I think it goes without saying that the OP isn't referring to single player games but to MMO's, we are after all on the MMORPG.com forum.
I think it would be equally obvious that he's not referring to the modding community backing games like Skyrim but to the online community that exists within an MMO's game world or shard. In that example he's completely correct. Comparing the server community of say an old EQ server with any modern solo centric MMO (take your pick here) there is a marked difference in the level of community and co-operation.
Modern MMO's are designed from the ground up for a solo experience with a few group dungeons thrown in along the way but they are in no way required content. This fosters a community that has no use for other players until they get to the level cap and start to raid, if the game includes them. In either case you're more likely to have a toxic FPS style community that an old school MMO community. Sweeping generalities aside, there will always be a few helpful players that don't talk smack and help players out but for the most part my experience of modern MMO's has been pretty dire when it comes to community.
Purely anecdotal.
The central source of douchedom in any MMO is not from the solo crowd, it's the people who like to group. Whether it's an old/new is irrelevant, it's always been the case.
So catering to solo players does not increase toxic communities or degrade them.
The reason you're seeing an increased number of idiots (and also a great more number of nice people) is online gaming is very cheap compared to the past.
FPS games like Doom and Quake had great communities, during that time you had to pay per minute to play online, now it's completely free.
I don't like the term "forced grouping" I prefer "a co-operative multiplayer situation"
I also don't like the term "solo" I prefer "playing with the only person that thinks I'm interesting"
I find grouping in mmo's is not such a big deal, the problem is that it's easier to not bother. I think the perspective that game designers should use is that if a person chooses to go through content without a group, that the time invested should end up being proportionately longer. If the content was intended for 6 people, than soloing should take 6 times as long or at least a suitable compromise.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I also don't like the term "solo" I prefer "playing with the only person that thinks I'm interesting"
The silliness of the first line aside, consider this for the second one (quoted):
The majority of the most famous and most memorable contributors to community gameplay - good or bad - in MMOs have been players that spend more time solo than grouped by game mechanics. If anything, forced grouping prevents those players from standing out or taking their place in the game's history.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Regardless of the original design intentions, it may be inevitable for games to grow more solo-friendly over time.
We don't have a huge number of data points to study, but there aren't any decade-old games that have not grown less dedicated to "forced grouping" over time. Including EQ and FFXI.
And I think that's for reasons that should be obvious. We like to say "they caved!" but it's almost certainly for reasons of Retention.
Which, the proprietary former owners (consumers) of the older titles never, ever like.
I'm not sure making the games more solo friendly lead to retention. That was surely the idea but I'm not sure it actually worked.
After WoW was released, everybody thought that solo-centric MMOs was the way to go.
But the past decade has shown that just because you make a game like WoW, it's not guaranteed to succeed. The vast majority of them have failed.
I also don't like the term "solo" I prefer "playing with the only person that thinks I'm interesting"
The silliness of the first line aside, consider this for the second one (quoted):
The majority of the most famous and most memorable contributors to community gameplay - good or bad - in MMOs have been players that spend more time solo than grouped by game mechanics. If anything, forced grouping prevents those players from standing out or taking their place in the game's history.
I'm not sure whose comment is sillier, mine or yours. Nobody ever is memorable by themselves, you can only be remembered by the other people who were there. Nobody ever is famous without others applauding their efforts. People that are determined to be alone do not gain respect, adoration, friendship, mentorship, or fellowship. Those are social constructs and require social interaction.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I also don't like the term "solo" I prefer "playing with the only person that thinks I'm interesting"
The silliness of the first line aside, consider this for the second one (quoted):
The majority of the most famous and most memorable contributors to community gameplay - good or bad - in MMOs have been players that spend more time solo than grouped by game mechanics. If anything, forced grouping prevents those players from standing out or taking their place in the game's history.
I'm not sure whose comment is sillier, mine or yours. Nobody ever is memorable by themselves, you can only be remembered by the other people who were there. Nobody ever is famous without others applauding their efforts. People that are determined to be alone do not gain respect, adoration, friendship, mentorship, or fellowship. Those are social constructs and require social interaction.
I'm not sure if you're being obtuse or if you really don't know/understand any type of gameplay outside of killing mobs solo and killing mobs in a group. Either way, we're at an impasse, so I guess the best bet here is to agree to disagree.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Regardless of the original design intentions, it may be inevitable for games to grow more solo-friendly over time.
...
I'm not sure making the games more solo friendly lead to retention. That was surely the idea but I'm not sure it actually worked.
So much this! In any mmo I've played, from FFXI to WoW (and many others, but those two are polar opposites), the thing that keeps people playing is attachment to their friends, and to their characters.
How many times have you worked to help a friend complete a task that you weren't, yourself, entirely interested in? In the content lulls, friendships and bonds really matter. How many of us reach the point that dungeon that was, at release, moderately hard, is so far on farm that the healer tanks when the tank has to afk? Remember all the laughing and joking on teamspeak/etc? Or what about the times that maybe the overgeared tank maybe shouldn't have pulled the whole instance. Maybe. Everybody chuckles, ribs the tank about it for the next few months.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug. 12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
This just sounds like single player gamers want to be apart of the MMORPG crowd but without any of the MMO parts.
They don't belong to the genre and forced themselves upon us anyways.
You got it reversed. The MMORPG devs want single player gamers to be part of their audience.
I doubt single player gamers would care much about MMORPGs if they are not made into solo-friendly games.
You should ask the devs why they want the solo crowd so much ... i bet it has something to do with money.
No I don't. It's people like you, that games are in the mess they are in.
You don't give a shit about MMORPGs. You are a freeloading locust. You care nothing for the success of a game as long as you can play for free and leave for a different game as soon as you hit a wall.
You bitch for 10 minutes of free "entertainment". Your opinion doesn't mean a damn to anybody.
Doesn't matter if the game is good or not to you, you're never going to stay around anyways. 2 million others are just like you, leave a true fan of MMORPGs that play as a hobby screwed.
People trying to dismiss the correlation between group oriented games and strong communities:
Until a study proves otherwise, the connection is obvious. Communities went downhill when games became more soloable, and the thing is, communities aren't improving.
Some people are naturally nice, and a highly competitive game will either change them or cause them to leave because stealing kills is not their idea of fun.
Some are naturally mean to anyone that they don't have a use for, and a teamwork-oriented game will either cause them to work with other players, cause them to leave, or isolate themselves with other like-minded afkholes.
It is more than likely true that a teamwork-oriented game will never be as successful as a solo with everyone else game.
I fully acknowledge that a polished up FFXI will never be as successful as WoW, and probably not as FFXIV, but you don't have to be king of the mountain to be great.
Companies aren't trying it because it's not how Blizzard got ELEVENTY MILLION PEOPLE. Nobody wants to be Target, they want to be Wal Mart. Wal Mart, imo, is a great comparison to Blizzard. Everyone seems to hate it (me as well), but even hated so much, it's still the biggest of them.
The great thing about XI, is they never tried to compete with WoW. When they introduced more solo-friendly tools, it's because the game was lacking an influx of new players. Two of those tools, Level-sync and Campaign Battle removed the relevancy of closeness of levels/gear from playing together (in those contexts).
The moment ffxi introduced solo able content is when game died and wasn't as fun anymore. Died for me and everyone I knew in game. Solo content should not be in mmorpg if there is then make a new genre like single player rpg with mmo chat.
You bitch for 10 minutes of free "entertainment". Your opinion doesn't mean a damn to anybody.
Apparently my opinion mean a lot more to devs than MMO "purists". Otherwise, why would they cater to my preferences, and let me play their games for free?
You bitch for 10 minutes of free "entertainment". Your opinion doesn't mean a damn to anybody.
Apparently my opinion mean a lot more to devs than MMO "purists". Otherwise, why would they cater to my preferences, and let me play their games for free?
The need you as fodder for the whales, cheaper than providing quality content.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The connotation is bad, but really it's just the best term people have come up with.
People wouldn't call MMOs "forced questing" or "forced killing things" or "forced leveling", but it's the same idea. It's just about the rules of the game.
"You don't need much retention to make money off f2p games. Data show that most (80%) quit in 30 days.
It is really not about retention anymore. It is about fleecing the whales. "
This is true but it wasn't always this way. Age of Conan and Warhammer were considered dismal failures at their time because they lost 50% after 6 months. Nowadays retention numbers like that would be considered a success.
It may just be possible that people ditch these games because solo-centric MMOs just aren't that fun after all.
In any case, we have zero data on forced grouping MMOs because none have been offered for over a decade. For the ones that were offered before then, retention after release was positive, not negative, and for years on end.
People trying to dismiss the correlation between group oriented games and strong communities:
Until a study proves otherwise, the connection is obvious. Communities went downhill when games became more soloable, and the thing is, communities aren't improving.
Some people are naturally nice, and a highly competitive game will either change them or cause them to leave because stealing kills is not their idea of fun.
Some are naturally mean to anyone that they don't have a use for, and a teamwork-oriented game will either cause them to work with other players, cause them to leave, or isolate themselves with other like-minded afkholes.
It is more than likely true that a teamwork-oriented game will never be as successful as a solo with everyone else game.
I fully acknowledge that a polished up FFXI will never be as successful as WoW, and probably not as FFXIV, but you don't have to be king of the mountain to be great.
Companies aren't trying it because it's not how Blizzard got ELEVENTY MILLION PEOPLE. Nobody wants to be Target, they want to be Wal Mart. Wal Mart, imo, is a great comparison to Blizzard. Everyone seems to hate it (me as well), but even hated so much, it's still the biggest of them.
The great thing about XI, is they never tried to compete with WoW. When they introduced more solo-friendly tools, it's because the game was lacking an influx of new players. Two of those tools, Level-sync and Campaign Battle removed the relevancy of closeness of levels/gear from playing together (in those contexts).
I don't think that is exactly right but close. It isn't exactly soloing that turns the community toxic but focus on your own character. Even if you only have forced grouping you still get a toxic community if the only focus of the game is to make you more powerful (usually with gear).
Building things together is what makes a good community, fighting for something greater than yourself. That could be about guilds, realm or something else but players need to feel that they are working together for a common goal.
It is fine that part of the game is about gaining treasures but it must be about more if we want MMOs to be more than a single player game, and since single player games are cheaper, easier to make and focus better on that experience MMOs need to be about more if we want it to survive.
Forced grouping isn't enough by far, you need to make the players care at least as much about a group/faction or guild as about themselves. It need to be as fun when you unlock something cool for your guild or faction as when you get some good loot for yourself. Yes, that takes some work but it have worked before, DaoC for example did this fine to mention one game.
Personally I would also add a new thing beside guilds: permanent adventurer groups like in P&P. Give an extra bonus when you play together with your group and make it into a miniguild with reputation, specific gear you can unlock and so on. That gives you something different and often easier to focus on then your 150 people guild.
You bitch for 10 minutes of free "entertainment". Your opinion doesn't mean a damn to anybody.
Apparently my opinion mean a lot more to devs than MMO "purists". Otherwise, why would they cater to my preferences, and let me play their games for free?
The need you as fodder for the whales, cheaper than providing quality content.
Wow, since the good old McDonalds is brought up enough about these games, I guess it would make those fodder the equivalent of Pink Slime?
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?"
Comments
The central source of douchedom in any MMO is not from the solo crowd, it's the people who like to group. Whether it's an old/new is irrelevant, it's always been the case.
So catering to solo players does not increase toxic communities or degrade them.
The reason you're seeing an increased number of idiots (and also a great more number of nice people) is online gaming is very cheap compared to the past.
FPS games like Doom and Quake had great communities, during that time you had to pay per minute to play online, now it's completely free.
I don't like the term "forced grouping" I prefer "a co-operative multiplayer situation"
I also don't like the term "solo" I prefer "playing with the only person that thinks I'm interesting"
I find grouping in mmo's is not such a big deal, the problem is that it's easier to not bother. I think the perspective that game designers should use is that if a person chooses to go through content without a group, that the time invested should end up being proportionately longer. If the content was intended for 6 people, than soloing should take 6 times as long or at least a suitable compromise.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
I don't see why this does not apply to other online games, which incidentally, some have forced grouping.
The silliness of the first line aside, consider this for the second one (quoted):
The majority of the most famous and most memorable contributors to community gameplay - good or bad - in MMOs have been players that spend more time solo than grouped by game mechanics. If anything, forced grouping prevents those players from standing out or taking their place in the game's history.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
After WoW was released, everybody thought that solo-centric MMOs was the way to go.
But the past decade has shown that just because you make a game like WoW, it's not guaranteed to succeed. The vast majority of them have failed.
They can, but by doing that you lose out on the main advantage MMOs have over single player games- the interaction with other people.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Encouraging through mechanics is good.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
They don't belong to the genre and forced themselves upon us anyways.
Generally, when I get the feeling that I am unwanted, I leave. But, that was before people had no shame.
So much this! In any mmo I've played, from FFXI to WoW (and many others, but those two are polar opposites), the thing that keeps people playing is attachment to their friends, and to their characters.
How many times have you worked to help a friend complete a task that you weren't, yourself, entirely interested in? In the content lulls, friendships and bonds really matter. How many of us reach the point that dungeon that was, at release, moderately hard, is so far on farm that the healer tanks when the tank has to afk? Remember all the laughing and joking on teamspeak/etc? Or what about the times that maybe the overgeared tank maybe shouldn't have pulled the whole instance. Maybe. Everybody chuckles, ribs the tank about it for the next few months.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
I doubt single player gamers would care much about MMORPGs if they are not made into solo-friendly games.
You should ask the devs why they want the solo crowd so much ... i bet it has something to do with money.
It is ONLY an advantage if you like interaction with others.
I enjoy playing MMOs as a single player game much more .. and if i have fun this way, is there a reason why i should not?
You don't need much retention to make money off f2p games. Data show that most (80%) quit in 30 days.
https://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/understanding-mmo-retention/
It is really not about retention anymore. It is about fleecing the whales.
You don't give a shit about MMORPGs. You are a freeloading locust. You care nothing for the success of a game as long as you can play for free and leave for a different game as soon as you hit a wall.
You bitch for 10 minutes of free "entertainment". Your opinion doesn't mean a damn to anybody.
Doesn't matter if the game is good or not to you, you're never going to stay around anyways. 2 million others are just like you, leave a true fan of MMORPGs that play as a hobby screwed.
The devs already made that new genre ... they just call them MMORPG. It is just semantics.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
People wouldn't call MMOs "forced questing" or "forced killing things" or "forced leveling", but it's the same idea. It's just about the rules of the game.
"You don't need much retention to make money off f2p games. Data show that most (80%) quit in 30 days.
https://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/understanding-mmo-retention/
It is really not about retention anymore. It is about fleecing the whales. "
This is true but it wasn't always this way. Age of Conan and Warhammer were considered dismal failures at their time because they lost 50% after 6 months. Nowadays retention numbers like that would be considered a success.
It may just be possible that people ditch these games because solo-centric MMOs just aren't that fun after all.
In any case, we have zero data on forced grouping MMOs because none have been offered for over a decade. For the ones that were offered before then, retention after release was positive, not negative, and for years on end.
Do you feel that MMOs like A Tale in the Desert, EVE Online, Second Life, and Star Wars Galaxies were a step in the wrong direction for the genre?
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Building things together is what makes a good community, fighting for something greater than yourself. That could be about guilds, realm or something else but players need to feel that they are working together for a common goal.
It is fine that part of the game is about gaining treasures but it must be about more if we want MMOs to be more than a single player game, and since single player games are cheaper, easier to make and focus better on that experience MMOs need to be about more if we want it to survive.
Forced grouping isn't enough by far, you need to make the players care at least as much about a group/faction or guild as about themselves. It need to be as fun when you unlock something cool for your guild or faction as when you get some good loot for yourself. Yes, that takes some work but it have worked before, DaoC for example did this fine to mention one game.
Personally I would also add a new thing beside guilds: permanent adventurer groups like in P&P. Give an extra bonus when you play together with your group and make it into a miniguild with reputation, specific gear you can unlock and so on. That gives you something different and often easier to focus on then your 150 people guild.
Wow, since the good old McDonalds is brought up enough about these games, I guess it would make those fodder the equivalent of Pink Slime?
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?"