In Vanguard you won't have this problem cause the worst people will give up on the game at early stages, and only mature and skilled people will last, making grouping and raiding extremely fun and rewarding.
I hope it is more clear
You have your head in the clouds if you really believe this. In EQ, any idiot .. with enough time and patience.... could level to 50, then 60, then 65, etc. I met more than my fair share of poorly-skilled players at all levels of the game at pretty much all locations. You might try and use the argument "poorly skilled players end up with a bad rep". My answer to you is that MMORPG players generally have a VERY short memory and are extremely forgiving, and that comes from approx. 7 years of playing. Even in Ultima Online, which was MUCH MUCH harsher and unforgiving than EQ ever was had its share of people who made up for a lack of skill by simply mashing a lot of buttons over and over and sinking incredible amounts of time into the game.
Vanguard won't be much different unless Brad and Microsoft are only sending the game out to select people and not sticking it on store shelves.
Originally posted by Aildrik You have your head in the clouds if you really believe this. In EQ, any idiot .. with enough time and patience.... could level to 50, then 60, then 65, etc. I met more than my fair share of poorly-skilled players at all levels of the game at pretty much all locations. You might try and use the argument "poorly skilled players end up with a bad rep". My answer to you is that MMORPG players generally have a VERY short memory and are extremely forgiving, and that comes from approx. 7 years of playing.Even in Ultima Online, which was MUCH MUCH harsher and unforgiving than EQ ever was had its share of people who made up for a lack of skill by simply mashing a lot of buttons over and over and sinking incredible amounts of time into the game. Vanguard won't be much different unless Brad and Microsoft are only sending the game out to select people and not sticking it on store shelves.
When I played EQ, there were many times when someone would apply for our guild (which was one of the top on the server), and someone would remember something that person did in the past and they would be denied. There were lots of players that were known to have a bad reputation or even be e-bayed and they couldn't get a spot in the top guilds. Sure, there were some guilds that took these people in, but they were treated much the same way and generally remained lower end guilds because of the type of players they allowed. EQ had better self policing than any game I have ever played.
When I played EQ, there were many times when someone would apply for our guild (which was one of the top on the server), and someone would remember something that person did in the past and they would be denied. There were lots of players that were known to have a bad reputation or even be e-bayed and they couldn't get a spot in the top guilds. Sure, there were some guilds that took these people in, but they were treated much the same way and generally remained lower end guilds because of the type of players they allowed. EQ had better self policing than any game I have ever played.
I agree completely, but keep in mind the other poster wasn't specifically talking about people with horrible reps, but also people with little skill - who by the way might be perfectly nice people. I was actually guilded for a time in EQ with a small, family-style guild that had a lot of nice, down-to-earth players, some of them who just didn't have a clue and I say that in the nicest way possible.
UO had them, EQ had them, WoW has them and certainly Vanguard will have these players as well. It's certainly not a mark against the game, its just that as long as a game is a public product and doesn't involve some sort of lengthy interview process just to sign up an account, you will end up meeting players from all walks of life - good and bad. The notion that Vanguard is going to be a bastion for high and mighty, uber l33t snobs is silly.
In Vanguard you won't have this problem cause the worst people will give up on the game at early stages, and only mature and skilled people will last, making grouping and raiding extremely fun and rewarding.
I hope it is more clear
You have your head in the clouds if you really believe this. In EQ, any idiot .. with enough time and patience.... could level to 50, then 60, then 65, etc. I met more than my fair share of poorly-skilled players at all levels of the game at pretty much all locations. You might try and use the argument "poorly skilled players end up with a bad rep". My answer to you is that MMORPG players generally have a VERY short memory and are extremely forgiving, and that comes from approx. 7 years of playing. Even in Ultima Online, which was MUCH MUCH harsher and unforgiving than EQ ever was had its share of people who made up for a lack of skill by simply mashing a lot of buttons over and over and sinking incredible amounts of time into the game.
Vanguard won't be much different unless Brad and Microsoft are only sending the game out to select people and not sticking it on store shelves.
I think Steve is right to a greater extent than any of us think. Vanguard will be kinda unforgiving (If things go as I hope ) and I suspect the...well for lack of a better phrase "bedwetting spammers/whiners" will run for the hills! Now this doesn't refer to skill, I think more about patience than I do skill. Those poeple who require instant gratification will not have the patience for Vanguard.
When I was in EQ we were in the second biggest guild on the server. We had a lot of snobby elitist people, but a lot of non elitist people too. I found that when people joined our guild, no matter the skill level they would rise to the challenge and behave and perform amazingly on raids, suprising even the most upturned noses.
Skill can be learned, respect is earned, but patience is a gift. Hmm thats a pretty decent quote
In Vanguard you won't have this problem cause the worst people will give up on the game at early stages, and only mature and skilled people will last, making grouping and raiding extremely fun and rewarding.
I hope it is more clear
You have your head in the clouds if you really believe this. In EQ, any idiot .. with enough time and patience.... could level to 50, then 60, then 65, etc. I met more than my fair share of poorly-skilled players at all levels of the game at pretty much all locations. You might try and use the argument "poorly skilled players end up with a bad rep". My answer to you is that MMORPG players generally have a VERY short memory and are extremely forgiving, and that comes from approx. 7 years of playing. Even in Ultima Online, which was MUCH MUCH harsher and unforgiving than EQ ever was had its share of people who made up for a lack of skill by simply mashing a lot of buttons over and over and sinking incredible amounts of time into the game.
Vanguard won't be much different unless Brad and Microsoft are only sending the game out to select people and not sticking it on store shelves.
Aldrik, the skills I meant are social skills. Anyone can learn how to play a game if they have enough time.
But if someone is a dick, it will always be a dick. As N2sooner mentioned, if you behaved like a jerk in group or in raid you were marked, and no respectable Guild will accept you. If you are not in a good Guild, your chances to enjoy EQ are pretty slim, since it is a Guild centered game. The more the game is solo friendly the more idiots will play the game, because there are no penalties in misbehaving, WoW and GW communities are the worst for exactly those reasons. (disclaimer: I am not saying that people that like solo are idiots, just that solo friendly games also attract larger number of idiots)
I played EQ for 4 years, and I believe that EQ community is the best out there, because of the maturity of people.
Games like EQ and Vanguard will keep the jerks out of the game, so people like me can enjoy the game in peace.
I agree. The way EQ works, over time people just get to know practically everybody. You know who's a good guy and who's a dick. You know who's a good player and who sucks. If somebody is a nice person and not too good a player you put up with them and try to help. Every guild has people who are not too good but everybody likes them. But if somebody is a dick and also sucks, well, adios.
Sure some worthless people make it to the high levels. But a heck of a lot get culled out along the way. Not so with so many current games.
Originally posted by ste2000 Aldrik, the skills I meant are social skills. Anyone can learn how to play a game if they have enough time.
But if someone is a dick, it will always be a dick. As N2sooner mentioned, if you behaved like a jerk in group or in raid you were marked, and no respectable Guild will accept you. If you are not in a good Guild, your chances to enjoy EQ are pretty slim, since it is a Guild centered game. The more the game is solo friendly the more idiots will play the game, because there are no penalties in misbehaving, WoW and GW communities are the worst for exactly those reasons. (disclaimer: I am not saying that people that like solo are idiots, just that solo friendly games also attract larger number of idiots)
I played EQ for 4 years, and I believe that EQ community is the best out there, because of the maturity of people.
Games like EQ and Vanguard will keep the jerks out of the game, so people like me can enjoy the game in peace.
And this exactly why all the uber guild of my server spam me endlessly.
Or maybe it was because chanters that were not awfull misfits where deadly rares, up to a point raiding guilds harass chanters who have an incredible dislike toward raiding, like me? (the fact they like grouping me was appreciated, but beyond that = no thanks and some guilds cant take a NO answer, and the fact they ALL ask is freaking annoying, I see the webpage and I didnt apply, yet they always think that maybe I didnt see it...eh, wake up call, you see an unguilded chanter with more farming XP then 90% of your fellow guild members, what are the odds say chanter dont know every guild pretty well, with the exception of ''asian'' guilds?)
Anyway, I wont be there to check on Vanguard unless they make grouping and raiding independant...and soloing would be nice, but not required.
And guilds where so ''socially skilled'' that they race each others, train each others, KS each others...so, to what social skills are you referring exactly? The art of pissing other Uberguilds with a complete lack of respect and possibility to resolve a conflict in a rationnal way?
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by Anofalye And guilds where so ''socially skilled'' that they race each others, train each others, KS each others...so, to what social skills are you referring exactly?
This is called "healthy competition" mate, which is far away from abusing other people like it happens in lots of other games. Good Guilds don't allow their members to train other people, or to KS other people mobs. But probably you don't know that, since you were unguilded most of the time.
But between Guilds there is a competition to overtake each other and be the best, and that s why I like EQ.
I met more than my fair share of poorly-skilled players at all levels of the game at pretty much all locations.
Anyone who had high level friends could powerlevel them to any target level in EQ1. The absolute worst thing that could have happened to someone would to be powerlevelled through the "learning" levels of the game. I met far too many Level 70 newbies, be they EBayers or PL'd or just numb as a fence post.
From Beta 1999 in EQ1 to the point at which I left in early 2005, I saw EQ go from an amazing game that made you "think" about what your next move is, to a game that made you "think" about what the next game you will play is. Its was a sad day when I finally cancelled my EQ account, but it was time. They made the game far too easy to attract more of the XBox/PS2/Gamecube kids.
I am hoping that Vanguard sticks to the "Group" gaming (EQ was a group game at first, then Brad left and they made it soloable) and I hope they dont conform to the same old "Squeeky wheel gets the grease" attitude that most games have now. Where the whiners will get their way just to shut them up. This is precicely why EQ became soloable, the necro's and druids whined that they could not get groups, so EQ gave them the ability to solo better than the rest of the classes.
Lets hope that Brad and the rest of Sigil remains focused on their "vision" and do not change it to become one of the "cookie cutter" games that are out there.
Almost 6 yrs in EQ1 - cancelled Almost 6 mo in EQ2 - cancelled Almost 4 mo in Anarchy Online - cancelled Almost 2 mo in Knight Online - cancelled Still in MU Online and City of Heroes .... Waiting patiently for Vanguard.
Originally posted by Anofalye And guilds where so ''socially skilled'' that they race each others, train each others, KS each others...so, to what social skills are you referring exactly?
This is called "healthy competition" mate, which is far away from abusing other people like it happens in lots of other games.
Good Guilds don't allow their members to train other people, or to KS other people mobs. But probably you don't know that, since you were unguilded most of the time.
But between Guilds there is a competition to overtake each other and be the best, and that s why I like EQ.
Exactly. For the most part it was fun. Yup, sometimes it was irritating, but that only made it real. Very few guilds approved of dirty tactics, and that was only because those guilds liked the "bad boy' image. Again ... simple reality ... made the game world feel like a real world rather than these mechanical artificial games worlds we're handed now.
"Social skill" merely means the ability to work cooperatively with other people toward common goals, and, hopefully, to enjoy doing it. And working with other people means being tolerant of differences. Approached with a positive attitude, this produces the best possible game experience. Or, somebody can avoid it and turn working with other people into some nagtaive experience to be avoided.
Originally posted by anarchyart If you really really want to solo, then why in gods name pay a monthly fee to play with thousands of other people?? Why not instead buy an automobile just to listen to the stereo, or here's one, buy a washing machine and use it as an aquarium.
lol, I enjoy your post anarchyart.
To very briefly add to the other side of the coin:
Soloing is important to people who have families or otherwise have a very, very active social life. They have to be able to log in, play, and log out pretty much when they want to. Why not play a single player game? Because you can permanently finish a single player game. With only a few very rare exceptions, that MMOG will be there whenever and it will be (semi-)regularly updated.
That's one reason.
Another possible explanation is that someone 'has' schizoid personality disorder or something like it. In this case it is a person's nature to avoid others but you have those rare moments when you meet someone that you click with and that in itself makes the game (more) enjoyable. Also, you have a big fantasy/sci-fi/whatever world to adventure in... perhaps they play for the excitement of exploring the fantasy world and/or learning about its story more so than the smash'em bash'em content.
Anyway, I'm just playing the other side of the debate at the moment. To be honest, I largely agree with your comment anarchyart.
Why would you want to pay a monthly fee to play a MMO and then not play with others in the game It sounds more like you should stick to single player rpgs not ones where yes you are playing with 100,000's other other players
It doesn't make sence to solo in a game thats all about playing with other players
Originally posted by Feldron Why would you want to pay a monthly fee to play a MMO and then not play with others in the game It sounds more like you should stick to single player rpgs not ones where yes you are playing with 100,000's other other players It doesn't make sence to solo in a game thats all about playing with other players
What does soloers remove from others players? Nothing. Missing what most players enjoy in a game is a severe flaw at any rate.
Single RPG lack content, depht, focus, accomplishment, they all can be completed in less then 200 hours...
I am tired of peoples like Feldron who just like to trash on peoples who dont need him to be happy.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by Feldron Why would you want to pay a monthly fee to play a MMO and then not play with others in the game It sounds more like you should stick to single player rpgs not ones where yes you are playing with 100,000's other other players It doesn't make sence to solo in a game thats all about playing with other players
What does soloers remove from others players? Nothing. Missing what most players enjoy in a game is a severe flaw at any rate.
Single RPG lack content, depht, focus, accomplishment, they all can be completed in less then 200 hours...
I am tired of peoples like Feldron who just like to trash on peoples who dont need him to be happy.
I agree with some of what you say Anofalye. Soloing is great for those days when I just don't wanna hear from anyone hehe But I do like the way EQ2 handles this.
Solo is possible and kind of fun in EQ2, but the experience is slow enough for you to want to put up with grouping, even on a stressful or hungover day. But cmon, you SHOULD get a bonus for grouping and putting up with a group of n00bs and teaching them how a group works.
The bonus is, you can kill mobs a single person just can't. So more rewards (in loot and experience in theory) to go along with the stress hehe. I like soloing a bit now and then, but I think grouping is more healthy in some ways, wouldn't you agree? Kind of fun to work together effectively as a tight unit too can be very rewarding and gratifying.
Originally posted by Feldron ________________________________________ What does soloers remove from others players? Nothing. ________________________________________ go play WOW and then go try playing most other mmo's Yeah if you have soloers able to max out in 2 weeks you game has a very short shelf life this will not be another WOW you will have to party to lvl
Well, what all you guys are missing is this: A soloer want a REASON to solo. Just like everyone want a reason to group or raid. If you make solo lame(EQ2 style), then soloers wont enjoy the game. If you make solo supreme(WoW style but leaning more on the solo side) you just kill grouping, raiding and everything else.
And then folks try to find a balance on this scale, and no balance can be found. Soloing need to give the BEST solo edges, so that nobody but soloers solo well...and grouping giving grouping edges.
Yet, some folks like to think a ''lame solo'' system is worth it, not it is not, and everytime someone try to say solo is part of the game while it is lame, I feel insulted. Soloers dont want to rule the grouping & raiding games, they just want something...to solo better then any non-soloer. This is a reasonable and rational request, everyone that care can solo to their hearth content, if they dont, well they are enjoying another aspect of the game, which mean they are subscribing and happy and you have a safenet called soloing for when they get bored and maybe to catch them to keep them playing while you fixed grouping or raiding...
Again, solo is not the enemy, the enemy is to try to put everything in 1 system. Someone that always group(like I often do) dont deserve solo uberness, he deserve group uberness, nothing more, nothing less...and guess what, a grouper will group for no other reason then becoming a better grouper!
Yet, the way you think will bring all the systems to favorised PvP(or raiding if they are carebears, or tradeskill, or a mixt of the 3 like DnL). Favorised an unrightfull aspect of the game in the others aspect is plainly killing the others. A soloer need to see soloing as been what he need to developp, focus, fullfill...if he plan to solo better. He try to group 1 day...nice now he know he is quite lame in groups and need to work it as well if he want to group better, which is just fine, logical and FAIR.
I respect more a game that say: No soloing, then a game that say yes soloing but in fact make solo lame. Same apply with any aspect that is not self reliant. A Dragon flagged as a solo mob should be something only the most accomplished soloers would consider to try, groups & raids should avoid them like plague. A Dragon flagged as a group mob should be something only groups would consider, raids and soloers should avoid them like plagues. A Dragon flagged as raid mob, should be something only raiders consider, and everyone else avoid like plague. Simple, logical, efficient and...FUN!
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by Anofalye A Dragon flagged as a solo mob should be something only the most accomplished soloers would consider to try, groups & raids should avoid them like plague. A Dragon flagged as a group mob should be something only groups would consider, raids and soloers should avoid them like plagues. A Dragon flagged as raid mob, should be something only raiders consider, and everyone else avoid like plague. Simple, logical, efficient and...FUN!
Anofalye, no offense (I know you don't like me lol), but I just can't understand your logic. So you're saying that a party of 5 that comes across a dragon conned as a solo mob should stop in their tracks and say "Hold on, guys. That beasty is meant to be tackled by a single person. Lets get the hell out of here! We shouldn't take it on!" That doesn't make sense.
You suggest that the solo aspect of a game should be completely and wholly separate from group and raid aspects, but I can't see how this would cause anything but problems. By letting soloers have content wholly exclusive to them, you eventually create a section of the playerbase that has no desire to group at all, because they don't need to. What this eventually does is negatively impact the ability to find groups easily for those that wish to do so.
Do I like to group all the time? No. I like my fair share of solo content. I just don't believe there is any way appease one side without hurting the other.
I don't know what all the talk is about. This game will NEVER be a solo fest. It just won't happen. This game is going to be made in the likeness of Old EQ. Some classes will solo better than other classes, but grouping will always be better than soloing and the more people you have the badder the mob you will be able to kill. You can whine, complain, moan and everything else, that will not change. Just stop trying to convince people this game should be a solo game and go find one of the dozens of solo games already on the market or coming out soon.
Vanguard has moved from a "must-see" to a "lets wait and see" for me since E3. Recent info has been a bit troubling but I'm willing to see what happens. I must say, I am concerned with the direction of Vanguard. I was always glad that they(Sigil) wanted to make the true successor to EQ. From what I've gathered, it looks like a more "hardcore" version of EQ2 which isn't necessarily a bad thing it just isn't a great thing either, as EQ2 lacked all the immersion and "magic" that EQ had. But then again, this could all be misunderstanding on my part.
As far as soloing goes. I hated how EQ2 had seperate solo content. You should be able to solo all the way to the top, it just should take a lot longer. You shouldn't be able to solo all possible content as there will be some content that should require a group or even more to handle.
E3 and up killed my interest in all other mmogs but Vanguard. It's probably the only game coming out that isn't filled with instances and easy gameplay. I just don't know what to do until Vanguard is out!
The only other game I am really excited about is Warhammer Online, and there are just two reasons for that. One is that it was picked up by Mythic and will be an RvR game (my personal favorite type of PvP). Two is that they haven't really released any information about it other than it will be RvR so there is nothing in particular I can dislike about it.
Vanguard just looks better and better the more I hear about it. I don't know if I will ever get into a game the way I got into EQ again, but if I do it will be Vanguard.
Originally posted by Anofalye I respect more a game that say: No soloing, then a game that say yes soloing but in fact make solo lame. Same apply with any aspect that is not self reliant. A Dragon flagged as a solo mob should be something only the most accomplished soloers would consider to try, groups & raids should avoid them like plague. A Dragon flagged as a group mob should be something only groups would consider, raids and soloers should avoid them like plagues. A Dragon flagged as raid mob, should be something only raiders consider, and everyone else avoid like plague. Simple, logical, efficient and...FUN!
Yes Anofalye the game you described already exists, it s called EQ2, and that s one of the reason why i quit. We found the game for you finally.
Seriously. We are 2 different types of players, I like black you like white. Sigil decided to make black. Lucky me, commiseration to you. Worst than black or white is grey, therefore I am quite pleased that Sigil decided not to compromise with all kind of players making another grey game. The only thing I can say to you is that I hope you will find the game that suits your needs as I found the game that suits mine.
Other than that I don't see the point to keep beating this dead horse. There is nothing you can do to change Sigil decision, and nothing you can say to us that will make your cause sound more sympathetic to us. Sigil knows what is doing, they decided that this game would be for a certain category of players, and they know that they gonna cut off a big chunk of the player base making such a game, but it is all planned, nothing is left to chances.
Anofalye I understand your pain and I hope you will find a game that you will like, but please let us enjoy our game in peace.
Comments
You have your head in the clouds if you really believe this. In EQ, any idiot .. with enough time and patience.... could level to 50, then 60, then 65, etc. I met more than my fair share of poorly-skilled players at all levels of the game at pretty much all locations. You might try and use the argument "poorly skilled players end up with a bad rep". My answer to you is that MMORPG players generally have a VERY short memory and are extremely forgiving, and that comes from approx. 7 years of playing.
Even in Ultima Online, which was MUCH MUCH harsher and unforgiving than EQ ever was had its share of people who made up for a lack of skill by simply mashing a lot of buttons over and over and sinking incredible amounts of time into the game.
Vanguard won't be much different unless Brad and Microsoft are only sending the game out to select people and not sticking it on store shelves.
When I played EQ, there were many times when someone would apply for our guild (which was one of the top on the server), and someone would remember something that person did in the past and they would be denied. There were lots of players that were known to have a bad reputation or even be e-bayed and they couldn't get a spot in the top guilds. Sure, there were some guilds that took these people in, but they were treated much the same way and generally remained lower end guilds because of the type of players they allowed. EQ had better self policing than any game I have ever played.
I agree completely, but keep in mind the other poster wasn't specifically talking about people with horrible reps, but also people with little skill - who by the way might be perfectly nice people. I was actually guilded for a time in EQ with a small, family-style guild that had a lot of nice, down-to-earth players, some of them who just didn't have a clue and I say that in the nicest way possible.
UO had them, EQ had them, WoW has them and certainly Vanguard will have these players as well. It's certainly not a mark against the game, its just that as long as a game is a public product and doesn't involve some sort of lengthy interview process just to sign up an account, you will end up meeting players from all walks of life - good and bad. The notion that Vanguard is going to be a bastion for high and mighty, uber l33t snobs is silly.
You have your head in the clouds if you really believe this. In EQ, any idiot .. with enough time and patience.... could level to 50, then 60, then 65, etc. I met more than my fair share of poorly-skilled players at all levels of the game at pretty much all locations. You might try and use the argument "poorly skilled players end up with a bad rep". My answer to you is that MMORPG players generally have a VERY short memory and are extremely forgiving, and that comes from approx. 7 years of playing.
Even in Ultima Online, which was MUCH MUCH harsher and unforgiving than EQ ever was had its share of people who made up for a lack of skill by simply mashing a lot of buttons over and over and sinking incredible amounts of time into the game.
Vanguard won't be much different unless Brad and Microsoft are only sending the game out to select people and not sticking it on store shelves.
I think Steve is right to a greater extent than any of us think. Vanguard will be kinda unforgiving (If things go as I hope
) and I suspect the...well for lack of a better phrase "bedwetting spammers/whiners" will run for the hills! Now this doesn't refer to skill, I think more about patience than I do skill. Those poeple who require instant gratification will not have the patience for Vanguard.
When I was in EQ we were in the second biggest guild on the server. We had a lot of snobby elitist people, but a lot of non elitist people too. I found that when people joined our guild, no matter the skill level they would rise to the challenge and behave and perform amazingly on raids, suprising even the most upturned noses.
Skill can be learned, respect is earned, but patience is a gift. Hmm thats a pretty decent quote
You have your head in the clouds if you really believe this. In EQ, any idiot .. with enough time and patience.... could level to 50, then 60, then 65, etc. I met more than my fair share of poorly-skilled players at all levels of the game at pretty much all locations. You might try and use the argument "poorly skilled players end up with a bad rep". My answer to you is that MMORPG players generally have a VERY short memory and are extremely forgiving, and that comes from approx. 7 years of playing.
Even in Ultima Online, which was MUCH MUCH harsher and unforgiving than EQ ever was had its share of people who made up for a lack of skill by simply mashing a lot of buttons over and over and sinking incredible amounts of time into the game.
Vanguard won't be much different unless Brad and Microsoft are only sending the game out to select people and not sticking it on store shelves.
Aldrik, the skills I meant are social skills.
Anyone can learn how to play a game if they have enough time.
But if someone is a dick, it will always be a dick.
As N2sooner mentioned, if you behaved like a jerk in group or in raid you were marked, and no respectable Guild will accept you.
If you are not in a good Guild, your chances to enjoy EQ are pretty slim, since it is a Guild centered game.
The more the game is solo friendly the more idiots will play the game, because there are no penalties in misbehaving, WoW and GW communities are the worst for exactly those reasons. (disclaimer: I am not saying that people that like solo are idiots, just that solo friendly games also attract larger number of idiots)
I played EQ for 4 years, and I believe that EQ community is the best out there, because of the maturity of people.
Games like EQ and Vanguard will keep the jerks out of the game, so people like me can enjoy the game in peace.
I agree. The way EQ works, over time people just get to know practically everybody. You know who's a good guy and who's a dick. You know who's a good player and who sucks. If somebody is a nice person and not too good a player you put up with them and try to help. Every guild has people who are not too good but everybody likes them. But if somebody is a dick and also sucks, well, adios.
Sure some worthless people make it to the high levels. But a heck of a lot get culled out along the way. Not so with so many current games.
And this exactly why all the uber guild of my server spam me endlessly.
Or maybe it was because chanters that were not awfull misfits where deadly rares, up to a point raiding guilds harass chanters who have an incredible dislike toward raiding, like me? (the fact they like grouping me was appreciated, but beyond that = no thanks and some guilds cant take a NO answer, and the fact they ALL ask is freaking annoying, I see the webpage and I didnt apply, yet they always think that maybe I didnt see it...eh, wake up call, you see an unguilded chanter with more farming XP then 90% of your fellow guild members, what are the odds say chanter dont know every guild pretty well, with the exception of ''asian'' guilds?)
Anyway, I wont be there to check on Vanguard unless they make grouping and raiding independant...and soloing would be nice, but not required.
And guilds where so ''socially skilled'' that they race each others, train each others, KS each others...so, to what social skills are you referring exactly? The art of pissing other Uberguilds with a complete lack of respect and possibility to resolve a conflict in a rationnal way?
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Good Guilds don't allow their members to train other people, or to KS other people mobs.
But probably you don't know that, since you were unguilded most of the time.
But between Guilds there is a competition to overtake each other and be the best, and that s why I like EQ.
Anyone who had high level friends could powerlevel them to any target level in EQ1. The absolute worst thing that could have happened to someone would to be powerlevelled through the "learning" levels of the game. I met far too many Level 70 newbies, be they EBayers or PL'd or just numb as a fence post.
From Beta 1999 in EQ1 to the point at which I left in early 2005, I saw EQ go from an amazing game that made you "think" about what your next move is, to a game that made you "think" about what the next game you will play is. Its was a sad day when I finally cancelled my EQ account, but it was time. They made the game far too easy to attract more of the XBox/PS2/Gamecube kids.
I am hoping that Vanguard sticks to the "Group" gaming (EQ was a group game at first, then Brad left and they made it soloable) and I hope they dont conform to the same old "Squeeky wheel gets the grease" attitude that most games have now. Where the whiners will get their way just to shut them up. This is precicely why EQ became soloable, the necro's and druids whined that they could not get groups, so EQ gave them the ability to solo better than the rest of the classes.
Lets hope that Brad and the rest of Sigil remains focused on their "vision" and do not change it to become one of the "cookie cutter" games that are out there.
Almost 6 yrs in EQ1 - cancelled
Almost 6 mo in EQ2 - cancelled
Almost 4 mo in Anarchy Online - cancelled
Almost 2 mo in Knight Online - cancelled
Still in MU Online and City of Heroes
.... Waiting patiently for Vanguard.
This is called "healthy competition" mate, which is far away from abusing other people like it happens in lots of other games.
Good Guilds don't allow their members to train other people, or to KS other people mobs.
But probably you don't know that, since you were unguilded most of the time.
But between Guilds there is a competition to overtake each other and be the best, and that s why I like EQ.
Exactly. For the most part it was fun. Yup, sometimes it was irritating, but that only made it real. Very few guilds approved of dirty tactics, and that was only because those guilds liked the "bad boy' image. Again ... simple reality ... made the game world feel like a real world rather than these mechanical artificial games worlds we're handed now.
"Social skill" merely means the ability to work cooperatively with other people toward common goals, and, hopefully, to enjoy doing it. And working with other people means being tolerant of differences. Approached with a positive attitude, this produces the best possible game experience. Or, somebody can avoid it and turn working with other people into some nagtaive experience to be avoided.
If you really really want to solo, then why in gods name pay a monthly fee to play with thousands of other people??
Why not instead buy an automobile just to listen to the stereo, or here's one, buy a washing machine and use it as an aquarium.
lol, I enjoy your post anarchyart.
To very briefly add to the other side of the coin:
Soloing is important to people who have families or otherwise have a very, very active social life. They have to be able to log in, play, and log out pretty much when they want to. Why not play a single player game? Because you can permanently finish a single player game. With only a few very rare exceptions, that MMOG will be there whenever and it will be (semi-)regularly updated.
That's one reason.
Another possible explanation is that someone 'has' schizoid personality disorder or something like it. In this case it is a person's nature to avoid others but you have those rare moments when you meet someone that you click with and that in itself makes the game (more) enjoyable. Also, you have a big fantasy/sci-fi/whatever world to adventure in... perhaps they play for the excitement of exploring the fantasy world and/or learning about its story more so than the smash'em bash'em content.
Anyway, I'm just playing the other side of the debate at the moment. To be honest, I largely agree with your comment anarchyart.
~Mysk
Why would you want to pay a monthly fee to play a MMO and then not play with others in the game It sounds more like you should stick to single player rpgs not ones where yes you are playing with 100,000's other other players
It doesn't make sence to solo in a game thats all about playing with other players
What does soloers remove from others players? Nothing. Missing what most players enjoy in a game is a severe flaw at any rate.
Single RPG lack content, depht, focus, accomplishment, they all can be completed in less then 200 hours...
I am tired of peoples like Feldron who just like to trash on peoples who dont need him to be happy.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
What does soloers remove from others players? Nothing. Missing what most players enjoy in a game is a severe flaw at any rate.
Single RPG lack content, depht, focus, accomplishment, they all can be completed in less then 200 hours...
I am tired of peoples like Feldron who just like to trash on peoples who dont need him to be happy.
I agree with some of what you say Anofalye. Soloing is great for those days when I just don't wanna hear from anyone hehe But I do like the way EQ2 handles this.
Solo is possible and kind of fun in EQ2, but the experience is slow enough for you to want to put up with grouping, even on a stressful or hungover day. But cmon, you SHOULD get a bonus for grouping and putting up with a group of n00bs and teaching them how a group works.
The bonus is, you can kill mobs a single person just can't. So more rewards (in loot and experience in theory) to go along with the stress hehe. I like soloing a bit now and then, but I think grouping is more healthy in some ways, wouldn't you agree? Kind of fun to work together effectively as a tight unit too can be very rewarding and gratifying.
The way they are planning on doing soloing is the way it should be done Hard
so yes you can go and try soloing but it will be like hitting your head on a brick wall 'hard'
The game is a massive multipler game its not mean to you be play solo it never was
________________________________________
What does soloers remove from others players? Nothing.
________________________________________
go play WOW and then go try playing most other mmo's
Yeah if you have soloers able to max out in 2 weeks you game has a very short shelf life
this will not be another WOW you will have to party to lvl
Well, what all you guys are missing is this: A soloer want a REASON to solo. Just like everyone want a reason to group or raid. If you make solo lame(EQ2 style), then soloers wont enjoy the game. If you make solo supreme(WoW style but leaning more on the solo side) you just kill grouping, raiding and everything else.
And then folks try to find a balance on this scale, and no balance can be found. Soloing need to give the BEST solo edges, so that nobody but soloers solo well...and grouping giving grouping edges.
Yet, some folks like to think a ''lame solo'' system is worth it, not it is not, and everytime someone try to say solo is part of the game while it is lame, I feel insulted. Soloers dont want to rule the grouping & raiding games, they just want something...to solo better then any non-soloer. This is a reasonable and rational request, everyone that care can solo to their hearth content, if they dont, well they are enjoying another aspect of the game, which mean they are subscribing and happy and you have a safenet called soloing for when they get bored and maybe to catch them to keep them playing while you fixed grouping or raiding...
Again, solo is not the enemy, the enemy is to try to put everything in 1 system. Someone that always group(like I often do) dont deserve solo uberness, he deserve group uberness, nothing more, nothing less...and guess what, a grouper will group for no other reason then becoming a better grouper!
Yet, the way you think will bring all the systems to favorised PvP(or raiding if they are carebears, or tradeskill, or a mixt of the 3 like DnL). Favorised an unrightfull aspect of the game in the others aspect is plainly killing the others. A soloer need to see soloing as been what he need to developp, focus, fullfill...if he plan to solo better. He try to group 1 day...nice now he know he is quite lame in groups and need to work it as well if he want to group better, which is just fine, logical and FAIR.
I respect more a game that say: No soloing, then a game that say yes soloing but in fact make solo lame. Same apply with any aspect that is not self reliant. A Dragon flagged as a solo mob should be something only the most accomplished soloers would consider to try, groups & raids should avoid them like plague. A Dragon flagged as a group mob should be something only groups would consider, raids and soloers should avoid them like plagues. A Dragon flagged as raid mob, should be something only raiders consider, and everyone else avoid like plague. Simple, logical, efficient and...FUN!
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Anofalye, no offense (I know you don't like me lol), but I just can't understand your logic. So you're saying that a party of 5 that comes across a dragon conned as a solo mob should stop in their tracks and say "Hold on, guys. That beasty is meant to be tackled by a single person. Lets get the hell out of here! We shouldn't take it on!" That doesn't make sense.
You suggest that the solo aspect of a game should be completely and wholly separate from group and raid aspects, but I can't see how this would cause anything but problems. By letting soloers have content wholly exclusive to them, you eventually create a section of the playerbase that has no desire to group at all, because they don't need to. What this eventually does is negatively impact the ability to find groups easily for those that wish to do so.
Do I like to group all the time? No. I like my fair share of solo content. I just don't believe there is any way appease one side without hurting the other.
I don't know what all the talk is about. This game will NEVER be a solo fest. It just won't happen. This game is going to be made in the likeness of Old EQ. Some classes will solo better than other classes, but grouping will always be better than soloing and the more people you have the badder the mob you will be able to kill. You can whine, complain, moan and everything else, that will not change. Just stop trying to convince people this game should be a solo game and go find one of the dozens of solo games already on the market or coming out soon.
Vanguard has moved from a "must-see" to a "lets wait and see" for me since E3. Recent info has been a bit troubling but I'm willing to see what happens. I must say, I am concerned with the direction of Vanguard. I was always glad that they(Sigil) wanted to make the true successor to EQ. From what I've gathered, it looks like a more "hardcore" version of EQ2 which isn't necessarily a bad thing it just isn't a great thing either, as EQ2 lacked all the immersion and "magic" that EQ had. But then again, this could all be misunderstanding on my part.
As far as soloing goes. I hated how EQ2 had seperate solo content. You should be able to solo all the way to the top, it just should take a lot longer. You shouldn't be able to solo all possible content as there will be some content that should require a group or even more to handle.
E3 and up killed my interest in all other mmogs but Vanguard. It's probably the only game coming out that isn't filled with instances and easy gameplay. I just don't know what to do until Vanguard is out!
The only other game I am really excited about is Warhammer Online, and there are just two reasons for that. One is that it was picked up by Mythic and will be an RvR game (my personal favorite type of PvP). Two is that they haven't really released any information about it other than it will be RvR so there is nothing in particular I can dislike about it.
Vanguard just looks better and better the more I hear about it. I don't know if I will ever get into a game the way I got into EQ again, but if I do it will be Vanguard.
We found the game for you finally.
Seriously.
We are 2 different types of players, I like black you like white.
Sigil decided to make black.
Lucky me, commiseration to you.
Worst than black or white is grey, therefore I am quite pleased that Sigil decided not to compromise with all kind of players making another grey game.
The only thing I can say to you is that I hope you will find the game that suits your needs as I found the game that suits mine.
Other than that I don't see the point to keep beating this dead horse.
There is nothing you can do to change Sigil decision, and nothing you can say to us that will make your cause sound more sympathetic to us.
Sigil knows what is doing, they decided that this game would be for a certain category of players, and they know that they gonna cut off a big chunk of the player base making such a game, but it is all planned, nothing is left to chances.
Anofalye I understand your pain and I hope you will find a game that you will like, but please let us enjoy our game in peace.
PS: Why you are so obsessed with Vanguard anyway?