Everyone has access to it, soloers just don't want to access it which is a different thing altogether. It's a matter of choice, not some artificial block. You want the content? Then join up with people and see that content, that's how it's been designed to be approached, so it's your fault if you choose to avoid it. I wouldn't go to a themepark and whine because I didn't get to go on the rollercoaster if I don't like rollercoasters.
[mod edit] The whole point is not to have to change your playstyle. A soloer should be able to solo through the entire game and never group once if they want to. A grouper should be able to group through the entire game an never solo once if they want to.
Any part of the game that forces someone to do something they don't want to do is bad. Period.
The above idiscredits you as a poster. I wrote the following (which you conveniently cut out):
"I believe that a properly balanced mmo can including soloing to end game as well as the majority of content and also include group based play that is challenging and as profitable as soloing. In fact I think group based gameplay should have accelerated progression (loot / xp) and possibly other benefits but should not exclude any solo person from achieving the same outcomes in terms of xp / loot / achievements abeit at a reduced rate."
Its quite clear to anyone with an IQ that advocating for a game where grouping was as viable as soloing and in which grouping let you attain an accelerated rate of xp gear is not advocating for enforced soloing. Its more advocating for grouping but allows for the option for soloers to compete, except at a slower rate of acqusition.
And yet you conveniently ignored Adalwulff's previous comment that said:
"Im not for forced grouping, I dont play lineage or FX, so you are wrong about me.
What your not getting, is the more solo mechanics you put into a game, it takes away any incentive for teamwork, or to group. Then you would have us believe that players would naturally group up, basically ignoring all the evidence, your idealogy is short sighted at best.".
So again, what's the difference?
What you are not getting is "the more solo mechanics you put into a game, it takes away any incentive for teamwork and to group" is just your opinion. I feel it is an opinion that lacks thought and is knee jerk emotional, especially in light of the fact that it is a response to a post in which I stated "and in which grouping lets you attain an accelerated rate of xp gear".
As a great example of how wrong you are, in EvE Online one can conduct a mining operation, build a ship, run a plex / mission entirely solo, in fact when I started; every single function, npc, solar system could be soloed by a single player. Yet by far the most profitable and likely scenario for most people even back then was grouping because it increased profit, safety even though there was NO requirement to group.
Everyones comment on this thread is based on opinion, whats your point? My opinions are based on 12 years of playing online games. Mostly MMOs.
Besides that, you are still avoiding the real issue, so I will ask again. Do you or dont you feel excluded when a dungeon or quest is offered only to groups, even if there is no loot/exp reward?
That is what I am hearing from the solo crowd, and there is a ton of those kinds comments right here in this thread, so you cant claim that its "only my opinion".
Stop deflecting and answer the question.
I have no problem with you expressing your own opinion however if I present evidence and you refute it with only an opinion and no evidence that is counterproductive to this whole discussion and you lose credibility.
Take this statement by Usualsuspect:
"What your not getting, is the more solo mechanics you put into a game, it takes away any incentive for teamwork, or to group. Then you would have us believe that players would naturally group up, basically ignoring all the evidence, your idealogy is short sighted at best."
He ties "solo mechanics" directly and solely to incentive to group when its more likely that incentive to group is not only related to solo mechanics but to loot and xp mechanics. If solo mechanics had no bearing on loot / xp (ie you only ever got loot or xp in a group) than even if soloing was x times easier and x times more fun, the majority would likely group for the loot / xp. This is how WoW works, not many people I have spoken with enjoy grinding instances for loot / xp.
In my example with EvE I provide evidence (EvE Mechanics and history) that show that even though its entirely possible to solo everything in EVE its much more likely and often you will find players band together in EvE for reasons of socializing, safety and profit through natural means rather than enforced player grouping mechanics.
The fact is (and this is a fact because I can back it up with evidence - link) that there is no need to force, coerce, reward humans for grouping up since its a natural tendency and it already provides very large rewards for those that engage in grouping.
Usual suspect says "Then you would have us believe that players would naturally group up, basically ignoring all the evidence, your idealogy is short sighted at best." to that I say absolutely, EvE provides evidence of it, scientific research provides evidence of it, human behaviour througout our history has shown this is the case.
If a developer makes an effort, rethinks the whole xp / loot / group / solo dynamic and can put together a system in which loot is fairly distributed based on WORK DONE not whether you are in a group. Since group mechanics in MMO's would naturally provide increased security, profit and socializing benefits, like real life, then yes people will naturally group up, like they do in EvE.
And the soloers, who are for various reasons unable or unwilling to group, could still solo and achieve, but in a natural way they will obviously be acheiving at a slower pace, just like real life.
The whole point is not to have to change your playstyle. A soloer should be able to solo through the entire game and never group once if they want to. A grouper should be able to group through the entire game an never solo once if they want to.
Any part of the game that forces someone to do something they don't want to do is bad. Period.
I disagree, if a game is designed in such a way that you have to solo for something or you have to group for something, then that's just the way the game is designed. There is no given right that every playstyle should be catered to, at the moment the majority of content is soloable and that's fine with me, I just don't bother playing those games. Same case with grouping, if you don't like grouping and a game is designed to promote that, then don't play it.
Different strokes for different folks, as the saying goes. Trying to cater to both sides of the table is just going to end up with a mess of a game, it just won't work, developers need to decide if they're making a solo game or a group focused game (note focused, not forced) before they decide on anything else.
The whole point is not to have to change your playstyle. A soloer should be able to solo through the entire game and never group once if they want to. A grouper should be able to group through the entire game an never solo once if they want to.
Any part of the game that forces someone to do something they don't want to do is bad. Period.
I disagree, if a game is designed in such a way that you have to solo for something or you have to group for something, then that's just the way the game is designed. There is no given right that every playstyle should be catered to, at the moment the majority of content is soloable and that's fine with me, I just don't bother playing those games. Same case with grouping, if you don't like grouping and a game is designed to promote that, then don't play it.
Different strokes for different folks, as the saying goes. Trying to cater to both sides of the table is just going to end up with a mess of a game, it just won't work, developers need to decide if they're making a solo game or a group focused game (note focused, not forced) before they decide on anything else.
You assume that developers have to cater to a specific playstyle. Why are you so convinced that this is the case? Which games can you name that are in a big mess because they deliberately tried to to cater to both solo and group play?
I disagree, if a game is designed in such a way that you have to solo for something or you have to group for something, then that's just the way the game is designed. There is no given right that every playstyle should be catered to, at the moment the majority of content is soloable and that's fine with me, I just don't bother playing those games. Same case with grouping, if you don't like grouping and a game is designed to promote that, then don't play it.
Different strokes for different folks, as the saying goes. Trying to cater to both sides of the table is just going to end up with a mess of a game, it just won't work, developers need to decide if they're making a solo game or a group focused game (note focused, not forced) before they decide on anything else.
So if they started making content that absolutely could not be grouped, that you either played solo or you could not do it at all, you'd have no problem with that then?
I can answer both people with one answer: SW: TOR. That game is a mess because they tried to cater to both sides. A long solo levelling game followed by group content at end game. Neither side were happy with that, it went too far during levelling into solo play, then completely ignored solo at max level.
There were also quests in that game that were completely solo and that was fine. I've never said I like grouping to the exclusion of soloing, I like to solo now and again when I'm feeling like I want to be alone, I just want to see MMOs have more focus on group gaming - it's a multiplayer game after all, why put it online if it's all done alone?
I've also heard that The Secret World has solo quests and that's okay with me. I've read about the game a little and it's obviously not for me, so I won't be playing it.
Originally posted by UsualSuspect I can answer both people with one answer: SW: TOR. That game is a mess because they tried to cater to both sides. A long solo levelling game followed by group content at end game. Neither side were happy with that, it went too far during levelling into solo play, then completely ignored solo at max level.
There were also quests in that game that were completely solo and that was fine. I've never said I like grouping to the exclusion of soloing, I like to solo now and again when I'm feeling like I want to be alone, I just want to see MMOs have more focus on group gaming - it's a multiplayer game after all, why put it online if it's all done alone?
I've also heard that The Secret World has solo quests and that's okay with me. I've read about the game a little and it's obviously not for me, so I won't be playing it.
Sorry I disagree, I don't think the solo vs group had anything to do with SwTor's success or lack of it. The problems with swtor hinged on the extreme linearity, problems with pvp and lack of end-game.
Actually I think people generally liked the solo story part of the game, unfortunatley the game just didn't offer much else.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
In Parallel Kingdom, it is generally much better to have allies; Mainly b/c everyone you run across will have allies so it's best not to be outnumbered!
The above idiscredits you as a poster. I wrote the following (which you conveniently cut out):
"I believe that a properly balanced mmo can including soloing to end game as well as the majority of content and also include group based play that is challenging and as profitable as soloing. In fact I think group based gameplay should have accelerated progression (loot / xp) and possibly other benefits but should not exclude any solo person from achieving the same outcomes in terms of xp / loot / achievements abeit at a reduced rate."
Its quite clear to anyone with an IQ that advocating for a game where grouping was as viable as soloing and in which grouping let you attain an accelerated rate of xp gear is not advocating for enforced soloing. Its more advocating for grouping but allows for the option for soloers to compete, except at a slower rate of acqusition.
And yet you conveniently ignored Adalwulff's previous comment that said:
"Im not for forced grouping, I dont play lineage or FX, so you are wrong about me.
What your not getting, is the more solo mechanics you put into a game, it takes away any incentive for teamwork, or to group. Then you would have us believe that players would naturally group up, basically ignoring all the evidence, your idealogy is short sighted at best.".
So again, what's the difference?
What you are not getting is "the more solo mechanics you put into a game, it takes away any incentive for teamwork and to group" is just your opinion. I feel it is an opinion that lacks thought and is knee jerk emotional, especially in light of the fact that it is a response to a post in which I stated "and in which grouping lets you attain an accelerated rate of xp gear".
As a great example of how wrong you are, in EvE Online one can conduct a mining operation, build a ship, run a plex / mission entirely solo, in fact when I started; every single function, npc, solar system could be soloed by a single player. Yet by far the most profitable and likely scenario for most people even back then was grouping because it increased profit, safety even though there was NO requirement to group.
Everyones comment on this thread is based on opinion, whats your point? My opinions are based on 12 years of playing online games. Mostly MMOs.
Besides that, you are still avoiding the real issue, so I will ask again. Do you or dont you feel excluded when a dungeon or quest is offered only to groups, even if there is no loot/exp reward?
That is what I am hearing from the solo crowd, and there is a ton of those kinds comments right here in this thread, so you cant claim that its "only my opinion".
Stop deflecting and answer the question.
I have no problem with you expressing your own opinion however if I present evidence and you refute it with only an opinion and no evidence that is counterproductive to this whole discussion and you lose credibility.
Take this statement by Usualsuspect:
"What your not getting, is the more solo mechanics you put into a game, it takes away any incentive for teamwork, or to group. Then you would have us believe that players would naturally group up, basically ignoring all the evidence, your idealogy is short sighted at best."
He ties "solo mechanics" directly and solely to incentive to group when its more likely that incentive to group is not only related to solo mechanics but to loot and xp mechanics. If solo mechanics had no bearing on loot / xp (ie you only ever got loot or xp in a group) than even if soloing was x times easier and x times more fun, the majority would likely group for the loot / xp. This is how WoW works, not many people I have spoken with enjoy grinding instances for loot / xp.
In my example with EvE I provide evidence (EvE Mechanics and history) that show that even though its entirely possible to solo everything in EVE its much more likely and often you will find players band together in EvE for reasons of socializing, safety and profit through natural means rather than enforced player grouping mechanics.
The fact is (and this is a fact because I can back it up with evidence - link) that there is no need to force, coerce, reward humans for grouping up since its a natural tendency and it already provides very large rewards for those that engage in grouping.
Usual suspect says "Then you would have us believe that players would naturally group up, basically ignoring all the evidence, your idealogy is short sighted at best." to that I say absolutely, EvE provides evidence of it, scientific research provides evidence of it, human behaviour througout our history has shown this is the case.
If a developer makes an effort, rethinks the whole xp / loot / group / solo dynamic and can put together a system in which loot is fairly distributed based on WORK DONE not whether you are in a group. Since group mechanics in MMO's would naturally provide increased security, profit and socializing benefits, like real life, then yes people will naturally group up, like they do in EvE.
And the soloers, who are for various reasons unable or unwilling to group, could still solo and achieve, but in a natural way they will obviously be acheiving at a slower pace, just like real life.
Thats a fine attempt to justify a game that is built for a soloer, not even seeing the hypocrisy of your words. Baffling.
You already admitted it, you want the game built for soloers, no group content at all, that sounds pretty selfhish to me.
You try and turn a "game option", into "forced grouping", a strawman with no straw. You are the one taking away game options, while I am adding them. There is no game mechanic stopping you from that option, its sheer selfishness that keeps you from it.
Every player agrees that online games should have plenty of options, which results in more content for everyone. Try as you might, all your doing is taking all that away, in favor of YOUR preferred playstyle.
I wouldn't go to a themepark and whine because I didn't get to go on the rollercoaster if I don't like rollercoasters.
With raid content, the analogy sounds like this : you pay in advance to get into the amusement park only to find out that if you want to ride the rollercoaster, you can't ride it now or even TODAY. You must join a group of 10 or 20 others and agree to return with said group on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday nights between 7 and 12 pm or YOU CAN’T RIDE AT ALL!
Oh, and many rewards are only available to rollercoaster riders. So even if you really LIKE rollercoasters, if you don’t reschedule many hours of your REAL LIFE, you can’t ride it. This is not merely a choice for many paying players. These schedules are game breakers. They are barriers. That’s where this amusement park analogy takes you.
Loot should be altogether independent of play style when multiple styles are extant. Why not? If a game sequesters crafting materials and plans in raid instances or as pvp rewards then these avenues of advancement are cut off from players who neither raid or pvp. There is no decent reason for this sort of design.
Usual Suspect and Adalwulff, are you or have you been group leaders or theory crafters in your party play? Most serious group advocates are boss/leader types in my experience. I don’t mean to suggest that being the boss means that a player is an oppressive jerk. The fact remains that groups need leaders and LEADERS NEED GROUPS. For some players of MMOs, being the party leader is the biggest thrill. That’s why they frequently dislike solo content. It distracts would be followers.
Without yielding to some compulsion or incentive to join a group, many people reject being lead by others as soon as they can. Our daily lives are full of leading or following. Often I think soloing is just the result of enjoying the unusual freedom of being able to accomplish things alone and without weighing the impact of our actions upon others. Solo players interact with others to EXACTLY the degree they choose. RL seldom affords so much autonomy.
I wouldn't go to a themepark and whine because I didn't get to go on the rollercoaster if I don't like rollercoasters.
With raid content, the analogy sounds like this : you pay in advance to get into the amusement park only to find out that if you want to ride the rollercoaster, you can't ride it now or even TODAY. You must join a group of 10 or 20 others and agree to return with said group on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday nights between 7 and 12 pm or YOU CAN’T RIDE AT ALL!
Oh, and many rewards are only available to rollercoaster riders. So even if you really LIKE rollercoasters, if you don’t reschedule many hours of your REAL LIFE, you can’t ride it. This is not merely a choice for many paying players. These schedules are game breakers. They are barriers. That’s where this amusement park analogy takes you.
Loot should be altogether independent of play style when multiple styles are extant. Why not? If a game sequesters crafting materials and plans in raid instances or as pvp rewards then these avenues of advancement are cut off from players who neither raid or pvp. There is no decent reason for this sort of design.
Usual Suspect and Adalwulff, are you or have you been group leaders or theory crafters in your party play? Most serious group advocates are boss/leader types in my experience. I don’t mean to suggest that being the boss means that a player is an oppressive jerk. The fact remains that groups need leaders and LEADERS NEED GROUPS. For some players of MMOs, being the party leader is the biggest thrill. That’s why they frequently dislike solo content. It distracts would be followers.
Without yielding to some compulsion or incentive to join a group, many people reject being lead by others as soon as they can. Our daily lives are full of leading or following. Often I think soloing is just the result of enjoying the unusual freedom of being able to accomplish things alone and without weighing the impact of our actions upon others. Solo players interact with others to EXACTLY the degree they choose. RL seldom affords so much autonomy.
Raiding, well WoW raiding, is a good example of what NOT to do with group content.
I am in total agreement with you guys on that. That content was abused because it was designed all wrong. Players were being locked out, it was the main force behind elitism in WOW, with all the gear grinding.
But most of all, the content was just bad, repititive and just boring.
I wouldn't go to a themepark and whine because I didn't get to go on the rollercoaster if I don't like rollercoasters.
With raid content, the analogy sounds like this : you pay in advance to get into the amusement park only to find out that if you want to ride the rollercoaster, you can't ride it now or even TODAY. You must join a group of 10 or 20 others and agree to return with said group on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday nights between 7 and 12 pm or YOU CAN’T RIDE AT ALL!
Oh, and many rewards are only available to rollercoaster riders. So even if you really LIKE rollercoasters, if you don’t reschedule many hours of your REAL LIFE, you can’t ride it. This is not merely a choice for many paying players. These schedules are game breakers. They are barriers. That’s where this amusement park analogy takes you.
Loot should be altogether independent of play style when multiple styles are extant. Why not? If a game sequesters crafting materials and plans in raid instances or as pvp rewards then these avenues of advancement are cut off from players who neither raid or pvp. There is no decent reason for this sort of design.
Usual Suspect and Adalwulff, are you or have you been group leaders or theory crafters in your party play? Most serious group advocates are boss/leader types in my experience. I don’t mean to suggest that being the boss means that a player is an oppressive jerk. The fact remains that groups need leaders and LEADERS NEED GROUPS. For some players of MMOs, being the party leader is the biggest thrill. That’s why they frequently dislike solo content. It distracts would be followers.
Without yielding to some compulsion or incentive to join a group, many people reject being lead by others as soon as they can. Our daily lives are full of leading or following. Often I think soloing is just the result of enjoying the unusual freedom of being able to accomplish things alone and without weighing the impact of our actions upon others. Solo players interact with others to EXACTLY the degree they choose. RL seldom affords so much autonomy.
Well, a rollercoaster generally does have a lot of people onboard before it starts moving. Unless the themepark is dead then they wait until there are more seats filled before sending it around the track, so I'd expect 10 or 20 people to be along for the ride. That said, the point was about preference - if I don't like rollercoasters then no amount of selling will get me on one. The same can be said for group content - if you don't like it, then don't do it, just don't whine about lack of loot or missing content purely because your preference stops you from taking part.
On the point of loot, the majority of loot from raids tend to be geared toward making that and future raids a little easier. If all you're doing is soloing and your current equipment is fine then why worry about it? All I can see is soloers are whining, "They gots stuffs that I don't and I WANTS IT! Wahhhh!". That's how it comes across to me. As I said though, it's up to you if you do the content and get the equipment or not, I don't understand why soloers are crying about this fact. You're playing a multiplayer game, you should have gone in at level 1 realising that you might need to.. oh, I don't know.. do some multiplayer content perhaps?
To answer your question, however, I tend to jump into open groups rather than lead them, I don't like being the figure head for what the group is doing as I always feel I'll disappoint someone if I make a bad choice, and I don't like disappointing people. I have lead groups when there doesn't seem to be anyone else up to the task, like recently on DDO where nobody was doing the harbor quests and I was at that level, I started a group up. It's not something I like to do, but will do it out of necessity if I have to.
Theory crafter? Not sure what you mean by that, but I'm thinking perhaps working out how to defeat a raid boss. I've put my 2 copper pieces in on discussions but that's it, someone else always runs that side of things. I don't like running groups, the thought of running raids just frightens the hell out of me.
With raid content, the analogy sounds like this : you pay in advance to get into the amusement park only to find out that if you want to ride the rollercoaster, you can't ride it now or even TODAY. You must join a group of 10 or 20 others and agree to return with said group on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday nights between 7 and 12 pm or YOU CAN’T RIDE AT ALL!
Oh, and many rewards are only available to rollercoaster riders. So even if you really LIKE rollercoasters, if you don’t reschedule many hours of your REAL LIFE, you can’t ride it. This is not merely a choice for many paying players. These schedules are game breakers. They are barriers. That’s where this amusement park analogy takes you.
I'm not even talking about raiding, but I can borrow your analogy. It is like going to an amusement park, but being told that you can't ride the roller coaster unless you can bring 30 friends with you. And yes, lots of rewards await you on the roller coaster, but unless you want to either bring everyone you know to the park or go try to find 29 strangers to get into a group with, you can't ride.
I paid the same amount to get into the park as everyone else did, I should be able to ride all the rides without restrictions.
With raid content, the analogy sounds like this : you pay in advance to get into the amusement park only to find out that if you want to ride the rollercoaster, you can't ride it now or even TODAY. You must join a group of 10 or 20 others and agree to return with said group on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday nights between 7 and 12 pm or YOU CAN’T RIDE AT ALL!
Oh, and many rewards are only available to rollercoaster riders. So even if you really LIKE rollercoasters, if you don’t reschedule many hours of your REAL LIFE, you can’t ride it. This is not merely a choice for many paying players. These schedules are game breakers. They are barriers. That’s where this amusement park analogy takes you.
I'm not even talking about raiding, but I can borrow your analogy. It is like going to an amusement park, but being told that you can't ride the roller coaster unless you can bring 30 friends with you. And yes, lots of rewards await you on the roller coaster, but unless you want to either bring everyone you know to the park or go try to find 29 strangers to get into a group with, you can't ride.
I paid the same amount to get into the park as everyone else did, I should be able to ride all the rides without restrictions.
Another really bad analogy, since groups are usually 6-8 men max, your statement could be considered an out and out lie.
Unless your talking about WoW raiding, but there is a ton of group content outside of WoW raiding, and outside of WoW completly.
I paid the same amount too, and I happen to have lots of friends, and family who play MMOs. We all love the group content, and your trying to take that away from us.
Originally posted by Ikonoclastia And yet you conveniently ignored Adalwulff's previous comment that said: "Im not for forced grouping, I dont play lineage or FX, so you are wrong about me. What your not getting, is the more solo mechanics you put into a game, it takes away any incentive for teamwork, or to group. Then you would have us believe that players would naturally group up, basically ignoring all the evidence, your idealogy is short sighted at best.".
It seems that #1 reason given for people who like to group do so because they enjoy the company of others. I don't know of ANY game mechanics that either take away or add to this experience.
What this argument boils down to is: "I want everyone forced to group with me."
That changes things. There is not a MMO made today that does not allow people to group. Not one.
There are group oriented mechanics in almost every MMO. Dungeons are not solo-able, I think. Raids are definitely not solo-able. World bosses are group encounters. I have not read every post in every thread, but of what I have read, I don't recall "soloers" clamoring for solo dungeons/raids/world bosses.
That leaves people who enjoy the social aspect of grouping wanting everyone playing the same way, as it affects their own style of play. In later MMOS, I find myself grouping from random comments made in local chat. That gets my attention (and usually a laugh) and a convo ensues. We end up grouping up for a bit and if we have fun, continue to do so.
Give me people in my group who want to be there, not because they HAVE to be there. Go play! Be social!
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I'm not even talking about raiding, but I can borrow your analogy. It is like going to an amusement park, but being told that you can't ride the roller coaster unless you can bring 30 friends with you. And yes, lots of rewards await you on the roller coaster, but unless you want to either bring everyone you know to the park or go try to find 29 strangers to get into a group with, you can't ride.
I paid the same amount to get into the park as everyone else did, I should be able to ride all the rides without restrictions.
Or, to put a different spin on it, you can't go on the rollercoaster without 30 other people due to safety precautions. The ride is finely tuned to account for the weight of bodies. If you go on alone then the car can derail and you will plunge to a quick and horrible death. Of course, no roller coaster would be built like that, but that matches up with how raiding works.
And sure, you paid the same amount to get into the park, much like I paid the same amount to buy other games with parts I'll never play. Looking up I see Call of Duty Modern Warfare sitting on my shelf - I've never played the multiplayer game part of that as I don't like FPS multiplayer. Does that mean I should cry about it? Or realise that it's my choice not to play that part of the game and simply move on?
What this argument boils down to is: "I want everyone forced to group with me."
That changes things. There is not a MMO made today that does not allow people to group. Not one.
And what soloers are arguing is, "I want to be able to solo everything.". Just look up at Cephus404's post, he's saying he should have access to, and be able to complete, raids on his own, not with 30 other people. The thing pro-groupers are arguing about is the fact that if everything is soloable then it removes the need for groups. If content is soloable then by definition it's going to be simple to four or five people grouped up. So simple it's not even worth grouping for.
Some are saying that scalable content fixes this, but there's only been one game I can think of that got scalable content right and that's DDO. 99% of MMO's are created with set locations and set mobs that are just sitting around waiting to be killed. If a soloer can kill those mobs in a few seconds then there's no incentive, no reason, no point whatsoever in creating a group to tackle that same content.
Pro-soloers say that if we wanted to group then we would regardless of the difficulty of content, and that's naive at best. People don't group up for something they can do alone. You don't invite 3 friends around to help you change a lightbulb, or hire six people to help you make a slice of toast. Same principle. If it's so easy you can do it alone your natural instinct is to do it alone. That's what people don't seem to understand. The option might be there but it's comical to think that the option would be taken for such simple tasks.
Another really bad analogy, since groups are usually 6-8 men max, your statement could be considered an out and out lie.
Unless your talking about WoW raiding, but there is a ton of group content outside of WoW raiding, and outside of WoW completly.
I paid the same amount too, and I happen to have lots of friends, and family who play MMOs. We all love the group content, and your trying to take that away from us.
Not cool man, not cool at all.
It's not my fault that you're only defining "group content" as things that you are required to group for and cannot play any other way. The reality is, there ought to just be content. It shouldn't be group content. It shouldn't be solo content. It's just content. You can play it no matter what playstyle you prefer. You want to solo it? You solo it and it reacts to you as solo content. If you want to group it, you group it and it reacts to you as group content. There is no difference whatsoever. You have access to everything and so do I.
And what soloers are arguing is, "I want to be able to solo everything.". Just look up at Cephus404's post, he's saying he should have access to, and be able to complete, raids on his own, not with 30 other people. The thing pro-groupers are arguing about is the fact that if everything is soloable then it removes the need for groups. If content is soloable then by definition it's going to be simple to four or five people grouped up. So simple it's not even worth grouping for.
Ah, see, that's where you're wrong. It removes the *NEED* for groups, but not the *DESIRE* for groups. People don't have to group. They should do it because they WANT TO!
If you can't find enough people who are willing to group, that's your problem. Apparently, your chosen playstyle is even less popular than we think if that's the case.
Originally posted by UsualSuspect Originally posted by AlBQuirky What this argument boils down to is: "I want everyone forced to group with me."That changes things. There is not a MMO made today that does not allow people to group. Not one.
And what soloers are arguing is, "I want to be able to solo everything.". Just look up at Cephus404's post, he's saying he should have access to, and be able to complete, raids on his own, not with 30 other people. The thing pro-groupers are arguing about is the fact that if everything is soloable then it removes the need for groups. If content is soloable then by definition it's going to be simple to four or five people grouped up. So simple it's not even worth grouping for.
Some are saying that scalable content fixes this, but there's only been one game I can think of that got scalable content right and that's DDO. 99% of MMO's are created with set locations and set mobs that are just sitting around waiting to be killed. If a soloer can kill those mobs in a few seconds then there's no incentive, no reason, no point whatsoever in creating a group to tackle that same content.
Pro-soloers say that if we wanted to group then we would regardless of the difficulty of content, and that's naive at best. People don't group up for something they can do alone. You don't invite 3 friends around to help you change a lightbulb, or hire six people to help you make a slice of toast. Same principle. If it's so easy you can do it alone your natural instinct is to do it alone. That's what people don't seem to understand. The option might be there but it's comical to think that the option would be taken for such simple tasks.
I may invite friends over to change a lightbulb. Order some pizza, have some beer and maybe watch a DVD or play a boardgame afterwards.
In WoW, I have been in groups for collect x quests! No need to, but it was more fun then soloing at the time. At the same time, I don't need to group to have fun. Sometimes, I feel anti-social. I just want to log in, kill stuff, and move on. Other times, I just get caught up in chain quests and forget the rest of the gaming world.
I guess I am missing the point of why people desire to group up together. From what I am reading, it sounds like people want forced grouping, just so people who like to group can, not because they enjoy the social aspects of said group. People who like the social aspects don't seem to have a problem finding groups to play with.
Now, I am NOT against games that have forced grouping. I just don't enjoy them. I don't want my online time dictated by waiting for others to play with.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Ah, see, that's where you're wrong. It removes the *NEED* for groups, but not the *DESIRE* for groups. People don't have to group. They should do it because they WANT TO!If you can't find enough people who are willing to group, that's your problem. Apparently, your chosen playstyle is even less popular than we think if that's the case.
This ideal you have that people will just come together through some instinctive mutual interest is really bizarre. People don't and won't without reason. How many strangers do you start hanging out with in your everyday life? Ever walk down the street and strike up conversation with the person you're walking next to? I highly doubt it.
Without a need to socialise or group, people won't do it, especially if what they need to do can be done on their own. That's the point of multiplayer games, to bring people together and have them work against or with each other. How many people have stories of meeting people in MMOs from across the globe after spending the night grouped in a dungeon? How many people say the same after soloing the same place?
A multiplayer game needs multiplayer content, not some romantic ideal of people coming together out of a desire to meet new people. There are chat rooms for that sort of thing, most offering other desires that can be fulfilled.
What this argument boils down to is: "I want everyone forced to group with me."
That changes things. There is not a MMO made today that does not allow people to group. Not one.
And what soloers are arguing is, "I want to be able to solo everything.". Just look up at Cephus404's post, he's saying he should have access to, and be able to complete, raids on his own, not with 30 other people. The thing pro-groupers are arguing about is the fact that if everything is soloable then it removes the need for groups. If content is soloable then by definition it's going to be simple to four or five people grouped up. So simple it's not even worth grouping for.
Some are saying that scalable content fixes this, but there's only been one game I can think of that got scalable content right and that's DDO. 99% of MMO's are created with set locations and set mobs that are just sitting around waiting to be killed. If a soloer can kill those mobs in a few seconds then there's no incentive, no reason, no point whatsoever in creating a group to tackle that same content.
Pro-soloers say that if we wanted to group then we would regardless of the difficulty of content, and that's naive at best. People don't group up for something they can do alone. You don't invite 3 friends around to help you change a lightbulb, or hire six people to help you make a slice of toast. Same principle. If it's so easy you can do it alone your natural instinct is to do it alone. That's what people don't seem to understand. The option might be there but it's comical to think that the option would be taken for such simple tasks.
He should be able to do raids himself, why not? Even more so if its in an instance. Who cares if he does? As long as its balanced it doesn't matter (example: if it takes 1 person 10 hours, perhaps it only takes 10 people 1 hour, making it possible for 10 people to run it 10 times in the same time it takes to run it 1 time with 1 person)
Soloable content does not necessarily mean trivial content for groups. In fact its not even necessary for them to run the same content at all.
We're not talking about current MMO's, nor are we talking about the 99% figure you pulled out of thin air. We are talking about a theorectical game which doesn't include your disincentives. And we can choose to ignore the possibility of a complete lack of creativity and innovation which you seem to want to include in your idea of MMO production, so that we can create something that satisfies both camps.
If a game is created properly there should be no necessity to enforce grouping. The game itself will provide the playing field, the content will provide the goal posts, the ball and the rules and the players will team up because its a fun game to play together. If players are running off by themselves when they would rather group then thats not a failure of the players its a failure of the game. If they are running off by themselves because they would rather not group than thats what they should be allowed to do.
Edit:
To answer the above question, yes, people will naturally group up simply for the sake of conversation. There are underlying reasons of security, reproduction, profit involved in the psychology behind it but people like to group together. Its a poor game that sociable players, given the option to gain equal or greater profit, won't choose to group. Game problem, not player problem.
What this argument boils down to is: "I want everyone forced to group with me."
That changes things. There is not a MMO made today that does not allow people to group. Not one.
And what soloers are arguing is, "I want to be able to solo everything.". Just look up at Cephus404's post, he's saying he should have access to, and be able to complete, raids on his own, not with 30 other people. The thing pro-groupers are arguing about is the fact that if everything is soloable then it removes the need for groups. If content is soloable then by definition it's going to be simple to four or five people grouped up. So simple it's not even worth grouping for.
Some are saying that scalable content fixes this, but there's only been one game I can think of that got scalable content right and that's DDO. 99% of MMO's are created with set locations and set mobs that are just sitting around waiting to be killed. If a soloer can kill those mobs in a few seconds then there's no incentive, no reason, no point whatsoever in creating a group to tackle that same content.
Pro-soloers say that if we wanted to group then we would regardless of the difficulty of content, and that's naive at best. People don't group up for something they can do alone. You don't invite 3 friends around to help you change a lightbulb, or hire six people to help you make a slice of toast. Same principle. If it's so easy you can do it alone your natural instinct is to do it alone. That's what people don't seem to understand. The option might be there but it's comical to think that the option would be taken for such simple tasks.
He should be able to do raids himself, why not? Even more so if its in an instance. Who cares if he does? As long as its balanced it doesn't matter (example: if it takes 1 person 10 hours, perhaps it only takes 10 people 1 hour, making it possible for 10 people to run it 10 times in the same time it takes to run it 1 time with 1 person)
Soloable content does not necessarily mean trivial content for groups. In fact its not even necessary for them to run the same content at all.
We're not talking about current MMO's, nor are we talking about the 99% figure you pulled out of thin air. We are talking about a theorectical game which doesn't include your disincentives. And we can choose to ignore the possibility of a complete lack of creativity and innovation which you seem to want to include in your idea of MMO production, so that we can create something that satisfies both camps.
If a game is created properly there should be no necessity to enforce grouping. The game itself will provide the playing field, the content will provide the goal posts, the ball and the rules and the players will team up because its a fun game to play together. If players are running off by themselves when they would rather group then thats not a failure of the players its a failure of the game. If they are running off by themselves because they would rather not group than thats what they should be allowed to do.
Edit:
To answer the above question, yes, people will naturally group up simply for the sake of conversation. There are underlying reasons of security, reproduction, profit involved in the psychology behind it but people like to group together. Its a poor game that sociable players, given the option to gain equal or greater profit, won't choose to group. Game problem, not player problem.
Yes, solo content is definitly trivial for groups, for very obvious reasons, the content is built for ONE person. I thought everyone knew that..lol
And your wrong again about players naturaly grouping up for .... conversation? That is obsurd, and what online game allows for reproduction? LOL!!!
Bottom line is simple, your way is less content, our way is more content. There is NO denying that.
He should be able to do raids himself, why not? Even more so if its in an instance. Who cares if he does? As long as its balanced it doesn't matter (example: if it takes 1 person 10 hours, perhaps it only takes 10 people 1 hour, making it possible for 10 people to run it 10 times in the same time it takes to run it 1 time with 1 person)
Soloable content does not necessarily mean trivial content for groups. In fact its not even necessary for them to run the same content at all.
We're not talking about current MMO's, nor are we talking about the 99% figure you pulled out of thin air. We are talking about a theorectical game which doesn't include your disincentives. And we can choose to ignore the possibility of a complete lack of creativity and innovation which you seem to want to include in your idea of MMO production, so that we can create something that satisfies both camps.
If a game is created properly there should be no necessity to enforce grouping. The game itself will provide the playing field, the content will provide the goal posts, the ball and the rules and the players will team up because its a fun game to play together. If players are running off by themselves when they would rather group then thats not a failure of the players its a failure of the game. If they are running off by themselves because they would rather not group than thats what they should be allowed to do.
Edit:
To answer the above question, yes, people will naturally group up simply for the sake of conversation. There are underlying reasons of security, reproduction, profit involved in the psychology behind it but people like to group together. Its a poor game that sociable players, given the option to gain equal or greater profit, won't choose to group. Game problem, not player problem.
Yes, solo content is definitly trivial for groups, for very obvious reasons, the content is built for ONE person. I thought everyone knew that..lol
And your wrong again about players naturaly grouping up for .... conversation? That is obsurd, and what online game allows for reproduction? LOL!!!
Bottom line is simple, your way is less content, our way is more content. There is NO denying that.
[mod edit]
[mod edit] When you add options, you add content. Now your trying to tell us that dungeons can be solo content or group content, depending on your gear. That is some baffling logic!
Everyone knows that "humans", as you put it...lol, will follow the path of least resistence. I have never heard of players grouping up, only to gimp themselves, all because they wish to chat. Most players do that in the general chat channels.
Your analogies are ridiculous, and your logic is full of straw.
Comments
[mod edit] The whole point is not to have to change your playstyle. A soloer should be able to solo through the entire game and never group once if they want to. A grouper should be able to group through the entire game an never solo once if they want to.
Any part of the game that forces someone to do something they don't want to do is bad. Period.
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 have no problem with you expressing your own opinion however if I present evidence and you refute it with only an opinion and no evidence that is counterproductive to this whole discussion and you lose credibility.
Take this statement by Usualsuspect:
"What your not getting, is the more solo mechanics you put into a game, it takes away any incentive for teamwork, or to group. Then you would have us believe that players would naturally group up, basically ignoring all the evidence, your idealogy is short sighted at best."
He ties "solo mechanics" directly and solely to incentive to group when its more likely that incentive to group is not only related to solo mechanics but to loot and xp mechanics. If solo mechanics had no bearing on loot / xp (ie you only ever got loot or xp in a group) than even if soloing was x times easier and x times more fun, the majority would likely group for the loot / xp. This is how WoW works, not many people I have spoken with enjoy grinding instances for loot / xp.
In my example with EvE I provide evidence (EvE Mechanics and history) that show that even though its entirely possible to solo everything in EVE its much more likely and often you will find players band together in EvE for reasons of socializing, safety and profit through natural means rather than enforced player grouping mechanics.
The fact is (and this is a fact because I can back it up with evidence - link) that there is no need to force, coerce, reward humans for grouping up since its a natural tendency and it already provides very large rewards for those that engage in grouping.
Usual suspect says "Then you would have us believe that players would naturally group up, basically ignoring all the evidence, your idealogy is short sighted at best." to that I say absolutely, EvE provides evidence of it, scientific research provides evidence of it, human behaviour througout our history has shown this is the case.
If a developer makes an effort, rethinks the whole xp / loot / group / solo dynamic and can put together a system in which loot is fairly distributed based on WORK DONE not whether you are in a group. Since group mechanics in MMO's would naturally provide increased security, profit and socializing benefits, like real life, then yes people will naturally group up, like they do in EvE.
And the soloers, who are for various reasons unable or unwilling to group, could still solo and achieve, but in a natural way they will obviously be acheiving at a slower pace, just like real life.
I disagree, if a game is designed in such a way that you have to solo for something or you have to group for something, then that's just the way the game is designed. There is no given right that every playstyle should be catered to, at the moment the majority of content is soloable and that's fine with me, I just don't bother playing those games. Same case with grouping, if you don't like grouping and a game is designed to promote that, then don't play it.
Different strokes for different folks, as the saying goes. Trying to cater to both sides of the table is just going to end up with a mess of a game, it just won't work, developers need to decide if they're making a solo game or a group focused game (note focused, not forced) before they decide on anything else.
I was actually quoting Adalwulff.
You assume that developers have to cater to a specific playstyle. Why are you so convinced that this is the case? Which games can you name that are in a big mess because they deliberately tried to to cater to both solo and group play?
So if they started making content that absolutely could not be grouped, that you either played solo or you could not do it at all, you'd have no problem with that then?
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
There were also quests in that game that were completely solo and that was fine. I've never said I like grouping to the exclusion of soloing, I like to solo now and again when I'm feeling like I want to be alone, I just want to see MMOs have more focus on group gaming - it's a multiplayer game after all, why put it online if it's all done alone?
I've also heard that The Secret World has solo quests and that's okay with me. I've read about the game a little and it's obviously not for me, so I won't be playing it.
Sorry I disagree, I don't think the solo vs group had anything to do with SwTor's success or lack of it. The problems with swtor hinged on the extreme linearity, problems with pvp and lack of end-game.
Actually I think people generally liked the solo story part of the game, unfortunatley the game just didn't offer much else.
In Parallel Kingdom, it is generally much better to have allies; Mainly b/c everyone you run across will have allies so it's best not to be outnumbered!
Thats a fine attempt to justify a game that is built for a soloer, not even seeing the hypocrisy of your words. Baffling.
You already admitted it, you want the game built for soloers, no group content at all, that sounds pretty selfhish to me.
You try and turn a "game option", into "forced grouping", a strawman with no straw. You are the one taking away game options, while I am adding them. There is no game mechanic stopping you from that option, its sheer selfishness that keeps you from it.
Every player agrees that online games should have plenty of options, which results in more content for everyone. Try as you might, all your doing is taking all that away, in favor of YOUR preferred playstyle.
Raiding, well WoW raiding, is a good example of what NOT to do with group content.
I am in total agreement with you guys on that. That content was abused because it was designed all wrong. Players were being locked out, it was the main force behind elitism in WOW, with all the gear grinding.
But most of all, the content was just bad, repititive and just boring.
Well, a rollercoaster generally does have a lot of people onboard before it starts moving. Unless the themepark is dead then they wait until there are more seats filled before sending it around the track, so I'd expect 10 or 20 people to be along for the ride. That said, the point was about preference - if I don't like rollercoasters then no amount of selling will get me on one. The same can be said for group content - if you don't like it, then don't do it, just don't whine about lack of loot or missing content purely because your preference stops you from taking part.
On the point of loot, the majority of loot from raids tend to be geared toward making that and future raids a little easier. If all you're doing is soloing and your current equipment is fine then why worry about it? All I can see is soloers are whining, "They gots stuffs that I don't and I WANTS IT! Wahhhh!". That's how it comes across to me. As I said though, it's up to you if you do the content and get the equipment or not, I don't understand why soloers are crying about this fact. You're playing a multiplayer game, you should have gone in at level 1 realising that you might need to.. oh, I don't know.. do some multiplayer content perhaps?
To answer your question, however, I tend to jump into open groups rather than lead them, I don't like being the figure head for what the group is doing as I always feel I'll disappoint someone if I make a bad choice, and I don't like disappointing people. I have lead groups when there doesn't seem to be anyone else up to the task, like recently on DDO where nobody was doing the harbor quests and I was at that level, I started a group up. It's not something I like to do, but will do it out of necessity if I have to.
Theory crafter? Not sure what you mean by that, but I'm thinking perhaps working out how to defeat a raid boss. I've put my 2 copper pieces in on discussions but that's it, someone else always runs that side of things. I don't like running groups, the thought of running raids just frightens the hell out of me.
I'm not even talking about raiding, but I can borrow your analogy. It is like going to an amusement park, but being told that you can't ride the roller coaster unless you can bring 30 friends with you. And yes, lots of rewards await you on the roller coaster, but unless you want to either bring everyone you know to the park or go try to find 29 strangers to get into a group with, you can't ride.
I paid the same amount to get into the park as everyone else did, I should be able to ride all the rides without restrictions.
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
Another really bad analogy, since groups are usually 6-8 men max, your statement could be considered an out and out lie.
Unless your talking about WoW raiding, but there is a ton of group content outside of WoW raiding, and outside of WoW completly.
I paid the same amount too, and I happen to have lots of friends, and family who play MMOs. We all love the group content, and your trying to take that away from us.
Not cool man, not cool at all.
What this argument boils down to is:
"I want everyone forced to group with me."
That changes things. There is not a MMO made today that does not allow people to group. Not one.
There are group oriented mechanics in almost every MMO. Dungeons are not solo-able, I think. Raids are definitely not solo-able. World bosses are group encounters. I have not read every post in every thread, but of what I have read, I don't recall "soloers" clamoring for solo dungeons/raids/world bosses.
That leaves people who enjoy the social aspect of grouping wanting everyone playing the same way, as it affects their own style of play. In later MMOS, I find myself grouping from random comments made in local chat. That gets my attention (and usually a laugh) and a convo ensues. We end up grouping up for a bit and if we have fun, continue to do so.
Give me people in my group who want to be there, not because they HAVE to be there. Go play! Be social!
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Or, to put a different spin on it, you can't go on the rollercoaster without 30 other people due to safety precautions. The ride is finely tuned to account for the weight of bodies. If you go on alone then the car can derail and you will plunge to a quick and horrible death. Of course, no roller coaster would be built like that, but that matches up with how raiding works.
And sure, you paid the same amount to get into the park, much like I paid the same amount to buy other games with parts I'll never play. Looking up I see Call of Duty Modern Warfare sitting on my shelf - I've never played the multiplayer game part of that as I don't like FPS multiplayer. Does that mean I should cry about it? Or realise that it's my choice not to play that part of the game and simply move on?
And what soloers are arguing is, "I want to be able to solo everything.". Just look up at Cephus404's post, he's saying he should have access to, and be able to complete, raids on his own, not with 30 other people. The thing pro-groupers are arguing about is the fact that if everything is soloable then it removes the need for groups. If content is soloable then by definition it's going to be simple to four or five people grouped up. So simple it's not even worth grouping for.
Some are saying that scalable content fixes this, but there's only been one game I can think of that got scalable content right and that's DDO. 99% of MMO's are created with set locations and set mobs that are just sitting around waiting to be killed. If a soloer can kill those mobs in a few seconds then there's no incentive, no reason, no point whatsoever in creating a group to tackle that same content.
Pro-soloers say that if we wanted to group then we would regardless of the difficulty of content, and that's naive at best. People don't group up for something they can do alone. You don't invite 3 friends around to help you change a lightbulb, or hire six people to help you make a slice of toast. Same principle. If it's so easy you can do it alone your natural instinct is to do it alone. That's what people don't seem to understand. The option might be there but it's comical to think that the option would be taken for such simple tasks.
It's not my fault that you're only defining "group content" as things that you are required to group for and cannot play any other way. The reality is, there ought to just be content. It shouldn't be group content. It shouldn't be solo content. It's just content. You can play it no matter what playstyle you prefer. You want to solo it? You solo it and it reacts to you as solo content. If you want to group it, you group it and it reacts to you as group content. There is no difference whatsoever. You have access to everything and so do I.
Of course, you don't like that.
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
Ah, see, that's where you're wrong. It removes the *NEED* for groups, but not the *DESIRE* for groups. People don't have to group. They should do it because they WANT TO!
If you can't find enough people who are willing to group, that's your problem. Apparently, your chosen playstyle is even less popular than we think if that's the case.
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
Some are saying that scalable content fixes this, but there's only been one game I can think of that got scalable content right and that's DDO. 99% of MMO's are created with set locations and set mobs that are just sitting around waiting to be killed. If a soloer can kill those mobs in a few seconds then there's no incentive, no reason, no point whatsoever in creating a group to tackle that same content.
Pro-soloers say that if we wanted to group then we would regardless of the difficulty of content, and that's naive at best. People don't group up for something they can do alone. You don't invite 3 friends around to help you change a lightbulb, or hire six people to help you make a slice of toast. Same principle. If it's so easy you can do it alone your natural instinct is to do it alone. That's what people don't seem to understand. The option might be there but it's comical to think that the option would be taken for such simple tasks.
I may invite friends over to change a lightbulb. Order some pizza, have some beer and maybe watch a DVD or play a boardgame afterwards.
In WoW, I have been in groups for collect x quests! No need to, but it was more fun then soloing at the time. At the same time, I don't need to group to have fun. Sometimes, I feel anti-social. I just want to log in, kill stuff, and move on. Other times, I just get caught up in chain quests and forget the rest of the gaming world.
I guess I am missing the point of why people desire to group up together. From what I am reading, it sounds like people want forced grouping, just so people who like to group can, not because they enjoy the social aspects of said group. People who like the social aspects don't seem to have a problem finding groups to play with.
Now, I am NOT against games that have forced grouping. I just don't enjoy them. I don't want my online time dictated by waiting for others to play with.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
This ideal you have that people will just come together through some instinctive mutual interest is really bizarre. People don't and won't without reason. How many strangers do you start hanging out with in your everyday life? Ever walk down the street and strike up conversation with the person you're walking next to? I highly doubt it.Without a need to socialise or group, people won't do it, especially if what they need to do can be done on their own. That's the point of multiplayer games, to bring people together and have them work against or with each other. How many people have stories of meeting people in MMOs from across the globe after spending the night grouped in a dungeon? How many people say the same after soloing the same place?
A multiplayer game needs multiplayer content, not some romantic ideal of people coming together out of a desire to meet new people. There are chat rooms for that sort of thing, most offering other desires that can be fulfilled.
He should be able to do raids himself, why not? Even more so if its in an instance. Who cares if he does? As long as its balanced it doesn't matter (example: if it takes 1 person 10 hours, perhaps it only takes 10 people 1 hour, making it possible for 10 people to run it 10 times in the same time it takes to run it 1 time with 1 person)
Soloable content does not necessarily mean trivial content for groups. In fact its not even necessary for them to run the same content at all.
We're not talking about current MMO's, nor are we talking about the 99% figure you pulled out of thin air. We are talking about a theorectical game which doesn't include your disincentives. And we can choose to ignore the possibility of a complete lack of creativity and innovation which you seem to want to include in your idea of MMO production, so that we can create something that satisfies both camps.
If a game is created properly there should be no necessity to enforce grouping. The game itself will provide the playing field, the content will provide the goal posts, the ball and the rules and the players will team up because its a fun game to play together. If players are running off by themselves when they would rather group then thats not a failure of the players its a failure of the game. If they are running off by themselves because they would rather not group than thats what they should be allowed to do.
Edit:
To answer the above question, yes, people will naturally group up simply for the sake of conversation. There are underlying reasons of security, reproduction, profit involved in the psychology behind it but people like to group together. Its a poor game that sociable players, given the option to gain equal or greater profit, won't choose to group. Game problem, not player problem.
Yes, solo content is definitly trivial for groups, for very obvious reasons, the content is built for ONE person. I thought everyone knew that..lol
And your wrong again about players naturaly grouping up for .... conversation? That is obsurd, and what online game allows for reproduction? LOL!!!
Bottom line is simple, your way is less content, our way is more content. There is NO denying that.
[mod edit] When you add options, you add content. Now your trying to tell us that dungeons can be solo content or group content, depending on your gear. That is some baffling logic!
Everyone knows that "humans", as you put it...lol, will follow the path of least resistence. I have never heard of players grouping up, only to gimp themselves, all because they wish to chat. Most players do that in the general chat channels.
Your analogies are ridiculous, and your logic is full of straw.