Don't get me wrong, my cleverness in AO was very hit or miss, mostly I just died, and lots of times my point allocation schemes led to sheer gimpness, and my shiny new gear was often over-equipped, too. Mostly I had no spare energy or time for serious twinking, but when I did twink out a character and allocate all my points correctly and figure out how to kill much higher level mobs, it gave me a sense of accomplishment that I will never obtain from grinding same level mobs for same level gear. I'd love a game that gave that sense of accomplishment back to me.
AO was actually pretty easy to twink if you picked the right classes. Fixers, for example, were really simple. If I remember right, at level 140-150, I could easily take on 220 mobs. Stick 'em to the wall, shoot 'em from afar. Especially when grouping in the Shadowlands, you could get a group of 140ish toons and bang through 4-5 levels an hour without a single fatality.
AO was actually pretty easy to twink if you picked the right classes. Fixers, for example, were really simple. If I remember right, at level 140-150, I could easily take on 220 mobs. Stick 'em to the wall, shoot 'em from afar. Especially when grouping in the Shadowlands, you could get a group of 140ish toons and bang through 4-5 levels an hour without a single fatality.
Fixers and Enforcers were the two toons I never stayed interested in long enough to really get to know. I probably had one of each in the seventies at some point or other, but that's as far as I ever went.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
These games should all have 100% scalable content (and by that I mean all mobs) by now, in which the mob detects how many are in your group and adjusts it strength accordingly (with enhanced XPor drop buffs that themselves upscale the more people you join with to play- encouraging, not enforcing, grouping is good). This would allow everyone to play the way they want and experience the whole game according to their needs.
We should be so frikin past segregating content based on the number of people in a group (even if that 'group' is one).
The whole solo vs group vs raid debate was old 10 years ago, the devs need to solve it already.
I understand what you're saying, but there is also something to be said for letting clever soloers take on mobs way higher level, and then allow them to allocate skill points in such a way that the high level items that drop are usable at much lower levels.
Oh yes, fully agree.
Thats why I talk about content scaling in terms of numbers in a group (even a 'group' of one) and not in terms of character level.
I agree with your second point as well, that would be nice and fullypossible within the characater level system (that allocates points based on level to be distributed amongst skills)
snipped the rest for clarity, but not because I didnt enjoy reading it
I don't like to be forced to geek it up in a Guild, where it's led by some unemployed bum collecting welfare or some kid.
Oh yes, I know all about that. Was in a guild on AO led by a guy who spent all his time whining about how horrible his life was, but how bitching he was in the game. Then he used to call "guild meetings" for no real reason and get mad at people for not attending.
The whole point is that the genre was originally meant to be played in group.. You couldn't do a lot on your own back in UO, EQ, CoH and even WoW.. From it roots, MMORPGs are a PC version of pen and paper RPGs.. Where the idea was to undertake major quests with friends..
But somewhere along the way, something happenned.. Would be easy to throw rocks here and there, but let's just say the genre wanted to appeal to the masses.. And soon, every gaming studios were (and still are) heading in the same way : giving the possibility to play the game on your own...
I personnally think that the genre lost its soul in the process and now its working on getting a new personnality.. Or at least, the player base is asking for something new.. But I think the main problem comes from the fact that that switch came way too fast and those who once helped build the early MMORPGs would like to have that experience they had earlier.. And on the other hand, the "new" players are approaching every game as any other single player game where you only try to get to the end of the story, get your hands on end-game content, get another game, rinse and repeat..
Whose fault is it ? I don't know.. My guess is that it's everyone's fault why we're even having this discussion as how a MMORPG should be played... You won't have that kind of discussion over a FPS or RTS game..
I think this whole thread is kinda sad actually.. Some kind of proof that the entire genre is slowly going belly up...
As has been stated it's just so easy to solo the current crop of MMO's, you could do back in the early day's but damn it was hard, it was just so much safer and more fun to group.
I personally like the option to solo as I don't have the same free time as I did back when i was play EQ. I think the way that some of the games are allowing public grouping is encouraging as I've notice while playing RIFT that some of the groups I've joined to do a RIFT have decide to stay together and try a dungeon or to as well.
So maybe that's the way to bring grouping back in, start it in an easy casual manner and once people get the feel for it they'll start activelly looking for groups.
The whole point is that the genre was originally meant to be played in group.. You couldn't do a lot on your own back in UO, EQ, CoH and even WoW.. From it roots, MMORPGs are a PC version of pen and paper RPGs.. Where the idea was to undertake major quests with friends..
That's not the whole point of the genre and MMORPG's are not a PC version of pen and paper RPG's.
I also love the Public Groups idea in RIFT. I've had the same experience where people of the same level get grouped together automatically when an area event occurs that they have to overcome together. It is uniwue experience that I hope catches on and/or attracts more players.
Vindictus has the most wonderful balance i've seen so far imo.
You start a group destined to perform the quest you'd like, at the difficulty you'd like, with the extra challenge you'd like, and wait for a bit to see if anyone joins up for it. Level doesn't matter, and people will usually join quite swiftly.
But if they do not.. whatever! Press start and play.
Some quests actually have the extra challenge of winning solo. (The massive polar bear boss meant for 6 people was FUN!)
Playing with others is fun. If an enemy dies and leaves behind an 'evil core' EVERY player gets to pull an item from it.
Great game!! Play for free right now! You have nothing to lose
The whole point is that the genre was originally meant to be played in group.. You couldn't do a lot on your own back in UO, EQ, CoH and even WoW.. From it roots, MMORPGs are a PC version of pen and paper RPGs.. Where the idea was to undertake major quests with friends..
That's not the whole point of the genre and MMORPG's are not a PC version of pen and paper RPG's.
Absolutely true, there is nothing in MMOs that have anything whatsoever to do with PnP RPGs. About the only connection is that people who worked on them and a lot of the early players also played PnP RPGs. MMOs, rather, are a multi-player version of games like Final Fantasy. Just because they slap an RPG label on it doesn't make it an RPG.
Absolutely true, there is nothing in MMOs that have anything whatsoever to do with PnP RPGs. About the only connection is that people who worked on them and a lot of the early players also played PnP RPGs. MMOs, rather, are a multi-player version of games like Final Fantasy. Just because they slap an RPG label on it doesn't make it an RPG.
Huh? What? There's a world in common with PnP games. Let's compare D&D and EverQuest. D&D has Cleric, Druid, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Wizard, etc.. oh, so does EverQuest. D&D uses an armour class and hitpoint system.. oh, so does EverQuest. D&D is usually played by a group of people.. so is EverQuest. D&D is usually played in a fantasy world.. so is EverQuest.
And the list goes on.
Nothing whatsoever? Really? Not even a little inspiration?
Simply going with the fact that people have different interests:
Make it always possible to CHOOSE.
And I mean this like in my last thread here: PvP should also be done skillfully solo. Ofc it is hard, but it SHOULD be possible with an effort! Same goes to a certain degree to harder Mobs. Worst PvP-example at this point was/still is Age of Conan - where 1vs2 was 99,9% impossible.
Dont shut all down, like in older MMOs where you could not solo a single elite because they hit hard as a rock. Go more in the direction, like said: It stays hard - but not impossible to solo - to a certain degree (of course not raid-mobs).
Variety is what makes a game interesting. Get rid of most rules and let people have their fun.
I've already posted here, but the short version is that MMORPGs are multiplayer games hence ideally players should be together at all times. The problem is that's not very feasible, so there has to be solo content in a game in order to prevent players from simply wasting away hours doing nothing while waiting on the prospect of a group. The solution then is to encourage grouping in any way possible. Most MMORPGs like Rift, LotRO, and until the dungeon finder, WoW gave players too much incentive to solo and not enough incentive to group. Not only does this make for rather boring, one dimensional gameplay, but players get a false impression of the game itself and fail to learn how to operate in a group environment (how the classes should be balanced in the first place). Currently, WoW does a group job of finding a balance between grouping and soloing while leveling with its cross-server dungeon finder, and my feelings are that Rift will as well once Trion stops listening to the tin-foil hat loonies and implements cross-server grouping on their dungeon finder as well. When you take out the biggest annoyances of grouping (actually having to sit in town spamming for invites and dealing with impatient players) coupled with the larger pool of players to actually choose from, you have a worthy counterpoint to the advantages of soloing.
I'm all for expanding endgame activities, but If you believe that you are entitled to the same gear or the same content as group players or raiders, you're bordering on lunacy. The argument of "well, I just like being in a gameworld and seeing all the people running around" is valid, but it's just as valid as is playing an FPS because you like to write your name in bullet holes on the wall. It's great if you can do it, but the game simply isn't designed to facilitate that sort of gameplay.
I'm all for expanding endgame activities, but If you believe that you are entitled to the same gear or the same content as group players or raiders, you're bordering on lunacy. The argument of "well, I just like being in a gameworld and seeing all the people running around" is valid, but it's just as valid as is playing an FPS because you like to write your name in bullet holes on the wall. It's great if you can do it, but the game simply isn't designed to facilitate that sort of gameplay.
Maybe not, but it can be. It's not for you to decide what someone else finds fun. Lots of people find MMOs more fun than, or in addition to, FPS games.
MMOs don't have to be designed to funnel all the other playstyles towards raiding as the only endgame. There's no law that says this must be so.
All play styles should have a chance and be valid. I have no problem with grouping giving out exp bonuses or increasing the chance at better loot. I just wish we could get away from raiding being the end game for every game that comes out. I don't mind grouping with others but I should not be forced to group to do every thing in the game.. As for raiders give them their raids and just have them leave me alone. All I ask ios give me some small group or solo quests lines to get my own gear that looks great that is worth something. It does not have to have the same stats as raid gear as I don't need all the uber stas as I have no intention to raid as I have yet to experience a raiding community that I would feel comfortable belonging too. Just give us options at the end.
WOW perfected forced grouping, unless you think WOW doesn't force you to group enough and you shouldn't have to go to the bathroom solo without someone wiping......
Absolutely true, there is nothing in MMOs that have anything whatsoever to do with PnP RPGs. About the only connection is that people who worked on them and a lot of the early players also played PnP RPGs. MMOs, rather, are a multi-player version of games like Final Fantasy. Just because they slap an RPG label on it doesn't make it an RPG.
Huh? What? There's a world in common with PnP games. Let's compare D&D and EverQuest. D&D has Cleric, Druid, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Wizard, etc.. oh, so does EverQuest. D&D uses an armour class and hitpoint system.. oh, so does EverQuest. D&D is usually played by a group of people.. so is EverQuest. D&D is usually played in a fantasy world.. so is EverQuest.
And the list goes on.
Nothing whatsoever? Really? Not even a little inspiration?
That's generic fantasy setting, not inspiration. The means of play, the aims and goals, etc. are entirely different. MMOs are terribly shallow compared to PnP games.
I feel thats its all a matter of taste. Does anyone here eat pizza every night for dinner? I don't, nor do I play the same game the same way every session. Some games I've played as single player I would have loved some other players to run with (Fallout 3) and some MMORPG's that should have just been made as single player games at first.
I think that Final Fantasy Xi should have been made as Atlantica Online. FFXI should have been first a single player game, then with all the bugs worked out released it as the MMORPG, except with a party system so people could have played solo.
I feel thats its all a matter of taste. Does anyone here eat pizza every night for dinner? I don't, nor do I play the same game the same way every session. Some games I've played as single player I would have loved some other players to run with (Fallout 3) and some MMORPG's that should have just been made as single player games at first.
I think that Final Fantasy Xi should have been made as Atlantica Online. FFXI should have been first a single player game, then with all the bugs worked out released it as the MMORPG, except with a party system so people could have played solo.
Then it is definately a matter of taste, because where I come from, most people bring out FFXI as an example of how they want contemporary mmorpg's to be in regards to solo vs team play (aka they want more team play in their mmorpgs). I play MMORPGs to have fun. Dont we all?
But let's say I was a bit of a "creative" person, and I found a way to wash my dog in the washing machine, it wouldnt be fair to the manufacturers (or the breeders) to demand all dishwashers be able to wash dogs. A far stretched example, but its 3.30 am here...
MMORPG has grown far from its roots is what i'm saying. It was more like FFXI before. Now it's more like a cinema experience. 300 people go in together, but none of them interact (well, secretly perhaps? and they have no use for eachother. The others are there out of necessity - more of a burden.
I'm sorry our genre is currently going this way. I'm looking forward to another change.
MMORPG has grown far from its roots is what i'm saying. It was more like FFXI before. Now it's more like a cinema experience. 300 people go in together, but none of them interact (well, secretly perhaps? and they have no use for eachother. The others are there out of necessity - more of a burden.
I'm sorry our genre is currently going this way. I'm looking forward to another change.
I think this is correct. However, to continue your analogy, not everyone goes to the movies alone. In fact, most do not. They go with groups of friends, although some do go alone.
So the modern MMO should allow for groups and soloers. And for the most part, it does. Until the endgame. Only the groupers seem to be allowed to sit in the best seats.
For some of us, if we want to play an MMO, we simply want to play a game. We are not there to meet and interact with strangers, not all of us. If someone wants to interact with internet strangers, there are tons of programs (not just games) that allow people to do that. So it seems wrong to me to force that, or even more greatly reward that than any other aspect. It should simply be possible within the game. The game should not be rewarding it or treating it special. In a movie, the group-goers pay the same price of admission and see the same movie. The same should be true of a game.
If someone wants to play with their friends, or even their just-met new friends, the game should let them. But it should give them no more or better reward than someone who plays alone. The game's purpose should not be to facillitate meeting strangers, it should be to provide a fun experience in whatever way the paying customer wants to play. It'd be ridiculous of a movie owner or even a social club owner to say to his patrons "you must converse with, and hang out with, at least 5 others while you are here, otherwise you must sit at the back where the view is poor."
This is what MMOs currently do with their endgame. I agree with you that it is changing, but it hasn't changed far enough yet. It needs to go further still.
I think this is correct. However, to continue your analogy, not everyone goes to the movies alone. In fact, most do not. They go with groups of friends, although some do go alone.
So the modern MMO should allow for groups and soloers. And for the most part, it does. Until the endgame. Only the groupers seem to be allowed to sit in the best seats.
For some of us, if we want to play an MMO, we simply want to play a game. We are not there to meet and interact with strangers, not all of us. If someone wants to interact with internet strangers, there are tons of programs (not just games) that allow people to do that. So it seems wrong to me to force that, or even more greatly reward that than any other aspect. It should simply be possible within the game. The game should not be rewarding it or treating it special. In a movie, the group-goers pay the same price of admission and see the same movie. The same should be true of a game.
If someone wants to play with their friends, or even their just-met new friends, the game should let them. But it should give them no more or better reward than someone who plays alone. The game's purpose should not be to facillitate meeting strangers, it should be to provide a fun experience in whatever way the paying customer wants to play. It'd be ridiculous of a movie owner or even a social club owner to say to his patrons "you must converse with, and hang out with, at least 5 others while you are here, otherwise you must sit at the back where the view is poor."
This is what MMOs currently do with their endgame. I agree with you that it is changing, but it hasn't changed far enough yet. It needs to go further still.
Allow me to do the same, and expand on our now common metaphor If I go to the cinema with friends, and you go alone, during our experience in the theater, you cant really tell the difference between us. Maybe some very immature youngsters are throwing popcorn together, and a couple is making out, making it obvious they are together. The rest of us sit there, and we simply use our eyes and ears. We do nothing.
It's a socio-psychologic thing - I feel safer about my social self image if I dont go alone, but during the movie, nobody around you can tell who are friends and who arent. Maybe you whisper a short line to your pal, and you laugh together, but there is no "team work" in watching a movie. Maybe an odd couple has it: Honey, you watch for a bit now, while I take a nap. I'll take the next watch.
If someone wants to play with their friends, or even their just-met new friends, the game should let them. But it should give them no more or better reward than someone who plays alone. The game's purpose should not be to facillitate meeting strangers, it should be to provide a fun experience in whatever way the paying customer wants to play. It'd be ridiculous of a movie owner or even a social club owner to say to his patrons "you must converse with, and hang out with, at least 5 others while you are here, otherwise you must sit at the back where the view is poor."
Or for a different example:
You're good at football, you go to play for your local team but there is no team, it's just you versus the opposing team. How on earth are you supposed to beat the opposing team on your own? This is a team game. It might be entirely possible that you are just that good and can beat the rival team on your own, and as such you'll be praised for your efforts.
This is what an MMO should be like, team based challenges, we're playing a multiplayer game after all. Instead, what the casual 'footballer' is saying is, "I can't beat all them players on my own! I want to play a game of one vs one instead.". But that's not what the game is, it's a team football game, and you expect the paying fans to be happy to watch you and someone else kick a ball up and down a field? They came here for a football game, dammit!
But then the coach went, hold on, that boy wants to pay me to come and kick a ball around on his own even in this team game. Wow, I could make money off this. And so he splits the field up into twenty different sections and lets one person play in each while counting all the cash he's raking in.
The fans keep turning up expecting a football game but instead get to see a bunch of loners kicking balls back and fore. This isn't what they paid for.
If someone wants to play with their friends, or even their just-met new friends, the game should let them. But it should give them no more or better reward than someone who plays alone. The game's purpose should not be to facillitate meeting strangers, it should be to provide a fun experience in whatever way the paying customer wants to play. It'd be ridiculous of a movie owner or even a social club owner to say to his patrons "you must converse with, and hang out with, at least 5 others while you are here, otherwise you must sit at the back where the view is poor."
Or for a different example:
You're good at football, you go to play for your local team but there is no team, it's just you versus the opposing team. How on earth are you supposed to beat the opposing team on your own? This is a team game. It might be entirely possible that you are just that good and can beat the rival team on your own, and as such you'll be praised for your efforts.
This is what an MMO should be like, team based challenges, we're playing a multiplayer game after all. Instead, what the casual 'footballer' is saying is, "I can't beat all them players on my own! I want to play a game of one vs one instead.". But that's not what the game is, it's a team football game, and you expect the paying fans to be happy to watch you and someone else kick a ball up and down a field? They came here for a football game, dammit!
But then the coach went, hold on, that boy wants to pay me to come and kick a ball around on his own even in this team game. Wow, I could make money off this. And so he splits the field up into twenty different sections and lets one person play in each while counting all the cash he's raking in.
The fans keep turning up expecting a football game but instead get to see a bunch of loners kicking balls back and fore. This isn't what they paid for.
Played WOW (5 years), AOC, AO, EQ2,AC2, Horizons, Saga of Ryzom, SWG, CO, STO(Beta),ROM, Allods, and many other F2P titles. Asl been in beta for many of the main titles and played countless SP games. I have been gaming for 15+ years!
Comments
AO was actually pretty easy to twink if you picked the right classes. Fixers, for example, were really simple. If I remember right, at level 140-150, I could easily take on 220 mobs. Stick 'em to the wall, shoot 'em from afar. Especially when grouping in the Shadowlands, you could get a group of 140ish toons and bang through 4-5 levels an hour without a single fatality.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Fixers and Enforcers were the two toons I never stayed interested in long enough to really get to know. I probably had one of each in the seventies at some point or other, but that's as far as I ever went.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
I don't like to be forced to geek it up in a Guild, where it's led by some unemployed bum collecting welfare or some kid.
Oh yes, I know all about that. Was in a guild on AO led by a guy who spent all his time whining about how horrible his life was, but how bitching he was in the game. Then he used to call "guild meetings" for no real reason and get mad at people for not attending.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Thank You, I think good
Vietnam Visa , vietnam car rental
The whole point is that the genre was originally meant to be played in group.. You couldn't do a lot on your own back in UO, EQ, CoH and even WoW.. From it roots, MMORPGs are a PC version of pen and paper RPGs.. Where the idea was to undertake major quests with friends..
But somewhere along the way, something happenned.. Would be easy to throw rocks here and there, but let's just say the genre wanted to appeal to the masses.. And soon, every gaming studios were (and still are) heading in the same way : giving the possibility to play the game on your own...
I personnally think that the genre lost its soul in the process and now its working on getting a new personnality.. Or at least, the player base is asking for something new.. But I think the main problem comes from the fact that that switch came way too fast and those who once helped build the early MMORPGs would like to have that experience they had earlier.. And on the other hand, the "new" players are approaching every game as any other single player game where you only try to get to the end of the story, get your hands on end-game content, get another game, rinse and repeat..
Whose fault is it ? I don't know.. My guess is that it's everyone's fault why we're even having this discussion as how a MMORPG should be played... You won't have that kind of discussion over a FPS or RTS game..
I think this whole thread is kinda sad actually.. Some kind of proof that the entire genre is slowly going belly up...
As has been stated it's just so easy to solo the current crop of MMO's, you could do back in the early day's but damn it was hard, it was just so much safer and more fun to group.
I personally like the option to solo as I don't have the same free time as I did back when i was play EQ. I think the way that some of the games are allowing public grouping is encouraging as I've notice while playing RIFT that some of the groups I've joined to do a RIFT have decide to stay together and try a dungeon or to as well.
So maybe that's the way to bring grouping back in, start it in an easy casual manner and once people get the feel for it they'll start activelly looking for groups.
I also love the Public Groups idea in RIFT. I've had the same experience where people of the same level get grouped together automatically when an area event occurs that they have to overcome together. It is uniwue experience that I hope catches on and/or attracts more players.
Vindictus has the most wonderful balance i've seen so far imo.
You start a group destined to perform the quest you'd like, at the difficulty you'd like, with the extra challenge you'd like, and wait for a bit to see if anyone joins up for it. Level doesn't matter, and people will usually join quite swiftly.
But if they do not.. whatever! Press start and play.
Some quests actually have the extra challenge of winning solo. (The massive polar bear boss meant for 6 people was FUN!)
Playing with others is fun. If an enemy dies and leaves behind an 'evil core' EVERY player gets to pull an item from it.
Great game!! Play for free right now! You have nothing to lose
Absolutely true, there is nothing in MMOs that have anything whatsoever to do with PnP RPGs. About the only connection is that people who worked on them and a lot of the early players also played PnP RPGs. MMOs, rather, are a multi-player version of games like Final Fantasy. Just because they slap an RPG label on it doesn't make it an RPG.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Huh? What? There's a world in common with PnP games. Let's compare D&D and EverQuest. D&D has Cleric, Druid, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Wizard, etc.. oh, so does EverQuest. D&D uses an armour class and hitpoint system.. oh, so does EverQuest. D&D is usually played by a group of people.. so is EverQuest. D&D is usually played in a fantasy world.. so is EverQuest.
And the list goes on.
Nothing whatsoever? Really? Not even a little inspiration?
Simply going with the fact that people have different interests:
Make it always possible to CHOOSE.
And I mean this like in my last thread here: PvP should also be done skillfully solo. Ofc it is hard, but it SHOULD be possible with an effort! Same goes to a certain degree to harder Mobs. Worst PvP-example at this point was/still is Age of Conan - where 1vs2 was 99,9% impossible.
Dont shut all down, like in older MMOs where you could not solo a single elite because they hit hard as a rock. Go more in the direction, like said: It stays hard - but not impossible to solo - to a certain degree (of course not raid-mobs).
Variety is what makes a game interesting. Get rid of most rules and let people have their fun.
I've already posted here, but the short version is that MMORPGs are multiplayer games hence ideally players should be together at all times. The problem is that's not very feasible, so there has to be solo content in a game in order to prevent players from simply wasting away hours doing nothing while waiting on the prospect of a group. The solution then is to encourage grouping in any way possible. Most MMORPGs like Rift, LotRO, and until the dungeon finder, WoW gave players too much incentive to solo and not enough incentive to group. Not only does this make for rather boring, one dimensional gameplay, but players get a false impression of the game itself and fail to learn how to operate in a group environment (how the classes should be balanced in the first place). Currently, WoW does a group job of finding a balance between grouping and soloing while leveling with its cross-server dungeon finder, and my feelings are that Rift will as well once Trion stops listening to the tin-foil hat loonies and implements cross-server grouping on their dungeon finder as well. When you take out the biggest annoyances of grouping (actually having to sit in town spamming for invites and dealing with impatient players) coupled with the larger pool of players to actually choose from, you have a worthy counterpoint to the advantages of soloing.
I'm all for expanding endgame activities, but If you believe that you are entitled to the same gear or the same content as group players or raiders, you're bordering on lunacy. The argument of "well, I just like being in a gameworld and seeing all the people running around" is valid, but it's just as valid as is playing an FPS because you like to write your name in bullet holes on the wall. It's great if you can do it, but the game simply isn't designed to facilitate that sort of gameplay.
Maybe not, but it can be. It's not for you to decide what someone else finds fun. Lots of people find MMOs more fun than, or in addition to, FPS games.
MMOs don't have to be designed to funnel all the other playstyles towards raiding as the only endgame. There's no law that says this must be so.
All play styles should have a chance and be valid. I have no problem with grouping giving out exp bonuses or increasing the chance at better loot. I just wish we could get away from raiding being the end game for every game that comes out. I don't mind grouping with others but I should not be forced to group to do every thing in the game.. As for raiders give them their raids and just have them leave me alone. All I ask ios give me some small group or solo quests lines to get my own gear that looks great that is worth something. It does not have to have the same stats as raid gear as I don't need all the uber stas as I have no intention to raid as I have yet to experience a raiding community that I would feel comfortable belonging too. Just give us options at the end.
WOW perfected forced grouping, unless you think WOW doesn't force you to group enough and you shouldn't have to go to the bathroom solo without someone wiping......
That's generic fantasy setting, not inspiration. The means of play, the aims and goals, etc. are entirely different. MMOs are terribly shallow compared to PnP games.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
I feel thats its all a matter of taste. Does anyone here eat pizza every night for dinner? I don't, nor do I play the same game the same way every session. Some games I've played as single player I would have loved some other players to run with (Fallout 3) and some MMORPG's that should have just been made as single player games at first.
I think that Final Fantasy Xi should have been made as Atlantica Online. FFXI should have been first a single player game, then with all the bugs worked out released it as the MMORPG, except with a party system so people could have played solo.
Then it is definately a matter of taste, because where I come from, most people bring out FFXI as an example of how they want contemporary mmorpg's to be in regards to solo vs team play (aka they want more team play in their mmorpgs). I play MMORPGs to have fun. Dont we all?
But let's say I was a bit of a "creative" person, and I found a way to wash my dog in the washing machine, it wouldnt be fair to the manufacturers (or the breeders) to demand all dishwashers be able to wash dogs. A far stretched example, but its 3.30 am here...
MMORPG has grown far from its roots is what i'm saying. It was more like FFXI before. Now it's more like a cinema experience. 300 people go in together, but none of them interact (well, secretly perhaps?
and they have no use for eachother. The others are there out of necessity - more of a burden.
I'm sorry our genre is currently going this way. I'm looking forward to another change.
I think this is correct. However, to continue your analogy, not everyone goes to the movies alone. In fact, most do not. They go with groups of friends, although some do go alone.
So the modern MMO should allow for groups and soloers. And for the most part, it does. Until the endgame. Only the groupers seem to be allowed to sit in the best seats.
For some of us, if we want to play an MMO, we simply want to play a game. We are not there to meet and interact with strangers, not all of us. If someone wants to interact with internet strangers, there are tons of programs (not just games) that allow people to do that. So it seems wrong to me to force that, or even more greatly reward that than any other aspect. It should simply be possible within the game. The game should not be rewarding it or treating it special. In a movie, the group-goers pay the same price of admission and see the same movie. The same should be true of a game.
If someone wants to play with their friends, or even their just-met new friends, the game should let them. But it should give them no more or better reward than someone who plays alone. The game's purpose should not be to facillitate meeting strangers, it should be to provide a fun experience in whatever way the paying customer wants to play. It'd be ridiculous of a movie owner or even a social club owner to say to his patrons "you must converse with, and hang out with, at least 5 others while you are here, otherwise you must sit at the back where the view is poor."
This is what MMOs currently do with their endgame. I agree with you that it is changing, but it hasn't changed far enough yet. It needs to go further still.
Allow me to do the same, and expand on our now common metaphor
If I go to the cinema with friends, and you go alone, during our experience in the theater, you cant really tell the difference between us. Maybe some very immature youngsters are throwing popcorn together, and a couple is making out, making it obvious they are together. The rest of us sit there, and we simply use our eyes and ears. We do nothing.
It's a socio-psychologic thing - I feel safer about my social self image if I dont go alone, but during the movie, nobody around you can tell who are friends and who arent. Maybe you whisper a short line to your pal, and you laugh together, but there is no "team work" in watching a movie. Maybe an odd couple has it: Honey, you watch for a bit now, while I take a nap. I'll take the next watch.
Or for a different example:
You're good at football, you go to play for your local team but there is no team, it's just you versus the opposing team. How on earth are you supposed to beat the opposing team on your own? This is a team game. It might be entirely possible that you are just that good and can beat the rival team on your own, and as such you'll be praised for your efforts.
This is what an MMO should be like, team based challenges, we're playing a multiplayer game after all. Instead, what the casual 'footballer' is saying is, "I can't beat all them players on my own! I want to play a game of one vs one instead.". But that's not what the game is, it's a team football game, and you expect the paying fans to be happy to watch you and someone else kick a ball up and down a field? They came here for a football game, dammit!
But then the coach went, hold on, that boy wants to pay me to come and kick a ball around on his own even in this team game. Wow, I could make money off this. And so he splits the field up into twenty different sections and lets one person play in each while counting all the cash he's raking in.
The fans keep turning up expecting a football game but instead get to see a bunch of loners kicking balls back and fore. This isn't what they paid for.
Played WOW (5 years), AOC, AO, EQ2,AC2, Horizons, Saga of Ryzom, SWG, CO, STO(Beta),ROM, Allods, and many other F2P titles. Asl been in beta for many of the main titles and played countless SP games. I have been gaming for 15+ years!