I'm curious; how did you feel about Age of Conan's levelling system? If you've not played, I'll summarise .. when entering an area you are given a choice between solo or group. The two zones are identical in terms of quests, terrain, NPCs, etc .. the only difference is that if you enter a group area every mob is "elite" and requires a group to kill. They also drop better loot. Is this a game that you are happy to play?
If the rewards compensated for the increased inconvenience of grouping, then that sounds like a good system to me.
Mind you, that would mean the quests gave better rewards in a group instance, since the mobs are tougher.
From an outsider's point of view, AoC's system sounds much better than WoW's.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Who says you can't group all the way to 80 in WoW or most games like it? If you can't, you are playing in the WRONG guild. Matter of fact, I have seven level 80s and five of them went all the way 95% grouping. The other two I didn't group at all until I hit 80. If, and thati's a big if I log back in, my next adventure is going to be leveling to 60 with a toon solo and then PvPing my way to level cap. See, more grouping in WoW. The GROUPING is out there, you just have to go look for it in the right guild.
You can group for outdoor content in WoW, but the system punishes you for doing so.
More hassle + lesser reward = a disincentive to group.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Who says you can't group all the way to 80 in WoW or most games like it? If you can't, you are playing in the WRONG guild. Matter of fact, I have seven level 80s and five of them went all the way 95% grouping. The other two I didn't group at all until I hit 80. If, and thati's a big if I log back in, my next adventure is going to be leveling to 60 with a toon solo and then PvPing my way to level cap. See, more grouping in WoW. The GROUPING is out there, you just have to go look for it in the right guild.
You can group for outdoor content in WoW, but the system punishes you for doing so.
More hassle + lesser reward = a disincentive to group.
I completely disagree. Over the course of a day of grouping, you will get far more xp and rewards grouping than soloing in level appropriate outdoor content simply from the fact that you'll be able to complete tons more quests in the same amount of time. Questing is where the XP is in WoW for outdoor content until you get to 60. 60-80 is a HELL of a lot faster PvPing than questing from what I've been told.
Fear not fanbois, we are not trolls, let's take off your tin foil hat and learn what VAPORWARE is:
"Vaporware is a term used to describe a software or hardware product that is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge after having well exceeded the period of development time that was initially claimed or would normally be expected for the development cycle of a similar product."
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.
If you want to group, group. I have yet to see any MMO where it's impossible to group if that's your thing.
Oh, and one of the biggest turn offs to MMO grouping is finding someone who wants to tell me how I should play. It makes me want to SOLO.
Who says you can't group all the way to 80 in WoW or most games like it? If you can't, you are playing in the WRONG guild. Matter of fact, I have seven level 80s and five of them went all the way 95% grouping. The other two I didn't group at all until I hit 80. If, and thati's a big if I log back in, my next adventure is going to be leveling to 60 with a toon solo and then PvPing my way to level cap. See, more grouping in WoW. The GROUPING is out there, you just have to go look for it in the right guild.
You can group for outdoor content in WoW, but the system punishes you for doing so.
More hassle + lesser reward = a disincentive to group.
I completely disagree. Over the course of a day of grouping, you will get far more xp and rewards grouping than soloing in level appropriate outdoor content simply from the fact that you'll be able to complete tons more quests in the same amount of time.
Not for drop quests, since you end up competing for the drops. Now, if the quest item dropped for everyone in the group, that would be a HUGE improvement. Kill quests are definitely much better in a group, but the kill xp for groups is greatly reduced. Groups also have the issue of needing to be on the same stage of a chain quest to be efficient. Not to mention the competition between players for the random drops. Grouping should not be competitive.
Questing is where the XP is in WoW for outdoor content until you get to 60. 60-80 is a HELL of a lot faster PvPing than questing from what I've been told.
Not in my experience. Unless they recently upped the xp from BGs, questing gives much better xp for the time involved. They should give xp for kills in BGs (as Warhammer does), but I guess they don't want to distract players from the objectives any more than they already are.
I found the xp rate in AB to be sufficient but not exceptional, while AV is better. I found Strand and Isle to be very difficult to get pops for in the 70s bracket.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Who says you can't group all the way to 80 in WoW or most games like it? If you can't, you are playing in the WRONG guild. Matter of fact, I have seven level 80s and five of them went all the way 95% grouping. The other two I didn't group at all until I hit 80. If, and thati's a big if I log back in, my next adventure is going to be leveling to 60 with a toon solo and then PvPing my way to level cap. See, more grouping in WoW. The GROUPING is out there, you just have to go look for it in the right guild.
You can group for outdoor content in WoW, but the system punishes you for doing so.
More hassle + lesser reward = a disincentive to group.
I completely disagree. Over the course of a day of grouping, you will get far more xp and rewards grouping than soloing in level appropriate outdoor content simply from the fact that you'll be able to complete tons more quests in the same amount of time.
Not for drop quests, since you end up competing for the drops. Now, if the quest item dropped for everyone in the group, that would be a HUGE improvement. Kill quests are definitely much better in a group, but the kill xp for groups is greatly reduced. Groups also have the issue of needing to be on the same stage of a chain quest to be efficient. Not to mention the competition between players for the random drops. Grouping should not be competitive.
Questing is where the XP is in WoW for outdoor content until you get to 60. 60-80 is a HELL of a lot faster PvPing than questing from what I've been told.
Not in my experience. Unless they recently upped the xp from BGs, questing gives much better xp for the time involved. They should give xp for kills in BGs (as Warhammer does), but I guess they don't want to distract players from the objectives any more than they already are.
I found the xp rate in AB to be sufficient but not exceptional, while AV is better. I found Strand and Isle to be very difficult to get pops for in the 70s bracket.
Now you are getting nit picky situational and that isn't the point of the Solo vs Group debate. If you go there then Group has a complete advantage over Solo because the outdoor solo player in WoW won't get the XP from the group quests or the blues from the group quest rewards.
Fear not fanbois, we are not trolls, let's take off your tin foil hat and learn what VAPORWARE is:
"Vaporware is a term used to describe a software or hardware product that is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge after having well exceeded the period of development time that was initially claimed or would normally be expected for the development cycle of a similar product."
I'm of mixed opinion. I love playing in a group, but I have HAVING to be in a group in order to play. I think what needs to be done is to separate the content some. Create actual team quests. Not just quests that have harder mobs that you need a team to beat, but quests and content that relie on having teams to accomplish. (Push these two buttons at the same time) Different storylines, some different zones, etc, that having a team will lead you to.
Who says you can't group all the way to 80 in WoW or most games like it? If you can't, you are playing in the WRONG guild. Matter of fact, I have seven level 80s and five of them went all the way 95% grouping. The other two I didn't group at all until I hit 80. If, and thati's a big if I log back in, my next adventure is going to be leveling to 60 with a toon solo and then PvPing my way to level cap. See, more grouping in WoW. The GROUPING is out there, you just have to go look for it in the right guild.
You can group for outdoor content in WoW, but the system punishes you for doing so.
More hassle + lesser reward = a disincentive to group.
I completely disagree. Over the course of a day of grouping, you will get far more xp and rewards grouping than soloing in level appropriate outdoor content simply from the fact that you'll be able to complete tons more quests in the same amount of time. Questing is where the XP is in WoW for outdoor content until you get to 60. 60-80 is a HELL of a lot faster PvPing than questing from what I've been told.
You are only counting combat time, which is unrealistic.
You are not taking into account coordination, organization, travel to meet up, waiting on someone that is link dead, waiting on people to take bio breaks, discussing where to go, which quest to do, compromising, letting someone go buy a piece of gear, and things like that.
Those things happen in a group, not in solo play. You acting as if people magically appear in a group, and don't have to talk or agree about anything, and instantly start killing mobs. Doesnt' happen. But you CAN do that solo, since the only one that has a say so in what to do, is you.
Originally posted by Ihmotepp You just contradicted yourself. You're telling me how ot play, and saying no one should tell you how to play. I want a game with challenging group content. If that content can be soloed, it's not a challenge and you've ruined the group content for me. And yet you insist the solo content needs to be in the game, so no one else will tell someone how to play. So you want to destroy the content in the game I like, then tell me you've given me a choice? WTF??!!
I'm curious; how did you feel about Age of Conan's levelling system?
If you've not played, I'll summarise .. when entering an area you are given a choice between solo or group. The two zones are identical in terms of quests, terrain, NPCs, etc .. the only difference is that if you enter a group area every mob is "elite" and requires a group to kill. They also drop better loot.
Is this a game that you are happy to play?
No, I would not want to play that game. IMO, it's the same thing as scaling dungeons, it's just an Iwin button. I'm not interested.
However, if you made servers for each, and you could not transfer between servers, then I would play on the group server.
That would be an excellent solution. Obviously what you are doing on another server has no impact on my game experience, and the game difficulty could be set on my server so it would be challenging, without "forcing" you to group, since you'd be on the solo friendly server.
Given the popularity of WOW (a solo-heavy game) and the vast popularity of singleplayer games in general (compared to multiplayer titles), I believe you're wrong on this point.
WOW for instance is not a solo game at all. Sure the leveling process is preferably soloed, but leveling is a mere fraction of most's playing time. In WOW your entire endgame is grouping/raiding, anything less then endgame is considered trivial content and considered to be a hurdle in getting to the real fun (as most players will harp on about on chats). Heroic dungeons = group, raids = many groups, battlegrounds = multiple groups, Arena = group. Things you can do solo in WOWs endgame consist of gathering mats for use or sale, playing the auction house and griefing newbs.
No, I would not want to play that game. IMO, it's the same thing as scaling dungeons, it's just an Iwin button. I'm not interested. However, if you made servers for each, and you could not transfer between servers, then I would play on the group server. That would be an excellent solution. Obviously what you are doing on another server has no impact on my game experience, and the game difficulty could be set on my server so it would be challenging, without "forcing" you to group, since you'd be on the solo friendly server.
That right there is why you will never be happy in an MMO.
AoC offers you exactly what you are asking for. 100% group based content that is more rewarded than solo play in terms of XP and drops. You asked for the ability to choose the grouper playstyle and AoC gives you that.
But you're still not happy.
And you're not happy because, although you now have your choice, other people also have theirs .. and they might make a different choice than you. I wish you luck, but you will never find the game that you want because it would not be commercially viable.
To provide a historical example: remember how "well" DDO did at launch with no solo content?
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
And you're not happy because, although you now have your choice, other people also have theirs .. and they might make a different choice than you. I wish you luck, but you will never find the game that you want because it would not be commercially viable.
IF (for example) 20% of players of a certain MMO wanted to group exclusively - then making 20% of the servers for grouping only would seem quite reasonable.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
And you're not happy because, although you now have your choice, other people also have theirs .. and they might make a different choice than you. I wish you luck, but you will never find the game that you want because it would not be commercially viable.
IF (for example) 20% of players of a certain MMO wanted to group exclusively - then making 20% of the servers for grouping only would seem quite reasonable.
Or people could just grow up, play the game how they want, and let everyone else play the way they want, and stop blaming the MMO industry for their own personal failings.
No, I would not want to play that game. IMO, it's the same thing as scaling dungeons, it's just an Iwin button. I'm not interested. However, if you made servers for each, and you could not transfer between servers, then I would play on the group server. That would be an excellent solution. Obviously what you are doing on another server has no impact on my game experience, and the game difficulty could be set on my server so it would be challenging, without "forcing" you to group, since you'd be on the solo friendly server.
That right there is why you will never be happy in an MMO.
AoC offers you exactly what you are asking for. 100% group based content that is more rewarded than solo play in terms of XP and drops. You asked for the ability to choose the grouper playstyle and AoC gives you that.
But you're still not happy.
And you're not happy because, although you now have your choice, other people also have theirs .. and they might make a different choice than you. I wish you luck, but you will never find the game that you want because it would not be commercially viable.
To provide a historical example: remember how "well" DDO did at launch with no solo content?
I was happy with EQ, and also DAoC. If AoC functions similarly to those games in terms of progress you can make as a group or solo player, then it would be fine.
I'm not really concerned with items, but more with XP. If the rate of extra xp you earn grouping in DAoC is comparable to that of EQ or early DAoC, sure that's ok, but I'd have to know more details than you have given.
I played the DDO beta. IMO, the lack of content was not the problem. It was just a sucky game, to much clickety click combat, no open world.
Well OP, I don't condone your efforts to promote how companies should make THEIR mmorpg. Let's look at the land scape. How are the pure sanbox games doing as a whole? What do their concurrent subscriber numbers look like? The same can be said about a pure PVE genre as a whole. How do their numbers look? Now let's look at a mixed genre and see how games look if they cater to PvPers, Groupers, and PvPers. Are you getting the point yet? These companies make games to turn a profit. If they determine the best way for them to turn their own profit is to ensure there game is a pure sand box, great! Pure PvE, great! Mixture, great! Point is, the financial success of their game will depend on their choice. Just don't go blaming others because you game sucks and is void of players because people chose to play a game that offers more variety.
Variety = good solo game.
If you can solo the content or group and both are equally effective, then it's a solo game.
You're basically saying, give me a solo game and screw people that like to group. I don't mind ruining their content, and if they dont' like it they can solo. BUT., I'll say the game has "variety" and they should be happy with that because they can form a group if they want to.
Groupers don't want to form a group for no reason, they want to form a group to overcome a challenge.
What is your point? WoW has the best variety out there and soloers can't get best endgame stuff without grouping. Your point is moot. Otherwise you are are screw solo players, grouping is the only way to play. We both pay the same $15 a month to play, so why can't we each play our own way and be happy? FFS, I don't see solo players running around WoW with the latest T10 gear. You only get it from grouping.
So the solution is simply to design the game without T10 gear.
No T10 gear...no complaints...everyone can solo or group as they like.
Just luike a Sandbox game.
Solution is really easy..you do not have to go far and analyse profit margins, projections etc etc and all that bull.
You just have to make a fun game that people of all styles can and enjoy to play.
A game where people can set their own Goals and own Achievements and therefore own rewards...lets not forget most of the people in this thread are younger generation of MMORPGers, that are used to be rewarded for doing anything in a game, so rewards have to be in any future MMORPG..it is the way of delivery that can change however.
Instead of implementing the Carrot and the stick approach...a more open way can be in place so that the player rewards their own selves through own actions and undertaking in the Fantasy World.
This would mean that you could potentially get the same reward Solo or with a Group, and the only thing that could be different is the time it could take since, a group always has inherently an advantage...two heads are better than one and three better than two.
But all solo style or not would have access to the same rewards since the player defines what the rewards are.
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
And you're not happy because, although you now have your choice, other people also have theirs .. and they might make a different choice than you. I wish you luck, but you will never find the game that you want because it would not be commercially viable.
IF (for example) 20% of players of a certain MMO wanted to group exclusively - then making 20% of the servers for grouping only would seem quite reasonable.
Or people could just grow up, play the game how they want, and let everyone else play the way they want, and stop blaming the MMO industry for their own personal failings.
Are you suggesting that only children want good grouping games, and grown ups prefer to solo?
I think it would be the other way around if anything, since coordination and cooperation require a certain degree of maturity, and solo actions require none.
Well OP, I don't condone your efforts to promote how companies should make THEIR mmorpg. Let's look at the land scape. How are the pure sanbox games doing as a whole? What do their concurrent subscriber numbers look like? The same can be said about a pure PVE genre as a whole. How do their numbers look? Now let's look at a mixed genre and see how games look if they cater to PvPers, Groupers, and PvPers. Are you getting the point yet? These companies make games to turn a profit. If they determine the best way for them to turn their own profit is to ensure there game is a pure sand box, great! Pure PvE, great! Mixture, great! Point is, the financial success of their game will depend on their choice. Just don't go blaming others because you game sucks and is void of players because people chose to play a game that offers more variety.
Variety = good solo game.
If you can solo the content or group and both are equally effective, then it's a solo game.
You're basically saying, give me a solo game and screw people that like to group. I don't mind ruining their content, and if they dont' like it they can solo. BUT., I'll say the game has "variety" and they should be happy with that because they can form a group if they want to.
Groupers don't want to form a group for no reason, they want to form a group to overcome a challenge.
What is your point? WoW has the best variety out there and soloers can't get best endgame stuff without grouping. Your point is moot. Otherwise you are are screw solo players, grouping is the only way to play. We both pay the same $15 a month to play, so why can't we each play our own way and be happy? FFS, I don't see solo players running around WoW with the latest T10 gear. You only get it from grouping.
So the solution is simply to design the game without T10 gear.
No T10 gear...no complaints...everyone can solo or group as they like.
Just luike a Sandbox game.
Solution is really easy..you do not have to go far and analyse profit margins, projections etc etc and all that bull.
You just have to make a fun game that people of all styles can and enjoy to play.
A game where people can set their own Goals and own Achievements and therefore own rewards...lets not forget most of the people in this thread are younger generation of MMORPGers, that are used to be rewarded for doing anything in a game, so rewards have to be in any future MMORPG..it is the way of delivery that can change however.
Instead of implementing the Carrot and the stick approach...a more open way can be in place so that the player rewards their own selves through own actions and undertaking in the Fantasy World.
This would mean that you could potentially get the same reward Solo or with a Group, and the only thing that could be different is the time it could take since, a group always has inherently an advantage...two heads are better than one and three better than two.
But all solo style or not would have access to the same rewards since the player defines what the rewards are.
That just won't work because of the weak minded groupers who will not be satisfied if a solo player can accomplish the same things they can.
Well OP, I don't condone your efforts to promote how companies should make THEIR mmorpg. Let's look at the land scape. How are the pure sanbox games doing as a whole? What do their concurrent subscriber numbers look like? The same can be said about a pure PVE genre as a whole. How do their numbers look? Now let's look at a mixed genre and see how games look if they cater to PvPers, Groupers, and PvPers. Are you getting the point yet? These companies make games to turn a profit. If they determine the best way for them to turn their own profit is to ensure there game is a pure sand box, great! Pure PvE, great! Mixture, great! Point is, the financial success of their game will depend on their choice. Just don't go blaming others because you game sucks and is void of players because people chose to play a game that offers more variety.
Variety = good solo game.
If you can solo the content or group and both are equally effective, then it's a solo game.
You're basically saying, give me a solo game and screw people that like to group. I don't mind ruining their content, and if they dont' like it they can solo. BUT., I'll say the game has "variety" and they should be happy with that because they can form a group if they want to.
Groupers don't want to form a group for no reason, they want to form a group to overcome a challenge.
What is your point? WoW has the best variety out there and soloers can't get best endgame stuff without grouping. Your point is moot. Otherwise you are are screw solo players, grouping is the only way to play. We both pay the same $15 a month to play, so why can't we each play our own way and be happy? FFS, I don't see solo players running around WoW with the latest T10 gear. You only get it from grouping.
So the solution is simply to design the game without T10 gear.
No T10 gear...no complaints...everyone can solo or group as they like.
Just luike a Sandbox game.
Solution is really easy..you do not have to go far and analyse profit margins, projections etc etc and all that bull.
You just have to make a fun game that people of all styles can and enjoy to play.
A game where people can set their own Goals and own Achievements and therefore own rewards...lets not forget most of the people in this thread are younger generation of MMORPGers, that are used to be rewarded for doing anything in a game, so rewards have to be in any future MMORPG..it is the way of delivery that can change however.
Instead of implementing the Carrot and the stick approach...a more open way can be in place so that the player rewards their own selves through own actions and undertaking in the Fantasy World.
This would mean that you could potentially get the same reward Solo or with a Group, and the only thing that could be different is the time it could take since, a group always has inherently an advantage...two heads are better than one and three better than two.
But all solo style or not would have access to the same rewards since the player defines what the rewards are.
I am never concerned with "gear" in the solo vs group debate, just rate of xp.
I don't see how turning the game into a solo friendly game with less gear does anything for someone wanting a good grouping game.
Are you suggesting that only children want good grouping games, and grown ups prefer to solo? I think it would be the other way around if anything, since coordination and cooperation require a certain degree of maturity, and solo actions require none.
Keep in mind that it requires a certain level of maturity to recognize that.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Well OP, I don't condone your efforts to promote how companies should make THEIR mmorpg. Let's look at the land scape. How are the pure sanbox games doing as a whole? What do their concurrent subscriber numbers look like? The same can be said about a pure PVE genre as a whole. How do their numbers look? Now let's look at a mixed genre and see how games look if they cater to PvPers, Groupers, and PvPers. Are you getting the point yet? These companies make games to turn a profit. If they determine the best way for them to turn their own profit is to ensure there game is a pure sand box, great! Pure PvE, great! Mixture, great! Point is, the financial success of their game will depend on their choice. Just don't go blaming others because you game sucks and is void of players because people chose to play a game that offers more variety.
Variety = good solo game.
If you can solo the content or group and both are equally effective, then it's a solo game.
You're basically saying, give me a solo game and screw people that like to group. I don't mind ruining their content, and if they dont' like it they can solo. BUT., I'll say the game has "variety" and they should be happy with that because they can form a group if they want to.
Groupers don't want to form a group for no reason, they want to form a group to overcome a challenge.
What is your point? WoW has the best variety out there and soloers can't get best endgame stuff without grouping. Your point is moot. Otherwise you are are screw solo players, grouping is the only way to play. We both pay the same $15 a month to play, so why can't we each play our own way and be happy? FFS, I don't see solo players running around WoW with the latest T10 gear. You only get it from grouping.
So the solution is simply to design the game without T10 gear.
No T10 gear...no complaints...everyone can solo or group as they like.
Just luike a Sandbox game.
Solution is really easy..you do not have to go far and analyse profit margins, projections etc etc and all that bull.
You just have to make a fun game that people of all styles can and enjoy to play.
A game where people can set their own Goals and own Achievements and therefore own rewards...lets not forget most of the people in this thread are younger generation of MMORPGers, that are used to be rewarded for doing anything in a game, so rewards have to be in any future MMORPG..it is the way of delivery that can change however.
Instead of implementing the Carrot and the stick approach...a more open way can be in place so that the player rewards their own selves through own actions and undertaking in the Fantasy World.
This would mean that you could potentially get the same reward Solo or with a Group, and the only thing that could be different is the time it could take since, a group always has inherently an advantage...two heads are better than one and three better than two.
But all solo style or not would have access to the same rewards since the player defines what the rewards are.
I am never concerned with "gear" in the solo vs group debate, just rate of xp.
I don't see how turning the game into a solo friendly game with less gear does anything for someone wanting a good grouping game.
Perhaps people should be more concerned with having fun. I'm just saying...
Well OP, I don't condone your efforts to promote how companies should make THEIR mmorpg. Let's look at the land scape. How are the pure sanbox games doing as a whole? What do their concurrent subscriber numbers look like? The same can be said about a pure PVE genre as a whole. How do their numbers look? Now let's look at a mixed genre and see how games look if they cater to PvPers, Groupers, and PvPers. Are you getting the point yet? These companies make games to turn a profit. If they determine the best way for them to turn their own profit is to ensure there game is a pure sand box, great! Pure PvE, great! Mixture, great! Point is, the financial success of their game will depend on their choice. Just don't go blaming others because you game sucks and is void of players because people chose to play a game that offers more variety.
Variety = good solo game.
If you can solo the content or group and both are equally effective, then it's a solo game.
You're basically saying, give me a solo game and screw people that like to group. I don't mind ruining their content, and if they dont' like it they can solo. BUT., I'll say the game has "variety" and they should be happy with that because they can form a group if they want to.
Groupers don't want to form a group for no reason, they want to form a group to overcome a challenge.
What is your point? WoW has the best variety out there and soloers can't get best endgame stuff without grouping. Your point is moot. Otherwise you are are screw solo players, grouping is the only way to play. We both pay the same $15 a month to play, so why can't we each play our own way and be happy? FFS, I don't see solo players running around WoW with the latest T10 gear. You only get it from grouping.
So the solution is simply to design the game without T10 gear.
No T10 gear...no complaints...everyone can solo or group as they like.
Just luike a Sandbox game.
Solution is really easy..you do not have to go far and analyse profit margins, projections etc etc and all that bull.
You just have to make a fun game that people of all styles can and enjoy to play.
A game where people can set their own Goals and own Achievements and therefore own rewards...lets not forget most of the people in this thread are younger generation of MMORPGers, that are used to be rewarded for doing anything in a game, so rewards have to be in any future MMORPG..it is the way of delivery that can change however.
Instead of implementing the Carrot and the stick approach...a more open way can be in place so that the player rewards their own selves through own actions and undertaking in the Fantasy World.
This would mean that you could potentially get the same reward Solo or with a Group, and the only thing that could be different is the time it could take since, a group always has inherently an advantage...two heads are better than one and three better than two.
But all solo style or not would have access to the same rewards since the player defines what the rewards are.
That just won't work because of the weak minded groupers who will not be satisfied if a solo player can accomplish the same things they can.
Or to phrase it another way, the solo player will never be satisfied if the grouper has a challenging game to play, because they can't do the same thing solo.
In other words, both players are looking for a game they find fun, and if you design it to be fun for one, it wrecks the design for the other.
Just two sides of the same coin. Your argument is simply, why can't the grouper just play a solo game and be happy?
Why can't the solo player just play a "forced grouping" game and be happy?
Turning a game into a solo friendly game is not adding "choice" for both players, it's just making it a solo friendly game, which means by definition not a good grouping game.
Groupers want a challenging grouping game, not a solo game that let's them group.
Are you suggesting that only children want good grouping games, and grown ups prefer to solo? I think it would be the other way around if anything, since coordination and cooperation require a certain degree of maturity, and solo actions require none.
Keep in mind that it requires a certain level of maturity to recognize that.
Most grownups have realized that they don't need mommy to force other people to play with them... and they've learned the value in doing some things on your own... not to mention the value of personal choice and, ultimately, responsibility.
Well OP, I don't condone your efforts to promote how companies should make THEIR mmorpg. Let's look at the land scape. How are the pure sanbox games doing as a whole? What do their concurrent subscriber numbers look like? The same can be said about a pure PVE genre as a whole. How do their numbers look? Now let's look at a mixed genre and see how games look if they cater to PvPers, Groupers, and PvPers. Are you getting the point yet? These companies make games to turn a profit. If they determine the best way for them to turn their own profit is to ensure there game is a pure sand box, great! Pure PvE, great! Mixture, great! Point is, the financial success of their game will depend on their choice. Just don't go blaming others because you game sucks and is void of players because people chose to play a game that offers more variety.
Variety = good solo game.
If you can solo the content or group and both are equally effective, then it's a solo game.
You're basically saying, give me a solo game and screw people that like to group. I don't mind ruining their content, and if they dont' like it they can solo. BUT., I'll say the game has "variety" and they should be happy with that because they can form a group if they want to.
Groupers don't want to form a group for no reason, they want to form a group to overcome a challenge.
What is your point? WoW has the best variety out there and soloers can't get best endgame stuff without grouping. Your point is moot. Otherwise you are are screw solo players, grouping is the only way to play. We both pay the same $15 a month to play, so why can't we each play our own way and be happy? FFS, I don't see solo players running around WoW with the latest T10 gear. You only get it from grouping.
So the solution is simply to design the game without T10 gear.
No T10 gear...no complaints...everyone can solo or group as they like.
Just luike a Sandbox game.
Solution is really easy..you do not have to go far and analyse profit margins, projections etc etc and all that bull.
You just have to make a fun game that people of all styles can and enjoy to play.
A game where people can set their own Goals and own Achievements and therefore own rewards...lets not forget most of the people in this thread are younger generation of MMORPGers, that are used to be rewarded for doing anything in a game, so rewards have to be in any future MMORPG..it is the way of delivery that can change however.
Instead of implementing the Carrot and the stick approach...a more open way can be in place so that the player rewards their own selves through own actions and undertaking in the Fantasy World.
This would mean that you could potentially get the same reward Solo or with a Group, and the only thing that could be different is the time it could take since, a group always has inherently an advantage...two heads are better than one and three better than two.
But all solo style or not would have access to the same rewards since the player defines what the rewards are.
I am never concerned with "gear" in the solo vs group debate, just rate of xp.
I don't see how turning the game into a solo friendly game with less gear does anything for someone wanting a good grouping game.
Perhaps people should be more concerned with having fun. I'm just saying...
Perhaps people should not try to determine what is fun for others. I'm just saying...
I find a challenging grouping game fun. I find that when you make it solo friendly, the fun is gone.
But I guess you want to tell me I can't decide for myself what is fun.
Well OP, I don't condone your efforts to promote how companies should make THEIR mmorpg. Let's look at the land scape. How are the pure sanbox games doing as a whole? What do their concurrent subscriber numbers look like? The same can be said about a pure PVE genre as a whole. How do their numbers look? Now let's look at a mixed genre and see how games look if they cater to PvPers, Groupers, and PvPers. Are you getting the point yet? These companies make games to turn a profit. If they determine the best way for them to turn their own profit is to ensure there game is a pure sand box, great! Pure PvE, great! Mixture, great! Point is, the financial success of their game will depend on their choice. Just don't go blaming others because you game sucks and is void of players because people chose to play a game that offers more variety.
Variety = good solo game.
If you can solo the content or group and both are equally effective, then it's a solo game.
You're basically saying, give me a solo game and screw people that like to group. I don't mind ruining their content, and if they dont' like it they can solo. BUT., I'll say the game has "variety" and they should be happy with that because they can form a group if they want to.
Groupers don't want to form a group for no reason, they want to form a group to overcome a challenge.
What is your point? WoW has the best variety out there and soloers can't get best endgame stuff without grouping. Your point is moot. Otherwise you are are screw solo players, grouping is the only way to play. We both pay the same $15 a month to play, so why can't we each play our own way and be happy? FFS, I don't see solo players running around WoW with the latest T10 gear. You only get it from grouping.
So the solution is simply to design the game without T10 gear.
No T10 gear...no complaints...everyone can solo or group as they like.
Just luike a Sandbox game.
Solution is really easy..you do not have to go far and analyse profit margins, projections etc etc and all that bull.
You just have to make a fun game that people of all styles can and enjoy to play.
A game where people can set their own Goals and own Achievements and therefore own rewards...lets not forget most of the people in this thread are younger generation of MMORPGers, that are used to be rewarded for doing anything in a game, so rewards have to be in any future MMORPG..it is the way of delivery that can change however.
Instead of implementing the Carrot and the stick approach...a more open way can be in place so that the player rewards their own selves through own actions and undertaking in the Fantasy World.
This would mean that you could potentially get the same reward Solo or with a Group, and the only thing that could be different is the time it could take since, a group always has inherently an advantage...two heads are better than one and three better than two.
But all solo style or not would have access to the same rewards since the player defines what the rewards are.
That just won't work because of the weak minded groupers who will not be satisfied if a solo player can accomplish the same things they can.
Or to phrase it another way, the solo player will never be satisfied if the grouper has a challenging game to play, because they can't do the same thing solo.
In other words, both players are looking for a game they find fun, and if you design it to be fun for one, it wrecks the design for the other.
Just two sides of the same coin. Your argument is simply, why can't the grouper just play a solo game and be happy?
Why can't the solo player just play a "forced grouping" game and be happy?
Turning a game into a solo friendly game is not adding "choice" for both players, it's just making it a solo friendly game, which means by definition not a good grouping game.
Groupers want a challenging grouping game, not a solo game that let's them group.
Soloers are just fine with a game designed to allow for both types of gameplay. It's only the groupers that I see talking about doing away with the type of play soloers prefer.
Are you suggesting that only children want good grouping games, and grown ups prefer to solo? I think it would be the other way around if anything, since coordination and cooperation require a certain degree of maturity, and solo actions require none.
Keep in mind that it requires a certain level of maturity to recognize that.
Most grownups have realized that they don't need mommy to force other people to play with them... and they've learned the value in doing some things on your own... not to mention the value of personal choice and, ultimately, responsibility.
Nobody wants you to group with them. I don't, and I don't think any of the forum users here do either.
Seriously. Do not want you to group with me. Not ever. Not in any game.
Nobody "forces" people to play baseball instead of tennis.
Baseball is a group sport. Tennis is a solo sport. Nobody is kidnapping people and making them play baseball instead of tennis. Nobody wants to make you play a good grouping game instead of a good solo game.
Play a solo friendly game like WoW. I"im find with that.
Why dont' you want to let me play a good grouping game?
Comments
If the rewards compensated for the increased inconvenience of grouping, then that sounds like a good system to me.
Mind you, that would mean the quests gave better rewards in a group instance, since the mobs are tougher.
From an outsider's point of view, AoC's system sounds much better than WoW's.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
You can group for outdoor content in WoW, but the system punishes you for doing so.
More hassle + lesser reward = a disincentive to group.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
You can group for outdoor content in WoW, but the system punishes you for doing so.
More hassle + lesser reward = a disincentive to group.
I completely disagree. Over the course of a day of grouping, you will get far more xp and rewards grouping than soloing in level appropriate outdoor content simply from the fact that you'll be able to complete tons more quests in the same amount of time. Questing is where the XP is in WoW for outdoor content until you get to 60. 60-80 is a HELL of a lot faster PvPing than questing from what I've been told.
Fear not fanbois, we are not trolls, let's take off your tin foil hat and learn what VAPORWARE is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporware
"Vaporware is a term used to describe a software or hardware product that is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge after having well exceeded the period of development time that was initially claimed or would normally be expected for the development cycle of a similar product."
If you want to group, group. I have yet to see any MMO where it's impossible to group if that's your thing.
Oh, and one of the biggest turn offs to MMO grouping is finding someone who wants to tell me how I should play. It makes me want to SOLO.
You can group for outdoor content in WoW, but the system punishes you for doing so.
More hassle + lesser reward = a disincentive to group.
I completely disagree. Over the course of a day of grouping, you will get far more xp and rewards grouping than soloing in level appropriate outdoor content simply from the fact that you'll be able to complete tons more quests in the same amount of time.
Not for drop quests, since you end up competing for the drops. Now, if the quest item dropped for everyone in the group, that would be a HUGE improvement. Kill quests are definitely much better in a group, but the kill xp for groups is greatly reduced. Groups also have the issue of needing to be on the same stage of a chain quest to be efficient. Not to mention the competition between players for the random drops. Grouping should not be competitive.
Questing is where the XP is in WoW for outdoor content until you get to 60. 60-80 is a HELL of a lot faster PvPing than questing from what I've been told.
Not in my experience. Unless they recently upped the xp from BGs, questing gives much better xp for the time involved. They should give xp for kills in BGs (as Warhammer does), but I guess they don't want to distract players from the objectives any more than they already are.
I found the xp rate in AB to be sufficient but not exceptional, while AV is better. I found Strand and Isle to be very difficult to get pops for in the 70s bracket.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
You can group for outdoor content in WoW, but the system punishes you for doing so.
More hassle + lesser reward = a disincentive to group.
I completely disagree. Over the course of a day of grouping, you will get far more xp and rewards grouping than soloing in level appropriate outdoor content simply from the fact that you'll be able to complete tons more quests in the same amount of time.
Not for drop quests, since you end up competing for the drops. Now, if the quest item dropped for everyone in the group, that would be a HUGE improvement. Kill quests are definitely much better in a group, but the kill xp for groups is greatly reduced. Groups also have the issue of needing to be on the same stage of a chain quest to be efficient. Not to mention the competition between players for the random drops. Grouping should not be competitive.
Questing is where the XP is in WoW for outdoor content until you get to 60. 60-80 is a HELL of a lot faster PvPing than questing from what I've been told.
Not in my experience. Unless they recently upped the xp from BGs, questing gives much better xp for the time involved. They should give xp for kills in BGs (as Warhammer does), but I guess they don't want to distract players from the objectives any more than they already are.
I found the xp rate in AB to be sufficient but not exceptional, while AV is better. I found Strand and Isle to be very difficult to get pops for in the 70s bracket.
Now you are getting nit picky situational and that isn't the point of the Solo vs Group debate. If you go there then Group has a complete advantage over Solo because the outdoor solo player in WoW won't get the XP from the group quests or the blues from the group quest rewards.
Fear not fanbois, we are not trolls, let's take off your tin foil hat and learn what VAPORWARE is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporware
"Vaporware is a term used to describe a software or hardware product that is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge after having well exceeded the period of development time that was initially claimed or would normally be expected for the development cycle of a similar product."
I'm of mixed opinion. I love playing in a group, but I have HAVING to be in a group in order to play. I think what needs to be done is to separate the content some. Create actual team quests. Not just quests that have harder mobs that you need a team to beat, but quests and content that relie on having teams to accomplish. (Push these two buttons at the same time) Different storylines, some different zones, etc, that having a team will lead you to.
So long, and thanks for all the fish!
You can group for outdoor content in WoW, but the system punishes you for doing so.
More hassle + lesser reward = a disincentive to group.
I completely disagree. Over the course of a day of grouping, you will get far more xp and rewards grouping than soloing in level appropriate outdoor content simply from the fact that you'll be able to complete tons more quests in the same amount of time. Questing is where the XP is in WoW for outdoor content until you get to 60. 60-80 is a HELL of a lot faster PvPing than questing from what I've been told.
You are only counting combat time, which is unrealistic.
You are not taking into account coordination, organization, travel to meet up, waiting on someone that is link dead, waiting on people to take bio breaks, discussing where to go, which quest to do, compromising, letting someone go buy a piece of gear, and things like that.
Those things happen in a group, not in solo play. You acting as if people magically appear in a group, and don't have to talk or agree about anything, and instantly start killing mobs. Doesnt' happen. But you CAN do that solo, since the only one that has a say so in what to do, is you.
I'm curious; how did you feel about Age of Conan's levelling system?
If you've not played, I'll summarise .. when entering an area you are given a choice between solo or group. The two zones are identical in terms of quests, terrain, NPCs, etc .. the only difference is that if you enter a group area every mob is "elite" and requires a group to kill. They also drop better loot.
Is this a game that you are happy to play?
No, I would not want to play that game. IMO, it's the same thing as scaling dungeons, it's just an Iwin button. I'm not interested.
However, if you made servers for each, and you could not transfer between servers, then I would play on the group server.
That would be an excellent solution. Obviously what you are doing on another server has no impact on my game experience, and the game difficulty could be set on my server so it would be challenging, without "forcing" you to group, since you'd be on the solo friendly server.
WOW for instance is not a solo game at all. Sure the leveling process is preferably soloed, but leveling is a mere fraction of most's playing time. In WOW your entire endgame is grouping/raiding, anything less then endgame is considered trivial content and considered to be a hurdle in getting to the real fun (as most players will harp on about on chats). Heroic dungeons = group, raids = many groups, battlegrounds = multiple groups, Arena = group. Things you can do solo in WOWs endgame consist of gathering mats for use or sale, playing the auction house and griefing newbs.
That right there is why you will never be happy in an MMO.
AoC offers you exactly what you are asking for. 100% group based content that is more rewarded than solo play in terms of XP and drops. You asked for the ability to choose the grouper playstyle and AoC gives you that.
But you're still not happy.
And you're not happy because, although you now have your choice, other people also have theirs .. and they might make a different choice than you. I wish you luck, but you will never find the game that you want because it would not be commercially viable.
To provide a historical example: remember how "well" DDO did at launch with no solo content?
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
IF (for example) 20% of players of a certain MMO wanted to group exclusively - then making 20% of the servers for grouping only would seem quite reasonable.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
IF (for example) 20% of players of a certain MMO wanted to group exclusively - then making 20% of the servers for grouping only would seem quite reasonable.
Or people could just grow up, play the game how they want, and let everyone else play the way they want, and stop blaming the MMO industry for their own personal failings.
That right there is why you will never be happy in an MMO.
AoC offers you exactly what you are asking for. 100% group based content that is more rewarded than solo play in terms of XP and drops. You asked for the ability to choose the grouper playstyle and AoC gives you that.
But you're still not happy.
And you're not happy because, although you now have your choice, other people also have theirs .. and they might make a different choice than you. I wish you luck, but you will never find the game that you want because it would not be commercially viable.
To provide a historical example: remember how "well" DDO did at launch with no solo content?
I was happy with EQ, and also DAoC. If AoC functions similarly to those games in terms of progress you can make as a group or solo player, then it would be fine.
I'm not really concerned with items, but more with XP. If the rate of extra xp you earn grouping in DAoC is comparable to that of EQ or early DAoC, sure that's ok, but I'd have to know more details than you have given.
I played the DDO beta. IMO, the lack of content was not the problem. It was just a sucky game, to much clickety click combat, no open world.
Variety = good solo game.
If you can solo the content or group and both are equally effective, then it's a solo game.
You're basically saying, give me a solo game and screw people that like to group. I don't mind ruining their content, and if they dont' like it they can solo. BUT., I'll say the game has "variety" and they should be happy with that because they can form a group if they want to.
Groupers don't want to form a group for no reason, they want to form a group to overcome a challenge.
What is your point? WoW has the best variety out there and soloers can't get best endgame stuff without grouping. Your point is moot. Otherwise you are are screw solo players, grouping is the only way to play. We both pay the same $15 a month to play, so why can't we each play our own way and be happy? FFS, I don't see solo players running around WoW with the latest T10 gear. You only get it from grouping.
So the solution is simply to design the game without T10 gear.
No T10 gear...no complaints...everyone can solo or group as they like.
Just luike a Sandbox game.
Solution is really easy..you do not have to go far and analyse profit margins, projections etc etc and all that bull.
You just have to make a fun game that people of all styles can and enjoy to play.
A game where people can set their own Goals and own Achievements and therefore own rewards...lets not forget most of the people in this thread are younger generation of MMORPGers, that are used to be rewarded for doing anything in a game, so rewards have to be in any future MMORPG..it is the way of delivery that can change however.
Instead of implementing the Carrot and the stick approach...a more open way can be in place so that the player rewards their own selves through own actions and undertaking in the Fantasy World.
This would mean that you could potentially get the same reward Solo or with a Group, and the only thing that could be different is the time it could take since, a group always has inherently an advantage...two heads are better than one and three better than two.
But all solo style or not would have access to the same rewards since the player defines what the rewards are.
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
IF (for example) 20% of players of a certain MMO wanted to group exclusively - then making 20% of the servers for grouping only would seem quite reasonable.
Or people could just grow up, play the game how they want, and let everyone else play the way they want, and stop blaming the MMO industry for their own personal failings.
Are you suggesting that only children want good grouping games, and grown ups prefer to solo?
I think it would be the other way around if anything, since coordination and cooperation require a certain degree of maturity, and solo actions require none.
Variety = good solo game.
If you can solo the content or group and both are equally effective, then it's a solo game.
You're basically saying, give me a solo game and screw people that like to group. I don't mind ruining their content, and if they dont' like it they can solo. BUT., I'll say the game has "variety" and they should be happy with that because they can form a group if they want to.
Groupers don't want to form a group for no reason, they want to form a group to overcome a challenge.
What is your point? WoW has the best variety out there and soloers can't get best endgame stuff without grouping. Your point is moot. Otherwise you are are screw solo players, grouping is the only way to play. We both pay the same $15 a month to play, so why can't we each play our own way and be happy? FFS, I don't see solo players running around WoW with the latest T10 gear. You only get it from grouping.
So the solution is simply to design the game without T10 gear.
No T10 gear...no complaints...everyone can solo or group as they like.
Just luike a Sandbox game.
Solution is really easy..you do not have to go far and analyse profit margins, projections etc etc and all that bull.
You just have to make a fun game that people of all styles can and enjoy to play.
A game where people can set their own Goals and own Achievements and therefore own rewards...lets not forget most of the people in this thread are younger generation of MMORPGers, that are used to be rewarded for doing anything in a game, so rewards have to be in any future MMORPG..it is the way of delivery that can change however.
Instead of implementing the Carrot and the stick approach...a more open way can be in place so that the player rewards their own selves through own actions and undertaking in the Fantasy World.
This would mean that you could potentially get the same reward Solo or with a Group, and the only thing that could be different is the time it could take since, a group always has inherently an advantage...two heads are better than one and three better than two.
But all solo style or not would have access to the same rewards since the player defines what the rewards are.
That just won't work because of the weak minded groupers who will not be satisfied if a solo player can accomplish the same things they can.
Variety = good solo game.
If you can solo the content or group and both are equally effective, then it's a solo game.
You're basically saying, give me a solo game and screw people that like to group. I don't mind ruining their content, and if they dont' like it they can solo. BUT., I'll say the game has "variety" and they should be happy with that because they can form a group if they want to.
Groupers don't want to form a group for no reason, they want to form a group to overcome a challenge.
What is your point? WoW has the best variety out there and soloers can't get best endgame stuff without grouping. Your point is moot. Otherwise you are are screw solo players, grouping is the only way to play. We both pay the same $15 a month to play, so why can't we each play our own way and be happy? FFS, I don't see solo players running around WoW with the latest T10 gear. You only get it from grouping.
So the solution is simply to design the game without T10 gear.
No T10 gear...no complaints...everyone can solo or group as they like.
Just luike a Sandbox game.
Solution is really easy..you do not have to go far and analyse profit margins, projections etc etc and all that bull.
You just have to make a fun game that people of all styles can and enjoy to play.
A game where people can set their own Goals and own Achievements and therefore own rewards...lets not forget most of the people in this thread are younger generation of MMORPGers, that are used to be rewarded for doing anything in a game, so rewards have to be in any future MMORPG..it is the way of delivery that can change however.
Instead of implementing the Carrot and the stick approach...a more open way can be in place so that the player rewards their own selves through own actions and undertaking in the Fantasy World.
This would mean that you could potentially get the same reward Solo or with a Group, and the only thing that could be different is the time it could take since, a group always has inherently an advantage...two heads are better than one and three better than two.
But all solo style or not would have access to the same rewards since the player defines what the rewards are.
I am never concerned with "gear" in the solo vs group debate, just rate of xp.
I don't see how turning the game into a solo friendly game with less gear does anything for someone wanting a good grouping game.
Keep in mind that it requires a certain level of maturity to recognize that.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Variety = good solo game.
If you can solo the content or group and both are equally effective, then it's a solo game.
You're basically saying, give me a solo game and screw people that like to group. I don't mind ruining their content, and if they dont' like it they can solo. BUT., I'll say the game has "variety" and they should be happy with that because they can form a group if they want to.
Groupers don't want to form a group for no reason, they want to form a group to overcome a challenge.
What is your point? WoW has the best variety out there and soloers can't get best endgame stuff without grouping. Your point is moot. Otherwise you are are screw solo players, grouping is the only way to play. We both pay the same $15 a month to play, so why can't we each play our own way and be happy? FFS, I don't see solo players running around WoW with the latest T10 gear. You only get it from grouping.
So the solution is simply to design the game without T10 gear.
No T10 gear...no complaints...everyone can solo or group as they like.
Just luike a Sandbox game.
Solution is really easy..you do not have to go far and analyse profit margins, projections etc etc and all that bull.
You just have to make a fun game that people of all styles can and enjoy to play.
A game where people can set their own Goals and own Achievements and therefore own rewards...lets not forget most of the people in this thread are younger generation of MMORPGers, that are used to be rewarded for doing anything in a game, so rewards have to be in any future MMORPG..it is the way of delivery that can change however.
Instead of implementing the Carrot and the stick approach...a more open way can be in place so that the player rewards their own selves through own actions and undertaking in the Fantasy World.
This would mean that you could potentially get the same reward Solo or with a Group, and the only thing that could be different is the time it could take since, a group always has inherently an advantage...two heads are better than one and three better than two.
But all solo style or not would have access to the same rewards since the player defines what the rewards are.
I am never concerned with "gear" in the solo vs group debate, just rate of xp.
I don't see how turning the game into a solo friendly game with less gear does anything for someone wanting a good grouping game.
Perhaps people should be more concerned with having fun. I'm just saying...
Variety = good solo game.
If you can solo the content or group and both are equally effective, then it's a solo game.
You're basically saying, give me a solo game and screw people that like to group. I don't mind ruining their content, and if they dont' like it they can solo. BUT., I'll say the game has "variety" and they should be happy with that because they can form a group if they want to.
Groupers don't want to form a group for no reason, they want to form a group to overcome a challenge.
What is your point? WoW has the best variety out there and soloers can't get best endgame stuff without grouping. Your point is moot. Otherwise you are are screw solo players, grouping is the only way to play. We both pay the same $15 a month to play, so why can't we each play our own way and be happy? FFS, I don't see solo players running around WoW with the latest T10 gear. You only get it from grouping.
So the solution is simply to design the game without T10 gear.
No T10 gear...no complaints...everyone can solo or group as they like.
Just luike a Sandbox game.
Solution is really easy..you do not have to go far and analyse profit margins, projections etc etc and all that bull.
You just have to make a fun game that people of all styles can and enjoy to play.
A game where people can set their own Goals and own Achievements and therefore own rewards...lets not forget most of the people in this thread are younger generation of MMORPGers, that are used to be rewarded for doing anything in a game, so rewards have to be in any future MMORPG..it is the way of delivery that can change however.
Instead of implementing the Carrot and the stick approach...a more open way can be in place so that the player rewards their own selves through own actions and undertaking in the Fantasy World.
This would mean that you could potentially get the same reward Solo or with a Group, and the only thing that could be different is the time it could take since, a group always has inherently an advantage...two heads are better than one and three better than two.
But all solo style or not would have access to the same rewards since the player defines what the rewards are.
That just won't work because of the weak minded groupers who will not be satisfied if a solo player can accomplish the same things they can.
Or to phrase it another way, the solo player will never be satisfied if the grouper has a challenging game to play, because they can't do the same thing solo.
In other words, both players are looking for a game they find fun, and if you design it to be fun for one, it wrecks the design for the other.
Just two sides of the same coin. Your argument is simply, why can't the grouper just play a solo game and be happy?
Why can't the solo player just play a "forced grouping" game and be happy?
Turning a game into a solo friendly game is not adding "choice" for both players, it's just making it a solo friendly game, which means by definition not a good grouping game.
Groupers want a challenging grouping game, not a solo game that let's them group.
Keep in mind that it requires a certain level of maturity to recognize that.
Most grownups have realized that they don't need mommy to force other people to play with them... and they've learned the value in doing some things on your own... not to mention the value of personal choice and, ultimately, responsibility.
Variety = good solo game.
If you can solo the content or group and both are equally effective, then it's a solo game.
You're basically saying, give me a solo game and screw people that like to group. I don't mind ruining their content, and if they dont' like it they can solo. BUT., I'll say the game has "variety" and they should be happy with that because they can form a group if they want to.
Groupers don't want to form a group for no reason, they want to form a group to overcome a challenge.
What is your point? WoW has the best variety out there and soloers can't get best endgame stuff without grouping. Your point is moot. Otherwise you are are screw solo players, grouping is the only way to play. We both pay the same $15 a month to play, so why can't we each play our own way and be happy? FFS, I don't see solo players running around WoW with the latest T10 gear. You only get it from grouping.
So the solution is simply to design the game without T10 gear.
No T10 gear...no complaints...everyone can solo or group as they like.
Just luike a Sandbox game.
Solution is really easy..you do not have to go far and analyse profit margins, projections etc etc and all that bull.
You just have to make a fun game that people of all styles can and enjoy to play.
A game where people can set their own Goals and own Achievements and therefore own rewards...lets not forget most of the people in this thread are younger generation of MMORPGers, that are used to be rewarded for doing anything in a game, so rewards have to be in any future MMORPG..it is the way of delivery that can change however.
Instead of implementing the Carrot and the stick approach...a more open way can be in place so that the player rewards their own selves through own actions and undertaking in the Fantasy World.
This would mean that you could potentially get the same reward Solo or with a Group, and the only thing that could be different is the time it could take since, a group always has inherently an advantage...two heads are better than one and three better than two.
But all solo style or not would have access to the same rewards since the player defines what the rewards are.
I am never concerned with "gear" in the solo vs group debate, just rate of xp.
I don't see how turning the game into a solo friendly game with less gear does anything for someone wanting a good grouping game.
Perhaps people should be more concerned with having fun. I'm just saying...
Perhaps people should not try to determine what is fun for others. I'm just saying...
I find a challenging grouping game fun. I find that when you make it solo friendly, the fun is gone.
But I guess you want to tell me I can't decide for myself what is fun.
Variety = good solo game.
If you can solo the content or group and both are equally effective, then it's a solo game.
You're basically saying, give me a solo game and screw people that like to group. I don't mind ruining their content, and if they dont' like it they can solo. BUT., I'll say the game has "variety" and they should be happy with that because they can form a group if they want to.
Groupers don't want to form a group for no reason, they want to form a group to overcome a challenge.
What is your point? WoW has the best variety out there and soloers can't get best endgame stuff without grouping. Your point is moot. Otherwise you are are screw solo players, grouping is the only way to play. We both pay the same $15 a month to play, so why can't we each play our own way and be happy? FFS, I don't see solo players running around WoW with the latest T10 gear. You only get it from grouping.
So the solution is simply to design the game without T10 gear.
No T10 gear...no complaints...everyone can solo or group as they like.
Just luike a Sandbox game.
Solution is really easy..you do not have to go far and analyse profit margins, projections etc etc and all that bull.
You just have to make a fun game that people of all styles can and enjoy to play.
A game where people can set their own Goals and own Achievements and therefore own rewards...lets not forget most of the people in this thread are younger generation of MMORPGers, that are used to be rewarded for doing anything in a game, so rewards have to be in any future MMORPG..it is the way of delivery that can change however.
Instead of implementing the Carrot and the stick approach...a more open way can be in place so that the player rewards their own selves through own actions and undertaking in the Fantasy World.
This would mean that you could potentially get the same reward Solo or with a Group, and the only thing that could be different is the time it could take since, a group always has inherently an advantage...two heads are better than one and three better than two.
But all solo style or not would have access to the same rewards since the player defines what the rewards are.
That just won't work because of the weak minded groupers who will not be satisfied if a solo player can accomplish the same things they can.
Or to phrase it another way, the solo player will never be satisfied if the grouper has a challenging game to play, because they can't do the same thing solo.
In other words, both players are looking for a game they find fun, and if you design it to be fun for one, it wrecks the design for the other.
Just two sides of the same coin. Your argument is simply, why can't the grouper just play a solo game and be happy?
Why can't the solo player just play a "forced grouping" game and be happy?
Turning a game into a solo friendly game is not adding "choice" for both players, it's just making it a solo friendly game, which means by definition not a good grouping game.
Groupers want a challenging grouping game, not a solo game that let's them group.
Soloers are just fine with a game designed to allow for both types of gameplay. It's only the groupers that I see talking about doing away with the type of play soloers prefer.
Keep in mind that it requires a certain level of maturity to recognize that.
Most grownups have realized that they don't need mommy to force other people to play with them... and they've learned the value in doing some things on your own... not to mention the value of personal choice and, ultimately, responsibility.
Nobody wants you to group with them. I don't, and I don't think any of the forum users here do either.
Seriously. Do not want you to group with me. Not ever. Not in any game.
Nobody "forces" people to play baseball instead of tennis.
Baseball is a group sport. Tennis is a solo sport. Nobody is kidnapping people and making them play baseball instead of tennis. Nobody wants to make you play a good grouping game instead of a good solo game.
Play a solo friendly game like WoW. I"im find with that.
Why dont' you want to let me play a good grouping game?