Originally posted by Scott1102 I won't skip around the bush to please other ppl or to avade criticism.I HATE! Solo play in MMORPG's. The clue is in the title of the genre ppl!
Does the "G" in MMORPG stand for "Grouping?" Is grouping the ONLY way to interact with other players in a game? Personally, I interact with MORE people when I am NOT grouped than when I am. I guess this argument just goes over my head when I see it. I see it a lot, too.
Multiplayer does not equal group. Many times, it is player AGAINST another player. What then?
- 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 love the difference group play and solo play make on an MMO RPG. I always create my first character with the intent of playing by myself to get the best RP experience the developers worked to offer. The only exception I make with this character is to experience each dungeon or forced multiplayer experience once. If I've gotten further while playing a separate character with friends, I will skip dungeons entirely.
The multiplayer experience in MMO's are always different per encounter. I recently started playing RIFT since having put the game down a month after launch. Now that I'm playing through a solo character about an hour a day, I find the interactions with other players when closing a rift is the best experience I've had online. Whether the rift ends with a wave or "good job" or a conversation that leads into completing quests and bouncing questions off each other, I can't help but feel that this is the great game time the developers envisioned in rift. I could speak days about the amazing storytelling of my band of friends throughout every quest area Star Wars the Knights of the Old Republic offered. ^_^
To sum up my opinion, I value both the individual and multiplayer experiences MMO's have to offer.
A MMO gives the player the ability to interact with other people in the same virtual environment but this do not necessarily means someone landed to a MMO because wanted gaming group. People only want to feel those around are real players and not bots but perhaps those who play MMOs in the lone way are reflecting how they are in the real life, loners people who are not easygoing and prefer to work alone.
I like the idea that there is a big ass zone out there, that nobody ever likes going to but once in a while the draw to be there is too great for certain people. So I'm like 3 hours deep into this zone and it's hostile, hard and oppressive. Suddenly, another player pops up along and we see each other and decide that we could really benefit one another by partying up.
I realize a lot of people think group play vs solo play is "Raid Content vs Questing" but to me man... there is nothing better than just being by yourself in a world, where another player could just pop up any time.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
I think group play only works if it is done right, and most games fail to do it right unfortunately. I don't want to wait in a lobby, and I don't want to have to wade through spam to get into a group. I also don't want to rely on having friends online to get a group setup. The gameplay needs to be built around natural groups forming to accomplish co-op and competitive goals. This is clearly much harder said than done, but should be something to strive for.
I like the idea that there is a big ass zone out there, that nobody ever likes going to but once in a while the draw to be there is too great for certain people. So I'm like 3 hours deep into this zone and it's hostile, hard and oppressive. Suddenly, another player pops up along and we see each other and decide that we could really benefit one another by partying up.
I realize a lot of people think group play vs solo play is "Raid Content vs Questing" but to me man... there is nothing better than just being by yourself in a world, where another player could just pop up any time.
totally agree.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
MMO were made to replace Pen and Paper Rpg, those games were played by a group of players, each watching the others backs with their specific skill sets. I don't think we will ever see that wonderful synergy between players anymore. Those were the good times.
The only reason you'd never see that again is if you individually are not a social person, you instead require mechanics to force others into the situation of grouping up with you, people do this everyday in MMO's today, why aren't you?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Personally I'm not too into being forced to do either "solo" or "group" activities. I'd prefer a game to be a big virtual world where there would be benefits to soloing and benefits to grouping.
Originally posted by Holophonist Personally I'm not too into being forced to do either "solo" or "group" activities. I'd prefer a game to be a big virtual world where there would be benefits to soloing and benefits to grouping.
Agreed
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Originally posted by Holophonist Personally I'm not too into being forced to do either "solo" or "group" activities. I'd prefer a game to be a big virtual world where there would be benefits to soloing and benefits to grouping.
The problem is, what if what you want to do is not the same as what the group wants to do or vice versa? You either have to go and play the way the group wants to play and be miserable or you go and play by yourself and be happy but not get the benefits that the group gets. That much is fine and I think it fits into your argument, but there are a lot of people who think that everyone has to play the same way to be in a group and therefore, groups ought to get huge benefits in order to force people into the same groupthink.
I don't accept that as a good way to build a game.
Originally posted by Holophonist Personally I'm not too into being forced to do either "solo" or "group" activities. I'd prefer a game to be a big virtual world where there would be benefits to soloing and benefits to grouping.
The problem is, what if what you want to do is not the same as what the group wants to do or vice versa? You either have to go and play the way the group wants to play and be miserable or you go and play by yourself and be happy but not get the benefits that the group gets. That much is fine and I think it fits into your argument, but there are a lot of people who think that everyone has to play the same way to be in a group and therefore, groups ought to get huge benefits in order to force people into the same groupthink.
I don't accept that as a good way to build a game.
They make single player games, plenty of them. No need to ruin the genre for people that think a solo person should have access to 100% of a mmorpg. I duo with my wife a lot, but accept that I shouldn't have the same loot in a themepark that a 24-36 man raid can get....Now if you want to talk sandbox, then I am more accepting of smaller groups of people having access to stuff, as a sandbox generally does not have big raids and a lot of stuff is doable by a group or to a individual. Even though sandbox is a little more popular, themepark is the majority, and I don't buy the 1 person getting the best dungeon/raid gear soloing...I say play a single player game.
Originally posted by Holophonist Personally I'm not too into being forced to do either "solo" or "group" activities. I'd prefer a game to be a big virtual world where there would be benefits to soloing and benefits to grouping.
The problem is, what if what you want to do is not the same as what the group wants to do or vice versa? You either have to go and play the way the group wants to play and be miserable or you go and play by yourself and be happy but not get the benefits that the group gets. That much is fine and I think it fits into your argument, but there are a lot of people who think that everyone has to play the same way to be in a group and therefore, groups ought to get huge benefits in order to force people into the same groupthink.
I don't accept that as a good way to build a game.
They make single player games, plenty of them. No need to ruin the genre for people that think a solo person should have access to 100% of a mmorpg. I duo with my wife a lot, but accept that I shouldn't have the same loot in a themepark that a 24-36 man raid can get....Now if you want to talk sandbox, then I am more accepting of smaller groups of people having access to stuff, as a sandbox generally does not have big raids and a lot of stuff is doable by a group or to a individual. Even though sandbox is a little more popular, themepark is the majority, and I don't buy the 1 person getting the best dungeon/raid gear soloing...I say play a single player game.
Yes they do and I play them, but I'm not ruining anything for you because you're not entitled to have a game that you like. You only get what the developers want to make and they're making games to appeal to the widest possible audience so they make the greatest amount of money. That's how the real world works. You ought to deal with what's actually true and not what you wish was true in your little fantasy world.
Originally posted by Holophonist Personally I'm not too into being forced to do either "solo" or "group" activities. I'd prefer a game to be a big virtual world where there would be benefits to soloing and benefits to grouping.
The problem is, what if what you want to do is not the same as what the group wants to do or vice versa? You either have to go and play the way the group wants to play and be miserable or you go and play by yourself and be happy but not get the benefits that the group gets. That much is fine and I think it fits into your argument, but there are a lot of people who think that everyone has to play the same way to be in a group and therefore, groups ought to get huge benefits in order to force people into the same groupthink.
I don't accept that as a good way to build a game.
Not same as what which group wants to do? I don't understand. If there's a large task that requires a lot of people to complete, then you get a group together and go do it. If the group doesn't want to complete that task, then find another group.
What I'm talking about is a game where groups don't always have the advantages. For instance: farming gold or harvesting in UO. Both of these are preferably solo activities.
Originally posted by Holophonist Personally I'm not too into being forced to do either "solo" or "group" activities. I'd prefer a game to be a big virtual world where there would be benefits to soloing and benefits to grouping.
The problem is, what if what you want to do is not the same as what the group wants to do or vice versa? You either have to go and play the way the group wants to play and be miserable or you go and play by yourself and be happy but not get the benefits that the group gets. That much is fine and I think it fits into your argument, but there are a lot of people who think that everyone has to play the same way to be in a group and therefore, groups ought to get huge benefits in order to force people into the same groupthink.
I don't accept that as a good way to build a game.
They make single player games, plenty of them. No need to ruin the genre for people that think a solo person should have access to 100% of a mmorpg. I duo with my wife a lot, but accept that I shouldn't have the same loot in a themepark that a 24-36 man raid can get....Now if you want to talk sandbox, then I am more accepting of smaller groups of people having access to stuff, as a sandbox generally does not have big raids and a lot of stuff is doable by a group or to a individual. Even though sandbox is a little more popular, themepark is the majority, and I don't buy the 1 person getting the best dungeon/raid gear soloing...I say play a single player game.
Yes they do and I play them, but I'm not ruining anything for you because you're not entitled to have a game that you like. You only get what the developers want to make and they're making games to appeal to the widest possible audience so they make the greatest amount of money. That's how the real world works. You ought to deal with what's actually true and not what you wish was true in your little fantasy world.
I've never understood this thought process. The way it works is the masses demand something, so a lot of developers give it to them because they want to make as much money as possible. It seems totally reasonable to be upset with the people demanding something that you don't want. That's also how the world works. People are allowed to demand watered down, overly streamlined content, and we're allowed to be upset that their demands are ruining our experience.
Why any game dev or publisher believes it is smart to either force players to (a) group or (b) solo is beyond me. The very best and most successful MMOs of all time, WoW and Gw 1, didn't force anyone to do anything and still don't. If you want to solo, hop to it. If you feel like grouping, make one or find one. Honestly, it should be as simple as that.
Anyone who wants to roll solo should be able to do so freely and not be looked at as a bottom-feeder by development staff. People who want to group more should have two things: (a) plenty of content to satiate their desire for said grouping, and (b) an intuitive, functional group finder for those who don't happen to have 16 buddies online all the time. I think it's rather simple. And those who choose to hit the world solo should NOT be forced to group for any reason other than bonus side quests or optional content. I look at something like FF Xiv Arr, which forces people to do dungeons just to unlock basic content, and I can't help but wonder what line of reasoning went alongside that design decision.
Along that same vein, forcing people to PvP is a horrible idea also. Guys, if you're going to make a successful MMO - especially if you're going to charge for it - the absolute key is player choice. Once your players feel like they're being pigeonholed into certain play styles, made to slog through content they aren't interested in, or herded towards your cash shop, you can pretty much forget it. I haven't played them all, but I would surmise that most of the failed subscription models we have seen over the past few years can attribute a large portion of their failures to the fact that they simply did not offer their players enough choice in terms of progression or level-cap content.
It's not that complicated. Yes, you really can make content for both solo and group-oriented players! (See the two aforementioned games in my first paragraph, and then see many of the games released since that have failed.) Plain and simple: nobody should be made to do anything they don't want to do just to advance basic progression or storylines. Group content is fun for me, but not for everyone, and therefore it should be optional.
A little respect for other peoples' play styles goes a long, long way.
"Why would I want to loose a religion upon my people? Religions wreck from within - Empires and individuals alike! It's all the same." - God Emperor of Dune
Why any game dev or publisher believes it is smart to either force players to (a) group or (b) solo is beyond me. The very best and most successful MMOs of all time, WoW and Gw 1, didn't force anyone to do anything and still don't. If you want to solo, hop to it. If you feel like grouping, make one or find one. Honestly, it should be as simple as that.
Anyone who wants to roll solo should be able to do so freely and not be looked at as a bottom-feeder by development staff. People who want to group more should have two things: (a) plenty of content to satiate their desire for said grouping, and (b) an intuitive, functional group finder for those who don't happen to have 16 buddies online all the time. I think it's rather simple. And those who choose to hit the world solo should NOT be forced to group for any reason other than bonus side quests or optional content. I look at something like FF Xiv Arr, which forces people to do dungeons just to unlock basic content, and I can't help but wonder what line of reasoning went alongside that design decision.
Along that same vein, forcing people to PvP is a horrible idea also. Guys, if you're going to make a successful MMO - especially if you're going to charge for it - the absolute key is player choice. Once your players feel like they're being pigeonholed into certain play styles, made to slog through content they aren't interested in, or herded towards your cash shop, you can pretty much forget it. I haven't played them all, but I would surmise that most of the failed subscription models we have seen over the past few years can attribute a large portion of their failures to the fact that they simply did not offer their players enough choice in terms of progression or level-cap content.
It's not that complicated. Yes, you really can make content for both solo and group-oriented players! (See the two aforementioned games in my first paragraph, and then see many of the games released since that have failed.) Plain and simple: nobody should be made to do anything they don't want to do just to advance basic progression or storylines. Group content is fun for me, but not for everyone, and therefore it should be optional.
A little respect for other peoples' play styles goes a long, long way.
The problem is if you make a game designed for everybody, it's probably not going to appeal as deeply to individual people. For instance, my ideal game would be very sandboxy, including ow pvp and full loot. You simply can't have that "playstyle" in the same game as one that is designed around endgame content, gear grinds, etc.
As far as grouping goes, I feel like the most organic solution would be to make more of a functioning virtual world that makes sense. Where sometimes grouping together will be ideal and sometimes playing solo would be ideal. What that doesn't mean is giving solo players and groups the same rewards. I don't want a "everybody wins!" type of game. There should be advantages/disadvantages to both. They should be separate activities.
Originally posted by Holophonist Personally I'm not too into being forced to do either "solo" or "group" activities. I'd prefer a game to be a big virtual world where there would be benefits to soloing and benefits to grouping.
The problem is, what if what you want to do is not the same as what the group wants to do or vice versa? You either have to go and play the way the group wants to play and be miserable or you go and play by yourself and be happy but not get the benefits that the group gets. That much is fine and I think it fits into your argument, but there are a lot of people who think that everyone has to play the same way to be in a group and therefore, groups ought to get huge benefits in order to force people into the same groupthink.
I don't accept that as a good way to build a game.
They make single player games, plenty of them. No need to ruin the genre for people that think a solo person should have access to 100% of a mmorpg. I duo with my wife a lot, but accept that I shouldn't have the same loot in a themepark that a 24-36 man raid can get....Now if you want to talk sandbox, then I am more accepting of smaller groups of people having access to stuff, as a sandbox generally does not have big raids and a lot of stuff is doable by a group or to a individual. Even though sandbox is a little more popular, themepark is the majority, and I don't buy the 1 person getting the best dungeon/raid gear soloing...I say play a single player game.
Yes they do and I play them, but I'm not ruining anything for you because you're not entitled to have a game that you like. You only get what the developers want to make and they're making games to appeal to the widest possible audience so they make the greatest amount of money. That's how the real world works. You ought to deal with what's actually true and not what you wish was true in your little fantasy world.
Enjoy Farmville, jeesh, I didn't trample on your corn did I?
Originally posted by Holophonist Personally I'm not too into being forced to do either "solo" or "group" activities. I'd prefer a game to be a big virtual world where there would be benefits to soloing and benefits to grouping.
The problem is, what if what you want to do is not the same as what the group wants to do or vice versa? You either have to go and play the way the group wants to play and be miserable or you go and play by yourself and be happy but not get the benefits that the group gets. That much is fine and I think it fits into your argument, but there are a lot of people who think that everyone has to play the same way to be in a group and therefore, groups ought to get huge benefits in order to force people into the same groupthink.
I don't accept that as a good way to build a game.
They make single player games, plenty of them. No need to ruin the genre for people that think a solo person should have access to 100% of a mmorpg. I duo with my wife a lot, but accept that I shouldn't have the same loot in a themepark that a 24-36 man raid can get....Now if you want to talk sandbox, then I am more accepting of smaller groups of people having access to stuff, as a sandbox generally does not have big raids and a lot of stuff is doable by a group or to a individual. Even though sandbox is a little more popular, themepark is the majority, and I don't buy the 1 person getting the best dungeon/raid gear soloing...I say play a single player game.
Yes they do and I play them, but I'm not ruining anything for you because you're not entitled to have a game that you like. You only get what the developers want to make and they're making games to appeal to the widest possible audience so they make the greatest amount of money. That's how the real world works. You ought to deal with what's actually true and not what you wish was true in your little fantasy world.
I've never understood this thought process. The way it works is the masses demand something, so a lot of developers give it to them because they want to make as much money as possible. It seems totally reasonable to be upset with the people demanding something that you don't want. That's also how the world works. People are allowed to demand watered down, overly streamlined content, and we're allowed to be upset that their demands are ruining our experience.
It is his version of I am taking my ball home with me.... I never said all games had to be a certain way, but the problem is imo that too many are the same, and not enough variety....But hey, I obviously missed the secret! MY dream mmo is out there, many of them, but he wont tell me!!!!
Originally posted by Holophonist Personally I'm not too into being forced to do either "solo" or "group" activities. I'd prefer a game to be a big virtual world where there would be benefits to soloing and benefits to grouping.
The problem is, what if what you want to do is not the same as what the group wants to do or vice versa? You either have to go and play the way the group wants to play and be miserable or you go and play by yourself and be happy but not get the benefits that the group gets. That much is fine and I think it fits into your argument, but there are a lot of people who think that everyone has to play the same way to be in a group and therefore, groups ought to get huge benefits in order to force people into the same groupthink.
I don't accept that as a good way to build a game.
They make single player games, plenty of them. No need to ruin the genre for people that think a solo person should have access to 100% of a mmorpg. I duo with my wife a lot, but accept that I shouldn't have the same loot in a themepark that a 24-36 man raid can get....Now if you want to talk sandbox, then I am more accepting of smaller groups of people having access to stuff, as a sandbox generally does not have big raids and a lot of stuff is doable by a group or to a individual. Even though sandbox is a little more popular, themepark is the majority, and I don't buy the 1 person getting the best dungeon/raid gear soloing...I say play a single player game.
Yes they do and I play them, but I'm not ruining anything for you because you're not entitled to have a game that you like. You only get what the developers want to make and they're making games to appeal to the widest possible audience so they make the greatest amount of money. That's how the real world works. You ought to deal with what's actually true and not what you wish was true in your little fantasy world.
Enjoy Farmville, jeesh, I didn't trample on your corn did I?
You can whine all you want, it doesn't change what I said, which accurately represents reality. You ought to learn to grasp it.
It's really what I am in the mood for. My real life job has a lot of social interaction, so sometimes I just want to log in an run around by myself to blow off steam and relax. Sometimes that relaxation extends to group activities but I'm not interested in the min max culture anymore. I just want to have a good time and enjoy the people I'm with.
As far as game design, I think the game that incorporates both play styles is a a good design. A degree of interdependency can foster community and being a part of something brings another kind of satisfaction.
Comments
Multiplayer does not equal group. Many times, it is player AGAINST another player. What then?
- 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 always create my first character with the intent of playing by myself to get the best RP experience the developers worked to offer. The only exception I make with this character is to experience each dungeon or forced multiplayer experience once. If I've gotten further while playing a separate character with friends, I will skip dungeons entirely.
The multiplayer experience in MMO's are always different per encounter. I recently started playing RIFT since having put the game down a month after launch. Now that I'm playing through a solo character about an hour a day, I find the interactions with other players when closing a rift is the best experience I've had online. Whether the rift ends with a wave or "good job" or a conversation that leads into completing quests and bouncing questions off each other, I can't help but feel that this is the great game time the developers envisioned in rift. I could speak days about the amazing storytelling of my band of friends throughout every quest area Star Wars the Knights of the Old Republic offered. ^_^
To sum up my opinion, I value both the individual and multiplayer experiences MMO's have to offer.
I like the idea that there is a big ass zone out there, that nobody ever likes going to but once in a while the draw to be there is too great for certain people. So I'm like 3 hours deep into this zone and it's hostile, hard and oppressive. Suddenly, another player pops up along and we see each other and decide that we could really benefit one another by partying up.
I realize a lot of people think group play vs solo play is "Raid Content vs Questing" but to me man... there is nothing better than just being by yourself in a world, where another player could just pop up any time.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
CasinoRPG - Free Casino MMORPG
GoldFire Studios
It's none of your business what I do in MY mmo.
That is all
totally agree.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
The only reason you'd never see that again is if you individually are not a social person, you instead require mechanics to force others into the situation of grouping up with you, people do this everyday in MMO's today, why aren't you?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Agreed
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The problem is, what if what you want to do is not the same as what the group wants to do or vice versa? You either have to go and play the way the group wants to play and be miserable or you go and play by yourself and be happy but not get the benefits that the group gets. That much is fine and I think it fits into your argument, but there are a lot of people who think that everyone has to play the same way to be in a group and therefore, groups ought to get huge benefits in order to force people into the same groupthink.
I don't accept that as a good way to build a game.
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
They make single player games, plenty of them. No need to ruin the genre for people that think a solo person should have access to 100% of a mmorpg. I duo with my wife a lot, but accept that I shouldn't have the same loot in a themepark that a 24-36 man raid can get....Now if you want to talk sandbox, then I am more accepting of smaller groups of people having access to stuff, as a sandbox generally does not have big raids and a lot of stuff is doable by a group or to a individual. Even though sandbox is a little more popular, themepark is the majority, and I don't buy the 1 person getting the best dungeon/raid gear soloing...I say play a single player game.
Yes they do and I play them, but I'm not ruining anything for you because you're not entitled to have a game that you like. You only get what the developers want to make and they're making games to appeal to the widest possible audience so they make the greatest amount of money. That's how the real world works. You ought to deal with what's actually true and not what you wish was true in your little fantasy world.
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
Not same as what which group wants to do? I don't understand. If there's a large task that requires a lot of people to complete, then you get a group together and go do it. If the group doesn't want to complete that task, then find another group.
What I'm talking about is a game where groups don't always have the advantages. For instance: farming gold or harvesting in UO. Both of these are preferably solo activities.
I've never understood this thought process. The way it works is the masses demand something, so a lot of developers give it to them because they want to make as much money as possible. It seems totally reasonable to be upset with the people demanding something that you don't want. That's also how the world works. People are allowed to demand watered down, overly streamlined content, and we're allowed to be upset that their demands are ruining our experience.
Why any game dev or publisher believes it is smart to either force players to (a) group or (b) solo is beyond me. The very best and most successful MMOs of all time, WoW and Gw 1, didn't force anyone to do anything and still don't. If you want to solo, hop to it. If you feel like grouping, make one or find one. Honestly, it should be as simple as that.
Anyone who wants to roll solo should be able to do so freely and not be looked at as a bottom-feeder by development staff. People who want to group more should have two things: (a) plenty of content to satiate their desire for said grouping, and (b) an intuitive, functional group finder for those who don't happen to have 16 buddies online all the time. I think it's rather simple. And those who choose to hit the world solo should NOT be forced to group for any reason other than bonus side quests or optional content. I look at something like FF Xiv Arr, which forces people to do dungeons just to unlock basic content, and I can't help but wonder what line of reasoning went alongside that design decision.
Along that same vein, forcing people to PvP is a horrible idea also. Guys, if you're going to make a successful MMO - especially if you're going to charge for it - the absolute key is player choice. Once your players feel like they're being pigeonholed into certain play styles, made to slog through content they aren't interested in, or herded towards your cash shop, you can pretty much forget it. I haven't played them all, but I would surmise that most of the failed subscription models we have seen over the past few years can attribute a large portion of their failures to the fact that they simply did not offer their players enough choice in terms of progression or level-cap content.
It's not that complicated. Yes, you really can make content for both solo and group-oriented players! (See the two aforementioned games in my first paragraph, and then see many of the games released since that have failed.) Plain and simple: nobody should be made to do anything they don't want to do just to advance basic progression or storylines. Group content is fun for me, but not for everyone, and therefore it should be optional.
A little respect for other peoples' play styles goes a long, long way.
"Why would I want to loose a religion upon my people? Religions wreck from within - Empires and individuals alike! It's all the same." - God Emperor of Dune
The problem is if you make a game designed for everybody, it's probably not going to appeal as deeply to individual people. For instance, my ideal game would be very sandboxy, including ow pvp and full loot. You simply can't have that "playstyle" in the same game as one that is designed around endgame content, gear grinds, etc.
As far as grouping goes, I feel like the most organic solution would be to make more of a functioning virtual world that makes sense. Where sometimes grouping together will be ideal and sometimes playing solo would be ideal. What that doesn't mean is giving solo players and groups the same rewards. I don't want a "everybody wins!" type of game. There should be advantages/disadvantages to both. They should be separate activities.
Enjoy Farmville, jeesh, I didn't trample on your corn did I?
It is his version of I am taking my ball home with me.... I never said all games had to be a certain way, but the problem is imo that too many are the same, and not enough variety....But hey, I obviously missed the secret! MY dream mmo is out there, many of them, but he wont tell me!!!!
OH come on, it was a accident that I hit need for that gear I cannot use!
Pseudo asshole.
You can whine all you want, it doesn't change what I said, which accurately represents reality. You ought to learn to grasp it.
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
It's really what I am in the mood for. My real life job has a lot of social interaction, so sometimes I just want to log in an run around by myself to blow off steam and relax. Sometimes that relaxation extends to group activities but I'm not interested in the min max culture anymore. I just want to have a good time and enjoy the people I'm with.
As far as game design, I think the game that incorporates both play styles is a a good design. A degree of interdependency can foster community and being a part of something brings another kind of satisfaction.