This, and many replies like it, are why MMORPG's are not the games they used to be. If this is an example of modern day interaction then is it any surprise that communities no longer grow? Merge this with the fact that most MMORPG's are single player activities now and you realise that until the console gamers go back to their consoles then we're never going to get another decent MMORPG.
This type of gross generalization and stereotyping prevents you from seeing the whole picture. Your straw man is obvious.
I'm going to go on a bit of a rant here.
The thing people don't realize is that the Grandfather of modern day MMO games, UO, was almost entirely soloable. There were only a few mobs or dungeon areas that you needed a group to get through, and even those could be soloable if you had the right skills. Even AC was a solo-friendly game. WoW did not invent soloing, just soloing in the EQ style of MMO game.
The thing that made UO group focused was the PvP. You had to group up to survive in a lot of areas, because if you didn't have a group of friends with you, you would probably get ganked and die.
But the genius of this system is that the game itself did not force you to group, you had the option to do everything solo and only play by yourself, but the open world PvP system encouraged grouping.
It was organic grouping. People naturally banded together. There was no game mechanic telling you "this is a solo encounter, we will penalize you for being a group", or "this is a group encounter, there is no way you can do this solo". There was none of that type of thing in UO.
We, the players, were given a world to live in. We decided how to approach encounters. I think this is the big difference between the UO style of game design, and the EQ style of game design.
The UO style is focused on choices, while the EQ style is focused on restrictions.
Anyway, that's just my opinion.
That sounds like a setup I'd enjoy. I don't mind grouping, I do not mind soloing, I DO MIND forced versions of either.
My god has horns.... nah, I don't think he is real either.
This, and many replies like it, are why MMORPG's are not the games they used to be. If this is an example of modern day interaction then is it any surprise that communities no longer grow? Merge this with the fact that most MMORPG's are single player activities now and you realise that until the console gamers go back to their consoles then we're never going to get another decent MMORPG.
This type of gross generalization and stereotyping prevents you from seeing the whole picture. Your straw man is obvious.
I'm going to go on a bit of a rant here.
The thing people don't realize is that the Grandfather of modern day MMO games, UO, was almost entirely soloable. There were only a few mobs or dungeon areas that you needed a group to get through, and even those could be soloable if you had the right skills. Even AC was a solo-friendly game. WoW did not invent soloing, just soloing in the EQ style of MMO game.
The thing that made UO group focused was the PvP. You had to group up to survive in a lot of areas, because if you didn't have a group of friends with you, you would probably get ganked and die.
But the genius of this system is that the game itself did not force you to group, you had the option to do everything solo and only play by yourself, but the open world PvP system encouraged grouping.
It was organic grouping. People naturally banded together. There was no game mechanic telling you "this is a solo encounter, we will penalize you for being a group", or "this is a group encounter, there is no way you can do this solo". There was none of that type of thing in UO.
We, the players, were given a world to live in. We decided how to approach encounters. I think this is the big difference between the UO style of game design, and the EQ style of game design.
The UO style is focused on choices, while the EQ style is focused on restrictions.
Anyway, that's just my opinion.
"Organic" is a very good way to put it. I loved UO, even though I hated the PKing.
Soloing the toughest MOBs was not something just anyone could do, regardless of skills. That took some brains and tactics. Deamons were really tough to the best of skilled players. At least for a while, what with updates and changes like all games have.
Remember people opening a Gate portal from a dungeon to a bank and training a Deamon through it? Players running everywhere, scattering and running for their lives, then the assault by those who quickly organized to take the Deamon down.
I Hythloth Dungeon at the walkway overpass near the Deamons, I used to have a set of runes marked for all around that area, and would use gates to help my guildmates escape certain death from the Deamons. Loads of fun.
Damn I miss that stuff.
And I totally agree. I like worlds that make sense. Go solo if you want, but at greater risk, and some things may be beyond you at any given time or place, depending on unforeseeable circumstances.
But hey, it's your opinion. You can be wrong if you want to.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.- -And on the 8th day, man created God.-
I missed the generation of pen and paper and the old school Dungeons and Dragons. But I have a good idea of why people fell in love with these genre in the first place. It allowed you to be someone you could never hope to be and to go places and go on adventures that you could never hope to take on in real life. It was your imagination doing the work while you had a great time playing with your friends. MMOs now don't require your imagination to do much of anything, because the world your playing in is someone elses imagination. It's pretty awesome in every aspect you look at it.
MMOs are nothing like pen and paper RPGs (and D&D is one of the worst BTW).
Let me explain the differences.
First and most importantly you solve P&P adventures with your mind. there are usually many different ways to solve anything and not even the GM know how things will end. In fact the best GM I know never thinks on how the players should solve anything, he just put us in a situation and makes us get out of it. You don't always use brawns but sometimes you make smart plans or live by stealth or charm.
MMOs on the other hand have only one solution to any quest and it almost involve violence all the time.
Secondly good P6P RPGs have very flexible combat systems. You don't have a bunch of certain attacks but you tell what you want to do and the GM will give you a number to roll based on what it was.
Thirdly quests in pen and paper RPGs are epic. Like when we broke in to Lone star complex in R.I.F.T.S to steal a fighter jet or when we threw out a 100 Sabbath vampires from St Petersburgh in Werewolf. In MMOs most are menial tasks that any of my P&P characters would be upset if anyone suggested him to do them.
The stories of pen and paper RPGs are of course as good as the guy who wrote them but the best MMO stories are possibly in class with the worst stories I ever played in a MMO.
You really should give it a chance, I can recommend Palladium fantasy, it is rather beginner friendly. It is really nothing like a MMO, the closest game to a P&P game is still Biowares old Neverwinter nights and it is pretty far off also even if you run it with a real GM.
I read the LoTRO vs. WoW column and when the 'Solo Play' in LoTRO was rated lower because the quests required you to group with other people that made me come to a realization. The whole point of an MMO is to interact directly and indirectly with other people that play the game and having the option to meet new people, join a guild or clan or what have you, and to have a good time. How fun was playing DnD or Diablo by yourself? Definitely not as fun as playing with your friends right? So I can in no way see why grouping with people can take away from a game and the game that encourages you to solo play would be BETTER.
The "whole point" of an MMORPG is to have fun. People enjoy the game in different ways.
Sometimes people like others around them, but they don't necessarily want to interact with them. Or, they want to interact with them by chatting, but not actually playing the game mechanics with them.
Let's see. I can't use a bar as an example, because you're to young. The playground? You might enjoy it more if there's lots of kids playing on the play ground, even though you don't actually play with them.
So, some kinds might want to play on the see saw with each other. It requires grouping, two people. Or some kids might want to swing together, one pushes, one swings, and then they take turns pushing each ohter.
But, some kids don't want to ride the see saw with you, or push you while you swing. BUT, they want to chat with you while you see saw, or while you swing. It's just to much for them ot actually engage in an activity with you that requires cooperation, but they don't mind chatting. What if they want to swing right now and you don't want to? What if they want to stop swinging, and you want to keep going. To complicated for them, just chatting is more than enough interaction.
I'm with you. I think the idea is to group and play the game with other players, but I'm just saying, not everyone likes the same thing.
Go solo if you want, but at greater risk, and some things may be beyond you at any given time or place, depending on unforeseeable circumstances.
Amen to that.
I remember the days when going solo was done because players wanted to face the challenge of doing so.
To tell the tales of their victories, and even their fate-sealed defeats, among friends and companions.
To do the epic. To rip fame from the world by sword or spell, and hold it high like a true badge of honor. To make a name that was heard by all for something beyond the normal, something special and honored.
-----------
These days players do it just to stay away from other players.
Exactly, once solo was about achievment, now MMO's are designed for soloing. Its easy mode time and grouping just makes it easier rather than being a requirement to complete an objective. Some MMO's do scale up the difficulty for groups but not for every quest and raid etc.
Now we just see someones cape as they run past us and they call that Massive Multiplayer.
Something that I've notced lately (I'm 14 btw) with these forums and with new MMOs coming out and what it has turned into. Let me explain by starting off with a generation that I missed.
I missed the generation of pen and paper and the old school Dungeons and Dragons. But I have a good idea of why people fell in love with these genre in the first place. It allowed you to be someone you could never hope to be and to go places and go on adventures that you could never hope to take on in real life. It was your imagination doing the work while you had a great time playing with your friends. MMOs now don't require your imagination to do much of anything, because the world your playing in is someone elses imagination. It's pretty awesome in every aspect you look at it.
I read the LoTRO vs. WoW column and when the 'Solo Play' in LoTRO was rated lower because the quests required you to group with other people that made me come to a realization. The whole point of an MMO is to interact directly and indirectly with other people that play the game and having the option to meet new people, join a guild or clan or what have you, and to have a good time. How fun was playing DnD or Diablo by yourself? Definitely not as fun as playing with your friends right? So I can in no way see why grouping with people can take away from a game and the game that encourages you to solo play would be BETTER.
I've also read the 'When did Instant Gratification Usurp Adventure?' thread and that got me thinking. Playing an MMO should make you feel like a hero on an epic adventure and along the way you collect items and gear, trophies or what have you to make you stand out from everyone else.
People are attracted to WoW because you get to the top so fast and it kind of gives the illusion that since you have all these epic items that you're awesome! But are you really? The guy next to you is wearing 6 pieces of the same gear. I guess it works but not for me or anyone else who is seeking more than some shallow gameplay and an easy reward system.
In short I think that MMOs lack a real sense of adventure and fail to make you seem like a hero. I'm not saying that grinding your ass off to feel special is the way to go either. I think that the content should be harder, and longer (I'm talking about dungeons). They should be more difficult and add a sense of adventure, therefore when you finish it and claim your reward it actually feels like you've earned it.
I currently pen and paper with a group of friends of mine, not DnD though. I'm 18. For me, it has always been sitting down with my friends and having a good time while doing something interesting, different, and fun. There is a sense of adventure while playing, and a sense that I am this character doing these things. Its always been fun to play through to the end of the session, and to play through the set up campaign. Its not about the loot, its not about the levels, its about the people. I think thats why I got into GW in the beginning. It wasn't about the gear, it wasn't about the levels, it was about playing with these other people in your party, experiencing the story, and kicking some ass. Sure, you could solo, but you had these lifeless henchmen who were often less effective than pugs.
I like the idea of making some things larger, but small groups are largely under used for what they can provide, being fundamentally different from a larger group. The group in PnP with is about 10 in total, but about 5 at any one time. And we do enjoy it when we go through a particularly difficult session, but length is not the way to improve MMOs. That makes them less accessable. It becomes a game of endurance and scheduling when you have to devote more than an hour to any specific task in a game. Make it long term rewards and short term rewards. Chain a story through a set of dungeons that you don't have to do all at once and give a reward at the end of each, but give a larger and better one at the end of the last one in the set. That way, you have a longer term goal to complete and a few shorter term ones as well. You feel like you earned it and you get noticeable completion along the way, without forcing the players to scheduel strictly around playtime or have copious ammounts of it.
You have a nice lull in between major releases unless you are going for FFXIV next month. When it comes to MMORPG games a lot of them inherently require you to determine or discover the adventure within, by dev design or not.
I will say some of my best online memories of adventure were not the 24+ people raids or PUGs. But when I had 4 or 5 people I ran around with consistently. I can definitely attribute that to the old days of AD&D with maybe 8 of us on regular basis every weekend for good times.
Today I think it is harder to find the adventure because in part it is harder to find the people looking for it.
So many gogogo or “thanks got my 10 kills, I’m out.” When you have 4 more and now can’t do it. Gigantic zerg guilds/organizations, medium size guilds that are hard to warm into as they are so used to the gogogo who /gquit in 15 days.
Generally speaking it is harder to socialize with strangers online today and often players like me, simply don’t much anymore. Except for the folks we know in RL or over the years in games.
Anyhow, I don’t want to lose sight of your point with my tangents…
I wonder if the reality is that the adventure wasn’t lost, it’s that developers began thinking they were wholly responsible for it. Adding so many details and removing the mystery that helps creates a grand adventure in the first place.
This just so nicely describes how I feel about the MMOs nowadays... The One and Only thing you get from socializing with others is just "gogogo", "no need to kill this trash, lets get boss loot", "chain pull for f**k sake!", "why do you read quests, lol?" and such bullshit. I'm just glad I was there in LotRO before it died, adventuring with a group of total strangers through Carn Dum and having just the best gaming time in my life. Because we shared the adventure, not the gameplay...
Go solo if you want, but at greater risk, and some things may be beyond you at any given time or place, depending on unforeseeable circumstances.
Amen to that.
I remember the days when going solo was done because players wanted to face the challenge of doing so.
To tell the tales of their victories, and even their fate-sealed defeats, among friends and companions.
To do the epic. To rip fame from the world by sword or spell, and hold it high like a true badge of honor. To make a name that was heard by all for something beyond the normal, something special and honored.
So anyone who didnt solo just took easy mode then? isnt that what everyone is complaining about?
The only thing thats happened is people were given a choice, and they chose to solo, because the whole reason they grouped was because it was the easiest route.
Apparently stating the truth in my sig is "trolling" Sig typo fixed thanks to an observant stragen001.
Go solo if you want, but at greater risk, and some things may be beyond you at any given time or place, depending on unforeseeable circumstances.
Amen to that.
I remember the days when going solo was done because players wanted to face the challenge of doing so.
To tell the tales of their victories, and even their fate-sealed defeats, among friends and companions.
To do the epic. To rip fame from the world by sword or spell, and hold it high like a true badge of honor. To make a name that was heard by all for something beyond the normal, something special and honored.
So anyone who didnt solo just took easy mode then? isnt that what everyone is complaining about?
The only thing thats happened is people were given a choice, and they chose to solo, because the whole reason they grouped was because it was the easiest route.
Yes, but they also learned a lot about the game in the process and met great people in-game, which they sticked to. And one day, they did not form a group to make their lives easier, but to meet them again and to face the danger alonside them. Which is just what PnPs used to be about (for me OFC)... Sure it does not come the first day but the game can teach you to play it in the "right" way (pre-MoM LotRO comes to mind), just some will not make it up to that point and there is the point where you lose subscriptions = money = 'hey, let's make it easier so we can make more!"
Go solo if you want, but at greater risk, and some things may be beyond you at any given time or place, depending on unforeseeable circumstances.
Amen to that.
I remember the days when going solo was done because players wanted to face the challenge of doing so.
To tell the tales of their victories, and even their fate-sealed defeats, among friends and companions.
To do the epic. To rip fame from the world by sword or spell, and hold it high like a true badge of honor. To make a name that was heard by all for something beyond the normal, something special and honored.
So anyone who didnt solo just took easy mode then? isnt that what everyone is complaining about?
The only thing thats happened is people were given a choice, and they chose to solo, because the whole reason they grouped was because it was the easiest route.
Ahhh, Warmaster, you just summed it all up.
The old way, solo for hard mode, group for easy mode
The new way, solo or group for easy mode.
Now, that sounds fine if your thinking just along the lines of player choice. But it has affects on the game as a whole.
It removes challenge
It removes need to be social
It takes away from that natural feeling that "this is a world" and makes it more "gamey" feeling, loses immersion
It caters to the "we all have to be winners no matter what we do" and thus loses any feeling of success
It makes the game a single player game with multiplayer capability, and loses that massively multiplayer feel
All that is fine for players who want a game like that. It's just that a lot of us want "more".
And thinking about this, forced grouping is just as bad.
It removes challenge -no option here, or the reverse that it forces challenge by design, thus removing "easy" option, which should be a mix
It removes need to be social -forced grouping would naturally lead to one of two things. Forced guild activity which leaves you not interacting with anyone outside of that guild (multiplayer mode rather than massively) or just hopping into and out of groups out of need and not actually interacting with the masses
It takes away from that natural feeling that "this is a world" and makes it more "gamey" feeling, loses immersion -same result, dictated grouping and no freedom doesn't feel "realistic"
It caters to the "we all have to be winners no matter what we do" and thus loses any feeling of success -same overall result when you have to do it the designed way, you aren't doing anything for success, the game tells you what to do
It makes the game a single player game with multiplayer capability, and loses that massively multiplayer feel -again, same thing only from the reversed angle, only you're skipping the single player option and going right to multiplayer, and entirely missing the massively.
In affect, forced grouping forces small social spheres, and removes the massively multiplayer from your experience.
The pencil and paper generation also watched a *lot* of television - a very passive medium.
A sixth of of the pencil and paper generation were the ones running adventures and creating worlds - being a mere player in someone else's world is a very odd experience for me at times.
I agree with the original post. At the same time, I'm susceptable to the desire to advance fast and get "uber gear" and the frustrations inherent in being dependent on getting a group together and also being dependent on the competency of 5 or so other people.
But yeah, grouping is the absolute best thing about MMORPGs. Otherwise if you just use them to chat and play solo, you mightaswell play a single player game and have x-fire or some other chat program going.
I've been playing these things for closing in on a decade and by far the most fulfilling and fun moments were from accomplishing something with a group of strangers or friends, after facing a difficult and multi-hour quest and overcoming multiple obstacles together.
Those moments are why I play these games. I solo so I can be better in my role in a group, not for fun or gaming fulfilliment.
But yeah, grouping is the absolute best thing about MMORPGs. Otherwise if you just use them to chat and play solo, you mightaswell play a single player game and have x-fire or some other chat program going.
I've been playing these things for closing in on a decade and by far the most fulfilling and fun moments were from accomplishing something with a group of strangers or friends, after facing a difficult and multi-hour quest and overcoming multiple obstacles together.
Those moments are why I play these games. I solo so I can be better in my role in a group, not for fun or gaming fulfilliment.
Even if a player plays solo and only uses ingame chat it will still be a very different experiance then playing a singleplayer game with a outside chat program. Due to your decade of experiance you should have known this already. To be honost I always thought people new to games in this genre make those "might aswell play single player games" comments
I agree with the second part that it us to be allot of fun to group, but that overall community is no more, not due to the game but due how people want to play their games. Nowaday's grouping lacks true social structure nad seems to be about the fastes way to cap lvl type of mentality. And not really to defeat that Monster Boss but pure to gain they Awesome Sword of Uberness.
Aslong the MMORPG I play doesn't have the holy trinity then I am all for grouping, then atleast I feel a challenge. Not saying that the trinity can't be challenging as it can, but I just like to use more tactics then merly depend on the trinity and then TO ME grouping is fun.
But yeah, grouping is the absolute best thing about MMORPGs. Otherwise if you just use them to chat and play solo, you mightaswell play a single player game and have x-fire or some other chat program going.
I've been playing these things for closing in on a decade and by far the most fulfilling and fun moments were from accomplishing something with a group of strangers or friends, after facing a difficult and multi-hour quest and overcoming multiple obstacles together.
Those moments are why I play these games. I solo so I can be better in my role in a group, not for fun or gaming fulfilliment.
Even if a player plays solo and only uses ingame chat it will still be a very different experiance then playing a singleplayer game with a outside chat program. Due to your decade of experiance you should have known this already. To be honost I always thought people new to games in this genre make those "might aswell play single player games" comments
I agree with the second part that it us to be allot of fun to group, but that overall community is no more, not due to the game but due how people want to play their games. Nowaday's grouping lacks true social structure nad seems to be about the fastes way to cap lvl type of mentality. And not really to defeat that Monster Boss but pure to gain they Awesome Sword of Uberness.
Aslong the MMORPG I play doesn't have the holy trinity then I am all for grouping, then atleast I feel a challenge. Not saying that the trinity can't be challenging as it can, but I just like to use more tactics then merly depend on the trinity and then TO ME grouping is fun.
I agree with you, but it just so happens to be that like 99.9% of all group quests require you to kill something. If a game came along that was just 'get whoever you can grab' and not 'lf healer x100'. Then I think more players would be inclined to group. Maybe there will be some quests like that in GW2 or Rift or SWTOR. Who knows? But I think if group quests could have more thouhgt put into them it would add to the game greatly
Comments
That sounds like a setup I'd enjoy. I don't mind grouping, I do not mind soloing, I DO MIND forced versions of either.
My god has horns.... nah, I don't think he is real either.
"Organic" is a very good way to put it. I loved UO, even though I hated the PKing.
Soloing the toughest MOBs was not something just anyone could do, regardless of skills. That took some brains and tactics. Deamons were really tough to the best of skilled players. At least for a while, what with updates and changes like all games have.
Remember people opening a Gate portal from a dungeon to a bank and training a Deamon through it? Players running everywhere, scattering and running for their lives, then the assault by those who quickly organized to take the Deamon down.
I Hythloth Dungeon at the walkway overpass near the Deamons, I used to have a set of runes marked for all around that area, and would use gates to help my guildmates escape certain death from the Deamons. Loads of fun.
Damn I miss that stuff.
And I totally agree. I like worlds that make sense. Go solo if you want, but at greater risk, and some things may be beyond you at any given time or place, depending on unforeseeable circumstances.
Once upon a time....
In your opinion.
Which is wrong, by the way.
But hey, it's your opinion. You can be wrong if you want to.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.-
-And on the 8th day, man created God.-
MMOs are nothing like pen and paper RPGs (and D&D is one of the worst BTW).
Let me explain the differences.
First and most importantly you solve P&P adventures with your mind. there are usually many different ways to solve anything and not even the GM know how things will end. In fact the best GM I know never thinks on how the players should solve anything, he just put us in a situation and makes us get out of it. You don't always use brawns but sometimes you make smart plans or live by stealth or charm.
MMOs on the other hand have only one solution to any quest and it almost involve violence all the time.
Secondly good P6P RPGs have very flexible combat systems. You don't have a bunch of certain attacks but you tell what you want to do and the GM will give you a number to roll based on what it was.
Thirdly quests in pen and paper RPGs are epic. Like when we broke in to Lone star complex in R.I.F.T.S to steal a fighter jet or when we threw out a 100 Sabbath vampires from St Petersburgh in Werewolf. In MMOs most are menial tasks that any of my P&P characters would be upset if anyone suggested him to do them.
The stories of pen and paper RPGs are of course as good as the guy who wrote them but the best MMO stories are possibly in class with the worst stories I ever played in a MMO.
You really should give it a chance, I can recommend Palladium fantasy, it is rather beginner friendly. It is really nothing like a MMO, the closest game to a P&P game is still Biowares old Neverwinter nights and it is pretty far off also even if you run it with a real GM.
Amen to that.
The "whole point" of an MMORPG is to have fun. People enjoy the game in different ways.
Sometimes people like others around them, but they don't necessarily want to interact with them. Or, they want to interact with them by chatting, but not actually playing the game mechanics with them.
Let's see. I can't use a bar as an example, because you're to young. The playground? You might enjoy it more if there's lots of kids playing on the play ground, even though you don't actually play with them.
So, some kinds might want to play on the see saw with each other. It requires grouping, two people. Or some kids might want to swing together, one pushes, one swings, and then they take turns pushing each ohter.
But, some kids don't want to ride the see saw with you, or push you while you swing. BUT, they want to chat with you while you see saw, or while you swing. It's just to much for them ot actually engage in an activity with you that requires cooperation, but they don't mind chatting. What if they want to swing right now and you don't want to? What if they want to stop swinging, and you want to keep going. To complicated for them, just chatting is more than enough interaction.
I'm with you. I think the idea is to group and play the game with other players, but I'm just saying, not everyone likes the same thing.
I remember the days when going solo was done because players wanted to face the challenge of doing so.
To tell the tales of their victories, and even their fate-sealed defeats, among friends and companions.
To do the epic. To rip fame from the world by sword or spell, and hold it high like a true badge of honor. To make a name that was heard by all for something beyond the normal, something special and honored.
-----------
These days players do it just to stay away from other players.
There's something very sad about all that.
Once upon a time....
Exactly, once solo was about achievment, now MMO's are designed for soloing. Its easy mode time and grouping just makes it easier rather than being a requirement to complete an objective. Some MMO's do scale up the difficulty for groups but not for every quest and raid etc.
Now we just see someones cape as they run past us and they call that Massive Multiplayer.
I currently pen and paper with a group of friends of mine, not DnD though. I'm 18. For me, it has always been sitting down with my friends and having a good time while doing something interesting, different, and fun. There is a sense of adventure while playing, and a sense that I am this character doing these things. Its always been fun to play through to the end of the session, and to play through the set up campaign. Its not about the loot, its not about the levels, its about the people. I think thats why I got into GW in the beginning. It wasn't about the gear, it wasn't about the levels, it was about playing with these other people in your party, experiencing the story, and kicking some ass. Sure, you could solo, but you had these lifeless henchmen who were often less effective than pugs.
I like the idea of making some things larger, but small groups are largely under used for what they can provide, being fundamentally different from a larger group. The group in PnP with is about 10 in total, but about 5 at any one time. And we do enjoy it when we go through a particularly difficult session, but length is not the way to improve MMOs. That makes them less accessable. It becomes a game of endurance and scheduling when you have to devote more than an hour to any specific task in a game. Make it long term rewards and short term rewards. Chain a story through a set of dungeons that you don't have to do all at once and give a reward at the end of each, but give a larger and better one at the end of the last one in the set. That way, you have a longer term goal to complete and a few shorter term ones as well. You feel like you earned it and you get noticeable completion along the way, without forcing the players to scheduel strictly around playtime or have copious ammounts of it.
Disagreement Heirarchy
This just so nicely describes how I feel about the MMOs nowadays... The One and Only thing you get from socializing with others is just "gogogo", "no need to kill this trash, lets get boss loot", "chain pull for f**k sake!", "why do you read quests, lol?" and such bullshit. I'm just glad I was there in LotRO before it died, adventuring with a group of total strangers through Carn Dum and having just the best gaming time in my life. Because we shared the adventure, not the gameplay...
So anyone who didnt solo just took easy mode then? isnt that what everyone is complaining about?
The only thing thats happened is people were given a choice, and they chose to solo, because the whole reason they grouped was because it was the easiest route.
Apparently stating the truth in my sig is "trolling"
Sig typo fixed thanks to an observant stragen001.
Yes, but they also learned a lot about the game in the process and met great people in-game, which they sticked to. And one day, they did not form a group to make their lives easier, but to meet them again and to face the danger alonside them. Which is just what PnPs used to be about (for me OFC)... Sure it does not come the first day but the game can teach you to play it in the "right" way (pre-MoM LotRO comes to mind), just some will not make it up to that point and there is the point where you lose subscriptions = money = 'hey, let's make it easier so we can make more!"
Ahhh, Warmaster, you just summed it all up.
The old way, solo for hard mode, group for easy mode
The new way, solo or group for easy mode.
Now, that sounds fine if your thinking just along the lines of player choice. But it has affects on the game as a whole.
It removes challenge
It removes need to be social
It takes away from that natural feeling that "this is a world" and makes it more "gamey" feeling, loses immersion
It caters to the "we all have to be winners no matter what we do" and thus loses any feeling of success
It makes the game a single player game with multiplayer capability, and loses that massively multiplayer feel
All that is fine for players who want a game like that. It's just that a lot of us want "more".
And thinking about this, forced grouping is just as bad.
It removes challenge -no option here, or the reverse that it forces challenge by design, thus removing "easy" option, which should be a mix
It removes need to be social -forced grouping would naturally lead to one of two things. Forced guild activity which leaves you not interacting with anyone outside of that guild (multiplayer mode rather than massively) or just hopping into and out of groups out of need and not actually interacting with the masses
It takes away from that natural feeling that "this is a world" and makes it more "gamey" feeling, loses immersion -same result, dictated grouping and no freedom doesn't feel "realistic"
It caters to the "we all have to be winners no matter what we do" and thus loses any feeling of success -same overall result when you have to do it the designed way, you aren't doing anything for success, the game tells you what to do
It makes the game a single player game with multiplayer capability, and loses that massively multiplayer feel -again, same thing only from the reversed angle, only you're skipping the single player option and going right to multiplayer, and entirely missing the massively.
In affect, forced grouping forces small social spheres, and removes the massively multiplayer from your experience.
Massively multiplayer
Not massively
Single player option
Multiplayer option
Once upon a time....
The pencil and paper generation also watched a *lot* of television - a very passive medium.
A sixth of of the pencil and paper generation were the ones running adventures and creating worlds - being a mere player in someone else's world is a very odd experience for me at times.
I agree with the original post. At the same time, I'm susceptable to the desire to advance fast and get "uber gear" and the frustrations inherent in being dependent on getting a group together and also being dependent on the competency of 5 or so other people.
But yeah, grouping is the absolute best thing about MMORPGs. Otherwise if you just use them to chat and play solo, you mightaswell play a single player game and have x-fire or some other chat program going.
I've been playing these things for closing in on a decade and by far the most fulfilling and fun moments were from accomplishing something with a group of strangers or friends, after facing a difficult and multi-hour quest and overcoming multiple obstacles together.
Those moments are why I play these games. I solo so I can be better in my role in a group, not for fun or gaming fulfilliment.
Even if a player plays solo and only uses ingame chat it will still be a very different experiance then playing a singleplayer game with a outside chat program. Due to your decade of experiance you should have known this already. To be honost I always thought people new to games in this genre make those "might aswell play single player games" comments
I agree with the second part that it us to be allot of fun to group, but that overall community is no more, not due to the game but due how people want to play their games. Nowaday's grouping lacks true social structure nad seems to be about the fastes way to cap lvl type of mentality. And not really to defeat that Monster Boss but pure to gain they Awesome Sword of Uberness.
Aslong the MMORPG I play doesn't have the holy trinity then I am all for grouping, then atleast I feel a challenge. Not saying that the trinity can't be challenging as it can, but I just like to use more tactics then merly depend on the trinity and then TO ME grouping is fun.
I agree with you, but it just so happens to be that like 99.9% of all group quests require you to kill something. If a game came along that was just 'get whoever you can grab' and not 'lf healer x100'. Then I think more players would be inclined to group. Maybe there will be some quests like that in GW2 or Rift or SWTOR. Who knows? But I think if group quests could have more thouhgt put into them it would add to the game greatly