When haven't MMORPGs been anything other than themed chat rooms?
It's not so much the fact that players can quest and craft solo as it's the complete lack of social options outside of the main game concept. Seriously, why does the multiplayer aspect have to involve killing something? Why can't there be an option for a player to run their own tavern or buy everyone a round of drinks in a tavern? Why can't people just collect and trade in-game objects that have no other function than just being rare? custom dance animations? Composing music? printing on clothes? No?...
It's really depressing to see threads like this and be confronted by the complete lack of creativity on the part of the community. Here's a thought: Maybe it's not the developer's fault for the genre getting stale.
As far as this thread goes i think EVE online is as close to perfect as it might get. You dont HAVE to group. You dont HAVE to interact at all. But in real life strength comes in numbers, strength comes from cooperation. You dont have to work with anyone. I think it comes down to a dichotomey between those who look to fantasy to escape reality and feel significant and those looking for an easily adopted alternate reality to explore the very real power struggles inherent in the human condition....
...or maby we just want to kill things.....
I told those mother #%$^% i aint never scared! i aint Nevr scared! I aint never scared!!
This is the number one reason I could not play WoW. The grouping game from 1-59 absolutely sucks, and is pretty much pointless.
Bring back the good grouping games. That's really all I like to do in an MMORPG. Nothing wrong with solo games like WoW (pre-Raid level) and obviously lots of people like that sort of gameplay, but it's not for me.
A truly multiplayer game where it's all or nothing would be amazing, but the problem is that outside factors affect how such a game would work. For instance, grouping could be a living nightmare unless everyone is one one server and there are millions of subscribers. Over time, however, there will be less new players and more veterans, making it hard for new players to find groups. I'd definitely play a game where one HAS to group, but only if finding that group isn't hell on Earth and if all classes (once again if there are any) are in high demand.
That sums up my sentiment exactly. I like questing, sure, but where's the fracking tavern? Or why can't I open my own? How about a bounty board on materials from animals (for those that like farming mobs anyways) that I pay a premium for some and bulk for others? Basically, where can I exert my influence on the game world in major and minor ways? If there is none, why make it a multiplayer monthly fee game? Why not just tailor it up as the next Mass Effect and put it up on Steam for me to buy for 45USD? I guess I won't get a handle on these developers and their ideas considering I'm my own wouldbe developer. *shrugs* -- Brede
I agree with you wholeheartedly on this point Ladyattis. There is such a lack of imagination, and creativity in a lot of current MMO's, and the frustrating thing is that the potential for some really amazing games is out there.
Most of the posts on this thread have done a good and concise job, of answering your original question, and so there is not much else I can add, but for what it's worth, here's my tuppence worth.
When everything is boiled down, I think that the primary motive for software companies is money. Pure and simple. At the end of the day, the big-wigs at all these companies could not really care how innovative their product is, as long as they are getting the cash. What has this got to do with the original question about solo-ing?
Well, ever since WoW became such a commercial success, a lot of software houses decided to jump on the MMORPG band-wagon. However, instead of trying to take chances, and incorporate new aspects to these games, they figure they can use the basic formula and 'doll up' their own take on the concept. The way they see it; ' if it ain't broken, don't fix it.' Which is a crying shame, as ultimately the genre could stagnate if we just get the same ideas, over and over again.
Solo-play will probably become more and more available, so that a game can be viewed as mainstream, and friendly to the masses. There is no way you will ever get a game as demanding as, say, Lineage 2, to have the subscription numbers as WoW. The average punter wants to be able to access all that a game offers, with the minimum of effort.
I personally would like to see a balance. I do solo a lot, and a lot of MMO's are very unfriendly when it comes to new players, which makes finding a group difficult. To counter that, I often join a guild, which in my opinion is a much better way to find group members than just PUG's. So, ideally, I would like to have the choice, as some nights I may be in the mood to form a group, and others just play my own game. If Dev's can provide a fair quantity of both in these games, then I'd be happy, even more so if they experimented with the genre, and provided us with more than just your bog-standard, seek and destroy-type quests.
I'd agree with much of whats been said (and I'm a chronic soloer). The issue isn't the lack of forced grouping, it's:
1) The lack of a "virtual world"
2) The extremely narrow scope of MMO's
There's no real community, because there doesn't need to be one. You're just grinding/questing you're way to the top, so you can get in a guild and participate in some repetitive, pointless endgame. Most of your money comes from questing, most of you're gear comes from questing, and most of your xp comes from questing. Who the hell needs a community? This is basically a linear, single player RPG, with a mutiplayer option.
I pose this question in light of my own conclusions about the majority of 'modern' MMOs, where the entire set of 'content' that one can play is fashioned to be from the perspective of a single player as opposed to multiple players. Whether we're talking about Tabula Rasa or talking about Vanguard, or Everquest 2 or even World of Warcraft. Each one of these MMOs can be effectively played solo with no need to even have the chat window open save for to bicker with others if one so chooses. This observation makes me wonder where MMO developers went wrong, by that I mean that the entire point of MMOs is the MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER aspect of the 'genre' (I use this loosely), where you're stuck with strangers and suppose to cooperate in some function to win out over extraordinary odds. Yet, this doesn't pan out like it anymore. I doubt it has anything to do with the playerbases getting older otherwise people would become total shut-ins in real life, so I'm puzzled by this development. Is it because it makes development easier for the companies? Or is it because they're trying to appeal to the largest segments of the market? I have my own ideas on it, but I rather see what you all have to say. -- Brede
Neither Vanguard or EQ2 does support solo playing. Those games alow you to level your character but you will not find any decent loot in those games if you play solo.
Originally posted by Vidir Neither Vanguard or EQ2 does support solo playing. Those games alow you to level your character but you will not find any decent loot in those games if you play solo.
The last time I played EQ2, there was tons of solo content. The old content is still group focused along with the raiding content, but there's loads of single/solo quest lines anyone can engage in. More than enough to level and get equipment well enough to tackle most group content as well (save for raids of course). For Vanguard, I never had issue leveling at all in a solo manner, save for dungeons, which did get sticky, but nothing like what use to be the norm for say UO in the old days or AC1 (try to tackle a swarm of lugians without buffs regardless of weapon you should choose, and you'll die *fast* from their all too often landing crits...). So, no, my examples stand pretty well on their own just by examining solo leveling guides offered for both games by players, which know their classes and the current content up to a point (it depends on whether the guide has been updated to the most recent content patches or not...). Ultimately, soloplay in these games is possible and quite easy compared to older games and their previous game rules.
I have to agree, this is something I've been saying to people for a while, that MMOG's are becoming unfriendly to groups and basically solo games with many players in the same area. Its completely against the design of MMOG's, read what it says, 'Massively Multiplayer Online Game'. When I see Multiplayer I immediately think I'm going to have to co-operate with other players. Look at all the other multiplayer games.
Quake Wars, Counterstrike, Unreal Tournament, all sold as multiplayer games. Can you solo in these? Of course not. How long are you going to last alone against a full team on the other side? Are you going to be able to take all the strategic points alone? No. They're multiplayer games, and if you form 'clans' then your chances of winning increase. Games such as Crysis are sold as singleplayer games, I expect to be able to fight my way through hordes of enemies alone and win.
So why do people suddenly think that MMO's are suddenly solo singleplayer games? They never used to be, and never should have become so, but someone decided that solo content should be added and now its blown out of proportion to the point where group content is in the minority. Should we be relabelling them to MSOG's?
Some people are saying that we should be able to solo because its a 'Virtual World' and that they want to live in it. But people, its not a virtual world, its a multiplayer game. Second Life is a virtual world, theres no quest system or levelling to be done in Second Life, because its not a 'game'. LOTRO is not a virtual world, its a bunch of game locations strung together. They have housing and inns purely for the fact of the last few letters, that many people seem to forget. mmoRPG. Its a multiplayer roleplaying game.
Solo content in MMO's have so killed the interaction and grouping, basically because theres no point in doing either unless you need help in getting a difficult quest of yours completed. This can especially be seen in LOTRO, where people don't respond to group calls unless they need to complete the same quest as the LFG'er. On top of that they've thrown in instanting, which further removes the people who want to group away from the population.
So what to do to fix it? Remove the quest system seen in LOTRO and EQ2 for a start, where one quest leads to the next and so on, all in a very limited area. Its very linear and does nothing for the game. Instead, bring back some of the EQ1 style quests, where you were sent all over the world tracking down named mobs or hard to reach places, places that could never be reached alone. Remove solo content after level 10 - this has given you enough time to familiarise yourself with your class and got you ready to enter into the big wide world.
Most of all, remind people what you're playing - a multiplayer game. For single player, seek out games such as Oblivion, thats where single player should remain.
"Most of all, remind people what you're playing - a multiplayer game. For single player, seek out games such as Oblivion, thats where single player should remain."
Sorry, but YOU have no control over what game I play. If I want to play by myself in an MMO there is nothing you can do to stop me. I don't knock people who are unable to handle solo play, so I don't see why you should knock people who don't care for group play. Get over yourself.
Originally posted by Jirel "Most of all, remind people what you're playing - a multiplayer game. For single player, seek out games such as Oblivion, thats where single player should remain." Sorry, but YOU have no control over what game I play. If I want to play by myself in an MMO there is nothing you can do to stop me. I don't knock people who are unable to handle solo play, so I don't see why you should knock people who don't care for group play. Get over yourself. 53, female, a gamer and proud of it.
I think there's plenty of room for solo play in an MMO, but what the problem is that they're trying to shoe horn the old singleplayer game concepts onto the solo experience in an MMO. So, we get the stale the static quest lines instead of a dynamic environment to conquer or player/non-player conflicts that arise from the fact that it is a world we're playing in. As such, I believe it under-utilizes both the power of the MMO 'genre' and it treats players of all types as idiots that fit neatly in one category or another (oh, you're a 'raider'. oh, you're a 'crafter', and so on...). Someday, who knows, maybe some developer will grasp that. I know I'm trying to condense it in my own project, but I doubt I'll even get half of what I would have wanted in a game. But what drives me nuts is how developers of other titles completely ignore this frustration (as to pretend it's not even there or worthy of simply getting an intern to do a bit of weekend research to find leads for future titles...). And that is what irks me more so than any other portion of the development of MMOs (the hype, the lies, and cliches...).
"Most of all, remind people what you're playing - a multiplayer game. For single player, seek out games such as Oblivion, thats where single player should remain." Sorry, but YOU have no control over what game I play. If I want to play by myself in an MMO there is nothing you can do to stop me. I don't knock people who are unable to handle solo play, so I don't see why you should knock people who don't care for group play. Get over yourself. 53, female, a gamer and proud of it.
But you shouldn't be able to play by yourself, its a flaw of current MMO design. You seem to have missed my point, MMO's are multiplayer games and should be designed as such. They're being designed nowadays with the solo player in mind and thats not how it should be.
Maybe they should make a new genre, perhaps thats what developers should be doing. You can then have the MMO's, the multiplayer games, and the MSO's, which are 90% solo games with a large community that you can interact with.
Would that even work? Would probably be too hard to differentiate, unless someone set a standard that had to be mentioned as part of the game description.
"Get over yourself.." <-- was that really necessary. I wasn't being abusive to anyone.
No you aren't being abusive, however your post does sound pretty arrogant. You have a specific play style and that's fine, but you have no right to dictate how people play a game. I prefer grouping, but really I have no problem with people wanting to solo in MMOs.
No you aren't being abusive, however your post does sound pretty arrogant. You have a specific play style and that's fine, but you have no right to dictate how people play a game. I prefer grouping, but really I have no problem with people wanting to solo in MMOs.
I'm not dictating how people should play a game, but a multiplayer game should be exactly that, not a single player game with other people logged in. I wouldn't buy Unreal Tournament expecting to be able to win the game alone, so why is it acceptable to sell a multiplayer game with 90% solo play? And then ask people to pay every month for it? I'm not going to pay every month so I can keep playing Grand Theft Auto...
The fun of multiplayer games has always been working with other players to achieve a goal. In Unreal it might be to capture a flag, in MMO's its to overcome powerful creatures and tough dungeons. If you can do that alone, you're just playing Oblivion Online.
I pose this question in light of my own conclusions about the majority of 'modern' MMOs, where the entire set of 'content' that one can play is fashioned to be from the perspective of a single player as opposed to multiple players. Whether we're talking about Tabula Rasa or talking about Vanguard, or Everquest 2 or even World of Warcraft. Each one of these MMOs can be effectively played solo with no need to even have the chat window open save for to bicker with others if one so chooses. This observation makes me wonder where MMO developers went wrong, by that I mean that the entire point of MMOs is the MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER aspect of the 'genre' (I use this loosely), where you're stuck with strangers and suppose to cooperate in some function to win out over extraordinary odds. Yet, this doesn't pan out like it anymore. I doubt it has anything to do with the playerbases getting older otherwise people would become total shut-ins in real life, so I'm puzzled by this development. Is it because it makes development easier for the companies? Or is it because they're trying to appeal to the largest segments of the market? I have my own ideas on it, but I rather see what you all have to say. -- Brede
Neither Vanguard or EQ2 does support solo playing. Those games alow you to level your character but you will not find any decent loot in those games if you play solo.
There is lots of solo content in EQ2. From level 70-79 there is hardly anything worthwhile to do but solo quest which is the main reason I stopped playing.
Solo content is essential to have, but so is group content and that group content has to be suitably challenging and rewarding enough to make the overhead of forming a group worthwhile.
No you aren't being abusive, however your post does sound pretty arrogant. You have a specific play style and that's fine, but you have no right to dictate how people play a game. I prefer grouping, but really I have no problem with people wanting to solo in MMOs.
I'm not dictating how people should play a game, but a multiplayer game should be exactly that, not a single player game with other people logged in. I wouldn't buy Unreal Tournament expecting to be able to win the game alone, so why is it acceptable to sell a multiplayer game with 90% solo play? And then ask people to pay every month for it? I'm not going to pay every month so I can keep playing Grand Theft Auto...
The fun of multiplayer games has always been working with other players to achieve a goal. In Unreal it might be to capture a flag, in MMO's its to overcome powerful creatures and tough dungeons. If you can do that alone, you're just playing Oblivion Online.
That is one reason to play an MMO, there are others. Being in a dynamic world where you can play the lone wolf is another, making friends and socializing is another, crafting gear for other players is yet another...there are many reasons to play these games and they aren't narrowly defined by a specific type of game play. You are dictating how people should play, and you're offering a very narrow version of what a MMO is.
With recent successes in mmos the driving force now is money. Developers are catering more and more to solo content because it incorperates a broader spectrum of subscribers. And subscriptions sadly are what matter the most. This leads to content that encourages repetitive hooks in its gameplay.
MMO success has lead to talks of "marketing stratigies" and "subscriber retention" games aren't being designed with fun and innovation because that doesn't keep the cash rolling in. As long as developers can keep gamers paying to chase carrots then solo play repetitivness and gear loop raiding is here to stay.
last time I played WoW being in the sub BC level noone looks for group and everyone just solos. I find solo content mind-numbingly boring so the only choice left to me was to quit really. Its just far too easy to solo in WoW and going back to what someone else said- everyone just wants to do their own quests. -like they're just living in their own quest-world and interaction is only desired when its needed and done for as little as possible.
I did put a suggestion on the forums whereby people who helped others do quests they had already done could get a reward somehow to incent grouping, but don't think anyone listens.
I pose this question in light of my own conclusions about the majority of 'modern' MMOs, where the entire set of 'content' that one can play is fashioned to be from the perspective of a single player as opposed to multiple players. Whether we're talking about Tabula Rasa or talking about Vanguard, or Everquest 2 or even World of Warcraft. Each one of these MMOs can be effectively played solo with no need to even have the chat window open save for to bicker with others if one so chooses. This observation makes me wonder where MMO developers went wrong, by that I mean that the entire point of MMOs is the MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER aspect of the 'genre' (I use this loosely), where you're stuck with strangers and suppose to cooperate in some function to win out over extraordinary odds. Yet, this doesn't pan out like it anymore. I doubt it has anything to do with the playerbases getting older otherwise people would become total shut-ins in real life, so I'm puzzled by this development. Is it because it makes development easier for the companies? Or is it because they're trying to appeal to the largest segments of the market? I have my own ideas on it, but I rather see what you all have to say. -- Brede
Why is anything "wrong" with this? If lots of people want it (and by the popularity of solo-able as a feature, i would say lots do want it), why is it a problem for developers to give it to them?
And solo-content usually only relates to the questing/combat aspect of the MMO. May be people don't want to group when they level but want to interact with other people on AH or BG?
In any case, there is nothing "wrong" as long as people like it.
the idea is to cater to everyone. people that either want to play socially or people that want to solo. though it's not easy to solo in WoW when you hit end-game and you want all the nice gear.
First, multiplayers is not a synonym of teams. It means the game is played by many peoples on a server (duh !). I don't think peoples want hardcore game like the original EQ where everything was so hard that you had to constantly play in team.
Who got the time today to LFG for hours to have something done in a game? Games are supposed to be fun, having to wait for a group is boring. When i play, i want to feel i'm accomplishing something wether i have 30 minutes or 2 hours.
All MMO's should have solo and team content. This way you cather for a large audience, hardcore and causual. Releasing a game where you cant accomplish anything by yourself would remove all the casual crowd, i dont think any game developpers can afford to loose that much potential customers.
Are mmo's becoming massively singplayer ? I think you asked the wrong question.
As I have said before, I don't group much due to physical difficulties with playing and the fact that my characters are never the best with reactions, put me in a stress situation and I'm likely to fumble. If I solo, I only hurt myself. I find it sad that there's content in LoTRO that I'll probably never see, but that's the way it is. Meanwhile I can craft, trade with other players, have conversations in game and, occaisionally, group in a fun situation. All things that make Multiplayer games a heck of a lot more fun than single player games.
"That is one reason to play an MMO, there are others. Being in a dynamic world where you can play the lone wolf is another, making friends and socializing is another, crafting gear for other players is yet another...there are many reasons to play these games and they aren't narrowly defined by a specific type of game play. You are dictating how people should play, and you're offering a very narrow version of what a MMO is."
" I find it sad that there's content in LoTRO that I'll probably never see, but that's the way it is. Meanwhile I can craft, trade with other players, have conversations in game and, occaisionally, group in a fun situation. All things that make Multiplayer games a heck of a lot more fun than single player games."
It sounds to me like you both want to play an interactive IRC, not a multiplayer game. You can play a 'lone wolf' in most MMOs, in original EverQuest that would have been a Necromancer or Druid, both which were great at soloing. You make friends and socialize by default when you're playing a multiplayer game, you can't ignore your team-mates or nothing gets done. Crafting is just an amusing side product of MMO's, offering the ability to make better equipment to help you in the actual game.
Just because MMO's offer these side things, don't be fooled into thinking thats what the game is there for. MMO's have been and should be focused primarily on multiplayer action, not soloing and tending to those who want to stay at level 1, chat to friends and make pretty objects while roleplaying marriage.
Have you both tried A Tale in the Desert? That might suit you more.
I play for the exploration of worlds and the adventure that comes with it.
You simply cannot find many single player RPG games with the content of an MMO. I solo most of my time or group with real life close friends. I do not enjoy catering to other peoples agendas or habits and refuse to be told by someone how to play, which is common in groups.
I love the size and freedom an MMO world provides and enjoy the many hours I can spend exploring and encountering new things. I get distracted in games very easy and fly off on tangents to do many things at once. I never follow set routes or even quest lines and I enjoy finding things out for myself. A high percentage of players on any game are playing for gain, be that loot, gold, new powers or progression. They want to find the shortest route to level 1000 and don't often care about what's around them or how superb the sun rise is over the Wetlands. these are the common people you find and end up grouping with, and these are the people I don't want to group with, not just cos I don't like them but because that is not my play style. I play these games for the journey through the worlds not for the last level.
I'm glad developers are catering for solo play and I encourage that and hope it continues.
Comments
Much?
When haven't MMORPGs been anything other than themed chat rooms?
It's not so much the fact that players can quest and craft solo as it's the complete lack of social options outside of the main game concept. Seriously, why does the multiplayer aspect have to involve killing something? Why can't there be an option for a player to run their own tavern or buy everyone a round of drinks in a tavern? Why can't people just collect and trade in-game objects that have no other function than just being rare? custom dance animations? Composing music? printing on clothes? No?...
It's really depressing to see threads like this and be confronted by the complete lack of creativity on the part of the community. Here's a thought: Maybe it's not the developer's fault for the genre getting stale.
As far as this thread goes i think EVE online is as close to perfect as it might get. You dont HAVE to group. You dont HAVE to interact at all. But in real life strength comes in numbers, strength comes from cooperation. You dont have to work with anyone. I think it comes down to a dichotomey between those who look to fantasy to escape reality and feel significant and those looking for an easily adopted alternate reality to explore the very real power struggles inherent in the human condition....
...or maby we just want to kill things.....
I told those mother #%$^% i aint never scared! i aint Nevr scared! I aint never scared!!
This is the number one reason I could not play WoW. The grouping game from 1-59 absolutely sucks, and is pretty much pointless.
Bring back the good grouping games. That's really all I like to do in an MMORPG. Nothing wrong with solo games like WoW (pre-Raid level) and obviously lots of people like that sort of gameplay, but it's not for me.
A truly multiplayer game where it's all or nothing would be amazing, but the problem is that outside factors affect how such a game would work. For instance, grouping could be a living nightmare unless everyone is one one server and there are millions of subscribers. Over time, however, there will be less new players and more veterans, making it hard for new players to find groups. I'd definitely play a game where one HAS to group, but only if finding that group isn't hell on Earth and if all classes (once again if there are any) are in high demand.
I agree with you wholeheartedly on this point Ladyattis. There is such a lack of imagination, and creativity in a lot of current MMO's, and the frustrating thing is that the potential for some really amazing games is out there.
Most of the posts on this thread have done a good and concise job, of answering your original question, and so there is not much else I can add, but for what it's worth, here's my tuppence worth.
When everything is boiled down, I think that the primary motive for software companies is money. Pure and simple. At the end of the day, the big-wigs at all these companies could not really care how innovative their product is, as long as they are getting the cash. What has this got to do with the original question about solo-ing?
Well, ever since WoW became such a commercial success, a lot of software houses decided to jump on the MMORPG band-wagon. However, instead of trying to take chances, and incorporate new aspects to these games, they figure they can use the basic formula and 'doll up' their own take on the concept. The way they see it; ' if it ain't broken, don't fix it.' Which is a crying shame, as ultimately the genre could stagnate if we just get the same ideas, over and over again.
Solo-play will probably become more and more available, so that a game can be viewed as mainstream, and friendly to the masses. There is no way you will ever get a game as demanding as, say, Lineage 2, to have the subscription numbers as WoW. The average punter wants to be able to access all that a game offers, with the minimum of effort.
I personally would like to see a balance. I do solo a lot, and a lot of MMO's are very unfriendly when it comes to new players, which makes finding a group difficult. To counter that, I often join a guild, which in my opinion is a much better way to find group members than just PUG's. So, ideally, I would like to have the choice, as some nights I may be in the mood to form a group, and others just play my own game. If Dev's can provide a fair quantity of both in these games, then I'd be happy, even more so if they experimented with the genre, and provided us with more than just your bog-standard, seek and destroy-type quests.
I'd agree with much of whats been said (and I'm a chronic soloer). The issue isn't the lack of forced grouping, it's:
1) The lack of a "virtual world"
2) The extremely narrow scope of MMO's
There's no real community, because there doesn't need to be one. You're just grinding/questing you're way to the top, so you can get in a guild and participate in some repetitive, pointless endgame. Most of your money comes from questing, most of you're gear comes from questing, and most of your xp comes from questing. Who the hell needs a community? This is basically a linear, single player RPG, with a mutiplayer option.
Neither Vanguard or EQ2 does support solo playing. Those games alow you to level your character but you will not find any decent loot in those games if you play solo.
The last time I played EQ2, there was tons of solo content. The old content is still group focused along with the raiding content, but there's loads of single/solo quest lines anyone can engage in. More than enough to level and get equipment well enough to tackle most group content as well (save for raids of course). For Vanguard, I never had issue leveling at all in a solo manner, save for dungeons, which did get sticky, but nothing like what use to be the norm for say UO in the old days or AC1 (try to tackle a swarm of lugians without buffs regardless of weapon you should choose, and you'll die *fast* from their all too often landing crits...). So, no, my examples stand pretty well on their own just by examining solo leveling guides offered for both games by players, which know their classes and the current content up to a point (it depends on whether the guide has been updated to the most recent content patches or not...). Ultimately, soloplay in these games is possible and quite easy compared to older games and their previous game rules.
-- Brede
I have to agree, this is something I've been saying to people for a while, that MMOG's are becoming unfriendly to groups and basically solo games with many players in the same area. Its completely against the design of MMOG's, read what it says, 'Massively Multiplayer Online Game'. When I see Multiplayer I immediately think I'm going to have to co-operate with other players. Look at all the other multiplayer games.
Quake Wars, Counterstrike, Unreal Tournament, all sold as multiplayer games. Can you solo in these? Of course not. How long are you going to last alone against a full team on the other side? Are you going to be able to take all the strategic points alone? No. They're multiplayer games, and if you form 'clans' then your chances of winning increase. Games such as Crysis are sold as singleplayer games, I expect to be able to fight my way through hordes of enemies alone and win.
So why do people suddenly think that MMO's are suddenly solo singleplayer games? They never used to be, and never should have become so, but someone decided that solo content should be added and now its blown out of proportion to the point where group content is in the minority. Should we be relabelling them to MSOG's?
Some people are saying that we should be able to solo because its a 'Virtual World' and that they want to live in it. But people, its not a virtual world, its a multiplayer game. Second Life is a virtual world, theres no quest system or levelling to be done in Second Life, because its not a 'game'. LOTRO is not a virtual world, its a bunch of game locations strung together. They have housing and inns purely for the fact of the last few letters, that many people seem to forget. mmoRPG. Its a multiplayer roleplaying game.
Solo content in MMO's have so killed the interaction and grouping, basically because theres no point in doing either unless you need help in getting a difficult quest of yours completed. This can especially be seen in LOTRO, where people don't respond to group calls unless they need to complete the same quest as the LFG'er. On top of that they've thrown in instanting, which further removes the people who want to group away from the population.
So what to do to fix it? Remove the quest system seen in LOTRO and EQ2 for a start, where one quest leads to the next and so on, all in a very limited area. Its very linear and does nothing for the game. Instead, bring back some of the EQ1 style quests, where you were sent all over the world tracking down named mobs or hard to reach places, places that could never be reached alone. Remove solo content after level 10 - this has given you enough time to familiarise yourself with your class and got you ready to enter into the big wide world.
Most of all, remind people what you're playing - a multiplayer game. For single player, seek out games such as Oblivion, thats where single player should remain.
"Most of all, remind people what you're playing - a multiplayer game. For single player, seek out games such as Oblivion, thats where single player should remain."
Sorry, but YOU have no control over what game I play. If I want to play by myself in an MMO there is nothing you can do to stop me. I don't knock people who are unable to handle solo play, so I don't see why you should knock people who don't care for group play. Get over yourself.
53, female, a gamer and proud of it.
I think there's plenty of room for solo play in an MMO, but what the problem is that they're trying to shoe horn the old singleplayer game concepts onto the solo experience in an MMO. So, we get the stale the static quest lines instead of a dynamic environment to conquer or player/non-player conflicts that arise from the fact that it is a world we're playing in. As such, I believe it under-utilizes both the power of the MMO 'genre' and it treats players of all types as idiots that fit neatly in one category or another (oh, you're a 'raider'. oh, you're a 'crafter', and so on...). Someday, who knows, maybe some developer will grasp that. I know I'm trying to condense it in my own project, but I doubt I'll even get half of what I would have wanted in a game. But what drives me nuts is how developers of other titles completely ignore this frustration (as to pretend it's not even there or worthy of simply getting an intern to do a bit of weekend research to find leads for future titles...). And that is what irks me more so than any other portion of the development of MMOs (the hype, the lies, and cliches...).
-- Brede
Maybe they should make a new genre, perhaps thats what developers should be doing. You can then have the MMO's, the multiplayer games, and the MSO's, which are 90% solo games with a large community that you can interact with.
Would that even work? Would probably be too hard to differentiate, unless someone set a standard that had to be mentioned as part of the game description.
"Get over yourself.." <-- was that really necessary. I wasn't being abusive to anyone.
No you aren't being abusive, however your post does sound pretty arrogant. You have a specific play style and that's fine, but you have no right to dictate how people play a game. I prefer grouping, but really I have no problem with people wanting to solo in MMOs.
The fun of multiplayer games has always been working with other players to achieve a goal. In Unreal it might be to capture a flag, in MMO's its to overcome powerful creatures and tough dungeons. If you can do that alone, you're just playing Oblivion Online.
Neither Vanguard or EQ2 does support solo playing. Those games alow you to level your character but you will not find any decent loot in those games if you play solo.
Solo content is essential to have, but so is group content and that group content has to be suitably challenging and rewarding enough to make the overhead of forming a group worthwhile.
The fun of multiplayer games has always been working with other players to achieve a goal. In Unreal it might be to capture a flag, in MMO's its to overcome powerful creatures and tough dungeons. If you can do that alone, you're just playing Oblivion Online.
That is one reason to play an MMO, there are others. Being in a dynamic world where you can play the lone wolf is another, making friends and socializing is another, crafting gear for other players is yet another...there are many reasons to play these games and they aren't narrowly defined by a specific type of game play. You are dictating how people should play, and you're offering a very narrow version of what a MMO is.
With recent successes in mmos the driving force now is money. Developers are catering more and more to solo content because it incorperates a broader spectrum of subscribers. And subscriptions sadly are what matter the most. This leads to content that encourages repetitive hooks in its gameplay.
MMO success has lead to talks of "marketing stratigies" and "subscriber retention" games aren't being designed with fun and innovation because that doesn't keep the cash rolling in. As long as developers can keep gamers paying to chase carrots then solo play repetitivness and gear loop raiding is here to stay.
Forced grouping = Nazi
My playstyle = Teamplayer
It's all about personal preferences and a game should, imo, cater to as many of them as possible.
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe. - Carl Sagan
last time I played WoW being in the sub BC level noone looks for group and everyone just solos. I find solo content mind-numbingly boring so the only choice left to me was to quit really. Its just far too easy to solo in WoW and going back to what someone else said- everyone just wants to do their own quests. -like they're just living in their own quest-world and interaction is only desired when its needed and done for as little as possible.
I did put a suggestion on the forums whereby people who helped others do quests they had already done could get a reward somehow to incent grouping, but don't think anyone listens.
Why is anything "wrong" with this? If lots of people want it (and by the popularity of solo-able as a feature, i would say lots do want it), why is it a problem for developers to give it to them?
And solo-content usually only relates to the questing/combat aspect of the MMO. May be people don't want to group when they level but want to interact with other people on AH or BG?
In any case, there is nothing "wrong" as long as people like it.
the idea is to cater to everyone. people that either want to play socially or people that want to solo. though it's not easy to solo in WoW when you hit end-game and you want all the nice gear.
____________________________________________________________________
First, multiplayers is not a synonym of teams. It means the game is played by many peoples on a server (duh !). I don't think peoples want hardcore game like the original EQ where everything was so hard that you had to constantly play in team.
Who got the time today to LFG for hours to have something done in a game? Games are supposed to be fun, having to wait for a group is boring. When i play, i want to feel i'm accomplishing something wether i have 30 minutes or 2 hours.
All MMO's should have solo and team content. This way you cather for a large audience, hardcore and causual. Releasing a game where you cant accomplish anything by yourself would remove all the casual crowd, i dont think any game developpers can afford to loose that much potential customers.
Are mmo's becoming massively singplayer ? I think you asked the wrong question.
As I have said before, I don't group much due to physical difficulties with playing and the fact that my characters are never the best with reactions, put me in a stress situation and I'm likely to fumble. If I solo, I only hurt myself. I find it sad that there's content in LoTRO that I'll probably never see, but that's the way it is. Meanwhile I can craft, trade with other players, have conversations in game and, occaisionally, group in a fun situation. All things that make Multiplayer games a heck of a lot more fun than single player games.
"That is one reason to play an MMO, there are others. Being in a dynamic world where you can play the lone wolf is another, making friends and socializing is another, crafting gear for other players is yet another...there are many reasons to play these games and they aren't narrowly defined by a specific type of game play. You are dictating how people should play, and you're offering a very narrow version of what a MMO is."
" I find it sad that there's content in LoTRO that I'll probably never see, but that's the way it is. Meanwhile I can craft, trade with other players, have conversations in game and, occaisionally, group in a fun situation. All things that make Multiplayer games a heck of a lot more fun than single player games."
It sounds to me like you both want to play an interactive IRC, not a multiplayer game. You can play a 'lone wolf' in most MMOs, in original EverQuest that would have been a Necromancer or Druid, both which were great at soloing. You make friends and socialize by default when you're playing a multiplayer game, you can't ignore your team-mates or nothing gets done. Crafting is just an amusing side product of MMO's, offering the ability to make better equipment to help you in the actual game.
Just because MMO's offer these side things, don't be fooled into thinking thats what the game is there for. MMO's have been and should be focused primarily on multiplayer action, not soloing and tending to those who want to stay at level 1, chat to friends and make pretty objects while roleplaying marriage.
Have you both tried A Tale in the Desert? That might suit you more.
I play for the exploration of worlds and the adventure that comes with it.
You simply cannot find many single player RPG games with the content of an MMO. I solo most of my time or group with real life close friends. I do not enjoy catering to other peoples agendas or habits and refuse to be told by someone how to play, which is common in groups.
I love the size and freedom an MMO world provides and enjoy the many hours I can spend exploring and encountering new things. I get distracted in games very easy and fly off on tangents to do many things at once. I never follow set routes or even quest lines and I enjoy finding things out for myself. A high percentage of players on any game are playing for gain, be that loot, gold, new powers or progression. They want to find the shortest route to level 1000 and don't often care about what's around them or how superb the sun rise is over the Wetlands. these are the common people you find and end up grouping with, and these are the people I don't want to group with, not just cos I don't like them but because that is not my play style. I play these games for the journey through the worlds not for the last level.
I'm glad developers are catering for solo play and I encourage that and hope it continues.
V