People don't give a damn about Soloing OR Grouping. They care about advancement. They will take the path that is easiest/quickest/best for them to get there. And for the vast majority of people on this planet, that is by themselves. The groupers are upset because they feel this genre caters too much to solo play. To the point that there very few people are willing to group, and the rewards for doing so are weak. And they (I) believe that at an even split between advancement rates will still heavily favour soloers to the point that grouping is still nigh obsolete because people tend follow the easiest route, which in modern times is relying solely on yourself.
Soloers are upset because they feel that they are unable to compete with groupers because of the mandatory group requirement for advancement. That it is impossible to attain the uber gear solo.
BOTH ARE RIGHT! Depending upon what part of most modern games you are talking about, either one is correct. The "Leveling Process" heavily favours solo advancement, to the point that grouping is very rare and very unrewarding. The "End Game" Always favours the groupers to the point that solo play is unrewarding, and sometimes, downright depressing.
This is because investors, developers, publishers, ect are too God Damn afraid to choose an audience. They instead try for mass appeal, creating, at best, a mediocre experience for everyone.
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.
The attitude of the rude and inconsiderate has absolutely nothing to do with a preferred play style, and everything to do with the anonymity proffered by the internet and a wider example of society today as a whole. The idea it could be tied in any way, shape, or form, to someone simply because they choose to play alone for a while is complete hogwash and garbage.
You also present the idea that social interaction begins and ends with grouping and co operation, nothing could be further from the truth, one is not exclusive to the other. I have met many anti social players in groups; those who would grab all they can, are inconsiderate and put at risk an entire group, solely for personal satisfaction. Along with far too many groups to count, that would zerg solo content and deliberately grief others, so you can take that idea and shove it too.
Most of those arguing the solo corner seek only equality, regardless of play style, and happily accept and take part in both styles of play regularly. It is the group only crowd, who look to set themselves apart, as somehow being more deserving of reward and satisfaction, simply for having played with friends or god forbid even pugs.
Your real agenda for posting, is so thinly veiled it is transparent, you do not even warrant 1/10 for effort, quite frankly, your entire post is full of facile nonsense; that is my way of saying your talking out of your arse.
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.
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.
The attitude of the rude and inconsiderate has absolutely nothing to do with a preferred play style, and everything to do with the anonymity proffered by the internet and a wider example of society today as a whole. The idea it could be tied in any way, shape, or form, to someone simply because they choose to play alone for a while is complete hogwash and garbage.
You also present the idea that social interaction begins and ends with grouping and co operation, nothing could be further from the truth, one is not exclusive to the other. I have met many anti social players in groups; those who would grab all they can, are inconsiderate and put at risk an entire group, solely for personal satisfaction. Along with far too many groups to count, that would zerg solo content and deliberately grief others, so you can take that idea and shove it too.
Most of those arguing the solo corner seek only equality, regardless of play style, and happily accept and take part in both styles of play regularly. It is the group only crowd, who look to set themselves apart, as somehow being more deserving of reward and satisfaction, simply for having played with friends or god forbid even pugs.
Your real agenda for posting, is so thinly veiled it is transparent, you do not even warrant 1/10 for effort, quite frankly, your entire post is full of facile nonsense; that is my way of saying your talking out of your arse.
Oh, woe is me, to be so outclassed by such wit as that which you provide. One small problem with your preposition: you fail to back up any of your assertions with anything. Just because you say its true oh yee elite message board champion does not mean it is. If you had comprehension skills, you would see that I said ONE of the reasons was due to solo intensive games. Anonymity, the immaturity of new gamers to the genre, and other social factors are certainly part of the problem. But since this thread is about soloing, that is the part I addressed. You may think that you are quite witty to openly attack what I wrote, but you can in no way disprove it. Many games went through periods in the 2002-2004 range where everything switched to solo dominated gameplay. For me, it was in DAoC. There was a clear shift from grouping to solo play. Why? Because it was more efficient due to current coding and the reward system. Hell, there was even a trend shift in EQ to solo play. And just like you find in WoW or any current mmorpg today, most of these soloers brag that they are somehow skilled and therefore solo because they are simply better than the rest. I never said soloing is wrong or hinting as to a magical amount of time that makes it bad.
Your second argument is offpoint at best. Nowhere did I say that grouping is more efficient or that there are never rude players in groups. In fact, thats kinda the whole point behind my post, that many of the rude people in groups in current mmorpgs are a result of this elitist/entitlement subculture. So again, reading comprehension ftw.
Third, while this may be YOUR experience or pehaps compensation for what is really the case, it is not the experience of myself and most others I have played with, talked with, or read. How pompus and ignorant to come here and proclaim that the soloers have the moral high ground and seek only peace and equality. Sorry champ, but it is far more often that its is the soloers who play the role of griefer, in various forms. But I am glad you made such a stupid comment because it exposes the fallacy behind the whole solo is king mentality. You want equality, you want to be able to do all the same content, but just by yourself. So again, why do you choose a mmorpg as a vehicle to do this? Thats right, to flex your epeen ( whether openly or internally) and proclaim your superiority to poor masses who group because they lack the leet skills you possess. Why, in a mmorpg, a genre that unquestionably is designed to create and foster an interconnected community, do you strive to elevate a playstyle that does nothing for the community and simply satisfies your needs? I guess the same reason you feel the need to attack someone on a messageboard. Interesting that your first instinct to a neutral post is to flame and proclaim your supreme views.
And finally, I hate to cut through your savy, educate argument here, but why exactly do I need to veil my true intentions. Just as you said in your own witty retort, the internet allows for anonymity, so what do I have to fear from making a post? Am I scared to post my true thoughts? Do you really believe I need to hide or disguise my views from such intellectual giants as yourself? The premise of my post is sound. Whether you can admit it or not is irrelevant. It is unquestionable that games have continuously skewed to the side of soloability while devaluing and in some cases punishing grouping. It is also unquestionable that the amount of leet gamers like yourself has increased exponentially in the last 5 or so years. Finally, it is unquestionable that gropuing and cooperation are designed into every major mmorpg on the market. I solo most of the time when I play, usually only grouping if friends are on or simply when I have to. Yet, that doesnt stop me from remembering the origins of mmorpgs and knowing that the uniqueness of the genre wont survive in its current state. But nice try in assuming by stance and my thoughts.
So you can enjoy your smugness as much as you want, but you sir fail as you failed to invalidate anything I posted. So try harder next time champ and becareful with your wise assumptions. Oh, and being a douche irl does come through online as well, just fyi.
As I said in the past I will ONLY solo anymore because of problems with totally ANAL group types. My son and my 12 year old triplet grand-daughters are the ONLY exception to this.
I AM NOT asking for any changes to be made to dungeons or instances - I can SOLO them as they stand - and if that makes me an "ELITIST" solo player then maybe I am. If I can clear the instance SOLO - HELL YES I am a better player than a HERD of inepts that take a dozen to do the same thing - and I DESERVE all the goodies and XP for the effort.
I just SOLOED a new lvl 22 COMBAT ROGUE (Dual wield - Maces) completely thru Ghostlands in WOW. It was not uncommon to have as many as three opponents on my troop at once - sometimes more. Had 2 adds jump her while she was wailing on one of the lvl21 Elite uglys - and still won. (Female troops only on my murdered wife's memorial account - My personal account has Male troops only.)
My troops are not twinked at all. All my troops have only what they find on the battlefield or can buy with money they earn by "Farming" or by playing the AH.
The only swapping that is done between my troops is profession Mats. I have Chanters, Scribers, Alchemists, LWs, JCs, Engineers, etc and the other players send applicable mats to those troops for equipment and buffs as applicable. I had to go this route because the High level players on line have the prices in the AH so screwed up that a person playing by the INTENT of the game don't have a prayer in hell of being able to buy anything worthwhile in the AH for a reasonable price.
These "Professional" troops are all lower level too since I swap back and forth to bring them up to the next level of ability (Need to get my engineer to lvl 10 so he can make better stuff.)
For all you who want to PENALIZE solo players I can only say Get your head out of your butt and learn how to play your class instead of relying on a gaggle of equally inept players to carry you.
I wouldn't mind grouping except for one small little thing. People are terrible. Both in personality and the ability to play...a video game... because it's rocket science.
So keep your forced grouping games to the failbin, the day I'm forced to share precious moments of my life with your average MMO monkey is the day I stop playing the genre.
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.
yes you dodged it just like you are still doing. its simple really theres two ways to make grouping viable again
1) force it - long down-times for soloing so thus you want to group to get rid of said downtime. no one wants to see that again.
2) encourage it - give it bonuses so that people are more obliged to group up with other gamers but not forced into it.
as it stands right in current MMOs grouping and soloing are fairly balanced in exp per hour and maybe even slightly tipped toward soloing. so what do you get, hardly anyone groups unless its for a quest and after that quest is done the group immediately breaks up because "i get more exp solo". you see this in WOW, WAR, AOC and even in AION. people would rather solo than group unless its to do an instance run.
so if you tripled the xp thus tipping the scales even more in favor of soloing why would anyone actually ever group to level? they wouldn't there is no need. so yes your situation does hinder the grouping playstyle.
in my scenerio soloing isn't hindered at all you can still solo you can still get good exp you can still do quests. Yet you are encouraged via bonuses to make new friends and join up with other players.
so why don't you stop dodging my question and actually answer it for once.
The attitude of the rude and inconsiderate has absolutely nothing to do with a preferred play style,
actually i disagree with that completely. back in EQ1 you had a little thing called accountability. where as you NEEDED other people to help you level. if you were a douche, a ninja looter or Killstealer ....
I knew
my group knew
My guild knew
mostly likely the other group members guilds knew
and OOC knew
so when this person tried to group up people recognized the name and said no way. thus pretty much killing off his progression so he either had to start a new character or quit.
but now that anyone and thier mother can solo to max level they don't need to care if they are a douche or not because they will hit max level anyway.
People don't give a damn about Soloing OR Grouping. They care about advancement. They will take the path that is easiest/quickest/best for them to get there. And for the vast majority of people on this planet, that is by themselves. The groupers are upset because they feel this genre caters too much to solo play. To the point that there very few people are willing to group, and the rewards for doing so are weak. And they (I) believe that at an even split between advancement rates will still heavily favour soloers to the point that grouping is still nigh obsolete because people tend follow the easiest route, which in modern times is relying solely on yourself. Soloers are upset because they feel that they are unable to compete with groupers because of the mandatory group requirement for advancement. That it is impossible to attain the uber gear solo. BOTH ARE RIGHT! Depending upon what part of most modern games you are talking about, either one is correct. The "Leveling Process" heavily favours solo advancement, to the point that grouping is very rare and very unrewarding. The "End Game" Always favours the groupers to the point that solo play is unrewarding, and sometimes, downright depressing. This is because investors, developers, publishers, ect are too God Damn afraid to choose an audience. They instead try for mass appeal, creating, at best, a mediocre experience for everyone.
This is the right answer. Most players simply choose what advances them the fastest and easiest.
I think that devs will, eventually choose to appeal to more specific groups of gamers, as there is clearly a market for only a small few mass-market MMOs. I think niche games are the future because investors will finally learn that having a big slice of a small pie is better than a tiny piece of a big pie.
There wil be grouping games in the future, as it is a market which is currently under-exploited.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
There is often talk of a heavy grouping game being a niche need that developers may create MMO’s for. As someone who thinks we just need a rebalance of play style I am not sure this is needed. But I also doubt any such games will get made. The new FF is a possibility, but I understand that is already being touted as more solo friendly then the old one.
MMO companies want to appear to cater for all our needs and that’s why no one is ever happy. Whether its grouping/solo, sandbox/themepark, pvp/pve, severe death penalty/no death penalty etc etc. They want us all to join to maximise profit, so we get a muddle every time. Commercially this does happen of course, but more often you get a wide range of choice. Imagine every cereal producer only makes cereals with the same amount of sugar, wheat and nuts. We would be all commenting on how alike they are and asking for some variety.
Originally posted by Scot One size does not suit all.
Yup, which is why when you set up your production line for mass producing one size of clothing, you try to hit the sweet spot in the market. The majority of people will be pleased. The vocal minority will bitch about your product in the clothing forums.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
You can still have community without forcing people to group all the time. SWG was very solo friendly even pre-CU and had a terrific community.
Nothing in MMORPG says grouping is mandatory. I won't sub to a MMO that I HAVE to group to get to max level...I'm not going to stand around LFG all the time.
It is only the result of Ignorance. A massive multi player online role playing game.
This genre is like the seed of a great tree and the poison that does not allow It to grow is solo game design.
A gamer should be allowed to play the game and have experiences without grouping but the core component that is needed for this genre to grow is community and grouping.
Player interactivity, grouping and community is as important to keeping this genre alive as food is to our bodies.
Without It, It becomes a dead life form.
We've seen the dead end that is forced grouping in games. One need look no further than Dungeons and Dragons online for what happens... I was in at the original launch. I for one do not wish to spend a good part of my limited play time being forced to LFG. A game first and foremost must be fun and entertaining. If one looks at the market trend, solo friendly games are the future. Which is just as well, as group collectivism is a poison that could well kill the MMO industry.
You can still have community without forcing people to group all the time. SWG was very solo friendly even pre-CU and had a terrific community. Nothing in MMORPG says grouping is mandatory. I won't sub to a MMO that I HAVE to group to get to max level...I'm not going to stand around LFG all the time.
Yup, which is why when you set up your production line for mass producing one size of clothing, you try to hit the sweet spot in the market. The majority of people will be pleased. The vocal minority will bitch about your product in the clothing forums.
Some companies make baby clothes or pet clothes.
If the slice is big enough, a small pie will do.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
So you can enjoy your smugness as much as you want, but you sir fail as you failed to invalidate anything I posted. So try harder next time champ and becareful with your wise assumptions. Oh, and being a douche irl does come through online as well, just fyi.
You make groundless and unsubstantiated claims that a gamers attitude towards others predicates his gaming style, which is simply asinine and absurd. You also suffer an overly romanticised view of early mmo’s, where solo content was always available alongside group content. You infer that grouping is essential to community and socialising within mmo’s. You also make the mistake of assuming that I stand on one side of the fence or the other having a set play style . You are also the one who uses language in an attempt to infer he has some sort of statistical insight into gaming culture. And you are the one who is reduced to insults and demeaning language when referring to gamers with other preferences. Moreover, it is you that would seek to pigeonhole gamers, based on nothing more than your bias and preference. You are the only one being pompous and arrogant, little man.
Had you bothered to read the contents of the thread before trying to jump on the bandwagon, you may not have made quite so many mistakes with your comprehension. I had no need to debunk your original arguments, as they had no merit in the first place.
All I, and others who would support the solo argument wish for is equality for all, it is the pro group camp that mistakenly believes it is somehow superior or more deserving, while paying no more for subscriptions than a solo gamer. The one thing that was not balanced in early mmo’s was the reward system, where groups were rewarded with greater items and experience over solo play, while the scaled content was no harder for the group than that of the solo content for the soloers. The pro group camp are the ones whining now that they cannot enjoy their elite raid items to further their epeens, and accelerated levelling. You claim to play predominantly solo while your use of language and general attitude scream otherwise.
“Oh, and being a douche irl does come through online as well” this is about the only thing you got right. Must be damned hard getting through life, with that chip on your shoulder nagging in your ear all the time.
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.
You can still have community without forcing people to group all the time. SWG was very solo friendly even pre-CU and had a terrific community. Nothing in MMORPG says grouping is mandatory. I won't sub to a MMO that I HAVE to group to get to max level...I'm not going to stand around LFG all the time.
And I won't play a game that's solo friendly pre-raid because the grouping part of the game, which I enjoy, sucks.
that's why developers should make different games for different types of players to capture different segments of the market.
Some people want FFA PvP, some people like P2P some like F2P, and so on.
There's no problem that you want a solo friendly game. Developers should make them to cater to players like you.
All I, and others who would support the solo argument wish for is equality for all, it is the pro group camp that mistakenly believes it is somehow superior or more deserving, while paying no more for subscriptions than a solo gamer. The one thing that was not balanced in early mmo’s was the reward system, where groups were rewarded with greater items and experience over solo play, while the scaled content was no harder for the group than that of the solo content for the soloers.
oh spare me the "im the victim routine" the soloer is the golden child of MMOs, where as most developers now spend so much time on thousands of "kill X mob" quests instead of focusing on real content, because the soloer will throw a fit. then they will turn around and double the xp of those quests once the soloer finds out "WTF i can't ding off two quests ... OMG THIS GAME IS AS GRIND!"
games even give out "purple items" for these quests because of the pouting soloists.
the Elite soloer is right up there with the hardcore raider and hardcore PVPer as one of the most obnoxious MMO player. that if thier way isn't THE way to play then everyone else is wrong.
I want balance according to risk vs reward or time and effort vs reward, going into a group setting IS more risky since you have to rely on other people than just yourself. the mobs are tougher so that everyone has to be on the same page. As well as the other outside factors that come with group downtime that you have no control over.
And I won't play a game that's solo friendly pre-raid because the grouping part of the game, which I enjoy, sucks. that's why developers should make different games for different types of players to capture different segments of the market. Some people want FFA PvP, some people like P2P some like F2P, and so on. There's no problem that you want a solo friendly game. Developers should make them to cater to players like you.
Absolutely not. While there are a lot of people who only enjoy soloing or grouping, most (at least the ones that I have known) enjoy partaking in both, plus a few others. Instead of narrowing the field, you should be trying to broaden it. That way you get a much more diverse playerbase.
"Those who dislike things based only on the fact that they are popular are just as shallow and superficial as those who only like them for the same reason."
And I won't play a game that's solo friendly pre-raid because the grouping part of the game, which I enjoy, sucks. that's why developers should make different games for different types of players to capture different segments of the market. Some people want FFA PvP, some people like P2P some like F2P, and so on. There's no problem that you want a solo friendly game. Developers should make them to cater to players like you.
Absolutely not. While there are a lot of people who only enjoy soloing or grouping, most (at least the ones that I have known) enjoy partaking in both, plus a few others. Instead of narrowing the field, you should be trying to broaden it. That way you get a much more diverse playerbase.
If you make it to solo friendly, it's not a good group game.
If you make it to group friendly, it's not a solo friendly game.
You cannot make a group friendly solo friendly game.
If you make a solo friendly game, IMO you have destroyed many of the dynamics that make a good grouping game.
If you make a good grouping game, you will get cries of "forced grouping".
However, there is NO mmorpg you cannot solo in, and NO mmorpg you cannot group in, that I know of.
It's not a matter of excluding one style or the other. NO games do that.
But you will have to lean one way or the other. It's impossible not to.
WoW, to solo friendly pre-raid for me.
EQ, to group friendly for the solo players.
Tell me how you can design a game that plays like EQ and WoW at the exact same time? I'd really like to hear that one.
What I imagine you're going to say, is make it like WoW, NOT like EQ, and that's a good grouping game, but you know what? It's not.
Originally posted by Ihmotepp And I won't play a game that's solo friendly pre-raid because the grouping part of the game, which I enjoy, sucks. that's why developers should make different games for different types of players to capture different segments of the market. Some people want FFA PvP, some people like P2P some like F2P, and so on. There's no problem that you want a solo friendly game. Developers should make them to cater to players like you.
Difference is, you can still group in solo friendly games, so your preferred playstyle is still doable...the reverse is rarely true. I generally like grouping, problem is that it's usually more hassle than it's worth, at least to level.
Of course end game should be group dependent. The problem with group dependent leveling is after the first couple months, there aren't a ton of lower levels running around to group with. When WAR first launched, the "public quests" were great because there were no shortage of people your level to do them with. After a short time, you were SOL.
Difference is, you can still group in solo friendly games, so your preferred playstyle is still doable...the reverse is rarely true. What's preventing you from soloing? I generally like grouping, problem is that it's usually more hassle than it's worth, at least to level. That's the whole point. Grouping needs to be rewarded enough to BE worth the hassle. Of course end game should be group dependent. The problem with group dependent leveling is after the first couple months, there aren't a ton of lower levels running around to group with. When WAR first launched, the "public quests" were great because there were no shortage of people your level to do them with. After a short time, you were SOL.
Well, they did reduce numbers needed on some of the PQs, so it's not as bad as it was at one point, but yes, these games need to either facilitate co-operation between high- and low-level characters or encourage rerolls.
I have come up with a couple of systems to encourage the leveling of alts, but the pros are behind me on this point.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Originally posted by Ihmotepp And I won't play a game that's solo friendly pre-raid because the grouping part of the game, which I enjoy, sucks. that's why developers should make different games for different types of players to capture different segments of the market. Some people want FFA PvP, some people like P2P some like F2P, and so on. There's no problem that you want a solo friendly game. Developers should make them to cater to players like you.
Difference is, you can still group in solo friendly games, so your preferred playstyle is still doable...the reverse is rarely true. I generally like grouping, problem is that it's usually more hassle than it's worth, at least to level.
Of course end game should be group dependent. The problem with group dependent leveling is after the first couple months, there aren't a ton of lower levels running around to group with. When WAR first launched, the "public quests" were great because there were no shortage of people your level to do them with. After a short time, you were SOL.
you can solo in ALL good grouping games, you just dont' make progress as fast as groupers.
This is true in EQ nad DAoC both good grouping games.
So YOUR playstyle is still doable, you can still solo.
Solo friendly games don't stop you from grouping, true, but group friendly games dont' stop you from soloing either.
I disagree that your statement is correct, that ONLY solo friendly games allow both play styles. It's simply a false statement.
IMO, the Pubic Quest idea sounds great on paper, but after playing WAR I thought in practice it sucked.
Originally posted by Ihmotepp And I won't play a game that's solo friendly pre-raid because the grouping part of the game, which I enjoy, sucks. that's why developers should make different games for different types of players to capture different segments of the market. Some people want FFA PvP, some people like P2P some like F2P, and so on. There's no problem that you want a solo friendly game. Developers should make them to cater to players like you.
Difference is, you can still group in solo friendly games, so your preferred playstyle is still doable...the reverse is rarely true. I generally like grouping, problem is that it's usually more hassle than it's worth, at least to level.
Of course end game should be group dependent. The problem with group dependent leveling is after the first couple months, there aren't a ton of lower levels running around to group with. When WAR first launched, the "public quests" were great because there were no shortage of people your level to do them with. After a short time, you were SOL.
you can solo in ALL good grouping games, you just dont' make progress as fast as groupers.
This is true in EQ nad DAoC both good grouping games.
So YOUR playstyle is still doable, you can still solo.
Solo friendly games don't stop you from grouping, true, but group friendly games dont' stop you from soloing either.
I disagree that your statement is correct, that ONLY solo friendly games allow both play styles. It's simply a false statement.
IMO, the Pubic Quest idea sounds great on paper, but after playing WAR I thought in practice it sucked.
Good luck trying to solo any class besides necro or druid past level 10 in the original EQ.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Difference is, you can still group in solo friendly games, so your preferred playstyle is still doable...the reverse is rarely true. What's preventing you from soloing? If the game makes me group to level, it's preventing me from soloing. A game that is solo friendly, you can still group all you want.
I generally like grouping, problem is that it's usually more hassle than it's worth, at least to level. That's the whole point. Grouping needs to be rewarded enough to BE worth the hassle. I don't disagree, but TO LEVEL, I haven't found a game where this is true. LotRO probably came closest. Of course end game should be group dependent. The problem with group dependent leveling is after the first couple months, there aren't a ton of lower levels running around to group with. When WAR first launched, the "public quests" were great because there were no shortage of people your level to do them with. After a short time, you were SOL.
Well, they did reduce numbers needed on some of the PQs, so it's not as bad as it was at one point, but yes, these games need to either facilitate co-operation between high- and low-level characters or encourage rerolls.
I have come up with a couple of systems to encourage the leveling of alts, but the pros are behind me on this point.
I'm an altoholic, so I don't need encouragement to roll alts, but so far this only worsens the problem because with each alt, it seems harder to find a group to level with in MMOs I've played. The only way I think that would work would be for high levels to scale down in level to the lowbies they want to group with. Lowbies scaling up is just power leveling.
Originally posted by Ihmotepp And I won't play a game that's solo friendly pre-raid because the grouping part of the game, which I enjoy, sucks. that's why developers should make different games for different types of players to capture different segments of the market. Some people want FFA PvP, some people like P2P some like F2P, and so on. There's no problem that you want a solo friendly game. Developers should make them to cater to players like you.
Difference is, you can still group in solo friendly games, so your preferred playstyle is still doable...the reverse is rarely true. I generally like grouping, problem is that it's usually more hassle than it's worth, at least to level.
Of course end game should be group dependent. The problem with group dependent leveling is after the first couple months, there aren't a ton of lower levels running around to group with. When WAR first launched, the "public quests" were great because there were no shortage of people your level to do them with. After a short time, you were SOL.
you can solo in ALL good grouping games, you just dont' make progress as fast as groupers.
This is true in EQ nad DAoC both good grouping games.
So YOUR playstyle is still doable, you can still solo.
Solo friendly games don't stop you from grouping, true, but group friendly games dont' stop you from soloing either.
I disagree that your statement is correct, that ONLY solo friendly games allow both play styles. It's simply a false statement.
IMO, the Pubic Quest idea sounds great on paper, but after playing WAR I thought in practice it sucked.
Not all grouping games. Did you ever try soloing some of the dungeons in Dungeons and Dragons at the original launch? They where not designed for that. In fact, I'd say that with in a given level range, they could not be solo'ed successfully. Which is just one of the reasons that DDO had the subscriber problems that it did.
Comments
People don't give a damn about Soloing OR Grouping. They care about advancement. They will take the path that is easiest/quickest/best for them to get there. And for the vast majority of people on this planet, that is by themselves. The groupers are upset because they feel this genre caters too much to solo play. To the point that there very few people are willing to group, and the rewards for doing so are weak. And they (I) believe that at an even split between advancement rates will still heavily favour soloers to the point that grouping is still nigh obsolete because people tend follow the easiest route, which in modern times is relying solely on yourself.
Soloers are upset because they feel that they are unable to compete with groupers because of the mandatory group requirement for advancement. That it is impossible to attain the uber gear solo.
BOTH ARE RIGHT! Depending upon what part of most modern games you are talking about, either one is correct. The "Leveling Process" heavily favours solo advancement, to the point that grouping is very rare and very unrewarding. The "End Game" Always favours the groupers to the point that solo play is unrewarding, and sometimes, downright depressing.
This is because investors, developers, publishers, ect are too God Damn afraid to choose an audience. They instead try for mass appeal, creating, at best, a mediocre experience for everyone.
The attitude of the rude and inconsiderate has absolutely nothing to do with a preferred play style, and everything to do with the anonymity proffered by the internet and a wider example of society today as a whole. The idea it could be tied in any way, shape, or form, to someone simply because they choose to play alone for a while is complete hogwash and garbage.
You also present the idea that social interaction begins and ends with grouping and co operation, nothing could be further from the truth, one is not exclusive to the other. I have met many anti social players in groups; those who would grab all they can, are inconsiderate and put at risk an entire group, solely for personal satisfaction. Along with far too many groups to count, that would zerg solo content and deliberately grief others, so you can take that idea and shove it too.
Most of those arguing the solo corner seek only equality, regardless of play style, and happily accept and take part in both styles of play regularly. It is the group only crowd, who look to set themselves apart, as somehow being more deserving of reward and satisfaction, simply for having played with friends or god forbid even pugs.
Your real agenda for posting, is so thinly veiled it is transparent, you do not even warrant 1/10 for effort, quite frankly, your entire post is full of facile nonsense; that is my way of saying your talking out of your arse.
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
The attitude of the rude and inconsiderate has absolutely nothing to do with a preferred play style, and everything to do with the anonymity proffered by the internet and a wider example of society today as a whole. The idea it could be tied in any way, shape, or form, to someone simply because they choose to play alone for a while is complete hogwash and garbage.
You also present the idea that social interaction begins and ends with grouping and co operation, nothing could be further from the truth, one is not exclusive to the other. I have met many anti social players in groups; those who would grab all they can, are inconsiderate and put at risk an entire group, solely for personal satisfaction. Along with far too many groups to count, that would zerg solo content and deliberately grief others, so you can take that idea and shove it too.
Most of those arguing the solo corner seek only equality, regardless of play style, and happily accept and take part in both styles of play regularly. It is the group only crowd, who look to set themselves apart, as somehow being more deserving of reward and satisfaction, simply for having played with friends or god forbid even pugs.
Your real agenda for posting, is so thinly veiled it is transparent, you do not even warrant 1/10 for effort, quite frankly, your entire post is full of facile nonsense; that is my way of saying your talking out of your arse.
Oh, woe is me, to be so outclassed by such wit as that which you provide. One small problem with your preposition: you fail to back up any of your assertions with anything. Just because you say its true oh yee elite message board champion does not mean it is. If you had comprehension skills, you would see that I said ONE of the reasons was due to solo intensive games. Anonymity, the immaturity of new gamers to the genre, and other social factors are certainly part of the problem. But since this thread is about soloing, that is the part I addressed. You may think that you are quite witty to openly attack what I wrote, but you can in no way disprove it. Many games went through periods in the 2002-2004 range where everything switched to solo dominated gameplay. For me, it was in DAoC. There was a clear shift from grouping to solo play. Why? Because it was more efficient due to current coding and the reward system. Hell, there was even a trend shift in EQ to solo play. And just like you find in WoW or any current mmorpg today, most of these soloers brag that they are somehow skilled and therefore solo because they are simply better than the rest. I never said soloing is wrong or hinting as to a magical amount of time that makes it bad.
Your second argument is offpoint at best. Nowhere did I say that grouping is more efficient or that there are never rude players in groups. In fact, thats kinda the whole point behind my post, that many of the rude people in groups in current mmorpgs are a result of this elitist/entitlement subculture. So again, reading comprehension ftw.
Third, while this may be YOUR experience or pehaps compensation for what is really the case, it is not the experience of myself and most others I have played with, talked with, or read. How pompus and ignorant to come here and proclaim that the soloers have the moral high ground and seek only peace and equality. Sorry champ, but it is far more often that its is the soloers who play the role of griefer, in various forms. But I am glad you made such a stupid comment because it exposes the fallacy behind the whole solo is king mentality. You want equality, you want to be able to do all the same content, but just by yourself. So again, why do you choose a mmorpg as a vehicle to do this? Thats right, to flex your epeen ( whether openly or internally) and proclaim your superiority to poor masses who group because they lack the leet skills you possess. Why, in a mmorpg, a genre that unquestionably is designed to create and foster an interconnected community, do you strive to elevate a playstyle that does nothing for the community and simply satisfies your needs? I guess the same reason you feel the need to attack someone on a messageboard. Interesting that your first instinct to a neutral post is to flame and proclaim your supreme views.
And finally, I hate to cut through your savy, educate argument here, but why exactly do I need to veil my true intentions. Just as you said in your own witty retort, the internet allows for anonymity, so what do I have to fear from making a post? Am I scared to post my true thoughts? Do you really believe I need to hide or disguise my views from such intellectual giants as yourself? The premise of my post is sound. Whether you can admit it or not is irrelevant. It is unquestionable that games have continuously skewed to the side of soloability while devaluing and in some cases punishing grouping. It is also unquestionable that the amount of leet gamers like yourself has increased exponentially in the last 5 or so years. Finally, it is unquestionable that gropuing and cooperation are designed into every major mmorpg on the market. I solo most of the time when I play, usually only grouping if friends are on or simply when I have to. Yet, that doesnt stop me from remembering the origins of mmorpgs and knowing that the uniqueness of the genre wont survive in its current state. But nice try in assuming by stance and my thoughts.
So you can enjoy your smugness as much as you want, but you sir fail as you failed to invalidate anything I posted. So try harder next time champ and becareful with your wise assumptions. Oh, and being a douche irl does come through online as well, just fyi.
Am I missing something here?
As I said in the past I will ONLY solo anymore because of problems with totally ANAL group types. My son and my 12 year old triplet grand-daughters are the ONLY exception to this.
I AM NOT asking for any changes to be made to dungeons or instances - I can SOLO them as they stand - and if that makes me an "ELITIST" solo player then maybe I am. If I can clear the instance SOLO - HELL YES I am a better player than a HERD of inepts that take a dozen to do the same thing - and I DESERVE all the goodies and XP for the effort.
I just SOLOED a new lvl 22 COMBAT ROGUE (Dual wield - Maces) completely thru Ghostlands in WOW. It was not uncommon to have as many as three opponents on my troop at once - sometimes more. Had 2 adds jump her while she was wailing on one of the lvl21 Elite uglys - and still won. (Female troops only on my murdered wife's memorial account - My personal account has Male troops only.)
My troops are not twinked at all. All my troops have only what they find on the battlefield or can buy with money they earn by "Farming" or by playing the AH.
The only swapping that is done between my troops is profession Mats. I have Chanters, Scribers, Alchemists, LWs, JCs, Engineers, etc and the other players send applicable mats to those troops for equipment and buffs as applicable. I had to go this route because the High level players on line have the prices in the AH so screwed up that a person playing by the INTENT of the game don't have a prayer in hell of being able to buy anything worthwhile in the AH for a reasonable price.
These "Professional" troops are all lower level too since I swap back and forth to bring them up to the next level of ability (Need to get my engineer to lvl 10 so he can make better stuff.)
For all you who want to PENALIZE solo players I can only say Get your head out of your butt and learn how to play your class instead of relying on a gaggle of equally inept players to carry you.
I wouldn't mind grouping except for one small little thing. People are terrible. Both in personality and the ability to play...a video game... because it's rocket science.
So keep your forced grouping games to the failbin, the day I'm forced to share precious moments of my life with your average MMO monkey is the day I stop playing the genre.
Alltern8 Blog | Star Wars Space Combat and The Old Republic | Cryptic Studios - A Pre Post-Mortem | Klingon Preview, STO's Monster Play
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.
yes you dodged it just like you are still doing. its simple really theres two ways to make grouping viable again
1) force it - long down-times for soloing so thus you want to group to get rid of said downtime. no one wants to see that again.
2) encourage it - give it bonuses so that people are more obliged to group up with other gamers but not forced into it.
as it stands right in current MMOs grouping and soloing are fairly balanced in exp per hour and maybe even slightly tipped toward soloing. so what do you get, hardly anyone groups unless its for a quest and after that quest is done the group immediately breaks up because "i get more exp solo". you see this in WOW, WAR, AOC and even in AION. people would rather solo than group unless its to do an instance run.
so if you tripled the xp thus tipping the scales even more in favor of soloing why would anyone actually ever group to level? they wouldn't there is no need. so yes your situation does hinder the grouping playstyle.
in my scenerio soloing isn't hindered at all you can still solo you can still get good exp you can still do quests. Yet you are encouraged via bonuses to make new friends and join up with other players.
so why don't you stop dodging my question and actually answer it for once.
The attitude of the rude and inconsiderate has absolutely nothing to do with a preferred play style,
actually i disagree with that completely. back in EQ1 you had a little thing called accountability. where as you NEEDED other people to help you level. if you were a douche, a ninja looter or Killstealer ....
I knew
my group knew
My guild knew
mostly likely the other group members guilds knew
and OOC knew
so when this person tried to group up people recognized the name and said no way. thus pretty much killing off his progression so he either had to start a new character or quit.
but now that anyone and thier mother can solo to max level they don't need to care if they are a douche or not because they will hit max level anyway.
This is the right answer. Most players simply choose what advances them the fastest and easiest.
I think that devs will, eventually choose to appeal to more specific groups of gamers, as there is clearly a market for only a small few mass-market MMOs. I think niche games are the future because investors will finally learn that having a big slice of a small pie is better than a tiny piece of a big pie.
There wil be grouping games in the future, as it is a market which is currently under-exploited.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
There is often talk of a heavy grouping game being a niche need that developers may create MMO’s for. As someone who thinks we just need a rebalance of play style I am not sure this is needed. But I also doubt any such games will get made. The new FF is a possibility, but I understand that is already being touted as more solo friendly then the old one.
MMO companies want to appear to cater for all our needs and that’s why no one is ever happy. Whether its grouping/solo, sandbox/themepark, pvp/pve, severe death penalty/no death penalty etc etc. They want us all to join to maximise profit, so we get a muddle every time. Commercially this does happen of course, but more often you get a wide range of choice. Imagine every cereal producer only makes cereals with the same amount of sugar, wheat and nuts. We would be all commenting on how alike they are and asking for some variety.
One size does not suit all.
Yup, which is why when you set up your production line for mass producing one size of clothing, you try to hit the sweet spot in the market. The majority of people will be pleased. The vocal minority will bitch about your product in the clothing forums.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
You can still have community without forcing people to group all the time. SWG was very solo friendly even pre-CU and had a terrific community.
Nothing in MMORPG says grouping is mandatory. I won't sub to a MMO that I HAVE to group to get to max level...I'm not going to stand around LFG all the time.
We've seen the dead end that is forced grouping in games. One need look no further than Dungeons and Dragons online for what happens... I was in at the original launch. I for one do not wish to spend a good part of my limited play time being forced to LFG. A game first and foremost must be fun and entertaining. If one looks at the market trend, solo friendly games are the future. Which is just as well, as group collectivism is a poison that could well kill the MMO industry.
No signature, I don't have a pen
Some companies make baby clothes or pet clothes.
If the slice is big enough, a small pie will do.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
You make groundless and unsubstantiated claims that a gamers attitude towards others predicates his gaming style, which is simply asinine and absurd. You also suffer an overly romanticised view of early mmo’s, where solo content was always available alongside group content. You infer that grouping is essential to community and socialising within mmo’s. You also make the mistake of assuming that I stand on one side of the fence or the other having a set play style . You are also the one who uses language in an attempt to infer he has some sort of statistical insight into gaming culture. And you are the one who is reduced to insults and demeaning language when referring to gamers with other preferences. Moreover, it is you that would seek to pigeonhole gamers, based on nothing more than your bias and preference. You are the only one being pompous and arrogant, little man.
Had you bothered to read the contents of the thread before trying to jump on the bandwagon, you may not have made quite so many mistakes with your comprehension. I had no need to debunk your original arguments, as they had no merit in the first place.
All I, and others who would support the solo argument wish for is equality for all, it is the pro group camp that mistakenly believes it is somehow superior or more deserving, while paying no more for subscriptions than a solo gamer. The one thing that was not balanced in early mmo’s was the reward system, where groups were rewarded with greater items and experience over solo play, while the scaled content was no harder for the group than that of the solo content for the soloers. The pro group camp are the ones whining now that they cannot enjoy their elite raid items to further their epeens, and accelerated levelling. You claim to play predominantly solo while your use of language and general attitude scream otherwise.
“Oh, and being a douche irl does come through online as well” this is about the only thing you got right. Must be damned hard getting through life, with that chip on your shoulder nagging in your ear all the time.
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
And I won't play a game that's solo friendly pre-raid because the grouping part of the game, which I enjoy, sucks.
that's why developers should make different games for different types of players to capture different segments of the market.
Some people want FFA PvP, some people like P2P some like F2P, and so on.
There's no problem that you want a solo friendly game. Developers should make them to cater to players like you.
oh spare me the "im the victim routine" the soloer is the golden child of MMOs, where as most developers now spend so much time on thousands of "kill X mob" quests instead of focusing on real content, because the soloer will throw a fit. then they will turn around and double the xp of those quests once the soloer finds out "WTF i can't ding off two quests ... OMG THIS GAME IS AS GRIND!"
games even give out "purple items" for these quests because of the pouting soloists.
the Elite soloer is right up there with the hardcore raider and hardcore PVPer as one of the most obnoxious MMO player. that if thier way isn't THE way to play then everyone else is wrong.
I want balance according to risk vs reward or time and effort vs reward, going into a group setting IS more risky since you have to rely on other people than just yourself. the mobs are tougher so that everyone has to be on the same page. As well as the other outside factors that come with group downtime that you have no control over.
Absolutely not. While there are a lot of people who only enjoy soloing or grouping, most (at least the ones that I have known) enjoy partaking in both, plus a few others. Instead of narrowing the field, you should be trying to broaden it. That way you get a much more diverse playerbase.
"Those who dislike things based only on the fact that they are popular are just as shallow and superficial as those who only like them for the same reason."
Absolutely not. While there are a lot of people who only enjoy soloing or grouping, most (at least the ones that I have known) enjoy partaking in both, plus a few others. Instead of narrowing the field, you should be trying to broaden it. That way you get a much more diverse playerbase.
If you make it to solo friendly, it's not a good group game.
If you make it to group friendly, it's not a solo friendly game.
You cannot make a group friendly solo friendly game.
If you make a solo friendly game, IMO you have destroyed many of the dynamics that make a good grouping game.
If you make a good grouping game, you will get cries of "forced grouping".
However, there is NO mmorpg you cannot solo in, and NO mmorpg you cannot group in, that I know of.
It's not a matter of excluding one style or the other. NO games do that.
But you will have to lean one way or the other. It's impossible not to.
WoW, to solo friendly pre-raid for me.
EQ, to group friendly for the solo players.
Tell me how you can design a game that plays like EQ and WoW at the exact same time? I'd really like to hear that one.
What I imagine you're going to say, is make it like WoW, NOT like EQ, and that's a good grouping game, but you know what? It's not.
Difference is, you can still group in solo friendly games, so your preferred playstyle is still doable...the reverse is rarely true. I generally like grouping, problem is that it's usually more hassle than it's worth, at least to level.
Of course end game should be group dependent. The problem with group dependent leveling is after the first couple months, there aren't a ton of lower levels running around to group with. When WAR first launched, the "public quests" were great because there were no shortage of people your level to do them with. After a short time, you were SOL.
Well, they did reduce numbers needed on some of the PQs, so it's not as bad as it was at one point, but yes, these games need to either facilitate co-operation between high- and low-level characters or encourage rerolls.
I have come up with a couple of systems to encourage the leveling of alts, but the pros are behind me on this point.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Difference is, you can still group in solo friendly games, so your preferred playstyle is still doable...the reverse is rarely true. I generally like grouping, problem is that it's usually more hassle than it's worth, at least to level.
Of course end game should be group dependent. The problem with group dependent leveling is after the first couple months, there aren't a ton of lower levels running around to group with. When WAR first launched, the "public quests" were great because there were no shortage of people your level to do them with. After a short time, you were SOL.
you can solo in ALL good grouping games, you just dont' make progress as fast as groupers.
This is true in EQ nad DAoC both good grouping games.
So YOUR playstyle is still doable, you can still solo.
Solo friendly games don't stop you from grouping, true, but group friendly games dont' stop you from soloing either.
I disagree that your statement is correct, that ONLY solo friendly games allow both play styles. It's simply a false statement.
IMO, the Pubic Quest idea sounds great on paper, but after playing WAR I thought in practice it sucked.
Difference is, you can still group in solo friendly games, so your preferred playstyle is still doable...the reverse is rarely true. I generally like grouping, problem is that it's usually more hassle than it's worth, at least to level.
Of course end game should be group dependent. The problem with group dependent leveling is after the first couple months, there aren't a ton of lower levels running around to group with. When WAR first launched, the "public quests" were great because there were no shortage of people your level to do them with. After a short time, you were SOL.
you can solo in ALL good grouping games, you just dont' make progress as fast as groupers.
This is true in EQ nad DAoC both good grouping games.
So YOUR playstyle is still doable, you can still solo.
Solo friendly games don't stop you from grouping, true, but group friendly games dont' stop you from soloing either.
I disagree that your statement is correct, that ONLY solo friendly games allow both play styles. It's simply a false statement.
IMO, the Pubic Quest idea sounds great on paper, but after playing WAR I thought in practice it sucked.
Good luck trying to solo any class besides necro or druid past level 10 in the original EQ.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Well, they did reduce numbers needed on some of the PQs, so it's not as bad as it was at one point, but yes, these games need to either facilitate co-operation between high- and low-level characters or encourage rerolls.
I have come up with a couple of systems to encourage the leveling of alts, but the pros are behind me on this point.
I'm an altoholic, so I don't need encouragement to roll alts, but so far this only worsens the problem because with each alt, it seems harder to find a group to level with in MMOs I've played. The only way I think that would work would be for high levels to scale down in level to the lowbies they want to group with. Lowbies scaling up is just power leveling.
Difference is, you can still group in solo friendly games, so your preferred playstyle is still doable...the reverse is rarely true. I generally like grouping, problem is that it's usually more hassle than it's worth, at least to level.
Of course end game should be group dependent. The problem with group dependent leveling is after the first couple months, there aren't a ton of lower levels running around to group with. When WAR first launched, the "public quests" were great because there were no shortage of people your level to do them with. After a short time, you were SOL.
you can solo in ALL good grouping games, you just dont' make progress as fast as groupers.
This is true in EQ nad DAoC both good grouping games.
So YOUR playstyle is still doable, you can still solo.
Solo friendly games don't stop you from grouping, true, but group friendly games dont' stop you from soloing either.
I disagree that your statement is correct, that ONLY solo friendly games allow both play styles. It's simply a false statement.
IMO, the Pubic Quest idea sounds great on paper, but after playing WAR I thought in practice it sucked.
Not all grouping games. Did you ever try soloing some of the dungeons in Dungeons and Dragons at the original launch? They where not designed for that. In fact, I'd say that with in a given level range, they could not be solo'ed successfully. Which is just one of the reasons that DDO had the subscriber problems that it did.