarded differently as a result. I would also argue, there is typically more risk of dying, when playing solo than there is grouped, because, as already mentioned the solo’er goes with what he has, and will most certainly not be able to heal,tank,dps and cc all in the same instant.
Before some muttonhead attempts to classify me, to suit his own agenda. I enjoy solo and group content equally, and have run very successful guilds with numbers running into triple figures. However, I understand neither play style has any more validity than the other, and both sides have every right to expect comparable, reward, content and experience while continuing to pay exactly the same subscription for a service.
My Colour Is Vomit green, I puke on the tards with stupid colour sigs. My symbol is ,,!, O ,!,, My enemies are any prat with a colour sig, a meaningless personality test, or a pointless list of games and classes.
Regards Hexcaliber
Which is why TSR officially released module B-Solo, Ghost of Lion Castle, which was a solo adventure.
Yup, no question, TSR never supported solo adventuring.
You know, facts and reality are just a crutch for you because you can't properly fabricate an argument.
I am sorry but I can not and will not accept 3.5 as stanalone rule edition since it is revision of 3.0 rule set, also I would agree about original D&D, but it was blended with basic since basic was revision of original D&D, so I would not accept that as seperate rule set also. Which leaves us with 5 counting original one. If you want to count every revision they have done we could say that there are more than 12 which is not true and I just want to say that even with your OD&D, basic D&D, and AD&D 1,2,3,3.5,4 there are seven not eight.
GM are expected to do this yes but only for home play, in every D&D tournament there are no rules bending of any kind and GM are measured by their knowledge about rules not their improvisation, that is main reason we have so many revisions of rulesets, cause they are always trying to keep game in balance. GM bending rules as stated in dungeon master guide is for home casual play and exporing different types of possible play scenarios. Wizard support this but it will not publish any adventure which is not by the book, opposite of many published adventures which are made strictlly by ruleset. And I must also mention that it really takes experienced GM to bend rules and not having them go back at him like a boomerang, it happened me couple of times, than I learned to be very carefull.
Nicely said, good to see that there are still people who like to play D&D as originally designed.
Yeah with that kind of argumentation he could be a Blizz GM
What if groupers got 1200xp and soloers got 3000xp? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income? Oh, you mean it doesn't work both ways, it's only ok if it caters to YOUR playstyle? Ok, got it.
Wow, didn't know we had the reincarnation of Gary Gygax here who could tell us all about how D&D is *SUPPOSED* to be.
No Shyte, I am impressed - must have had a Cleric with a rez spell handy.
Somehow I doubt that very skilled GM would waste his time holding whole game session to only one person. But than again it's strange world we are living in.
Which is why TSR officially released module B-Solo, Ghost of Lion Castle, which was a solo adventure.
Yup, no question, TSR never supported solo adventuring.
You know, facts and reality are just a crutch for you because you can't properly fabricate an argument.
I'm sorry, I won't do it anymore.
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
Sorry but lower xp is not the answer since most of the quests can be soloed and are more challenging with better rewards to the soloer in WOW than doing most of the quests in a group in WOW. The only answer to the Solo/Group is for developers to change the mechanics of the game to recognize how big the party is that is doing the quest and to increasie the toughness of the mob and give out better rewards for the number of players in a group ( after all why should 2 or more people split the same amount of coin that a soloer gets as a reward for killing the same mob). EQ II came up with a great idea of risk vs reward for the Solo/Group players with the Splitpaw Saga Expansion. The person that soloed could experience the same content as the grouper even if they had to go into a zone 100 times to get what they need where as a group could get the reward in less time. Currently there isn't an incentive to group except to complete 5% of the quests in WOW ( excluding dungeons and raid content of course)
To add to my comment if WOW made it to forced grouping it would not be a successful as it currently is. LOTR is a good example of a good game gone bad by having forced grouping to complete quests. One can literally spend hours trying to get a group to help them complete a quest that is in their log book.
What if groupers got 1200xp and soloers got 3000xp? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income? Oh, you mean it doesn't work both ways, it's only ok if it caters to YOUR playstyle? Ok, got it.
whats the matter buddy? did i get you on that question so bad you have to dodge it? how typical.
your situation would actually hinder grouping, since it would make grouping even more worthless. these games are about risk vs reward, there is much more risk when leaning on other people fighting tougher mobs (in terms of HP and attack power) yet there is little reward.
Sorry but lower xp is not the answer since most of the quests can be soloed and are more challenging with better rewards to the soloer in WOW than doing most of the quests in a group in WOW. The only answer to the Solo/Group is for developers to change the mechanics of the game to recognize how big the party is that is doing the quest and to increasie the toughness of the mob and give out better rewards for the number of players in a group ( after all why should 2 or more people split the same amount of coin that a soloer gets as a reward for killing the same mob). EQ II came up with a great idea of risk vs reward for the Solo/Group players with the Splitpaw Saga Expansion. The person that soloed could experience the same content as the grouper even if they had to go into a zone 100 times to get what they need where as a group could get the reward in less time. Currently there isn't an incentive to group except to complete 5% of the quests in WOW ( excluding dungeons and raid content of course)
To add to my comment if WOW made it to forced grouping it would not be a successful as it currently is. LOTR is a good example of a good game gone bad by having forced grouping to complete quests. One can literally spend hours trying to get a group to help them complete a quest that is in their log book.
actually, in my opinion, the answer is to leave it alone, it isn't broken - much to the contrary of Imho. The market for group centric games is not that high.
Sorry but lower xp is not the answer since most of the quests can be soloed and are more challenging with better rewards to the soloer in WOW than doing most of the quests in a group in WOW. The only answer to the Solo/Group is for developers to change the mechanics of the game to recognize how big the party is that is doing the quest and to increasie the toughness of the mob and give out better rewards for the number of players in a group ( after all why should 2 or more people split the same amount of coin that a soloer gets as a reward for killing the same mob). EQ II came up with a great idea of risk vs reward for the Solo/Group players with the Splitpaw Saga Expansion. The person that soloed could experience the same content as the grouper even if they had to go into a zone 100 times to get what they need where as a group could get the reward in less time. Currently there isn't an incentive to group except to complete 5% of the quests in WOW ( excluding dungeons and raid content of course)
To add to my comment if WOW made it to forced grouping it would not be a successful as it currently is. LOTR is a good example of a good game gone bad by having forced grouping to complete quests. One can literally spend hours trying to get a group to help them complete a quest that is in their log book.
actually, in my opinion, the answer is to leave it alone, it isn't broken - much to the contrary of Imho. The market for group centric games is not that high.
LOL of course YOU don't think its broken.
ladies and gentlemen the elitist soloer in the flesh ... a round of applause.
Sorry but lower xp is not the answer since most of the quests can be soloed and are more challenging with better rewards to the soloer in WOW than doing most of the quests in a group in WOW. The only answer to the Solo/Group is for developers to change the mechanics of the game to recognize how big the party is that is doing the quest and to increasie the toughness of the mob and give out better rewards for the number of players in a group ( after all why should 2 or more people split the same amount of coin that a soloer gets as a reward for killing the same mob). EQ II came up with a great idea of risk vs reward for the Solo/Group players with the Splitpaw Saga Expansion. The person that soloed could experience the same content as the grouper even if they had to go into a zone 100 times to get what they need where as a group could get the reward in less time. Currently there isn't an incentive to group except to complete 5% of the quests in WOW ( excluding dungeons and raid content of course)
To add to my comment if WOW made it to forced grouping it would not be a successful as it currently is. LOTR is a good example of a good game gone bad by having forced grouping to complete quests. One can literally spend hours trying to get a group to help them complete a quest that is in their log book.
actually, in my opinion, the answer is to leave it alone, it isn't broken - much to the contrary of Imho. The market for group centric games is not that high.
Actually you are correct in your opinion that if it isn't broken don't fix it. One gets tired of reading the dribble about how soloing is ruining MMO's and is forced to comment in a more constructive manner. If you like to solo do so. If you like to group do that as well. If the game isn't hardcore enough that where it doesn't have a good death penalty for you delete you toon and start over so you can be more hardcore than the game allows.
what about the "dribble" about how a game should be soloable, but a game that also completely encourages group with exp bonuses for working together and tackling tougher mobs.
what about the "dribble" about how a game should be soloable, but a game that also completely encourages group with exp bonuses for working together and tackling tougher mobs.
Tougher group mobs are by their very nature tougher as you so eloquently point out, as groups bring far more to the fight than any soloer can hope, However, the effort by each individual member of the group is very often far less than that exerted by a solo’er, and very very seldom greater. For every raid or group boss, it is possible to point to a solo npc that is equally as hard to solo.
Try addressing my arguments, that of cost to play as opposed to how you chose to play; can you in any way shape or form put forth a reasonable argument as to why an individual in a group, should expect more for his money than an individual playing solo in a game catering to both. No, of course you cannot, and it is at the very core of the argument, yet a topic every single pro group proponent skips and avoids like the plague.
Neither demographics money carries more value, the content taken in context no tougher or difficult. As a result, the idea that simply playing as PART of group should offer benefits greater than those already inherent in playing as a unit, is simply elitist horseshit with no solid reasoning behind it.
Every group is dependent on the individuals that are part of it, and those people as individuals have no more sway than any other, regardless of how one or the other side may choose to spend their free time in an arena open to all.
I can imagine the outcry from this elitist brigade, should we propose that mmo's start offering greater rewards to those with multiple accounts; after all, they pay far more for continued development than an individual member of a group paying for one. Shall we also tackle the groups who zerg solo content, effectively stealing from and shutting out the target audience?
My Colour Is Vomit green, I puke on the tards with stupid colour sigs. My symbol is ,,!, O ,!,, My enemies are any prat with a colour sig, a meaningless personality test, or a pointless list of games and classes.
Regards Hexcaliber
What if groupers got 1200xp and soloers got 3000xp? how does it hinder your playstyle if nothing is done to effect your xp income? Oh, you mean it doesn't work both ways, it's only ok if it caters to YOUR playstyle? Ok, got it.
whats the matter buddy? did i get you on that question so bad you have to dodge it? how typical.
your situation would actually hinder grouping, since it would make grouping even more worthless. these games are about risk vs reward, there is much more risk when leaning on other people fighting tougher mobs (in terms of HP and attack power) yet there is little reward.
Dodge it? By turning it around so you would see how ridiculous it was?
If my situation would hinder grouping, then your situation would just as equally hinder soloing.
My stance is that neither should be hindered, both should be allowed and treated equally.
what about the "dribble" about how a game should be soloable, but a game that also completely encourages group with exp bonuses for working together and tackling tougher mobs.
Actually that goes both ways for solo and group play. But mainly you read about how solo is ruining the MMO genre instead of the other way around. LOTR is a good example of a group play game that just doesn't cut it. While it's a very good game you can spend hours trying to get a group to complete quests and after you complete the quest it's k thanks bye rinse and repeat for the next quest ( at least the server I played on). Again their has to be an incentive for a person who doesn't even have the same quest as you or may have already completed the quest to join up with you in your party. To me that's where grouping fails.
Sorry but lower xp is not the answer since most of the quests can be soloed and are more challenging with better rewards to the soloer in WOW than doing most of the quests in a group in WOW. The only answer to the Solo/Group is for developers to change the mechanics of the game to recognize how big the party is that is doing the quest and to increasie the toughness of the mob and give out better rewards for the number of players in a group ( after all why should 2 or more people split the same amount of coin that a soloer gets as a reward for killing the same mob). EQ II came up with a great idea of risk vs reward for the Solo/Group players with the Splitpaw Saga Expansion. The person that soloed could experience the same content as the grouper even if they had to go into a zone 100 times to get what they need where as a group could get the reward in less time. Currently there isn't an incentive to group except to complete 5% of the quests in WOW ( excluding dungeons and raid content of course)
To add to my comment if WOW made it to forced grouping it would not be a successful as it currently is. LOTR is a good example of a good game gone bad by having forced grouping to complete quests. One can literally spend hours trying to get a group to help them complete a quest that is in their log book.
actually, in my opinion, the answer is to leave it alone, it isn't broken - much to the contrary of Imho. The market for group centric games is not that high.
Actually you are correct in your opinion that if it isn't broken don't fix it. One gets tired of reading the dribble about how soloing is ruining MMO's and is forced to comment in a more constructive manner. If you like to solo do so. If you like to group do that as well. If the game isn't hardcore enough that where it doesn't have a good death penalty for you delete you toon and start over so you can be more hardcore than the game allows.
So the top ranked Kenyan runner could enter a race with 6 year olds, and all he needs to do is tie a rope between his legs, and that would be the same thing as running the Boston marathon.
Riiiiiight.
Sorry but lower xp is not the answer since most of the quests can be soloed and are more challenging with better rewards to the soloer in WOW than doing most of the quests in a group in WOW. The only answer to the Solo/Group is for developers to change the mechanics of the game to recognize how big the party is that is doing the quest and to increasie the toughness of the mob and give out better rewards for the number of players in a group ( after all why should 2 or more people split the same amount of coin that a soloer gets as a reward for killing the same mob). EQ II came up with a great idea of risk vs reward for the Solo/Group players with the Splitpaw Saga Expansion. The person that soloed could experience the same content as the grouper even if they had to go into a zone 100 times to get what they need where as a group could get the reward in less time. Currently there isn't an incentive to group except to complete 5% of the quests in WOW ( excluding dungeons and raid content of course)
To add to my comment if WOW made it to forced grouping it would not be a successful as it currently is. LOTR is a good example of a good game gone bad by having forced grouping to complete quests. One can literally spend hours trying to get a group to help them complete a quest that is in their log book.
actually, in my opinion, the answer is to leave it alone, it isn't broken - much to the contrary of Imho. The market for group centric games is not that high.
Actually you are correct in your opinion that if it isn't broken don't fix it. One gets tired of reading the dribble about how soloing is ruining MMO's and is forced to comment in a more constructive manner. If you like to solo do so. If you like to group do that as well. If the game isn't hardcore enough that where it doesn't have a good death penalty for you delete you toon and start over so you can be more hardcore than the game allows.
So the top ranked Kenyan runner could enter a race with 6 year olds, and all he needs to do is tie a rope between his legs, and that would be the same thing as running the Boston marathon.
Riiiiiight.
Interesting analogy. Not quit sure how that ties into MMO's though =P
Sorry but lower xp is not the answer since most of the quests can be soloed and are more challenging with better rewards to the soloer in WOW than doing most of the quests in a group in WOW. The only answer to the Solo/Group is for developers to change the mechanics of the game to recognize how big the party is that is doing the quest and to increasie the toughness of the mob and give out better rewards for the number of players in a group ( after all why should 2 or more people split the same amount of coin that a soloer gets as a reward for killing the same mob). EQ II came up with a great idea of risk vs reward for the Solo/Group players with the Splitpaw Saga Expansion. The person that soloed could experience the same content as the grouper even if they had to go into a zone 100 times to get what they need where as a group could get the reward in less time. Currently there isn't an incentive to group except to complete 5% of the quests in WOW ( excluding dungeons and raid content of course)
To add to my comment if WOW made it to forced grouping it would not be a successful as it currently is. LOTR is a good example of a good game gone bad by having forced grouping to complete quests. One can literally spend hours trying to get a group to help them complete a quest that is in their log book.
actually, in my opinion, the answer is to leave it alone, it isn't broken - much to the contrary of Imho. The market for group centric games is not that high.
Actually you are correct in your opinion that if it isn't broken don't fix it. One gets tired of reading the dribble about how soloing is ruining MMO's and is forced to comment in a more constructive manner. If you like to solo do so. If you like to group do that as well. If the game isn't hardcore enough that where it doesn't have a good death penalty for you delete you toon and start over so you can be more hardcore than the game allows.
So the top ranked Kenyan runner could enter a race with 6 year olds, and all he needs to do is tie a rope between his legs, and that would be the same thing as running the Boston marathon.
Riiiiiight.
WTF are you on! Your current analogy makes as much sense as your last about cars in the other thread, for future reference that would be “bugger all” sense. Perhaps I will take up bungee jumping using neckties, because it is completely unlike climbing the Eifel tower using only my toenails.
Taaaake that.
What I really wanted to say would probably see my account banned; I rue the day halfwits started buying computers for entertainment, instead of using their sisters.
My Colour Is Vomit green, I puke on the tards with stupid colour sigs. My symbol is ,,!, O ,!,, My enemies are any prat with a colour sig, a meaningless personality test, or a pointless list of games and classes.
Regards Hexcaliber
This is an exerpt of a post I made on a game forum I play regarding Partying vs Solo. I think it says my feelings on this subject.
"Now, here's my problem with partying. I hate it, makes me uncomfortable 99% of the time. My personality?...a bit shy in RL could factor into it. But there's more. I've had quite a few covos with friends on this issue and we've thrashed out our thoughts, mostly in agreement. My brother and best friend both named this as their "final factor" in quitting WOW. That factor being the irritating plp they run across whiile being forced to party...lol
The internet is a huge huge place, be it international time zones, personal playing style whatever, most people's friends in RL often do not play the same games, much less at the same time or in the same manner. So you are left with strangers or cyber-friends. Factor in a game like this where the population has dropped so much and here we go with the list of problems in games that force party to play. How often can 3 people, age 50, 30 and 15 actually get along for an hour (now factor in personality types, playing styles, personal situations...blah blah.)
SO many times I've ran across problems, they play too slow, too fast, babble like they're on crack, get up for a coffee break, get dc'd, mommy's calling, wanna go this way, wanna go that way, i'm too slow, i'm too fast, get their drops and run gotta go turn it in, oops they're dead (what the hell were they doing in here anyway...lol), oops I'm dead (who's gonna wait), hello hello what quest you on?, damn no ones even here, I'm all alone on the whole floor, uhh sure I can party with ya but I only need 2 more...lol, do you speak english?, oh you died and now i've got to cuss you out....and the beat goes on and on and on.
Trying to force social interaction between strangers as a gameplay rule is not easy, to tell players that it is required is often a game killer. I don't mind partying occasionally with nice people, or even helping...seen many the same way. But overall, outside of some formed social clique, most noobs (and players in general) enter a game alone. True friendships, even in RL, take years of f2f understanding and bonding. To make an internet, international, mmo game too party dependant is just no fun. It is often thrown up as an excuse by some as an answer to the overpowered mobs in this game, when we know its never been about social stuff and all about the IM. (most often by those very hardcore leveling on crack speedsters that irritate me most...LOL) Games have to offer what suits their playerbase. AO is just not the game to be forcing constant parting after lvl 80..lol Some areas yeah, but everything? Just wont work. I think many miss the point, games are suppose to be fun...not irritating as hell on top of the game already having "going down in flames" issues..lol
I quote my best friend who recently quit wow " I feel so much better knowing i'll never be cussed out by a 13 year old party member again and have to feel that "feeling" of what I would do if I could stick my hand through the monitor and grab ahold of their throats"...LOL"
One of the reason there are so many rude/inconsiderate/annoying players these days is because of the overly heavy focus on soloing. Most of these people think that because they can solo something that they are automatically an elite player and thus need not be bothered with things like groups. There will always be good players and bad players, but to think most mmorpgs require such skill to play that there is somehow a subpopulation of elite players is laughable.
Just about any mmorpg I can think of is presented in terms of a faction, a realm, or some other type of unifying classification. In many games this means nothing and has no bearing on gameplay. In some, it does. Nevertheless, the fact that these unifying factors exist suggest that it is intended for players to work together towards a common goal. This is much easier to see in games like DAoC, WoW, etc, not so much in others. So by the very design of mmorpgs, grouping and cooperation is implied at the very least.
That being said, there always should be a solo option. The market is saturated with so many casual and non-traditional gamers that a solo option is required. But just because the option exists doesnt mean that all games should focus on soloability and worse yet, make it the clearly superior path for advancement and playability.