I don't see how dismissing solo players helps anything. If a game is unplayable to them and they are forced to do something they don't want to do they will just leave. The resulting loss is not a benefit to social players because it dries up the "money well" for the game. You may not like what they do, but you should tolerate them for the sake of your favorite game.
As a social player, I absolutely do advocate advanced, complex, choice-ridden play in the games. Use your dollar vote with game companies and be vocal about the content YOU WANT instead of targeting some other part of the population.
Love this article and agree 100%. I am a solo player just like her. She is absolutely correct that you can be a solo player and enjoy grouping. I play alone 95% of the time but will group if asked. Even though I play solo my favorite time was in WOW BC in AV as a healer. Although I hate forced grouping I loved vanilla RIFT automatically joining players together to fight invasions. It was as much fun as AV. Now most of the time you are kicked out of the group as soon as you are joined - by hardcore groupers.
Here's the thing the "old school" players need to get through their head is the whole community thing will not go back to the way it was in EQ1, unless you are playing some Niche MMO by some indie company with 200 other players.
back in the days of EQ1 it was only played by "nerds", now with MMOs becoming more mainstream communities have become more guild oriented instead of you knowing everyone on the server.
sorry but the "forced grouping" faction of this forum is WRONG you cannot have a successful MMO without a heavy soloing element. now you can encourage grouping which is what MMOs should do but forcing people to be in a group to do ANYTHING will just make people unsubscribe.
Your abundance of misinformation is truly astounding.
oh i know i insult the god known as EQ1 on this forum which is bound to bring out the fanboys with their pitchforks and torches. but the reality is that forced grouping is a DEAD mechanic thankfully games need crap for the solo player to do and reward the solo player or else they will get bored and find a game that does cater to them.
people talk about giving soloers too much "epic" gear and i say well until you find another way to progress their character you have to give them upgraded gear. thats the whole point of MMORPGs right now ... the stat progression. And soloers are part of the community they should be able to progress their characters past max level.
Dumb article. CoH doesn't force grouping, but for many years people grouped all the time, because it was fun.
If you are a soloer, that means you don't like grouping, so don't write a dumb article telling us that you like grouping and are a 'soloer', it doesn't work that way.
I don't blame soloers, I blame games that don't entice grouping effectively. There's no point in a monthly fee or even playing online if you aren't grouping regularly. Solo some, sure, but no groups at all makes the whole genre pointless.
If that's not breaking the game, what is?
tell me what part of Massive Multiplayer Online role playing game states group only?
Massive? nah that just states lots of people.
multiplayer means simply Multiple players playing the same game
Online well duh
and the rest has nothing to do with grouping either
It isn't the solo gamer's fault that all these new mmorpgs suck, it is the developers fault. The gear treadmill idea is just lame, but the mechanics behind it are addictive, and people get sucked in. People just need to stop shoveling money at these gear treadmill social experiments and then developers will stop making them.
Are you a Pavlovian Fish Biscuit Addict? Get Help Now! I will play no more MMORPGs until somethign good comes out!
Soloers don't destroy mmo's. Neither does some forced grouping.
what destroys them are
A, bad design decisions, and
B, bad players of all types.
In lineage 2 I mostly soloed and had excellent gear. Why? Because there was no bind on equip so everything could be sold on the market. And, with the exception of some boss jewels (that also could be sold) all gear could be crafted.
Another bad design desision is having grouped content that takes 10 minutes. The people who want to group want to make a session of it. Having a solo quest line that suddenly requires a group for one part, only then to go back to solo is ridiculous.
There should be forced grouping parts of games and the rewards should be different and enticing enough so that people will take advantage of it.
Solo players should always have a way to advance their characters. It won't be the same as those who want to group all the time but one should be able to play solo and at least be reasonably competitive.
Groups AND Soloers can be selfish and demand that they have things their way. So bad players are just bad players. If I had a dime for how many times I was in a group with "pro-grouping" players who were just horrible to play with I'd be retired.
And I can't get behind some solo players who demand that all content be soloable. My thought and preference is that solo content be solo content and group content be group content and if you want to take advantage of that content you just have to solo or group to do it.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
What is a problem is that outside of instances there is no content for people that want any sort of challange.
This is a problem.
Open world nowadays is streamlined, linear and faceroll - difficulty wise.
+ if you even want to group usually you can group to do solo quests (sic!)
That's what's wrong - it is not a problem game cater to soloers.
Problem is that it do it at expense of groupers.
Solo questing is faster and more conveniant than grouping.
Oh and things liek Rifts. They are nice but they are like "playing alone together" and they are not answer. They are great as addition or supplement but they are not replacement.
My favorite game addressing this issue was GW1. It was largely soloable (using heroes/henchmen), but it was (1) much more fun in player groups, (2) most of the missions/dungeons a lot more difficult when just using AI assistance, and (3) Guild Wars reserved its elite areas for player groups only. Any MMO that offers a viable henchman/hero alternative to just having to skip group content altogether in low-player-population areas/zones is more likely to keep me playing their game.
I thought GW1 had a pretty good game design -- and it allowed players to progress (using AI, if need be) and not get stuck in "LFG Limbo". Many games -- LotRO and vanilla WoW come to mind -- incorporated lots of elite group content that became unplayable once player populations thinned down. In SWTOR, which I'm currently playing, it's already becoming difficult to run 4-man heroics on thinly populated worlds. My hope is that Bioware will (1) improve the LFG mechanism somehow, (2) nerf these 4-man heroic areas so they can be soloed or duoed, or (3) make them all instances in which you can use more than just one companion at a time.
Ideally, I think all MMOs should gradually "solo-fy" their lower-level content once player populations thin out, reserving the higher-level zones/instances for player groups only. I'd probably resubscribe to WoW if they did something like that to the level 1-60/65 dungeons or offered "mirrored" versions of those dungeons for solo players.
Since WoW came out all the good gear comes from specific bosses, which require grouping in most cases. With that came a paradigm shift from "let's group and have fun" to "you can only group with us if you have this much health, this high of equipment level and use this rotation, and God save your soul if you pull the wrong mob." Groups have ceased being fun and as such I find my own company more enjoyable.
This ^^ not sure its the game's fault so much as people in general , but I see your point.
it's usually not game mechanics that drive me away from a game, its guild drama and poor interactions with people.
I have RL freinds that I met playing the original EQ, followed most of them through EQ2, WOW, AION and some RIFT (a lot dropped out of gaming after AION)
once these people were gone, I tried to find new friends (and did for a while in RIFT) but they unforntunatley left for TOR , which I had little interest in jumping too. My subsequent experiences with guilds in RIFT were just as you say .. and I canceled my sub not because of anything wrong with the game .. just people that I did not enjoy playing with.
So now I am in EVE now surprisingly in a game designed around "ganking" the community is 100x more appealing and social than what the theme-park games communities have devolved too.
Kind of sad ... but very true .. PEOPLE can ruin games.
Dumb article. CoH doesn't force grouping, but for many years people grouped all the time, because it was fun.
If you are a soloer, that means you don't like grouping, so don't write a dumb article telling us that you like grouping and are a 'soloer', it doesn't work that way.
I don't blame soloers, I blame games that don't entice grouping effectively. There's no point in a monthly fee or even playing online if you aren't grouping regularly. Solo some, sure, but no groups at all makes the whole genre pointless.
If that's not breaking the game, what is?
Completely incorrect.
I enjoy grouping, depending on the game and depending on the group. If I'm playing a game that my other friends are playing, I group most of the time and only go solo when none of them are online. In games where none of my friends are playing, I solo most of the time and only group for content that requires it.
The reason is that I'm just not that interested in getting to know most of you beyond acquaintance level. No offense, but I have enough friends. I'm just not in the market to for more. However, when I'm in a group, I'm part of the team. I chat, I joke, I take care of business, I share the spoils, I offer encouragement when it's needed and advice when it's welcome. And after that, I thank everyone for the group and go my own way. You see, it's possible to be friendly without being friends.
Not every soloist is an anti-social, mouthbreathing basement dweller. Many of us just prefer to be able to do whatever the hell we want most of the time, without having to worry about communal decision making. It absolutely doesn't mean we don't enjoy the groups we are in, when we are in them. We just want to keep it to a part time activity.
Interesting diatribe. The problem here is that every game must be built to accomodate every play style. That's simply a false concept. There are simply certain design goals that just work at odds with each other....you can't really fully satisfy both...and it's a fools errand to try. For example, you can't make a password that is both short and hard to crack at the same time. Nor can you expect to use the same password for every account you own on every site/application and not compromise the security of your more sensitive accounts. If you use the same login info for the hobby site that hasn't patched thier servers in 10 years that you use to protect your Online Banking Account...your Online Banking Account just isn't going to be secure...no matter how much you might like to think you can have your cake and eat it too.
The same holds true for the Solo/Group thing. You can't fully satisfy the desires of people who really want group/cooperative play emphasized in a game and people who really want solo play emphasized. You are going to end up having to compromise one for the other somewhere. While you certainly can have a game that has CONTENT that is designed for groups and content that is designed for solo-play......a (quality) game is MUCH more (or should be at least) then it's individual bits of content. There are some intrinisic qualities of the game as a whole that give it it's identity and neccesarly are going to push it towards being group orientied or solo oriented in it's core nature.
The idea that grouping and solo-play can coexist peacefully in the same game is a false notion. A game that attempts for that in it's core design (not talking individual bits of content here) either has no real identity as a game....or it has a split (and generaly dysfunctional) personality.
Here's the thing, (speaking for myself at least) groupers don't simply want a game experience where you CAN group.....they want a game experience where you MUST group to achieve anything significant. It's because we enjoy the experience of shared adversity and interdependance that's REQUIRED in order to achieve. Having effective self-sufficiency detracts from that goal. It also detracts from building strong communities...nature has proved when individuals HAVE to work together, they end up building strong communities or they perish.....the same forces aren't at play when everyone can be self-sufficient.
I have nothing against soloers...anymore then I have anything against the game of Golf. That is a sport where your success depends upon your individual ability... nothing wrong with it. However, that is a qualitatevly different experience than a game like Baseball or Football where it's NOT just about you individual ability but it's about how you work with others as a Team. I have the same attitude toward soloers who think that every single MMO should cater to thier ability to solo effectively as Baseball or Football players who think that they should be able to win by just doing thier own thing and not working with thier Team-mates...and having the rules of the game changed to accomodate that.
If you are really into that....great....go to a Batting Cage and knock yourself out...go to someplace where all you do is toss a pass (and don't even worry about a reciever or blockers).... but trying to push that sort of play style into the same space we are using to play a Team Sport doesn't work....our favored activity may not be impacting you but YOUR activity IS impacting us...because it requires an entirely different rule-set to support....and believe it or not, trying to incorporate multiple competeing rule-sets in the same space at the same time (virtual or not) generaly doesn't work very well.
So yes.... Soloers ARE destroying MMO's when they insist on imposing rule-sets that accomodate their play style on a product that wasn't origionaly designed/advertised with it in mind in the first place. No problem if an MMO is designed with a focus on solo play from the outset (and advertised as such)..... but saying that you want to have strong solo based play in game that groups are going to like is kinda like trying to tell low Fantasy fans that having Laser Guns and Star-Fighters and Light Sabres in a game isn't going to impact their enjoyment of that environment.... it just doesn't cohabitate well in the same space.
Solo content should end within the first third of a well designed MMORPG.
Because the massive portion of the game should be the selling point.
Still solo content is there because game companies realized they can charge these people for the game anyway. So there's no benefit for them to cater to what the genre was created for.
So yeah, Soloers killed the MMO.
I used to play MMOs like you, but then I took an arrow to the knee.
AMEN SISTER!! This is a very good article and I agree 100% with all of the points. I solo nearly 100% of the time while I am questing, but I am really only questing to get to a point where I can PVP. The reason I level solo is because:
1) Abusive social behavior and gear judging is rampant in most MMOs right now. I have seen groups advertising for dungeon runs that were requiring such a high level of gear that you would have no reason to go through the dungeon in the first place, since you already have to have all the gear to qualify.
2) It is difficult to go AFK. I regularly take short breaks from the computer and while I am grouped I can't just wander downstairs and poke around in the fridge for 10 minutes or spend 20 minutes dropping a five-pounder in the toilet.
3) Waiting for groups to form. I am not a fan of waiting 20 minutes for everyone to show up only to have one guy go linkdead or leave the group after 5 minutes.
4) Ninjas and ragers. On the one hand you have people that ninja gear that they can't use just to sell it and on the other hand you have people that rage because you won the roll and they think they deserve the item more. It just isn't fun to deal with.
That is why if I group, I usually only group with guildies. You are much less likely to have to deal with these behaviors. If no guild groups are available, then it is just less hassle to run solo.
And for the record, even if you are leveling solo, it is nice to chat with people in the area and guildies, so it's not like a single player game would be more fun.
Currently playing: Rift Played: SWToR, Aion,EQ, Dark Age of Camelot World of Warcraft, AoC
Spot on, Isabelle. The simple truth is that often soloers have to think more and put in more effort to accomplish anything in most games. Developers intentionally put all the "good stuff" out of reach unless players are willing to run the same group-oriented content over and over for a slim chance at winning an item roll. It's ridiculous.
Scaling content is step in the right direction, but few developers are inclined to commit to it. Too much work, I guess. Before WoW launched, I was hopeful that it would incorporate a random loot table like Diablo 2 had. That way, everyone had an even shot at getting the good items. Unfortunately, what we got was a system that caters to only a certain segment of the player base.
Many of the responses here are indicative of the problem. Is it such a blow to the epeen of the groupers that a soloist should be able to sport a set of Fiery Shoulders of Awesomeness or ride a Shadow-touched Gnaarg simply on their own efforts.
If you are one of those who can't take two steps without a full group, you really can't take credit for any of your accomplishments, because any success is a direct result of superior numbers. The solo player can however, proudlly state, "Yes, I did this!"
Thanks again, Isabelle for validating what has become a much-maligned playstyle.
"Soloists and those who prefer small groups should never have to feel like they''re the ones getting the proverbial table scraps, as it were." - Scott Hartsman, Senior Producer, Everquest II "People love groups. Its a fallacy that people want to play solo all the time." - Scott Hartsman, Executive Producer, Rift
Here's the thing the "old school" players need to get through their head is the whole community thing will not go back to the way it was in EQ1, unless you are playing some Niche MMO by some indie company with 200 other players.
back in the days of EQ1 it was only played by "nerds", now with MMOs becoming more mainstream communities have become more guild oriented instead of you knowing everyone on the server.
sorry but the "forced grouping" faction of this forum is WRONG you cannot have a successful MMO without a heavy soloing element. now you can encourage grouping which is what MMOs should do but forcing people to be in a group to do ANYTHING will just make people unsubscribe.
Your abundance of misinformation is truly astounding.
oh i know i insult the god known as EQ1 on this forum which is bound to bring out the fanboys with their pitchforks and torches. but the reality is that forced grouping is a DEAD mechanic thankfully games need crap for the solo player to do and reward the solo player or else they will get bored and find a game that does cater to them.
people talk about giving soloers too much "epic" gear and i say well until you find another way to progress their character you have to give them upgraded gear. thats the whole point of MMORPGs right now ... the stat progression. And soloers are part of the community they should be able to progress their characters past max level.
Gotta love how quickly some people jump to use the word "fanboy" whenever someone disagrees with them. Thanks for further proving my earlier statement. Now, had you said "I don't like forced grouping" then ok, you're entitled to your opinion. To proclaim it dead, and that it can't work, however, just displays your own ignorance when it comes to the MMO market.
Soloers don't destroy mmo's. Neither does some forced grouping.
what destroys them are
A, bad design decisions, and
B, bad players of all types.
In lineage 2 I mostly soloed and had excellent gear. Why? Because there was no bind on equip so everything could be sold on the market. And, with the exception of some boss jewels (that also could be sold) all gear could be crafted.
Another bad design desision is having grouped content that takes 10 minutes. The people who want to group want to make a session of it. Having a solo quest line that suddenly requires a group for one part, only then to go back to solo is ridiculous.
There should be forced grouping parts of games and the rewards should be different and enticing enough so that people will take advantage of it.
Solo players should always have a way to advance their characters. It won't be the same as those who want to group all the time but one should be able to play solo and at least be reasonably competitive.
Groups AND Soloers can be selfish and demand that they have things their way. So bad players are just bad players. If I had a dime for how many times I was in a group with "pro-grouping" players who were just horrible to play with I'd be retired.
And I can't get behind some solo players who demand that all content be soloable. My thought and preference is that solo content be solo content and group content be group content and if you want to take advantage of that content you just have to solo or group to do it.
I agree with about 98% of what you've said here. I'd just like to mention that while solo players should have a way to advance their characters, in terms of leveling, it should be at a much slower pace than grouping. Far slower than it is in today's MMOs. That, of course, is my opinion.
I don't agree that people should be able to reach max level solo, but a well-designed game should ALWAYS have something for a solo player to do. Fighting and leveling may be the proverbial meant & potatoes of MMORPGs, but there's no reason for a soloer shouldnt have a carrot or a breadroll or two. Any well-designed game will have more to do than killing monsters for exp and equipment. Whether its crafting, farming (like growing crops, not item farming), item farming, gambling, or some other activity there should always be content to be enjoyed.
The players are just playing the games the way they are designed. Designed to be a single player game up to level cap. You can group before that but there isn't much point. Solo leveling is quick, gear is rapidly replaced, and you can burn through a lot of content solo (80% of PvE is soloable now anyway).
What happened to creating MMOs that redefined the genre? Oh yeah... money.
Not providing content for your audience is a deficiency in game design not people. MMOs do have a wide and diverse audience that enjoys and expects many different types of content. Delivering the content fast enough to please the audience has always been a problem. Many companies have tried various methods to improve content delivery.
I blame current doldrums on metrics because they measure what we actually do in games verses what we say we want to do. But they don't examine why we do it. So devs are looking at our reaction and methods of consuming content and assuming that because we are doing something we must be enjoying it. When instead we are just keeping ourselves occupied until some content we really like appears.
So yeah we start soloing up alts when we get bored with our mains so the devs assume that's the content we like.
That's not to say that I personally have anything against soloing or grouping. I tend to group on weekends just because that's when I have larger amounts of free time but there are also times when I solo for weeks. Besides the fact I paid as much if not more to enjoy my fun as the next person.
Terrible article that accuses the readers that see things differently of 'bitching', as a cheap way of dismissing their perspective, when the whole thing was one long 'bitch'.
MMORPG.com used to be better then this kind of official troll piece.
Really? It couldn't possibly be in response to all of the posts and topics over the years by groupies spewing their hatred toward us soloers. Blaming us for everything that is wrong with the genre? I've seen an awful lot of bitching and whining by group lovers to justify this response and then some.
I agree with about 98% of what you've said here. I'd just like to mention that while solo players should have a way to advance their characters, in terms of leveling, it should be at a much slower pace than grouping. Far slower than it is in today's MMOs. That, of course, is my opinion.
I don't agree that people should be able to reach max level solo, but a well-designed game should ALWAYS have something for a solo player to do. Fighting and leveling may be the proverbial meant & potatoes of MMORPGs, but there's no reason for a soloer shouldnt have a carrot or a breadroll or two. Any well-designed game will have more to do than killing monsters for exp and equipment. Whether its crafting, farming (like growing crops, not item farming), item farming, gambling, or some other activity there should always be content to be enjoyed.
I levelled close to max level in Lineage 2 at a time when that would be considered a feat. And i did it mostly solo.
I would accept L2's leveling speed for either solo or group content. This would be at the start of the game.
Though I doubt most people would be able to take such a deliberate leveling curve. Soloing to max level is very much possible in harder games and I still say it should be included. Groupign should provide incentives to group such as grouping xp bonuses (thus making it a bit faster) as well as a greater % of rewards that can be sold on the market to anyone.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Terrible article that accuses the readers that see things differently of 'bitching', as a cheap way of dismissing their perspective, when the whole thing was one long 'bitch'.
MMORPG.com used to be better then this kind of official troll piece.
Really? It couldn't possibly be in response to all of the posts and topics over the years by groupies spewing their hatred toward us soloers. Blaming us for everything that is wrong with the genre? I've seen an awful lot of bitching and whining by group lovers to justify this response and then some.
Well both of groups throw sh** at each other if you would like to be perfectly honest.
One throw 'carebears' and second 'elitists' at each other.
Spot on, Isabelle. The simple truth is that often soloers have to think more and put in more effort to accomplish anything in most games. Developers intentionally put all the "good stuff" out of reach unless players are willing to run the same group-oriented content over and over for a slim chance at winning an item roll. It's ridiculous.
Scaling content is step in the right direction, but few developers are inclined to commit to it. Too much work, I guess. Before WoW launched, I was hopeful that it would incorporate a random loot table like Diablo 2 had. That way, everyone had an even shot at getting the good items. Unfortunately, what we got was a system that caters to only a certain segment of the player base.
Many of the responses here are indicative of the problem. Is it such a blow to the epeen of the groupers that a soloist should be able to sport a set of Fiery Shoulders of Awesomeness or ride a Shadow-touched Gnaarg simple on their own efforts.
If you are one of those who can't take two steps without a full group, you really can't take credit for any of your accomplishments, because any success is a direct result of superior numbers. The solo player can however, proudlly state, "Yes, I did this!"
Thanks again, Isabelle for validating what has become a much-maligned playstyle.
It's not about "e-peen" , it's about the impact that one play-style has on the other when they are attempting to share the same play-space (game). Rule-sets and designs that are conduscive for making solo play fun/practical are inherently different then the rule-sets and designs that are conducsive to making group play fun/practical. We want to play 2 inherently different types of games.
You don't mind or look down upon you for wanting to play Golf. I do mind if you want to try to play Golf on the same field that I want to play Baseball on at the same time, because it impacts my ability to play Baseball..... and if you try to tell me that it doesn't I'm going to respectfully disagree with you.
Developers want to try to sell players on the idea that they can incorporate solo play-styles and group play-styles equaly well in the same game and one won't have any negative impact upon the other, but it's a lie. It's no secret why Developers want to try to sell players on that concept. It's the same reason why a Manufacturer would LOVE to be able to make one product and market/sell it to people who want to buy a soft-drink at the same time they market/sell it to people who want to buy a floor-wax and pretend the same product does a good job of satisfying both demands. If a company can develop and support just one product that it can sell to vastly different audiences...it's minimizing it's costs while maximizing it's profits.
Thing is when a Manufactuer tries to pull the floor wax/soda pitch, most consumers are saavy enough to say "Yeah...that doesn't really work.....the things that generaly make for good floor-waxes don't generaly work well in soft drinks"..... and neither the floor-wax buyers nor the soft drink buyers get upset with or look down upon the other group...because they don't want to settle for something that doesn't incorporate well the qualities in the type of product they desire.
However, when it comes to MMO's (or even just Technology in general) people start to turn off thier brains and pretend that a single product can satisfy radicaly different and incompatible demands. As someone who works in Technology design, I can attest that's just not true. Just because something is virtual doesn't mean it's any better at satisfying competing and diametricaly opposed design goals then a physical product can. What's worse, we shouldn't get PO'd at each other just because I don't want some guys floor wax in my soft drink. The only ones we should get PO'd at is maybe the Developers that think they can package incompatible design goals in a single product and then tell us it's our fault when we aren't satisfied with the end result.
Bottom line, if you want to sell me a product that I'm satisfied with....it's not going to be the same product that the guy over there wants to use to wax his floor.
Terrible article that accuses the readers that see things differently of 'bitching', as a cheap way of dismissing their perspective, when the whole thing was one long 'bitch'.
MMORPG.com used to be better then this kind of official troll piece.
Really? It couldn't possibly be in response to all of the posts and topics over the years by groupies spewing their hatred toward us soloers. Blaming us for everything that is wrong with the genre? I've seen an awful lot of bitching and whining by group lovers to justify this response and then some.
Well both of groups throw sh** at each other if you would like to be perfectly honest.
One throw 'carebears' and second 'elitists' at each other.
Lurking the various boards since 2000, there is no doubt in my mind which group started the whining and who is consistently the most vocal and obnoxious.
Thank you Isabelle. For the last almost twenty years online I've been a mostly solo player. I say mostly because I'd estimate that at least 70% of the time I was indeed solo. Not that I didn't group up or enjoy it, I did. I loved to help others as well specially in the older days when helping mattered and was needed, rescues, corpse and gear runs, someone getting ganked etc.
I love to explore and see what I can manage to do or pull off by myself though. I never wanted any game developer to change creatures, quests, areas or what ever mechanics to suit my desire to see what I could do to challenge myself solo. I didn't run around whining that I couldn't solo X, Y or Z either.
No matter how many times I've taken Bartles test over the years I come up pretty much this everytime within a few percentages...
Bartle Test of Gamer Psychology
Your gamerDNA is: Explorer:73%. Killer:67%. Socializer:40%. Achiever:20%
I don't care about achieveing, though I am good at raiding as a tank, dps or healer actually, I am social but exploring is more important to me. Hell, blame uncle Sam for training me to be a recon scout and doing what I did for many many years, I love being a self operator. It is why I've also been good at doing jobs post military where I'm given the task/assignment and I get it done, I'm the guy management tells other managment to leave alone and let him do his job.
Though my Achiever section is lower it doesn't mean I want things easy, it just means I'm just not really into being competitive versus others honestly. I actually like it hard, I like when I feel that when I do pull something off I get a sense of achievement. Whether that is with a group of fellow adventurers or by myself.
Game developers didn't futz up the risk/rewards of mmo-rpgs because of my type of player, they futz it up in more recent years because as we got more and more newer players to the genre they were very vocal about what they wanted and didn't want. And they wanted things easier, mmo-rpgs changed from the "journey to the destination" . So anything that wasn't the destination was hindering to them, tedious, slowing them down from end game activities.
That was the critical error, those players were playing the wrong genre of online game! But because they were so vocal and grew in population they got the developers to listen. These players should have been playing MOFPS or MOBA games! Instead our genre, the MMO-RPG has been forced into a hybrid bastardization that makes no one happy. It wasn't the old school soloer who caused this, and we shouldn't be blamed for it.
Edit: Reading six pages of posts I see that a majority missed Issabelle's points or flat out dismissed the points. Ah well...just another typical Sierra-November-Alpha-Foxtrot-Uniform.
Comments
I don't see how dismissing solo players helps anything. If a game is unplayable to them and they are forced to do something they don't want to do they will just leave. The resulting loss is not a benefit to social players because it dries up the "money well" for the game. You may not like what they do, but you should tolerate them for the sake of your favorite game.
As a social player, I absolutely do advocate advanced, complex, choice-ridden play in the games. Use your dollar vote with game companies and be vocal about the content YOU WANT instead of targeting some other part of the population.
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
Love this article and agree 100%. I am a solo player just like her. She is absolutely correct that you can be a solo player and enjoy grouping. I play alone 95% of the time but will group if asked. Even though I play solo my favorite time was in WOW BC in AV as a healer. Although I hate forced grouping I loved vanilla RIFT automatically joining players together to fight invasions. It was as much fun as AV. Now most of the time you are kicked out of the group as soon as you are joined - by hardcore groupers.
/agree
oh i know i insult the god known as EQ1 on this forum which is bound to bring out the fanboys with their pitchforks and torches. but the reality is that forced grouping is a DEAD mechanic thankfully games need crap for the solo player to do and reward the solo player or else they will get bored and find a game that does cater to them.
people talk about giving soloers too much "epic" gear and i say well until you find another way to progress their character you have to give them upgraded gear. thats the whole point of MMORPGs right now ... the stat progression. And soloers are part of the community they should be able to progress their characters past max level.
tell me what part of Massive Multiplayer Online role playing game states group only?
Massive? nah that just states lots of people.
multiplayer means simply Multiple players playing the same game
Online well duh
and the rest has nothing to do with grouping either
so playing solo isn't genre breaking at all.
It isn't the solo gamer's fault that all these new mmorpgs suck, it is the developers fault. The gear treadmill idea is just lame, but the mechanics behind it are addictive, and people get sucked in. People just need to stop shoveling money at these gear treadmill social experiments and then developers will stop making them.
Are you a Pavlovian Fish Biscuit Addict? Get Help Now!
I will play no more MMORPGs until somethign good comes out!
Soloers don't destroy mmo's. Neither does some forced grouping.
what destroys them are
A, bad design decisions, and
B, bad players of all types.
In lineage 2 I mostly soloed and had excellent gear. Why? Because there was no bind on equip so everything could be sold on the market. And, with the exception of some boss jewels (that also could be sold) all gear could be crafted.
Another bad design desision is having grouped content that takes 10 minutes. The people who want to group want to make a session of it. Having a solo quest line that suddenly requires a group for one part, only then to go back to solo is ridiculous.
There should be forced grouping parts of games and the rewards should be different and enticing enough so that people will take advantage of it.
Solo players should always have a way to advance their characters. It won't be the same as those who want to group all the time but one should be able to play solo and at least be reasonably competitive.
Groups AND Soloers can be selfish and demand that they have things their way. So bad players are just bad players. If I had a dime for how many times I was in a group with "pro-grouping" players who were just horrible to play with I'd be retired.
And I can't get behind some solo players who demand that all content be soloable. My thought and preference is that solo content be solo content and group content be group content and if you want to take advantage of that content you just have to solo or group to do it.
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
What is a problem is that outside of instances there is no content for people that want any sort of challange.
This is a problem.
Open world nowadays is streamlined, linear and faceroll - difficulty wise.
+ if you even want to group usually you can group to do solo quests (sic!)
That's what's wrong - it is not a problem game cater to soloers.
Problem is that it do it at expense of groupers.
Solo questing is faster and more conveniant than grouping.
Oh and things liek Rifts. They are nice but they are like "playing alone together" and they are not answer. They are great as addition or supplement but they are not replacement.
My favorite game addressing this issue was GW1. It was largely soloable (using heroes/henchmen), but it was (1) much more fun in player groups, (2) most of the missions/dungeons a lot more difficult when just using AI assistance, and (3) Guild Wars reserved its elite areas for player groups only. Any MMO that offers a viable henchman/hero alternative to just having to skip group content altogether in low-player-population areas/zones is more likely to keep me playing their game.
I thought GW1 had a pretty good game design -- and it allowed players to progress (using AI, if need be) and not get stuck in "LFG Limbo". Many games -- LotRO and vanilla WoW come to mind -- incorporated lots of elite group content that became unplayable once player populations thinned down. In SWTOR, which I'm currently playing, it's already becoming difficult to run 4-man heroics on thinly populated worlds. My hope is that Bioware will (1) improve the LFG mechanism somehow, (2) nerf these 4-man heroic areas so they can be soloed or duoed, or (3) make them all instances in which you can use more than just one companion at a time.
Ideally, I think all MMOs should gradually "solo-fy" their lower-level content once player populations thin out, reserving the higher-level zones/instances for player groups only. I'd probably resubscribe to WoW if they did something like that to the level 1-60/65 dungeons or offered "mirrored" versions of those dungeons for solo players.
Since WoW came out all the good gear comes from specific bosses, which require grouping in most cases. With that came a paradigm shift from "let's group and have fun" to "you can only group with us if you have this much health, this high of equipment level and use this rotation, and God save your soul if you pull the wrong mob." Groups have ceased being fun and as such I find my own company more enjoyable.
This ^^ not sure its the game's fault so much as people in general , but I see your point.
it's usually not game mechanics that drive me away from a game, its guild drama and poor interactions with people.
I have RL freinds that I met playing the original EQ, followed most of them through EQ2, WOW, AION and some RIFT (a lot dropped out of gaming after AION)
once these people were gone, I tried to find new friends (and did for a while in RIFT) but they unforntunatley left for TOR , which I had little interest in jumping too. My subsequent experiences with guilds in RIFT were just as you say .. and I canceled my sub not because of anything wrong with the game .. just people that I did not enjoy playing with.
So now I am in EVE now surprisingly in a game designed around "ganking" the community is 100x more appealing and social than what the theme-park games communities have devolved too.
Kind of sad ... but very true .. PEOPLE can ruin games.
Completely incorrect.
I enjoy grouping, depending on the game and depending on the group. If I'm playing a game that my other friends are playing, I group most of the time and only go solo when none of them are online. In games where none of my friends are playing, I solo most of the time and only group for content that requires it.
The reason is that I'm just not that interested in getting to know most of you beyond acquaintance level. No offense, but I have enough friends. I'm just not in the market to for more. However, when I'm in a group, I'm part of the team. I chat, I joke, I take care of business, I share the spoils, I offer encouragement when it's needed and advice when it's welcome. And after that, I thank everyone for the group and go my own way. You see, it's possible to be friendly without being friends.
Not every soloist is an anti-social, mouthbreathing basement dweller. Many of us just prefer to be able to do whatever the hell we want most of the time, without having to worry about communal decision making. It absolutely doesn't mean we don't enjoy the groups we are in, when we are in them. We just want to keep it to a part time activity.
Interesting diatribe. The problem here is that every game must be built to accomodate every play style. That's simply a false concept. There are simply certain design goals that just work at odds with each other....you can't really fully satisfy both...and it's a fools errand to try. For example, you can't make a password that is both short and hard to crack at the same time. Nor can you expect to use the same password for every account you own on every site/application and not compromise the security of your more sensitive accounts. If you use the same login info for the hobby site that hasn't patched thier servers in 10 years that you use to protect your Online Banking Account...your Online Banking Account just isn't going to be secure...no matter how much you might like to think you can have your cake and eat it too.
The same holds true for the Solo/Group thing. You can't fully satisfy the desires of people who really want group/cooperative play emphasized in a game and people who really want solo play emphasized. You are going to end up having to compromise one for the other somewhere. While you certainly can have a game that has CONTENT that is designed for groups and content that is designed for solo-play......a (quality) game is MUCH more (or should be at least) then it's individual bits of content. There are some intrinisic qualities of the game as a whole that give it it's identity and neccesarly are going to push it towards being group orientied or solo oriented in it's core nature.
The idea that grouping and solo-play can coexist peacefully in the same game is a false notion. A game that attempts for that in it's core design (not talking individual bits of content here) either has no real identity as a game....or it has a split (and generaly dysfunctional) personality.
Here's the thing, (speaking for myself at least) groupers don't simply want a game experience where you CAN group.....they want a game experience where you MUST group to achieve anything significant. It's because we enjoy the experience of shared adversity and interdependance that's REQUIRED in order to achieve. Having effective self-sufficiency detracts from that goal. It also detracts from building strong communities...nature has proved when individuals HAVE to work together, they end up building strong communities or they perish.....the same forces aren't at play when everyone can be self-sufficient.
I have nothing against soloers...anymore then I have anything against the game of Golf. That is a sport where your success depends upon your individual ability... nothing wrong with it. However, that is a qualitatevly different experience than a game like Baseball or Football where it's NOT just about you individual ability but it's about how you work with others as a Team. I have the same attitude toward soloers who think that every single MMO should cater to thier ability to solo effectively as Baseball or Football players who think that they should be able to win by just doing thier own thing and not working with thier Team-mates...and having the rules of the game changed to accomodate that.
If you are really into that....great....go to a Batting Cage and knock yourself out...go to someplace where all you do is toss a pass (and don't even worry about a reciever or blockers).... but trying to push that sort of play style into the same space we are using to play a Team Sport doesn't work....our favored activity may not be impacting you but YOUR activity IS impacting us...because it requires an entirely different rule-set to support....and believe it or not, trying to incorporate multiple competeing rule-sets in the same space at the same time (virtual or not) generaly doesn't work very well.
So yes.... Soloers ARE destroying MMO's when they insist on imposing rule-sets that accomodate their play style on a product that wasn't origionaly designed/advertised with it in mind in the first place. No problem if an MMO is designed with a focus on solo play from the outset (and advertised as such)..... but saying that you want to have strong solo based play in game that groups are going to like is kinda like trying to tell low Fantasy fans that having Laser Guns and Star-Fighters and Light Sabres in a game isn't going to impact their enjoyment of that environment.... it just doesn't cohabitate well in the same space.
I absolutely disagree with every point.
Solo content should end within the first third of a well designed MMORPG.
Because the massive portion of the game should be the selling point.
Still solo content is there because game companies realized they can charge these people for the game anyway. So there's no benefit for them to cater to what the genre was created for.
So yeah, Soloers killed the MMO.
I used to play MMOs like you, but then I took an arrow to the knee.
AMEN SISTER!! This is a very good article and I agree 100% with all of the points. I solo nearly 100% of the time while I am questing, but I am really only questing to get to a point where I can PVP. The reason I level solo is because:
1) Abusive social behavior and gear judging is rampant in most MMOs right now. I have seen groups advertising for dungeon runs that were requiring such a high level of gear that you would have no reason to go through the dungeon in the first place, since you already have to have all the gear to qualify.
2) It is difficult to go AFK. I regularly take short breaks from the computer and while I am grouped I can't just wander downstairs and poke around in the fridge for 10 minutes or spend 20 minutes dropping a five-pounder in the toilet.
3) Waiting for groups to form. I am not a fan of waiting 20 minutes for everyone to show up only to have one guy go linkdead or leave the group after 5 minutes.
4) Ninjas and ragers. On the one hand you have people that ninja gear that they can't use just to sell it and on the other hand you have people that rage because you won the roll and they think they deserve the item more. It just isn't fun to deal with.
That is why if I group, I usually only group with guildies. You are much less likely to have to deal with these behaviors. If no guild groups are available, then it is just less hassle to run solo.
And for the record, even if you are leveling solo, it is nice to chat with people in the area and guildies, so it's not like a single player game would be more fun.
Currently playing:
Rift
Played:
SWToR, Aion,EQ, Dark Age of Camelot
World of Warcraft, AoC
Spot on, Isabelle. The simple truth is that often soloers have to think more and put in more effort to accomplish anything in most games. Developers intentionally put all the "good stuff" out of reach unless players are willing to run the same group-oriented content over and over for a slim chance at winning an item roll. It's ridiculous.
Scaling content is step in the right direction, but few developers are inclined to commit to it. Too much work, I guess. Before WoW launched, I was hopeful that it would incorporate a random loot table like Diablo 2 had. That way, everyone had an even shot at getting the good items. Unfortunately, what we got was a system that caters to only a certain segment of the player base.
Many of the responses here are indicative of the problem. Is it such a blow to the epeen of the groupers that a soloist should be able to sport a set of Fiery Shoulders of Awesomeness or ride a Shadow-touched Gnaarg simply on their own efforts.
If you are one of those who can't take two steps without a full group, you really can't take credit for any of your accomplishments, because any success is a direct result of superior numbers. The solo player can however, proudlly state, "Yes, I did this!"
Thanks again, Isabelle for validating what has become a much-maligned playstyle.
"Soloists and those who prefer small groups should never have to feel like they''re the ones getting the proverbial table scraps, as it were." - Scott Hartsman, Senior Producer, Everquest II
"People love groups. Its a fallacy that people want to play solo all the time." - Scott Hartsman, Executive Producer, Rift
Gotta love how quickly some people jump to use the word "fanboy" whenever someone disagrees with them. Thanks for further proving my earlier statement. Now, had you said "I don't like forced grouping" then ok, you're entitled to your opinion. To proclaim it dead, and that it can't work, however, just displays your own ignorance when it comes to the MMO market.
I agree with about 98% of what you've said here. I'd just like to mention that while solo players should have a way to advance their characters, in terms of leveling, it should be at a much slower pace than grouping. Far slower than it is in today's MMOs. That, of course, is my opinion.
I don't agree that people should be able to reach max level solo, but a well-designed game should ALWAYS have something for a solo player to do. Fighting and leveling may be the proverbial meant & potatoes of MMORPGs, but there's no reason for a soloer shouldnt have a carrot or a breadroll or two. Any well-designed game will have more to do than killing monsters for exp and equipment. Whether its crafting, farming (like growing crops, not item farming), item farming, gambling, or some other activity there should always be content to be enjoyed.
+1 solo centric game design killed MMOs
The players are just playing the games the way they are designed. Designed to be a single player game up to level cap. You can group before that but there isn't much point. Solo leveling is quick, gear is rapidly replaced, and you can burn through a lot of content solo (80% of PvE is soloable now anyway).
What happened to creating MMOs that redefined the genre? Oh yeah... money.
Not providing content for your audience is a deficiency in game design not people. MMOs do have a wide and diverse audience that enjoys and expects many different types of content. Delivering the content fast enough to please the audience has always been a problem. Many companies have tried various methods to improve content delivery.
I blame current doldrums on metrics because they measure what we actually do in games verses what we say we want to do. But they don't examine why we do it. So devs are looking at our reaction and methods of consuming content and assuming that because we are doing something we must be enjoying it. When instead we are just keeping ourselves occupied until some content we really like appears.
So yeah we start soloing up alts when we get bored with our mains so the devs assume that's the content we like.
That's not to say that I personally have anything against soloing or grouping. I tend to group on weekends just because that's when I have larger amounts of free time but there are also times when I solo for weeks. Besides the fact I paid as much if not more to enjoy my fun as the next person.
Really? It couldn't possibly be in response to all of the posts and topics over the years by groupies spewing their hatred toward us soloers. Blaming us for everything that is wrong with the genre? I've seen an awful lot of bitching and whining by group lovers to justify this response and then some.
I levelled close to max level in Lineage 2 at a time when that would be considered a feat. And i did it mostly solo.
I would accept L2's leveling speed for either solo or group content. This would be at the start of the game.
Though I doubt most people would be able to take such a deliberate leveling curve. Soloing to max level is very much possible in harder games and I still say it should be included. Groupign should provide incentives to group such as grouping xp bonuses (thus making it a bit faster) as well as a greater % of rewards that can be sold on the market to anyone.
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
Well both of groups throw sh** at each other if you would like to be perfectly honest.
One throw 'carebears' and second 'elitists' at each other.
It's not about "e-peen" , it's about the impact that one play-style has on the other when they are attempting to share the same play-space (game). Rule-sets and designs that are conduscive for making solo play fun/practical are inherently different then the rule-sets and designs that are conducsive to making group play fun/practical. We want to play 2 inherently different types of games.
You don't mind or look down upon you for wanting to play Golf. I do mind if you want to try to play Golf on the same field that I want to play Baseball on at the same time, because it impacts my ability to play Baseball..... and if you try to tell me that it doesn't I'm going to respectfully disagree with you.
Developers want to try to sell players on the idea that they can incorporate solo play-styles and group play-styles equaly well in the same game and one won't have any negative impact upon the other, but it's a lie. It's no secret why Developers want to try to sell players on that concept. It's the same reason why a Manufacturer would LOVE to be able to make one product and market/sell it to people who want to buy a soft-drink at the same time they market/sell it to people who want to buy a floor-wax and pretend the same product does a good job of satisfying both demands. If a company can develop and support just one product that it can sell to vastly different audiences...it's minimizing it's costs while maximizing it's profits.
Thing is when a Manufactuer tries to pull the floor wax/soda pitch, most consumers are saavy enough to say "Yeah...that doesn't really work.....the things that generaly make for good floor-waxes don't generaly work well in soft drinks"..... and neither the floor-wax buyers nor the soft drink buyers get upset with or look down upon the other group...because they don't want to settle for something that doesn't incorporate well the qualities in the type of product they desire.
However, when it comes to MMO's (or even just Technology in general) people start to turn off thier brains and pretend that a single product can satisfy radicaly different and incompatible demands. As someone who works in Technology design, I can attest that's just not true. Just because something is virtual doesn't mean it's any better at satisfying competing and diametricaly opposed design goals then a physical product can. What's worse, we shouldn't get PO'd at each other just because I don't want some guys floor wax in my soft drink. The only ones we should get PO'd at is maybe the Developers that think they can package incompatible design goals in a single product and then tell us it's our fault when we aren't satisfied with the end result.
Bottom line, if you want to sell me a product that I'm satisfied with....it's not going to be the same product that the guy over there wants to use to wax his floor.
Lurking the various boards since 2000, there is no doubt in my mind which group started the whining and who is consistently the most vocal and obnoxious.
Thank you Isabelle.
For the last almost twenty years online I've been a mostly solo player. I say mostly because I'd estimate that at least 70% of the time I was indeed solo. Not that I didn't group up or enjoy it, I did. I loved to help others as well specially in the older days when helping mattered and was needed, rescues, corpse and gear runs, someone getting ganked etc.
I love to explore and see what I can manage to do or pull off by myself though. I never wanted any game developer to change creatures, quests, areas or what ever mechanics to suit my desire to see what I could do to challenge myself solo. I didn't run around whining that I couldn't solo X, Y or Z either.
No matter how many times I've taken Bartles test over the years I come up pretty much this everytime within a few percentages...
Bartle Test of Gamer Psychology
Your gamerDNA is: Explorer:73%. Killer:67%. Socializer:40%. Achiever:20%
I don't care about achieveing, though I am good at raiding as a tank, dps or healer actually, I am social but exploring is more important to me. Hell, blame uncle Sam for training me to be a recon scout and doing what I did for many many years, I love being a self operator. It is why I've also been good at doing jobs post military where I'm given the task/assignment and I get it done, I'm the guy management tells other managment to leave alone and let him do his job.
Though my Achiever section is lower it doesn't mean I want things easy, it just means I'm just not really into being competitive versus others honestly. I actually like it hard, I like when I feel that when I do pull something off I get a sense of achievement. Whether that is with a group of fellow adventurers or by myself.
Game developers didn't futz up the risk/rewards of mmo-rpgs because of my type of player, they futz it up in more recent years because as we got more and more newer players to the genre they were very vocal about what they wanted and didn't want. And they wanted things easier, mmo-rpgs changed from the "journey to the destination" . So anything that wasn't the destination was hindering to them, tedious, slowing them down from end game activities.
That was the critical error, those players were playing the wrong genre of online game! But because they were so vocal and grew in population they got the developers to listen. These players should have been playing MOFPS or MOBA games! Instead our genre, the MMO-RPG has been forced into a hybrid bastardization that makes no one happy. It wasn't the old school soloer who caused this, and we shouldn't be blamed for it.
Edit: Reading six pages of posts I see that a majority missed Issabelle's points or flat out dismissed the points. Ah well...just another typical Sierra-November-Alpha-Foxtrot-Uniform.