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.
I think that's how you might approach it in a game like WoW, begging people you don't know to help you.
Because, why should they help you? They can just run off and solo to the cap just as easy as if they group with you, more or less.
In this game, you wouldn't be "begging" anyone. They'd need you as much as you need them.
I voted no because I do not want to rely on others for being able to have fun. Some days I do not have the time to put together or join a group. I want to be able to just log on and have some fun for a while. I have nothing against groups and I think all mmorpgs should have incentives to group with others. But as far as not having a solo option, no way.
I play to be around people not be forced to always play with people. Of course, I really enjoy playing with the handful of good, nice, laid back, players I've met over the years but have no patience for some of the more "intense" players out there.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
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.
Actually, no one has ever made a game like that.
Players have soloed to the cap in every MMORPG ever made.
*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...
I actually hate scaleable content. I think it puts an "I win" button on the dungeon, and makes it no fun at all to play.
I want the dungeon to have X in it. I want to be either not powerful enough to beat X, which means I need to get more powerful, or get more help.
Or, I am powerful enough to beat X. Or, I am so powerful X is not a challenge, and does not give me a reward.
I don't want X to turn into A or F or G or whatever just to give me the reward based on levels and numbers in my group.
People were SO AGAINST THE IDEA OF GROUPING, they wouldn't play the game EVEN IF A SOLO FRIENDLY SERVER WAS PROVIDED.
No, just the idea of forced grouping. People should either come together of their own accord to play or they shouldn't come together at all. Only social engineers believe that everyone would be happier as part of a crowd.
People were SO AGAINST THE IDEA OF GROUPING, they wouldn't play the game EVEN IF A SOLO FRIENDLY SERVER WAS PROVIDED.
No, just the idea of forced grouping. People should either come together of their own accord to play or they shouldn't come together at all. Only social engineers believe that everyone would be happier as part of a crowd.
I don't see it like that.
I see it like playing Call of Duty. There's a single player, offline, but it's just a brief tutorial really.
The real game is online.
It's not a solo game.
You can't play it by yoruself.
You are FORCED to play Call of Duty with other players, or you don't play.
What's wrong with an MMORPG game where you play with others, or you don't play?
How is that different from playing Call of Duty online?
OF COURSE you come together on your own accord.
That's deciding to play the game.
Or deciding NOT to play the game.
If you don't want to play with others, you dont' play Call of Duty.
I voted no because I do not want to rely on others for being able to have fun. Some days I do not have the time to put together or join a group. I want to be able to just log on and have some fun for a while. I have nothing against groups and I think all mmorpgs should have incentives to group with others. But as far as not having a solo option, no way.
Does this mean you would not play a game like Call of Duty online?
People were SO AGAINST THE IDEA OF GROUPING, they wouldn't play the game EVEN IF A SOLO FRIENDLY SERVER WAS PROVIDED.
No, just the idea of forced grouping. People should either come together of their own accord to play or they shouldn't come together at all. Only social engineers believe that everyone would be happier as part of a crowd.
Yea, but there's a server in the OP, where you can solo the entire game. So what's the problem? You won't play just because there's a server where you can't play solo?
I voted no. I played FFXI and while it did have a class (Beastmaster) that was a solo character, all of the other jobs and id guestimate 95% of the game content required others to get through it. Bst was a solo character, but the other jobs couldn't level solo and I dont mean killen something that was supposed to be a decent challenge but some jobs barely survived those for the 75 exp you get when you needed 80k to hit the next level That's isn't what solo play is. Sure you could level even the solo character to max, but there were limit breaks and for those you needed others to remove the limit allowing you to continue getting exp.
My time there was fun since it was the first MMORPG i got into, but after playing other types I see how little I actually played and how much I waited to have fun. Don't misunderstand me, I am a very pro social gamer. Even solo friendly games I have a partner (wife) that i run with so I am rarely alone in any adventure. But if there was a game that had absolutely no solo option, I'd probably look elsewhere unless I personally knew others and they were given it a try.
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?
First of all a server doesn't need to be "just like wow" to have solo content. I levelled in Lineage 2 mostly solo.
And that game is pretty far from wow.
Secondly, I saw that option but ignored it because I felt it negated what seemed the point of your poll.
It waters down the first 2 choices. If I picked it then you learn nothing other than I will go to the server that has solo options. It seemed an odd addition to the poll.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I voted no because I do not want to rely on others for being able to have fun. Some days I do not have the time to put together or join a group. I want to be able to just log on and have some fun for a while. I have nothing against groups and I think all mmorpgs should have incentives to group with others. But as far as not having a solo option, no way.
Does this mean you would not play a game like Call of Duty online?
There is no solo option.
Nope, games with no depth bore the crap out of me. Hence the reason why I do not own anything like Call of Duty.
You could pay me to play an MMO like this, but you would have to pay me a lot.
No way would I pay for a game like this.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
Originally posted by Ihmotepp 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?
My game time is limited. If I want to log into the MMO I'm paying for and none of my friends are online, why shouldn't I have the option to do things solo if I want?
I don't want to solo through the entire game from start to finish. That would be incredibly dull. I just want the option of creating a new alt or whatever and playing it on my own to see if I like that class. Or the option to harvest and craft with my main while I'm online solo.
Games with forced grouping 100% of the time don't allow for that. Ergo, they're not for me.
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?
Again -- there's nothing wrong with grouping. It's forcing the issue that's a problem for some folks.
Speaking for myself only, I don't like having the game force me into grouping. I prefer to game with my guild. I know their playstyles. I know them. I trust them. If they're not online, a forced grouping game would mean that I'd have to deal with PUGs, and those suck. They're a nightmare. Thanks, but no.
You seem to be confusing the desire to have the option to occasionally solo with the need to solo through an entire game. Very few people WANT to solo through a game. They just want the option of being able to play the game without others if none of their friends are on. That's all. Forced grouping prevents that, so they said no in your poll.
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.
Actually, no one has ever made a game like that.
Players have soloed to the cap in every MMORPG ever made.
you've never played FFXI have you? Cause FFXI is 99% exclusively group content. I remember trying to kill a monster in the first map outside the main town i was at least 10 lvls higher, and it almost killed me. No i wasn't retarded, its the way the game was designed. Every fight you try to solo is like a freaking boss fight, and unless you go in fully prepared with insane preparations, you'll likely die if you're careless.
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.
Actually, no one has ever made a game like that.
Players have soloed to the cap in every MMORPG ever made.
you've never played FFXI have you? Cause FFXI is 99% exclusively group content. I remember trying to kill a monster in the first map outside the main town i was at least 10 lvls higher, and it almost killed me. No i wasn't retarded, its the way the game was designed. Every fight you try to solo is like a freaking boss fight, and unless you go in fully prepared with insane preparations, you'll likely die if you're careless.
That game sucked needless to say.
You obviously didn't play a bst, drg, or rdm. As far as fighting on the first map outside of town basically all classes could solo level appropriate mobs up to two zones outside of town relatively efficiently. You just had to fight the right mobs. Its the way the game was designed. Later after changes to the sam class you could even solo mobs that were level and job appropriate with it up to a pretty decent level. Yes I agree not all even match mobs were soloable, but really you just had to know where to level. I remember solo chaining tough and VT mobs in garlaige citadel on a drg. At around level 50.
Comments
I think that's how you might approach it in a game like WoW, begging people you don't know to help you.
Because, why should they help you? They can just run off and solo to the cap just as easy as if they group with you, more or less.
In this game, you wouldn't be "begging" anyone. They'd need you as much as you need them.
I voted no because I do not want to rely on others for being able to have fun. Some days I do not have the time to put together or join a group. I want to be able to just log on and have some fun for a while. I have nothing against groups and I think all mmorpgs should have incentives to group with others. But as far as not having a solo option, no way.
No.
I play to be around people not be forced to always play with people. Of course, I really enjoy playing with the handful of good, nice, laid back, players I've met over the years but have no patience for some of the more "intense" players out there.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Actually, no one has ever made a game like that.
Players have soloed to the cap in every MMORPG ever made.
I actually hate scaleable content. I think it puts an "I win" button on the dungeon, and makes it no fun at all to play.
I want the dungeon to have X in it. I want to be either not powerful enough to beat X, which means I need to get more powerful, or get more help.
Or, I am powerful enough to beat X. Or, I am so powerful X is not a challenge, and does not give me a reward.
I don't want X to turn into A or F or G or whatever just to give me the reward based on levels and numbers in my group.
That cheapens the whole thing, IMO.
No, just the idea of forced grouping. People should either come together of their own accord to play or they shouldn't come together at all. Only social engineers believe that everyone would be happier as part of a crowd.
I don't see it like that.
I see it like playing Call of Duty. There's a single player, offline, but it's just a brief tutorial really.
The real game is online.
It's not a solo game.
You can't play it by yoruself.
You are FORCED to play Call of Duty with other players, or you don't play.
What's wrong with an MMORPG game where you play with others, or you don't play?
How is that different from playing Call of Duty online?
OF COURSE you come together on your own accord.
That's deciding to play the game.
Or deciding NOT to play the game.
If you don't want to play with others, you dont' play Call of Duty.
Does this mean you would not play a game like Call of Duty online?
There is no solo option.
Yea, but there's a server in the OP, where you can solo the entire game. So what's the problem? You won't play just because there's a server where you can't play solo?
I voted no. I played FFXI and while it did have a class (Beastmaster) that was a solo character, all of the other jobs and id guestimate 95% of the game content required others to get through it. Bst was a solo character, but the other jobs couldn't level solo and I dont mean killen something that was supposed to be a decent challenge but some jobs barely survived those for the 75 exp you get when you needed 80k to hit the next level That's isn't what solo play is. Sure you could level even the solo character to max, but there were limit breaks and for those you needed others to remove the limit allowing you to continue getting exp.
My time there was fun since it was the first MMORPG i got into, but after playing other types I see how little I actually played and how much I waited to have fun. Don't misunderstand me, I am a very pro social gamer. Even solo friendly games I have a partner (wife) that i run with so I am rarely alone in any adventure. But if there was a game that had absolutely no solo option, I'd probably look elsewhere unless I personally knew others and they were given it a try.
RIP Jimmy "The Rev" Sullivan and Paul Gray.
First of all a server doesn't need to be "just like wow" to have solo content. I levelled in Lineage 2 mostly solo.
And that game is pretty far from wow.
Secondly, I saw that option but ignored it because I felt it negated what seemed the point of your poll.
It waters down the first 2 choices. If I picked it then you learn nothing other than I will go to the server that has solo options. It seemed an odd addition to the poll.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Nope, games with no depth bore the crap out of me. Hence the reason why I do not own anything like Call of Duty.
You could pay me to play an MMO like this, but you would have to pay me a lot.
No way would I pay for a game like this.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
My game time is limited. If I want to log into the MMO I'm paying for and none of my friends are online, why shouldn't I have the option to do things solo if I want?
I don't want to solo through the entire game from start to finish. That would be incredibly dull. I just want the option of creating a new alt or whatever and playing it on my own to see if I like that class. Or the option to harvest and craft with my main while I'm online solo.
Games with forced grouping 100% of the time don't allow for that. Ergo, they're not for me.
Again -- there's nothing wrong with grouping. It's forcing the issue that's a problem for some folks.
Speaking for myself only, I don't like having the game force me into grouping. I prefer to game with my guild. I know their playstyles. I know them. I trust them. If they're not online, a forced grouping game would mean that I'd have to deal with PUGs, and those suck. They're a nightmare. Thanks, but no.
You seem to be confusing the desire to have the option to occasionally solo with the need to solo through an entire game. Very few people WANT to solo through a game. They just want the option of being able to play the game without others if none of their friends are on. That's all. Forced grouping prevents that, so they said no in your poll.
you've never played FFXI have you? Cause FFXI is 99% exclusively group content. I remember trying to kill a monster in the first map outside the main town i was at least 10 lvls higher, and it almost killed me. No i wasn't retarded, its the way the game was designed. Every fight you try to solo is like a freaking boss fight, and unless you go in fully prepared with insane preparations, you'll likely die if you're careless.
That game sucked needless to say.
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
Yes, it's called Team Fortress 2.
Anything much more sophisticated than that, like a game with extensive character progression, death penalties, etc. forget it.
You obviously didn't play a bst, drg, or rdm. As far as fighting on the first map outside of town basically all classes could solo level appropriate mobs up to two zones outside of town relatively efficiently. You just had to fight the right mobs. Its the way the game was designed. Later after changes to the sam class you could even solo mobs that were level and job appropriate with it up to a pretty decent level. Yes I agree not all even match mobs were soloable, but really you just had to know where to level. I remember solo chaining tough and VT mobs in garlaige citadel on a drg. At around level 50.