Until there is a decent MMO where I, as a soloer, can achieve (eventually) anything in the game, I'm sticking with non-MMO games. I enjoy playing around other people, and the persistent, updated world concept, but grouping isn't my cup of tea.
Don't think WoW pulled it off as well as some of the other posts might have described, I played WoW on and off for 2~3 years; and I gotta say there is a lot of content both solo and group, but it wasn't neccessarily fun (at least not for me). Raid/Gear gathering was tons of fun, but most of the solo-leveling that was done was repetitive and just plain boring; was pretty tough to get to max level (Just dulllllllllll). It's defintely hard to pull off solo + group play in an MMO and pull it off well, it also depends on what the player wants to accomplish with the game as well (Casual player, Hardcore player); this would include Casual games and Hardcore games as well. At the moment I'm playing Global Agenda, and I feel that it's a good casual game, with a mix of solo (non premade) play and Group (premade) play. I can jump on, do a few matches and head out; or I can take and defend territories in AvA (Agency Vs Agency), maybe even a bit of 4v4 with Clan mates. I highly recommended it to FPS/TPS lovers Overall though you need both Group and Solo play, its just silly not to be able to do one or the other.
I would have tried GA if i didn't see that flying about junk,that turned me right off.The reason i was even looking at it,is because i understand the difference between a MMORPG and a FPS,and they cannot exist in the same genre.
So i always played shooters like UT/Quake/COD1/HL for my PVP fix,then when i wanted a RPG atmosphere i mainly played Eq/EQ2 and FFXI.I now realize how bad EQ is lol,took me long enough,well FFXI woke me up to understand what a true brilliant game design is all about,other than the worst economy design i have ever seen lol.
If they kept GA more like UT1,more realistic and skillful,i probably would be playing it right now,as i do not enjoy any of the RPG's right now.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
It's really as simple as this: Until there is a decent MMO where I, as a soloer, can achieve (eventually) anything in the game, I'm sticking with non-MMO games. I enjoy playing around other people, and the persistent, updated world concept, but grouping isn't my cup of tea.
The thing is, I, as a pretty staunch soloer, don't believe that everything should be accomplished solo.
I think there is a very strong value that can be experienced when one groups. My problem with the system is when grouping has to be done or else your character won't grow at all or is gimped because you can't group.
There are many reasons why people don't group and probably as many variations on those reasons as there are people.
I have to say that though I'm very social in life and not scared of crowds or speaking in public or anything where I'm being focused on by a large number of people, I find it very difficult to just strike up conversations with strangers "just because". There needs to be a reason for me to do so and a reason that feels organic.
Being in an mmo is not very organic with me. I find it easy to step in front of an audience of 1000 people or to go into a store and even help people who are looking at something that I know about but they have questions. But jumping into a party vent is very much the antithesis of "me".
So in general I tend to party with clan members or just prefer soloing as soloing allows me to experience the world or the story in a way that feels right to me.
But I do think that there are things that can be experienced in a group that are very special and specific to grouping. Whether it be group vs group pvp or downing a huge boss encounter.
So in designing these games devs should be cognizant of how solo players and group players are going to develop. If there is a story line that requires a group then dollars to donuts a good amount of people are going to miss it. I'm just going through the rest of book 1 in LOTRO and found out something about Sarah Oakheart. Imagine my surprise. All this time, li'l ol' sarah.
The thign is that people cry "you can't have both solo and group options in games, it doesn't work. And to this I say nonsense. In Lineage 2 there were areas where one could easily solo, no issues. There were also areas you have to work on in a group. So the grouping players would go to Cruma or Tower of Insolence or Forge of gods and the soloers might go to the Wastelands or Forsaken plains or Ivory tower.
My thought is that if a questline is group there should be a solo version. And the rewards shouldn't be inferior but different. A character should at least be competitive if they solo. However, it's ok for raids to be group or for there to be ways that grouping can lend to a different and desired play experience for those who are on the fence.
I don't mind rewards given to grouping players as long as at the end of the day we can play together when we want to play together.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I still wonder why others have not attempted to steal CoX's uncomplicated grouping mechanics. While I don't generally love instancing, I also don't think their ideas could not be done uninstanced.
For those that have not played CoX, (several of the methods have been used in other MMOs but I cant recall one that got it so harmonized):
You can adjust the amount of mobs in a mission.
You can adjust the mobs levels and difficulties.
You can bump team mates up to your level.
You share most mission rewards, even if it was not 'your' mission.
I image something similar could be done even uninstanced. It could be very immersive. I forget now if in Tabula Rasa the more people you had defending an outpost, the more mobs showed up? and this was in the open worlds.
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
I like grouping and prefer to play my MMO's that way in a duo or more.But what I don't like is having nothing to do when not grouped or stalled in leveling because I can't find a group.
I think arguing about something like Solo Play and Group play is stupid. They are both in MMOs you can't make one disappear forever.
To the Pro Solo Play Side: Okay, i can understand you don't want to have to group all the time but if you don't want to group at all then why play an MMO? MMO's are based upon the principle of playing with other people. Not playing by yourself so if you want to always solo go play single player games.
To the Pro Group Play Side: Again, i understand wanting to group and all, i mean why else would you play an MMO? but some of you guys want forced grouping, well let's say a new game comes out and it forces you to group, you pre order the game and fall for the 12 Months for a discount sale they do. Well, a few weeks after launch less, and less people play. So, you're on this quest requires you to be in a group to do it but you could solo the quest easily and the reward is some great weapon of power or something like that. You can't get this weapon because the game is a forced grouping game and you have to be in a group in order to do certain easily soloable quests.
Originally posted by AgentAnarkii To the Pro Solo Play Side: Okay, i can understand you don't want to have to group all the time but if you don't want to group at all then why play an MMO? MMO's are based upon the principle of playing with other people. Not playing by yourself so if you want to always solo go play single player games.
Playing with other people doesn't necessarily mean grouping. Why do people play countless online games where there is no "grouping" of any sort? Because you feel like you are part of a greater community and you can talk and interact if you want, and it doesn't affect your game.
Here's the problem with the concept that an MMOG "should" be about grouping up; not everyone is a good player. Not everyone is wonderful human being. Not everyone can stay focused on what the group is trying to accomplish. When you make a game so that there is unique, superior content that only increasingly larger and better-organized groups can accomplish, it is no longer just a social game, it has become a factory-like job, where you are required to be able to do your part of the job in an efficient manner so that the group/raid (read: production line) can meet its quota. You are responsible to the team to do your part and to do it according to specs.
I don't want my online socializing to be channeled into a being a job, where I'm looking for "employment" and am constantly on probation, and have the chance to be blackballed or get some nasty reviews or get fired for not operating my on-screen avatar like a profession forklift driver because my granddaughter wanted me to drive her to the game at an inconvenient time.
I play MMOGs (or did, and would) for two reasons: to advance my character, and to socialize. I don't want the two to be intrinsically tied together in the same game because it always ruins both for me. Why should the two be necessarily tied together, when most online games (think farmville) completely seperate the advancement, or the goals, from the socializing?
I like group content, but the problem for me has always been getting a group together in a reasonable time. I remember trying to get groups together for group quests and instances in LoTRO, and even WoW, and it just wasn't happening. Unless you can stomach spamming "LFG or LFM blah blah blah" for at least an hour it's just not going to happen. Then you have the issue of chain quests within these areas and the headache of everybody is doing a different part of a quest change. Ugh.
That's probably why I've enjoyed Warhammer Online so much. You click a button and within a few seconds you're in a warband playing together. It's also why I'm enjoying WoW as much as I am now with the dungeon finder. Also, City of Heroes is another game that makes finding groups really easy and fun.
So, in short, group play is awesome, but most MMOs do a terrible job allowing players to come together and experience that sort of content.
"Then it will die. Players will play the way they want to play, if grouping dies, it's evolution in action. Both soloing and grouping have inherent strengths and weaknesses. Soloing is faster and easier, but it is inherently slower than grouping. Grouping takes more time to set up, but you can tackle much harder and higher level content, thus getting XP faster and better gear earlier than a soloer. Now let the players decide which is favored. In practice, soloing wins because MMO gaming has shifted from a hardcore audience to a casual audience."
I think it will die, if developers don't start doing something about it. Before long MMO's will be nothing more than single player games that you pay monthly for. What do soloers want from an MMO, is my question? Why do they want to be in a game with other players that they don't want to team up with? What are they paying monthly for that they can't get out of a single player game?
Also, if you're looking at grouping as being the means to tackling higher level content and getting better gear faster, then I can see why you prefer to solo. I like to group because there are other people involved. Some might be good, some might be bad, but you know what? That's life. Some people you meet are inevitably going to be idiots, it's no different in a video game. But I like the fact that people are there, that I can have a laugh with them, that we can pool our abilities to do amazing things - all of which I would never get from soloing. Soloing is purely a series of button presses while you stare at the screen, watching hitpoints drop. That to me is just not fun.
"But that's not the way it works. Groupers are a small minority of the total MMO market and the people with the money will always win. Welcome to the real world."
Groupers are the minority because since EverQuest, no game has made a point of using grouping to its potential. Every game since then has been solo friendly in the extreme, the only time grouping becomes a necessity now is when you're max level and the raids start to appear. And people only do that because they want the Cool Stuff (tm). There is little to no reason to group through MMO's anymore, I can't think of a single one I've played since EverQuest that I needed to call people to assist me.
"I have the opposite experience, I tend to leave games where grouping is necessary to get anywhere, simply because the majority of people that I group with do not have the same goals I do. They want to run through the content as fast as possible, get as much XP and loot and gear and get out. I want to enjoy the ride. I want to see the sights. I want to make sure I clear an area 100%. That means I don't play in groups very often, only when I want a ton of XP with minimal effort. That's just not fun as far as I'm concerned. Your mileage may vary."
The reason for this is the same as the reason above, no game has made it a necessity to group, so the groups you're talking about are purely there to get from Point A to Point B, grab the quest item or kill the boss mob, then get out again. That's exactly my experience of playing MMO's such as Champions Online. The occasional quest needs a group and firstly, nobody knows how to actually group effectively and, secondly, everyone just wants to get the quest complete box ticked. Once you're in and out and done, the group disbands. That's how grouping is in MMO's these days, there doesn't seem to be any need to do otherwise.
And sure, I'm certain people will say "Well you can group up any time..", but seriously, do you expect people to do that when there is no point to do so? I tend to play these things the way the designers set them out to be played. If I feel I should be soloing then I'll do that, if I feel I need to group then I do that. Unfortuntely the need to group is becoming a thing of the past, and I think that's a sad thing.
"Then it will die. Players will play the way they want to play, if grouping dies, it's evolution in action. Both soloing and grouping have inherent strengths and weaknesses. Soloing is faster and easier, but it is inherently slower than grouping. Grouping takes more time to set up, but you can tackle much harder and higher level content, thus getting XP faster and better gear earlier than a soloer. Now let the players decide which is favored. In practice, soloing wins because MMO gaming has shifted from a hardcore audience to a casual audience."
I think it will die, if developers don't start doing something about it. Before long MMO's will be nothing more than single player games that you pay monthly for. What do soloers want from an MMO, is my question? Why do they want to be in a game with other players that they don't want to team up with? What are they paying monthly for that they can't get out of a single player game?
Depth, breadth, content, constant updates, freedom... there are lots of things that you cannot and do not get in a single-player game that is available in an MMO. Since I dropped my last MMO about 6 months ago, I've played through, or re-played through, virtually every decent single-player game on the market. So now what? I can spend years and years in an MMO and not consume all of the available content. I can't even make a single-player game last more than 2-3 weeks.
Also, if you're looking at grouping as being the means to tackling higher level content and getting better gear faster, then I can see why you prefer to solo. I like to group because there are other people involved. Some might be good, some might be bad, but you know what? That's life. Some people you meet are inevitably going to be idiots, it's no different in a video game. But I like the fact that people are there, that I can have a laugh with them, that we can pool our abilities to do amazing things - all of which I would never get from soloing. Soloing is purely a series of button presses while you stare at the screen, watching hitpoints drop. That to me is just not fun.
I'm not looking at it that way, I'm responding to those groupers who claim that they're not being exceptionally compensated for grouping. The fact is, the very act of grouping can give you that exceptional compensation because you can do things as a group that there's no way in hell you could ever tackle yourself. That means you're going to have that e-peen gear faster than someone who solos. That means that you're going to level faster than someone who solos. That means you're going to have more loot than someone who solos. This is inherent challenge in your game, just because you bring along a couple of friends. People need to stop complaining that "it's too easy". It's only too easy if you don't go do something difficult.
"But that's not the way it works. Groupers are a small minority of the total MMO market and the people with the money will always win. Welcome to the real world."
Groupers are the minority because since EverQuest, no game has made a point of using grouping to its potential. Every game since then has been solo friendly in the extreme, the only time grouping becomes a necessity now is when you're max level and the raids start to appear. And people only do that because they want the Cool Stuff (tm). There is little to no reason to group through MMO's anymore, I can't think of a single one I've played since EverQuest that I needed to call people to assist me.
No, groupers are the minority because they are the minority. Developers cater to the people who pay the bills. The reason grouping isn't used to it's supposed potential is because there aren't enough people to make it a financially viable focus. Games moved slowly to catering to the solo player because there were more solo players who were paying for subscriptions and developers went where the money was. If there were 80% groupers all along who kept demanding group content, that's where you'd see the market today. The marketplace didn't change to reflect the games, the games changed to reflect the market.
"I have the opposite experience, I tend to leave games where grouping is necessary to get anywhere, simply because the majority of people that I group with do not have the same goals I do. They want to run through the content as fast as possible, get as much XP and loot and gear and get out. I want to enjoy the ride. I want to see the sights. I want to make sure I clear an area 100%. That means I don't play in groups very often, only when I want a ton of XP with minimal effort. That's just not fun as far as I'm concerned. Your mileage may vary."
The reason for this is the same as the reason above, no game has made it a necessity to group, so the groups you're talking about are purely there to get from Point A to Point B, grab the quest item or kill the boss mob, then get out again. That's exactly my experience of playing MMO's such as Champions Online. The occasional quest needs a group and firstly, nobody knows how to actually group effectively and, secondly, everyone just wants to get the quest complete box ticked. Once you're in and out and done, the group disbands. That's how grouping is in MMO's these days, there doesn't seem to be any need to do otherwise.
No game has any reason to make it a necessity to group because only a small percentage of people are even interested in it. Come up with a sizeable percentage of people who want to group, go to the developers and ask for a game that does what you want, you'll get it. But your playstyle has to compete in the forum of ideas, the biggest and the most vocal and the ones that pay the best are going to win. If that's not your group, then you lose. It's evolution in action.
And sure, I'm certain people will say "Well you can group up any time..", but seriously, do you expect people to do that when there is no point to do so? I tend to play these things the way the designers set them out to be played. If I feel I should be soloing then I'll do that, if I feel I need to group then I do that. Unfortuntely the need to group is becoming a thing of the past, and I think that's a sad thing.
Yes, I expect people to do that, simply because they want to. I can play a game and craft, just because I want to, not because I have to. It's easier in most games to just go buy whatever I want and not develop those crafting skills. But lots of people actually craft, not because they have to, but because they want to. They enjoy it. Therefore they do it.
Apparently you don't want to group, you just want a game where grouping is forced by the developers, maybe to make you feel better about your chosen playstyle. Instead of complaining about it, why not go do it? Get as many people who also want to group together and group. Then go to the developers and ask for expanded content when you can prove to them that you're a sizeable, paying contingent that will make it worth their while to work on that content. This isn't rocket science.
Depth, breadth, content, constant updates, freedom... there are lots of things that you cannot and do not get in a single-player game that is available in an MMO. Since I dropped my last MMO about 6 months ago, I've played through, or re-played through, virtually every decent single-player game on the market. So now what? I can spend years and years in an MMO and not consume all of the available content. I can't even make a single-player game last more than 2-3 weeks.
Fair enough, can't argue with that. That's one of the reasons I play them too.
I'm not looking at it that way, I'm responding to those groupers who claim that they're not being exceptionally compensated for grouping. The fact is, the very act of grouping can give you that exceptional compensation because you can do things as a group that there's no way in hell you could ever tackle yourself. That means you're going to have that e-peen gear faster than someone who solos. That means that you're going to level faster than someone who solos. That means you're going to have more loot than someone who solos. This is inherent challenge in your game, just because you bring along a couple of friends. People need to stop complaining that "it's too easy". It's only too easy if you don't go do something difficult.
The problem mainly stems from the way MMO's are designed these days, they're made in such a way that you go from A to Z in a very linear fashion, handed quests at every step, and if you don't complete those quests then you don't finish the end quest which will probably have some nice reward attached (see LOTRO book quests for example). The mobs in the areas of these quests are generally to your level, such that people can solo them, so when it comes to trying to group together it's just not worth it.
You can't group to do harder content because you need to do the quests you're already on, so you end up asking for a group to do content that everyone, including yourself, is capable of soloing. You don't want to move off and fight a load of higher level mobs because MMO's now seem to have put a lesser reward on fighting mobs and more on completing quests. So in essence the developers are saying, "Solo these quests.", and that's what people do. The only time people group up for a quest is when it's a boss mob, and even then it's just an in-out, wham bam thank you mam, job done, lets go back to soloing.
On top of that, MMO's these days seem to spread out the XP gains based on the number of players in the group, so you end up being able to fight more but gaining the same amount of XP in the same amount of time. Modern MMO's are just badly designed single player games.
No, groupers are the minority because they are the minority. Developers cater to the people who pay the bills. The reason grouping isn't used to it's supposed potential is because there aren't enough people to make it a financially viable focus. Games moved slowly to catering to the solo player because there were more solo players who were paying for subscriptions and developers went where the money was. If there were 80% groupers all along who kept demanding group content, that's where you'd see the market today. The marketplace didn't change to reflect the games, the games changed to reflect the market.
The reason groupers are in the minority is because they've been forced there. In the past MMO's were for a niche market of spotty geeks into AD&D - the moment the developers saw the potential cash gains from making single player games that you had to pay monthly for, the whole design of MMO's changed, and changed for the worse. MMO's originally were based on the old AD&D adage of people grouping together to overcome challenges in a fantasy setting. You'd never see a single player AD&D tabletop game, it's just not worth doing. But once MMO's became solo friendly, the floodgates opened and the gamers who prefer single player games came rushing in and the geeks were again picked on, laughed at and told to go find a different game where you could group. It's like being back in school.
So yes, you're right, the games changed to reflect the market. But the groupers are still there, they'd still happily jump onto the next game without mass solo content, it's just they're overshadowed by the massive amount of casual players that now inhabit the very different MMO's that now exist. Just as an example, ask these solo players if they'd like to spend their time in EverQuest. I can guarantee you'd get a no. And yet there were 550,000 people in EverQuest back in 2004, which equates to a lot of groupers, but can't compare to the number of single player gamers such as the amount that inhabit World of Warcraft, which is almost 20x the amount. So of course the figures are going to look skewed, when you open the gates to 'every day gamers' you're going to see a lot more than just our little niche market.
No game has any reason to make it a necessity to group because only a small percentage of people are even interested in it. Come up with a sizeable percentage of people who want to group, go to the developers and ask for a game that does what you want, you'll get it. But your playstyle has to compete in the forum of ideas, the biggest and the most vocal and the ones that pay the best are going to win. If that's not your group, then you lose. It's evolution in action.
See my previous response. The people are there to fill up a 'grouping game', but developers are too busy trying to emulate WoW's success to pull in their playerbase. If you get even 10% of those players, that's still a million subscribers. Why would they care about the platform that MMO's were built on, when all they can see are dollar signs?
Yes, I expect people to do that, simply because they want to. I can play a game and craft, just because I want to, not because I have to. It's easier in most games to just go buy whatever I want and not develop those crafting skills. But lots of people actually craft, not because they have to, but because they want to. They enjoy it. Therefore they do it.
I'm not a big fan of crafting so I won't put mention into that, but I will say that crafting is a means to an end - you make something you can use, or can sell to get money to buy something else you can use. So there's a point to crafting. Read my previous point above about quests, that basically explains everything I can say here, but I'll summarise: To form a group you need a point to group. If you can do what the game has set out for you alone, then you're going to do it alone.
For example, you're sat at home and the doorbell rings. Do you a) Go answer the door yourself or b) Gather some friends, get one to check the route is clear, get another to grab the door handle while you see who it is once the door is open? If it's obvious that something can be done alone then people are going to do it alone. It's how we are. Simple as.
Apparently you don't want to group, you just want a game where grouping is forced by the developers, maybe to make you feel better about your chosen playstyle. Instead of complaining about it, why not go do it? Get as many people who also want to group together and group. Then go to the developers and ask for expanded content when you can prove to them that you're a sizeable, paying contingent that will make it worth their while to work on that content. This isn't rocket science.
I want to group, I'd love to group, but yes, the game needs to force it. Just like the current list of MMO's forces me to solo. Does that make you feel better about your chosen playstyle? Are you happy that everyone has to play exactly how you want them to? Because nothing supports grouping until the very end of a game where raiding appears, but you know what? By then, I'm bored of soloing and have probably given up half way through the game. Not only that but raiding is a limited thing where respawns are on a long timer, or the difficulty level is ramped up so you spend half your night trying to defeat one mob, or whatever else it might be.
Not only that but now complaints are coming up that solo players aren't getting what raiders are getting and that's not fair. Why don't they just turn MMO's into multiplayer versions of God of War and be done with it?
Depth, breadth, content, constant updates, freedom... there are lots of things that you cannot and do not get in a single-player game that is available in an MMO. Since I dropped my last MMO about 6 months ago, I've played through, or re-played through, virtually every decent single-player game on the market. So now what? I can spend years and years in an MMO and not consume all of the available content. I can't even make a single-player game last more than 2-3 weeks.
Fair enough, can't argue with that. That's one of the reasons I play them too.
Yet that doesn't stop many people around here from claiming that solers have no legitimate reason whatsoever for playing MMOs. Go figure.
I'm not looking at it that way, I'm responding to those groupers who claim that they're not being exceptionally compensated for grouping. The fact is, the very act of grouping can give you that exceptional compensation because you can do things as a group that there's no way in hell you could ever tackle yourself. That means you're going to have that e-peen gear faster than someone who solos. That means that you're going to level faster than someone who solos. That means you're going to have more loot than someone who solos. This is inherent challenge in your game, just because you bring along a couple of friends. People need to stop complaining that "it's too easy". It's only too easy if you don't go do something difficult.
The problem mainly stems from the way MMO's are designed these days, they're made in such a way that you go from A to Z in a very linear fashion, handed quests at every step, and if you don't complete those quests then you don't finish the end quest which will probably have some nice reward attached (see LOTRO book quests for example). The mobs in the areas of these quests are generally to your level, such that people can solo them, so when it comes to trying to group together it's just not worth it.
Some are, some aren't. Sandbox MMOs are not linear at all but they are in the minority of MMO designs. Lots of people like theme park MMOs, they want design and direction in their gameplay. Again, this is a matter of popularity. More people like theme parks, therefore there are more theme parks. The market place follows the market.
You can't group to do harder content because you need to do the quests you're already on, so you end up asking for a group to do content that everyone, including yourself, is capable of soloing. You don't want to move off and fight a load of higher level mobs because MMO's now seem to have put a lesser reward on fighting mobs and more on completing quests. So in essence the developers are saying, "Solo these quests.", and that's what people do. The only time people group up for a quest is when it's a boss mob, and even then it's just an in-out, wham bam thank you mam, job done, lets go back to soloing.
It depends on the particular MMO you're playing. In some cases, you're right, you do have to do one quest before another. So? Do it and get it over with. There are plenty of MMOs where you can choose your content, you ought to play one of those instead of complaining that you can't do what you want to do in the one you're playing.
On top of that, MMO's these days seem to spread out the XP gains based on the number of players in the group, so you end up being able to fight more but gaining the same amount of XP in the same amount of time. Modern MMO's are just badly designed single player games.
Then don't play those MMOs. There are lots of MMOs where that simply doesn't happen. Easy to fix.
No, groupers are the minority because they are the minority. Developers cater to the people who pay the bills. The reason grouping isn't used to it's supposed potential is because there aren't enough people to make it a financially viable focus. Games moved slowly to catering to the solo player because there were more solo players who were paying for subscriptions and developers went where the money was. If there were 80% groupers all along who kept demanding group content, that's where you'd see the market today. The marketplace didn't change to reflect the games, the games changed to reflect the market.
The reason groupers are in the minority is because they've been forced there. In the past MMO's were for a niche market of spotty geeks into AD&D - the moment the developers saw the potential cash gains from making single player games that you had to pay monthly for, the whole design of MMO's changed, and changed for the worse. MMO's originally were based on the old AD&D adage of people grouping together to overcome challenges in a fantasy setting. You'd never see a single player AD&D tabletop game, it's just not worth doing. But once MMO's became solo friendly, the floodgates opened and the gamers who prefer single player games came rushing in and the geeks were again picked on, laughed at and told to go find a different game where you could group. It's like being back in school.
No, the reason groupers are in the minority is because they are in the minority. There just aren't as many of them as there are soloers. It's purely a matter of numbers. The MMO market didn't take off until it started catering to soloers and more casual players, then it ballooned to 10-15 million players. Niche markets are just not that profitable, all markets will eventually go from a niche to a general purpose marketplace because that's where the money is. Money, like it or not, makes the world go around.
So yes, you're right, the games changed to reflect the market. But the groupers are still there, they'd still happily jump onto the next game without mass solo content, it's just they're overshadowed by the massive amount of casual players that now inhabit the very different MMO's that now exist. Just as an example, ask these solo players if they'd like to spend their time in EverQuest. I can guarantee you'd get a no. And yet there were 550,000 people in EverQuest back in 2004, which equates to a lot of groupers, but can't compare to the number of single player gamers such as the amount that inhabit World of Warcraft, which is almost 20x the amount. So of course the figures are going to look skewed, when you open the gates to 'every day gamers' you're going to see a lot more than just our little niche market.
Good, I'm glad they're still there but it doesn't change anything. The fact still remains that MMO developers are in business to make money, that their investors demand a significant return on investment and that groupers are in the minority and therefore are not going to get catered to. You don't have to like the facts, you just have to live with them. 550k groupers is nothing compared to WoW's 11 million soloers or howmany ever Farmville can attract. You can stop living in the past, that's why it's the past. Today it is not a niche market, nor is it ever going to be one again. Deal with the reality that actually exists instead of the one you wish existed.
No game has any reason to make it a necessity to group because only a small percentage of people are even interested in it. Come up with a sizeable percentage of people who want to group, go to the developers and ask for a game that does what you want, you'll get it. But your playstyle has to compete in the forum of ideas, the biggest and the most vocal and the ones that pay the best are going to win. If that's not your group, then you lose. It's evolution in action.
See my previous response. The people are there to fill up a 'grouping game', but developers are too busy trying to emulate WoW's success to pull in their playerbase. If you get even 10% of those players, that's still a million subscribers. Why would they care about the platform that MMO's were built on, when all they can see are dollar signs?
Then you need to convince a developer to make that game. But here's news for you, there aren't many developers, especially AAA developers who are going to be happy with 550,000 potential players, especially since they may only actually attract a small number of those. You act like trying to emulate success is a bad thing and it's not. There's no investor on the planet who is going to give you money if you can't promise a significant return on their investment. MMOs cost millions of dollars to develop, then even more to keep running, none of which is going to be invested if people don't think they're going to make their money back and then some. Again, wishful thinking doesn't get you anywhere, you have to deal with the reality.
Yes, I expect people to do that, simply because they want to. I can play a game and craft, just because I want to, not because I have to. It's easier in most games to just go buy whatever I want and not develop those crafting skills. But lots of people actually craft, not because they have to, but because they want to. They enjoy it. Therefore they do it.
I'm not a big fan of crafting so I won't put mention into that, but I will say that crafting is a means to an end - you make something you can use, or can sell to get money to buy something else you can use. So there's a point to crafting. Read my previous point above about quests, that basically explains everything I can say here, but I'll summarise: To form a group you need a point to group. If you can do what the game has set out for you alone, then you're going to do it alone.
For lots of people, crafting is the entire game. They don't want to fight in dungeons, they just want to make things. And you know something? Nobody makes games for them either! There just aren't enough of them t make a difference to the MMO designers.
I'll summarise too: If you're going to do it alone, then you didn't want to be in a group that bad to begin with.
For example, you're sat at home and the doorbell rings. Do you a) Go answer the door yourself or b) Gather some friends, get one to check the route is clear, get another to grab the door handle while you see who it is once the door is open? If it's obvious that something can be done alone then people are going to do it alone. It's how we are. Simple as.
You have the choice to go with option B, no matter how absurd it is in the situation you describe. Nothing is stopping you. Granted, from a purely pragmatic position, it's a bit silly, but it's always an option, assuming you're in no hurry to open the door.
Apparently you don't want to group, you just want a game where grouping is forced by the developers, maybe to make you feel better about your chosen playstyle. Instead of complaining about it, why not go do it? Get as many people who also want to group together and group. Then go to the developers and ask for expanded content when you can prove to them that you're a sizeable, paying contingent that will make it worth their while to work on that content. This isn't rocket science.
I want to group, I'd love to group, but yes, the game needs to force it. Just like the current list of MMO's forces me to solo. Does that make you feel better about your chosen playstyle? Are you happy that everyone has to play exactly how you want them to? Because nothing supports grouping until the very end of a game where raiding appears, but you know what? By then, I'm bored of soloing and have probably given up half way through the game. Not only that but raiding is a limited thing where respawns are on a long timer, or the difficulty level is ramped up so you spend half your night trying to defeat one mob, or whatever else it might be.
No, the game doesn't need to force it, you just need to do what you claim you want to do! No game out there forces you to solo. Nobody holds a gun to your head and makes you leave your group. Nobody has removed grouping dynamics from the game itself. You *CAN* group if you want, you're just being lazy. You don't want to group, you want to force everyone into your particular playstyle so you feel better about doing it.
Frankly, I couldn't care less about endgame, I retire any character I have that gets to max level. I don't raid, I find it pointless.
Not only that but now complaints are coming up that solo players aren't getting what raiders are getting and that's not fair. Why don't they just turn MMO's into multiplayer versions of God of War and be done with it?
If that makes more money than current MMOs, more power to them if they want to. I'll either play it or I won't. I certainly won't get upset with developers for making as much money as they can. But then again, I don't pretend that the games are all about me. They offer a product, I either buy the product or I don't. I don't pretend that they have to make me happy or I stomp my feet.
Okay, will cut this down a bit as it covers the same ground, but there's a few things I wanted to pick up on...
For lots of people, crafting is the entire game. They don't want to fight in dungeons, they just want to make things. And you know something? Nobody makes games for them either!
Correct me if I'm wrong because I'm not 100% on this, as I only played it for a little while, but isn't Tale in the Desert a game based purely around crafting?
It depends on the particular MMO you're playing. In some cases, you're right, you do have to do one quest before another. So? Do it and get it over with. There are plenty of MMOs where you can choose your content, you ought to play one of those instead of complaining that you can't do what you want to do in the one you're playing.
Then don't play those MMOs. There are lots of MMOs where that simply doesn't happen. Easy to fix.
I've been through quite a few MMO's in the past year or two, including EverQuest 2, World of Warcraft, City of Heroes, Champions Online, Age of Conan, Lord of the Rings Online, Warhammer Online.. and they all follow the same procedure. Get quest, do quest, get another quest after that quest, ad infinitum. All of them are soloable, none of them make grouping an interesting or viable option, it's all the same 'follow the path' procedure that has appeared since World of Warcraft took off.
You say don't play those MMO's, that there are lots where that doesn't happen. Give me a few names because the so called 'best of the bunch' are all the same. And the whole 'Do it and get it over with.'. Well, that's fine, but when it's over with, another quest appears and so you spend your entire time doing it and getting it over with. Alone. Because you never need to group.
You have the choice to go with option B, no matter how absurd it is in the situation you describe. Nothing is stopping you. Granted, from a purely pragmatic position, it's a bit silly, but it's always an option, assuming you're in no hurry to open the door.
And that there was my point. It's silly. To spend your time trying to gather people to do solo quests when you could be doing solo quests is silly. I have the choice to group. Good. I also have the choice to find the highest mountain and throw myself off it just because I can, but that doesn't make it any less silly.
No, the game doesn't need to force it, you just need to do what you claim you want to do! No game out there forces you to solo. Nobody holds a gun to your head and makes you leave your group. Nobody has removed grouping dynamics from the game itself. You *CAN* group if you want, you're just being lazy. You don't want to group, you want to force everyone into your particular playstyle so you feel better about doing it.
No game forces you to solo. I tend to disagree. Let me describe a situation. I'm playing Lord of the Rings Online, for example, and I just got a quest to Kill 10 Orcs. All the orcs are soloable with little effort by myself, all the orcs are very close, less than a minute's travel away, when the orcs are dead I'm going to have to come back and continue the quest chain.
Now I can ask for a group, but seriously, why call a group when you're looking at that quest and thinking, "Get that done quick and move on.."? Not only that but for anyone to want to join the group, they're also going to need to be on that quest, which immediately cuts down the amount of people that are likely to respond to a LFG request.
Considering both of those options, especially the latter which continues on through the entire game, it's quite obvious why I feel I'm being forced to solo. It might not be a physical thing, there might be group options available, but mentally the way the game is designed you're being told to solo.
And that's the problem with the majority of new MMO's, the A to Z path is killing grouping more than anything else. However...
Good, I'm glad they're still there but it doesn't change anything. The fact still remains that MMO developers are in business to make money, that their investors demand a significant return on investment and that groupers are in the minority and therefore are not going to get catered to. You don't have to like the facts, you just have to live with them. 550k groupers is nothing compared to WoW's 11 million soloers or howmany ever Farmville can attract. You can stop living in the past, that's why it's the past. Today it is not a niche market, nor is it ever going to be one again. Deal with the reality that actually exists instead of the one you wish existed.
... this is, sadly, very true. Money makes the world go around, and with the success of World of Warcraft, the state of MMO's have been changed. I have my fingers crossed that someone, maybe Bioware will be able to do it, will say, "Hey, what happened to the AD&D style gameplay?", and we'll get a focus on grouping back again. At the moment, the old AD&D atmosphere only seems to exist in offline RPG's. It's a sad day, but I guess the geeky roleplay games have come out of the closet and been found by the masses, where it's been morphed and twisted into something I no longer find interest in.
For lots of people, crafting is the entire game. They don't want to fight in dungeons, they just want to make things. And you know something? Nobody makes games for them either!
Correct me if I'm wrong because I'm not 100% on this, as I only played it for a little while, but isn't Tale in the Desert a game based purely around crafting?
Sorry, never heard of it so I have no information on it. I'm not sure how you could have a purely crafting game where nobody ever does anything else, what would be the point of crafting if nobody could ever use the items you crafted? Why make weapons and armor, if that's what they do, if nobody ever got in a fight? Seems silly to me, but again, I have zero information on the game so I'm just making blind assumptions that may be entirely wrong.
It depends on the particular MMO you're playing. In some cases, you're right, you do have to do one quest before another. So? Do it and get it over with. There are plenty of MMOs where you can choose your content, you ought to play one of those instead of complaining that you can't do what you want to do in the one you're playing.
Then don't play those MMOs. There are lots of MMOs where that simply doesn't happen. Easy to fix.
I've been through quite a few MMO's in the past year or two, including EverQuest 2, World of Warcraft, City of Heroes, Champions Online, Age of Conan, Lord of the Rings Online, Warhammer Online.. and they all follow the same procedure. Get quest, do quest, get another quest after that quest, ad infinitum. All of them are soloable, none of them make grouping an interesting or viable option, it's all the same 'follow the path' procedure that has appeared since World of Warcraft took off.
While I'm sure you won't like this option, it remains an option. If you don't like the MMOs currently on the market, don't play MMOs. I'm not. I don't like anything out there, I'm not playing. I have other things to do. If and when an MMO that I want to play comes along, I'll join, otherwise, I don't do things that I don't enjoy doing.
You say don't play those MMO's, that there are lots where that doesn't happen. Give me a few names because the so called 'best of the bunch' are all the same. And the whole 'Do it and get it over with.'. Well, that's fine, but when it's over with, another quest appears and so you spend your entire time doing it and getting it over with. Alone. Because you never need to group.
How about EvE? No quests whatsoever, it's a sandbox game where you can solo, but the vast majority group together in corporations and the like.
You have the choice to go with option B, no matter how absurd it is in the situation you describe. Nothing is stopping you. Granted, from a purely pragmatic position, it's a bit silly, but it's always an option, assuming you're in no hurry to open the door.
And that there was my point. It's silly. To spend your time trying to gather people to do solo quests when you could be doing solo quests is silly. I have the choice to group. Good. I also have the choice to find the highest mountain and throw myself off it just because I can, but that doesn't make it any less silly.
I've yet to see an MMO that doesn't have an LFG channel or list of some sort where people who want to group can advertise and get together. WoW just made it easy, you can put together a group in mere minutes.
No, the game doesn't need to force it, you just need to do what you claim you want to do! No game out there forces you to solo. Nobody holds a gun to your head and makes you leave your group. Nobody has removed grouping dynamics from the game itself. You *CAN* group if you want, you're just being lazy. You don't want to group, you want to force everyone into your particular playstyle so you feel better about doing it.
No game forces you to solo. I tend to disagree. Let me describe a situation. I'm playing Lord of the Rings Online, for example, and I just got a quest to Kill 10 Orcs. All the orcs are soloable with little effort by myself, all the orcs are very close, less than a minute's travel away, when the orcs are dead I'm going to have to come back and continue the quest chain.
Nobody is forcing you to solo. You *COULD* get a group if you wanted. You'd rather just do the quest (and that's a ridiculously low-level quest, a beginning type quest in most games, I don't play LORTO so I don't know specifically on that game). Maybe you're just playing the wrong MMO?
Good, I'm glad they're still there but it doesn't change anything. The fact still remains that MMO developers are in business to make money, that their investors demand a significant return on investment and that groupers are in the minority and therefore are not going to get catered to. You don't have to like the facts, you just have to live with them. 550k groupers is nothing compared to WoW's 11 million soloers or howmany ever Farmville can attract. You can stop living in the past, that's why it's the past. Today it is not a niche market, nor is it ever going to be one again. Deal with the reality that actually exists instead of the one you wish existed.
... this is, sadly, very true. Money makes the world go around, and with the success of World of Warcraft, the state of MMO's have been changed. I have my fingers crossed that someone, maybe Bioware will be able to do it, will say, "Hey, what happened to the AD&D style gameplay?", and we'll get a focus on grouping back again. At the moment, the old AD&D atmosphere only seems to exist in offline RPG's. It's a sad day, but I guess the geeky roleplay games have come out of the closet and been found by the masses, where it's been morphed and twisted into something I no longer find interest in.
Whether it's sad or not, it's reality. Get used to it. It was true back when UO and EQ came out, they catered to their existing marketplace just like modern MMOs do. However, it didn't take them long to realize that the market they were catering to was just the tip of the iceberg. They were wasting their time on those half-million players when they could have been making games that catered to 20x as many.
What happened to AD&D style gameplay? It died. It failed in the competition of ideas. In fact, the whole tabletop roleplaying idea has basically died in favor of video games and MMOs. A few barely hang on, clinging to the edge by their fingernails over the abyss of oblivion, but for the most part, games, game shops and game companies that produced tabletop RPGs are extinct. You can miss them all you want, it's not going to make them magically come back, any more than the "good old days" of MMOs ever will. They're dead. It's time you moved on with the rest of the marketplace.
Whether it's sad or not, it's reality. Get used to it. It was true back when UO and EQ came out, they catered to their existing marketplace just like modern MMOs do. However, it didn't take them long to realize that the market they were catering to was just the tip of the iceberg. They were wasting their time on those half-million players when they could have been making games that catered to 20x as many.
What happened to AD&D style gameplay? It died. It failed in the competition of ideas. In fact, the whole tabletop roleplaying idea has basically died in favor of video games and MMOs. A few barely hang on, clinging to the edge by their fingernails over the abyss of oblivion, but for the most part, games, game shops and game companies that produced tabletop RPGs are extinct. You can miss them all you want, it's not going to make them magically come back, any more than the "good old days" of MMOs ever will. They're dead. It's time you moved on with the rest of the marketplace.
Why should we have to? We as gamers power the industry and in effect change what can and will be produced by the developers. To say that we should "give up" and "move on" is ignorant and a perfect example of why developers are shoving pointless content down our throats and raping your wallet with the same old crap game after game and patch after patch. It's the same reason why games like WoW and it's clones are able to create a monopoly over the market is because noone challenges Blizzard on their content. They just take it in their backside and keep on grinding.
I agree that the days of "old school" MMOs are behind us at the moment. People made their voices heard that they wanted more player friendly games with faster paced action and even different worlds than your typical D&D elves and orcs world. The devs saw this and started developing games to fit their audience's changing interest. It is this very idea of change that you've expressed that makes your statement false.
The old style of games are not dead, gamers of today are just far too accepting of the content we've been given by the companies who develop our games. We've changed the industry once obviously, or we wouldn't here arguing about "new school" vs. "old school". So if gamers want to see games made like they used to be they have simply to make their voices heard and buy/support only games that exhibit those qualities.
Whether it's sad or not, it's reality. Get used to it. It was true back when UO and EQ came out, they catered to their existing marketplace just like modern MMOs do. However, it didn't take them long to realize that the market they were catering to was just the tip of the iceberg. They were wasting their time on those half-million players when they could have been making games that catered to 20x as many.
What happened to AD&D style gameplay? It died. It failed in the competition of ideas. In fact, the whole tabletop roleplaying idea has basically died in favor of video games and MMOs. A few barely hang on, clinging to the edge by their fingernails over the abyss of oblivion, but for the most part, games, game shops and game companies that produced tabletop RPGs are extinct. You can miss them all you want, it's not going to make them magically come back, any more than the "good old days" of MMOs ever will. They're dead. It's time you moved on with the rest of the marketplace.
Why should we have to? We as gamers power the industry and in effect change what can and will be produced by the developers. To say that we should "give up" and "move on" is ignorant and a perfect example of why developers are shoving pointless content down our throats and raping your wallet with the same old crap game after game and patch after patch. It's the same reason why games like WoW and it's clones are able to create a monopoly over the market is because noone challenges Blizzard on their content. They just take it in their backside and keep on grinding.
I agree that the days of "old school" MMOs are behind us at the moment. People made their voices heard that they wanted more player friendly games with faster paced action and even different worlds than your typical D&D elves and orcs world. The devs saw this and started developing games to fit their audience's changing interest. It is this very idea of change that you've expressed that makes your statement false.
The old style of games are not dead, gamers of today are just far too accepting of the content we've been given by the companies who develop our games. We've changed the industry once obviously, or we wouldn't here arguing about "new school" vs. "old school". So if gamers want to see games made like they used to be they have simply to make their voices heard and buy/support only games that exhibit those qualities.
I would venture a guess as that might not be possible.
To draw a parallel...
I listen to and write (for all intent and purposes) classical music.
However the reality is that more people listen to pop music or some sort of rock over classical music. The same can be said of blues and Jazz.
I constantly hear people talk about how modern music is bereft of depth and complexity, etc.
So one might say "well, all they have to do is to start supporting classical music or Jazz or Blues and the market will change.
This is true.
but really, does anyone see this happening?
The people who experienced and loved old school games are just outnumbered by a new generation of players. This is not to say that some of those players wouldn't want an old school game but I bet dollars to donuts that they might look at anyone suggesting one as crazy.
Which in some ways is sad. I look at Vanugauard's world and I say "I only want a world that has this size and scope".
but I wonder if anything that size and that varied and open will ever be made again?
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I would venture a guess as that might not be possible.
To draw a parallel...
I listen to and write (for all intent and purposes) classical music.
However the reality is that more people listen to pop music or some sort of rock over classical music. The same can be said of blues and Jazz.
I constantly hear people talk about how modern music is bereft of depth and complexity, etc.
So one might say "well, all they have to do is to start supporting classical music or Jazz or Blues and the market will change.
This is true.
but really, does anyone see this happening?
The people who experienced and loved old school games are just outnumbered by a new generation of players. This is not to say that some of those players wouldn't want an old school game but I bet dollars to donuts that they might look at anyone suggesting one as crazy.
Which in some ways is sad. I look at Vanugauard's world and I say "I only want a world that has this size and scope".
but I wonder if anything that size and that varied and open will ever be made again?
A valid example. However in my opinion, as that is all I can give...I feel as though the world of media (gaming, music, film and such) is only as absolute as we make it.
I work loosely in the film/video industry as a freelance artist. The one thing I have learned from my time within that line of work is that the client/customer powers everything. It's basic properties of supply and demand. You will create whatever type of service your client wants because the client or customer fills your pockets at the end of the day.
This translates over to the topic at hand as there is not currently a market for the old school style games anymore. The trend in MMOs...and in gaming all together IMO has shifted due to a public outcry for a different type of game. Who's to say it can't/won't sway the other way should enough people stand together to create interest in a particular style, call it "retro-MMOs" or what-have you.
I will not argue the advantages of older style MMOs to newer, as I have things I like in both. I have only the intentions of trying to pursuade people not to give up on their own opinion and to continue to voice/support the things they want in games...or in any media for that matter. Because if you give up on the idea that you can tailor an industry as a customer you have invited money hungry developers into your pocket only to rob you of your money and the joy these things are supposed to bring into your life.
I would venture a guess as that might not be possible.
To draw a parallel...
I listen to and write (for all intent and purposes) classical music.
However the reality is that more people listen to pop music or some sort of rock over classical music. The same can be said of blues and Jazz.
I constantly hear people talk about how modern music is bereft of depth and complexity, etc.
So one might say "well, all they have to do is to start supporting classical music or Jazz or Blues and the market will change.
This is true.
but really, does anyone see this happening?
The people who experienced and loved old school games are just outnumbered by a new generation of players. This is not to say that some of those players wouldn't want an old school game but I bet dollars to donuts that they might look at anyone suggesting one as crazy.
Which in some ways is sad. I look at Vanugauard's world and I say "I only want a world that has this size and scope".
but I wonder if anything that size and that varied and open will ever be made again?
A valid example. However in my opinion, as that is all I can give...I feel as though the world of media (gaming, music, film and such) is only as absolute as we make it.
I work loosely in the film/video industry as a freelance artist. The one thing I have learned from my time within that line of work is that the client/customer powers everything. It's basic properties of supply and demand. You will create whatever type of service your client wants because the client or customer fills your pockets at the end of the day.
This translates over to the topic at hand as there is not currently a market for the old school style games anymore. The trend in MMOs...and in gaming all together IMO has shifted due to a public outcry for a different type of game. Who's to say it can't/won't sway the other way should enough people stand together to create interest in a particular style, call it "retro-MMOs" or what-have you.
I will not argue the advantages of older style MMOs to newer, as I have things I like in both. I have only the intentions of trying to pursuade people not to give up on their own opinion and to continue to voice/support the things they want in games...or in any media for that matter. Because if you give up on the idea that you can tailor an industry as a customer you have invited money hungry developers into your pocket only to rob you of your money and the joy these things are supposed to bring into your life.
/steps down from soapbox.
Theoretically that is true. If there are enough people then there will be someone to fill that void with some sort of product.
but realistically do we see that happening? Do you really think that there will be enough people turned on to 12 tone or Aleatoric music (which I don't write but it's thorny so it seems like a good example) so that you will find one of these pieces in the top 10?
Or to match your own example, do you think you will find T.V. shows that match the styles from say the 50's? Or even better there will be a new found love for silent films?
I will agree that it will take a good size audience to sway developers and investors. But chances are they are going to want something with TONS of content like wow, fast travel, fast leveling lots of rewards, etc.
In Lineage 2 I waited days to prick Baium with a knife so that I could make my 3rd class transfer (I think that was the transfer, it was so long). Or was it sub class?
Even though it wasn't fun I did it and in retrospect I found it a rite of passage. Lineage 2 is filled with them.
It might be possible that a good amount of players will want to have the same type of experience but my sense is that the days of such things are gone. I'm not sure if this is good or not.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Theoretically that is true. If there are enough people then there will be someone to fill that void with some sort of product.
but realistically do we see that happening? Do you really think that there will be enough people turned on to 12 tone or Aleatoric music (which I don't write but it's thorny so it seems like a good example) so that you will find one of these pieces in the top 10?
Or to match your own example, do you think you will find T.V. shows that match the styles from say the 50's? Or even better there will be a new found love for silent films?
I will agree that it will take a good size audience to sway developers and investors. But chances are they are going to want something with TONS of content like wow, fast travel, fast leveling lots of rewards, etc.
In Lineage 2 I waited days to prick Baium with a knife so that I could make my 3rd class transfer (I think that was the transfer, it was so long). Or was it sub class?
Even though it wasn't fun I did it and in retrospect I found it a rite of passage. Lineage 2 is filled with them.
It might be possible that a good amount of players will want to have the same type of experience but my sense is that the days of such things are gone. I'm not sure if this is good or not.
I agree with you, and I don't see the state of the gaming industry as well as MMOs changing anytime soon. The best I can do is hold out for FFXIV and hope it gives me a small piece of those days I enjoyed.
Theoretically that is true. If there are enough people then there will be someone to fill that void with some sort of product.
but realistically do we see that happening? Do you really think that there will be enough people turned on to 12 tone or Aleatoric music (which I don't write but it's thorny so it seems like a good example) so that you will find one of these pieces in the top 10?
Or to match your own example, do you think you will find T.V. shows that match the styles from say the 50's? Or even better there will be a new found love for silent films?
I will agree that it will take a good size audience to sway developers and investors. But chances are they are going to want something with TONS of content like wow, fast travel, fast leveling lots of rewards, etc.
In Lineage 2 I waited days to prick Baium with a knife so that I could make my 3rd class transfer (I think that was the transfer, it was so long). Or was it sub class?
Even though it wasn't fun I did it and in retrospect I found it a rite of passage. Lineage 2 is filled with them.
It might be possible that a good amount of players will want to have the same type of experience but my sense is that the days of such things are gone. I'm not sure if this is good or not.
I agree with you, and I don't see the state of the gaming industry as well as MMOs changing anytime soon. The best I can do is hold out for FFXIV and hope it gives me a small piece of those days I enjoyed.
I really hope it is what you are looking for!
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
EQ did it right. You COULD solo, but it took you about 10x longer then grouping to kill anything. Yea, you could progress while you were looking for a group, but it wasnt by any means optimal. Plenty of people still did it though, and it was FUN.
Also, quests should NOT be a means of advancement and by no means be required, again, much like EQ. This would allow the solo crowd to not be gimped due to the fact they cant find the necessary people to complete a quest.
I do believe MMORPGs need to have difficult content though, and thats where the grouping with WoW has went wrong. I dont want dungeons where 6 people just rush through killing mob after mob in a race to the end. People who attempt that should die a horrible death from overpulling too much. Strategy needs to be required. Class interdependency needs to be brought back as well, and for the love of god potions need to be thrown away. Nothing annoys me more then a Warrior able to heal himself. He should need a healer, or fight mobs that he can kill before his hp is extinguished. Thats why he has a lot of hp.
MMORPGs used to be challenging, fun, and yes, painful. There HAS to be risk. Otherwise you can lose as many times as you want with no consequence until you get what you want. That shouldnt be how it works. If you're deep in a dungeon, you should be SCARED to die. If you're group pulls more then they can handle, you should be fighting your ass off while biting your nails to the cuticle hoping your teamwork prevails and you live to fight the next mobs.
When playing EQ I used to solo a lot, and never had a problem with it. Sure it took longer, sure I couldnt take on a lot of the harder content with the best loot, but I had enough content to get me through while I waited to find a group. Hell, sometimes I spent all day soloing and I loved it because it was risky and fun. If you're soloing you should not be able to steamroll mob after mob, fighting four at a time the same level as you without worrying. You should be extra careful because you don't have backup. You should pick your fights wisely and watch your back at all times for possible roamers who would mean a death sentence. Any more, in games like WoW, soloing is a gaurenteed win unless you literally fall asleep while fighting. Anyone who dies in that game soloing was just being lazy. And the reason they are lazy is because its so easy, and there is no meaningful consequence if you die anyway.
Games like EQ, FFXI, DAoC, and the rest of the group-oriented MMORPGs are the ones that we want to bring back. EVERY MMO made any more lets you solo to end game. Why must you complain if us groupers want a challenging, group oriented game that requires teamwork, patience, and depending on others to complete a job. When you're bear hunting in real life, do you do it solo? Most likely not, because there is danger. You depend on others to have your back. Thats what we want in our games. We want a community. We want teamwork. What we dont want is 5 or 6 people going into a dungeon, smacking everything in sight in a mad rush to the end, and calling that teamwork. Thats something you would expect from coop action games, not MMORPGs.
Also, people always say the solo to end games are the ones with all the players and thats what the people want. I have to disagree with this. Maybe its only because there isnt anything else worth playing for the group oriented players? And everybody knows players will do whatever is the easiest way to do anything. Give somebody the option of grouping a hard dungeon to get to 80 or playing whack-a-mole solo to get there in the same amount of time, and thats what they will all do. Sad but true. I am willing to bet if a copy of classic EQ, DAoC, or FFXI was released - it would be HUGE. But instead all we get is WoW clones which fail a month or two after release, or even worse, games like star trek online.
I'm not against soloing. I totally understand not having the time to find a group all the time. But it should be MUCH slower then grouping, and also should not give many rewards. I actually am a firm believer that gear is handed out wayyyy too much now in games anyway. Anything you do you get a new item. Good items should require good groups and good teamwork to aquire, not getting a pointless kill 10 boars quest for a "epic" sword. I actually play eve online and solo quite a bit, more then grouping, but I also dont expect to get as good rewards, and I'm fine with that.
All I'm saying is give the group crowd a bone, give us a game to call our own and enjoy without totally dumbing it down to the point anyone can solo to the end. I want fear in my game, I want peril, I want challenges. I want to depend on my healer to keep me alive. I want to depend on my enchanter to mezmerize the four adds that came with the pull. I want my dps classes to attack from behind because the mob cant parry or dodge such attacks. The casters should have to worry about getting hit five times or else they die, so they must manage their aggro well WITHOUT some stupid addon. I want complexity. I want teamwork. I want to remember the names of people who made life saving decisions which only happense with consequences that are painful.
The solo crowd has plenty of MMORPGs to play AND offline RPGs as well. We who enjoy the way the games used to be only have the option of games over a decade old which are faint images of their past glory. We are stuck hoping for anything but another solo-fest, and until that type of game is released, nobody actually knows if the majority really wants complete soloing, or if they just play it because its the only decent game thats been released in the last five years.
Its late, and I typed this up a bit quick, but hopefully some of the stuff makes sense and you see where I'm coming from. I would want the game to have soloing, because I dont always group, but I dont want that to be the most efficient, or even close to being the best way to play the game.
Why should we have to? We as gamers power the industry and in effect change what can and will be produced by the developers. To say that we should "give up" and "move on" is ignorant and a perfect example of why developers are shoving pointless content down our throats and raping your wallet with the same old crap game after game and patch after patch. It's the same reason why games like WoW and it's clones are able to create a monopoly over the market is because noone challenges Blizzard on their content. They just take it in their backside and keep on grinding.
I agree that the days of "old school" MMOs are behind us at the moment. People made their voices heard that they wanted more player friendly games with faster paced action and even different worlds than your typical D&D elves and orcs world. The devs saw this and started developing games to fit their audience's changing interest. It is this very idea of change that you've expressed that makes your statement false.
The old style of games are not dead, gamers of today are just far too accepting of the content we've been given by the companies who develop our games. We've changed the industry once obviously, or we wouldn't here arguing about "new school" vs. "old school". So if gamers want to see games made like they used to be they have simply to make their voices heard and buy/support only games that exhibit those qualities.
You "power the industry" insofar as you pay a monthly fee for a game. Sitting around whining about how awful the games are doesn't do jack squat. At the moment, the people who power the industry are the casual players beause those are the people who put the most money into the games. The majority financial support comes from casual players, therefore they get the majority of catering by the industry. I never said you should give up, I said you should accept the current reality. If you want to change the current reality, the only way you can do it is by presenting a large united front of financially-willing players who want a game to play. If you cannot find a couple of hundred people at a minimum, don't expect developers to listen to your demands because you're just not worth it to them. That is the financial reality of the MMO marketplace. Money talks. If you don't represent significant money to the developers, you're just wasting your breath.
The problem is, *YOU* didn't change the industry, talking about old-timers. The people who changed the industry was the mainstream player who the developers courted because they represented a massive infusion of cash into an industry that was desperate for it. It is conceivable that you could present enough sub-paying players to make the developers change their tactics again but it's highly unlikely. There just aren't enough hardcore old-timers around. Most have either accepted the casual playstyle or have stopped playing altogether. Add to that the fact that you need to produce a huge number of people, not just a few thousand, but closer to a million to make developers sit up and take notice.
That's more people than comprised the "old-time" MMO marketplace in the first place!
Good luck to you but I'm sure not holding my breath.
Comments
It's really as simple as this:
Until there is a decent MMO where I, as a soloer, can achieve (eventually) anything in the game, I'm sticking with non-MMO games. I enjoy playing around other people, and the persistent, updated world concept, but grouping isn't my cup of tea.
I would have tried GA if i didn't see that flying about junk,that turned me right off.The reason i was even looking at it,is because i understand the difference between a MMORPG and a FPS,and they cannot exist in the same genre.
So i always played shooters like UT/Quake/COD1/HL for my PVP fix,then when i wanted a RPG atmosphere i mainly played Eq/EQ2 and FFXI.I now realize how bad EQ is lol,took me long enough,well FFXI woke me up to understand what a true brilliant game design is all about,other than the worst economy design i have ever seen lol.
If they kept GA more like UT1,more realistic and skillful,i probably would be playing it right now,as i do not enjoy any of the RPG's right now.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
The thing is, I, as a pretty staunch soloer, don't believe that everything should be accomplished solo.
I think there is a very strong value that can be experienced when one groups. My problem with the system is when grouping has to be done or else your character won't grow at all or is gimped because you can't group.
There are many reasons why people don't group and probably as many variations on those reasons as there are people.
I have to say that though I'm very social in life and not scared of crowds or speaking in public or anything where I'm being focused on by a large number of people, I find it very difficult to just strike up conversations with strangers "just because". There needs to be a reason for me to do so and a reason that feels organic.
Being in an mmo is not very organic with me. I find it easy to step in front of an audience of 1000 people or to go into a store and even help people who are looking at something that I know about but they have questions. But jumping into a party vent is very much the antithesis of "me".
So in general I tend to party with clan members or just prefer soloing as soloing allows me to experience the world or the story in a way that feels right to me.
But I do think that there are things that can be experienced in a group that are very special and specific to grouping. Whether it be group vs group pvp or downing a huge boss encounter.
So in designing these games devs should be cognizant of how solo players and group players are going to develop. If there is a story line that requires a group then dollars to donuts a good amount of people are going to miss it. I'm just going through the rest of book 1 in LOTRO and found out something about Sarah Oakheart. Imagine my surprise. All this time, li'l ol' sarah.
The thign is that people cry "you can't have both solo and group options in games, it doesn't work. And to this I say nonsense. In Lineage 2 there were areas where one could easily solo, no issues. There were also areas you have to work on in a group. So the grouping players would go to Cruma or Tower of Insolence or Forge of gods and the soloers might go to the Wastelands or Forsaken plains or Ivory tower.
My thought is that if a questline is group there should be a solo version. And the rewards shouldn't be inferior but different. A character should at least be competitive if they solo. However, it's ok for raids to be group or for there to be ways that grouping can lend to a different and desired play experience for those who are on the fence.
I don't mind rewards given to grouping players as long as at the end of the day we can play together when we want to play together.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
I still wonder why others have not attempted to steal CoX's uncomplicated grouping mechanics. While I don't generally love instancing, I also don't think their ideas could not be done uninstanced.
For those that have not played CoX, (several of the methods have been used in other MMOs but I cant recall one that got it so harmonized):
You can adjust the amount of mobs in a mission.
You can adjust the mobs levels and difficulties.
You can bump team mates up to your level.
You share most mission rewards, even if it was not 'your' mission.
I image something similar could be done even uninstanced. It could be very immersive. I forget now if in Tabula Rasa the more people you had defending an outpost, the more mobs showed up? and this was in the open worlds.
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
I like grouping and prefer to play my MMO's that way in a duo or more.But what I don't like is having nothing to do when not grouped or stalled in leveling because I can't find a group.
I think arguing about something like Solo Play and Group play is stupid. They are both in MMOs you can't make one disappear forever.
To the Pro Solo Play Side: Okay, i can understand you don't want to have to group all the time but if you don't want to group at all then why play an MMO? MMO's are based upon the principle of playing with other people. Not playing by yourself so if you want to always solo go play single player games.
To the Pro Group Play Side: Again, i understand wanting to group and all, i mean why else would you play an MMO? but some of you guys want forced grouping, well let's say a new game comes out and it forces you to group, you pre order the game and fall for the 12 Months for a discount sale they do. Well, a few weeks after launch less, and less people play. So, you're on this quest requires you to be in a group to do it but you could solo the quest easily and the reward is some great weapon of power or something like that. You can't get this weapon because the game is a forced grouping game and you have to be in a group in order to do certain easily soloable quests.
Well, that's how i feel.
Playing with other people doesn't necessarily mean grouping. Why do people play countless online games where there is no "grouping" of any sort? Because you feel like you are part of a greater community and you can talk and interact if you want, and it doesn't affect your game.
Here's the problem with the concept that an MMOG "should" be about grouping up; not everyone is a good player. Not everyone is wonderful human being. Not everyone can stay focused on what the group is trying to accomplish. When you make a game so that there is unique, superior content that only increasingly larger and better-organized groups can accomplish, it is no longer just a social game, it has become a factory-like job, where you are required to be able to do your part of the job in an efficient manner so that the group/raid (read: production line) can meet its quota. You are responsible to the team to do your part and to do it according to specs.
I don't want my online socializing to be channeled into a being a job, where I'm looking for "employment" and am constantly on probation, and have the chance to be blackballed or get some nasty reviews or get fired for not operating my on-screen avatar like a profession forklift driver because my granddaughter wanted me to drive her to the game at an inconvenient time.
I play MMOGs (or did, and would) for two reasons: to advance my character, and to socialize. I don't want the two to be intrinsically tied together in the same game because it always ruins both for me. Why should the two be necessarily tied together, when most online games (think farmville) completely seperate the advancement, or the goals, from the socializing?
I prefer to play solo than group play because I get to keep all the loot instead of sharing it.
I like group content, but the problem for me has always been getting a group together in a reasonable time. I remember trying to get groups together for group quests and instances in LoTRO, and even WoW, and it just wasn't happening. Unless you can stomach spamming "LFG or LFM blah blah blah" for at least an hour it's just not going to happen. Then you have the issue of chain quests within these areas and the headache of everybody is doing a different part of a quest change. Ugh.
That's probably why I've enjoyed Warhammer Online so much. You click a button and within a few seconds you're in a warband playing together. It's also why I'm enjoying WoW as much as I am now with the dungeon finder. Also, City of Heroes is another game that makes finding groups really easy and fun.
So, in short, group play is awesome, but most MMOs do a terrible job allowing players to come together and experience that sort of content.
"Then it will die. Players will play the way they want to play, if grouping dies, it's evolution in action. Both soloing and grouping have inherent strengths and weaknesses. Soloing is faster and easier, but it is inherently slower than grouping. Grouping takes more time to set up, but you can tackle much harder and higher level content, thus getting XP faster and better gear earlier than a soloer. Now let the players decide which is favored. In practice, soloing wins because MMO gaming has shifted from a hardcore audience to a casual audience."
I think it will die, if developers don't start doing something about it. Before long MMO's will be nothing more than single player games that you pay monthly for. What do soloers want from an MMO, is my question? Why do they want to be in a game with other players that they don't want to team up with? What are they paying monthly for that they can't get out of a single player game?
Also, if you're looking at grouping as being the means to tackling higher level content and getting better gear faster, then I can see why you prefer to solo. I like to group because there are other people involved. Some might be good, some might be bad, but you know what? That's life. Some people you meet are inevitably going to be idiots, it's no different in a video game. But I like the fact that people are there, that I can have a laugh with them, that we can pool our abilities to do amazing things - all of which I would never get from soloing. Soloing is purely a series of button presses while you stare at the screen, watching hitpoints drop. That to me is just not fun.
"But that's not the way it works. Groupers are a small minority of the total MMO market and the people with the money will always win. Welcome to the real world."
Groupers are the minority because since EverQuest, no game has made a point of using grouping to its potential. Every game since then has been solo friendly in the extreme, the only time grouping becomes a necessity now is when you're max level and the raids start to appear. And people only do that because they want the Cool Stuff (tm). There is little to no reason to group through MMO's anymore, I can't think of a single one I've played since EverQuest that I needed to call people to assist me.
"I have the opposite experience, I tend to leave games where grouping is necessary to get anywhere, simply because the majority of people that I group with do not have the same goals I do. They want to run through the content as fast as possible, get as much XP and loot and gear and get out. I want to enjoy the ride. I want to see the sights. I want to make sure I clear an area 100%. That means I don't play in groups very often, only when I want a ton of XP with minimal effort. That's just not fun as far as I'm concerned. Your mileage may vary."
The reason for this is the same as the reason above, no game has made it a necessity to group, so the groups you're talking about are purely there to get from Point A to Point B, grab the quest item or kill the boss mob, then get out again. That's exactly my experience of playing MMO's such as Champions Online. The occasional quest needs a group and firstly, nobody knows how to actually group effectively and, secondly, everyone just wants to get the quest complete box ticked. Once you're in and out and done, the group disbands. That's how grouping is in MMO's these days, there doesn't seem to be any need to do otherwise.
And sure, I'm certain people will say "Well you can group up any time..", but seriously, do you expect people to do that when there is no point to do so? I tend to play these things the way the designers set them out to be played. If I feel I should be soloing then I'll do that, if I feel I need to group then I do that. Unfortuntely the need to group is becoming a thing of the past, and I think that's a sad thing.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Depth, breadth, content, constant updates, freedom... there are lots of things that you cannot and do not get in a single-player game that is available in an MMO. Since I dropped my last MMO about 6 months ago, I've played through, or re-played through, virtually every decent single-player game on the market. So now what? I can spend years and years in an MMO and not consume all of the available content. I can't even make a single-player game last more than 2-3 weeks.
Fair enough, can't argue with that. That's one of the reasons I play them too.
I'm not looking at it that way, I'm responding to those groupers who claim that they're not being exceptionally compensated for grouping. The fact is, the very act of grouping can give you that exceptional compensation because you can do things as a group that there's no way in hell you could ever tackle yourself. That means you're going to have that e-peen gear faster than someone who solos. That means that you're going to level faster than someone who solos. That means you're going to have more loot than someone who solos. This is inherent challenge in your game, just because you bring along a couple of friends. People need to stop complaining that "it's too easy". It's only too easy if you don't go do something difficult.
The problem mainly stems from the way MMO's are designed these days, they're made in such a way that you go from A to Z in a very linear fashion, handed quests at every step, and if you don't complete those quests then you don't finish the end quest which will probably have some nice reward attached (see LOTRO book quests for example). The mobs in the areas of these quests are generally to your level, such that people can solo them, so when it comes to trying to group together it's just not worth it.
You can't group to do harder content because you need to do the quests you're already on, so you end up asking for a group to do content that everyone, including yourself, is capable of soloing. You don't want to move off and fight a load of higher level mobs because MMO's now seem to have put a lesser reward on fighting mobs and more on completing quests. So in essence the developers are saying, "Solo these quests.", and that's what people do. The only time people group up for a quest is when it's a boss mob, and even then it's just an in-out, wham bam thank you mam, job done, lets go back to soloing.
On top of that, MMO's these days seem to spread out the XP gains based on the number of players in the group, so you end up being able to fight more but gaining the same amount of XP in the same amount of time. Modern MMO's are just badly designed single player games.
No, groupers are the minority because they are the minority. Developers cater to the people who pay the bills. The reason grouping isn't used to it's supposed potential is because there aren't enough people to make it a financially viable focus. Games moved slowly to catering to the solo player because there were more solo players who were paying for subscriptions and developers went where the money was. If there were 80% groupers all along who kept demanding group content, that's where you'd see the market today. The marketplace didn't change to reflect the games, the games changed to reflect the market.
The reason groupers are in the minority is because they've been forced there. In the past MMO's were for a niche market of spotty geeks into AD&D - the moment the developers saw the potential cash gains from making single player games that you had to pay monthly for, the whole design of MMO's changed, and changed for the worse. MMO's originally were based on the old AD&D adage of people grouping together to overcome challenges in a fantasy setting. You'd never see a single player AD&D tabletop game, it's just not worth doing. But once MMO's became solo friendly, the floodgates opened and the gamers who prefer single player games came rushing in and the geeks were again picked on, laughed at and told to go find a different game where you could group. It's like being back in school.
So yes, you're right, the games changed to reflect the market. But the groupers are still there, they'd still happily jump onto the next game without mass solo content, it's just they're overshadowed by the massive amount of casual players that now inhabit the very different MMO's that now exist. Just as an example, ask these solo players if they'd like to spend their time in EverQuest. I can guarantee you'd get a no. And yet there were 550,000 people in EverQuest back in 2004, which equates to a lot of groupers, but can't compare to the number of single player gamers such as the amount that inhabit World of Warcraft, which is almost 20x the amount. So of course the figures are going to look skewed, when you open the gates to 'every day gamers' you're going to see a lot more than just our little niche market.
No game has any reason to make it a necessity to group because only a small percentage of people are even interested in it. Come up with a sizeable percentage of people who want to group, go to the developers and ask for a game that does what you want, you'll get it. But your playstyle has to compete in the forum of ideas, the biggest and the most vocal and the ones that pay the best are going to win. If that's not your group, then you lose. It's evolution in action.
See my previous response. The people are there to fill up a 'grouping game', but developers are too busy trying to emulate WoW's success to pull in their playerbase. If you get even 10% of those players, that's still a million subscribers. Why would they care about the platform that MMO's were built on, when all they can see are dollar signs?
Yes, I expect people to do that, simply because they want to. I can play a game and craft, just because I want to, not because I have to. It's easier in most games to just go buy whatever I want and not develop those crafting skills. But lots of people actually craft, not because they have to, but because they want to. They enjoy it. Therefore they do it.
I'm not a big fan of crafting so I won't put mention into that, but I will say that crafting is a means to an end - you make something you can use, or can sell to get money to buy something else you can use. So there's a point to crafting. Read my previous point above about quests, that basically explains everything I can say here, but I'll summarise: To form a group you need a point to group. If you can do what the game has set out for you alone, then you're going to do it alone.
For example, you're sat at home and the doorbell rings. Do you a) Go answer the door yourself or b) Gather some friends, get one to check the route is clear, get another to grab the door handle while you see who it is once the door is open? If it's obvious that something can be done alone then people are going to do it alone. It's how we are. Simple as.
Apparently you don't want to group, you just want a game where grouping is forced by the developers, maybe to make you feel better about your chosen playstyle. Instead of complaining about it, why not go do it? Get as many people who also want to group together and group. Then go to the developers and ask for expanded content when you can prove to them that you're a sizeable, paying contingent that will make it worth their while to work on that content. This isn't rocket science.
I want to group, I'd love to group, but yes, the game needs to force it. Just like the current list of MMO's forces me to solo. Does that make you feel better about your chosen playstyle? Are you happy that everyone has to play exactly how you want them to? Because nothing supports grouping until the very end of a game where raiding appears, but you know what? By then, I'm bored of soloing and have probably given up half way through the game. Not only that but raiding is a limited thing where respawns are on a long timer, or the difficulty level is ramped up so you spend half your night trying to defeat one mob, or whatever else it might be.
Not only that but now complaints are coming up that solo players aren't getting what raiders are getting and that's not fair. Why don't they just turn MMO's into multiplayer versions of God of War and be done with it?
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Okay, will cut this down a bit as it covers the same ground, but there's a few things I wanted to pick up on...
For lots of people, crafting is the entire game. They don't want to fight in dungeons, they just want to make things. And you know something? Nobody makes games for them either!
Correct me if I'm wrong because I'm not 100% on this, as I only played it for a little while, but isn't Tale in the Desert a game based purely around crafting?
It depends on the particular MMO you're playing. In some cases, you're right, you do have to do one quest before another. So? Do it and get it over with. There are plenty of MMOs where you can choose your content, you ought to play one of those instead of complaining that you can't do what you want to do in the one you're playing.
Then don't play those MMOs. There are lots of MMOs where that simply doesn't happen. Easy to fix.
I've been through quite a few MMO's in the past year or two, including EverQuest 2, World of Warcraft, City of Heroes, Champions Online, Age of Conan, Lord of the Rings Online, Warhammer Online.. and they all follow the same procedure. Get quest, do quest, get another quest after that quest, ad infinitum. All of them are soloable, none of them make grouping an interesting or viable option, it's all the same 'follow the path' procedure that has appeared since World of Warcraft took off.
You say don't play those MMO's, that there are lots where that doesn't happen. Give me a few names because the so called 'best of the bunch' are all the same. And the whole 'Do it and get it over with.'. Well, that's fine, but when it's over with, another quest appears and so you spend your entire time doing it and getting it over with. Alone. Because you never need to group.
You have the choice to go with option B, no matter how absurd it is in the situation you describe. Nothing is stopping you. Granted, from a purely pragmatic position, it's a bit silly, but it's always an option, assuming you're in no hurry to open the door.
And that there was my point. It's silly. To spend your time trying to gather people to do solo quests when you could be doing solo quests is silly. I have the choice to group. Good. I also have the choice to find the highest mountain and throw myself off it just because I can, but that doesn't make it any less silly.
No, the game doesn't need to force it, you just need to do what you claim you want to do! No game out there forces you to solo. Nobody holds a gun to your head and makes you leave your group. Nobody has removed grouping dynamics from the game itself. You *CAN* group if you want, you're just being lazy. You don't want to group, you want to force everyone into your particular playstyle so you feel better about doing it.
No game forces you to solo. I tend to disagree. Let me describe a situation. I'm playing Lord of the Rings Online, for example, and I just got a quest to Kill 10 Orcs. All the orcs are soloable with little effort by myself, all the orcs are very close, less than a minute's travel away, when the orcs are dead I'm going to have to come back and continue the quest chain.
Now I can ask for a group, but seriously, why call a group when you're looking at that quest and thinking, "Get that done quick and move on.."? Not only that but for anyone to want to join the group, they're also going to need to be on that quest, which immediately cuts down the amount of people that are likely to respond to a LFG request.
Considering both of those options, especially the latter which continues on through the entire game, it's quite obvious why I feel I'm being forced to solo. It might not be a physical thing, there might be group options available, but mentally the way the game is designed you're being told to solo.
And that's the problem with the majority of new MMO's, the A to Z path is killing grouping more than anything else. However...
Good, I'm glad they're still there but it doesn't change anything. The fact still remains that MMO developers are in business to make money, that their investors demand a significant return on investment and that groupers are in the minority and therefore are not going to get catered to. You don't have to like the facts, you just have to live with them. 550k groupers is nothing compared to WoW's 11 million soloers or howmany ever Farmville can attract. You can stop living in the past, that's why it's the past. Today it is not a niche market, nor is it ever going to be one again. Deal with the reality that actually exists instead of the one you wish existed.
... this is, sadly, very true. Money makes the world go around, and with the success of World of Warcraft, the state of MMO's have been changed. I have my fingers crossed that someone, maybe Bioware will be able to do it, will say, "Hey, what happened to the AD&D style gameplay?", and we'll get a focus on grouping back again. At the moment, the old AD&D atmosphere only seems to exist in offline RPG's. It's a sad day, but I guess the geeky roleplay games have come out of the closet and been found by the masses, where it's been morphed and twisted into something I no longer find interest in.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
I would venture a guess as that might not be possible.
To draw a parallel...
I listen to and write (for all intent and purposes) classical music.
However the reality is that more people listen to pop music or some sort of rock over classical music. The same can be said of blues and Jazz.
I constantly hear people talk about how modern music is bereft of depth and complexity, etc.
So one might say "well, all they have to do is to start supporting classical music or Jazz or Blues and the market will change.
This is true.
but really, does anyone see this happening?
The people who experienced and loved old school games are just outnumbered by a new generation of players. This is not to say that some of those players wouldn't want an old school game but I bet dollars to donuts that they might look at anyone suggesting one as crazy.
Which in some ways is sad. I look at Vanugauard's world and I say "I only want a world that has this size and scope".
but I wonder if anything that size and that varied and open will ever be made again?
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
A valid example. However in my opinion, as that is all I can give...I feel as though the world of media (gaming, music, film and such) is only as absolute as we make it.
I work loosely in the film/video industry as a freelance artist. The one thing I have learned from my time within that line of work is that the client/customer powers everything. It's basic properties of supply and demand. You will create whatever type of service your client wants because the client or customer fills your pockets at the end of the day.
This translates over to the topic at hand as there is not currently a market for the old school style games anymore. The trend in MMOs...and in gaming all together IMO has shifted due to a public outcry for a different type of game. Who's to say it can't/won't sway the other way should enough people stand together to create interest in a particular style, call it "retro-MMOs" or what-have you.
I will not argue the advantages of older style MMOs to newer, as I have things I like in both. I have only the intentions of trying to pursuade people not to give up on their own opinion and to continue to voice/support the things they want in games...or in any media for that matter. Because if you give up on the idea that you can tailor an industry as a customer you have invited money hungry developers into your pocket only to rob you of your money and the joy these things are supposed to bring into your life.
/steps down from soapbox.
Theoretically that is true. If there are enough people then there will be someone to fill that void with some sort of product.
but realistically do we see that happening? Do you really think that there will be enough people turned on to 12 tone or Aleatoric music (which I don't write but it's thorny so it seems like a good example) so that you will find one of these pieces in the top 10?
Or to match your own example, do you think you will find T.V. shows that match the styles from say the 50's? Or even better there will be a new found love for silent films?
I will agree that it will take a good size audience to sway developers and investors. But chances are they are going to want something with TONS of content like wow, fast travel, fast leveling lots of rewards, etc.
In Lineage 2 I waited days to prick Baium with a knife so that I could make my 3rd class transfer (I think that was the transfer, it was so long). Or was it sub class?
Even though it wasn't fun I did it and in retrospect I found it a rite of passage. Lineage 2 is filled with them.
It might be possible that a good amount of players will want to have the same type of experience but my sense is that the days of such things are gone. I'm not sure if this is good or not.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
I really hope it is what you are looking for!
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Thanks.
EQ did it right. You COULD solo, but it took you about 10x longer then grouping to kill anything. Yea, you could progress while you were looking for a group, but it wasnt by any means optimal. Plenty of people still did it though, and it was FUN.
Also, quests should NOT be a means of advancement and by no means be required, again, much like EQ. This would allow the solo crowd to not be gimped due to the fact they cant find the necessary people to complete a quest.
I do believe MMORPGs need to have difficult content though, and thats where the grouping with WoW has went wrong. I dont want dungeons where 6 people just rush through killing mob after mob in a race to the end. People who attempt that should die a horrible death from overpulling too much. Strategy needs to be required. Class interdependency needs to be brought back as well, and for the love of god potions need to be thrown away. Nothing annoys me more then a Warrior able to heal himself. He should need a healer, or fight mobs that he can kill before his hp is extinguished. Thats why he has a lot of hp.
MMORPGs used to be challenging, fun, and yes, painful. There HAS to be risk. Otherwise you can lose as many times as you want with no consequence until you get what you want. That shouldnt be how it works. If you're deep in a dungeon, you should be SCARED to die. If you're group pulls more then they can handle, you should be fighting your ass off while biting your nails to the cuticle hoping your teamwork prevails and you live to fight the next mobs.
When playing EQ I used to solo a lot, and never had a problem with it. Sure it took longer, sure I couldnt take on a lot of the harder content with the best loot, but I had enough content to get me through while I waited to find a group. Hell, sometimes I spent all day soloing and I loved it because it was risky and fun. If you're soloing you should not be able to steamroll mob after mob, fighting four at a time the same level as you without worrying. You should be extra careful because you don't have backup. You should pick your fights wisely and watch your back at all times for possible roamers who would mean a death sentence. Any more, in games like WoW, soloing is a gaurenteed win unless you literally fall asleep while fighting. Anyone who dies in that game soloing was just being lazy. And the reason they are lazy is because its so easy, and there is no meaningful consequence if you die anyway.
Games like EQ, FFXI, DAoC, and the rest of the group-oriented MMORPGs are the ones that we want to bring back. EVERY MMO made any more lets you solo to end game. Why must you complain if us groupers want a challenging, group oriented game that requires teamwork, patience, and depending on others to complete a job. When you're bear hunting in real life, do you do it solo? Most likely not, because there is danger. You depend on others to have your back. Thats what we want in our games. We want a community. We want teamwork. What we dont want is 5 or 6 people going into a dungeon, smacking everything in sight in a mad rush to the end, and calling that teamwork. Thats something you would expect from coop action games, not MMORPGs.
Also, people always say the solo to end games are the ones with all the players and thats what the people want. I have to disagree with this. Maybe its only because there isnt anything else worth playing for the group oriented players? And everybody knows players will do whatever is the easiest way to do anything. Give somebody the option of grouping a hard dungeon to get to 80 or playing whack-a-mole solo to get there in the same amount of time, and thats what they will all do. Sad but true. I am willing to bet if a copy of classic EQ, DAoC, or FFXI was released - it would be HUGE. But instead all we get is WoW clones which fail a month or two after release, or even worse, games like star trek online.
I'm not against soloing. I totally understand not having the time to find a group all the time. But it should be MUCH slower then grouping, and also should not give many rewards. I actually am a firm believer that gear is handed out wayyyy too much now in games anyway. Anything you do you get a new item. Good items should require good groups and good teamwork to aquire, not getting a pointless kill 10 boars quest for a "epic" sword. I actually play eve online and solo quite a bit, more then grouping, but I also dont expect to get as good rewards, and I'm fine with that.
All I'm saying is give the group crowd a bone, give us a game to call our own and enjoy without totally dumbing it down to the point anyone can solo to the end. I want fear in my game, I want peril, I want challenges. I want to depend on my healer to keep me alive. I want to depend on my enchanter to mezmerize the four adds that came with the pull. I want my dps classes to attack from behind because the mob cant parry or dodge such attacks. The casters should have to worry about getting hit five times or else they die, so they must manage their aggro well WITHOUT some stupid addon. I want complexity. I want teamwork. I want to remember the names of people who made life saving decisions which only happense with consequences that are painful.
The solo crowd has plenty of MMORPGs to play AND offline RPGs as well. We who enjoy the way the games used to be only have the option of games over a decade old which are faint images of their past glory. We are stuck hoping for anything but another solo-fest, and until that type of game is released, nobody actually knows if the majority really wants complete soloing, or if they just play it because its the only decent game thats been released in the last five years.
Its late, and I typed this up a bit quick, but hopefully some of the stuff makes sense and you see where I'm coming from. I would want the game to have soloing, because I dont always group, but I dont want that to be the most efficient, or even close to being the best way to play the game.
I'm glad I didn't have to type any of that out because you just said exactly how I feel.
Well put.
You "power the industry" insofar as you pay a monthly fee for a game. Sitting around whining about how awful the games are doesn't do jack squat. At the moment, the people who power the industry are the casual players beause those are the people who put the most money into the games. The majority financial support comes from casual players, therefore they get the majority of catering by the industry. I never said you should give up, I said you should accept the current reality. If you want to change the current reality, the only way you can do it is by presenting a large united front of financially-willing players who want a game to play. If you cannot find a couple of hundred people at a minimum, don't expect developers to listen to your demands because you're just not worth it to them. That is the financial reality of the MMO marketplace. Money talks. If you don't represent significant money to the developers, you're just wasting your breath.
The problem is, *YOU* didn't change the industry, talking about old-timers. The people who changed the industry was the mainstream player who the developers courted because they represented a massive infusion of cash into an industry that was desperate for it. It is conceivable that you could present enough sub-paying players to make the developers change their tactics again but it's highly unlikely. There just aren't enough hardcore old-timers around. Most have either accepted the casual playstyle or have stopped playing altogether. Add to that the fact that you need to produce a huge number of people, not just a few thousand, but closer to a million to make developers sit up and take notice.
That's more people than comprised the "old-time" MMO marketplace in the first place!
Good luck to you but I'm sure not holding my breath.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None