Regardless of whether they would enjoy it or not, dedicating an entire day to a raid is something that a lot of peaple just can't do. I personally can never sit down and play a game for more than about four hours. During the week an hour or two a night is my max. That's why I stick to games that allow me to make progress in short blocks of time. I'd love to be able to sit twiddling my thumbs for six hours waiting for some rare spawn like I could when I was a kid. But I just can't.
That said, I do see a lack of diversity among games being developed. While I personally wouldn't play one, I'd think it would be great to see at least some games come out that cater to the "got spare time flying out of my bum" crowd.
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
I mean you no offence whatsoever in saying this, so please try not to get upset by it, but I see situations such as this as a clear sign of jealousy.
No offence taken. And of course it's jealousy. I freely admit that after I quit the raiding guild I was jealous of the raiders being able to obtain high end loot that I had no way of getting. Why wouldn't I be jealous? In EQ there were two forms of character advancement, levels and equipment. I could still gain levels but I could no longer advance in equipment upgrades. And when the equipment upgrades were half of the way your success was measured...you're damn right I was jealous.
Just like raiders jealously insist that only their playstyle should result in substantial rewards. You don't think that's a form of jealousy? Well it is. Or you could call it greed or selfishness or some other word but it's definately rooted in self interest and having an edge over people who can't/won't join raiding guilds.
You say that everyone is capable of raiding. That's not necessarily true. But in my case it is true so I'm not going to argue that point. The thing is, I won't do it anymore. Even though I could make the time for it I absolutely refuse to put up with it anymore. Me paying a subscription fee to go on raids would make as much sense as me paying someone to hit me in the head with a hammer all day.
raiding is how the better gear is earned.
Why?
Because raiders insist that it be that way?
There is no intrinsic reason why the best loot in a game has to come from raiding. That's like saying, "We'll roll a dice and the first person to roll a 2 wins." It's a completely arbitrary thing. The best loot could just as likely come from solo questing. And then the solo questers would defend that by saying, "That's just the way it is. The best gear comes from solo questing. Live with it."
If you dont like to raid thats fine and dandy, but that doesnt mean the experience should be cheapened for those who do. I really think it's unfair to take away from others who want to experience content that you dont.
Let me quote that last line once more for emphasis...
I really think it's unfair to take away from others who want to experience content that you dont.
Really? Do you really think that? Then why do you want to relegate groupers and soloers to second rate status in a game?
If there were solo and group ways to get top quality gear. Ways that are just as difficult and time consuming as raiding. That involve as much, or more, risk. Then why would you argue against that? What...Do you want to cheapen the experience for those folks? Why would you want to take away from others when you just said that that is unfair?
I personally prefer grouping over soloing. But if a soloer were ALLOWED to try for high end rewards with an appropriate amount of time and effort I wouldn't hold it against him if he got as good a reward as I could get from grouping.
By the same token, if I put in an appropriate amount of time and effort into a group route to high end equipment, why would you feel upset if my reward were as good as a raid reward?
I'm not stopping you from raiding am I? Just because I'm getting good rewards for long and difficult group content it wouldn't prevent you or anyone else from raiding. Why couldn't you just do what you enjoy and stop worrying about what other people are doing? Why would it bother a raider if groupers could get equal rewards for equal effort?
And see, that's the thing that some people just can't tolerate---equal rewards for equal effort. People who insist that only raiders should be rewarded are essentially saying that raiders should get greater rewards even if non-raiders put in more effort, more risk, and more time.
So how about that? Would you give me a straight answer to one simple question: If a group of five people put in more time than the average raid takes and faced greater risks than the average raider faces, should they not be rewarded at least equally to a raid quality reward?
You yourself talked about working for your rewards in a game. So if a group worked EVEN HARDER than raiders for the same quality reward would that be ok? If you say no then..I hate to be so blunt and rude sounding...but if you say no then you are a hypocrite.
A game that gave every group their option at end-game would be un-freakin-believable. How awesome would that be if you could raid and get good rewards, solo and get good rewards, group and get good rewards. Especially if difficulty was same for all three options. I play WoW, and i'm not ashamed to say that I love it (for its good things), but i've recently been introduced to the EQ style end-game of raiding, and personally i don't like that anywhere near as much as small 5-man, 10-man or solo playing. Raids tend to relegate roles fairly precisely, as your JOB is this, do this and NOTHING else, whilst smaller play tends to rely more on individuals doing many different things to get the job done. I"m not saying that tactics don't play a role in Raiding, of course they do, i just like the variety you sometimes get in your own role with smaller groups.
Man WoW would have been so much better if the end-game had that sort of depth and variety. /cry
Oh well, i heard that Bioware are considering an MMO once they get their dragon age IP up and running, maybe that could feature some goodness for us, who knows.
after reading through, I tend to agree with the raiders, even though I don't/rarely participate. Perhaps because I always take games in more of an RP sense. It wouldn't be logical if you're soloing along and kill a tiger, while 50 people take down a dragon, and get the same reward. raiding would be obsolete. It takes an immense amount of time and effort to organize a raid. the more people involved, the more complicated things get.
I just like things making sense.
--------------------------------------- All you friggin suburban white kid wannabe poobutts that are in love with G-Unit are sad and pathetic. Find your own identity -Anarchyart
Ok, let me elaborate a bit on my opiion of raiding. Pretty much, it all comes to the strength of the creatures being fought rather than how many people it takes to get the job done. I dont see any problem at all with the most powerful beasts in the game having the most valuable drops. That's not to say exceptional equipment or items cant be obtained with a group or solo if there is a proper amount of effort involved.
Going back, once again, to EQ (since it's the only game I've ever raided in), there were lots of great items you could get both solo or with a group. Some examples are the ever popular Cloak of Greater Pernicity, and that awesome ring, or bracelet, or whichever it was, I forget, that required you to craft high lvl items in every tradeskill to get. There were several others as well, they were all tough to get, and they were all worth it. With raiding, it's not always easy to get enough competant people together to take on what you're after, and many times entire raids were wiped out by the insanely powerful creatures they went to fight. It's a bit more direct than some of the more complex group/solo quests, but thats not to say it doesnt hold it's own risk or level of difficulty. Also there is risk in entrusting your safety to others whom, as you stated, you probably dont even really know just as if you're grouping with strangers. People are a hazard as well as monsters.
Keep in mind, I'm not a raider myself, but I do think the way things are is more than fair. Do I wish I could get that same gear without having to raid? If I said no, I'd be deceiving you; but I dont think that should take away from others. The best of the best items come from raiding. Why? Because it's only natural for the most powerful, godlike creatures to guard the stuff of legend. It's the sort of cliche fantasy stories are made of. Brave warrior, A, must defeat ferocious dragon, B, that guards firey sword of destruction, C; but if said sword were so powerful, would it make sense for the dragon guarding it to be a pussycat creature that just any trained traveler could take down? Of course not, so brave warrior gathers a small army of powerful allies to claim the prize this legendary creature protects. Now I agree it would make more sense if say, instead of ferocious dragon, firey sword were guarded by numerous traps and puzzles, and brave warrior were replaced by lone treasure hunter. However the problem with implementing this into an mmorpg is that, like any quest, no matter how complex or difficult to overcome the traps may be, they'd be documented and plastered all over the internet for all to see, hence completely ruining their effectiveness, and everyone would have that firey sword, leaving all other equipment of the same type obsolete, thus the item would lose it's "specialness" factor.
I only want to say this, having raids that require 70-80 people and making people feel like a "face in the crowd" is partly the developers fault and partly the guilds fault for thinking they need that many people in the first place.
When you get too many people it becomes zerg raids and strategy is thrown out the window.
Overpowering an opponent with superior numbers is no less a strategy than planning out an effective way to use fewer resources to achieve the same goal. It also has it's drawbacks, such as being more difficult to manage without chaos insuing, and a lower likelihood of individuals getting the treasure they want, if any at all.
Further, the whole "face in the crowd" feeling is completely on the part of the player and is no fault of the game itself. While some may feel this way, others may feel as though they're contributing to the whole, others still may sense, and take solice in feeling that no one person in the group is any more or less important than another. Just as some may enjoy raiding and others may not, this is all a matter of varying opinion.
You left out the sales of T-shirts, hats, themed mouspads, coffee mugs, tickets to fanfairs and conventions as well as consessions sold therein, and all the other extra earnings a company recieves from it's more dedicated fans. This is what I meant by both audiences generating about the same income. In addition, that "Game C" you mentioned could also exist durring the life cyle of B as well, not just A, so making it a possibility in only one senario is somewhat biased and unrealistic.
There's more money to be made from a game than just box sales and subscription fees.
youre kidding, right?
Those sales would be so miniscule that they would not register. If you remeber b was far behind a in earnings, and could in no way be rescued by its petty trinkets.
Just to get things straight, is it that raiders should be rewarded for their hard work...in which case Neanderthal's argument makes perfect sense, or is it that for RP reasons only a giant monster that takes an 80 man force to take down should drop the best gear?
If we are all about realism, why is it that the God of Chaos or whatever only drops one peice of equipment per kill? I mean, he's a god and all. You really mean to tell me all he owned was a shield or pair of boots? And where was he keeping the thing the whole time you were fighting him? In his pocket? Someplace worse? And in the case of say . .a gaint Spider Monster, why did it even have those boots in the first place. Was it to lure in 80 man groups so that it could get "pwned?"
If we are going to have things makes sense a freaking god should have either no loot whatsoever ( at least that a mortal can use), or it should have so much loot that everyone in the raid group is rich for life. That wouldn't be very fun, it would destroy the basic end-game mechanics of most MMORPGs. Everyone would retire after their first raid, or wouldn't bother to raid at all. But it would be realistic. Of course if we are going to let fun come in to it, why not let groups and soloers have risks and rewards available that are equivilent to what a raid force can find?
Instead of murdering the God of Chaos why not spend 24 hours working your way past devilish traps so that you can steal something from him? To me that makes a lot more sense than "You take gather an army of heroes, storm his castle, murder the God of Chaos, and he poops out a pair of boots."
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
SDFrost, you are correct that once people figure out how to do a quest they will tell other people how it's done. But the same is true for raids, although to a lesser extent I'll admit. The only reason raiders are less likely to tell other guilds the best way to defeat a raid target is because they want to farm it themselves.
And most raiding in EQ was just that...guilds farming content that they had gone through before. They already knew how to handle it. They had it down pat and were just farming it for loot. The first time you raided something; if you didn't have any advice from people who had done it before, that was the most challenging type of raid. But after you had it figured out you were just going through the motions. Just farming it over and over and over again to get more and more loot. And then the next guild moves in and starts farming it when your guild moves on. Or several guilds farm it during the same time period. Maybe they try to work out a schedule of who gets it when or maybe they squable over it.
Anyway, the end result is the same as people using spoilers to complete quests. If raid M drops a fiery sword then a guild will farm it untill everyone in the guild who can use that fiery sword has one. Then the next guild farms it untill they all have fiery swords. So the fiery sword that comes from raids also loses it's "specialness" factor.
And a lot of times they will continue farming it past the point were everyone has the fiery sword because there is some other item that drops in that raid that people want. So then the fiery swords that they harvest start going to alts, or going on Ebay.
I'll admit that it does make RP sense for powerful creatures to have nice items. But fantasy novels are just chock full of stories about small groups of adventurers going on long quests for powerful items so that makes perfectly good RP sense in a fantasy game as well.
But whatever, I'm getting a little tired of this debate. It really doesn't matter to me if some company makes a raiding game. That's great for raiders, they can have fun with it. No one is forcing me to play it and I certainly won't play it. I just sometimes can't help arguing against the basic philosophy that some people have that high end content MUST revolve around raiding exclusively.
Windexofdoom, you do realize that merchandise such as I mentioned ranges from $13 - $30 on average do you not? Therefor, each time a die-hard fanboi buys an item it's the equivalent of another 1 or 2 months subscription. Just as your example was fictional with completely made up numbers, I can only assume the number of sales they recieve from merchandising is very lucrative for games with such devotees, or they'd stop selling the stuff.
Yeebo, you obviously didnt read my posts very thoroughly, or you would've seen the part where I not only state that there is a place for methods of attaining high end gear through grouping and quests, but I listed examples in a past game, Everquest. Also, your argument is, quite frankly, rediculous. Attacking my reasoning because I think it makes sense, in effect, is tantamount to claiming nothing in an mmorpg should make sense. Why should you get better at fighting by practicing it? Why should you start off weak or poor and have to work your way up the ladder? Why do we have to travel to get anywhere when we could just be everywhere at once? Sounds silly does it not? We become better fighters through practice because it makes sense. We start off weaker than those who have played before us because it makes sense. We have to travel to get someplace because it makes sense. Powerful artifacts are protected by powerful entities BECAUSE IT MAKES SENSE.
Neanderthal, I do agree with you to a certain extent, but the difference between traps and monsters, as I see it, is that when you have information on a trap, it can be completely bypassed and hence becomes totally effortless; when you have information on a creature, it becomes easier, but you still have to go through with the fight to kill it. If devs can come up with a way for traps and puzzles to be dynamic (as well as the attributes of certain creatures) then it would definately add a whole new level of depth to a game. I do hope to see something like this implemented in future products.
Just to clarify something here: I never said anything about group/solo quests relying on traps and puzzles. That would be fine too, if they had a way to implement it that wouldn't be easily trivialized but I never said anything about using those methods.
I wasn't trying to single you out SDfrost, sorry if it seemed like I was. I was just trying to make a point. Either:
1. The reason why raiders deserve good gear is that they do something hard, in which case Neanderthal is irrefutably correct in my opinion. If small groups and soloers do something that's just as difficult, or even more difficult then killing a raid mob 40 times they deserve gear that's just as good as what a raider can get.
2. The reason that raiders deserve good gear is that it "makes sense" that gear should drop only when a large group of players kills a giant space dragon, a god, or the like. However, the way that gear drops from raid mobs really makes very little sense at all!. So the second argument is illogical.
I apologize that it seemed like a direct attack on your posts SD, I did not intend it that way. You make a good point that some games do in fact have decent rewards for soloers. One obvious example is crazy rare crafted gear that takes hours and hours of grinding to get the ingredients for. Many games have something along those lines. I think that's a good thing, and I'd like to see more of it. Theres no reason a game can't have rewards that take great dedication to obtain for both soloers and raiders.
Peace!
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
Originally posted by SDFrost Overpowering an opponent with superior numbers is no less a strategy than planning out an effective way to use fewer resources to achieve the same goal. It also has it's drawbacks, such as being more difficult to manage without chaos insuing, and a lower likelihood of individuals getting the treasure they want, if any at all.
Sorry but I have to completely disagree here. How do you think the term "Zerg" was invented? Zerg means overpowering an opponent with great numbers using the least strategy possible. Plus, is it fun to use no real strategy? Isn't it completely defeating the purpose of the game to ruin the sense of challenge?
Plus with fewer numbers people are MORE likely to get the treasure they wanted because there are fewer to distribute to.
Yeebo, I apologise if I mistook your post, but I think I should explain further my own opinion. Lets see, where to start....I guess first off by saying that the treasure drops from creatures should most definately be scaled by how powerful the creature is. If a solo player takes on a strong creature and defeats it, they get the same treasure as if a group of 6 does the same thing. Just because it was more difficult for the solo player doesnt mean he should get better gear for the same creature. Conversely, when the 6-person team kills that monster, only one of them gets the treasure from it. That's where the difficulty/treasure balance comes in. Adding people makes the fight easier, but lessens the possibility of any given person getting what they want from the battle.
Saying that just because there are 50 people it's easy doesnt mean that 20 people should get something better for the same fight. The difficulty is indirectly proportionate to the odds of getting good stuff. Therefor it's completely fair in my opinion. More people = less risk, but less reward as well.
As for zethcarn, strategy means using the resources you have available to achive your goal. If you have, or can obtain, an overabundance of manpower, then your strategy is to overpower your opponent with numbers. Getting things done doesnt always take complex planning, and yes, to some it can be fun to burst in guns-a-blazin' (or swords-a-blazin') and mow down all opposition in a single ununiform onslaught. Fun has no concrete definition, it's all attribute to opinion. Some would describe mmorpg's in general as a boring waste of time with no fun value at all, but many people (assumingly everyone who posts on this site) feel just the opposite. Which is why I originally stated that there is definately a market for both the casual and dedicated gamers, because despite what I like, other people still deserve to have their own form of fun as well.
Comments
Regardless of whether they would enjoy it or not, dedicating an entire day to a raid is something that a lot of peaple just can't do. I personally can never sit down and play a game for more than about four hours. During the week an hour or two a night is my max. That's why I stick to games that allow me to make progress in short blocks of time. I'd love to be able to sit twiddling my thumbs for six hours waiting for some rare spawn like I could when I was a kid. But I just can't.
That said, I do see a lack of diversity among games being developed. While I personally wouldn't play one, I'd think it would be great to see at least some games come out that cater to the "got spare time flying out of my bum" crowd.
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
No offence taken. And of course it's jealousy. I freely admit that after I quit the raiding guild I was jealous of the raiders being able to obtain high end loot that I had no way of getting. Why wouldn't I be jealous? In EQ there were two forms of character advancement, levels and equipment. I could still gain levels but I could no longer advance in equipment upgrades. And when the equipment upgrades were half of the way your success was measured...you're damn right I was jealous.
Just like raiders jealously insist that only their playstyle should result in substantial rewards. You don't think that's a form of jealousy? Well it is. Or you could call it greed or selfishness or some other word but it's definately rooted in self interest and having an edge over people who can't/won't join raiding guilds.
You say that everyone is capable of raiding. That's not necessarily true. But in my case it is true so I'm not going to argue that point. The thing is, I won't do it anymore. Even though I could make the time for it I absolutely refuse to put up with it anymore. Me paying a subscription fee to go on raids would make as much sense as me paying someone to hit me in the head with a hammer all day.
Why?
Because raiders insist that it be that way?
There is no intrinsic reason why the best loot in a game has to come from raiding. That's like saying, "We'll roll a dice and the first person to roll a 2 wins." It's a completely arbitrary thing. The best loot could just as likely come from solo questing. And then the solo questers would defend that by saying, "That's just the way it is. The best gear comes from solo questing. Live with it."
Let me quote that last line once more for emphasis...
Really? Do you really think that? Then why do you want to relegate groupers and soloers to second rate status in a game?
If there were solo and group ways to get top quality gear. Ways that are just as difficult and time consuming as raiding. That involve as much, or more, risk. Then why would you argue against that? What...Do you want to cheapen the experience for those folks? Why would you want to take away from others when you just said that that is unfair?
I personally prefer grouping over soloing. But if a soloer were ALLOWED to try for high end rewards with an appropriate amount of time and effort I wouldn't hold it against him if he got as good a reward as I could get from grouping.
By the same token, if I put in an appropriate amount of time and effort into a group route to high end equipment, why would you feel upset if my reward were as good as a raid reward?
I'm not stopping you from raiding am I? Just because I'm getting good rewards for long and difficult group content it wouldn't prevent you or anyone else from raiding. Why couldn't you just do what you enjoy and stop worrying about what other people are doing? Why would it bother a raider if groupers could get equal rewards for equal effort?
And see, that's the thing that some people just can't tolerate---equal rewards for equal effort. People who insist that only raiders should be rewarded are essentially saying that raiders should get greater rewards even if non-raiders put in more effort, more risk, and more time.
So how about that? Would you give me a straight answer to one simple question: If a group of five people put in more time than the average raid takes and faced greater risks than the average raider faces, should they not be rewarded at least equally to a raid quality reward?
You yourself talked about working for your rewards in a game. So if a group worked EVEN HARDER than raiders for the same quality reward would that be ok? If you say no then..I hate to be so blunt and rude sounding...but if you say no then you are a hypocrite.
/cheer Neanderthal
Preach it brother.
A game that gave every group their option at end-game would be un-freakin-believable. How awesome would that be if you could raid and get good rewards, solo and get good rewards, group and get good rewards. Especially if difficulty was same for all three options. I play WoW, and i'm not ashamed to say that I love it (for its good things), but i've recently been introduced to the EQ style end-game of raiding, and personally i don't like that anywhere near as much as small 5-man, 10-man or solo playing. Raids tend to relegate roles fairly precisely, as your JOB is this, do this and NOTHING else, whilst smaller play tends to rely more on individuals doing many different things to get the job done. I"m not saying that tactics don't play a role in Raiding, of course they do, i just like the variety you sometimes get in your own role with smaller groups.
Man WoW would have been so much better if the end-game had that sort of depth and variety. /cry
Oh well, i heard that Bioware are considering an MMO once they get their dragon age IP up and running, maybe that could feature some goodness for us, who knows.
after reading through, I tend to agree with the raiders, even though I don't/rarely participate. Perhaps because I always take games in more of an RP sense. It wouldn't be logical if you're soloing along and kill a tiger, while 50 people take down a dragon, and get the same reward. raiding would be obsolete. It takes an immense amount of time and effort to organize a raid. the more people involved, the more complicated things get.
I just like things making sense.
---------------------------------------
-Anarchyart
All you friggin suburban white kid wannabe poobutts that are in love with G-Unit are sad and pathetic. Find your own identity
Ok, let me elaborate a bit on my opiion of raiding. Pretty much, it all
comes to the strength of the creatures being fought rather than how many
people it takes to get the job done. I dont see any problem at all with
the most powerful beasts in the game having the most valuable drops.
That's not to say exceptional equipment or items cant be obtained with a
group or solo if there is a proper amount of effort involved.
Going back, once again, to EQ (since it's the only game I've ever raided
in), there were lots of great items you could get both solo or with a
group. Some examples are the ever popular Cloak of Greater Pernicity,
and that awesome ring, or bracelet, or whichever it was, I forget, that
required you to craft high lvl items in every tradeskill to get. There
were several others as well, they were all tough to get, and they were
all worth it. With raiding, it's not always easy to get enough competant
people together to take on what you're after, and many times entire
raids were wiped out by the insanely powerful creatures they went to
fight. It's a bit more direct than some of the more complex group/solo
quests, but thats not to say it doesnt hold it's own risk or level of
difficulty. Also there is risk in entrusting your safety to others whom,
as you stated, you probably dont even really know just as if you're
grouping with strangers. People are a hazard as well as monsters.
Keep in mind, I'm not a raider myself, but I do think the way things are
is more than fair. Do I wish I could get that same gear without having
to raid? If I said no, I'd be deceiving you; but I dont think that
should take away from others. The best of the best items come from
raiding. Why? Because it's only natural for the most powerful, godlike
creatures to guard the stuff of legend. It's the sort of cliche fantasy
stories are made of. Brave warrior, A, must defeat ferocious dragon, B,
that guards firey sword of destruction, C; but if said sword were so
powerful, would it make sense for the dragon guarding it to be a
pussycat creature that just any trained traveler could take down? Of
course not, so brave warrior gathers a small army of powerful allies to
claim the prize this legendary creature protects. Now I agree it would
make more sense if say, instead of ferocious dragon, firey sword were
guarded by numerous traps and puzzles, and brave warrior were replaced
by lone treasure hunter. However the problem with implementing this into
an mmorpg is that, like any quest, no matter how complex or difficult to
overcome the traps may be, they'd be documented and plastered all over
the internet for all to see, hence completely ruining their
effectiveness, and everyone would have that firey sword, leaving all
other equipment of the same type obsolete, thus the item would lose it's
"specialness" factor.
I only want to say this, having raids that require 70-80 people and making people feel like a "face in the crowd" is partly the developers fault and partly the guilds fault for thinking they need that many people in the first place.
When you get too many people it becomes zerg raids and strategy is thrown out the window.
Overpowering an opponent with superior numbers is no less a strategy
than planning out an effective way to use fewer resources to achieve the
same goal. It also has it's drawbacks, such as being more difficult to
manage without chaos insuing, and a lower likelihood of individuals
getting the treasure they want, if any at all.
Further, the whole "face in the crowd" feeling is completely on the part
of the player and is no fault of the game itself. While some may feel
this way, others may feel as though they're contributing to the whole,
others still may sense, and take solice in feeling that no one person in
the group is any more or less important than another. Just as some may
enjoy raiding and others may not, this is all a matter of varying
opinion.
youre kidding, right?
Those sales would be so miniscule that they would not register. If you remeber b was far behind a in earnings, and could in no way be rescued by its petty trinkets.
Just to get things straight, is it that raiders should be rewarded for their hard work...in which case Neanderthal's argument makes perfect sense, or is it that for RP reasons only a giant monster that takes an 80 man force to take down should drop the best gear?
If we are all about realism, why is it that the God of Chaos or whatever only drops one peice of equipment per kill? I mean, he's a god and all. You really mean to tell me all he owned was a shield or pair of boots? And where was he keeping the thing the whole time you were fighting him? In his pocket? Someplace worse? And in the case of say . .a gaint Spider Monster, why did it even have those boots in the first place. Was it to lure in 80 man groups so that it could get "pwned?"
If we are going to have things makes sense a freaking god should have either no loot whatsoever ( at least that a mortal can use), or it should have so much loot that everyone in the raid group is rich for life. That wouldn't be very fun, it would destroy the basic end-game mechanics of most MMORPGs. Everyone would retire after their first raid, or wouldn't bother to raid at all. But it would be realistic. Of course if we are going to let fun come in to it, why not let groups and soloers have risks and rewards available that are equivilent to what a raid force can find?
Instead of murdering the God of Chaos why not spend 24 hours working your way past devilish traps so that you can steal something from him? To me that makes a lot more sense than "You take gather an army of heroes, storm his castle, murder the God of Chaos, and he poops out a pair of boots."
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
SDFrost, you are correct that once people figure out how to do a quest they will tell other people how it's done. But the same is true for raids, although to a lesser extent I'll admit. The only reason raiders are less likely to tell other guilds the best way to defeat a raid target is because they want to farm it themselves.
And most raiding in EQ was just that...guilds farming content that they had gone through before. They already knew how to handle it. They had it down pat and were just farming it for loot. The first time you raided something; if you didn't have any advice from people who had done it before, that was the most challenging type of raid. But after you had it figured out you were just going through the motions. Just farming it over and over and over again to get more and more loot. And then the next guild moves in and starts farming it when your guild moves on. Or several guilds farm it during the same time period. Maybe they try to work out a schedule of who gets it when or maybe they squable over it.
Anyway, the end result is the same as people using spoilers to complete quests. If raid M drops a fiery sword then a guild will farm it untill everyone in the guild who can use that fiery sword has one. Then the next guild farms it untill they all have fiery swords. So the fiery sword that comes from raids also loses it's "specialness" factor.
And a lot of times they will continue farming it past the point were everyone has the fiery sword because there is some other item that drops in that raid that people want. So then the fiery swords that they harvest start going to alts, or going on Ebay.
I'll admit that it does make RP sense for powerful creatures to have nice items. But fantasy novels are just chock full of stories about small groups of adventurers going on long quests for powerful items so that makes perfectly good RP sense in a fantasy game as well.
But whatever, I'm getting a little tired of this debate. It really doesn't matter to me if some company makes a raiding game. That's great for raiders, they can have fun with it. No one is forcing me to play it and I certainly won't play it. I just sometimes can't help arguing against the basic philosophy that some people have that high end content MUST revolve around raiding exclusively.
Windexofdoom, you do realize that merchandise such as I mentioned ranges
from $13 - $30 on average do you not? Therefor, each time a die-hard
fanboi buys an item it's the equivalent of another 1 or 2 months
subscription. Just as your example was fictional with completely made up
numbers, I can only assume the number of sales they recieve from
merchandising is very lucrative for games with such devotees, or they'd
stop selling the stuff.
Yeebo, you obviously didnt read my posts very thoroughly, or you
would've seen the part where I not only state that there is a place for
methods of attaining high end gear through grouping and quests, but I
listed examples in a past game, Everquest. Also, your argument is, quite
frankly, rediculous. Attacking my reasoning because I think it makes
sense, in effect, is tantamount to claiming nothing in an mmorpg should
make sense. Why should you get better at fighting by practicing it? Why
should you start off weak or poor and have to work your way up the
ladder? Why do we have to travel to get anywhere when we could just be
everywhere at once? Sounds silly does it not? We become better fighters
through practice because it makes sense. We start off weaker than those
who have played before us because it makes sense. We have to travel to
get someplace because it makes sense. Powerful artifacts are protected
by powerful entities BECAUSE IT MAKES SENSE.
Neanderthal, I do agree with you to a certain extent, but the difference
between traps and monsters, as I see it, is that when you have
information on a trap, it can be completely bypassed and hence becomes
totally effortless; when you have information on a creature, it becomes
easier, but you still have to go through with the fight to kill it. If
devs can come up with a way for traps and puzzles to be dynamic (as well
as the attributes of certain creatures) then it would definately add a
whole new level of depth to a game. I do hope to see something like this
implemented in future products.
Just to clarify something here: I never said anything about group/solo quests relying on traps and puzzles. That would be fine too, if they had a way to implement it that wouldn't be easily trivialized but I never said anything about using those methods.
I wasn't trying to single you out SDfrost, sorry if it seemed like I was. I was just trying to make a point. Either:
1. The reason why raiders deserve good gear is that they do something hard, in which case Neanderthal is irrefutably correct in my opinion. If small groups and soloers do something that's just as difficult, or even more difficult then killing a raid mob 40 times they deserve gear that's just as good as what a raider can get.
2. The reason that raiders deserve good gear is that it "makes sense" that gear should drop only when a large group of players kills a giant space dragon, a god, or the like. However, the way that gear drops from raid mobs really makes very little sense at all!. So the second argument is illogical.
I apologize that it seemed like a direct attack on your posts SD, I did not intend it that way. You make a good point that some games do in fact have decent rewards for soloers. One obvious example is crazy rare crafted gear that takes hours and hours of grinding to get the ingredients for. Many games have something along those lines. I think that's a good thing, and I'd like to see more of it. Theres no reason a game can't have rewards that take great dedication to obtain for both soloers and raiders.
Peace!
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
Sorry but I have to completely disagree here. How do you think the term "Zerg" was invented? Zerg means overpowering an opponent with great numbers using the least strategy possible. Plus, is it fun to use no real strategy? Isn't it completely defeating the purpose of the game to ruin the sense of challenge?
Plus with fewer numbers people are MORE likely to get the treasure they wanted because there are fewer to distribute to.
Yeebo, I apologise if I mistook your post, but I think I should explain further my own opinion. Lets see, where to start....I guess first off by saying that the treasure drops from creatures should most definately be scaled by how powerful the creature is. If a solo player takes on a strong creature and defeats it, they get the same treasure as if a group of 6 does the same thing. Just because it was more difficult for the solo player doesnt mean he should get better gear for the same creature. Conversely, when the 6-person team kills that monster, only one of them gets the treasure from it. That's where the difficulty/treasure balance comes in. Adding people makes the fight easier, but lessens the possibility of any given person getting what they want from the battle.
Saying that just because there are 50 people it's easy doesnt mean that 20 people should get something better for the same fight. The difficulty is indirectly proportionate to the odds of getting good stuff. Therefor it's completely fair in my opinion. More people = less risk, but less reward as well.
As for zethcarn, strategy means using the resources you have available to achive your goal. If you have, or can obtain, an overabundance of manpower, then your strategy is to overpower your opponent with numbers. Getting things done doesnt always take complex planning, and yes, to some it can be fun to burst in guns-a-blazin' (or swords-a-blazin') and mow down all opposition in a single ununiform onslaught. Fun has no concrete definition, it's all attribute to opinion. Some would describe mmorpg's in general as a boring waste of time with no fun value at all, but many people (assumingly everyone who posts on this site) feel just the opposite. Which is why I originally stated that there is definately a market for both the casual and dedicated gamers, because despite what I like, other people still deserve to have their own form of fun as well.