Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Should solo players have an endgame?

178101213

Comments

  • AntaranAntaran Member Posts: 579

    Originally posted by Reklaw

    Originally posted by Augurk


    Originally posted by WSIMike

    Nnnnno. Massively Multiplayer means "a large amount of other players". As in, a massive amount of other players. Massively describes Multiplayer, they're not discreet terms in that context.

    From Wikipedia:

    "Massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) is a genre of computer role-playing games in which a very large number of players interact with one another within a virtual game world.

    It's always meant that. It will always mean that. It does not mean "more than 1 player".

    Let's not start to conveniently redefine well established terms to suit our arguments, okay folks?

    Further about it not meaning you're in a group of other players. The heritage of MMORPGs and what they evolved from indicates otherwise. MMORPGs, traditionally, have been very focused on grouping and cooperation with other players. Let's not start revising or ignoring history to suit our arguments, okay folks?

    Age of Conan is a MMORPG *set in the world* of a single character. Everyone is not running around as Conan The Barbarian. Let's not start misrepresenting a game as something it isn't to suit our arguments, okay folks?

    You are right that Massively Multiplayer means a massive amount of other players. Massively is linked to multiplayer in MMORPG, they are not two seperate words. F.i. a world with 2 2km² zones might not be seen as massive, but it can still be an MMORPG world if it's a persistent online world with a (potentially) massive online community.

    However I feel you miss out on what's the essence (or heritage as you call it) of MMORPGs. This is in my eyes having a persistant (key word) online world that allows large amounts of players to play a role in and gives them the possibility to interact with each other and with the world itself[ on many aspects.

    But in the real world and in every online world people interact with each other on various levels of intensity. Grouping together is just one aspect of it. Trading is one. PvP-ing (even as a solo player) is another aspect. Participating in chat channels is one. Hell, even doing a simple /wave at anyone is one aspect.

    The essence of MMORPGs is not and has never been to only make players be able to play the game to its full extent if they group together. There are of course (parts of) several MMORPGs that aim for this, but it is not the purpose nor the heritage of the MMORPG genre in general. This is more a question of design choices made by the developers.

    Even someone who plays the game without interacting with other players at all, just soloes his way through the world, doesn't chat, nor PvPs, nor trades is still someone who interacts with the persistent online world (that is inhabited by other players) and still is an MMORPG player, that should have access to all content he has paid for, even though some might think a person like that is better off in a single player game. But who are we to decide that? There are not many single player games that offer a big fantasy/sci-fi persistent world for them to roleplay in. That alone can be their reason to play an MMORPG. In the real world someone like this may be referred to as a hermit, and they are not artificially blocked in their life by the government either. 

    The answer to the question in the OP in my eyes should definitely be a yes - however there are several good reasons as to why a developer would take a different approach and allow some content only for grouping players. Still I think that should mean that there should be a degree of endgame available for everyone. As said - this is a matter of design choice, but there is no reason at all to answer this particular question with a no.

     Very good post and agree with almost everything, except the highlighted red part, but perhaps it's just me of course, but I feel you only pay acces to the gameworld, I don't feel that when I pay for a MMORPG sub that I should have acces to ALL content as I am not paying for ALL content but paying for acces to the game world or more simply put "acces to the gameserver", which should allow me the freedom to do as I please within the bounderies of that gameworld. I might miss out on certain content due to how I want to play, if people actually would feel the right to have acces to ALL content then the whole being unique stops and the being a clone of a clone of a clone where everyone is the same starts, which seems to become the route many seem to choose or even want. As it seems people don't want to be unique anymore in MMORPG cause as you say they feel they have the right to acces all content. Which leaves me thinking why play a MMORPG if you want acces to all content.

    I personaly feel that when playing a singleplayer game I should be allowed to all content cause the game is targetted towards just me one player, where a MMORPG should create a atmospheer of thousands if not more unique induviduels, unlike singleplayer games.

    But as said it might just be me who thinks this way and I am perfectly okay with not getting ALL game content as I love being unique and not a sheep that follows the same road as most seem to walk.

    Well i know we see things differently Reklaw, the way i see things is you buy the game to get access to play and you pay a sub for the content of said game, therefore to me anyone paying a sub for a game should have access to all content if they so wish.

  • UsualSuspectUsualSuspect Member UncommonPosts: 1,243

    Originally posted by HYPERI0N

    Both people might pay to go see a football match supporting different teams. Should both teams 'win' because they both paid for the same 'content'? If not, one of them is going to walk away disappointed (unless it's a draw, then both will be). Or maybe both go to a themepark but one of them doesn't like rollercoasters. Should we remove rollercoasters because one of them isn't getting to access the same 'content'?

    Your Analogies have so many holes in them so i shall just make one and leave the rest up to others.

    In a competative team sports game such as football if both teams would win everytime because supporters from both sides brought tickets what would the point be in going at all? 

     

    Point is comparing a computer game based on endgame content where it is expected for you to win exentually as part of an overall experience to a competative mult team sport where winning is not always garanteed is fundementally wrong!

    The point is that both people paid the same money for the same thing, but came away with different experiences. The people going to the football game were either happy their team won or were disappointed they lost, the people who went to the theme park were both happy because there was enough to please both of them, even though one of them didn't like rollercoasters he still got to do plenty of other things. They both paid their money and came away with something, even the person whose team lost likely enjoyed the game all the same.

    So to compare this to an MMO: Why does just paying for something mean you should have access to everything and be given everything, when there are so many other people taking part that have different likes or dislikes, or want one thing over another? That's the joy of MMO's, they cover a lot of bases, be it grouping, soloing, crafting, trading, and many other things.

    If you've paid for the content, should you then also be forced to take part in every piece of that game, like it or not? According to the poster who says I paid my money so should get all content, then apparantly I should be forced to craft even though I hate it in all MMO's, or forced to trade when really just want to bash a few mobs. To not do that would mean I've been denied content.

  • AntaranAntaran Member Posts: 579

    Originally posted by UsualSuspect

    Originally posted by HYPERI0N

    Both people might pay to go see a football match supporting different teams. Should both teams 'win' because they both paid for the same 'content'? If not, one of them is going to walk away disappointed (unless it's a draw, then both will be). Or maybe both go to a themepark but one of them doesn't like rollercoasters. Should we remove rollercoasters because one of them isn't getting to access the same 'content'?

    Your Analogies have so many holes in them so i shall just make one and leave the rest up to others.

    In a competative team sports game such as football if both teams would win everytime because supporters from both sides brought tickets what would the point be in going at all? 

     

    Point is comparing a computer game based on endgame content where it is expected for you to win exentually as part of an overall experience to a competative mult team sport where winning is not always garanteed is fundementally wrong!

    The point is that both people paid the same money for the same thing, but came away with different experiences. The people going to the football game were either happy their team won or were disappointed they lost, the people who went to the theme park were both happy because there was enough to please both of them, even though one of them didn't like rollercoasters he still got to do plenty of other things. They both paid their money and came away with something, even the person whose team lost likely enjoyed the game all the same.

    So to compare this to an MMO: Why does just paying for something mean you should have access to everything and be given everything, when there are so many other people taking part that have different likes or dislikes, or want one thing over another? That's the joy of MMO's, they cover a lot of bases, be it grouping, soloing, crafting, trading, and many other things.

    If you've paid for the content, should you then also be forced to take part in every piece of that game, like it or not? According to the poster who says I paid my money so should get all content, then apparantly I should be forced to craft even though I hate it in all MMO's, or forced to trade when really just want to bash a few mobs. To not do that would mean I've been denied content.

    You shouldn't be forced to take part in anything you don't want to do but using crafting in your example is a really bad way of getting your point across, crafting is optional as instead of making things for yourself or to sell you have the option of buying stuff you want or need. However raiding, grouping and sometimes PvP you are forced to do these days, your forced to group throughout most games in order to complete certain hard quests/missions to progress, your forced to raid in order to be competative and on par with others because thats where they slap most of the good items or certain items needed to access other things and in some but not all games your forced to PvP in order to (yet again) be able to get the decent items that you can't get anywhere else. crafting you are not forced to do..

    With regards to your football match example, everyone who pays for a ticket gets exactly what they want and pay for, win or lose they pay to WATCH the match, not for their team to win, their team winning is a personal wish and hope and has nothing to do with the content they pay for.

  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254

    Solo players have an endgame. They just don't have a group oriented endgame. That's because they are solo. Since they aren't in a group, they have a solo oriented endgame. The solo oriented endgame is perfect for the player that likes to play solo. The group oriented endgame is perfect for the player that likes to play in a group. Group play is optional. Solo play is optional. Group content is meant for the person that likes to group. Solo content is for the person that likes to solo. Crafting content is for the person that likes to craft. Gathering content is for the person that likes to gather. Fishing content is for people that like to fish. Raiding content is for people that like to raid. PvP content is for people that like to PvP. Solo content is for people that like to solo. Group content is for people that like to group.

  • AntaranAntaran Member Posts: 579

    Originally posted by colddog04

    Solo players have an endgame. They just don't have a group oriented endgame. That's because they are solo. Since they aren't in a group, they have a solo oriented endgame. The solo oriented endgame is perfect for the player that likes to play solo. The group oriented endgame is perfect for the player that likes to play in a group. Group play is optional. Solo play is optional. Group content is meant for the person that likes to group. Solo content is for the person that likes to solo. Crafting content is for the person that likes to craft. Gathering content is for the person that likes to gather. Fishing content is for people that like to fish. Raiding content is for people that like to raid. PvP content is for people that like to PvP. Solo content is for people that like to solo. Group content is for people that like to group.

    just out of curiosity what games do you have in mind when you say "Solo players have an endgame" as other than crafting, gathering and chatting i haven't encountered a single thing for solo'ers in the games listed below.

    Lord of the Rings Online (now has Skirmishes though)

    Star Wars Galaxies

    and from what i've read on this very site and on official forums all the other games are exactly the same, Raid, PvP or Craft for endgame... nothing for solo players that don't want to Craft.

  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254

    Originally posted by Antaran

    Originally posted by colddog04

    Solo players have an endgame. They just don't have a group oriented endgame. That's because they are solo. Since they aren't in a group, they have a solo oriented endgame. The solo oriented endgame is perfect for the player that likes to play solo. The group oriented endgame is perfect for the player that likes to play in a group. Group play is optional. Solo play is optional. Group content is meant for the person that likes to group. Solo content is for the person that likes to solo. Crafting content is for the person that likes to craft. Gathering content is for the person that likes to gather. Fishing content is for people that like to fish. Raiding content is for people that like to raid. PvP content is for people that like to PvP. Solo content is for people that like to solo. Group content is for people that like to group.

    just out of curiosity what games do you have in mind when you say "Solo players have an endgame" as other than crafting, gathering and chatting i haven't encountered a single thing for solo'ers in the games listed below.

    Lord of the Rings Online (now has Skirmishes though)

    Star Wars Galaxies

    and from what i've read on this very site and on official forums all the other games are exactly the same, Raid, PvP or Craft for endgame... nothing for solo players that don't want to Craft.

    Questing

    Farming monsters for mats, items or dough

    PvP

    Daily questing (if available)

    Exploration

    Role Play

    Solo lower level content

    Crafting, gathering and chatting (I cheated)

    Farming (as in tobacco or other things)

    Planting

    Complete achievements (EQ2 and WoW)

    Minigames

    Playing the market

    Trading

    Explore other systems depending on the game (AAs, collections, archaeology, fishing, etc.)

    Collect mounts/pets

    Collect social clothing

    Get rich

    Duel

  • RagemasterRagemaster Member UncommonPosts: 131

    Originally posted by Rockgod99

    Should they have a endgame like the groupers do? Or should solo players just hit cap, finish out their quests and re-roll?

     

    This is too broad a question to ask in general.. it depends on the game. Personally, I think games need to be developed with either more focus on grouping or more focus on soloing... It is a tricfky balancing act, but trying to make a game that is great for soloers while also great for groups of players working together., never works, for they are polar opposites. Instead of one playstyle or the other being adequatly developed each becomes 50/50, and results in threads such as these ;)

    In my opinion, MMORPGS are multiplayer oriernted games and If I didnt want to ever socailixze with other players I would just play Here is a scale I made to describe it better. The left is more solo friendly, the right leans more towards grouping.

    (solo friendly / grouping is punished )                                          (group oriented, solo punished)

      <<  1  ========    2  ==========     3   ========  4   =======   5  >>

                              

    1 - is mostly solo, solo players can get all the stuff groups of players can, little to no point for organised groups, punishes players for grouping with reduce xp, quest count  limit, ect.

    2 - caters to soloers or small groups, with some minimal teamwork required for high end stuff

    3 - Middle of the road, neither group biased or solo biased, I think WOW would fall in here someplace, slightly slanted towards the left end... I put wow at a 2.7.

    4 - Players can solo, but is not effective as pooling resources/teamwork with other players. Soloers will have a difficult time.

    5 - Guild oriented game, thru and thru. Darkfall... EVE online, Mortal,, all your sandbox games, fall here, and perhaps old school games like UO or EQ. Soloers are second class citizens or outright useless

  • UsualSuspectUsualSuspect Member UncommonPosts: 1,243

    Originally posted by Antaran

    You shouldn't be forced to take part in anything you don't want to do but using crafting in your example is a really bad way of getting your point across, crafting is optional as instead of making things for yourself or to sell you have the option of buying stuff you want or need. However raiding, grouping and sometimes PvP you are forced to do these days, your forced to group throughout most games in order to complete certain hard quests/missions to progress, your forced to raid in order to be competative and on par with others because thats where they slap most of the good items or certain items needed to access other things and in some but not all games your forced to PvP in order to (yet again) be able to get the decent items that you can't get anywhere else. crafting you are not forced to do..

    You're not forced to do anything in an MMO, you choose to do it, just like everything else in life. Saying that you're forced to group is just rubbish, you choose to group because you want the 'shiny-shiny' at the end, it's nothing to do with being forced to. You want that stuff so you put aside your pride and jump on board. Grouping is as optional as crafting, you can do it or not, your decision.

    Lets throw a few examples into the mix. I was playing Lord of the Rings Online and got a bunch of quests for the Great Barrow. I spent ages trying to get all the soloers to come and do the quests, but no chance, so what did I do? I levelled past it and removed the quests from my list. I wasn't forced to enter the Great Barrow - I wanted to, sure, but I was never forced to, and I had the option of ignoring it completely - which I did.

    Now go to Champions Online. I wanted to just bash some bad guys and get on with the game, I don't like crafting, but at the start the game forced me to pick up crafting so I could get through the end instance of the tutorial area. I had no option. I either picked up crafting or I would take radiation poisoning and die. They have since changed this, thankfully, though they do still throw the quest in your face without telling you it's now avoidable.

    Much like the guy who hates rollercoasters at the themepark - you can either get on board and enjoy all the themeparks content, or you can ignore it and pick the rides you like best. WIth the exception of bad design (CO) the choice is almost always yours.

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441

    Originally posted by Ragemaster

    Originally posted by Rockgod99

    Should they have a endgame like the groupers do? Or should solo players just hit cap, finish out their quests and re-roll?

    This is too broad a question to ask in general.. it depends on the game. Personally, I think games need to be developed with either more focus on grouping or more focus on soloing... It is a tricfky balancing act, but trying to make a game that is great for soloers while also great for groups of players working together., never works, for they are polar opposites. Instead of one playstyle or the other being adequatly developed each becomes 50/50, and results in threads such as these ;)

    In my opinion, MMORPGS are multiplayer oriernted games and If I didnt want to ever socailixze with other players I would just play Here is a scale I made to describe it better. The left is more solo friendly, the right leans more towards grouping.

    (solo friendly / grouping is punished )                                          (group oriented, solo punished)

      <<  1  ========    2  ==========     3   ========  4   =======   5  >>                         

    1 - is mostly solo, solo players can get all the stuff groups of players can, little to no point for organised groups, punishes players for grouping with reduce xp, quest count  limit, ect.

    2 - caters to soloers or small groups, with some minimal teamwork required for high end stuff

    3 - Middle of the road, neither group biased or solo biased, I think WOW would fall in here someplace, slightly slanted towards the left end... I put wow at a 2.7.

    4 - Players can solo, but is not effective as pooling resources/teamwork with other players. Soloers will have a difficult time.

    5 - Guild oriented game, thru and thru. Darkfall... EVE online, Mortal,, all your sandbox games, fall here, and perhaps old school games like UO or EQ. Soloers are second class citizens or outright useless

    No, it is not really a broad question. Either you make a game with stuff for solo players or you don't. Both ways are fine, the problem is that many games can't choose which and make solo play for half the game, not the other half and that is just stupid.

    This does not mean soloplayers should get all the cool stuff group players can get but they at least deserves an endgame if you made the rest of the game for them. That does not mean they should have access to all endgame content either but at least some. Or just take away soloplaying all together but be consequent.

  • JellypigJellypig Member Posts: 126

    I've recently been playing a game with solo endgame.. and it's called Demon's Souls for the PS3.  I'm sure people have said it several times in this thread but why would you pay a sub fee to play a game that houses a ton of players and almost always encourages group play just to play by yourself? 

  • VidirVidir Member UncommonPosts: 963

    Imo solo players should have endgame and good loot as well as those that group.It is missunderstandint that solo is easy and should not get desent reward, soloing is allways more difficult than grouping.

  • AntaranAntaran Member Posts: 579

    Originally posted by colddog04

    Originally posted by Antaran


    Originally posted by colddog04

    Solo players have an endgame. They just don't have a group oriented endgame. That's because they are solo. Since they aren't in a group, they have a solo oriented endgame. The solo oriented endgame is perfect for the player that likes to play solo. The group oriented endgame is perfect for the player that likes to play in a group. Group play is optional. Solo play is optional. Group content is meant for the person that likes to group. Solo content is for the person that likes to solo. Crafting content is for the person that likes to craft. Gathering content is for the person that likes to gather. Fishing content is for people that like to fish. Raiding content is for people that like to raid. PvP content is for people that like to PvP. Solo content is for people that like to solo. Group content is for people that like to group.

    just out of curiosity what games do you have in mind when you say "Solo players have an endgame" as other than crafting, gathering and chatting i haven't encountered a single thing for solo'ers in the games listed below.

    Lord of the Rings Online (now has Skirmishes though)

    Star Wars Galaxies

    and from what i've read on this very site and on official forums all the other games are exactly the same, Raid, PvP or Craft for endgame... nothing for solo players that don't want to Craft.

    Questing

    Farming monsters for mats, items or dough

    PvP

    Daily questing (if available)

    Exploration

    Role Play

    Solo lower level content

    Crafting, gathering and chatting (I cheated)

    Farming (as in tobacco or other things)

    Planting

    Complete achievements (EQ2 and WoW)

    Minigames

    Playing the market

    Trading

    Explore other systems depending on the game (AAs, collections, archaeology, fishing, etc.)

    Collect mounts/pets

    Collect social clothing

    Get rich

    Duel

    Those are good examples of game content but it's not end game content for solo players leaving crafting out of the mix.

    Questing, Solo lower level content, Complete achievements and Daily questing (if available)= These are usually done and mostly covered throughout the gameplay itself and in the terms of questing and going for lower level mobs thats like telling a PvPer to gank low level players or Raiders to (using lotro example) keep running the great barrows and killing Sambrog.

    Farming monsters for mats, items or dough, Crafting, gathering and chatting, Farming (as in tobacco or other things), Planting, Playing the market, Trading, Get rich = These are all part of the game economy and as such in the Crafting terminology as it's being used in this thread.

    PvP and Duel = i don't understand why you added these as they are not SOLO content.

    Exploration, Role Play, Explore other systems depending on the game, Collect mounts/pets and Collect social clothing = although these are or can be classed as solo content in some games you'll find that suggesting this to a maxed out endgame level player as his/her endgame content is like telling a pvper that dueling is his end game content.

  • The word "endgame" originated in single player games.

     

    This thread just seems completely silly to me.

  • Rockgod99Rockgod99 Member Posts: 4,640

    Originally posted by gestalt11

    The word "endgame" originated in single player games.

     

    This thread just seems completely silly to me.

    I used the term "endgame" back when i played EQ.

    Not once did i ever see it used before that and i've been playing videogames since Pong, pac-man and defender on my Atari.

    image

    Playing: Rift, LotRO
    Waiting on: GW2, BP

  • Dark_HUmarDark_HUmar Member UncommonPosts: 200

    Depends on what kind of MMORPG you are playing since there are hardcore pvp and pve

    MMo's and also Casual MMO's.

    Beside that I liked the system WAR had with public quests you don't join a group you just go to an area and most of the time there are more people doing a certain public quest wich means no group joining but still having people to do a quest with.

  • IrishIrish Member UncommonPosts: 259

    If solo players pay 15 dollars a month, they should be entitled to partake in the fun- the same as anyone. Obviously, I don't expect single player dungeons or anything, but something progressive for your character.

    I am by no means saying that there aren't things for solo players to do, either.

    End game is relative to the player anyhow, regardless of the source of the word, so with that being said, I agree that this thread is indeed silly.

    This whole group v solo thing is retarded- the true appeal of a MMO is the community of players who are there when you want them to be. I am a solo player (mostly due to the fact I play stealth classes, who are capable of doing things without non-stealthers slowing me down), I hate voice chat/vent, people who tell me what to do and most importantly, responsibility in games. I have enough of all that nonsense in real life at a job that gives me money. No way I would pay monthly for it.

    What I do enjoy is logging into a game I pay for, and having people there when it benefits me, as those people are doing the exact same thing, be it through grouping, standing around emoting rude gestures or good ol' fashion PvPing.

    Also OP, owning an Atari doesn't legitimize your view, or place you at the forefront of gaming knowledge. A Tandy 1000? Maybe, but doubtful.

  • SwampRobSwampRob Member UncommonPosts: 1,003

    I'll try to illustrate the point another way.

     

                                                                             Soloing

    Lvl 1    (quest and get steadily better gear)          Max Lvl       No quests for improved gear   

       | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -|      ||    - - - - - - - - Endgame - - - - - - - -  ||

     

     

                                                                             Grouping

    Lvl 1    (quest and get steadily better gear)          Max Lvl     (quest and get steadily better gear)

       | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -|       ||    - - - - - - - - Endgame - - - - - - - -  ||

     

    This is why it's unfair.     Almost every MMO is happy to let you solo or group to the end and continue to see progression.   And then endgame hits and the progression ends for soloers.   

  • kaliniskalinis Member Posts: 1,428

    U know mmos are a multiplayer game right? they want u to eventually group with someone. While most mmos are solo freindly now due to wows popularity and its ease in soloing. They still want u to eventually play wiht others. Im sorry but if u never wanna group go play console games or get a computer game that has multiplayer but isnt an mmo.

    I think most mmos want u to group but allow u to solo to end game . The thought i think is that u will eventually make some freinds u can group with and join a guild u can run stuff with. End game was created to keep players around. U can solo in pvp with battle grounds. and get better gear

    U cant do dungeons or raids solo but no one should be able to. Wow has achievements alot of which are soloable. Sure your player doesnt grow in power but they do get some nice cosmetic goodies. I love to play by myself in wow. I like to level with jus tme and gf. But when i hit max level im looking for groups.

    I dont understand why anyone wants to solo forever. I think the end game for solo players is alts. U can always roll alts and level them and do whatever u can till u max them out. Exploration and other things are there as well in most mmos. That said eventually in mmo's u should have to group at some pt.

    The fact is u arent forced to group in most mmo's till max level but if u are never gonna group why are u playing an mmo?

  • bunnyhopperbunnyhopper Member CommonPosts: 2,751

    Originally posted by Loke666

    Originally posted by bunnyhopper

    You are missing the point here. The point is that MMOs promotes a style of playing for half the game but not for the later play.

    MMOs should either have soloing content for the entire game or not at all. Learning people to play one way and then suddenly not allowing them to play like that is stupid. I see both sides if soloing should be in or not but that isn't the problem here.

    This is like they would take away dungeons at the endgame or only allow crafting there, it is inconsequent. 

    Really? From my perspective you seem to be missing the point. Whilst you can solo at the beginning of most mmos this is down to the fact that most players fresh into a game do not have a multitude of friends with which they can instantly group with. Early content is geared for individuals to complete as they learn their 'class' and as they don't know many other players.

     

    In time people understand their class solo and meet other people, subsequently the game ramps up in difficulty at later levels calling for the player to not only master his class solo, but also to put it to play within the group dynamic, and so the cycle continues.

     

    "Come and have a look at what you could have won."

  • NekrataalNekrataal Member Posts: 557

    Single player game are for soloing from A to Z periode.

    If you get in a MMORPG, you have to accept that at some point you'll have to group to progress further, thats the narure of the beast, deal with it.

    The whole point of the genre is to accomplish things that can't be done solo.  Like in rl one can build a hut or a bird house on his own but he certainly can't build an hospital or a dam.

    Please, if MMO's aren't your cup of tea, why are you playing them? Fad of the moment due to WoW succes? idk... you tell me.

    Stop trying to change a genre & find your own... soloing is litterally destroying the world feeling/community the old MMO's had & its sad.


  • Originally posted by Rockgod99

    Originally posted by gestalt11

    The word "endgame" originated in single player games.

     

    This thread just seems completely silly to me.

    I used the term "endgame" back when i played EQ.

    Not once did i ever see it used before that and i've been playing videogames since Pong, pac-man and defender on my Atari.

    Well technically the word "endgame" is from chess and is much much much older than EQ.

     

    And the way it was used in EQ is rather silly to me as well.  It basically meant, the gear based advancement I do after I reached the "end" of the level based advancement that was originally what i was supposed to be doing.  This is of course ignoring AA which was added later.

     

    The word endgame as it relates to EQ was just a smoke and mirrors shell game.

     

    At least in the context of chess is has a real meaning.  In context of EQ it just another tacked on layer of stuff that is basically the same as the other stuff.

  • UsualSuspectUsualSuspect Member UncommonPosts: 1,243

    Originally posted by Irish

    If solo players pay 15 dollars a month, they should be entitled to partake in the fun- the same as anyone. Obviously, I don't expect single player dungeons or anything, but something progressive for your character.

    I'm still sticking to the point of my original post, that there are no solo players or group players, there are just 'Players'. If you don't like soloing then expect to sit around waiting to find groups, if you don't like grouping then don't expect to have access to every part of the game.

    You signed up to a multiplayer game FFS, why are you so bent out of shape when your solo-play style isn't supported throughout the entire game?

  • centkincentkin Member RarePosts: 1,527

    Here is yet another idea for getting some endgame gear....

    You have a quest to create a vessel(armor, weapon, etc).  Then you transfer a portion of your life essence into the item and drop 3 levels and you get a (cap-3) level piece of raid gear(would be silly to have the item be unusable when you get it and this would maintain balance as it would be say 90% of a decent raid piece -- IE fabled/gold/whatever your raid pieces are level 67 as opposed to the same level 70).

    These would be powerful enough so someone with decent solo gear and a couple of pieces of it could start casual raiding as if he had group gear.    Or could bypass about 33% of the progression if he had a full set(masochist) --ie one could join a raid guild at that point and not be fodder.

    ---

    Actually this mechanic could theoretically be used at any level -- so if you were outlevelling your friends or somesuch you could run the quest at level 27 and come out level 24 with a piece of gold level 24 gear (Might even be worth it if your weapon stank or something or you had tons of content you hadnt finished yet but had started to outlevel etc).

  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254

    Originally posted by Antaran

    Those are good examples of game content but it's not end game content for solo players leaving crafting out of the mix.

    Questing, Solo lower level content, Complete achievements and Daily questing (if available)= These are usually done and mostly covered throughout the gameplay itself and in the terms of questing and going for lower level mobs thats like telling a PvPer to gank low level players or Raiders to (using lotro example) keep running the great barrows and killing Sambrog.

    Farming monsters for mats, items or dough, Crafting, gathering and chatting, Farming (as in tobacco or other things), Planting, Playing the market, Trading, Get rich = These are all part of the game economy and as such in the Crafting terminology as it's being used in this thread.

    PvP and Duel = i don't understand why you added these as they are not SOLO content.

    Exploration, Role Play, Explore other systems depending on the game, Collect mounts/pets and Collect social clothing = although these are or can be classed as solo content in some games you'll find that suggesting this to a maxed out endgame level player as his/her endgame content is like telling a pvper that dueling is his end game content.

    these are all part of the game economy and as such in the Crafting terminology as it's being used in this thread.

    Those are all things that are part of the solo endgame. You apparently do not like what they offer the solo player. What you apparently want is to be able to kill bosses and get loot. Guess what? You can do that as a solo player at endgame in any game too! There are plenty of things to do as a solo player. You just choose not to do them. You view others as being superior and are unable to see the rest of the game because of it.

     

    Questing, Solo lower level contentComplete achievements and Daily questing (if available)

    These are done for the whole game but are also part of the endgame content. If you don't like that quests and daily quests are part of the solo endgame, that's fine. But they are so obviously part of it. 

     

    Soloing lower level content is also part of the solo experience. Going back and attempting to do difficult things solo is a great way to play solo. Often times there are rare loot drops or other things that you can get by playing this way. It's actually really fun to do these things solo. And it is part of the endgame.

     

    Exploration, Role Play, Explore other systems depending on the game, Collect mounts/pets and Collect social clothing

    All of those things can be done throughout the game but are also a big part of the endgame. They are part of the things available to solo players. 

     

    As for PvP, you do not have to be in a group to participate in PvP. You can simply go out and kill another player in most games. You do not have to be in a group to participate in a duel. I have no idea why anyone would think that this type of PvP was group oriented, but you seem to be arguing it in your post. 

     

    You seem to be stuck on the idea that because the activity exists below endgame, that means that that activity is not an endgame activity. Guess what? Grouping and raiding happen before endgame. According to the logic used so often in your post, that would make grouping and raiding not an endgame activity after all. For whatever reason, you fail to see all these other options as endgame activities. The truth is, all these other options are endgame activities that are available to solo players.

  • SwampRobSwampRob Member UncommonPosts: 1,003

    Originally posted by Nekrataal

    If you get in a MMORPG, you have to accept that at some point you'll have to group to progress further, thats the narure of the beast

    Why?   Why does it HAVE to be this way?   Why is it absolutely mandatory in every single MMO for it to be this way?

    It isn't.    It's just how most MMOs are designed now, because they all want to cash in on the Wow format,  Soloers are not asking for group content to be removed, nor do they always solo.   But there is no reason, NONE, why it must be that only grouping has a progressive endgame.

Sign In or Register to comment.