Other than FFXI , almost every mmo has soloable content so I'm not quite sure what the big fuss is all about. I think some are just paranoid that this game will be taking their subscibers away so they have to complain about something and make it known to everyone else.
I think the people saying it is heavily solo focused are using more logic than the fanboys saying it isn't. At least those saying it's a single player game are going on what has been shown. Those saying it isn't have nothing to base that on other than obscure dev references and hope.
The burden of proof falls on those who say somethign exists. If heavy/standard mmo multiplayer exists? Show it to me. A dev saying it exists does not mean it actually does. For all we know, them saying the standard mmo stuff exists means that there is one room where you can socialize, one 6v6 battleground, and 5 items you can craft. There needs to be actual examples. Screenshots, videos, detailed game systems, etc. AOC devs said there game would have meaningful lag free pvp, with minimal zoning. We all know how that turned out to be a lie.
As of right now. It's a single player game with the option to play with a few more people. It will remain that until they show otherwise.
LOL, only in your closed mind. The rest of us learned how to read, digest information, and come up with logical conclusions. Obviously a talent you are lacking. Never fear, someone will come along soon enough to spoon feed you the homer simpson version so you can get it. One of the most ignorant posts I have read outside the official boards.
No one literally believes it's going to be a single player game. We are exagerrating to get our point across. We do however believe that the game will be heavily heavily solo based where 90% of things can be done without a group at all. Which is terrible for an mmo in my opinion.
They've spent all this time telling us about solo ventures and/or two man groups. They'll randomly throw out "Oh yea, we have the other stuff to, but let's get back to the solo quests and story."
That suggests to me that actual massively multiplayer content is in the back of their minds. An afterthought.
I hope I'm wrong, I really do, but until they actually detail the massively multiplayer portions of this game I'll remain a skeptic.
90% of all content being done solo sounds a lot like pre-cu SWG to me. Actually I would say 98% of pre-cu could be soloed. Then we had the CU, which forced players into groups for decent XP (remember spin goups?), they made some mobs a bit tougher, some a bit easier, and they added lots of group content, all which people bitched about. Keep in mind this is how it is in EQ2, most of the content past 30 is raids and group type content.
I think the people saying it is heavily solo focused are using more logic than the fanboys saying it isn't. At least those saying it's a single player game are going on what has been shown. Those saying it isn't have nothing to base that on other than obscure dev references and hope.
The burden of proof falls on those who say somethign exists. If heavy/standard mmo multiplayer exists? Show it to me. A dev saying it exists does not mean it actually does. For all we know, them saying the standard mmo stuff exists means that there is one room where you can socialize, one 6v6 battleground, and 5 items you can craft. There needs to be actual examples. Screenshots, videos, detailed game systems, etc. AOC devs said there game would have meaningful lag free pvp, with minimal zoning. We all know how that turned out to be a lie.
As of right now. It's a single player game with the option to play with a few more people. It will remain that until they show otherwise.
LOL, only in your closed mind. The rest of us learned how to read, digest information, and come up with logical conclusions. Obviously a talent you are lacking. Never fear, someone will come along soon enough to spoon feed you the homer simpson version so you can get it. One of the most ignorant posts I have read outside the official boards.
No one literally believes it's going to be a single player game. We are exagerrating to get our point across. We do however believe that the game will be heavily heavily solo based where 90% of things can be done without a group at all. Which is terrible for an mmo in my opinion.
They've spent all this time telling us about solo ventures and/or two man groups. They'll randomly throw out "Oh yea, we have the other stuff to, but let's get back to the solo quests and story."
That suggests to me that actual massively multiplayer content is in the back of their minds. An afterthought.
I hope I'm wrong, I really do, but until they actually detail the massively multiplayer portions of this game I'll remain a skeptic.
90% of all content being done solo sounds a lot like pre-cu SWG to me. Actually I would say 98% of pre-cu could be soloed. Then we had the CU, which forced players into groups for decent XP (remember spin goups?), they made some mobs a bit tougher, some a bit easier, and they added lots of group content, all which people bitched about. Keep in mind this is how it is in EQ2, most of the content past 30 is raids and group type content.
Lets do a poll.
Not to me it doesn't. Most of my time was spent pvping in groups. Not solo content at all. It was world pvp, therefore unlimited group content. If that pvp had been a couple of battlegrounds, it would have run dry fast and I would have quit long before the cu.
And that poll is extremely loaded. Where is the "forced grouping if you want to complete high end" content. Don't tell me that you support being able to solo everything. I'm fine with being able to level solo, but once end-game comes you should not be able to achieve everything by yourself. Which is what I fear of this game.
When I think of solo play and group play. I think end-game. Leveling is nothing but a long boring instruction manual. It's all about end game.
I think the people saying it is heavily solo focused are using more logic than the fanboys saying it isn't. At least those saying it's a single player game are going on what has been shown. Those saying it isn't have nothing to base that on other than obscure dev references and hope.
The burden of proof falls on those who say somethign exists. If heavy/standard mmo multiplayer exists? Show it to me. A dev saying it exists does not mean it actually does. For all we know, them saying the standard mmo stuff exists means that there is one room where you can socialize, one 6v6 battleground, and 5 items you can craft. There needs to be actual examples. Screenshots, videos, detailed game systems, etc. AOC devs said there game would have meaningful lag free pvp, with minimal zoning. We all know how that turned out to be a lie.
As of right now. It's a single player game with the option to play with a few more people. It will remain that until they show otherwise.
LOL, only in your closed mind. The rest of us learned how to read, digest information, and come up with logical conclusions. Obviously a talent you are lacking. Never fear, someone will come along soon enough to spoon feed you the homer simpson version so you can get it. One of the most ignorant posts I have read outside the official boards.
No one literally believes it's going to be a single player game. We are exagerrating to get our point across. We do however believe that the game will be heavily heavily solo based where 90% of things can be done without a group at all. Which is terrible for an mmo in my opinion.
They've spent all this time telling us about solo ventures and/or two man groups. They'll randomly throw out "Oh yea, we have the other stuff to, but let's get back to the solo quests and story."
That suggests to me that actual massively multiplayer content is in the back of their minds. An afterthought.
I hope I'm wrong, I really do, but until they actually detail the massively multiplayer portions of this game I'll remain a skeptic.
90% of all content being done solo sounds a lot like pre-cu SWG to me. Actually I would say 98% of pre-cu could be soloed. Then we had the CU, which forced players into groups for decent XP (remember spin goups?), they made some mobs a bit tougher, some a bit easier, and they added lots of group content, all which people bitched about. Keep in mind this is how it is in EQ2, most of the content past 30 is raids and group type content.
Lets do a poll.
Not to me it doesn't. Most of my time was spent pvping in groups. Not solo content at all. It was world pvp, therefore unlimited group content. If that pvp had been a couple of battlegrounds, it would have run dry fast and I would have quit long before the cu.
And that poll is extremely loaded. Where is the "forced grouping if you want to complete high end" content. Don't tell me that you support being able to solo everything. I'm fine with being able to level solo, but once end-game comes you should not be able to achieve everything by yourself. Which is what I fear of this game.
When I think of solo play and group play. I think end-game. Leveling is nothing but a long boring instruction manual. It's all about end game.
To answer your question I think you should be able to level your character all the way up through your own story arc solo. It’s your character; you should be able to play how you choose, with who you choose. I do however believe that there should also be mass amounts of side quests that branch off your story arcs, or epic quests related to the large war for people who want a mix of both, like me, and a points system and rewards that show what you have done outside your story arcs.
As for PvP I think there should be plenty of contested areas where you are attackable, and areas where you can chose to become attackable since at this time there is a treaty, and it would seem some Sith and Rep forces are hostile towards each other, but not all the time. There should also be NPC that hate you both and get thrown in the mix of PvP in some cases. I also think there should be a points and ranking system that is tied to PvP and how NPC treat you, as well as what missions you get from them. There should be epic quests in contested PvP zones as well that are actually more than just, run in capture the flag without dyeing. It needs to be a mix of both solo and multi, it can’t cater to just one or the other.This is the direction I think they are taking this game, based on my understanding of what they have said. If you read every article up to this point, it sounds like the direction they want to go.
After reading that I threw up a little in my mouth.
Yup. Catering to the solo player, straight from the horses mouth. And people wonder why others are seeing this as a single player mmo? With an interview like in the link, what are people suppose to think?
I think the people saying it is heavily solo focused are using more logic than the fanboys saying it isn't. At least those saying it's a single player game are going on what has been shown. Those saying it isn't have nothing to base that on other than obscure dev references and hope.
The burden of proof falls on those who say somethign exists. If heavy/standard mmo multiplayer exists? Show it to me. A dev saying it exists does not mean it actually does. For all we know, them saying the standard mmo stuff exists means that there is one room where you can socialize, one 6v6 battleground, and 5 items you can craft. There needs to be actual examples. Screenshots, videos, detailed game systems, etc. AOC devs said there game would have meaningful lag free pvp, with minimal zoning. We all know how that turned out to be a lie.
As of right now. It's a single player game with the option to play with a few more people. It will remain that until they show otherwise.
LOL, only in your closed mind. The rest of us learned how to read, digest information, and come up with logical conclusions. Obviously a talent you are lacking. Never fear, someone will come along soon enough to spoon feed you the homer simpson version so you can get it. One of the most ignorant posts I have read outside the official boards.
No one literally believes it's going to be a single player game. We are exagerrating to get our point across. We do however believe that the game will be heavily heavily solo based where 90% of things can be done without a group at all. Which is terrible for an mmo in my opinion.
They've spent all this time telling us about solo ventures and/or two man groups. They'll randomly throw out "Oh yea, we have the other stuff to, but let's get back to the solo quests and story."
That suggests to me that actual massively multiplayer content is in the back of their minds. An afterthought.
I hope I'm wrong, I really do, but until they actually detail the massively multiplayer portions of this game I'll remain a skeptic.
Ok. Here are the basics as I see it. BW is a single player game company. This is their first foray into the MM arena. So of course they can release solo content like no ones business. They are masters of that, their RPG titles prove that. The MM area is where they are weakest. So it only stands to reason that they want to test the MM aspects of the game before they say; hey we have this and it's great!' But come game day it does not work. AOC, WAR anyone?
So, my opinion is they are not going to release any MM aspects until they have tested the hell out of them and made sure what they say they can deliver, they actually deliver. In my mind it makes perfect sense. Again, this is just my theory, of course I could be wrong but I am pretty convinced we are in for some very good surprises. All we have to do it wait a bit, and see how things play out. It really is far to early to be crying wolf over this game yet.
Again, these are my opinions and are based off what I have read thus far, and logical deduction.
Also, before some one say's it and pisses me off, I know we have seen 2 player game play so far, that in and of itself by no means constitutes massive. Unless you are with the department of homeland security, but they just make crap up as they go anyway.
Of course you have a different point of view and that's fine. Please come with an argument that make sense, If we are gonna debate this, then lets do that, not rehash the same old crap that's posted everywhere.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
What I don't like about TOR is it's graphic style. I really hate the kiddie cartoony style. I really wish Bioware would have made their own game engine instead of waisting so much cash on voice actors. Using the Heroes Journey engine instead of designing their own is disappointing.
You could use the Hero Engine with any sort of graphics you like. The game could look like AoC, WoW, LotRO, Aion, anything you can think of and still use the Hero Engine.
If Bioware had made their own engine, they would have made a copy of the Hero Engine. So, why would you want them to do that?
After reading that I threw up a little in my mouth.
Yup. Catering to the solo player, straight from the horses mouth. And people wonder why others are seeing this as a single player mmo? With an interview like in the link, what are people suppose to think?
That's an MMORPG like WoW, EQ2, LotRO, etc etc. At least that's what the non-emo crowd will see.
After reading that I threw up a little in my mouth.
Yup. Catering to the solo player, straight from the horses mouth. And people wonder why others are seeing this as a single player mmo? With an interview like in the link, what are people suppose to think?
OH NO, SOLO CONTENT /wrists.
In all seriousness wtf was you expecting, a hardcore grinder, a forced grouping MMO? Sorry neither one of those are that profitable in the west. And what I think, neither is a good idea. Let me break down what I seen from the interview. This is going to be long, so if you have ADD, you wont get past the first line.
"Schubert's talk, titled "The Loner," looked at the various reasons players would want to play alone in massively multiplayer online role-playing games. Schubert said it's a question that has been asked increasingly in the MMO community of late, with the conventional wisdom being that MMORPGs were only for those willing to group with others.
Schubert said the philosophy was so ingrained that when he worked on Shadowbane, players who reached level 25 would have a big gray shield appear over their heads that told everyone else in the world, "Yes, please come and kill me. I have no friends that will come to my aid." That has shifted in the last five years, Schubert said, pointing to World of Warcraft and Free Realms as two games that have fostered solo play in the MMO field."
Right off the bat I seen this, MMOs are reaching for a much broader appeal. MMOs no longer exclude the solo player from the game, they are kept in mind through development. Why? Not only are they a huge chunk of the MMO market, they also equal profit. And by providing an MMO that caters to certain requirements for them, they make more money, and keep people happy.
(if you are this far, you don't have ADD, congratulations!)
"There are still multiplayer evangelists, Schubert said, who look at those who want to play alone as weird scary types, "like serial killers or that No Country for Old Men guy." Instead, he said developers should look at the solo players as using a more compelling archetype, like the Lone Ranger, at which point someone in the audience pointed out that the Lone Ranger had Tonto.
"Shut the hell up," Schubert good-naturedly retorted.
Schubert stressed that there is still a magic to massively multiplayer experiences, and all MMO games need them at some point since it's the genre's differentiating quality. Also, without that multiplayer feature, MMO games are competing on an unlevel playing field against traditional single-player games. MMO designers can work on combat, but they'll never match the God of Wars or Batman: Arkham Asylums of the world, Schubert said."
Apparently us solo players are so badass we are in the ranks of "Anton Chigurh" (also if you have never watched No country for Old Men, you should, or you suck). Yet we shouldn't be seen as the bad guys, we have certain needs like other MMO players. And we have opinions just like you guys. We enjoy playing alone at times, for multiple reasons. It wouldn't be right if I started listing them due to not everybody having the same reasons. As he says we should be seen as the Lone Ranger, yes the Lone Ranger had Tonto, but don't forget companions in ToR.
He stresses that that MMOs DO need that MMO part, where at some point you interact with other players. So BioWare is very aware the game has to appeal to those wanting an MMO. Again they recognize if they put forth a game with nothing but solo play and a monthly fee it would never compete.
"That said, Schubert specified that it is "unacceptable" to make an MMO game today that doesn't have a "significant chunk of gameplay" accessible to the solo player. He didn't suggest that everything be accessible to those playing alone, just that there needs to be something for all the different types of solitary gamers.
One type of loner Schubert talked about is "the new kid in town." Those players are a blank slate, he said, with no connections, no friends in the game, no clue. There's a unique social pressure to getting up to speed in any game Schubert said, and it's something a lot of people don't want to do with an audience there to mock them for every misstep. People instead need to be acclimated to the gameworld, he said. "
They need to appeal to solo players (as I said earlier remember? BROAD appeal). At the same time they need to give us a game that is notable as a MMORPG, where grouping and player interaction are part of the game. If that's not MMO-ish enough for you, they have already said persistent worlds, end game content and PvP (granted, PvP is solable, yet the option to do so makes it that much more an MMO).
"the new kid in town" in other words, potential subscribers and possibly a new player to be part of the community. At some point and time we was that very person. Some of us are more social then others and can take off quite nicely. However not everybody is, these people need more time to feel secure in there new environment. I don't think you or anybody else has the right to tell them "This game is not for you" just because they was possibly shy, slower on picking things up, was not very social(don't confuse this with Shy totally different things) or didn't have all the time in the world to play a game. People like this usually start to give in as they get settled down. But not every single one, and to keep them happy they need to given things to play with to.
"He also talked about "the Hollow Earth problem," where the later in a game's life span you start it, the more likely you are to enter a long-since-abandoned area intended for lower-level players. In such places, it's easy for a solo player to get stuck when quests expect a number of lower-level players to team up to take on more-powerful enemies.
Schubert drew a parallel to casinos, describing them as a massively multiplayer environment where 70 percent of the revenue comes from the single-player options, like slot machines. And even in that single-player environment, Schubert said casinos have been designed to feel smaller and more social, a lesson MMO games should take to heart."
Big problem in a lot of MMOs, slow locations. Every MMO has one, no matter how popular it may be. You also have to keep in mind, not everybody plays MMOs at the same time, there is reason we point out Peak Hours in MMOs.
They acknowledge that MMOs need to be done to have solo aspects, yet at the same time make them so they encourage grouping. Also 70% of the revenue, guess I called it "Not only are they a huge chunk of the MMO market, they also equal profit".
"Then there are the sociopaths, people who don't understand or care about the social conventions of the space. Schubert said all new players start as sociopaths, and designers need to take them into account and bring them up to speed. For those who understand the conventions but don't care, Schubert said developers need to address them, whether it's by changing their behavior or simply removing them from the game. "
Ok I disagree with part of this. I don't believe all new players start out anti-social, I believe some people are more comfortable with other players around, that they can go into almost any game and mingle with the community as soon as they log in. Aside from that, the people he is talking about are the people I listed earlier and said they wasn't shy. These people are not interested in you or what's going on in the community. They are usual the ones to stick with a group of real life friends or they are somebody who just wants his own space. MMOs are not all about interacting with the community, people need to stop saying this, because it has become very clear.
I know a few of these guys that are very anti-social, one of them is a friend of mine, guy has never talked in chat or party, he only speaks in vent with people he knows. The only interaction he has with the community is killing them, but there is nothing social about that.
"Some players want to play alone just because they can't group with others. People on a strict timetable, playing at unusual hours, or on a business computer may want to group but can't for practical reasons. It's important for those kinds of players to progress in hour or half-hour chunks of playtime where they can squeeze it in, Schubert said."
I feel I don't really need to comment on this considering I have answered this above. Yet I will do it again, this time short and sweet. Not everybody is the same.
"The introverted crowd is also huge for MMO games, Schubert said. The majority of adult gamers are introverts, he said, and forcing them to group is something they could find uncomfortable. The way around that is to put some sort of pressure on extroverts to make first contact or to allow introverts to advertise passively, such as posting their stats online and saying they're available rather than having to seek out groups and pitch themselves to them.
Another group of solo players that Shadowbane had a problem with were adrift gamers, those whose guilds had disintegrated or who are alone unwillingly. They want to be part of a guild, raid group, corporation, or whatever, but they're in a sort of limbo and in danger of abandoning the game entirely. Schubert said the answer is better tools to help people find the right group for them and to consider allowing multiple affiliations. Regardless of how designers address the issue, Schubert said they need to give players things to do while they are between groups."
If you don't understand the whole introvert extrovert thing. I'll put it in layman's terms. Encourage social outgoing players to interact with solo anti-social players. Another method is allowing the introvert (anti-social) players post there statistics for observation and having the extrovert (social) players come to them. Get it? good.
Adrift gamers, or as I see it, people that don't have the connections or know how to find a guild. These people need a helping hand in settling in. Offering them tools, much like the introverts, to find a guild will help these players.
"Designers also need to take into account the casual people on the fence, those who want to be "part of the club" but are afraid they don't have the chops. Schubert said people want to be the key role in a big team effort but are terrified of being the weak link (the Bill Buckner of the raid, as he put it). To address that issue, Schubert said developers can ensure that casual players can compete with and get into the same recruiting pool as the hardcore players. The gap between the best of the best players and the casual ones should be "not nothing, but reasonable," Schubert said. Newbie-accessible roles (like cannon fodder, basically) that still provide value for the team are another way around the problem, he said."
And now we have the Shy players. They desperately want to be involved but are worried about multiple things, they are the next level of adrift gamers. Offering roles that are expendable and are known to be doesn't cause them much concern when they screw up. At the same time these expendable classes need to provide value, such as decent to high dps, some support skills (look at WoW, druid battle rez) and a decent easy learning curve. If you need an example of what an expendable class is, DPS, has value in groups, at the same time isn't a required class (something most shy players don't wanna be, they want to have value but not be dependate on) .
"Vacationers are another group Schubert said need to be considered with solo play. Sometimes gamers who are part of guilds and other groups want to explore the same gameworld, but on their own with a different character. Schubert cited studies that show the ideal commute to work to be about 20 minutes. For a number of people, that time alone in the car is the only time they get to be alone, to unwind between the pressures of home and the pressures of work.
There are also a number of commitment-phobic gamers who could benefit from solo play, people who don't want to make a long-term commitment or get sucked into guild drama. The emphasis some MMO games have on using voice chat is another barrier for the commitment-phobic. "
Vacationers, in other words, people that want some alone time. This one is me all the way. I enjoy being in a guild and talking to people. But I love to relax, move at my own pace and enjoy the game for myself at times. Some of us are constantly around people in our daily lives. When we enter the video game world we might feel like doing as he said "unwind" all he pressures. We also enjoy playing with others, but we are against 24/7 forced grouping to accomplish everything.
Commitment-phobic gamers, people who don't feel like being married to the game. They arn't anti-social, they arn't shy. They don't wanna be forced into something. The VOIP comment is so true, you can't even join a guild anymore with out having the requirement of some form of voice chat. I'm ok with it, but I understand for some it's not cool. So catering to them in some way is a good thing.
To wrap this up. Keep in mind just because BioWare releases an article about solo players that you group players will not be thought about. Why do people see this as a bad thing? I read nothing bad here, all I seen was a company trying to give EVERYBODY options. Something that is rare in most MMOs. I have never once seen a developer go down a list of gamers and what needs to be done to help these people.
Guys sit back and relax. Wait to taste the soup, it might have an ingredient you enjoy.
I don't think the observation is that it's "single player oriented". I think the expectation is that story line with voiceover will be stronger than any group based content such as raids or pvp.
Everyone plays through the same general storyline based on their class choice which makes largely a single player experience.
I don't think the observation is that it's "single player oriented". I think the expectation is that story line with voiceover will be stronger than any group based content such as raids or pvp. Everyone plays through the same general storyline based on their class choice which makes largely a single player experience.
Unless you recruit help. You know there are gonna be plenty of players wanting to check out other class story arcs.
After reading that I threw up a little in my mouth.
Yup. Catering to the solo player, straight from the horses mouth. And people wonder why others are seeing this as a single player mmo? With an interview like in the link, what are people suppose to think?
OH NO, SOLO CONTENT /wrists.
In all seriousness wtf was you expecting, a hardcore grinder, a forced grouping MMO? Sorry neither one of those are that profitable in the west. And what I think, neither is a good idea. Let me break down what I seen from the interview. This is going to be long, so if you have ADD, you wont get past the first line.
"Schubert's talk, titled "The Loner," looked at the various reasons players would want to play alone in massively multiplayer online role-playing games. Schubert said it's a question that has been asked increasingly in the MMO community of late, with the conventional wisdom being that MMORPGs were only for those willing to group with others.
Schubert said the philosophy was so ingrained that when he worked on Shadowbane, players who reached level 25 would have a big gray shield appear over their heads that told everyone else in the world, "Yes, please come and kill me. I have no friends that will come to my aid." That has shifted in the last five years, Schubert said, pointing to World of Warcraft and Free Realms as two games that have fostered solo play in the MMO field."
Right off the bat I seen this, MMOs are reaching for a much broader appeal. MMOs no longer exclude the solo player from the game, they are kept in mind through development. Why? Not only are they a huge chunk of the MMO market, they also equal profit. And by providing an MMO that caters to certain requirements for them, they make more money, and keep people happy.
(if you are this far, you don't have ADD, congratulations!)
"There are still multiplayer evangelists, Schubert said, who look at those who want to play alone as weird scary types, "like serial killers or that No Country for Old Men guy." Instead, he said developers should look at the solo players as using a more compelling archetype, like the Lone Ranger, at which point someone in the audience pointed out that the Lone Ranger had Tonto.
"Shut the hell up," Schubert good-naturedly retorted.
Schubert stressed that there is still a magic to massively multiplayer experiences, and all MMO games need them at some point since it's the genre's differentiating quality. Also, without that multiplayer feature, MMO games are competing on an unlevel playing field against traditional single-player games. MMO designers can work on combat, but they'll never match the God of Wars or Batman: Arkham Asylums of the world, Schubert said."
Apparently us solo players are so badass we are in the ranks of "Anton Chigurh" (also if you have never watched No country for Old Men, you should, or you suck). Yet we shouldn't be seen as the bad guys, we have certain needs like other MMO players. And we have opinions just like you guys. We enjoy playing alone at times, for multiple reasons. It wouldn't be right if I started listing them due to not everybody having the same reasons. As he says we should be seen as the Lone Ranger, yes the Lone Ranger had Tonto, but don't forget companions in ToR.
He stresses that that MMOs DO need that MMO part, where at some point you interact with other players. So BioWare is very aware the game has to appeal to those wanting an MMO. Again they recognize if they put forth a game with nothing but solo play and a monthly fee it would never compete.
"That said, Schubert specified that it is "unacceptable" to make an MMO game today that doesn't have a "significant chunk of gameplay" accessible to the solo player. He didn't suggest that everything be accessible to those playing alone, just that there needs to be something for all the different types of solitary gamers.
One type of loner Schubert talked about is "the new kid in town." Those players are a blank slate, he said, with no connections, no friends in the game, no clue. There's a unique social pressure to getting up to speed in any game Schubert said, and it's something a lot of people don't want to do with an audience there to mock them for every misstep. People instead need to be acclimated to the gameworld, he said. "
They need to appeal to solo players (as I said earlier remember? BROAD appeal). At the same time they need to give us a game that is notable as a MMORPG, where grouping and player interaction are part of the game. If that's not MMO-ish enough for you, they have already said persistent worlds, end game content and PvP (granted, PvP is solable, yet the option to do so makes it that much more an MMO).
"the new kid in town" in other words, potential subscribers and possibly a new player to be part of the community. At some point and time we was that very person. Some of us are more social then others and can take off quite nicely. However not everybody is, these people need more time to feel secure in there new environment. I don't think you or anybody else has the right to tell them "This game is not for you" just because they was possibly shy, slower on picking things up, was not very social(don't confuse this with Shy totally different things) or didn't have all the time in the world to play a game. People like this usually start to give in as they get settled down. But not every single one, and to keep them happy they need to given things to play with to.
"He also talked about "the Hollow Earth problem," where the later in a game's life span you start it, the more likely you are to enter a long-since-abandoned area intended for lower-level players. In such places, it's easy for a solo player to get stuck when quests expect a number of lower-level players to team up to take on more-powerful enemies.
Schubert drew a parallel to casinos, describing them as a massively multiplayer environment where 70 percent of the revenue comes from the single-player options, like slot machines. And even in that single-player environment, Schubert said casinos have been designed to feel smaller and more social, a lesson MMO games should take to heart."
Big problem in a lot of MMOs, slow locations. Every MMO has one, no matter how popular it may be. You also have to keep in mind, not everybody plays MMOs at the same time, there is reason we point out Peak Hours in MMOs.
They acknowledge that MMOs need to be done to have solo aspects, yet at the same time make them so they encourage grouping. Also 70% of the revenue, guess I called it "Not only are they a huge chunk of the MMO market, they also equal profit".
"Then there are the sociopaths, people who don't understand or care about the social conventions of the space. Schubert said all new players start as sociopaths, and designers need to take them into account and bring them up to speed. For those who understand the conventions but don't care, Schubert said developers need to address them, whether it's by changing their behavior or simply removing them from the game. "
Ok I disagree with part of this. I don't believe all new players start out anti-social, I believe some people are more comfortable with other players around, that they can go into almost any game and mingle with the community as soon as they log in. Aside from that, the people he is talking about are the people I listed earlier and said they wasn't shy. These people are not interested in you or what's going on in the community. They are usual the ones to stick with a group of real life friends or they are somebody who just wants his own space. MMOs are not all about interacting with the community, people need to stop saying this, because it has become very clear.
I know a few of these guys that are very anti-social, one of them is a friend of mine, guy has never talked in chat or party, he only speaks in vent with people he knows. The only interaction he has with the community is killing them, but there is nothing social about that.
"Some players want to play alone just because they can't group with others. People on a strict timetable, playing at unusual hours, or on a business computer may want to group but can't for practical reasons. It's important for those kinds of players to progress in hour or half-hour chunks of playtime where they can squeeze it in, Schubert said."
I feel I don't really need to comment on this considering I have answered this above. Yet I will do it again, this time short and sweet. Not everybody is the same.
"The introverted crowd is also huge for MMO games, Schubert said. The majority of adult gamers are introverts, he said, and forcing them to group is something they could find uncomfortable. The way around that is to put some sort of pressure on extroverts to make first contact or to allow introverts to advertise passively, such as posting their stats online and saying they're available rather than having to seek out groups and pitch themselves to them.
Another group of solo players that Shadowbane had a problem with were adrift gamers, those whose guilds had disintegrated or who are alone unwillingly. They want to be part of a guild, raid group, corporation, or whatever, but they're in a sort of limbo and in danger of abandoning the game entirely. Schubert said the answer is better tools to help people find the right group for them and to consider allowing multiple affiliations. Regardless of how designers address the issue, Schubert said they need to give players things to do while they are between groups."
If you don't understand the whole introvert extrovert thing. I'll put it in layman's terms. Encourage social outgoing players to interact with solo anti-social players. Another method is allowing the introvert (anti-social) players post there statistics for observation and having the extrovert (social) players come to them. Get it? good.
Adrift gamers, or as I see it, people that don't have the connections or know how to find a guild. These people need a helping hand in settling in. Offering them tools, much like the introverts, to find a guild will help these players.
"Designers also need to take into account the casual people on the fence, those who want to be "part of the club" but are afraid they don't have the chops. Schubert said people want to be the key role in a big team effort but are terrified of being the weak link (the Bill Buckner of the raid, as he put it). To address that issue, Schubert said developers can ensure that casual players can compete with and get into the same recruiting pool as the hardcore players. The gap between the best of the best players and the casual ones should be "not nothing, but reasonable," Schubert said. Newbie-accessible roles (like cannon fodder, basically) that still provide value for the team are another way around the problem, he said."
And now we have the Shy players. They desperately want to be involved but are worried about multiple things, they are the next level of adrift gamers. Offering roles that are expendable and are known to be doesn't cause them much concern when they screw up. At the same time these expendable classes need to provide value, such as decent to high dps, some support skills (look at WoW, druid battle rez) and a decent easy learning curve. If you need an example of what an expendable class is, DPS, has value in groups, at the same time isn't a required class (something most shy players don't wanna be, they want to have value but not be dependate on) .
"Vacationers are another group Schubert said need to be considered with solo play. Sometimes gamers who are part of guilds and other groups want to explore the same gameworld, but on their own with a different character. Schubert cited studies that show the ideal commute to work to be about 20 minutes. For a number of people, that time alone in the car is the only time they get to be alone, to unwind between the pressures of home and the pressures of work.
There are also a number of commitment-phobic gamers who could benefit from solo play, people who don't want to make a long-term commitment or get sucked into guild drama. The emphasis some MMO games have on using voice chat is another barrier for the commitment-phobic. "
Vacationers, in other words, people that want some alone time. This one is me all the way. I enjoy being in a guild and talking to people. But I love to relax, move at my own pace and enjoy the game for myself at times. Some of us are constantly around people in our daily lives. When we enter the video game world we might feel like doing as he said "unwind" all he pressures. We also enjoy playing with others, but we are against 24/7 forced grouping to accomplish everything.
Commitment-phobic gamers, people who don't feel like being married to the game. They arn't anti-social, they arn't shy. They don't wanna be forced into something. The VOIP comment is so true, you can't even join a guild anymore with out having the requirement of some form of voice chat. I'm ok with it, but I understand for some it's not cool. So catering to them in some way is a good thing.
To wrap this up. Keep in mind just because BioWare releases an article about solo players that you group players will not be thought about. Why do people see this as a bad thing? I read nothing bad here, all I seen was a company trying to give EVERYBODY options. Something that is rare in most MMOs. I have never once seen a developer go down a list of gamers and what needs to be done to help these people.
Guys sit back and relax. Wait to taste the soup, it might have an ingredient you enjoy.
Woah, hold on there Anton (great movie btw). No where did I say that it's wrong to be a solo player nor did I say I was against solo gameplay. I was merely pointing out an obvious fact as to why people are seeing this as a single player MMO. Which in a certain context it is if a single player will be able to complete all quest lines without the need of a group.
So yes, I can see why people see this as a single player mmo as per the question in the topic's title. No, I do not think it's really a bad thing since, like you said, they are trying to appeal to broader audience and a group that is typically ignored.
Originally posted by greed0104 I read nothing bad here, all I seen was a company trying to give EVERYBODY options. Something that is rare in most MMOs. I have never once seen a developer go down a list of gamers and what needs to be done to help these people.
Making a game with solo content is rare these days? Every MMO I have played since EQ has been soloable to the max level. I really don't have a problem with people being able to solo. Some people just have zero social skills so its probably better for everyone that games no longer force you to group to progress. The only options that the devs have gone indepth about is the solo experience, so its hard to say that they are trying to give everyone options. I know they have said there will be grouping but the only details on that were two people. A game designed for one or two people doesnt sound too appealing to me.
I still plan on playing TOR once it comes out but from all the info posted from the devs, I fear they are taking up where WoW left off in destroying medium to large communities.
Woah, hold on there Anton (great movie btw). No where did I say that it's wrong to be a solo player nor did I say I was against solo gameplay. I was merely pointing out an obvious fact as to why people are seeing this as a single player MMO. Which in a certain context it is if a single player will be able to complete all quest lines without the need of a group. So yes, I can see why people see this as a single player mmo as per the question in the topic's title. No, I do not think it's really a bad thing since, like you said, they are trying to appeal to broader audience and a group that is typically ignored.
Not saying you was claiming it to be. I wasn't necessarily pointing at you. I quoted you because of the many things said in that entire article about how much ToR will be an MMO.
People are twisting the word Single Player. Soloing is an option, grouping is an option. You are being given nothing but options. Not everybody will like them, but giving a wide range of possible paths to take is more appealing then being forced to group for everything. Grouping quests most certainly will be in the game, but as I said, it will be an option. People are calling the game a Single Player because it is giving people the option to enjoy the game for themselves. But in reality a Single Player game would have no player interaction. People can label the game a Single Player until release I don't care, because the day it releases and me and a few friends, and the other followers, hop into the game and take the option to group and interact with other players, people will be singing a different tune.
Originally posted by greed0104 I read nothing bad here, all I seen was a company trying to give EVERYBODY options. Something that is rare in most MMOs. I have never once seen a developer go down a list of gamers and what needs to be done to help these people.
Making a game with solo content is rare these days? Every MMO I have played since EQ has been soloable to the max level. I really don't have a problem with people being able to solo. Some people just have zero social skills so its probably better for everyone that games no longer force you to group to progress. The only options that the devs have gone indepth about is the solo experience, so its hard to say that they are trying to give everyone options. I know they have said there will be grouping but the only details on that were two people. A game designed for one or two people doesnt sound too appealing to me.
I still plan on playing TOR once it comes out but from all the info posted from the devs, I fear they are taking up where WoW left off in destroying medium to large communities.
Making a game accessible and recognizing everybody is rare. And my point went over your head, I won't comment on EQ because I have never played it, I would say the most soloable game on the market atm is WoW. Yet some people do not like to group, so gathering badges can become some what difficult for them. And BioWare wants to add options for these type of players to be on the same playing field.
I think groupers should get great rewards, I think soloers that work hard should get the same.
After reading that I threw up a little in my mouth.
Yup. Catering to the solo player, straight from the horses mouth. And people wonder why others are seeing this as a single player mmo? With an interview like in the link, what are people suppose to think?
OH NO, SOLO CONTENT /wrists.
In all seriousness wtf was you expecting, a hardcore grinder, a forced grouping MMO? Sorry neither one of those are that profitable in the west. And what I think, neither is a good idea. Let me break down what I seen from the interview. This is going to be long, so if you have ADD, you wont get past the first line.
"Schubert's talk, titled "The Loner," looked at the various reasons players would want to play alone in massively multiplayer online role-playing games. Schubert said it's a question that has been asked increasingly in the MMO community of late, with the conventional wisdom being that MMORPGs were only for those willing to group with others.
Schubert said the philosophy was so ingrained that when he worked on Shadowbane, players who reached level 25 would have a big gray shield appear over their heads that told everyone else in the world, "Yes, please come and kill me. I have no friends that will come to my aid." That has shifted in the last five years, Schubert said, pointing to World of Warcraft and Free Realms as two games that have fostered solo play in the MMO field."
Well, if I wanted a good solo MMO I wouldn't need to hang around on these forums, I'd just go play WoW.
Woah, hold on there Anton (great movie btw). No where did I say that it's wrong to be a solo player nor did I say I was against solo gameplay. I was merely pointing out an obvious fact as to why people are seeing this as a single player MMO. Which in a certain context it is if a single player will be able to complete all quest lines without the need of a group. So yes, I can see why people see this as a single player mmo as per the question in the topic's title. No, I do not think it's really a bad thing since, like you said, they are trying to appeal to broader audience and a group that is typically ignored.
Not saying you was claiming it to be. I wasn't necessarily pointing at you. I quoted you because of the many things said in that entire article about how much ToR will be an MMO.
People are twisting the word Single Player. Soloing is an option, grouping is an option. You are being given nothing but options. Not everybody will like them, but giving a wide range of possible paths to take is more appealing then being forced to group for everything. Grouping quests most certainly will be in the game, but as I said, it will be an option. People are calling the game a Single Player because it is giving people the option to enjoy the game for themselves. But in reality a Single Player game would have no player interaction. People can label the game a Single Player until release I don't care, because the day it releases and me and a few friends, and the other followers, hop into the game and take the option to group and interact with other players, people will be singing a different tune.
"Forced grouping" = I want an "option" that makes it just as easy to solo as grouping, therefore making grouping a waste of time because it always takes longer to do something in a group than solo.
For grouping to be an actual "option" IMO the rewards for grouping must take into account the time it takes to group, not just the time it takes to do the group content.
In other words, I killed 100 mobs solo in an hour, got 100 xp points. OR I can group with 6 players, kill 600 mobs in an hour, each player gets 100 xp points.
This is equal, and each is an "option" right?
No, the group players in this scenario lost xp because while the solo player is killing 100 mobs in an hour, and the group is killing 100 mobs in an hour each, the group spent an additional 30 minutes organizing and not killing anything.
Therefore the "option" to group, is the "option" to gimp yourself.
"Forced grouping" = I want an "option" that makes it just as easy to solo as grouping, therefore making grouping a waste of time because it always takes longer to do something in a group than solo. For grouping to be an actual "option" IMO the rewards for grouping must take into account the time it takes to group, not just the time it takes to do the group content. In other words, I killed 100 mobs solo in an hour, got 100 xp points. OR I can group with 6 players, kill 600 mobs in an hour, each player gets 100 xp points. This is equal, and each is an "option" right? No, the group players in this scenario lost xp because while the solo player is killing 100 mobs in an hour, and the group is killing 100 mobs in an hour each, the group spent an additional 30 minutes organizing and not killing anything. Therefore the "option" to group, is the "option" to gimp yourself.
Grouping shouldn't buy you the right to anything better, I think an alternative that requires dedication and/or skill should be added for solo players, hence an option. And through dedication and/or skill, they can collect the same rewards. XP is an entirely different subject, I was talking about gear and quests. Most themepark games revolve around quests, and these quests serve a large percentage of your XP. Again, I was talking about grouping as an option for quests and gear, not farming mobs for hours on end. If you want increased XP for having others carry you around then make a suggestion to bioware.
We are going on 2010 I'm hoping the "grind" has evolved a bit and isn't so reliant on mob kills when the game could be loaded with quests that are a far better option then mindless mob grinding. And by doing something as enjoyable as quests (deep story, bioware blah blah) you won't be looking at the time every 10 minutes because you're bored out of your mind. But yeah, w/e give an option to grind mobs and get good xp when grouped, I'm not against it.
"Forced grouping" = I want an "option" that makes it just as easy to solo as grouping, therefore making grouping a waste of time because it always takes longer to do something in a group than solo. For grouping to be an actual "option" IMO the rewards for grouping must take into account the time it takes to group, not just the time it takes to do the group content. In other words, I killed 100 mobs solo in an hour, got 100 xp points. OR I can group with 6 players, kill 600 mobs in an hour, each player gets 100 xp points. This is equal, and each is an "option" right? No, the group players in this scenario lost xp because while the solo player is killing 100 mobs in an hour, and the group is killing 100 mobs in an hour each, the group spent an additional 30 minutes organizing and not killing anything. Therefore the "option" to group, is the "option" to gimp yourself.
Grouping shouldn't buy you the right to anything better, I think an alternative that requires dedication and/or skill should be added for solo players, hence an option. And through dedication and/or skill, they can collect the same rewards. XP is an entirely different subject, I was talking about gear and quests. Most themepark games revolve around quests, and these quests serve a large percentage of your XP. Again, I was talking about grouping as an option for quests and gear, not farming mobs for hours on end. If you want increased XP for having others carry you around then make a suggestion to bioware.
We are going on 2010 I'm hoping the "grind" has evolved a bit and isn't so reliant on mob kills when the game could be loaded with quests that are a far better option then mindless mob grinding. And by doing something as enjoyable as quests (deep story, bioware blah blah) you won't be looking at the time every 10 minutes because you're bored out of your mind. But yeah, w/e give an option to grind mobs and get good xp when grouped, I'm not against it.
Everything in an MMORPG = time.
XP, Gear, quests, all require the same commodity, time. And they all get you the same thing, advancement, i.e. you become more powerful than you were before.
Quest grinding or mob grinding are no different, other than one has an NPC that tells a story now and then, and the other does not.
So again, your "option" sounds like the option ot gimp yourself if you take the time to organize and maintain a group, since you do not advocate rewarding players for this time spent, and all MMORPG rewards = time.
"Forced grouping" = I want an "option" that makes it just as easy to solo as grouping, therefore making grouping a waste of time because it always takes longer to do something in a group than solo. For grouping to be an actual "option" IMO the rewards for grouping must take into account the time it takes to group, not just the time it takes to do the group content. In other words, I killed 100 mobs solo in an hour, got 100 xp points. OR I can group with 6 players, kill 600 mobs in an hour, each player gets 100 xp points. This is equal, and each is an "option" right? No, the group players in this scenario lost xp because while the solo player is killing 100 mobs in an hour, and the group is killing 100 mobs in an hour each, the group spent an additional 30 minutes organizing and not killing anything. Therefore the "option" to group, is the "option" to gimp yourself.
Grouping shouldn't buy you the right to anything better, I think an alternative that requires dedication and/or skill should be added for solo players, hence an option. And through dedication and/or skill, they can collect the same rewards. XP is an entirely different subject, I was talking about gear and quests. Most themepark games revolve around quests, and these quests serve a large percentage of your XP. Again, I was talking about grouping as an option for quests and gear, not farming mobs for hours on end. If you want increased XP for having others carry you around then make a suggestion to bioware.
We are going on 2010 I'm hoping the "grind" has evolved a bit and isn't so reliant on mob kills when the game could be loaded with quests that are a far better option then mindless mob grinding. And by doing something as enjoyable as quests (deep story, bioware blah blah) you won't be looking at the time every 10 minutes because you're bored out of your mind. But yeah, w/e give an option to grind mobs and get good xp when grouped, I'm not against it.
Everything in an MMORPG = time.
XP, Gear, quests, all require the same commodity, time. And they all get you the same thing, advancement, i.e. you become more powerful than you were before.
Quest grinding or mob grinding are no different, other than one has an NPC that tells a story now and then, and the other does not.
So again, your "option" sounds like the option ot gimp yourself if you take the time to organize and maintain a group, since you do not advocate rewarding players for this time spent, and all MMORPG rewards = time.
So your complaint is about time? Again make a SUGGESTION, ok? I never said one or the other was a better choice, just that they were options. I don't group to go any faster (even though I have grouped from 10-70 in WoW and leveled a lot faster) I group for the enjoyment. That's where we differ.
Mob grinding and questing are way different. Where you could grind mobs for an hour walk away with half your level completed or quest for an hour and actually get an entire level. I know not every game works this way, but considering ToR will be a story game, I'm almost certain it will be a questing game. Complaining about how long it takes you to get a group together, imo, is not really a problem with the game. Make friends, build a static group, join a guild etc. I have been in the same situation of "LFG" for something, never found one or It may have taken an hour, at the same time I didn't think "well damn I should be rewarded for waiting".
All will be answered if you read the whole article
BioWare’s Blaine Christine Talks Heroism, Villainy, and Why You Would Play Anything But a Jedi in Star Wars: The Old Republic
/snip
The MMO Gamer: From the beginning, BioWare has always pitched story as the centerpiece of the game. But you’ve also said that this is going to be a true, “traditional” MMO—and in a traditional MMO you spend about 99.95% of your time engaged in killing things.
So, is story really the centerpiece of the game, or is it combat?
Blaine Christine: That’s a great question, and another important point: Essentially, if we break it down, and this is really rough in terms of percentage…
We’ve talked a lot about story as we’ve delivered demos over the course of the summer, but a very important message is in terms of time spent, you’ll spend more time in story in our game because we have the fully voiced system, and we have the conversation trees instead of just getting a quest from a quest-giver that is text on screen…
But in terms of how you play the game, it’s going to be a relatively small amount of time that you’re going to spend in these conversations. Let’s say roughly 10-20%. Whereas the rest of the time, we’re assuming, you’re going to be running around.
There is exploration, there is combat, it is a wide-open world. Going to have crafting and harvesting, going to have guilds and social activities…
We certainly expect you’re going to spend a lot of time doing that. We don’t want to mislead people into thinking, there’s been speculation out there, “It just looks like a single-player game!”
We’re trying to really get the message out, all of the other stuff is there, it’s just a little harder to demo that. Of course we want to demo the coolest stuff, and things that we feel is new into an MMO, but all of the other stuff is definitely going to be there.
The MMO Gamer: To follow up a bit on some of that speculation you just mentioned…
Word association: What is the first thing that comes to mind when you hear the phrase, “Massively Single-Player Online Role-Playing Game?”
Blaine Christine: To me, right now, it’s something that I want to try to avoid. I don’t know if people perceive that as a positive or a negative, but I want to make sure that people know this is a true MMO.
Yes, there are elements… but it’s up to you as a player, right?
You’ve seen where we show conversations with multiple group members taking part, so even when you’re in story mode you can do that within your party. To me that’s still the MMO experience, and that’s what people don’t understand yet, because people haven’t seen it in context.
The MMO Gamer: So then, can you put it in context? What’s the experience going to be for the average player, the breakdown between time spent doing essentially solo activities versus group based ones?
Blaine Christine: That’s entirely up to you. We want to cater to different play styles.
Our intent is to make the game entirely solo-able. If you want to go through and solo, if you’re that type of player, you can play it as essentially a single-player experience.
Of course, you’re going to have other people running around you when you’re in the areas like Hutta, just like you would in any other MMO.
But if you choose to pursue the story on your own, you can do that.
Similarly, if you’re a social gamer, and your core gameplay is you want to get into the game, play with your guild, group up with a bunch of people, and either just do combat or do quests together, we’re going to have a lot of opportunities for group quests so that you can do that.
I got a question the other day, “Hey, if I’m really into more the crafting, harvesting, auction house type of gameplay, are you going to support that?” Absolutely.
If you want to spend a lot of time in the game being great at crafting—we haven’t talked about the specifics yet, but we’re going to have an entire system like you would expect—you’ll be able to play the game of crafting, harvesting, selling things on the auction house, do that type of gameplay, as well.
"One of the things that will be different about our game, from other MMOs, is the amount of replayability in the game. When you play like a Jedi from 1 to max, and then decide to start as a Sith, you won't see any content that will be the same. It's almost like playing a completely different game. That's going to be a big appeal to try those other classes.
Plus, since you're adventuring with your buddies that are playing other classes, they'll be telling you some of the exciting stuff they're doing. You're going to get tidbits that might really get you interested in playing one of those other classes. It's probably going to make you excited to try things out."
How are people supposed to quest together when it is like this?
The MMO Gamer: So then, can you put it in context? What’s the experience going to be for the average player, the breakdown between time spent doing essentially solo activities versus group based ones? Blaine Christine: That’s entirely up to you. We want to cater to different play styles. Our intent is to make the game entirely solo-able. If you want to go through and solo, if you’re that type of player, you can play it as essentially a single-player experience. Of course, you’re going to have other people running around you when you’re in the areas like Hutta, just like you would in any other MMO. But if you choose to pursue the story on your own, you can do that. Similarly, if you’re a social gamer, and your core gameplay is you want to get into the game, play with your guild, group up with a bunch of people, and either just do combat or do quests together, we’re going to have a lot of opportunities for group quests so that you can do that. I got a question the other day, “Hey, if I’m really into more the crafting, harvesting, auction house type of gameplay, are you going to support that?” Absolutely. If you want to spend a lot of time in the game being great at crafting—we haven’t talked about the specifics yet, but we’re going to have an entire system like you would expect—you’ll be able to play the game of crafting, harvesting, selling things on the auction house, do that type of gameplay, as well.
It is a very linear, story driven, co-op game with limited game play beyond the scope of the immediate visual world. If you think this game is going to be anything like a sandbox game or be as open as WoW, you're sadly mistaken. Also, we have only iconic classes to play. The character models are some of the worse we've seen in an MMORPG - lots of people think this. I'll bet you one bounty hunter will play like the next and look like the next - due to limited armor and clothing options and it'll reek of stagnate skill progression ala every other main stream MMORPG to date. There will be no massive worlds to explore and you can bet they will be level centric - in that you will have to be level x to go there.
People can sit and say different...but until I see otherwise - this game seems like the developers are going to make sure you play their game, follow their path they all ready laid out and most everything will be predetermined before you ever even load a character into the game.
I mean they go so far as to show you with a green box looking figure where to stand, where to kneel for cover if you play a smuggler. That is just how lame this game is.
Comments
Other than FFXI , almost every mmo has soloable content so I'm not quite sure what the big fuss is all about. I think some are just paranoid that this game will be taking their subscibers away so they have to complain about something and make it known to everyone else.
What I don't like about TOR is it's graphic style. I really hate the kiddie cartoony style.
I really wish Bioware would have made their own game engine instead of waisting so much cash on voice actors.
Using the Heroes Journey engine instead of designing their own is disappointing.
SHOHADAKU
LOL, only in your closed mind. The rest of us learned how to read, digest information, and come up with logical conclusions. Obviously a talent you are lacking. Never fear, someone will come along soon enough to spoon feed you the homer simpson version so you can get it. One of the most ignorant posts I have read outside the official boards.
No one literally believes it's going to be a single player game. We are exagerrating to get our point across. We do however believe that the game will be heavily heavily solo based where 90% of things can be done without a group at all. Which is terrible for an mmo in my opinion.
They've spent all this time telling us about solo ventures and/or two man groups. They'll randomly throw out "Oh yea, we have the other stuff to, but let's get back to the solo quests and story."
That suggests to me that actual massively multiplayer content is in the back of their minds. An afterthought.
I hope I'm wrong, I really do, but until they actually detail the massively multiplayer portions of this game I'll remain a skeptic.
90% of all content being done solo sounds a lot like pre-cu SWG to me. Actually I would say 98% of pre-cu could be soloed. Then we had the CU, which forced players into groups for decent XP (remember spin goups?), they made some mobs a bit tougher, some a bit easier, and they added lots of group content, all which people bitched about. Keep in mind this is how it is in EQ2, most of the content past 30 is raids and group type content.
Lets do a poll.
LOL, only in your closed mind. The rest of us learned how to read, digest information, and come up with logical conclusions. Obviously a talent you are lacking. Never fear, someone will come along soon enough to spoon feed you the homer simpson version so you can get it. One of the most ignorant posts I have read outside the official boards.
No one literally believes it's going to be a single player game. We are exagerrating to get our point across. We do however believe that the game will be heavily heavily solo based where 90% of things can be done without a group at all. Which is terrible for an mmo in my opinion.
They've spent all this time telling us about solo ventures and/or two man groups. They'll randomly throw out "Oh yea, we have the other stuff to, but let's get back to the solo quests and story."
That suggests to me that actual massively multiplayer content is in the back of their minds. An afterthought.
I hope I'm wrong, I really do, but until they actually detail the massively multiplayer portions of this game I'll remain a skeptic.
90% of all content being done solo sounds a lot like pre-cu SWG to me. Actually I would say 98% of pre-cu could be soloed. Then we had the CU, which forced players into groups for decent XP (remember spin goups?), they made some mobs a bit tougher, some a bit easier, and they added lots of group content, all which people bitched about. Keep in mind this is how it is in EQ2, most of the content past 30 is raids and group type content.
Lets do a poll.
Not to me it doesn't. Most of my time was spent pvping in groups. Not solo content at all. It was world pvp, therefore unlimited group content. If that pvp had been a couple of battlegrounds, it would have run dry fast and I would have quit long before the cu.
And that poll is extremely loaded. Where is the "forced grouping if you want to complete high end" content. Don't tell me that you support being able to solo everything. I'm fine with being able to level solo, but once end-game comes you should not be able to achieve everything by yourself. Which is what I fear of this game.
When I think of solo play and group play. I think end-game. Leveling is nothing but a long boring instruction manual. It's all about end game.
The Official God FAQ
LOL, only in your closed mind. The rest of us learned how to read, digest information, and come up with logical conclusions. Obviously a talent you are lacking. Never fear, someone will come along soon enough to spoon feed you the homer simpson version so you can get it. One of the most ignorant posts I have read outside the official boards.
No one literally believes it's going to be a single player game. We are exagerrating to get our point across. We do however believe that the game will be heavily heavily solo based where 90% of things can be done without a group at all. Which is terrible for an mmo in my opinion.
They've spent all this time telling us about solo ventures and/or two man groups. They'll randomly throw out "Oh yea, we have the other stuff to, but let's get back to the solo quests and story."
That suggests to me that actual massively multiplayer content is in the back of their minds. An afterthought.
I hope I'm wrong, I really do, but until they actually detail the massively multiplayer portions of this game I'll remain a skeptic.
90% of all content being done solo sounds a lot like pre-cu SWG to me. Actually I would say 98% of pre-cu could be soloed. Then we had the CU, which forced players into groups for decent XP (remember spin goups?), they made some mobs a bit tougher, some a bit easier, and they added lots of group content, all which people bitched about. Keep in mind this is how it is in EQ2, most of the content past 30 is raids and group type content.
Lets do a poll.
Not to me it doesn't. Most of my time was spent pvping in groups. Not solo content at all. It was world pvp, therefore unlimited group content. If that pvp had been a couple of battlegrounds, it would have run dry fast and I would have quit long before the cu.
And that poll is extremely loaded. Where is the "forced grouping if you want to complete high end" content. Don't tell me that you support being able to solo everything. I'm fine with being able to level solo, but once end-game comes you should not be able to achieve everything by yourself. Which is what I fear of this game.
When I think of solo play and group play. I think end-game. Leveling is nothing but a long boring instruction manual. It's all about end game.
To answer your question I think you should be able to level your character all the way up through your own story arc solo. It’s your character; you should be able to play how you choose, with who you choose. I do however believe that there should also be mass amounts of side quests that branch off your story arcs, or epic quests related to the large war for people who want a mix of both, like me, and a points system and rewards that show what you have done outside your story arcs.
As for PvP I think there should be plenty of contested areas where you are attackable, and areas where you can chose to become attackable since at this time there is a treaty, and it would seem some Sith and Rep forces are hostile towards each other, but not all the time. There should also be NPC that hate you both and get thrown in the mix of PvP in some cases. I also think there should be a points and ranking system that is tied to PvP and how NPC treat you, as well as what missions you get from them. There should be epic quests in contested PvP zones as well that are actually more than just, run in capture the flag without dyeing. It needs to be a mix of both solo and multi, it can’t cater to just one or the other.This is the direction I think they are taking this game, based on my understanding of what they have said. If you read every article up to this point, it sounds like the direction they want to go.
After reading that I threw up a little in my mouth.
Yup. Catering to the solo player, straight from the horses mouth. And people wonder why others are seeing this as a single player mmo? With an interview like in the link, what are people suppose to think?
LOL, only in your closed mind. The rest of us learned how to read, digest information, and come up with logical conclusions. Obviously a talent you are lacking. Never fear, someone will come along soon enough to spoon feed you the homer simpson version so you can get it. One of the most ignorant posts I have read outside the official boards.
No one literally believes it's going to be a single player game. We are exagerrating to get our point across. We do however believe that the game will be heavily heavily solo based where 90% of things can be done without a group at all. Which is terrible for an mmo in my opinion.
They've spent all this time telling us about solo ventures and/or two man groups. They'll randomly throw out "Oh yea, we have the other stuff to, but let's get back to the solo quests and story."
That suggests to me that actual massively multiplayer content is in the back of their minds. An afterthought.
I hope I'm wrong, I really do, but until they actually detail the massively multiplayer portions of this game I'll remain a skeptic.
Ok. Here are the basics as I see it. BW is a single player game company. This is their first foray into the MM arena. So of course they can release solo content like no ones business. They are masters of that, their RPG titles prove that. The MM area is where they are weakest. So it only stands to reason that they want to test the MM aspects of the game before they say; hey we have this and it's great!' But come game day it does not work. AOC, WAR anyone?
So, my opinion is they are not going to release any MM aspects until they have tested the hell out of them and made sure what they say they can deliver, they actually deliver. In my mind it makes perfect sense. Again, this is just my theory, of course I could be wrong but I am pretty convinced we are in for some very good surprises. All we have to do it wait a bit, and see how things play out. It really is far to early to be crying wolf over this game yet.
Again, these are my opinions and are based off what I have read thus far, and logical deduction.
Also, before some one say's it and pisses me off, I know we have seen 2 player game play so far, that in and of itself by no means constitutes massive. Unless you are with the department of homeland security, but they just make crap up as they go anyway.
Of course you have a different point of view and that's fine. Please come with an argument that make sense, If we are gonna debate this, then lets do that, not rehash the same old crap that's posted everywhere.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
You could use the Hero Engine with any sort of graphics you like. The game could look like AoC, WoW, LotRO, Aion, anything you can think of and still use the Hero Engine.
If Bioware had made their own engine, they would have made a copy of the Hero Engine. So, why would you want them to do that?
After reading that I threw up a little in my mouth.
Yup. Catering to the solo player, straight from the horses mouth. And people wonder why others are seeing this as a single player mmo? With an interview like in the link, what are people suppose to think?
That's an MMORPG like WoW, EQ2, LotRO, etc etc. At least that's what the non-emo crowd will see.
Alltern8 Blog | Star Wars Space Combat and The Old Republic | Cryptic Studios - A Pre Post-Mortem | Klingon Preview, STO's Monster Play
After reading that I threw up a little in my mouth.
Yup. Catering to the solo player, straight from the horses mouth. And people wonder why others are seeing this as a single player mmo? With an interview like in the link, what are people suppose to think?
OH NO, SOLO CONTENT /wrists.
In all seriousness wtf was you expecting, a hardcore grinder, a forced grouping MMO? Sorry neither one of those are that profitable in the west. And what I think, neither is a good idea. Let me break down what I seen from the interview. This is going to be long, so if you have ADD, you wont get past the first line.
"Schubert's talk, titled "The Loner," looked at the various reasons players would want to play alone in massively multiplayer online role-playing games. Schubert said it's a question that has been asked increasingly in the MMO community of late, with the conventional wisdom being that MMORPGs were only for those willing to group with others.
Schubert said the philosophy was so ingrained that when he worked on Shadowbane, players who reached level 25 would have a big gray shield appear over their heads that told everyone else in the world, "Yes, please come and kill me. I have no friends that will come to my aid." That has shifted in the last five years, Schubert said, pointing to World of Warcraft and Free Realms as two games that have fostered solo play in the MMO field."
Right off the bat I seen this, MMOs are reaching for a much broader appeal. MMOs no longer exclude the solo player from the game, they are kept in mind through development. Why? Not only are they a huge chunk of the MMO market, they also equal profit. And by providing an MMO that caters to certain requirements for them, they make more money, and keep people happy.
(if you are this far, you don't have ADD, congratulations!)
"There are still multiplayer evangelists, Schubert said, who look at those who want to play alone as weird scary types, "like serial killers or that No Country for Old Men guy." Instead, he said developers should look at the solo players as using a more compelling archetype, like the Lone Ranger, at which point someone in the audience pointed out that the Lone Ranger had Tonto.
"Shut the hell up," Schubert good-naturedly retorted.
Schubert stressed that there is still a magic to massively multiplayer experiences, and all MMO games need them at some point since it's the genre's differentiating quality. Also, without that multiplayer feature, MMO games are competing on an unlevel playing field against traditional single-player games. MMO designers can work on combat, but they'll never match the God of Wars or Batman: Arkham Asylums of the world, Schubert said."
Apparently us solo players are so badass we are in the ranks of "Anton Chigurh" (also if you have never watched No country for Old Men, you should, or you suck). Yet we shouldn't be seen as the bad guys, we have certain needs like other MMO players. And we have opinions just like you guys. We enjoy playing alone at times, for multiple reasons. It wouldn't be right if I started listing them due to not everybody having the same reasons. As he says we should be seen as the Lone Ranger, yes the Lone Ranger had Tonto, but don't forget companions in ToR.
He stresses that that MMOs DO need that MMO part, where at some point you interact with other players. So BioWare is very aware the game has to appeal to those wanting an MMO. Again they recognize if they put forth a game with nothing but solo play and a monthly fee it would never compete.
"That said, Schubert specified that it is "unacceptable" to make an MMO game today that doesn't have a "significant chunk of gameplay" accessible to the solo player. He didn't suggest that everything be accessible to those playing alone, just that there needs to be something for all the different types of solitary gamers.
One type of loner Schubert talked about is "the new kid in town." Those players are a blank slate, he said, with no connections, no friends in the game, no clue. There's a unique social pressure to getting up to speed in any game Schubert said, and it's something a lot of people don't want to do with an audience there to mock them for every misstep. People instead need to be acclimated to the gameworld, he said. "
They need to appeal to solo players (as I said earlier remember? BROAD appeal). At the same time they need to give us a game that is notable as a MMORPG, where grouping and player interaction are part of the game. If that's not MMO-ish enough for you, they have already said persistent worlds, end game content and PvP (granted, PvP is solable, yet the option to do so makes it that much more an MMO).
"the new kid in town" in other words, potential subscribers and possibly a new player to be part of the community. At some point and time we was that very person. Some of us are more social then others and can take off quite nicely. However not everybody is, these people need more time to feel secure in there new environment. I don't think you or anybody else has the right to tell them "This game is not for you" just because they was possibly shy, slower on picking things up, was not very social(don't confuse this with Shy totally different things) or didn't have all the time in the world to play a game. People like this usually start to give in as they get settled down. But not every single one, and to keep them happy they need to given things to play with to.
"He also talked about "the Hollow Earth problem," where the later in a game's life span you start it, the more likely you are to enter a long-since-abandoned area intended for lower-level players. In such places, it's easy for a solo player to get stuck when quests expect a number of lower-level players to team up to take on more-powerful enemies.
Schubert drew a parallel to casinos, describing them as a massively multiplayer environment where 70 percent of the revenue comes from the single-player options, like slot machines. And even in that single-player environment, Schubert said casinos have been designed to feel smaller and more social, a lesson MMO games should take to heart."
Big problem in a lot of MMOs, slow locations. Every MMO has one, no matter how popular it may be. You also have to keep in mind, not everybody plays MMOs at the same time, there is reason we point out Peak Hours in MMOs.
They acknowledge that MMOs need to be done to have solo aspects, yet at the same time make them so they encourage grouping. Also 70% of the revenue, guess I called it "Not only are they a huge chunk of the MMO market, they also equal profit".
"Then there are the sociopaths, people who don't understand or care about the social conventions of the space. Schubert said all new players start as sociopaths, and designers need to take them into account and bring them up to speed. For those who understand the conventions but don't care, Schubert said developers need to address them, whether it's by changing their behavior or simply removing them from the game. "
Ok I disagree with part of this. I don't believe all new players start out anti-social, I believe some people are more comfortable with other players around, that they can go into almost any game and mingle with the community as soon as they log in. Aside from that, the people he is talking about are the people I listed earlier and said they wasn't shy. These people are not interested in you or what's going on in the community. They are usual the ones to stick with a group of real life friends or they are somebody who just wants his own space. MMOs are not all about interacting with the community, people need to stop saying this, because it has become very clear.
I know a few of these guys that are very anti-social, one of them is a friend of mine, guy has never talked in chat or party, he only speaks in vent with people he knows. The only interaction he has with the community is killing them, but there is nothing social about that.
"Some players want to play alone just because they can't group with others. People on a strict timetable, playing at unusual hours, or on a business computer may want to group but can't for practical reasons. It's important for those kinds of players to progress in hour or half-hour chunks of playtime where they can squeeze it in, Schubert said."
I feel I don't really need to comment on this considering I have answered this above. Yet I will do it again, this time short and sweet. Not everybody is the same.
"The introverted crowd is also huge for MMO games, Schubert said. The majority of adult gamers are introverts, he said, and forcing them to group is something they could find uncomfortable. The way around that is to put some sort of pressure on extroverts to make first contact or to allow introverts to advertise passively, such as posting their stats online and saying they're available rather than having to seek out groups and pitch themselves to them.
Another group of solo players that Shadowbane had a problem with were adrift gamers, those whose guilds had disintegrated or who are alone unwillingly. They want to be part of a guild, raid group, corporation, or whatever, but they're in a sort of limbo and in danger of abandoning the game entirely. Schubert said the answer is better tools to help people find the right group for them and to consider allowing multiple affiliations. Regardless of how designers address the issue, Schubert said they need to give players things to do while they are between groups."
If you don't understand the whole introvert extrovert thing. I'll put it in layman's terms. Encourage social outgoing players to interact with solo anti-social players. Another method is allowing the introvert (anti-social) players post there statistics for observation and having the extrovert (social) players come to them. Get it? good.
Adrift gamers, or as I see it, people that don't have the connections or know how to find a guild. These people need a helping hand in settling in. Offering them tools, much like the introverts, to find a guild will help these players.
"Designers also need to take into account the casual people on the fence, those who want to be "part of the club" but are afraid they don't have the chops. Schubert said people want to be the key role in a big team effort but are terrified of being the weak link (the Bill Buckner of the raid, as he put it). To address that issue, Schubert said developers can ensure that casual players can compete with and get into the same recruiting pool as the hardcore players. The gap between the best of the best players and the casual ones should be "not nothing, but reasonable," Schubert said. Newbie-accessible roles (like cannon fodder, basically) that still provide value for the team are another way around the problem, he said."
And now we have the Shy players. They desperately want to be involved but are worried about multiple things, they are the next level of adrift gamers. Offering roles that are expendable and are known to be doesn't cause them much concern when they screw up. At the same time these expendable classes need to provide value, such as decent to high dps, some support skills (look at WoW, druid battle rez) and a decent easy learning curve. If you need an example of what an expendable class is, DPS, has value in groups, at the same time isn't a required class (something most shy players don't wanna be, they want to have value but not be dependate on) .
"Vacationers are another group Schubert said need to be considered with solo play. Sometimes gamers who are part of guilds and other groups want to explore the same gameworld, but on their own with a different character. Schubert cited studies that show the ideal commute to work to be about 20 minutes. For a number of people, that time alone in the car is the only time they get to be alone, to unwind between the pressures of home and the pressures of work.
There are also a number of commitment-phobic gamers who could benefit from solo play, people who don't want to make a long-term commitment or get sucked into guild drama. The emphasis some MMO games have on using voice chat is another barrier for the commitment-phobic. "
Vacationers, in other words, people that want some alone time. This one is me all the way. I enjoy being in a guild and talking to people. But I love to relax, move at my own pace and enjoy the game for myself at times. Some of us are constantly around people in our daily lives. When we enter the video game world we might feel like doing as he said "unwind" all he pressures. We also enjoy playing with others, but we are against 24/7 forced grouping to accomplish everything.
Commitment-phobic gamers, people who don't feel like being married to the game. They arn't anti-social, they arn't shy. They don't wanna be forced into something. The VOIP comment is so true, you can't even join a guild anymore with out having the requirement of some form of voice chat. I'm ok with it, but I understand for some it's not cool. So catering to them in some way is a good thing.
To wrap this up. Keep in mind just because BioWare releases an article about solo players that you group players will not be thought about. Why do people see this as a bad thing? I read nothing bad here, all I seen was a company trying to give EVERYBODY options. Something that is rare in most MMOs. I have never once seen a developer go down a list of gamers and what needs to be done to help these people.
Guys sit back and relax. Wait to taste the soup, it might have an ingredient you enjoy.
I don't think the observation is that it's "single player oriented". I think the expectation is that story line with voiceover will be stronger than any group based content such as raids or pvp.
Everyone plays through the same general storyline based on their class choice which makes largely a single player experience.
Unless you recruit help. You know there are gonna be plenty of players wanting to check out other class story arcs.
After reading that I threw up a little in my mouth.
Yup. Catering to the solo player, straight from the horses mouth. And people wonder why others are seeing this as a single player mmo? With an interview like in the link, what are people suppose to think?
OH NO, SOLO CONTENT /wrists.
In all seriousness wtf was you expecting, a hardcore grinder, a forced grouping MMO? Sorry neither one of those are that profitable in the west. And what I think, neither is a good idea. Let me break down what I seen from the interview. This is going to be long, so if you have ADD, you wont get past the first line.
"Schubert's talk, titled "The Loner," looked at the various reasons players would want to play alone in massively multiplayer online role-playing games. Schubert said it's a question that has been asked increasingly in the MMO community of late, with the conventional wisdom being that MMORPGs were only for those willing to group with others.
Schubert said the philosophy was so ingrained that when he worked on Shadowbane, players who reached level 25 would have a big gray shield appear over their heads that told everyone else in the world, "Yes, please come and kill me. I have no friends that will come to my aid." That has shifted in the last five years, Schubert said, pointing to World of Warcraft and Free Realms as two games that have fostered solo play in the MMO field."
Right off the bat I seen this, MMOs are reaching for a much broader appeal. MMOs no longer exclude the solo player from the game, they are kept in mind through development. Why? Not only are they a huge chunk of the MMO market, they also equal profit. And by providing an MMO that caters to certain requirements for them, they make more money, and keep people happy.
(if you are this far, you don't have ADD, congratulations!)
"There are still multiplayer evangelists, Schubert said, who look at those who want to play alone as weird scary types, "like serial killers or that No Country for Old Men guy." Instead, he said developers should look at the solo players as using a more compelling archetype, like the Lone Ranger, at which point someone in the audience pointed out that the Lone Ranger had Tonto.
"Shut the hell up," Schubert good-naturedly retorted.
Schubert stressed that there is still a magic to massively multiplayer experiences, and all MMO games need them at some point since it's the genre's differentiating quality. Also, without that multiplayer feature, MMO games are competing on an unlevel playing field against traditional single-player games. MMO designers can work on combat, but they'll never match the God of Wars or Batman: Arkham Asylums of the world, Schubert said."
Apparently us solo players are so badass we are in the ranks of "Anton Chigurh" (also if you have never watched No country for Old Men, you should, or you suck). Yet we shouldn't be seen as the bad guys, we have certain needs like other MMO players. And we have opinions just like you guys. We enjoy playing alone at times, for multiple reasons. It wouldn't be right if I started listing them due to not everybody having the same reasons. As he says we should be seen as the Lone Ranger, yes the Lone Ranger had Tonto, but don't forget companions in ToR.
He stresses that that MMOs DO need that MMO part, where at some point you interact with other players. So BioWare is very aware the game has to appeal to those wanting an MMO. Again they recognize if they put forth a game with nothing but solo play and a monthly fee it would never compete.
"That said, Schubert specified that it is "unacceptable" to make an MMO game today that doesn't have a "significant chunk of gameplay" accessible to the solo player. He didn't suggest that everything be accessible to those playing alone, just that there needs to be something for all the different types of solitary gamers.
One type of loner Schubert talked about is "the new kid in town." Those players are a blank slate, he said, with no connections, no friends in the game, no clue. There's a unique social pressure to getting up to speed in any game Schubert said, and it's something a lot of people don't want to do with an audience there to mock them for every misstep. People instead need to be acclimated to the gameworld, he said. "
They need to appeal to solo players (as I said earlier remember? BROAD appeal). At the same time they need to give us a game that is notable as a MMORPG, where grouping and player interaction are part of the game. If that's not MMO-ish enough for you, they have already said persistent worlds, end game content and PvP (granted, PvP is solable, yet the option to do so makes it that much more an MMO).
"the new kid in town" in other words, potential subscribers and possibly a new player to be part of the community. At some point and time we was that very person. Some of us are more social then others and can take off quite nicely. However not everybody is, these people need more time to feel secure in there new environment. I don't think you or anybody else has the right to tell them "This game is not for you" just because they was possibly shy, slower on picking things up, was not very social(don't confuse this with Shy totally different things) or didn't have all the time in the world to play a game. People like this usually start to give in as they get settled down. But not every single one, and to keep them happy they need to given things to play with to.
"He also talked about "the Hollow Earth problem," where the later in a game's life span you start it, the more likely you are to enter a long-since-abandoned area intended for lower-level players. In such places, it's easy for a solo player to get stuck when quests expect a number of lower-level players to team up to take on more-powerful enemies.
Schubert drew a parallel to casinos, describing them as a massively multiplayer environment where 70 percent of the revenue comes from the single-player options, like slot machines. And even in that single-player environment, Schubert said casinos have been designed to feel smaller and more social, a lesson MMO games should take to heart."
Big problem in a lot of MMOs, slow locations. Every MMO has one, no matter how popular it may be. You also have to keep in mind, not everybody plays MMOs at the same time, there is reason we point out Peak Hours in MMOs.
They acknowledge that MMOs need to be done to have solo aspects, yet at the same time make them so they encourage grouping. Also 70% of the revenue, guess I called it "Not only are they a huge chunk of the MMO market, they also equal profit".
"Then there are the sociopaths, people who don't understand or care about the social conventions of the space. Schubert said all new players start as sociopaths, and designers need to take them into account and bring them up to speed. For those who understand the conventions but don't care, Schubert said developers need to address them, whether it's by changing their behavior or simply removing them from the game. "
Ok I disagree with part of this. I don't believe all new players start out anti-social, I believe some people are more comfortable with other players around, that they can go into almost any game and mingle with the community as soon as they log in. Aside from that, the people he is talking about are the people I listed earlier and said they wasn't shy. These people are not interested in you or what's going on in the community. They are usual the ones to stick with a group of real life friends or they are somebody who just wants his own space. MMOs are not all about interacting with the community, people need to stop saying this, because it has become very clear.
I know a few of these guys that are very anti-social, one of them is a friend of mine, guy has never talked in chat or party, he only speaks in vent with people he knows. The only interaction he has with the community is killing them, but there is nothing social about that.
"Some players want to play alone just because they can't group with others. People on a strict timetable, playing at unusual hours, or on a business computer may want to group but can't for practical reasons. It's important for those kinds of players to progress in hour or half-hour chunks of playtime where they can squeeze it in, Schubert said."
I feel I don't really need to comment on this considering I have answered this above. Yet I will do it again, this time short and sweet. Not everybody is the same.
"The introverted crowd is also huge for MMO games, Schubert said. The majority of adult gamers are introverts, he said, and forcing them to group is something they could find uncomfortable. The way around that is to put some sort of pressure on extroverts to make first contact or to allow introverts to advertise passively, such as posting their stats online and saying they're available rather than having to seek out groups and pitch themselves to them.
Another group of solo players that Shadowbane had a problem with were adrift gamers, those whose guilds had disintegrated or who are alone unwillingly. They want to be part of a guild, raid group, corporation, or whatever, but they're in a sort of limbo and in danger of abandoning the game entirely. Schubert said the answer is better tools to help people find the right group for them and to consider allowing multiple affiliations. Regardless of how designers address the issue, Schubert said they need to give players things to do while they are between groups."
If you don't understand the whole introvert extrovert thing. I'll put it in layman's terms. Encourage social outgoing players to interact with solo anti-social players. Another method is allowing the introvert (anti-social) players post there statistics for observation and having the extrovert (social) players come to them. Get it? good.
Adrift gamers, or as I see it, people that don't have the connections or know how to find a guild. These people need a helping hand in settling in. Offering them tools, much like the introverts, to find a guild will help these players.
"Designers also need to take into account the casual people on the fence, those who want to be "part of the club" but are afraid they don't have the chops. Schubert said people want to be the key role in a big team effort but are terrified of being the weak link (the Bill Buckner of the raid, as he put it). To address that issue, Schubert said developers can ensure that casual players can compete with and get into the same recruiting pool as the hardcore players. The gap between the best of the best players and the casual ones should be "not nothing, but reasonable," Schubert said. Newbie-accessible roles (like cannon fodder, basically) that still provide value for the team are another way around the problem, he said."
And now we have the Shy players. They desperately want to be involved but are worried about multiple things, they are the next level of adrift gamers. Offering roles that are expendable and are known to be doesn't cause them much concern when they screw up. At the same time these expendable classes need to provide value, such as decent to high dps, some support skills (look at WoW, druid battle rez) and a decent easy learning curve. If you need an example of what an expendable class is, DPS, has value in groups, at the same time isn't a required class (something most shy players don't wanna be, they want to have value but not be dependate on) .
"Vacationers are another group Schubert said need to be considered with solo play. Sometimes gamers who are part of guilds and other groups want to explore the same gameworld, but on their own with a different character. Schubert cited studies that show the ideal commute to work to be about 20 minutes. For a number of people, that time alone in the car is the only time they get to be alone, to unwind between the pressures of home and the pressures of work.
There are also a number of commitment-phobic gamers who could benefit from solo play, people who don't want to make a long-term commitment or get sucked into guild drama. The emphasis some MMO games have on using voice chat is another barrier for the commitment-phobic. "
Vacationers, in other words, people that want some alone time. This one is me all the way. I enjoy being in a guild and talking to people. But I love to relax, move at my own pace and enjoy the game for myself at times. Some of us are constantly around people in our daily lives. When we enter the video game world we might feel like doing as he said "unwind" all he pressures. We also enjoy playing with others, but we are against 24/7 forced grouping to accomplish everything.
Commitment-phobic gamers, people who don't feel like being married to the game. They arn't anti-social, they arn't shy. They don't wanna be forced into something. The VOIP comment is so true, you can't even join a guild anymore with out having the requirement of some form of voice chat. I'm ok with it, but I understand for some it's not cool. So catering to them in some way is a good thing.
To wrap this up. Keep in mind just because BioWare releases an article about solo players that you group players will not be thought about. Why do people see this as a bad thing? I read nothing bad here, all I seen was a company trying to give EVERYBODY options. Something that is rare in most MMOs. I have never once seen a developer go down a list of gamers and what needs to be done to help these people.
Guys sit back and relax. Wait to taste the soup, it might have an ingredient you enjoy.
Woah, hold on there Anton (great movie btw). No where did I say that it's wrong to be a solo player nor did I say I was against solo gameplay. I was merely pointing out an obvious fact as to why people are seeing this as a single player MMO. Which in a certain context it is if a single player will be able to complete all quest lines without the need of a group.
So yes, I can see why people see this as a single player mmo as per the question in the topic's title. No, I do not think it's really a bad thing since, like you said, they are trying to appeal to broader audience and a group that is typically ignored.
Making a game with solo content is rare these days? Every MMO I have played since EQ has been soloable to the max level. I really don't have a problem with people being able to solo. Some people just have zero social skills so its probably better for everyone that games no longer force you to group to progress. The only options that the devs have gone indepth about is the solo experience, so its hard to say that they are trying to give everyone options. I know they have said there will be grouping but the only details on that were two people. A game designed for one or two people doesnt sound too appealing to me.
I still plan on playing TOR once it comes out but from all the info posted from the devs, I fear they are taking up where WoW left off in destroying medium to large communities.
Not saying you was claiming it to be. I wasn't necessarily pointing at you. I quoted you because of the many things said in that entire article about how much ToR will be an MMO.
People are twisting the word Single Player. Soloing is an option, grouping is an option. You are being given nothing but options. Not everybody will like them, but giving a wide range of possible paths to take is more appealing then being forced to group for everything. Grouping quests most certainly will be in the game, but as I said, it will be an option. People are calling the game a Single Player because it is giving people the option to enjoy the game for themselves. But in reality a Single Player game would have no player interaction. People can label the game a Single Player until release I don't care, because the day it releases and me and a few friends, and the other followers, hop into the game and take the option to group and interact with other players, people will be singing a different tune.
Making a game with solo content is rare these days? Every MMO I have played since EQ has been soloable to the max level. I really don't have a problem with people being able to solo. Some people just have zero social skills so its probably better for everyone that games no longer force you to group to progress. The only options that the devs have gone indepth about is the solo experience, so its hard to say that they are trying to give everyone options. I know they have said there will be grouping but the only details on that were two people. A game designed for one or two people doesnt sound too appealing to me.
I still plan on playing TOR once it comes out but from all the info posted from the devs, I fear they are taking up where WoW left off in destroying medium to large communities.
Making a game accessible and recognizing everybody is rare. And my point went over your head, I won't comment on EQ because I have never played it, I would say the most soloable game on the market atm is WoW. Yet some people do not like to group, so gathering badges can become some what difficult for them. And BioWare wants to add options for these type of players to be on the same playing field.
I think groupers should get great rewards, I think soloers that work hard should get the same.
After reading that I threw up a little in my mouth.
Yup. Catering to the solo player, straight from the horses mouth. And people wonder why others are seeing this as a single player mmo? With an interview like in the link, what are people suppose to think?
OH NO, SOLO CONTENT /wrists.
In all seriousness wtf was you expecting, a hardcore grinder, a forced grouping MMO? Sorry neither one of those are that profitable in the west. And what I think, neither is a good idea. Let me break down what I seen from the interview. This is going to be long, so if you have ADD, you wont get past the first line.
"Schubert's talk, titled "The Loner," looked at the various reasons players would want to play alone in massively multiplayer online role-playing games. Schubert said it's a question that has been asked increasingly in the MMO community of late, with the conventional wisdom being that MMORPGs were only for those willing to group with others.
Schubert said the philosophy was so ingrained that when he worked on Shadowbane, players who reached level 25 would have a big gray shield appear over their heads that told everyone else in the world, "Yes, please come and kill me. I have no friends that will come to my aid." That has shifted in the last five years, Schubert said, pointing to World of Warcraft and Free Realms as two games that have fostered solo play in the MMO field."
Well, if I wanted a good solo MMO I wouldn't need to hang around on these forums, I'd just go play WoW.
Not saying you was claiming it to be. I wasn't necessarily pointing at you. I quoted you because of the many things said in that entire article about how much ToR will be an MMO.
People are twisting the word Single Player. Soloing is an option, grouping is an option. You are being given nothing but options. Not everybody will like them, but giving a wide range of possible paths to take is more appealing then being forced to group for everything. Grouping quests most certainly will be in the game, but as I said, it will be an option. People are calling the game a Single Player because it is giving people the option to enjoy the game for themselves. But in reality a Single Player game would have no player interaction. People can label the game a Single Player until release I don't care, because the day it releases and me and a few friends, and the other followers, hop into the game and take the option to group and interact with other players, people will be singing a different tune.
"Forced grouping" = I want an "option" that makes it just as easy to solo as grouping, therefore making grouping a waste of time because it always takes longer to do something in a group than solo.
For grouping to be an actual "option" IMO the rewards for grouping must take into account the time it takes to group, not just the time it takes to do the group content.
In other words, I killed 100 mobs solo in an hour, got 100 xp points. OR I can group with 6 players, kill 600 mobs in an hour, each player gets 100 xp points.
This is equal, and each is an "option" right?
No, the group players in this scenario lost xp because while the solo player is killing 100 mobs in an hour, and the group is killing 100 mobs in an hour each, the group spent an additional 30 minutes organizing and not killing anything.
Therefore the "option" to group, is the "option" to gimp yourself.
Grouping shouldn't buy you the right to anything better, I think an alternative that requires dedication and/or skill should be added for solo players, hence an option. And through dedication and/or skill, they can collect the same rewards. XP is an entirely different subject, I was talking about gear and quests. Most themepark games revolve around quests, and these quests serve a large percentage of your XP. Again, I was talking about grouping as an option for quests and gear, not farming mobs for hours on end. If you want increased XP for having others carry you around then make a suggestion to bioware.
We are going on 2010 I'm hoping the "grind" has evolved a bit and isn't so reliant on mob kills when the game could be loaded with quests that are a far better option then mindless mob grinding. And by doing something as enjoyable as quests (deep story, bioware blah blah) you won't be looking at the time every 10 minutes because you're bored out of your mind. But yeah, w/e give an option to grind mobs and get good xp when grouped, I'm not against it.
Grouping shouldn't buy you the right to anything better, I think an alternative that requires dedication and/or skill should be added for solo players, hence an option. And through dedication and/or skill, they can collect the same rewards. XP is an entirely different subject, I was talking about gear and quests. Most themepark games revolve around quests, and these quests serve a large percentage of your XP. Again, I was talking about grouping as an option for quests and gear, not farming mobs for hours on end. If you want increased XP for having others carry you around then make a suggestion to bioware.
We are going on 2010 I'm hoping the "grind" has evolved a bit and isn't so reliant on mob kills when the game could be loaded with quests that are a far better option then mindless mob grinding. And by doing something as enjoyable as quests (deep story, bioware blah blah) you won't be looking at the time every 10 minutes because you're bored out of your mind. But yeah, w/e give an option to grind mobs and get good xp when grouped, I'm not against it.
Everything in an MMORPG = time.
XP, Gear, quests, all require the same commodity, time. And they all get you the same thing, advancement, i.e. you become more powerful than you were before.
Quest grinding or mob grinding are no different, other than one has an NPC that tells a story now and then, and the other does not.
So again, your "option" sounds like the option ot gimp yourself if you take the time to organize and maintain a group, since you do not advocate rewarding players for this time spent, and all MMORPG rewards = time.
Grouping shouldn't buy you the right to anything better, I think an alternative that requires dedication and/or skill should be added for solo players, hence an option. And through dedication and/or skill, they can collect the same rewards. XP is an entirely different subject, I was talking about gear and quests. Most themepark games revolve around quests, and these quests serve a large percentage of your XP. Again, I was talking about grouping as an option for quests and gear, not farming mobs for hours on end. If you want increased XP for having others carry you around then make a suggestion to bioware.
We are going on 2010 I'm hoping the "grind" has evolved a bit and isn't so reliant on mob kills when the game could be loaded with quests that are a far better option then mindless mob grinding. And by doing something as enjoyable as quests (deep story, bioware blah blah) you won't be looking at the time every 10 minutes because you're bored out of your mind. But yeah, w/e give an option to grind mobs and get good xp when grouped, I'm not against it.
Everything in an MMORPG = time.
XP, Gear, quests, all require the same commodity, time. And they all get you the same thing, advancement, i.e. you become more powerful than you were before.
Quest grinding or mob grinding are no different, other than one has an NPC that tells a story now and then, and the other does not.
So again, your "option" sounds like the option ot gimp yourself if you take the time to organize and maintain a group, since you do not advocate rewarding players for this time spent, and all MMORPG rewards = time.
So your complaint is about time? Again make a SUGGESTION, ok? I never said one or the other was a better choice, just that they were options. I don't group to go any faster (even though I have grouped from 10-70 in WoW and leveled a lot faster) I group for the enjoyment. That's where we differ.
Mob grinding and questing are way different. Where you could grind mobs for an hour walk away with half your level completed or quest for an hour and actually get an entire level. I know not every game works this way, but considering ToR will be a story game, I'm almost certain it will be a questing game. Complaining about how long it takes you to get a group together, imo, is not really a problem with the game. Make friends, build a static group, join a guild etc. I have been in the same situation of "LFG" for something, never found one or It may have taken an hour, at the same time I didn't think "well damn I should be rewarded for waiting".
All will be answered if you read the whole article
BioWare’s Blaine Christine Talks Heroism, Villainy, and Why You Would Play Anything But a Jedi in Star Wars: The Old Republic
/snip
The MMO Gamer: From the beginning, BioWare has always pitched story as the centerpiece of the game. But you’ve also said that this is going to be a true, “traditional” MMO—and in a traditional MMO you spend about 99.95% of your time engaged in killing things.
So, is story really the centerpiece of the game, or is it combat?
Blaine Christine: That’s a great question, and another important point: Essentially, if we break it down, and this is really rough in terms of percentage…
We’ve talked a lot about story as we’ve delivered demos over the course of the summer, but a very important message is in terms of time spent, you’ll spend more time in story in our game because we have the fully voiced system, and we have the conversation trees instead of just getting a quest from a quest-giver that is text on screen…
But in terms of how you play the game, it’s going to be a relatively small amount of time that you’re going to spend in these conversations. Let’s say roughly 10-20%. Whereas the rest of the time, we’re assuming, you’re going to be running around.
There is exploration, there is combat, it is a wide-open world. Going to have crafting and harvesting, going to have guilds and social activities…
We certainly expect you’re going to spend a lot of time doing that. We don’t want to mislead people into thinking, there’s been speculation out there, “It just looks like a single-player game!”
We’re trying to really get the message out, all of the other stuff is there, it’s just a little harder to demo that. Of course we want to demo the coolest stuff, and things that we feel is new into an MMO, but all of the other stuff is definitely going to be there.
The MMO Gamer: To follow up a bit on some of that speculation you just mentioned…
Word association: What is the first thing that comes to mind when you hear the phrase, “Massively Single-Player Online Role-Playing Game?”
Blaine Christine: To me, right now, it’s something that I want to try to avoid. I don’t know if people perceive that as a positive or a negative, but I want to make sure that people know this is a true MMO.
Yes, there are elements… but it’s up to you as a player, right?
You’ve seen where we show conversations with multiple group members taking part, so even when you’re in story mode you can do that within your party. To me that’s still the MMO experience, and that’s what people don’t understand yet, because people haven’t seen it in context.
The MMO Gamer: So then, can you put it in context? What’s the experience going to be for the average player, the breakdown between time spent doing essentially solo activities versus group based ones?
Blaine Christine: That’s entirely up to you. We want to cater to different play styles.
Our intent is to make the game entirely solo-able. If you want to go through and solo, if you’re that type of player, you can play it as essentially a single-player experience.
Of course, you’re going to have other people running around you when you’re in the areas like Hutta, just like you would in any other MMO.
But if you choose to pursue the story on your own, you can do that.
Similarly, if you’re a social gamer, and your core gameplay is you want to get into the game, play with your guild, group up with a bunch of people, and either just do combat or do quests together, we’re going to have a lot of opportunities for group quests so that you can do that.
I got a question the other day, “Hey, if I’m really into more the crafting, harvesting, auction house type of gameplay, are you going to support that?” Absolutely.
If you want to spend a lot of time in the game being great at crafting—we haven’t talked about the specifics yet, but we’re going to have an entire system like you would expect—you’ll be able to play the game of crafting, harvesting, selling things on the auction house, do that type of gameplay, as well.
I gotz a 300,000 BTU WTFBBQ!
Because of quotes like this:
"One of the things that will be different about our game, from other MMOs, is the amount of replayability in the game. When you play like a Jedi from 1 to max, and then decide to start as a Sith, you won't see any content that will be the same. It's almost like playing a completely different game. That's going to be a big appeal to try those other classes.
Plus, since you're adventuring with your buddies that are playing other classes, they'll be telling you some of the exciting stuff they're doing. You're going to get tidbits that might really get you interested in playing one of those other classes. It's probably going to make you excited to try things out."
How are people supposed to quest together when it is like this?
FAIL
The Official God FAQ
It is a very linear, story driven, co-op game with limited game play beyond the scope of the immediate visual world. If you think this game is going to be anything like a sandbox game or be as open as WoW, you're sadly mistaken. Also, we have only iconic classes to play. The character models are some of the worse we've seen in an MMORPG - lots of people think this. I'll bet you one bounty hunter will play like the next and look like the next - due to limited armor and clothing options and it'll reek of stagnate skill progression ala every other main stream MMORPG to date. There will be no massive worlds to explore and you can bet they will be level centric - in that you will have to be level x to go there.
People can sit and say different...but until I see otherwise - this game seems like the developers are going to make sure you play their game, follow their path they all ready laid out and most everything will be predetermined before you ever even load a character into the game.
I mean they go so far as to show you with a green box looking figure where to stand, where to kneel for cover if you play a smuggler. That is just how lame this game is.