I played FFXI for many years before Abyssea and the new solo-friendly mechanics were added. No thanks. Sometimes I just would like to get things accomplished and not have to owe anyone for it. I don't want to have my game progress stunted because I can't get such and such to come for a raid/party. I do enjoy the party based system and the rewards, but not the elitism thats involved.
I played ffxi for a long time also.. before it became solo heaven
and i must say being forced to group at times pissed me off... having to play with people who were bad at their job (what ffxi called classes) or failing a difficult fight because of it.
I think it helped build a stronger community though... people took the time to make sure everybody in the group knew the battle strategy...
people cared about their reputation because if you were a complete douche.. odds were you weren't going to get much of anything accomplished (unless you were a rmt nut and spread gil (gold) around like a nut case.. ive seen people do that too heh)
I like games that push you to group... not that there shouldn't be solo elements to it.. but group play for me is what makes a mmo unique.. otherwise i might as well just play a single player rpg and mess around on chat rooms
Seriously when are MMO players going to look at themselves as the culprit of their grouping problem instead of blaming the game's grouping mechanics? Probably never.
Games are entertainment.
What is entertainment?
Well entertainment isn't "you will enjoy this."
Entertainment is "here's something you like."
Players aren't the problem. They're the customers. Games can either choose to successfully entertain them, or they can choose to suck. :P
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Short answer is NO, I would not play a game without the ability to solo.
Long answer is it depends. I have a group of friends that I play games with often. We love cooperative gaming. If a good cooperative game comes along, you bet we're going to play it...well, sort of. Usually when it comes to a new game, especially an MMORPG, I'm the one that ends up taking it for a test drive through a beta or free trial and then I have to brag it up a ton and hope that my friends jump on the band wagon with me, and also hope that enough of them do so we can 5 or 6 man whatever content is in the game.
So, if I can't solo at all, then I can't try the game out and thus we'll never play. What's that? Play with other people online? Yuck! Never! They're too selfish and mean! I'll never play with others online!
Of course. It's a multiplayer game, that's what I play MMO's for, I want to team up with people to combat things I could never do alone. It would need some work to be 100% grouping as I can't imagine why my level 2 fighter couldn't fight a grass snake...
A lot of people have commented they want to do something alone if they have limited time, or whatever. I just wonder why they bother loading an MMO then, do something else. Play a single player game, watch some TV, browse the web, there's plenty of things to do. Not having time to play is just an excuse for someone who's so addicted they can't think of anything else they could be doing. Must. Log. In. Must. Log. In. No, no you don't, it's you people who turned MMO's into single player games.
absolutely. Dota/League of legends are games based around teams, no reason why a mmorpg may do the same. In fact it has with DnD. Although if the game is a kind of 'world design' it probably ought to have options.
Not at all. Though I enjoyed myself while playing FFXI, searching for people was a fuckin bitch. I will never play another game that revolves around forced grouping. It was possible to sit around for hours forming a party. What do you do in the meantime? Just farm. That's cool that people want these type of games, but they're just not for me.
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.
Finding a group? Probably not an issue.
Finding a GOOD group? THAT is the issue, and why I don't like forced grouping in these games. If I log in and none of my guildmates are online, that means that I'd have to take the gamble on a PUG, and those are generally nightmares in my experience. I'd rather play with people I know and trust, and whose playstyles mesh with mine.
Ergo, if they're not online and I decide to stay on and play for a bit, I'd rather be able to do something on my own with an alt, or do some solo crafting or whatever.
*whispers to all MMO developers* Scalable content. Scalable content. Make the content scale to your group size and level. This would make solo players happy, and large groups, and everything in between. Wow! Now everyone is happy. What a concept! Scalable content. Scalable content. It will also keep older content from not being played in since they can go in at any level and still progress. Wow! What a concept! Scalable content...
*whispers to all MMO developers* Scalable content. Scalable content. Make the content scale to your group size and level. This would make solo players happy, and large groups, and everything in between. Wow! Now everyone is happy. What a concept! Scalable content. Scalable content. It will also keep older content from not being played in since they can go in at any level and still progress. Wow! What a concept! Scalable content...
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?"
nope won't go back to that model. Played WoW for years and no there is no solo content in that game accept questing which really doesn't give you the proper gear to do anything end game. its so bad that all you see is people in pvp gear doing dungeons in their random dungeon system. When i left WoW and went to Lotro i hadn't realized just HOW BAD it is in WoW. Lotro at the very least gives you (epics) from completing the epic quest line, has an easily soloable system for reputation with factions all of which sell epic gear and allows for crafting this type of gear so you are more prepared. No not going back to that model no way.
I would consider playing a game similar to classic EQ where most classes couldn't really solo anything after a certain level. Those classes that could solo well (mage, necro, druid) had the downside of (typically) being less desired in groups, though this changed over time.
Of course, in modern games, there never seems to be anything in between solo and single group (5 man or whatever the group size happens to be). In EQ, most classes couldn't really solo much of anything, but duos or trios were prefectly viable for a long most outdoor stuff, maybe not so much in dungeons.
The most important thing in a game that is not solo friendly is that you absolutely can not have empty servers. It worked for the most part in the early days of EQ because the servers were packed most of the time, and also because even years after the game came out there was still people around in nearly every level range. In a game where the servers are mostly empty, particularly at lower levels (which quickly becomes the case in games with fast leveling like RIFT and WoW), it wouldn't work as well.
*whispers to all MMO developers* Scalable content. Scalable content. Make the content scale to your group size and level. This would make solo players happy, and large groups, and everything in between. Wow! Now everyone is happy. What a concept! Scalable content. Scalable content. It will also keep older content from not being played in since they can go in at any level and still progress. Wow! What a concept! Scalable content...
City of hereos did it over 7 years ago.
It worked really well, too, at least that I remember. My friends and I would run CoH missions at the highest difficulty. It was great. Every instance was filled with tons of mobs to fight, up to and including AV's. Loved it.
Of course a game without solo play is a game with few options. No I would not play one. It runs contrary to my play style. But i'm sure their are people who would love nothing more then to force everyone to group to get someting done.
Of course a game without solo play is a game with few options. No I would not play one. It runs contrary to my play style. But i'm sure their are people who would love nothing more then to force everyone to group to get someting done.
I see where you are coming from.. i just hope for a mmo that can cater to both hardcore (super loser/extra free time) and casual (wife and 3 kids / mmo as a hobby) players.
currently the market seems to trend toward people who only play mmo's casually.. thats my opinion at least ;p
The only problem with scalable content is people start to complain about scalable rewards
not that i dont dislike scalable content ;p
I've done one of those scalable instances a couple of times at different levels in Age of Conan, and the loot scales just fine! I don't see a problem at all. You get the same item, but with higher stats, just how it should be. It's not that hard to balance. Developers just need to break out of the box and try some things new. That's what's wrong with the genre right now. Nobody is taking a risk.
I'm trying to think of a game I HAD to group in to do leveling, and I'm having a really hard time remembering any of them. EQ - soloed as a necro for a couple weeks until i quit and went to DAoC - you could solo, it was just slow. Lineage 2 - you could solo, again just really slow. FFXI - Solo until about level 15. I hear you can solo most everything now, again it's just slow.
So no, I don't remember playing any games that required 100% grouping which your poll is about. Even the hardcore games I mentioned above could be at least partly soloed if you were crazy enough to try.
Now would I try a game that had your grouping requirements. Sure. Although, I'm not sure how long I would stick with it. I love grouping. However, some of these more obscure indie games have low populations. Getting a group can be difficult at times. It just depends on the mechanics and the community mentality. I could probably login to CoH, create a new toon, and find a group in just a couple minutes(at least that was my past experiences before F2P.) That community loved to group and create alts. I liked playing Defenders and every time I logged in I would get group invites within seconds. If this hypothetical game had a similar type community then I could see it as being fun. Just remember EQ2 got nailed hard for being unsolo friendly at launch. They changed the game around to meet the needs of the majority fo the players.
Just want to make a couple of points as I read through the posts, which are some insightful comments.
1. Why do you HAVE to always be able to play? What's wrong with not being able to play 24/7? Think of it like Call of Duty. If there's no one on, you can't play. It's not a single player game. Why can't there be a similar game that is MMO based, instead of FPS based?
2. There are a lot of assumptions going on. For example, that people would level past you, so you'd be stuck at level one with no one to group with.
There are many ways to solve this problem, and they've already been done before. You can go the City of Heroes route, so that your level is raised up to play with high level players, or they can lower their levels to play with you.
OR, you can go the EVE route, or other games that have skills in stead of classes, where experience matters, but not so much you can't contribute to the group, even if they've been playing longer than you.
One thing surprising from the Poll.
People were SO AGAINST THE IDEA OF GROUPING, they wouldn't play the game EVEN IF A SOLO FRIENDLY SERVER WAS PROVIDED.
Almost no one picked that option. What's up with that?
So there's a server, that's JUST LIKE WOW, where you can solo all day long.
But the people that dont' like forced grouping, wouldn't even pick that option. They are so upset that a group only server exists, they won't try the game?
I don't want my online time dictated by other players. If there is no way I can do things on my own, I won't even bother. I don't like sitting around waiting for groups to form, let alone playing at others' pace.
Does that mean you would not play Call of Duty online? There's no solo option.
Comments
Usually when I'm online my "guild" is not online. That and "guild"s are geeky. So I voted no.
I played FFXI for many years before Abyssea and the new solo-friendly mechanics were added. No thanks. Sometimes I just would like to get things accomplished and not have to owe anyone for it. I don't want to have my game progress stunted because I can't get such and such to come for a raid/party. I do enjoy the party based system and the rewards, but not the elitism thats involved.
I played ffxi for a long time also.. before it became solo heaven
and i must say being forced to group at times pissed me off... having to play with people who were bad at their job (what ffxi called classes) or failing a difficult fight because of it.
I think it helped build a stronger community though... people took the time to make sure everybody in the group knew the battle strategy...
people cared about their reputation because if you were a complete douche.. odds were you weren't going to get much of anything accomplished (unless you were a rmt nut and spread gil (gold) around like a nut case.. ive seen people do that too heh)
I like games that push you to group... not that there shouldn't be solo elements to it.. but group play for me is what makes a mmo unique.. otherwise i might as well just play a single player rpg and mess around on chat rooms
Games are entertainment.
What is entertainment?
Well entertainment isn't "you will enjoy this."
Entertainment is "here's something you like."
Players aren't the problem. They're the customers. Games can either choose to successfully entertain them, or they can choose to suck. :P
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Short answer is NO, I would not play a game without the ability to solo.
Long answer is it depends. I have a group of friends that I play games with often. We love cooperative gaming. If a good cooperative game comes along, you bet we're going to play it...well, sort of. Usually when it comes to a new game, especially an MMORPG, I'm the one that ends up taking it for a test drive through a beta or free trial and then I have to brag it up a ton and hope that my friends jump on the band wagon with me, and also hope that enough of them do so we can 5 or 6 man whatever content is in the game.
So, if I can't solo at all, then I can't try the game out and thus we'll never play. What's that? Play with other people online? Yuck! Never! They're too selfish and mean! I'll never play with others online!
No... nuf said
Of course. It's a multiplayer game, that's what I play MMO's for, I want to team up with people to combat things I could never do alone. It would need some work to be 100% grouping as I can't imagine why my level 2 fighter couldn't fight a grass snake...
A lot of people have commented they want to do something alone if they have limited time, or whatever. I just wonder why they bother loading an MMO then, do something else. Play a single player game, watch some TV, browse the web, there's plenty of things to do. Not having time to play is just an excuse for someone who's so addicted they can't think of anything else they could be doing. Must. Log. In. Must. Log. In. No, no you don't, it's you people who turned MMO's into single player games.
absolutely. Dota/League of legends are games based around teams, no reason why a mmorpg may do the same. In fact it has with DnD. Although if the game is a kind of 'world design' it probably ought to have options.
Not at all. Though I enjoyed myself while playing FFXI, searching for people was a fuckin bitch. I will never play another game that revolves around forced grouping. It was possible to sit around for hours forming a party. What do you do in the meantime? Just farm. That's cool that people want these type of games, but they're just not for me.
Finding a group? Probably not an issue.
Finding a GOOD group? THAT is the issue, and why I don't like forced grouping in these games. If I log in and none of my guildmates are online, that means that I'd have to take the gamble on a PUG, and those are generally nightmares in my experience. I'd rather play with people I know and trust, and whose playstyles mesh with mine.
Ergo, if they're not online and I decide to stay on and play for a bit, I'd rather be able to do something on my own with an alt, or do some solo crafting or whatever.
No.
"Hell is other people."
-Sarte
And other robots.
*whispers to all MMO developers* Scalable content. Scalable content. Make the content scale to your group size and level. This would make solo players happy, and large groups, and everything in between. Wow! Now everyone is happy. What a concept! Scalable content. Scalable content. It will also keep older content from not being played in since they can go in at any level and still progress. Wow! What a concept! Scalable content...
City of hereos did it over 7 years ago.
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?"
nope won't go back to that model. Played WoW for years and no there is no solo content in that game accept questing which really doesn't give you the proper gear to do anything end game. its so bad that all you see is people in pvp gear doing dungeons in their random dungeon system. When i left WoW and went to Lotro i hadn't realized just HOW BAD it is in WoW. Lotro at the very least gives you (epics) from completing the epic quest line, has an easily soloable system for reputation with factions all of which sell epic gear and allows for crafting this type of gear so you are more prepared. No not going back to that model no way.
I would consider playing a game similar to classic EQ where most classes couldn't really solo anything after a certain level. Those classes that could solo well (mage, necro, druid) had the downside of (typically) being less desired in groups, though this changed over time.
Of course, in modern games, there never seems to be anything in between solo and single group (5 man or whatever the group size happens to be). In EQ, most classes couldn't really solo much of anything, but duos or trios were prefectly viable for a long most outdoor stuff, maybe not so much in dungeons.
The most important thing in a game that is not solo friendly is that you absolutely can not have empty servers. It worked for the most part in the early days of EQ because the servers were packed most of the time, and also because even years after the game came out there was still people around in nearly every level range. In a game where the servers are mostly empty, particularly at lower levels (which quickly becomes the case in games with fast leveling like RIFT and WoW), it wouldn't work as well.
It worked really well, too, at least that I remember. My friends and I would run CoH missions at the highest difficulty. It was great. Every instance was filled with tons of mobs to fight, up to and including AV's. Loved it.
The only problem with scalable content is people start to complain about scalable rewards
not that i dont dislike scalable content ;p
Of course a game without solo play is a game with few options. No I would not play one. It runs contrary to my play style. But i'm sure their are people who would love nothing more then to force everyone to group to get someting done.
Nope.
I see where you are coming from.. i just hope for a mmo that can cater to both hardcore (super loser/extra free time) and casual (wife and 3 kids / mmo as a hobby) players.
currently the market seems to trend toward people who only play mmo's casually.. thats my opinion at least ;p
I've done one of those scalable instances a couple of times at different levels in Age of Conan, and the loot scales just fine! I don't see a problem at all. You get the same item, but with higher stats, just how it should be. It's not that hard to balance. Developers just need to break out of the box and try some things new. That's what's wrong with the genre right now. Nobody is taking a risk.
I'm trying to think of a game I HAD to group in to do leveling, and I'm having a really hard time remembering any of them. EQ - soloed as a necro for a couple weeks until i quit and went to DAoC - you could solo, it was just slow. Lineage 2 - you could solo, again just really slow. FFXI - Solo until about level 15. I hear you can solo most everything now, again it's just slow.
So no, I don't remember playing any games that required 100% grouping which your poll is about. Even the hardcore games I mentioned above could be at least partly soloed if you were crazy enough to try.
Now would I try a game that had your grouping requirements. Sure. Although, I'm not sure how long I would stick with it. I love grouping. However, some of these more obscure indie games have low populations. Getting a group can be difficult at times. It just depends on the mechanics and the community mentality. I could probably login to CoH, create a new toon, and find a group in just a couple minutes(at least that was my past experiences before F2P.) That community loved to group and create alts. I liked playing Defenders and every time I logged in I would get group invites within seconds. If this hypothetical game had a similar type community then I could see it as being fun. Just remember EQ2 got nailed hard for being unsolo friendly at launch. They changed the game around to meet the needs of the majority fo the players.
Just want to make a couple of points as I read through the posts, which are some insightful comments.
1. Why do you HAVE to always be able to play? What's wrong with not being able to play 24/7? Think of it like Call of Duty. If there's no one on, you can't play. It's not a single player game. Why can't there be a similar game that is MMO based, instead of FPS based?
2. There are a lot of assumptions going on. For example, that people would level past you, so you'd be stuck at level one with no one to group with.
There are many ways to solve this problem, and they've already been done before. You can go the City of Heroes route, so that your level is raised up to play with high level players, or they can lower their levels to play with you.
OR, you can go the EVE route, or other games that have skills in stead of classes, where experience matters, but not so much you can't contribute to the group, even if they've been playing longer than you.
One thing surprising from the Poll.
People were SO AGAINST THE IDEA OF GROUPING, they wouldn't play the game EVEN IF A SOLO FRIENDLY SERVER WAS PROVIDED.
Almost no one picked that option. What's up with that?
So there's a server, that's JUST LIKE WOW, where you can solo all day long.
But the people that dont' like forced grouping, wouldn't even pick that option. They are so upset that a group only server exists, they won't try the game?
Does that mean you would not play Call of Duty online? There's no solo option.