Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Creating a mmorpg for soloist is the stupidest thing ever
nomatics856
Member UncommonPosts: 219
EQ 1 had the best solo/grouping game play ever, its like clubs are for people who like to socially interact yet a person goes there just to dance by themselves its stupid, you dont go to the nightclub and say this club is just for people to dance by themselves, the club doesnt revolve around a person that is by themselves its for a group of people to interact dance and have fun together
That is how a mmorpg should be, a mmorpg should be about bringing people together to socially interact if you do not like to socially interact their are certain classes with solo capabilities to help you solo, like EQs necro and druid the classes were for soloist but EQ did not revolve around the soloist mindset.
Comments
Not according to an obvious group on these forums. Sad what they've become. There is almost no difference between them and console games now...other than the other players assume the role of NPC's for the most part.
some of my favorite memories would to meet completely new people randomly not force grouped together and whisked to an instance but to actually explore with them and new of the difficulty lying ahead, people say we can group in mmorpgs now, its not the same, why group and explore when you can easily plow content on your own it takes the fun out of grouping....grouping with random people I met in kurns tower for instance in EQ was some of the most fun i ever had.
You seem to be getting solo playing and self sufficiency mixed up. Arguably, the two greatest sandbox mmorpgs that I've ever played (UO and SWG) did not require a group to advance your progression, but enhance it. In fact I did most of my daily task as a master ranger alone. And when I felt the need to socialize I headed to town or grabbed a challenging mission. That's the beauty of a virtual world rather than a virtual race.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
These posts make it painfully clear that exEQ players were oblivious to everything else on the market for years. There's no way that one can make a crazy post like this and know that UO, AC, Toon Town, Puzzle Pirates, EVE Online, etc exist - and have done so for a decade or more - with solo gameplay and social communities.
It's like they've been locked in a tiny EQ bubble for fourteen years.
EDIT: Just read Ramonski7's post and it sums things up rather well.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
They snub their nose at everything that wasn't EQ1. It's true.
so op does it mean yu drop evrything yur doin if someone looks for a group thn?
bein solo has the advantage for once that yu can go at yur own pace and looting is calmer
(thts y i usually solo no drama n yu can choose pace and what yu wanna do yurself)
Though I share your sentiment about grouping being personally more fun I do see the benefit from a busyness standpoint.
To be honest I wish I thought of the idea of charging people tons of money to solo in a game. When you think about it one of the ways to make money in a free to play game is to make it just hard enough to solo nowadays that people either group up and tackle the content, or with the modern mentality of "solo everything" they end up forking over quite a bit more money to the game just so that they can jump in and out of the game and play at their own pace.
This kind of works the same way in reverse. All the solo players go in and pay for everything and have a grand old time killing things on their own and leave the grouping people out in the cold. They get bitter about it, spend money on the cash shop to get the items to make them viable as solo players only to get bored of soloing and walk away from the game making more room for this whole process to start all over.
From the game maker's perspective it's a win win. Solo players pump money into said game repeatedly to fuel their play style while grouping players drop some money and leave and the makers no longer have to worry about dealing with them. In a commercialized "all about the money" world you happen to live in that's all it's about nowadays. The people making these games no longer make games they themselves would play but simply want to make a game that will make them the most money as fast as possible, and if it tanks they'll tweak a few ideas and paint it a different color and call it something else a year later.
All of that is why you face the issue at hand. People no longer play these games because they want to spend some time. Rather, they want to kill some time between whatever other things they have going on in their life that take higher priority such as children, family, wife, other hobbies... and so on. It's almost as if they play not because they WANT to but because they HAVE to and I think it all stems from the early days when these people did have the tons of time to commit to games and simply want to get back to that but life no longer allows.
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-
Nothing wrong with solo-friendly games. An important part of MMORPG - which people somehow manage to forget - is the RPG part. They're role-playing games. Role-playing doesn't equate to messing with stats and gear; it suggests a game in which you role-play as a character. A lot of great characters are loners, or at least self-sufficient. There is a certain satisfaction to be had in overcoming challenges on your own; and when there is a challenge that can't be beaten by oneself, it makes the resulting group scenario all the more awesome.
The best games are those that encourage both solo and group content. Being effectively forced to group is a lot less meaningful than having the choice to group - and taking it out of desire rather than necessity.
Oh of course there are differences ...
1) You can't show off your gear to other humans in console games.
2) Console games don't have AH.
3) Console games don't have some of the unique settings of some MMOs (like STO).
And other players are better NPCs than programmed ones. So there is a win there.
Hey .. don't group all the ex-EQ players in the same basket.
I played EQ for a year (since launch) and i am VERY glad that current MMOs are much better games, and will support solo play styles. In fact, if not for that, i won't be back to MMOs, and won't be here.
It's a shame that no MMO to date has managed to create a story or combat anywhere near the standard set by the best console games. TERA is a bloody joke compared to Devil May Cry 3 and 4, and even the more story-driven MMOs like Guild Wars 2 or SWTOR pale in comparison to single player RPG stories (admittedly, The Secret World comes reasonably close in this regard, but the mute turd of a player character really destroys immersion into the story).
MMO does have ONE advantage though: unique settings (for some, not all of them).
There is no Star Trek RPG, STO is it.
There is no Marvel characters RPG (recently, unless you go back to Marvel Ultimate Alliance 1 & 2, which are old games), Marvel Heroes is it.
There is no modern conspiracy RPG, TSW is it.
If you are in an instance, you won't be affected by other players. When i am playing MH solo in an instance, it is practically a diablo-type marvel single player game.
I go to a club/bar to drink by myself in a social setting. your entire argument is hereby bunk
Calling a successful and popular business model "stupid" seems ineffective.
You're entitled to an opinion that it's stupid, but you can't deny the fact that it's what most players want. So if you want to enact change, the method you should be pushing would be something like, "Soloing, grouping, and PVP should be viable methods of progression throughout every tier of play, so I'm not forced to solo to level." Because you're not going to get rid of the solo option.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Hear Hear, soloing can be and is just as challenging if made right. But I agree both solo and group content should always be added to every mmorpg game and not just one or the other.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
I don't think an mmo that can be played solo is a bad thing, but there should always be an option to group up with others at any stage and get some meaningful benefits out of it. What I don't like is how some games are basically designed to be played solo until max level and actually penalize you for not doing that.
A strong incentive to grouping is important, but I don't think it's very feasible to be 100% dependent on player interaction for everything you do.
I agree Op,
What needs to happen ?..........We have to re invent a the type of game all over again. Give all the solo players the name mmorpg and give us a name like " REAL MULTI PLAYER ". Because some place down the line developers abused what multi play is.
Let the kids, free players and solo players keep the name mmorpg. Maybe even a new message board other than this one filled with a bunch of free games.
As did I, so that's a good point, although I never really considered myself an EQer. I will qualify it better in the future.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
The reason MMO's went solo was to make them more like Solo RPG's. There were way more solo rpg players than MMO players back in the day, so that was the market they wanted to appeal to. The fact that Massive and Solo are the antithesis of each other did not matter, getting in more players was all that mattered.
So the games were made solo friendly in stages until you could solo the game to top level and do everything other than raids and group dungeons on your own. Will raids survive? Not sure on that one, but I would not like to bet on it. With todays solo games online and todays MMO's 100% solo friendly, they have become two sides of the same coin.
The fact MMO's now have more players is not a sign of gameplay success, MMO's have not become bigger games by becoming better MMO's. They have instead changed who they appeal to and got a larger player base as a result.
Are you sure you two aren't mixing up the terms "console games" and "single player games"?
FFXI is a console game, for instance.
Lol, so you are more concerned about a name than the actual games? Very shallow way of thinking XD.
We know. This type of thread pops up every now and again, as if someone has just had an amazing epiphany and discovered some new, shiny insight... but it's old, old news. Really old. That doesn't make you wrong though.