Originally posted by RollinDutch MMOGs without open, meaningful PvP are barely MMOGs.
Say what you will, but open PVP is just an excuse for ganking. I much more prefer PVP on equal terms, like an arena system or something. But I'm tired of running around, minding my own business and then getting ganked by some person whose level is so high I have no chance of winning, just to satisfy some pre-adolescent kid who has no life and grinded to death so he can run around and 'pwn n00bs'.
At least in CS, you are on equal ground, sans ping issues. It's an irrefutable fact that most MMORPGs are based on level and equipment, not skill, and I don't know about you, but getting killed by a level 60 when I'm level 20 over and over again when I HAVE to be in that zone in order to complete quests is not my idea of fun.
Regarding the issue of soloing in a MMORPG, although it defies the core reasoning behind a MMORPG (unless you're doing it for ePeen reasons), soloing is an integral part of MMORPG philosophy. Why? Because you can't expect everyone to always be able to get a group at any time, and FFXI is a testament to that. However, if you're playing a MMORPG with the intention of soloing your way up to the max level, you should reconsider why you're playing MMORPGs in the first place. Surely IRC / Yahoo chat + a single-player RPG can give the same experience...
Originally posted by katriell "Soloers are a large part of the MMOG playerbase."That is hilarious.
Not really, the big reason there are so many soloers is because it sucks it wait... and wait... and wait for a group... yah groups are more fun, yah they're more profitable, ... but... if i have a choice between standing in town twiddling my thumbs and soloing... guess which it'll be? One advances my char, one runs up his played time and bores me.
Vanguard will have solo content, something like 25% solo content, 50% grouping content and 25% raiding content is the quote. Also while I see the reasoning there needs to be solo content I prefer mmorpgs with a grouping emphasis. If soloers don't like that then there are a load of other mmorpgs, why must a mmorpg that makes itself group-emphasized have to change its vision to cater to a community that doesn't even want that type of game.
Solo players are a large part of gaming, always has been. I for one play about 50/50 but sometimes I get tired of trying to find a decent group and just want to play a quick hour of my game without dealing with other players.
Originally posted by nomadian Vanguard will have solo content, something like 25% solo content, 50% grouping content and 25% raiding content is the quote. Also while I see the reasoning there needs to be solo content I prefer mmorpgs with a grouping emphasis. If soloers don't like that then there are a load of other mmorpgs, why must a mmorpg that makes itself group-emphasized have to change its vision to cater to a community that doesn't even want that type of game.
It shouldn't have to, just stick with the vision. If a designer like Sigil wants to make a raiding and forced dependency MMOG like Vanguard, more power to them. But I bet with SOE involved, they will be flying banners down the road like EQ2 and DDO saying "look at all the new solo content guys, please play our game now".
The examples I mentioned were made afterwards with full knowledge and desire to alienate soloing at the start, and you have to be ignorant if you don't understand that lack of soloing will impact the bottom line. As long as you are ok with that fact, great, but don't try to kiss up to soloers afterwards while kicking your original player base in the ass. That's just two faced and I for one don't fall for it.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it." Brad McQuaid Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc. Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes www.vanguardsoh
I hate people who want to solo the whole game! If you want to solo go and play a OFFLINE RPG!
Yeh you need to be able to do something by yourself, but the main part of the game should be guild/group based or even server wide based like a major event.
That's bs. No offline game offers the worlds we want. It's easy to run cheats and never be detected and solo everything though. that' show the stupid farmers get so much gold so fast. Soloing raid content is the only resort. some of us just don't like grouping or have the time to wait on a big gathering of strangers, but I love some of the worlds mmos take place in and no single player rpgs Ive played, have ever held my interest for long.
I hate people who want to solo the whole game! If you want to solo go and play a OFFLINE RPG!
Or you could go play an offline rpg and "imagine" group members. Heck you could even roleplay their personalities.
Yeh you need to be able to do something by yourself, but the main part of the game should be guild/group based or even server wide based like a major event.
Talk about a SERIOUSLY necro'd thread. O M G it's from 2006. lol
Still clueless. Still relevant.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
"Soloers are a large part of the MMOG playerbase."
That is hilarious.
Not really, the big reason there are so many soloers is because it sucks it wait... and wait... and wait for a group... yah groups are more fun, yah they're more profitable, ... but... if i have a choice between standing in town twiddling my thumbs and soloing... guess which it'll be? One advances my char, one runs up his played time and bores me.
The big difference between DnD and DDO is that we played dnd with our friends. We scheduled a night or a major chunk of time to play and their was a commitment and friendship between each other to show up.
But in MMORPGs, even within strong guilds, that personal commitment just isn´t there for the average player. DnD was about friendships and the game was cool. MMOs are mostly anonymous.
I agree with the whole thing about MMOs being more for solo players.. The thing is. Maybe if someone like SKRYM would add monthly content.. then solo players might ´subscribe´ to it.. because in reality, the biggest features of MMO´s isn´t the huge amount of players that play them (that you can group with).. it is the persistence of your character and the ability to keep improving your character that makes them compelling.
I think, in most cases, there is more evidence to suggest that the players are clueless to general market demands, instead of developers being clueless.
the eq2 proccess was slow , 1 they unlinked the mobs OUTSIDE dungeons, then they changed the dungeons too....
soloers are what mmorpgs are all about until u hit "endgame"
thats just sad! , i miss exp groups so bad , FFXI was the last game i played that "forced" me to group if i wanted to get xp
that changed over the years ,and for 1 im happy that they included the Fields of valor? or whatever whats called , added quest and buffs to them (+teleports! that was just AMAZING) helped to get some plus xp in some camps :P
As Jess already stated, the reason that many of us enjoy playing mmos is the persistent, "living" environment that it offers, rather than the stagnant, inevitable ending-on-the-horizon single player experience. Frankly, the "must group" mentality has never made any sense to me. Being able to play solo is only an added playstyle option - people who want to group are still free to do so, and those of us who would typically rather solo or duo have that option as well. Where's the drawback exactly?
The fact is, we all pay the same monthly fee to play the game, and it just makes more sense to offer a variety of playstyles for your playerbase. I know that can be trickier when it comes to raid content, but with instancing being the big thing these days, level syncing/scaling to any and all content is certainly a possibility. Of course, even then, there would be arguments of raid content being "trivialized" because it's available to anyone and everyone, 1 player or 40 (for example), but they could have perks for both. I would imagine reasonable compromises could be made to accomdate everyone and their favored playstyle without trivializing either.
I spent years playing EQ, and subsequently FFXI after that, and although I enjoyed many of my experiences in those games, I can guarantee that I will never play an mmo that strictly forces the grouping playstyle again. Lucky for players like myself (despite still having raid content that exclusively requires grouping), it seems that most mmo developers have started rethinking their positions in playstyle variation, and because of that, we're starting to see more mmos that accomdate different playstyles and schedules, at least to some extent.
Heck, even the required participation of raids seems to be shrinking in numbers (10 mans in WoW for example), and personally, I think that's a step in the right direction. Everyone should get to experience any content they want with enough effort, in-line with what their playstyle or schedule permits. Don't get me wrong though, I still think those that want to experience raid content with a large portion of their guild should be able to do so - it could just be scaled for them accordingly.
Anyway, long story short - I know it may go against what many feel is required for an mmo to prosper, but I'm with Jess on this. I don't see many flaws (if any) by making content available to anyone and everyone (end-game content included). Everyone pays the same fee, everyone should have a means to experience the game in a way that reflects their personal gaming philosophy and/or schedule.
D&DO's attempts to appeal to soloers now after they originally designed a game that was solo hostile, is pathetic. Too little too late.
Saw the same thing with EQ2. They made a game with linked mobs specifically to force grouping and they ended up dropping that stupidity.
Soloers are a large part of the MMOG playerbase. Most gamers want to solo at least part of the time. This isn't a secret, it's been well established. So why do some developers insist on making games that are anti-soloing, only to tuck their tails in between their legs and do a 180 degree switch when they realize they need the solo playerbase to make a decent profit.
We will see the same thing with Vanguard, especially since SOE is involved and they love changing everything after release. This flip flopping lack of vision is ignorant and doesn't win over the soloers you first alienated, it just pisses of the gamers who like the dependency format. Wake up developers. You need to include soloing in the mix or realistically understand the limited profits that a forced grouping game will bring.
To a degree, you identify a player desire (soloability) and then criticize developers for increasing their soloability. Pretty rough to criticize someone at both ends of the spectrum.
Still, while harsh there's a ring of truth to it since changing your game won't bring back players who've quit but will piss off elder players. Granted, the trickle of new players coming in are going to be a little more likely to stick around with the added soloability, and elder player complaints are going to bounce off as long as they can still find the gameplay they want.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Saw the same thing with EQ2. They made a game with linked mobs specifically to force grouping and they ended up dropping that stupidity.
I have to nitpick at you a little here
If you are talking about linking mobs to the player, where others couldn't assist unless you typed /help, then that feature was not added to encourage grouping. It was to combat kill stealing and power levelling. Kill stealing was one of the most dealth with issues by the CS in EQ and one of the most frequent complaints on the forums as well.
EQ2 tried a lot of changes to accomodate the whining on the boards. Some of the solutions were not very popular. In the beginning the crafters complained their items didn't sell, because people used hand'me'downs instead, causing an overflow of crafted items on the market. SoE made all items bind on equip and the community whined yet again. Then they changed it back and the crafters started to whine once more.
I love soloring around in a game. Torchlight and Batman are indeed good games for soloers, they have many side-quests for you to explore (especially Batman: Arkham City). I'm not sure whether Torchlight 2 will cripple the soloing part, but I think they don't have to. Sometimes developers are relunctant to change, that's a problem. I think they need to talk to more players and then make the decision.
Originally posted by JessXIII Originally posted by scaramoosh I hate people who want to solo the whole game! If you want to solo go and play a OFFLINE RPG!
Yeh you need to be able to do something by yourself, but the main part of the game should be guild/group based or even server wide based like a major event.
That's bs. No offline game offers the worlds we want. It's easy to run cheats and never be detected and solo everything though. that' show the stupid farmers get so much gold so fast. Soloing raid content is the only resort. some of us just don't like grouping or have the time to wait on a big gathering of strangers, but I love some of the worlds mmos take place in and no single player rpgs Ive played, have ever held my interest for long.
So basically what you want a solo game that has the same land scale as a mmorpg with server authentication to check against cheating?
So if you had that + an irc client inbuilt you would be set?
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
I don't often post, but I will to make the following statement;
Those who solo are not playing, nor are they wanting to play a single player game.
They are not getting, nor do they want a single player experience.
Most of the time in life, you are doing your own thing, and it is not as simple as being with someone, or not being with someone.
The entire idea of playing an mmorpg solo is the fact that you are in an active world that has actual people that you are co-existing with in said world. They are there, you do not have to interact with them for them to be there.
From a roleplayer's perspective, it ruins immersion when you are forced to group with someone. Things like this should happen on their own, you shouldn't NEED to, and if you do, you should find that out on your own, and then be driven to the choice, not forced to make it.
And slightly off topic; every player's perspective SHOULD be a roleplayer's perspective, since you are playing a roleplaying game.
I don't often post, but I will to make the following statement;
Those who solo are not playing, nor are they wanting to play a single player game.
They are not getting, nor do they want a single player experience.
Most of the time in life, you are doing your own thing, and it is not as simple as being with someone, or not being with someone.
The entire idea of playing an mmorpg solo is the fact that you are in an active world that has actual people that you are co-existing with in said world. They are there, you do not have to interact with them for them to be there.
From a roleplayer's perspective, it ruins immersion when you are forced to group with someone. Things like this should happen on their own, you shouldn't NEED to, and if you do, you should find that out on your own, and then be driven to the choice, not forced to make it.
And slightly off topic; every player's perspective SHOULD be a roleplayer's perspective, since you are playing a roleplaying game.
Solo is the most important or second most important aspect a serious MMO would developp, the other important aspect would be grouping.
A good part of my RL friends would systematically decline grouping any stranger, they aren't bad. They just want to be with peoples they know in RL. I doesn't make that choice myself and sometimes I manage to tag a few strangers in their groups, but they then want strangers that I know for sometimes and been on my friend list. Often I would go like: "Let's get that guy into our group, he is LFG". They answer something like: "Is he on your friend list?" You are bright enough to figure the rest.
Personnally I rather group than solo, group anyone (except uberraiders) than solo, yet solo, sure that isn't a bad thing.
Solo deserves a end-game of it own. Not for me, I won't stop playing a game because it doesn't have enough solo, but for the player base...and yeah, I would enjoy it myself, even if I will not reveal in it.
Solo is REALLY important for any MMO planning on been a wide success, almost as important as grouping! While PvP would be a nice add-on if done nice and not enforced in anyway (not in a DAoCish way), tradeskills sure why not? Raiding, have at thee evil doer, your life end today! Raiding is a mistake and shouldn't be present in any MMO in it current form. Back to re-designing it so it doesn't screw anyone not doing it (raiding give nada rewards that screw any non-raider).
What you describe is an example of how antisocial gamers are becoming. Group-centric games rely on community, which has largely deteriorated over the years. For a good example, take WoW. Try making a new character and asking a question in any of the major cities. Typically you may get one helpful response if you're lucky, along with a dozen people either making fun of you, purposely giving you bad information to screw you up, or telling you to "L 2 Google".
Solo is the most important or second most important aspect a serious MMO would developp, the other important aspect would be grouping.
A good part of my RL friends would systematically decline grouping any stranger, they aren't bad. They just want to be with peoples they know in RL. I doesn't make that choice myself and sometimes I manage to tag a few strangers in their groups, but they then want strangers that I know for sometimes and been on my friend list. Often I would go like: "Let's get that guy into our group, he is LFG". They answer something like: "Is he on your friend list?" You are bright enough to figure the rest.
Personnally I rather group than solo, group anyone (except uberraiders) than solo, yet solo, sure that isn't a bad thing.
Solo deserves a end-game of it own. Not for me, I won't stop playing a game because it doesn't have enough solo, but for the player base...and yeah, I would enjoy it myself, even if I will not reveal in it.
Solo is REALLY important for any MMO planning on been a wide success, almost as important as grouping! While PvP would be a nice add-on if done nice and not enforced in anyway (not in a DAoCish way), tradeskills sure why not? Raiding, have at thee evil doer, your life end today! Raiding is a mistake and shouldn't be present in any MMO in it current form. Back to re-designing it so it doesn't screw anyone not doing it (raiding give nada rewards that screw any non-raider).
What you describe is an example of how antisocial gamers are becoming. Group-centric games rely on community, which has largely deteriorated over the years. For a good example, take WoW. Try making a new character and asking a question in any of the major cities. Typically you may get one helpful response if you're lucky, along with a dozen people either making fun of you, purposely giving you bad information to screw you up, or telling you to "L 2 Google".
Ironically its not the nerds who are the primarily anti social people. Its the regular kids.
What you describe is an example of how antisocial gamers are becoming. Group-centric games rely on community, which has largely deteriorated over the years. For a good example, take WoW. Try making a new character and asking a question in any of the major cities. Typically you may get one helpful response if you're lucky, along with a dozen people either making fun of you, purposely giving you bad information to screw you up, or telling you to "L 2 Google".
Which is a perfectly good piece of advice. Is there a WOW question that cannot be answered by google?
What you describe is an example of how antisocial gamers are becoming. Group-centric games rely on community, which has largely deteriorated over the years. For a good example, take WoW. Try making a new character and asking a question in any of the major cities. Typically you may get one helpful response if you're lucky, along with a dozen people either making fun of you, purposely giving you bad information to screw you up, or telling you to "L 2 Google".
Which is a perfectly good piece of advice. Is there a WOW question that cannot be answered by google?
Its a d-bag piece of advice that is the same as saying "figure it out for yourself". You'd just as well say nothing at all.
Asking questions is a part of learning. "L 2 Google" is not a productive answer. "You can find info on that at www.superinfoplace.com" is a productive answer. Its the people who dont know how to be social that treat asking a question like being slapped in the face. Maybe a real slap in the face would be good for those people.
Comments
Say what you will, but open PVP is just an excuse for ganking. I much more prefer PVP on equal terms, like an arena system or something. But I'm tired of running around, minding my own business and then getting ganked by some person whose level is so high I have no chance of winning, just to satisfy some pre-adolescent kid who has no life and grinded to death so he can run around and 'pwn n00bs'.
At least in CS, you are on equal ground, sans ping issues. It's an irrefutable fact that most MMORPGs are based on level and equipment, not skill, and I don't know about you, but getting killed by a level 60 when I'm level 20 over and over again when I HAVE to be in that zone in order to complete quests is not my idea of fun.
Regarding the issue of soloing in a MMORPG, although it defies the core reasoning behind a MMORPG (unless you're doing it for ePeen reasons), soloing is an integral part of MMORPG philosophy. Why? Because you can't expect everyone to always be able to get a group at any time, and FFXI is a testament to that. However, if you're playing a MMORPG with the intention of soloing your way up to the max level, you should reconsider why you're playing MMORPGs in the first place. Surely IRC / Yahoo chat + a single-player RPG can give the same experience...
Not really, the big reason there are so many soloers is because it sucks it wait... and wait... and wait for a group... yah groups are more fun, yah they're more profitable, ... but... if i have a choice between standing in town twiddling my thumbs and soloing... guess which it'll be? One advances my char, one runs up his played time and bores me.
Shadus
Witty saying to amuse you goes here.
It shouldn't have to, just stick with the vision. If a designer like Sigil wants to make a raiding and forced dependency MMOG like Vanguard, more power to them. But I bet with SOE involved, they will be flying banners down the road like EQ2 and DDO saying "look at all the new solo content guys, please play our game now".
The examples I mentioned were made afterwards with full knowledge and desire to alienate soloing at the start, and you have to be ignorant if you don't understand that lack of soloing will impact the bottom line. As long as you are ok with that fact, great, but don't try to kiss up to soloers afterwards while kicking your original player base in the ass. That's just two faced and I for one don't fall for it.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it."
Brad McQuaid
Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc.
Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
www.vanguardsoh
That's bs. No offline game offers the worlds we want. It's easy to run cheats and never be detected and solo everything though. that' show the stupid farmers get so much gold so fast. Soloing raid content is the only resort. some of us just don't like grouping or have the time to wait on a big gathering of strangers, but I love some of the worlds mmos take place in and no single player rpgs Ive played, have ever held my interest for long.
Talk about a SERIOUSLY necro'd thread. O M G it's from 2006. lol
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
Please check out my channel. I do gaming reviews, gaming related reviews & lets plays. Thanks!
https://www.youtube.com/user/BettyofDewm/videos
sshhh its fine.
Please check out my channel. I do gaming reviews, gaming related reviews & lets plays. Thanks!
https://www.youtube.com/user/BettyofDewm/videos
Still clueless. Still relevant.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
The big difference between DnD and DDO is that we played dnd with our friends. We scheduled a night or a major chunk of time to play and their was a commitment and friendship between each other to show up.
But in MMORPGs, even within strong guilds, that personal commitment just isn´t there for the average player. DnD was about friendships and the game was cool. MMOs are mostly anonymous.
I agree with the whole thing about MMOs being more for solo players.. The thing is. Maybe if someone like SKRYM would add monthly content.. then solo players might ´subscribe´ to it.. because in reality, the biggest features of MMO´s isn´t the huge amount of players that play them (that you can group with).. it is the persistence of your character and the ability to keep improving your character that makes them compelling.
I think, in most cases, there is more evidence to suggest that the players are clueless to general market demands, instead of developers being clueless.
if i remember well...
the eq2 proccess was slow , 1 they unlinked the mobs OUTSIDE dungeons, then they changed the dungeons too....
soloers are what mmorpgs are all about until u hit "endgame"
thats just sad! , i miss exp groups so bad
, FFXI was the last game i played that "forced" me to group if i wanted to get xp
that changed over the years ,and for 1 im happy that they included the Fields of valor? or whatever whats called , added quest and buffs to them (+teleports! that was just AMAZING) helped to get some plus xp in some camps :P
As Jess already stated, the reason that many of us enjoy playing mmos is the persistent, "living" environment that it offers, rather than the stagnant, inevitable ending-on-the-horizon single player experience. Frankly, the "must group" mentality has never made any sense to me. Being able to play solo is only an added playstyle option - people who want to group are still free to do so, and those of us who would typically rather solo or duo have that option as well. Where's the drawback exactly?
The fact is, we all pay the same monthly fee to play the game, and it just makes more sense to offer a variety of playstyles for your playerbase. I know that can be trickier when it comes to raid content, but with instancing being the big thing these days, level syncing/scaling to any and all content is certainly a possibility. Of course, even then, there would be arguments of raid content being "trivialized" because it's available to anyone and everyone, 1 player or 40 (for example), but they could have perks for both. I would imagine reasonable compromises could be made to accomdate everyone and their favored playstyle without trivializing either.
I spent years playing EQ, and subsequently FFXI after that, and although I enjoyed many of my experiences in those games, I can guarantee that I will never play an mmo that strictly forces the grouping playstyle again. Lucky for players like myself (despite still having raid content that exclusively requires grouping), it seems that most mmo developers have started rethinking their positions in playstyle variation, and because of that, we're starting to see more mmos that accomdate different playstyles and schedules, at least to some extent.
Heck, even the required participation of raids seems to be shrinking in numbers (10 mans in WoW for example), and personally, I think that's a step in the right direction. Everyone should get to experience any content they want with enough effort, in-line with what their playstyle or schedule permits. Don't get me wrong though, I still think those that want to experience raid content with a large portion of their guild should be able to do so - it could just be scaled for them accordingly.
Anyway, long story short - I know it may go against what many feel is required for an mmo to prosper, but I'm with Jess on this. I don't see many flaws (if any) by making content available to anyone and everyone (end-game content included). Everyone pays the same fee, everyone should have a means to experience the game in a way that reflects their personal gaming philosophy and/or schedule.
To a degree, you identify a player desire (soloability) and then criticize developers for increasing their soloability. Pretty rough to criticize someone at both ends of the spectrum.
Still, while harsh there's a ring of truth to it since changing your game won't bring back players who've quit but will piss off elder players. Granted, the trickle of new players coming in are going to be a little more likely to stick around with the added soloability, and elder player complaints are going to bounce off as long as they can still find the gameplay they want.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I have to nitpick at you a little here
If you are talking about linking mobs to the player, where others couldn't assist unless you typed /help, then that feature was not added to encourage grouping. It was to combat kill stealing and power levelling. Kill stealing was one of the most dealth with issues by the CS in EQ and one of the most frequent complaints on the forums as well.
EQ2 tried a lot of changes to accomodate the whining on the boards. Some of the solutions were not very popular. In the beginning the crafters complained their items didn't sell, because people used hand'me'downs instead, causing an overflow of crafted items on the market. SoE made all items bind on equip and the community whined yet again. Then they changed it back and the crafters started to whine once more.
Pleasing people is hard
I love soloring around in a game. Torchlight and Batman are indeed good games for soloers, they have many side-quests for you to explore (especially Batman: Arkham City). I'm not sure whether Torchlight 2 will cripple the soloing part, but I think they don't have to. Sometimes developers are relunctant to change, that's a problem. I think they need to talk to more players and then make the decision.
Looking for good ARPGs!
Um.
Vanguard supported soloing from day one on ?
You just cant do the best stuff. But I can, with my Dread Knight, raid the Magi Hold at any time for about 20 gold / hour, solo.
So basically what you want a solo game that has the same land scale as a mmorpg with server authentication to check against cheating?
So if you had that + an irc client inbuilt you would be set?
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
I don't often post, but I will to make the following statement;
Those who solo are not playing, nor are they wanting to play a single player game.
They are not getting, nor do they want a single player experience.
Most of the time in life, you are doing your own thing, and it is not as simple as being with someone, or not being with someone.
The entire idea of playing an mmorpg solo is the fact that you are in an active world that has actual people that you are co-existing with in said world. They are there, you do not have to interact with them for them to be there.
From a roleplayer's perspective, it ruins immersion when you are forced to group with someone. Things like this should happen on their own, you shouldn't NEED to, and if you do, you should find that out on your own, and then be driven to the choice, not forced to make it.
And slightly off topic; every player's perspective SHOULD be a roleplayer's perspective, since you are playing a roleplaying game.
Yup. What he or she said ^^^^^.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
What you describe is an example of how antisocial gamers are becoming. Group-centric games rely on community, which has largely deteriorated over the years. For a good example, take WoW. Try making a new character and asking a question in any of the major cities. Typically you may get one helpful response if you're lucky, along with a dozen people either making fun of you, purposely giving you bad information to screw you up, or telling you to "L 2 Google".
Ironically its not the nerds who are the primarily anti social people. Its the regular kids.
Which is a perfectly good piece of advice. Is there a WOW question that cannot be answered by google?
Its a d-bag piece of advice that is the same as saying "figure it out for yourself". You'd just as well say nothing at all.
Asking questions is a part of learning. "L 2 Google" is not a productive answer. "You can find info on that at www.superinfoplace.com" is a productive answer. Its the people who dont know how to be social that treat asking a question like being slapped in the face. Maybe a real slap in the face would be good for those people.