Everyone, including old schoolers, are going to agree that solo is always better. Why? Because once you play a game that is all solo content you never want to play a game where you have to rely on others for anything.
I always thought I wanted EQ1 days back, but I'm playing on P99 right now and I'm bored out of my mind. The thing is those days were those days and we can't ever go back. It has progressed to this point because this is what the majority wants.
I used to hate solo content but now I could care less.
Playing: Smite, Marvel Heroes Played: Nexus:Kingdom of the Winds, Everquest, DAoC, Everquest 2, WoW, Matrix Online, Vangaurd, SWG, DDO, EVE, Fallen Earth, LoTRo, CoX, Champions Online, WAR, Darkfall, Mortal Online, Guild Wars, Rift, Tera, Aion, AoC, Gods and Heroes, DCUO, FF14, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, Wildstar, ESO, ArcheAge Waiting On: Nothing. Mmorpg's are dead.
Everyone, including old schoolers, are going to agree that solo is always better. Why? Because once you play a game that is all solo content you never want to play a game where you have to rely on others for anything.
I always thought I wanted EQ1 days back, but I'm playing on P99 right now and I'm bored out of my mind. The thing is those days were those days and we can't ever go back. It has progressed to this point because this is what the majority wants.
I used to hate solo content but now I could care less.
Kinda reminds me of Wildstar's 40 player raids.
At first the players were going "Yay! 40 man raids! It's going to be as awesome as it was during vanilla WoW!" then several weeks down the line "Y'know, I'm starting to remember all the parts that sucked big time with the original 40 man raids too, and I just don't have the patience for it nowadays. /unsubscribe"
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
You know what OP? I reckon if you create more threads like these and keep shouting 'you are ruining my gamez!' Then everyone will listen to you and do what you say.
Hang on a min.... lol
It shows what PvP games are really all about, and no, it's not about more realism and immersion. It's about cowards hiding behind a screen to they can bully other defenseless players without any risk of direct retaliation like there would be if they acted like asshats in "real life". -Jean-Luc_Picard
Life itself is a game. So why shouldn't your game be ruined? - justmemyselfandi
Honestly, I cant see why anyone still agrees that solo is better.
At this point, after all the threads you've created and participated in on the topic, it's obviously because you simply don't want to see why.
Your checking my post history? Dont you find that a bit scary and weird?
Also if you could, please tell me why every solo-focused MMO post WoW has flopped and gone either F2P or just had sub number dwindle to nothing?
Tell me why Wildstar, Age Of Conan, and Star Trek Online all have terrible reviews and sub numbers from the player base and then ill start looking for a reason why I should like single player (Spoiler -I will not).
I didn't check you post history. Some people have a reputation on the forums for certain types of posts and threads. I've seen several of your threads/posts echoing the same question repeatedly.
Honestly if you don't get or accept that other people like to play online with others yet aren't interested in bland contrived face-roll grouping then I seriously doubt you will accept there are many successful modern mmos. That most every major modern mmo is more successful (financially and player concurrency) than any first gen mmo except WoW and Lineage. SWTOR blows EQ out of the water in every aspect that marks a successful project, as does GW2, Neverwinter, Tera, and even the super WoW-clone FF14.
Who cares if you like them. That's the entire point. No one, except maybe the developer, cares if you like any of those games. You seem to have this crazy idea that people who like playing solo or single player style in an MMO want your approval or you to like their game (Spoiler - They don't).
Why not just enjoy the group-centric games that are offered and let others enjoy their games how they like? Not once will you hear me say that because FF14, with its tiered dungeon/raid gear progression, doesn't interest me that you shouldn't like it and people shouldn't play it.
Reputation for certain posts? I post on here maybe 2-3 times a month at best, and in top of that the last post I made was about how we should respect the changes of the MMORPG genre as a whole.
I don't understand why people need to polarize these discussions. I have an analogy and an opinion and people react like I'm taking their first born.
The best part is your citing me as being unable to accept the way thing a are but have yet to defend 90% solo content MMOs failures and why they should still be relevant.
Group content had how long? 6 years. Solo has now had 10. I think it's time to give group content another shot and break down your own inhibitions about it.
I remember you mostly for making goofy entertaining posts, but yes, also for what Torval said - you've done your share of "Today's MMOs suck!" posts.
And besides, aren't you getting your wish? There are "old school" inspired MMOs in development, like Pantheon, probably PFO to a degree as well, and I highly doubt Crowfall will be the most solo friendly game out there. Only time will tell whether they'll turn things around or fall flat on their face. I'm more inclined to believe it to be the latter, since from the moment people had a choice it was the solo friendly MMOs that dominated.
After all people didn't say "OMG, soloing blows! Lets go back to the game we just left, or any of the other more group focused MMOs that are still out there!" The first "pioneers" of the MMO genre simply didn't have a choice in the matter, so hailing those games as superior and what people want is like saying everyone wants to drive wagons and ride horses again instead of cars. After all, they were once very popular.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
You can form groups, which makes content even easier unless its in an instance where it can scale.
However, I agree with OP that mmos should be developed with more group content or social content and in variety while not being easy mode similar to lvling content en masse.
Swtor could have afforded to have a lot less story, but more MMO content as in pvp systems in the open world, flying mounts in specific areas, mounted pvp, pazaak, swoop racing, gambling, day/night cycle, more raids which could have been dynamic where raids affect open world and the open world in turns affects the dynamic raid ( read as choice matters), npc movement and npv alignment, mini games galore, housing, player created content such pvp arenas/tournies or player created music etc but in the end the point imo should have been a lot more content that could be done at end game and throughout the game.
All this content could have been at release if they want to reduce the development. However, devs and publishers with money will use a certain formula, and that 'winning' formula is to make the game feel like it has a lot of 'content' which is just filler in really a static world with barely any content for end game at release and almost 4 years down the line in a similar state of affairs.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
Honestly, I cant see why anyone still agrees that solo is better.
At this point, after all the threads you've created and participated in on the topic, it's obviously because you simply don't want to see why.
Your checking my post history? Dont you find that a bit scary and weird?
Also if you could, please tell me why every solo-focused MMO post WoW has flopped and gone either F2P or just had sub number dwindle to nothing?
Tell me why Wildstar, Age Of Conan, and Star Trek Online all have terrible reviews and sub numbers from the player base and then ill start looking for a reason why I should like single player (Spoiler -I will not).
I didn't check you post history. Some people have a reputation on the forums for certain types of posts and threads. I've seen several of your threads/posts echoing the same question repeatedly.
Honestly if you don't get or accept that other people like to play online with others yet aren't interested in bland contrived face-roll grouping then I seriously doubt you will accept there are many successful modern mmos. That most every major modern mmo is more successful (financially and player concurrency) than any first gen mmo except WoW and Lineage. SWTOR blows EQ out of the water in every aspect that marks a successful project, as does GW2, Neverwinter, Tera, and even the super WoW-clone FF14.
Who cares if you like them. That's the entire point. No one, except maybe the developer, cares if you like any of those games. You seem to have this crazy idea that people who like playing solo or single player style in an MMO want your approval or you to like their game (Spoiler - They don't).
Why not just enjoy the group-centric games that are offered and let others enjoy their games how they like? Not once will you hear me say that because FF14, with its tiered dungeon/raid gear progression, doesn't interest me that you shouldn't like it and people shouldn't play it.
Reputation for certain posts? I post on here maybe 2-3 times a month at best, and in top of that the last post I made was about how we should respect the changes of the MMORPG genre as a whole.
I don't understand why people need to polarize these discussions. I have an analogy and an opinion and people react like I'm taking their first born.
The best part is your citing me as being unable to accept the way thing a are but have yet to defend 90% solo content MMOs failures and why they should still be relevant.
Group content had how long? 6 years. Solo has now had 10. I think it's time to give group content another shot and break down your own inhibitions about it.
I remember you mostly for making goofy entertaining posts, but yes, also for what Torval said - you've done your share of "Today's MMOs suck!" posts.
And besides, aren't you getting your wish? There are "old school" inspired MMOs in development, like Pantheon, probably PFO to a degree as well, and I highly doubt Crowfall will be the most solo friendly game out there. Only time will tell whether they'll turn things around or fall flat on their face. I'm more inclined to believe it to be the latter, since from the moment people had a choice it was the solo friendly MMOs that dominated.
After all people didn't say "OMG, soloing blows! Lets go back to the game we just left, or any of the other more group focused MMOs that are still out there!" The first "pioneers" of the MMO genre simply didn't have a choice in the matter, so hailing those games as superior and what people want is like saying everyone wants to drive wagons and ride horses again instead of cars. After all, they were once very popular.
O I'm not denying that modern MMOs mostly suck. But that's corporate money not the players.
i can't for the life of me understand why people want ONLY solo MMOs. And before you say "that's not what I want", then why even argue against more sandbox games?
Also I love panth because Brad Mcquaid is a crazed genius but it's not what I want.
I want another BIG AAA MMORPG that has group focused content, not kickstarted indie fanfare harkenong back to the old days.
My point with all this isn't to say I want strictly old school. I think classic MMOs like EQ, WoW, and SWG were the right direction.
And yes, WoW deserves a spot in there because original WoW was incredible. It was the best mix of MMOs and it did move the genre forward. It's the money hungry, unoriginal, corporate copycats that turned it into the solo-only bland games of today.
Modern MMOs aren't copies of Vanilla WoW, they are copies of post Wrath of the Lich King wow.
Sandbox games deserve another chance, wierd games like SWG deserve another chance. I'm literally just saying we don't need 90% solo games and that's it, yet for some reason people think I'm a broken record.
I don't advocated forcing folks to play one way or another, but anyone who plays MMORPG endgame and doesn't post in support of including group content in their MMORPG is being disingenuous, aside from those few folks who are altoholics and exclusively level new characters upon reaching high level with an old one.
The vast, vast majority of high-level content in MMORPGs revolve around groups of players. If you level to cap then immediately quit because you refuse to do group content, more power to you. But you can't, then, really complain about expansions focused around group content or dungeon delving/raiding, because it was those players (who leveled solo or not) that enjoyed and participated in group content that provided the bulk of the game's longevity.
Honestly, I cant see why anyone still agrees that solo is better.
That's fairly obvious by now. You don't get it. But that doesn't matter to those of us who like to play that way. It's okay for you not to get it. You don't have to. Enjoy your way of playing and let others enjoy theirs without you needing to 'get them'.
Then go play a solo RPG and stop diluting the MMO market with shitty compromised games that try to do everything at once. No MMO should focus on solo player, because that goes against everything that the genre stands for.
Actually, since most mmo's coming out (or that have come out in the last few years) are solo player based, doesn't that mean the players wanting group games are those who are diluting the market?
As far as the topic at hand ...
@sludgebeard: I"m not sure why it's hard to get, there have been huge threads with people clearly stating what they like out of these games. In fact all you would have to know is how to read.
As far as trying to establish a connection between games not doing well and "solo oriented games" I don't think the games that haven't done well had the cause of being "solo oriented". More like they were "solo oriented" but not enough content.
But that doesn't matter to many people as many people don't seem to want to dedicate themselves to a game but are happy enough to exhaust the content and move on.
Also your club analogy doesn't work. it's like someone opened a club and people went but instead of socializing with the strangers around them they just socialized with the people who came with them or found a booth in the corner so that they could enjoy the energy while they sipped their own drink.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
My point with all this isn't to say I want strictly old school. I think classic MMOs like EQ, WoW, and SWG were the right direction.
This is where I'm getting confused. You can solo in all those games you listed. They are part of what your complaining about, however you stand them above todays MMOs.
LOL, for something that is inherently flawed, it's the only thing drawing people into these games. No one seems to care about group anything anymore. It's like a 80's concept in a 2015 world.
Here's a bit of truth for you... it's not going to change in this decade no matter what the PR guys try to spin at you. Solo is in, group is out.
Your checking my post history? Dont you find that a bit scary and weird?
Not checking any history. You've made enough of these posts in the recent past for the pattern to be rather noticeable.
Also if you could, please tell me why every solo-focused MMO post WoW has flopped and gone either F2P or just had sub number dwindle to nothing?
Funny how once you get rid of the "post-WOW" qualifier, you see that the ones before WOW (EVE, UO, AC, ATITD, There, Second Life, Planet Entropia, SWG, etc) all had successful runs, with several of them still doing well today. Maybe the problem has nothing to do with whether you can play solo or not, no?
Tell me why Wildstar, Age Of Conan, and Star Trek Online all have terrible reviews and sub numbers from the player base and then ill start looking for a reason why I should like single player (Spoiler -I will not).
So, you just admitted you're really not up for an alternate view, so why keep creating these posts? Seems a bit obsessive, if not simply pointless.
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
@OP, what kind of group content are you talking about? Be specific.
Questing? Open-world? Grinding? Leveling? Farming? What exactly needs to be group oriented? Or are you just upset that only dungeons and raids require groups now?
OMG anther I miss swg thread. swg was a great giant chat room with very good crafting, and it was fine for what it was. There are so many mmo's out now that if you want sand go to Xyson, if you want star wars story driven mmo go to swtor, if you want great lore go to lotro etc. It is all out there you just have to chooose
Your checking my post history? Dont you find that a bit scary and weird?
Not checking any history. You've made enough of these posts in the recent past for the pattern to be rather noticeable.
Tell me why Wildstar, Age Of Conan, and Star Trek Online all have terrible reviews and sub numbers from the player base and then ill start looking for a reason why I should like single player (Spoiler -I will not).
So, you just admitted you're really not up for an alternate view, so why keep creating these posts? Seems a bit obsessive, if not simply pointless.
Besides, I don't think checking a person's post history is scary or weird. What better way to know what they are about and where they stand on things than to see several posts that clarify their position. As opposed to taking a person at face value for one post.
Sludgebeard, along with other people, seems to forget that correlation does not imply causation.
Wildstar - Not sure why it didn't do well, only played it for a small bit. I've heard that the group dungeons were very hard and that only dedicated raiders could do it. I don't know if that's true but if it is the that could be why. Maybe it was just a lot of same old same old.
Age Of Conan Didn't age of Conan have a rough launch with lots of bugs and once players got beyond the tortage area they found a game that had a lot of unfinished qualities? With level ranges that didn't have a lot of content? Could that really be the reason it didn't do well and just never lured back enough people? I had my own issues with the game and it never kept my interest.
Star Trek Online seems to me that a lot of actual star trek fans were interested until they learned what the game was about. They wanted a game that was going to mimic star trek. There were a lot of people very upset with the direction of the game.
So maybe all these games just missed their target audiences or their target audiences weren't enough to really "rake in the bucks".
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Honestly, I cant see why anyone still agrees that solo is better.
That's fairly obvious by now. You don't get it. But that doesn't matter to those of us who like to play that way. It's okay for you not to get it. You don't have to. Enjoy your way of playing and let others enjoy theirs without you needing to 'get them'.
Then go play a solo RPG and stop diluting the MMO market with shitty compromised games that try to do everything at once. No MMO should focus on solo player, because that goes against everything that the genre stands for.
No. And it really isn't any of your business what I play or how. I could just as easily say, go play a group only game and quit trying to ruin the good online games out there that offer solo play. You don't get to control what other people do or like.
There is no group only games, because people like you keep whining about a lack of options for "solo players". If your response to an opinion on a forum is "you don't get to control what other people do", perhaps single player games truly are right up your alley, because the internet is going to be a rough place for you.
edit: this isn't aimed directly at you OP, but at every fkkin extrovert who dances right into our territory and starts demanding things by whining incessantly. The worst being "why is everyone playing solo?" Because it's their FREEDOM, you dumb witted extrovert party animal! "But wouldn't it be more fun in 2/3/6?" NO! You are taking our freedom that way! Do you see us complaining about your behaviour in disco? About how crowded, noisy, shitty in general it's in there? NO YOU DON'T! Because we let you live, let you breathe, let you have your freedom! Why can't you people return the favour?
As an extrovert (though probably more of an ambivert) I can say you probably don't know what an extrovert is.
If someone is dancing into your territory and demanding and whining then it's probably more about them being rude or entitled and not being an "extrovert".
If you think extroverts are "party animals" then you probably need to learn a thing or two.
You can have a calm, socially adept person as part of "a book or knitting club" and have them be an extrovert.
I'm more amazed that you think that "extroverts" are all about "discos" or clubs. as opposed to people comfortable in social situations who aren't drained by having a lot of people around.
given your post I might suggest that you are more socially naive which has nothing to do with you being an introvert.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Honestly, I cant see why anyone still agrees that solo is better.
That's fairly obvious by now. You don't get it. But that doesn't matter to those of us who like to play that way. It's okay for you not to get it. You don't have to. Enjoy your way of playing and let others enjoy theirs without you needing to 'get them'.
Then go play a solo RPG and stop diluting the MMO market with shitty compromised games that try to do everything at once. No MMO should focus on solo player, because that goes against everything that the genre stands for.
I agree with Greenbow and the OP. MMOs have been crap ever since they focused on Single Player content when a person who wants a single player game can easily buy a single player game. MMOs were never meant for single player content. Yes MMOs should not be as group focused as FFXI was. That was a pain in the ass to always have a group. Vanilla WoW had a great balance in that while you COULD level solo it was more enjoyable in a group and sometimes faster when you did instances with friends. The problem is today MMOs are too solo player friendly all the time vs before automated LFD tools you needed to make friends and play required personal skills. Today its click a button and the game will do it FOR you. Yes that has hurt the genera.
I sit in neither extreme. I don't like soloing for long and can't stand prolonged force grouping.
Give me a single player game that gives me up to ten years of content like a veteran mmo does and I would gladly play those and never solo in an mmo again. Keep my mmos strictly grouping in that circumstance, at least duo if not full party. Until then, I would quit this genre if it skewed to one extreme or the other.
Honestly, I cant see why anyone still agrees that solo is better.
That's fairly obvious by now. You don't get it. But that doesn't matter to those of us who like to play that way. It's okay for you not to get it. You don't have to. Enjoy your way of playing and let others enjoy theirs without you needing to 'get them'.
Then go play a solo RPG and stop diluting the MMO market with shitty compromised games that try to do everything at once. No MMO should focus on solo player, because that goes against everything that the genre stands for.
No. And it really isn't any of your business what I play or how. I could just as easily say, go play a group only game and quit trying to ruin the good online games out there that offer solo play. You don't get to control what other people do or like.
There is no group only games, because people like you keep whining about a lack of options for "solo players". If your response to an opinion on a forum is "you don't get to control what other people do", perhaps single player games truly are right up your alley, because the internet is going to be a rough place for you.
Inadvertently, you give the reasons why there are no group only games. But it isn't because people like him whine about lack of options for "solo players," its because the larger majority of players simply prefer solo play and ask for it with their wallet. I think you're smart enough to understand the rule of supply and demand. If the demand for solo play wasn't the overwhelming preference of players, the majority of games would not be designed for that demographic. Game companies, like every other business, follow the money.
Why do you think many MMORPGs of late were MMORPGS in name only as they mostly mimicked FPS/MOBA type game play? Its because developers recognized the latest craze with MOBA's and tried to capitalize on that craze by poaching into that genre's player base by offering similar game play mechanics. You can see the pendulum swinging back the other way as they again realize that MOBA style game play doesn't translate well with MMORPGs and that simply because certain gamers like and play MOBAs, that doesn't automatically mean that they will like and play MMORPGs.
It's all about supply and demand. Developers will supply what the majority demand. And the majority of gamers demand "solo play" options, not "forced grouping." That's an old and stale MMORPG game play feature that has gone the way of the Do-Do, and to that I say thank goodness, bye-bye, and good riddance.
There is no group only games, because people like you keep whining about a lack of options for "solo players". If your response to an opinion on a forum is "you don't get to control what other people do", perhaps single player games truly are right up your alley, because the internet is going to be a rough place for you.
nah .. the response should be "if the devs want solo players, who are you to dictate what others enjoy"? Devs have no obligations to make games you like.
You are confused between who is doing what. Certainly people who like solo can play single player games ... but if MMO devs want their business, and cater to their preferences, is there a reason not to give MMOs a chance? After all, if it can be enjoyed as a solo game, is there a reason not to enjoy it?
Then go play a solo RPG and stop diluting the MMO market with shitty compromised games that try to do everything at once. No MMO should focus on solo player, because that goes against everything that the genre stands for.
No. And it really isn't any of your business what I play or how. I could just as easily say, go play a group only game and quit trying to ruin the good online games out there that offer solo play. You don't get to control what other people do or like.
There is no group only games, because people like you keep whining about a lack of options for "solo players". If your response to an opinion on a forum is "you don't get to control what other people do", perhaps single player games truly are right up your alley, because the internet is going to be a rough place for you.
Well, that's too bad for you. I don't need to whine. I have options and can pay for them. It sounds like you're the one complaining with a problem. I have games to play. I have mmos to play. I'm happy with gaming right now. It's never been better or had more options.
The internet isn't a rough place for me. Your dissatisfaction with what I do and how I play is of no real concern to me. I get that you don't like and I'm fine with that. I don't feel the need to run off because you don't like it. I just played TOR between my last visit and this. I had a great time and I'm going to go play another game later. By the way I also play single player games and coop games like Borderlands 2.
Ohhhh! This one goes out to Greenbow.
Schooled.
Welcome to the reality where no one gives a damn about your approval random internet person.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
I am convinced that most, if not all, of these "force" group-centric people are looking at grouping with rose-colored glasses. They remember back in the day when they grouped thinking it will be the same today not realizing that it's a different time, a different generation, and a different game. We all know of the obvious draw backs that grouping in the old days brought. The long waits for grouping, people dropping out of groups after the group had waited often up to an hour or more to form and an even longer period of time to get to the camp spot, everyone spamming "need a Healer," or "need a tank" in chat to the point that this is all you see in chat, etc. But as bad as all that was, it would still be tolerable and doable if game communities were as considerate and respectable now, as they were back then.
Fact of the matter being that grouping now days is a miserable experience. The best you can hope for is that every one shuts the hell up and plays the game right. But as bad as that best case scenario sounds, the reality is that it is far worse. Players now days are down right rude, disrespectful, obnoxious, and inconsiderate. Their favorite topics of discussion involve rape, incest, racism, misogyny, homophobia and often times much worse. And yet you want to "force" others into having to deal with that miserable experience just because YOU feel lonely playing and want company. Truth be told, I have enough jack-a friends in life to contend with, so that when I play my games I would rather enjoy them in peace rather than be "forced" into having to deal with yet more Jack-turd A-hole strangers. Unlike you "forced group-centric" folk, I am not advocating that they take away your option to group if you so chose. All I ask is that I be given the same courtesy to decide when, and if, I want to group.
Whether people like it or not, the market has spoken. MMOs that revolve around solo play are struggling, scraping up whatever they can from new players on the F2P monetization. The future for those games is bleak, so those of you championing for them better enjoy them while they last. I guess there is always WoW when the rest dry up and grind to a halt.
For the rest of us who liked MMOs that were massively multiplayer, it won't be easy, but theres dozens of them in development right now. It will be some time before most of them are completed or they struggle to create demos to attract investors, but its inevitable that a few will squeak through and become successful. Its only a matter of time before publishers see (and remember) that challenging, group-based games have higher long term playability and thus, better earnings potential.
You must be looking at a fictional 'market' cause over here in the real world solo focused Mmos are doing just fine. Gw2 sold 5 million Swtor makes 100-200 million in revenue every year Wow still has 7 million subs
It shows what PvP games are really all about, and no, it's not about more realism and immersion. It's about cowards hiding behind a screen to they can bully other defenseless players without any risk of direct retaliation like there would be if they acted like asshats in "real life". -Jean-Luc_Picard
Life itself is a game. So why shouldn't your game be ruined? - justmemyselfandi
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Comments
Everyone, including old schoolers, are going to agree that solo is always better. Why? Because once you play a game that is all solo content you never want to play a game where you have to rely on others for anything.
I always thought I wanted EQ1 days back, but I'm playing on P99 right now and I'm bored out of my mind. The thing is those days were those days and we can't ever go back. It has progressed to this point because this is what the majority wants.
I used to hate solo content but now I could care less.
Playing: Smite, Marvel Heroes
Played: Nexus:Kingdom of the Winds, Everquest, DAoC, Everquest 2, WoW, Matrix Online, Vangaurd, SWG, DDO, EVE, Fallen Earth, LoTRo, CoX, Champions Online, WAR, Darkfall, Mortal Online, Guild Wars, Rift, Tera, Aion, AoC, Gods and Heroes, DCUO, FF14, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, Wildstar, ESO, ArcheAge
Waiting On: Nothing. Mmorpg's are dead.
Kinda reminds me of Wildstar's 40 player raids.
At first the players were going "Yay! 40 man raids! It's going to be as awesome as it was during vanilla WoW!" then several weeks down the line "Y'know, I'm starting to remember all the parts that sucked big time with the original 40 man raids too, and I just don't have the patience for it nowadays. /unsubscribe"
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
Hang on a min.... lol
It shows what PvP games are really all about, and no, it's not about more realism and immersion. It's about cowards hiding behind a screen to they can bully other defenseless players without any risk of direct retaliation like there would be if they acted like asshats in "real life". -Jean-Luc_Picard
Life itself is a game. So why shouldn't your game be ruined? - justmemyselfandi
I remember you mostly for making goofy entertaining posts, but yes, also for what Torval said - you've done your share of "Today's MMOs suck!" posts.
And besides, aren't you getting your wish? There are "old school" inspired MMOs in development, like Pantheon, probably PFO to a degree as well, and I highly doubt Crowfall will be the most solo friendly game out there. Only time will tell whether they'll turn things around or fall flat on their face. I'm more inclined to believe it to be the latter, since from the moment people had a choice it was the solo friendly MMOs that dominated.
After all people didn't say "OMG, soloing blows! Lets go back to the game we just left, or any of the other more group focused MMOs that are still out there!" The first "pioneers" of the MMO genre simply didn't have a choice in the matter, so hailing those games as superior and what people want is like saying everyone wants to drive wagons and ride horses again instead of cars. After all, they were once very popular.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
You can form groups, which makes content even easier unless its in an instance where it can scale.
However, I agree with OP that mmos should be developed with more group content or social content and in variety while not being easy mode similar to lvling content en masse.
Swtor could have afforded to have a lot less story, but more MMO content as in pvp systems in the open world, flying mounts in specific areas, mounted pvp, pazaak, swoop racing, gambling, day/night cycle, more raids which could have been dynamic where raids affect open world and the open world in turns affects the dynamic raid ( read as choice matters), npc movement and npv alignment, mini games galore, housing, player created content such pvp arenas/tournies or player created music etc but in the end the point imo should have been a lot more content that could be done at end game and throughout the game.
All this content could have been at release if they want to reduce the development. However, devs and publishers with money will use a certain formula, and that 'winning' formula is to make the game feel like it has a lot of 'content' which is just filler in really a static world with barely any content for end game at release and almost 4 years down the line in a similar state of affairs.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
O I'm not denying that modern MMOs mostly suck. But that's corporate money not the players.
i can't for the life of me understand why people want ONLY solo MMOs. And before you say "that's not what I want", then why even argue against more sandbox games?
Also I love panth because Brad Mcquaid is a crazed genius but it's not what I want.
I want another BIG AAA MMORPG that has group focused content, not kickstarted indie fanfare harkenong back to the old days.
My point with all this isn't to say I want strictly old school. I think classic MMOs like EQ, WoW, and SWG were the right direction.
And yes, WoW deserves a spot in there because original WoW was incredible. It was the best mix of MMOs and it did move the genre forward. It's the money hungry, unoriginal, corporate copycats that turned it into the solo-only bland games of today.
Modern MMOs aren't copies of Vanilla WoW, they are copies of post Wrath of the Lich King wow.
Sandbox games deserve another chance, wierd games like SWG deserve another chance. I'm literally just saying we don't need 90% solo games and that's it, yet for some reason people think I'm a broken record.
WELL I'm not asking for much!!
The vast, vast majority of high-level content in MMORPGs revolve around groups of players. If you level to cap then immediately quit because you refuse to do group content, more power to you. But you can't, then, really complain about expansions focused around group content or dungeon delving/raiding, because it was those players (who leveled solo or not) that enjoyed and participated in group content that provided the bulk of the game's longevity.
Both have their place in MMORPGs.
Actually, since most mmo's coming out (or that have come out in the last few years) are solo player based, doesn't that mean the players wanting group games are those who are diluting the market?
As far as the topic at hand ...
@sludgebeard: I"m not sure why it's hard to get, there have been huge threads with people clearly stating what they like out of these games. In fact all you would have to know is how to read.
As far as trying to establish a connection between games not doing well and "solo oriented games" I don't think the games that haven't done well had the cause of being "solo oriented". More like they were "solo oriented" but not enough content.
But that doesn't matter to many people as many people don't seem to want to dedicate themselves to a game but are happy enough to exhaust the content and move on.
Also your club analogy doesn't work. it's like someone opened a club and people went but instead of socializing with the strangers around them they just socialized with the people who came with them or found a booth in the corner so that they could enjoy the energy while they sipped their own drink.
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
This is where I'm getting confused. You can solo in all those games you listed. They are part of what your complaining about, however you stand them above todays MMOs.
LOL, for something that is inherently flawed, it's the only thing drawing people into these games. No one seems to care about group anything anymore. It's like a 80's concept in a 2015 world.
Here's a bit of truth for you... it's not going to change in this decade no matter what the PR guys try to spin at you. Solo is in, group is out.
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
@OP, what kind of group content are you talking about? Be specific.
Questing? Open-world? Grinding? Leveling? Farming? What exactly needs to be group oriented? Or are you just upset that only dungeons and raids require groups now?
OMG anther I miss swg thread. swg was a great giant chat room with very good crafting, and it was fine for what it was. There are so many mmo's out now that if you want sand go to Xyson, if you want star wars story driven mmo go to swtor, if you want great lore go to lotro etc. It is all out there you just have to chooose
Besides, I don't think checking a person's post history is scary or weird. What better way to know what they are about and where they stand on things than to see several posts that clarify their position. As opposed to taking a person at face value for one post.
Sludgebeard, along with other people, seems to forget that correlation does not imply causation.
Wildstar - Not sure why it didn't do well, only played it for a small bit. I've heard that the group dungeons were very hard and that only dedicated raiders could do it. I don't know if that's true but if it is the that could be why. Maybe it was just a lot of same old same old.
Age Of Conan Didn't age of Conan have a rough launch with lots of bugs and once players got beyond the tortage area they found a game that had a lot of unfinished qualities? With level ranges that didn't have a lot of content? Could that really be the reason it didn't do well and just never lured back enough people? I had my own issues with the game and it never kept my interest.
Star Trek Online seems to me that a lot of actual star trek fans were interested until they learned what the game was about. They wanted a game that was going to mimic star trek. There were a lot of people very upset with the direction of the game.
So maybe all these games just missed their target audiences or their target audiences weren't enough to really "rake in the bucks".
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
There is no group only games, because people like you keep whining about a lack of options for "solo players". If your response to an opinion on a forum is "you don't get to control what other people do", perhaps single player games truly are right up your alley, because the internet is going to be a rough place for you.
As an extrovert (though probably more of an ambivert) I can say you probably don't know what an extrovert is.
If someone is dancing into your territory and demanding and whining then it's probably more about them being rude or entitled and not being an "extrovert".
If you think extroverts are "party animals" then you probably need to learn a thing or two.
You can have a calm, socially adept person as part of "a book or knitting club" and have them be an extrovert.
I'm more amazed that you think that "extroverts" are all about "discos" or clubs. as opposed to people comfortable in social situations who aren't drained by having a lot of people around.
given your post I might suggest that you are more socially naive which has nothing to do with you being an introvert.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
I sit in neither extreme. I don't like soloing for long and can't stand prolonged force grouping.
Give me a single player game that gives me up to ten years of content like a veteran mmo does and I would gladly play those and never solo in an mmo again. Keep my mmos strictly grouping in that circumstance, at least duo if not full party. Until then, I would quit this genre if it skewed to one extreme or the other.
Inadvertently, you give the reasons why there are no group only games. But it isn't because people like him whine about lack of options for "solo players," its because the larger majority of players simply prefer solo play and ask for it with their wallet. I think you're smart enough to understand the rule of supply and demand. If the demand for solo play wasn't the overwhelming preference of players, the majority of games would not be designed for that demographic. Game companies, like every other business, follow the money.
Why do you think many MMORPGs of late were MMORPGS in name only as they mostly mimicked FPS/MOBA type game play? Its because developers recognized the latest craze with MOBA's and tried to capitalize on that craze by poaching into that genre's player base by offering similar game play mechanics. You can see the pendulum swinging back the other way as they again realize that MOBA style game play doesn't translate well with MMORPGs and that simply because certain gamers like and play MOBAs, that doesn't automatically mean that they will like and play MMORPGs.
It's all about supply and demand. Developers will supply what the majority demand. And the majority of gamers demand "solo play" options, not "forced grouping." That's an old and stale MMORPG game play feature that has gone the way of the Do-Do, and to that I say thank goodness, bye-bye, and good riddance.
nah .. the response should be "if the devs want solo players, who are you to dictate what others enjoy"? Devs have no obligations to make games you like.
You are confused between who is doing what. Certainly people who like solo can play single player games ... but if MMO devs want their business, and cater to their preferences, is there a reason not to give MMOs a chance? After all, if it can be enjoyed as a solo game, is there a reason not to enjoy it?
Ohhhh! This one goes out to Greenbow.
Schooled.
Welcome to the reality where no one gives a damn about your approval random internet person.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
I am convinced that most, if not all, of these "force" group-centric people are looking at grouping with rose-colored glasses. They remember back in the day when they grouped thinking it will be the same today not realizing that it's a different time, a different generation, and a different game. We all know of the obvious draw backs that grouping in the old days brought. The long waits for grouping, people dropping out of groups after the group had waited often up to an hour or more to form and an even longer period of time to get to the camp spot, everyone spamming "need a Healer," or "need a tank" in chat to the point that this is all you see in chat, etc. But as bad as all that was, it would still be tolerable and doable if game communities were as considerate and respectable now, as they were back then.
Fact of the matter being that grouping now days is a miserable experience. The best you can hope for is that every one shuts the hell up and plays the game right. But as bad as that best case scenario sounds, the reality is that it is far worse. Players now days are down right rude, disrespectful, obnoxious, and inconsiderate. Their favorite topics of discussion involve rape, incest, racism, misogyny, homophobia and often times much worse. And yet you want to "force" others into having to deal with that miserable experience just because YOU feel lonely playing and want company. Truth be told, I have enough jack-a friends in life to contend with, so that when I play my games I would rather enjoy them in peace rather than be "forced" into having to deal with yet more Jack-turd A-hole strangers. Unlike you "forced group-centric" folk, I am not advocating that they take away your option to group if you so chose. All I ask is that I be given the same courtesy to decide when, and if, I want to group.
Whether people like it or not, the market has spoken. MMOs that revolve around solo play are struggling, scraping up whatever they can from new players on the F2P monetization. The future for those games is bleak, so those of you championing for them better enjoy them while they last. I guess there is always WoW when the rest dry up and grind to a halt.
For the rest of us who liked MMOs that were massively multiplayer, it won't be easy, but theres dozens of them in development right now. It will be some time before most of them are completed or they struggle to create demos to attract investors, but its inevitable that a few will squeak through and become successful. Its only a matter of time before publishers see (and remember) that challenging, group-based games have higher long term playability and thus, better earnings potential.
Gw2 sold 5 million
Swtor makes 100-200 million in revenue every year
Wow still has 7 million subs
It shows what PvP games are really all about, and no, it's not about more realism and immersion. It's about cowards hiding behind a screen to they can bully other defenseless players without any risk of direct retaliation like there would be if they acted like asshats in "real life". -Jean-Luc_Picard
Life itself is a game. So why shouldn't your game be ruined? - justmemyselfandi
+100
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"