Yet again and again you see developers trying to force people into group content, because they have decided that group content is the be all end all of mmorpgs even when the amounts of solo focused players keeps rising. Why so focused on getting people to play your group content when you could just create solo/solo que content that more people would experience and enjoy than the minority of high end pvers/pvpers.
What MMORPGs do you play that require you to do group content? I know it's an option in many but can't think of any that force it upon you.
New World does it more than most although they're walking some of that back.
The main quest line stops dead on its track until you do 3 group expeditions.
They have now changed the first 2 of those compulsory dungeon runs by providing a solo option for them.
The end game though is still pretty much all about grouping. No solo game play really after 60... not even alts.
"But they're walking some of it back" The game has been out two months and grouping is already being removed. So does anyone think in a year much grouping will be left? They could have made it so you walk to a quest area and just join a team of whoever is there, but the only solution solo casuals will accept is no grouping for any reason or any way whatsoever.
They have in my mind turned open world interactive games into a solo game in all but name. Wait you say what about PvP? Well they will be attacking that as well, does anyone here think the calls for endless dailies and the like to replace after 60 PvP have not already started?
It makes perfect sense that the level 25 and level 40 dungeon main quest steps now have an alternative way to progress the quest that does not require the dungeon. There is no level scaling for dungeons in the game and the bulk of the population is at 60. Finding groups for level 25 and 40 dungeons just ain't easy.
Having a grouping requirement for the main quest was a nice change of pace IMO, but I did those when the whole server was doing them so no problem whatsoever finding groups.
These changes are just facing the reality that new players at those quest steps are not having the same ease completing them that those who started all together did.
Dungeon scaling with appropriate loot drops at player level to incentivize level 60s doing them would be a better solution IMO but hey, we know how some people feel at the thought of scaled anything.
How well does that Scaling work? Wouldn't most gamers want to go to their appropriate leveled dungeon? I mean, as far as a wide scale adoption by higher level players?
the way i see it most dungeons are linear kill fests in most games. There are few distractions from this. Even in a group there is little need for interaction. Its just a path of destruction and collect phat l33t in most cases. You might have to play some dance dance revolution when you get to the boss but the formula is pretty stagnant.
rejection of this content is not really on the players but the developers lack of imagination.
a three man scalable group structure with the situational mitigation concept will solve alot of grouping vs soloing issues passively but they still need to build compelling content that goes beyond throwing just a bunch of enemies and loot in a cave to make it interesting for players.
You have to start with giving players a reason to interact, dungeons do that, but you are right they are not truly designed for much interaction. Indeed some systems like dungeon group finders cut back what interaction there is. But team players in MMORPg's have long gone past the stage where beggars can be choosers, we have to grab hold of any group play there is for dear life.
There are many forms of gameplay that could have more interaction, one I have seen had small teams competing dungeon objectives with the help of the other team, I think this was two four man groups which were part of the same eight man "group". Little design looks to complement interaction though, so we have little interaction.
It is the quality of the interaction that bothers me. I have been in groups that aside from the initial hello and good bye later and the macroed 'OOM' or 'pulling' nothing was spoken in between. I have been in FFXI groups where using the conversation wheel you can say things in Japanese and the Japanese can likewise speak in English had more meaningful conversations going as far as to as to explain where I was from. Mere interaction is all we have these days. People just don't bother to actually get to know the people they group with because they are treated like NPCs for all intents and purposes. One of the reasons I try to find good guilds over finding groups lacking any meaningful interaction is for this reason. I also am not blaming people for not talking. They may be shy or afraid of holding up the group. I for one cannot type and play and someone will die if I try to do both as a healer.
My hesitancy these days come from my advancing age and lack of confidence in doing well in groups and not because of my hatred of grouping.
Well I played in FFXI, maybe players said more because with language differences they had to be sure everyone knew what they were doing? Damn, I did not put that one on my MMORPG list! Well I was in it for only a month, the timezone was problematic but the connection was what killed it for me, I could not work out why my connection was so bad, mind you I am not sure I was even on 2MB back then.
You are right though, dungeons do not lend themselves to interaction, the best way to encourage interaction I have heard of is the "resting" system in SWG, where you sought a Minstrel (?) to handle your combat fatigue. Imagine getting fatigue for any activity, more for combat, less like crafting and once it starts to effect your abilities having to go to a tavern or the like to hear music. How about more rest for those who sit down and have a drink or unwind with a dance? That's what I would do to create a hub of interaction.
I like that idea of some form of fatigue. In a long term sense. It has the added benefit of limiting players from running scripts (AFK) endlessly.
The same thing can be done with campfires. SWG had that, I think, too.
What about banking? Could something be done there? Maybe have "investment opportunities" pop randomly? Anything to get players to gather while not hacking away at MOBs is an opportunity to get to know and talk to other players. That's a good way to form bonds, or at least a beginning.
Yet again and again you see developers trying to force people into group content, because they have decided that group content is the be all end all of mmorpgs even when the amounts of solo focused players keeps rising. Why so focused on getting people to play your group content when you could just create solo/solo que content that more people would experience and enjoy than the minority of high end pvers/pvpers.
What MMORPGs do you play that require you to do group content? I know it's an option in many but can't think of any that force it upon you.
New World does it more than most although they're walking some of that back.
The main quest line stops dead on its track until you do 3 group expeditions.
They have now changed the first 2 of those compulsory dungeon runs by providing a solo option for them.
The end game though is still pretty much all about grouping. No solo game play really after 60... not even alts.
"But they're walking some of it back" The game has been out two months and grouping is already being removed. So does anyone think in a year much grouping will be left? They could have made it so you walk to a quest area and just join a team of whoever is there, but the only solution solo casuals will accept is no grouping for any reason or any way whatsoever.
They have in my mind turned open world interactive games into a solo game in all but name. Wait you say what about PvP? Well they will be attacking that as well, does anyone here think the calls for endless dailies and the like to replace after 60 PvP have not already started?
It makes perfect sense that the level 25 and level 40 dungeon main quest steps now have an alternative way to progress the quest that does not require the dungeon. There is no level scaling for dungeons in the game and the bulk of the population is at 60. Finding groups for level 25 and 40 dungeons just ain't easy.
Having a grouping requirement for the main quest was a nice change of pace IMO, but I did those when the whole server was doing them so no problem whatsoever finding groups.
These changes are just facing the reality that new players at those quest steps are not having the same ease completing them that those who started all together did.
Dungeon scaling with appropriate loot drops at player level to incentivize level 60s doing them would be a better solution IMO but hey, we know how some people feel at the thought of scaled anything.
How well does that Scaling work? Wouldn't most gamers want to go to their appropriate leveled dungeon?
It works well in ESO making dungeons doable at any level. They ARE different from each other and some are just inherently easier (the ones that once upon a time, before level scaling, were low level) or harder. Players above a certain level are not scaled at all but those below it are scaled up. What makes them attractive is that the gear drops are all drops for your own level. A lower level player who is bolstered so they can handle the difficulty gets gear drops at their true level so they're useable right away.
ESO is also big into 5-piece gear sets and each individual dungeon has it's own unique set pieces that drop there exclusively. If players are no queuing for random dungeons they queue for the one they want based on gear set drops there.
That' actually the secret sauce that makes ESO scaling work: regardless of level, your drops will always match your true level whether in dungeons or anywhere else in the game and you're always building gear sets that are unique to dungeons, open world zones, PvP, Trials, etc.
Some of those sets are more powerful than others but not by much. They are typically just different for different play styles and may emphasize one or more skills over others. They have literally hundreds of different sets.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Yet again and again you see developers trying to force people into group content, because they have decided that group content is the be all end all of mmorpgs even when the amounts of solo focused players keeps rising. Why so focused on getting people to play your group content when you could just create solo/solo que content that more people would experience and enjoy than the minority of high end pvers/pvpers.
What MMORPGs do you play that require you to do group content? I know it's an option in many but can't think of any that force it upon you.
New World does it more than most although they're walking some of that back.
The main quest line stops dead on its track until you do 3 group expeditions.
They have now changed the first 2 of those compulsory dungeon runs by providing a solo option for them.
The end game though is still pretty much all about grouping. No solo game play really after 60... not even alts.
"But they're walking some of it back" The game has been out two months and grouping is already being removed. So does anyone think in a year much grouping will be left? They could have made it so you walk to a quest area and just join a team of whoever is there, but the only solution solo casuals will accept is no grouping for any reason or any way whatsoever.
They have in my mind turned open world interactive games into a solo game in all but name. Wait you say what about PvP? Well they will be attacking that as well, does anyone here think the calls for endless dailies and the like to replace after 60 PvP have not already started?
It makes perfect sense that the level 25 and level 40 dungeon main quest steps now have an alternative way to progress the quest that does not require the dungeon. There is no level scaling for dungeons in the game and the bulk of the population is at 60. Finding groups for level 25 and 40 dungeons just ain't easy.
Having a grouping requirement for the main quest was a nice change of pace IMO, but I did those when the whole server was doing them so no problem whatsoever finding groups.
These changes are just facing the reality that new players at those quest steps are not having the same ease completing them that those who started all together did.
Dungeon scaling with appropriate loot drops at player level to incentivize level 60s doing them would be a better solution IMO but hey, we know how some people feel at the thought of scaled anything.
How well does that Scaling work? Wouldn't most gamers want to go to their appropriate leveled dungeon?
It works well in ESO making dungeons doable at any level. They ARE different from each other and some are just inherently easier (the ones that once upon a time, before level scaling, were low level) or harder. Players above a certain level are not scaled at all but those below it are scaled up. What makes them attractive is that the gear drops are all drops for your own level. A lower level player who is bolstered so they can handle the difficulty gets gear drops at their true level so they're useable right away.
ESO is also big into 5-piece gear sets and each individual dungeon has it's own unique set pieces that drop there exclusively. If players are no queuing for random dungeons they queue for the one they want based on gear set drops there.
That' actually the secret sauce that makes ESO scaling work: regardless of level, your drops will always match your true level whether in dungeons or anywhere else in the game and you're always building gear sets that are unique to dungeons, open world zones, PvP, Trials, etc.
Some of those sets are more powerful than others but not by much. They are typically just different for different play styles and may emphasize one or more skills over others. They have literally hundreds of different sets.
Ahh, ok, so dungeons aren't based on a level? No restrictions?
That brings up a question. Why have that scaling at all? Why have the big numbers at all? It sounds like they aren't even used. Correct? It's just "cosmetic"? A carrot on a stick trick on a sliding scale?
Yet again and again you see developers trying to force people into group content, because they have decided that group content is the be all end all of mmorpgs even when the amounts of solo focused players keeps rising. Why so focused on getting people to play your group content when you could just create solo/solo que content that more people would experience and enjoy than the minority of high end pvers/pvpers.
What MMORPGs do you play that require you to do group content? I know it's an option in many but can't think of any that force it upon you.
New World does it more than most although they're walking some of that back.
The main quest line stops dead on its track until you do 3 group expeditions.
They have now changed the first 2 of those compulsory dungeon runs by providing a solo option for them.
The end game though is still pretty much all about grouping. No solo game play really after 60... not even alts.
"But they're walking some of it back" The game has been out two months and grouping is already being removed. So does anyone think in a year much grouping will be left? They could have made it so you walk to a quest area and just join a team of whoever is there, but the only solution solo casuals will accept is no grouping for any reason or any way whatsoever.
They have in my mind turned open world interactive games into a solo game in all but name. Wait you say what about PvP? Well they will be attacking that as well, does anyone here think the calls for endless dailies and the like to replace after 60 PvP have not already started?
It makes perfect sense that the level 25 and level 40 dungeon main quest steps now have an alternative way to progress the quest that does not require the dungeon. There is no level scaling for dungeons in the game and the bulk of the population is at 60. Finding groups for level 25 and 40 dungeons just ain't easy.
Having a grouping requirement for the main quest was a nice change of pace IMO, but I did those when the whole server was doing them so no problem whatsoever finding groups.
These changes are just facing the reality that new players at those quest steps are not having the same ease completing them that those who started all together did.
Dungeon scaling with appropriate loot drops at player level to incentivize level 60s doing them would be a better solution IMO but hey, we know how some people feel at the thought of scaled anything.
How well does that Scaling work? Wouldn't most gamers want to go to their appropriate leveled dungeon?
It works well in ESO making dungeons doable at any level. They ARE different from each other and some are just inherently easier (the ones that once upon a time, before level scaling, were low level) or harder. Players above a certain level are not scaled at all but those below it are scaled up. What makes them attractive is that the gear drops are all drops for your own level. A lower level player who is bolstered so they can handle the difficulty gets gear drops at their true level so they're useable right away.
ESO is also big into 5-piece gear sets and each individual dungeon has it's own unique set pieces that drop there exclusively. If players are no queuing for random dungeons they queue for the one they want based on gear set drops there.
That' actually the secret sauce that makes ESO scaling work: regardless of level, your drops will always match your true level whether in dungeons or anywhere else in the game and you're always building gear sets that are unique to dungeons, open world zones, PvP, Trials, etc.
Some of those sets are more powerful than others but not by much. They are typically just different for different play styles and may emphasize one or more skills over others. They have literally hundreds of different sets.
Ahh, ok, so dungeons aren't based on a level? No restrictions?
That brings up a question. Why have that scaling at all? Why have the big numbers at all? It sounds like they aren't even used. Correct? It's just "cosmetic"? A carrot on a stick trick on a sliding scale?
They have the numbers because they still have leveling - almost never-ending leveling actually since you level 1-50 and then you level Champion Points (used for your choice of passives from a large variety of them) from 1 to 3600.
The real progression in ESO is unlocking skills and passives in the skill lines you use so they could easily get rid of "1-50" if they wanted to with little impact to the actual game play The 1-3600 Champion Points thing is different and an end-game progression incentive where individual points are of little consequence but large chunks, if used wisely, can make a big difference,
I suspect they didn't want to do away with levels altogether because most players in RPGs want to level and see those numbers as progression. As a matter of fact the biggest anti-scaling gripe is from just those players who want to see the progression be more substantial instead of subtle.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
If the developers wouldn't make dungeons so linear, I'd like dungeons a lot more. A proper cave system can have 4 or 5 ways to get to any specific location. Dungeons in games, frequently have only one. Give the players some group decisions that need to be made (do we go this way or that way).
I like the situational migration idea, @Rungar. Definitely compelling content would 'fix' a lot of games. That's all on the way games are designed, though.
It is my understanding the old forest in LOTRO used to randomly change paths daily. Maybe more instanced dungeons with DIABLO randomization?
I don't remember it changing, maybe that was before my time. But the Old Forest design was certainly confusing enough without anything changing on a schedule.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Yet again and again you see developers trying to force people into group content, because they have decided that group content is the be all end all of mmorpgs even when the amounts of solo focused players keeps rising. Why so focused on getting people to play your group content when you could just create solo/solo que content that more people would experience and enjoy than the minority of high end pvers/pvpers.
What MMORPGs do you play that require you to do group content? I know it's an option in many but can't think of any that force it upon you.
New World does it more than most although they're walking some of that back.
The main quest line stops dead on its track until you do 3 group expeditions.
They have now changed the first 2 of those compulsory dungeon runs by providing a solo option for them.
The end game though is still pretty much all about grouping. No solo game play really after 60... not even alts.
"But they're walking some of it back" The game has been out two months and grouping is already being removed. So does anyone think in a year much grouping will be left? They could have made it so you walk to a quest area and just join a team of whoever is there, but the only solution solo casuals will accept is no grouping for any reason or any way whatsoever.
They have in my mind turned open world interactive games into a solo game in all but name. Wait you say what about PvP? Well they will be attacking that as well, does anyone here think the calls for endless dailies and the like to replace after 60 PvP have not already started?
It makes perfect sense that the level 25 and level 40 dungeon main quest steps now have an alternative way to progress the quest that does not require the dungeon. There is no level scaling for dungeons in the game and the bulk of the population is at 60. Finding groups for level 25 and 40 dungeons just ain't easy.
Having a grouping requirement for the main quest was a nice change of pace IMO, but I did those when the whole server was doing them so no problem whatsoever finding groups.
These changes are just facing the reality that new players at those quest steps are not having the same ease completing them that those who started all together did.
Dungeon scaling with appropriate loot drops at player level to incentivize level 60s doing them would be a better solution IMO but hey, we know how some people feel at the thought of scaled anything.
How well does that Scaling work? Wouldn't most gamers want to go to their appropriate leveled dungeon?
It works well in ESO making dungeons doable at any level. They ARE different from each other and some are just inherently easier (the ones that once upon a time, before level scaling, were low level) or harder. Players above a certain level are not scaled at all but those below it are scaled up. What makes them attractive is that the gear drops are all drops for your own level. A lower level player who is bolstered so they can handle the difficulty gets gear drops at their true level so they're useable right away.
ESO is also big into 5-piece gear sets and each individual dungeon has it's own unique set pieces that drop there exclusively. If players are no queuing for random dungeons they queue for the one they want based on gear set drops there.
That' actually the secret sauce that makes ESO scaling work: regardless of level, your drops will always match your true level whether in dungeons or anywhere else in the game and you're always building gear sets that are unique to dungeons, open world zones, PvP, Trials, etc.
Some of those sets are more powerful than others but not by much. They are typically just different for different play styles and may emphasize one or more skills over others. They have literally hundreds of different sets.
Ahh, ok, so dungeons aren't based on a level? No restrictions?
That brings up a question. Why have that scaling at all? Why have the big numbers at all? It sounds like they aren't even used. Correct? It's just "cosmetic"? A carrot on a stick trick on a sliding scale?
They have the numbers because they still have leveling - almost never-ending leveling actually since you level 1-50 and then you level Champion Points (used for your choice of passives from a large variety of them) from 1 to 3600.
The real progression in ESO is unlocking skills and passives in the skill lines you use so they could easily get rid of "1-50" if they wanted to with little impact to the actual game play The 1-3600 Champion Points thing is different and an end-game progression incentive where individual points are of little consequence but large chunks, if used wisely, can make a big difference,
I suspect they didn't want to do away with levels altogether because most players in RPGs want to level and see those numbers as progression. As a matter of fact the biggest anti-scaling gripe is from just those players who want to see the progression be more substantial instead of subtle.
So, it's actually a horizontal progression, once you adjust the numbers to what's real?
You know, it does sound better than anything else I've seen in the games being made since EQ went D&D-on-steroids. I just sort of resent the falseness of the numbers. But that's just me, I guess.
But I do have another question. Those higher level weapons and armor, they actually mean nothing compared to the lower stuff? At all?
Edit, another question. How do you judge what's better for gear? It seems like it is all meaningless, unless there's some difference. But how would you know what's what? (I understand that gear must be set for certain types, I mean like to like gear on the class basis.)
So, it's actually a horizontal progression, once you adjust the numbers to what's real?
You know, it does sound better than anything else I've seen in the games being made since EQ went D&D-on-steroids. I just sort of resent the falseness of the numbers. But that's just me, I guess.
But I do have another question. Those higher level weapons and armor, they actually mean nothing compared to the lower stuff? At all?
They do mean something because it's not 100% scaling, it's something less than that. Enough so that you can handle the fight but not the same as if it were a max level player with the same version of that sword but the sword at its max level.
They also keep gear replacement relevant while you level by reducing your gear's scaling when you're 5+ levels higher than it. But again, we're talking about small differences not huge ones. The gear doesn't become useless if you're 5 levels higher than it, just a bit less effective,
Also, unlike other games, you are encouraged to use skills instead of just basic attacks. The only skills that have cool downs in ESO are ultimates. Everything else is just resource use based but with a very generous system for recovering the resources quickly by weaving in basic heavy attacks with your skill use. Yes, a basic heavy attack can restore your stamina instead of draining it lol.
Power gaps are not so much about which weapon you use and its level but about which skills you have unlocked and are choosing to use. Unlocking some of the better skills takes a while and is the game's true leveling.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
So, it's actually a horizontal progression, once you adjust the numbers to what's real?
You know, it does sound better than anything else I've seen in the games being made since EQ went D&D-on-steroids. I just sort of resent the falseness of the numbers. But that's just me, I guess.
But I do have another question. Those higher level weapons and armor, they actually mean nothing compared to the lower stuff? At all?
They do mean something because it's not 100% scaling, it's something less than that. Enough so that you can handle the fight but not the same as if it were a max level player with the same version of that sword but the sword at its max level.
They also keep gear replacement relevant while you level by reducing your gear's scaling when you're 5+ levels higher than it. But again, we're talking about small differences not huge ones. The gear doesn't become useless if you're 5 levels higher than it, just a bit less effective,
Also, unlike other games, you are encouraged to use skills instead of just basic attacks. The only skills that have cool downs in ESO are ultimates. Everything else is just resource use based but with a very generous system for recovering the resources quickly by weaving in basic heavy attacks with your skill use. Yes, a basic heavy attack can restore your stamina instead of draining it lol.
Power gaps are not so much about which weapon you use and its level but about which skills you have unlocked and are choosing to use. Unlocking some of the better skills takes a while and is the game's true leveling.
So, you're telling me that the game I have been waiting for (low power gaps) has been out there for years?
Isn't that a kick in the pants. *Grumbles*
There's still a few things I'm not sure about (with ESO), for my tastes, but I can find that on my own.
I still wish they wouldn't have hidden this behind a false vision. But at least someone finally got where MMORPGs need to be. (My opinion, but evidently with support.)
The problem with level scaling is that, as implemented in MMORPGs that actually exist, it tends to be designed to make everything scale to be trivial for you at your level. That makes the entire game awful, and prevents you from using the normal level choice options to make it interesting. That could be fixable by a DDO-like difficulty scaling, at least for instanced content, but I haven't seen an MMORPG that has level scaling also do that.
the game was more like traditional eq clones at the start but they were going under and decided to change the game which turned it around for them. They should of went further.
Its a great game but it has an achilles heel buried within the combat system.
So, you're telling me that the game I have been waiting for (low power gaps) has been out there for years?
Isn't that a kick in the pants. *Grumbles*
There's still a few things I'm not sure about (with ESO), for my tastes, but I can find that on my own.
I still wish they wouldn't have hidden this behind a false vision. But at least someone finally got where MMORPGs need to be. (My opinion, but evidently with support.)
Thanks for taking the time.
Well it does have warts too lol. The overland difficulty, as others have already said, is trivially easy for anyone except a true klutz. I've seen people die in overland quest content and I really don't know how they managed it. It could really use mob buffs but it has been this way for years so I assume that's how the devs want it.
There is more difficult content to be had, group open world events, pretty fun dungeons... even a couple of pretty tough solo trials (ESOspeak for raid) but it's a pretty easy game overall.
I've always liked their skill unlock through use approach to leveling as well as their hybrid class / classless build choices.
They annoy me with some things, especially how much they push their damn cash shop with in-game ads, which is why I'm currently on a long, long break from it but it's not a bad game and has some interesting design choices.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
OP is a little jaded. Why should MMO remove competative group content? I can't count how many MMOs I have played over the past few years have thriving communities that play that kind of content and they should be rewarded for playing that way.
I do agree a growing solo community does need to be rewarded and there is no reason both communities can't enjoy their game space. But you can't get jealous of the rewards your not willing to play the content it comes from. Should they be rewarded equally? Depends on the game.
I do agree a growing solo community does need to be rewarded and there is no reason both communities can't enjoy their game space.
I agree, but when developers put the best rewards behind the competitive group content and give inferior and sometimes outright trash rewards to the casual community, that divide becomes very visible and clearly part of the outdated design that must go.
Now if both could get the same rewards through their own "game space" as you called it, or preferred content as I called it, there would be no such divide, people could get what they wanted either via hardcore raiding or casual content even if casual content due to its lower difficulty would take longer. Both could coexist.
That sounds very fair and balanced and both communities are treated equally, yet if you go suggest that in games like WoW raiders will absolutely hate the idea that the "casual plebs" can have access to their l33t gear, the idea that organized group content would stop receiving special treatment and instead people would be able to get rewards and power progression through content of their CHOOSING scares them.
And obviously if you say that if people can get the reward through other means nobody would bother with organized raiding then it sounds like people are forced to raid because of the rewards, not because they enjoy the content and I am one of those people, which isnt technically true because people still do FF14 ultimate raids even though there are no gear rewards, it is about the achievement, titles etc.
Many hard MMORPG players criticized FF14's choice to put story before the MMO part, yet look at it now, FF14 is the current king of mmorpgs for focusing on content that the casual solo players enjoys while WoW that follows the outdated hardcore raiding design is dead on the water.
The market clearly has moved heavily towards the solo mindset but design has not fully embraced that truth yet, even by this thread you see people realizing the solo community is growing based on how people play the game and instead of accepting that, they try to find more creative ways to force grouping simply because they themselves want it, they even give examples of how this doesnt work because even new games who have forced grouping design are forced to change to a more solo friendly design to survive because most people dont enjoy forced grouping.
Hell the fact that the design is focused on grouping to begin with is the problem I am talking about, as if the developers and many hardcore players dont want to believe that group content just isnt popular so they try to force it harder only to find out that it simply doesnt work, hence why my point is that developers need to start designing mmorpgs with the solo mindset in mind first and foremost when it comes to design philosophy rather than push for their own group based preferences that are proven to be unpopular and they have to change quickly after launch.
Forcing solo play in a group game is a habit of solo/casual players in a group game.
I mean why go into a genre that doesn't fit your play style and expect them to cater to you? I get the game might sound cool or look good but if you don't like that type of game then...? Not trying to be mean or anything but every game has a thread of X game needs to change this! So pvp games need to remove pvp for the pve player but then the pve games need to add pvp?
It's really like playing ff7 and being pissed that you can't invite your guild to join you. I get you want to experience the story solo but to "play" the game you need the group as it should be a focal point of the game really.
My question for you though, if you're playing with a couple friends then why is the grouping an issue? So maybe you pick up a player or 2 here and there, not that bad really.
didn't mean to have this come across as a rant or attack but it just doesn't make sense when most games already push a huge amount of solo play. How much more "solo friendly" does it need to get before we just remove the online function of this genre altogether?
Yet again and again you see developers trying to force people into group content, because they have decided that group content is the be all end all of mmorpgs even when the amounts of solo focused players keeps rising. Why so focused on getting people to play your group content when you could just create solo/solo que content that more people would experience and enjoy than the minority of high end pvers/pvpers.
What MMORPGs do you play that require you to do group content? I know it's an option in many but can't think of any that force it upon you.
New World does it more than most although they're walking some of that back.
The main quest line stops dead on its track until you do 3 group expeditions.
They have now changed the first 2 of those compulsory dungeon runs by providing a solo option for them.
The end game though is still pretty much all about grouping. No solo game play really after 60... not even alts.
"But they're walking some of it back" The game has been out two months and grouping is already being removed. So does anyone think in a year much grouping will be left? They could have made it so you walk to a quest area and just join a team of whoever is there, but the only solution solo casuals will accept is no grouping for any reason or any way whatsoever.
They have in my mind turned open world interactive games into a solo game in all but name. Wait you say what about PvP? Well they will be attacking that as well, does anyone here think the calls for endless dailies and the like to replace after 60 PvP have not already started?
It makes perfect sense that the level 25 and level 40 dungeon main quest steps now have an alternative way to progress the quest that does not require the dungeon. There is no level scaling for dungeons in the game and the bulk of the population is at 60. Finding groups for level 25 and 40 dungeons just ain't easy.
Having a grouping requirement for the main quest was a nice change of pace IMO, but I did those when the whole server was doing them so no problem whatsoever finding groups.
These changes are just facing the reality that new players at those quest steps are not having the same ease completing them that those who started all together did.
Dungeon scaling with appropriate loot drops at player level to incentivize level 60s doing them would be a better solution IMO but hey, we know how some people feel at the thought of scaled anything.
I realise what I am suggesting would take a lot more time and the team felt they had no time because of the launch issues. But something to entice players to help others do those dungeon quests would have been preferable. What about a reward for joining in that you could get a maximum of once per day that a level 60 would like? Some carrot goes a long way.
If the developers wouldn't make dungeons so linear, I'd like dungeons a lot more. A proper cave system can have 4 or 5 ways to get to any specific location. Dungeons in games, frequently have only one. Give the players some group decisions that need to be made (do we go this way or that way).
I like the situational migration idea, @Rungar. Definitely compelling content would 'fix' a lot of games. That's all on the way games are designed, though.
It is my understanding the old forest in LOTRO used to randomly change paths daily. Maybe more instanced dungeons with DIABLO randomization?
I remember it being a maze, apparently Moira was the same...but then they changed it. Easy mode is part of the template that must rule them all.
If you think about it, this is just another case of developers who dont see trends and go with with what other people did.
the trend is like a wave that cant be stopped. You have to flow with it and use it to your advantage.
eso come the closest with the 4 man group because players can and do solo and duo that content all the time but it isnt optimal.
3 people is optimal for all content types and always will be. If you want the most bang for the buck that is the answer that rides the wave.
get the group size right and you dont need to choose between solo and group since all content and groupsize required is tuned to the skill of the player.
more than three ruins this dynamic and it gets worse for every player required after 3.
Yet again and again you see developers trying to force people into group content, because they have decided that group content is the be all end all of mmorpgs even when the amounts of solo focused players keeps rising. Why so focused on getting people to play your group content when you could just create solo/solo que content that more people would experience and enjoy than the minority of high end pvers/pvpers.
What MMORPGs do you play that require you to do group content? I know it's an option in many but can't think of any that force it upon you.
New World does it more than most although they're walking some of that back.
The main quest line stops dead on its track until you do 3 group expeditions.
They have now changed the first 2 of those compulsory dungeon runs by providing a solo option for them.
The end game though is still pretty much all about grouping. No solo game play really after 60... not even alts.
"But they're walking some of it back" The game has been out two months and grouping is already being removed. So does anyone think in a year much grouping will be left? They could have made it so you walk to a quest area and just join a team of whoever is there, but the only solution solo casuals will accept is no grouping for any reason or any way whatsoever.
They have in my mind turned open world interactive games into a solo game in all but name. Wait you say what about PvP? Well they will be attacking that as well, does anyone here think the calls for endless dailies and the like to replace after 60 PvP have not already started?
It makes perfect sense that the level 25 and level 40 dungeon main quest steps now have an alternative way to progress the quest that does not require the dungeon. There is no level scaling for dungeons in the game and the bulk of the population is at 60. Finding groups for level 25 and 40 dungeons just ain't easy.
Having a grouping requirement for the main quest was a nice change of pace IMO, but I did those when the whole server was doing them so no problem whatsoever finding groups.
These changes are just facing the reality that new players at those quest steps are not having the same ease completing them that those who started all together did.
Dungeon scaling with appropriate loot drops at player level to incentivize level 60s doing them would be a better solution IMO but hey, we know how some people feel at the thought of scaled anything.
I realise what I am suggesting would take a lot more time and the team felt they had no time because of the launch issues. But something to entice players to help others do those dungeon quests would have been preferable. What about a reward for joining in that you could get a maximum of once per day that a level 60 would like? Some carrot goes a long way.
If the developers wouldn't make dungeons so linear, I'd like dungeons a lot more. A proper cave system can have 4 or 5 ways to get to any specific location. Dungeons in games, frequently have only one. Give the players some group decisions that need to be made (do we go this way or that way).
I like the situational migration idea, @Rungar. Definitely compelling content would 'fix' a lot of games. That's all on the way games are designed, though.
It is my understanding the old forest in LOTRO used to randomly change paths daily. Maybe more instanced dungeons with DIABLO randomization?
I remember it being a maze, apparently Moira was the same...but then they changed it. Easy mode is part of the template that must rule them all.
I'm going to generalize, but my thought is many, if not most MMORPG gamers are like me in that it's all about their progression.
They prefer predicability, knowing the fights in advance of ever trying them even, so anything random is not going to be well received.
I remember the old forest in LOTRO, it was an annoying hinderance to completing the quests there, give me another pie run and let me get my rewards.
Now maybe if the rewards from the randomized content far exceeded that of other activities it could be worth doing, but as I recall nothing remarkable came from within, just a major annoyance to completionists like me trying to clear their overly full quest logs.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Casuals and there solo attitudes has done unrepairable damage to the MMO genre ..
I see it the other way around (as has been said by others). The game designs have ruined the player's social behavior. And they did it by forcing the most unsocial form of socializing, "need and dump" in an otherwise divided space.
i dont blame people who like to solo or casuals considering pretty much everyone likes to solo to some degree.
lots have very valid reasons for doing so as well from endless asshats, boring gameplay etc.
as a developer you would think you would want to make content that can reach the maximum number of people regardless of their playstyle and this is only possible if you throw off the shackles of D&D and Everquest and bite the bullet on groupsize.
smaller groups are the most efficient content delivery since they can function as challenging solo content to some extent.
there are other ways to get people interacting that are better and more efficient.
for instance lazy developer makes a "groupfinder" that randomly matches people based off of usually weak criteria.
You dont need a groupfinder in a mmo. A npc guild with achievement based chats is a targeted group finder, if you make a guild for every activity.
just join the guild, and you will be naturally paired with people of your ability because its achievement based.
but they dont think that way so all you get is yet another shitty groupfinder.
Casuals and there solo attitudes has done unrepairable damage to the MMO genre ..
I see it the other way around (as has been said by others). The game designs have ruined the player's social behavior. And they did it by forcing the most unsocial form of socializing, "need and dump" in an otherwise divided space.
Yet again and again you see developers trying to force people into group content, because they have decided that group content is the be all end all of mmorpgs even when the amounts of solo focused players keeps rising. Why so focused on getting people to play your group content when you could just create solo/solo que content that more people would experience and enjoy than the minority of high end pvers/pvpers.
What MMORPGs do you play that require you to do group content? I know it's an option in many but can't think of any that force it upon you.
New World does it more than most although they're walking some of that back.
The main quest line stops dead on its track until you do 3 group expeditions.
They have now changed the first 2 of those compulsory dungeon runs by providing a solo option for them.
The end game though is still pretty much all about grouping. No solo game play really after 60... not even alts.
"But they're walking some of it back" The game has been out two months and grouping is already being removed. So does anyone think in a year much grouping will be left? They could have made it so you walk to a quest area and just join a team of whoever is there, but the only solution solo casuals will accept is no grouping for any reason or any way whatsoever.
They have in my mind turned open world interactive games into a solo game in all but name. Wait you say what about PvP? Well they will be attacking that as well, does anyone here think the calls for endless dailies and the like to replace after 60 PvP have not already started?
It makes perfect sense that the level 25 and level 40 dungeon main quest steps now have an alternative way to progress the quest that does not require the dungeon. There is no level scaling for dungeons in the game and the bulk of the population is at 60. Finding groups for level 25 and 40 dungeons just ain't easy.
Having a grouping requirement for the main quest was a nice change of pace IMO, but I did those when the whole server was doing them so no problem whatsoever finding groups.
These changes are just facing the reality that new players at those quest steps are not having the same ease completing them that those who started all together did.
Dungeon scaling with appropriate loot drops at player level to incentivize level 60s doing them would be a better solution IMO but hey, we know how some people feel at the thought of scaled anything.
I realise what I am suggesting would take a lot more time and the team felt they had no time because of the launch issues. But something to entice players to help others do those dungeon quests would have been preferable. What about a reward for joining in that you could get a maximum of once per day that a level 60 would like? Some carrot goes a long way.
If the developers wouldn't make dungeons so linear, I'd like dungeons a lot more. A proper cave system can have 4 or 5 ways to get to any specific location. Dungeons in games, frequently have only one. Give the players some group decisions that need to be made (do we go this way or that way).
I like the situational migration idea, @Rungar. Definitely compelling content would 'fix' a lot of games. That's all on the way games are designed, though.
It is my understanding the old forest in LOTRO used to randomly change paths daily. Maybe more instanced dungeons with DIABLO randomization?
I remember it being a maze, apparently Moira was the same...but then they changed it. Easy mode is part of the template that must rule them all.
I'm going to generalize, but my thought is many, if not most MMORPG gamers are like me in that it's all about their progression.
They prefer predicability, knowing the fights in advance of ever trying them even, so anything random is not going to be well received.
I remember the old forest in LOTRO, it was an annoying hinderance to completing the quests there, give me another pie run and let me get my rewards.
Now maybe if the rewards from the randomized content far exceeded that of other activities it could be worth doing, but as I recall nothing remarkable came from within, just a major annoyance to completionists like me trying to clear their overly full quest logs.
I would certainly advocate more reward for more difficulty, otherwise players just see difficulty spikes and want to go elsewhere. But with a decent reward the extra time seems well spent.
Comments
I mean, as far as a wide scale adoption by higher level players?
Once upon a time....
It has the added benefit of limiting players from running scripts (AFK) endlessly.
The same thing can be done with campfires. SWG had that, I think, too.
What about banking? Could something be done there? Maybe have "investment opportunities" pop randomly?
Anything to get players to gather while not hacking away at MOBs is an opportunity to get to know and talk to other players. That's a good way to form bonds, or at least a beginning.
Once upon a time....
ESO is also big into 5-piece gear sets and each individual dungeon has it's own unique set pieces that drop there exclusively. If players are no queuing for random dungeons they queue for the one they want based on gear set drops there.
That' actually the secret sauce that makes ESO scaling work: regardless of level, your drops will always match your true level whether in dungeons or anywhere else in the game and you're always building gear sets that are unique to dungeons, open world zones, PvP, Trials, etc.
Some of those sets are more powerful than others but not by much. They are typically just different for different play styles and may emphasize one or more skills over others. They have literally hundreds of different sets.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
That brings up a question. Why have that scaling at all? Why have the big numbers at all? It sounds like they aren't even used. Correct? It's just "cosmetic"? A carrot on a stick trick on a sliding scale?
Once upon a time....
The real progression in ESO is unlocking skills and passives in the skill lines you use so they could easily get rid of "1-50" if they wanted to with little impact to the actual game play The 1-3600 Champion Points thing is different and an end-game progression incentive where individual points are of little consequence but large chunks, if used wisely, can make a big difference,
I suspect they didn't want to do away with levels altogether because most players in RPGs want to level and see those numbers as progression. As a matter of fact the biggest anti-scaling gripe is from just those players who want to see the progression be more substantial instead of subtle.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
You know, it does sound better than anything else I've seen in the games being made since EQ went D&D-on-steroids.
I just sort of resent the falseness of the numbers. But that's just me, I guess.
But I do have another question.
Those higher level weapons and armor, they actually mean nothing compared to the lower stuff? At all?
Edit, another question. How do you judge what's better for gear? It seems like it is all meaningless, unless there's some difference. But how would you know what's what?
(I understand that gear must be set for certain types, I mean like to like gear on the class basis.)
Once upon a time....
They also keep gear replacement relevant while you level by reducing your gear's scaling when you're 5+ levels higher than it. But again, we're talking about small differences not huge ones. The gear doesn't become useless if you're 5 levels higher than it, just a bit less effective,
Also, unlike other games, you are encouraged to use skills instead of just basic attacks. The only skills that have cool downs in ESO are ultimates. Everything else is just resource use based but with a very generous system for recovering the resources quickly by weaving in basic heavy attacks with your skill use. Yes, a basic heavy attack can restore your stamina instead of draining it lol.
Power gaps are not so much about which weapon you use and its level but about which skills you have unlocked and are choosing to use. Unlocking some of the better skills takes a while and is the game's true leveling.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Isn't that a kick in the pants. *Grumbles*
There's still a few things I'm not sure about (with ESO), for my tastes, but I can find that on my own.
I still wish they wouldn't have hidden this behind a false vision. But at least someone finally got where MMORPGs need to be. (My opinion, but evidently with support.)
Thanks for taking the time.
Once upon a time....
Its a great game but it has an achilles heel buried within the combat system.
There is more difficult content to be had, group open world events, pretty fun dungeons... even a couple of pretty tough solo trials (ESOspeak for raid) but it's a pretty easy game overall.
I've always liked their skill unlock through use approach to leveling as well as their hybrid class / classless build choices.
They annoy me with some things, especially how much they push their damn cash shop with in-game ads, which is why I'm currently on a long, long break from it but it's not a bad game and has some interesting design choices.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I do agree a growing solo community does need to be rewarded and there is no reason both communities can't enjoy their game space. But you can't get jealous of the rewards your not willing to play the content it comes from. Should they be rewarded equally? Depends on the game.
I mean why go into a genre that doesn't fit your play style and expect them to cater to you? I get the game might sound cool or look good but if you don't like that type of game then...? Not trying to be mean or anything but every game has a thread of X game needs to change this! So pvp games need to remove pvp for the pve player but then the pve games need to add pvp?
It's really like playing ff7 and being pissed that you can't invite your guild to join you. I get you want to experience the story solo but to "play" the game you need the group as it should be a focal point of the game really.
My question for you though, if you're playing with a couple friends then why is the grouping an issue? So maybe you pick up a player or 2 here and there, not that bad really.
didn't mean to have this come across as a rant or attack but it just doesn't make sense when most games already push a huge amount of solo play. How much more "solo friendly" does it need to get before we just remove the online function of this genre altogether?
I remember it being a maze, apparently Moira was the same...but then they changed it. Easy mode is part of the template that must rule them all.
the trend is like a wave that cant be stopped. You have to flow with it and use it to your advantage.
eso come the closest with the 4 man group because players can and do solo and duo that content all the time but it isnt optimal.
3 people is optimal for all content types and always will be. If you want the most bang for the buck that is the answer that rides the wave.
get the group size right and you dont need to choose between solo and group since all content and groupsize required is tuned to the skill of the player.
more than three ruins this dynamic and it gets worse for every player required after 3.
They prefer predicability, knowing the fights in advance of ever trying them even, so anything random is not going to be well received.
I remember the old forest in LOTRO, it was an annoying hinderance to completing the quests there, give me another pie run and let me get my rewards.
Now maybe if the rewards from the randomized content far exceeded that of other activities it could be worth doing, but as I recall nothing remarkable came from within, just a major annoyance to completionists like me trying to clear their overly full quest logs.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The game designs have ruined the player's social behavior. And they did it by forcing the most unsocial form of socializing, "need and dump" in an otherwise divided space.
Once upon a time....
lots have very valid reasons for doing so as well from endless asshats, boring gameplay etc.
as a developer you would think you would want to make content that can reach the maximum number of people regardless of their playstyle and this is only possible if you throw off the shackles of D&D and Everquest and bite the bullet on groupsize.
smaller groups are the most efficient content delivery since they can function as challenging solo content to some extent.
there are other ways to get people interacting that are better and more efficient.
for instance lazy developer makes a "groupfinder" that randomly matches people based off of usually weak criteria.
You dont need a groupfinder in a mmo. A npc guild with achievement based chats is a targeted group finder, if you make a guild for every activity.
just join the guild, and you will be naturally paired with people of your ability because its achievement based.
but they dont think that way so all you get is yet another shitty groupfinder.