I don't mind if things take a little longer as long as I don't have to hear a 300lb. orc speaking like a 15 year old girl.
In these games, it's generally the other way around. That hot little Blood Elf Paladin in top tier armor will most likely be a 45-year old guy who probably looks like the Comic Book Guy from the Simpsons.
Well if you ever hear your hot blood elf friend say something like "Worst. Boss fight. Ever." Then you know it's time to run .
I don't mind if things take a little longer as long as I don't have to hear a 300lb. orc speaking like a 15 year old girl.
In these games, it's generally the other way around. That hot little Blood Elf Paladin in top tier armor will most likely be a 45-year old guy who probably looks like the Comic Book Guy from the Simpsons.
Well if you ever hear your hot blood elf friend say something like "Worst. Boss fight. Ever." Then you know it's time to run .
I would, but only because I play MMOs with my personal freinds, and only turn to the internet for help at higher levels, or if I find a good guild. I would probably not play it though, but I would at least give it a try.
Why do people think that with no soloing you won't find groups and can't do what YOU want to do? It's more likely you can always find a group that is likely doing something you want to do.
I think a MMO with no soloing could potentially be very fun because only the people playing are the kind that actually want to socialize and do stuff with other people. I've played old MMOs that were almost this way because leveling as a group was so much faster and more fun. Sure you could solo but it was a slow, casual torture if thats all you did.
But hey, I'm one of those that is disgusted with the idea of playing alone in an MMO with a bunch of other loners because so few groups are formed.
I know from my personal experiences in City of Heroes that what can look like a "solo player" to you might well be someone finishing a quick quest with an alt while on voice chat with their guild or fiends before they go and meet up with them. Just because people are alone in a game doens't mean that they're automatically an anti-social loner.
Not all loners are anti-social but they are playing alone because thats the best or easiest way to play, which is what I have a problem with.
Why do people think that with no soloing you won't find groups and can't do what YOU want to do? It's more likely you can always find a group that is likely doing something you want to do.
I think a MMO with no soloing could potentially be very fun because only the people playing are the kind that actually want to socialize and do stuff with other people. I've played old MMOs that were almost this way because leveling as a group was so much faster and more fun. Sure you could solo but it was a slow, casual torture if thats all you did.
But hey, I'm one of those that is disgusted with the idea of playing alone in an MMO with a bunch of other loners because so few groups are formed.
It's a nice thought, but having played "raiding" games for quite some time I know there's plenty of ppl not interested in anything else then gear and they are grouping and raiding. These kind of ppl are certainly not interested in socializing yet they play these games, dont ask me why
In those "raiding games" was that all there was to do or was it some kind of endgame content? Heh, sure not everyone is going to be the most sociable person.
Not every quest would be a kill quest. For example, you might have to go to the bottom of two different dungeons, and pull different levers at the same time, to complete a quest. Maybe it would open a door to release some prisoners.
Some quests could require more than two people, and still not be about killing anything. Like, one player has to distract the guard, another has to steal the sacred idol, while a third secures the escape route.
Sounds like DDO to me. Which strangely, allows soloing. Some quests do require more than 1 player to pull levers, stand on buttons, etc. but most don't. When I solo, I don't do those. ( Although if you want to hassle with a hireling you may be able to do the ones requiring only 2 players. )
When I'm feeling sociable, I hook up with a couple of guildies, and we head out and do some of those ( or whatever else the group wants. )
Where is the option, "I would play it if my friends were playing it"?
Thats what it boils down to isn't it? No one will want to play the game to make freinds. Well some will, even I would, but not if I didn't have people with me from the start too. Without people I know, it kind of boils down to begging people to help you that already have freinds.
Would you try a game with no solo game play? All mobs, all quests, that drop loot or give xp, require more than one player to beat. Anything you could kill solo, would be "gray" as in not give any xp or loot. Anything that did give loot or xp would kill you if you didnt' have at least one other person helping you.
Not every quest would be a kill quest. For example, you might have to go to the bottom of two different dungeons, and pull different levers at the same time, to complete a quest. Maybe it would open a door to release some prisoners.
Some quests could require more than two people, and still not be about killing anything. Like, one player has to distract the guard, another has to steal the sacred idol, while a third secures the escape route.
It would be like logging on to an online game of chess, or poker, or a match of Call of Duty. You don't play by yourself, you log on to play with another player.
If you did not feel like playing with other players, you would play something else, not this game, just like you don't log onto Call of Duty when you don't want to play a game with other players.
Would you try it? Assume it's a good MMORPG in all other respects.
if you would not try it:
Would it make a difference if there was an alternate server, where you could summon a "pet" that would take the place of another player when you wanted to play the game solo?
Would you try it then, as in, would you try the no solo content server or ONLY play on the alternate solo server?
Try a game is a pretty weak question. I could try it on a lark just to say I tried it. It implies that trying it is the same as subscribing to it or other big commitment. I wouldn't focus my time and energy following a game advertised as such in the first place.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Thats what it boils down to isn't it? No one will want to play the game to make freinds. Well some will, even I would, but not if I didn't have people with me from the start too. Without people I know, it kind of boils down to begging people to help you that already have freinds.
That's true for most games, I think. In general, people are going to stick to their guild/clan and to people they know and trust in real life. You see it all the time in shooters and sports games. Hell, developers push the social aspects of games as a way to play with your friends, not as a way to make friends.
Back in EQ1 socializing with strangers was needed because everyone was camping the same spots trying to get the same loot or grind the same XP. You had to make nice with whoever was there because they were there before you. These days, socialization is optional. You don't necessarily have to deal with people outside of your clan or guild if you don't want to.
I agree that socialization is pretty optional, but I kind of want to see that go away. The optional part I mean. I occasionally am sitting in an area, farming monsters for whatever reason, with about 2-5 other people. We rarely talk with each other, and when you do you almost feel obligated to freind list them, rather than just let it go. This is partly because you doubt you will find other people to talk to, but then you find a good guild, and spend the time your farming in your guild chat, rather than talk with the few people around you. I guess its not the worst sytem in the world, but I just feel so bored when I am in an MMO that I have not joined a guild yet.
I think soloing should be possible but it shouldn't be anywhere near optimal.
Just like you could solo in Diablo 2, but you really wanted to have a game of 8 people (albeit probably working solo in an 8man game, but I digress).
My favorite MUD had this system, there were HUGE xp bonuses for grouping up so it was better than soloing even if a certain class wasn't pulling their own weight.
Solo-wise, some classes did it better than others, but to hit max level you pretty much had to group up.
I think there should definitely be soloable levels at least for the first bit of the game. You have to be able to get yourself set, into the game, and toying with your character without someone else.
I like grouping but I have other demands on my time. So I need to be able to solo on nights I know I will be interrupted too often to give a group my undivided attention.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
I like grouping but I have other demands on my time. So I need to be able to solo on nights I know I will be interrupted too often to give a group my undivided attention.
I hear you. I usually play single player games or online shooters if I don't think I'll have time to play in a group. Sometimes I log in just to chat. I'll usually farm some stuff too, but I'd actually rather that was a group activity as well.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Too much group dependency means a lot of time wasted waiting and looking for people, time that I don't always have, and that usually ends in nothing ever getting done and eventually just not playing anymore.
Actually if it REQUIRED groups it would be far better than the games that offer poor solo options. IE I prefer a game where solo is very viable, but I prefer completely unviable to "much worse than grouping." The reason for this is there are a lot of people who will solo anyway if it is at all possible. With those people removed it leaves fewer people to group and a smaller part of the pie to group.
If soloing is 100% impossible as a practical option then people stop thinking about their character in a solo context.
Note -- we are talking 100% -- no necromancers and one or two other classes able to sort of solo.
To accomplish this it actually would be required to make two man groups also NOT work. IE yes you can have a tank and a healer but while the pair might survive against a monster they do not do enough damage to move its health bar. A dps is completely unsuitable to be a tank against a monster even with a healer.
And it is important to NOT have this occur later -- If you did this from the first time you entered the game, people would group out of necessity. If what we said in the first case (monster regen > tank output + dps damage taken > healer healing) is set up then you don't need a lot of skill for the first few monsters -- just the proper number of people (at least 2 people dealing damage with at least one tank to take the damage and a healer, OR 2 healers healing a dps trying to tank, or a major race state with at least 4 non-healers as the absolute minimums).
No, i would not want play an MMO without a solo option. Sometimes i like to enjoy the game by myself where i am the only 1 to blame for anything that can happen.
I never considered CoH a solo game and played classes that were pretty much impossible to solo and played for a couple years. So I guess that's a yes.
I was pleasantly surprised when I went from Apprentice to full 5 star Elite in under 2 months. I was pleasantly surprised again when I went from Elite to just barely Hardcore in 2 weeks. Apprentice, here I come!
I would not even consider playing a game that had no solo options. This subject has been up tp discussion lots of times, and it is well known that the "group only" MMO's are dead. Totally dead.
Only way I'd consider it would be if it were a game that had no way to verbally communicate. Not even a canned response menu system. I know, that might sound crazy, but in a game with no chat interface or anything, being forced to play with strangers all the time might not be so bad. If the gameplay made it interesting enough.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
No, I would have no interest in a game with zero solo play being possible. But I would have a very GREAT interest in a game that rewarded grouping to such an extreme that solo play was seen as *highly* inefficient. I would also have a great interest in a game that required group play ONLY as the ultimate means of gaining "excellent" to "top end" gear, be it through very rare crafting materials or loot drops.
This is my main concern involving Group - Only sorts of games. In original Everquest and Dark Age of Camelot, you *could* solo but it was a very slow means of leveling in comparison to grouping up to farm or kill. It also helped foster good communities. But by the same token, it also helped foster situations of peer pressure where players felt obligated to play for more time than they should have, due to real world commitments, because they "didn't want to let the group down" or some such. Putting the groups together was a chore, and preventing them from falling apart was on everyone's mind.
I'd want a game where if I said to myself " I only have 2 and a half hours to play, and then man, I gotta sleep for an early day tomorrow " and not feel bad about getting something done with my time spent. Alone. I think current game makers respect that outlook to ever go back to the old days of games, regardless of where this poll goes.
Originally posted by Lidane Not if group play was my only option, no. Real life doesn't force me to depend on others 100% of the time. When I'm at work, I'm expected to be able to function independently and do my own projects and assignments. Even though I'm in an office with others, I still have to be able to work alone and complete tasks by myself. Why should a game be any different? Besides, trying to find a stable group is usually a pain in the ass, and don't get me started on the nightmare of the PUG. In general, if I don't have any of my guildmates or trusted friends online, I don't bother. If they're not on, I find some other way to kill the limited game time I've got, whether it's solo quests, or crafting, or whatever. Give me the choice of some sort of solo play and I'll sign on if I think your game is interesting enough. Force me to group 100% of the time and I won't look twice.
Actually, in a game where there is no solo play, finding a group shouldn't be an issue. I would think that some activities (like crafting) would have some solo component, even if they were dependent on the activities of other players as well.
For instance, Global Agenda is pretty much a group only game. You can solo through the first 17 levels, but that's maybe 15% of your total play time if that. The rest of the time, you are grouping. Since everyone groups, finding a group isn't really an issue.
Hmmm, that means I'd have to change my vote to yes because I'm playing World of Tanks, and it's a group only game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I voted no. I like to group, but dont want to be forced to group all the time. I can only pug once in a while or it will piss me off Thats why I mainly group with my friends nowadays and almost never with a bunch of strangers anymore.
Comments
Well if you ever hear your hot blood elf friend say something like "Worst. Boss fight. Ever." Then you know it's time to run
.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Why you little....!
I would, but only because I play MMOs with my personal freinds, and only turn to the internet for help at higher levels, or if I find a good guild. I would probably not play it though, but I would at least give it a try.
Newb= Newly Enrolled Wannabe Badass.
Not all loners are anti-social but they are playing alone because thats the best or easiest way to play, which is what I have a problem with.
In those "raiding games" was that all there was to do or was it some kind of endgame content? Heh, sure not everyone is going to be the most sociable person.
Sounds like DDO to me. Which strangely, allows soloing. Some quests do require more than 1 player to pull levers, stand on buttons, etc. but most don't. When I solo, I don't do those. ( Although if you want to hassle with a hireling you may be able to do the ones requiring only 2 players. )
When I'm feeling sociable, I hook up with a couple of guildies, and we head out and do some of those ( or whatever else the group wants. )
Where is the option, "I would play it if my friends were playing it"?
------- END TRANSMISSION
Thats what it boils down to isn't it? No one will want to play the game to make freinds. Well some will, even I would, but not if I didn't have people with me from the start too. Without people I know, it kind of boils down to begging people to help you that already have freinds.
Newb= Newly Enrolled Wannabe Badass.
Try a game is a pretty weak question. I could try it on a lark just to say I tried it. It implies that trying it is the same as subscribing to it or other big commitment. I wouldn't focus my time and energy following a game advertised as such in the first place.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
That's true for most games, I think. In general, people are going to stick to their guild/clan and to people they know and trust in real life. You see it all the time in shooters and sports games. Hell, developers push the social aspects of games as a way to play with your friends, not as a way to make friends.
Back in EQ1 socializing with strangers was needed because everyone was camping the same spots trying to get the same loot or grind the same XP. You had to make nice with whoever was there because they were there before you. These days, socialization is optional. You don't necessarily have to deal with people outside of your clan or guild if you don't want to.
I agree that socialization is pretty optional, but I kind of want to see that go away. The optional part I mean. I occasionally am sitting in an area, farming monsters for whatever reason, with about 2-5 other people. We rarely talk with each other, and when you do you almost feel obligated to freind list them, rather than just let it go. This is partly because you doubt you will find other people to talk to, but then you find a good guild, and spend the time your farming in your guild chat, rather than talk with the few people around you. I guess its not the worst sytem in the world, but I just feel so bored when I am in an MMO that I have not joined a guild yet.
Newb= Newly Enrolled Wannabe Badass.
I think soloing should be possible but it shouldn't be anywhere near optimal.
Just like you could solo in Diablo 2, but you really wanted to have a game of 8 people (albeit probably working solo in an 8man game, but I digress).
My favorite MUD had this system, there were HUGE xp bonuses for grouping up so it was better than soloing even if a certain class wasn't pulling their own weight.
Solo-wise, some classes did it better than others, but to hit max level you pretty much had to group up.
I think there should definitely be soloable levels at least for the first bit of the game. You have to be able to get yourself set, into the game, and toying with your character without someone else.
I think the first few levels of any game should be solo-able, to at least get a feel for the game and your character.
But yes I would play a group-forced game.
I like grouping but I have other demands on my time. So I need to be able to solo on nights I know I will be interrupted too often to give a group my undivided attention.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
I hear you. I usually play single player games or online shooters if I don't think I'll have time to play in a group. Sometimes I log in just to chat. I'll usually farm some stuff too, but I'd actually rather that was a group activity as well.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
No, probably not.
Too much group dependency means a lot of time wasted waiting and looking for people, time that I don't always have, and that usually ends in nothing ever getting done and eventually just not playing anymore.
Actually if it REQUIRED groups it would be far better than the games that offer poor solo options. IE I prefer a game where solo is very viable, but I prefer completely unviable to "much worse than grouping." The reason for this is there are a lot of people who will solo anyway if it is at all possible. With those people removed it leaves fewer people to group and a smaller part of the pie to group.
If soloing is 100% impossible as a practical option then people stop thinking about their character in a solo context.
Note -- we are talking 100% -- no necromancers and one or two other classes able to sort of solo.
To accomplish this it actually would be required to make two man groups also NOT work. IE yes you can have a tank and a healer but while the pair might survive against a monster they do not do enough damage to move its health bar. A dps is completely unsuitable to be a tank against a monster even with a healer.
And it is important to NOT have this occur later -- If you did this from the first time you entered the game, people would group out of necessity. If what we said in the first case (monster regen > tank output + dps damage taken > healer healing) is set up then you don't need a lot of skill for the first few monsters -- just the proper number of people (at least 2 people dealing damage with at least one tank to take the damage and a healer, OR 2 healers healing a dps trying to tank, or a major race state with at least 4 non-healers as the absolute minimums).
No, i would not want play an MMO without a solo option. Sometimes i like to enjoy the game by myself where i am the only 1 to blame for anything that can happen.
Yeah I would try it. Sticking with it longterm these days though?.....Not sure about that.
I never considered CoH a solo game and played classes that were pretty much impossible to solo and played for a couple years. So I guess that's a yes.
I was pleasantly surprised when I went from Apprentice to full 5 star Elite in under 2 months. I was pleasantly surprised again when I went from Elite to just barely Hardcore in 2 weeks. Apprentice, here I come!
No. Group play is nice but forcing it is not.
I would not even consider playing a game that had no solo options. This subject has been up tp discussion lots of times, and it is well known that the "group only" MMO's are dead. Totally dead.
Make us care MORE about our faction & world pvp!
Only way I'd consider it would be if it were a game that had no way to verbally communicate. Not even a canned response menu system. I know, that might sound crazy, but in a game with no chat interface or anything, being forced to play with strangers all the time might not be so bad. If the gameplay made it interesting enough.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
No, I would have no interest in a game with zero solo play being possible. But I would have a very GREAT interest in a game that rewarded grouping to such an extreme that solo play was seen as *highly* inefficient. I would also have a great interest in a game that required group play ONLY as the ultimate means of gaining "excellent" to "top end" gear, be it through very rare crafting materials or loot drops.
This is my main concern involving Group - Only sorts of games. In original Everquest and Dark Age of Camelot, you *could* solo but it was a very slow means of leveling in comparison to grouping up to farm or kill. It also helped foster good communities. But by the same token, it also helped foster situations of peer pressure where players felt obligated to play for more time than they should have, due to real world commitments, because they "didn't want to let the group down" or some such. Putting the groups together was a chore, and preventing them from falling apart was on everyone's mind.
I'd want a game where if I said to myself " I only have 2 and a half hours to play, and then man, I gotta sleep for an early day tomorrow " and not feel bad about getting something done with my time spent. Alone. I think current game makers respect that outlook to ever go back to the old days of games, regardless of where this poll goes.
Actually, in a game where there is no solo play, finding a group shouldn't be an issue. I would think that some activities (like crafting) would have some solo component, even if they were dependent on the activities of other players as well.
For instance, Global Agenda is pretty much a group only game. You can solo through the first 17 levels, but that's maybe 15% of your total play time if that. The rest of the time, you are grouping. Since everyone groups, finding a group isn't really an issue.
Hmmm, that means I'd have to change my vote to yes because I'm playing World of Tanks, and it's a group only game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I voted no. I like to group, but dont want to be forced to group all the time. I can only pug once in a while or it will piss me off
Thats why I mainly group with my friends nowadays and almost never with a bunch of strangers anymore.