I could understand if you guys were trying to advocate for your own genre of game MSORPG massively single player rpg. but what your doing is trying to take something already established and change it into what you like.
gather data make graphs and do whatever you please to convince a company or some dev's that your idea would make them money and go from there. but please allow MMORPG to be multiplayer
If "multiplayer" the way you envision it is so popular and fun, why are you afraid of soloability (which is quite different from single-player-only) ?
Why do you care that someone can kill a boss in 100 minutes you and your group take down in 10?
Flame on!
because if everything is solo'able then all the tough content that people fail on, or takes a long time to complete most people will just go and do it themselves. and that changes the game for everyone else. and fine with being able to solo. just not the toughest of content. doesnt make sense at all that you can do the same thing me and 5 others just struggled to do and were the same level
So you feel that content that is soloable can't be tough? or you can't fail at?
It can fail, but it will always be the easiest out. you only have yourself to worry about, i have yet to find content ment for solo'ing that was as tough as things i needed groups to do.. maybe it isnt that the content is tougher in itself and the fact that 5 (or whatever makes a group in game) other people have to work together and leaves room for more human error.
Why will it always be the easiest way out. If it takes 100 x as long, that doesn't sound like the easiest way out. If it takes research or real strategy to solve, that doesn't sound like the easiest way out.
By and large (there are a few exceptions) I haven't found any group content that was any tougher than pushing 2 or 3 buttons every few seconds, you could train a bird to do that.
It's very very very conceivable that a more challenging content could be solo becaus they cant' produce the dps or have the healing/hp that a group can. So another strategy is needed.
buy you have found solo content in an mmo that was meant to be solo'ed tougher?
Not yet. But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or that it cant' exist.
I never had trouble with quests in MMO's (other than time) till TSW.
me either. and if the mmo genre can prove me wrong i'd be ok with that. but the way it is now thats why i dont want solo players doing endgame raid or being able to get every item/gear in game alone.
solo content i welcome as long as there's group content that is at least on par exp/loot gain as solo'ing. which it hasn't been latley
I could understand if you guys were trying to advocate for your own genre of game MSORPG massively single player rpg. but what your doing is trying to take something already established and change it into what you like.
gather data make graphs and do whatever you please to convince a company or some dev's that your idea would make them money and go from there. but please allow MMORPG to be multiplayer
If "multiplayer" the way you envision it is so popular and fun, why are you afraid of soloability (which is quite different from single-player-only) ?
Why do you care that someone can kill a boss in 100 minutes you and your group take down in 10?
Flame on!
because if everything is solo'able then all the tough content that people fail on, or takes a long time to complete most people will just go and do it themselves. and that changes the game for everyone else. and fine with being able to solo. just not the toughest of content. doesnt make sense at all that you can do the same thing me and 5 others just struggled to do and were the same level
So you feel that content that is soloable can't be tough? or you can't fail at?
It can fail, but it will always be the easiest out. you only have yourself to worry about, i have yet to find content ment for solo'ing that was as tough as things i needed groups to do.. maybe it isnt that the content is tougher in itself and the fact that 5 (or whatever makes a group in game) other people have to work together and leaves room for more human error.
Why will it always be the easiest way out. If it takes 100 x as long, that doesn't sound like the easiest way out. If it takes research or real strategy to solve, that doesn't sound like the easiest way out.
By and large (there are a few exceptions) I haven't found any group content that was any tougher than pushing 2 or 3 buttons every few seconds, you could train a bird to do that.
It's very very very conceivable that a more challenging content could be solo becaus they cant' produce the dps or have the healing/hp that a group can. So another strategy is needed.
buy you have found solo content in an mmo that was meant to be solo'ed tougher?
Not yet. But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or that it cant' exist.
I never had trouble with quests in MMO's (other than time) till TSW.
me either. and if the mmo genre can prove me wrong i'd be ok with that. but the way it is now thats why i dont want solo players doing endgame raid or being able to get every item/gear in game alone.
solo content i welcome as long as there's group content that is at least on par exp/loot gain as solo'ing. which it hasn't been latley
I would agree with that. The way solo is done now is typically grindy, easy or both.
However group content still has the best loot, coin and xp even in todays' games.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Personally i would like to see an MMO where almost nothing was soloable... Maybe something like how FFXI was. Where you could solo up to level 10-20(depending on class) then to kill even normal mobs your level you would need a leveling party. It really focused more on the MM part of MMO's, and i miss that.
If you can solo it ,then how easy would it be for 5 or 6 or 24?
Scalable content is a dumb idea ruins everything from immersion to player advancement to creature identity.
How tough was that level 50 boss?Oh he was nothing i beat him at level 1 because he scales down to me........./sigh sad game design.
I am sure there are a lot of people who really have no idea how things are designed or accomplished,i do know and i can truly say the 5-6 man group idea works for a reason.More than that is NOT needed and solo just ruins everything.
Tank/DPS/CC/Healing there is 4 ,i am sure creative minds can think of a couple more ideas to fill in the 5/6 spots or just have 2 of any of those ROLE playing ideas.Bottom line is you can't fill ROLES with ONE role and you don't need 32 players to fill 4/5/6 roles.There is no real secret to why games for so long have gone with the 4/5/6 idea,it just works.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Because then Devs would have to make instanced areas dynamic to the group size, level, and other stats to make it soloable. That and raid only material would literally just be a lame version of the raid instance. Most content in F2P games is soloable, not sure about the P2P games.
I played WoW up until WotLK, played RoM for 2 years and now Rift. I am F2P player. I support games when I feel they deserve my money and I want the items enough. I don't troll, and I don't take kindly to trolls.
If you can solo it ,then how easy would it be for 5 or 6 or 24?
Possibly no different, if the key to beating the boss doesn't only depend on dps
Scalable content is a dumb idea ruins everything from immersion to player advancement to creature identity.
Subjective - not worth a comment
How tough was that level 50 boss?Oh he was nothing i beat him at level 1 because he scales down to me........./sigh sad game design.
Possibly no different, if the key to beating the boss doesn't only depend on dps
I am sure there are a lot of people who really have no idea how things are designed or accomplished,i do know and i can truly say the 5-6 man group idea works for a reason.More than that is NOT needed and solo just ruins everything.
Tank/DPS/CC/Healing there is 4 ,i am sure creative minds can think of a couple more ideas to fill in the 5/6 spots or just have 2 of any of those ROLE playing ideas.Bottom line is you can't fill ROLES with ONE role and you don't need 32 players to fill 4/5/6 roles.There is no real secret to why games for so long have gone with the 4/5/6 idea,it just works.
Was easier just to copy the same answer as it applied to the whole post.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
The problem is tha the old games like Lineage and UO had one type of content. I
Torvaldr, the problem you just presented seems to be that some people only see murdering stuff as content. Either that you or made a mistake in your examples.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Doesn't sound right does it, but I guess those that want to play in a world with hundreds of thousands or million of other players without every saying a word to another player can still Role Play. They are role playing at being loners. Most games now-a-days are soloable until endgame anyway. Gotta love the only innovation WoW gave to the genre. Hurry up until the end then group and figure out how to deal with other people and play your class in a group vice solo environment.
Skyrim or any of the Elder scrolls games would be a good choice, if you have an issue with mmos not being soloable then I would suggest the infinite amount of single player rpgs out there.
Originally posted by gravesworn Skyrim or any of the Elder scrolls games would be a good choice, if you have an issue with mmos not being soloable then I would suggest the infinite amount of single player rpgs out there.
What if i want to solo fight mobs, but trade with massive number of people? Except Diablo 3, there aren' t any other single player RPG allowing me to do that out there, is it?
So i have to go to a MMO, if i want to solo adventure, but trade with lots of playres.
The problem is tha the old games like Lineage and UO had one type of content. I
Torvaldr, the problem you just presented seems to be that some people only see murdering stuff as content. Either that you or made a mistake in your examples.
No, you are right. The problem is actually kind of complicated and I was speaking only to "stabby" content. Lineage was a very simple game in mechanics and only offered stabby stuff to do. It didn't have real crafting, although it did have an enchantment system that could (and typically did) lead to item loss. The non-stabby content was community generated politics that often led to stabby stuff.
By one type of content I'm referring to content designed as a single system. Current games split their stabby content into solo and group stuff. The non-stabby content is mostly all solo. Occasionally it requires you to do solo or group stabby content to progress. For example to craft a rare and powerful item you might need a raid dropped component even though you're still crafting it solo.
Until games stop dividing their content types between group and solo I don't really see an end to the problem. The even greater travesty with this sort of design is that it segregates players into regions where they play. Groupers are mostly in instances, soloers/duo players mostly overland with the occasional "semi-group" blotches on the map.
THe other problem is that mostly everything being made is all stabby and doesn't have deep engaging systems that include non-genocidal activities. Until the the game supports non-violent activities as much as the stabby stuff we won't see progress on that front either. That's what makes it even more complex in my opinion.
Ok, I follow where you're going with that now. Thanks for explaining that.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Rift has solo instances called "chronicles", which are solo versions of the big raid dungeons. I think there are a few others with similar things too. or like the original GW, hirelings. Would be interesting to see how that plays out in an modern MMO
I could understand if you guys were trying to advocate for your own genre of game MSORPG massively single player rpg. but what your doing is trying to take something already established and change it into what you like.
gather data make graphs and do whatever you please to convince a company or some dev's that your idea would make them money and go from there. but please allow MMORPG to be multiplayer
If "multiplayer" the way you envision it is so popular and fun, why are you afraid of soloability (which is quite different from single-player-only) ?
Why do you care that someone can kill a boss in 100 minutes you and your group take down in 10?
Flame on!
because if everything is solo'able then all the tough content that people fail on, or takes a long time to complete most people will just go and do it themselves. and that changes the game for everyone else. and fine with being able to solo. just not the toughest of content. doesnt make sense at all that you can do the same thing me and 5 others just struggled to do and were the same level
So you feel that content that is soloable can't be tough? or you can't fail at?
It can fail, but it will always be the easiest out. you only have yourself to worry about, i have yet to find content ment for solo'ing that was as tough as things i needed groups to do.. maybe it isnt that the content is tougher in itself and the fact that 5 (or whatever makes a group in game) other people have to work together and leaves room for more human error.
Why will it always be the easiest way out. If it takes 100 x as long, that doesn't sound like the easiest way out. If it takes research or real strategy to solve, that doesn't sound like the easiest way out.
By and large (there are a few exceptions) I haven't found any group content that was any tougher than pushing 2 or 3 buttons every few seconds, you could train a bird to do that.
It's very very very conceivable that a more challenging content could be solo becaus they cant' produce the dps or have the healing/hp that a group can. So another strategy is needed.
buy you have found solo content in an mmo that was meant to be solo'ed tougher?
Not yet. But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or that it cant' exist.
I never had trouble with quests in MMO's (other than time) till TSW.
me either. and if the mmo genre can prove me wrong i'd be ok with that. but the way it is now thats why i dont want solo players doing endgame raid or being able to get every item/gear in game alone.
solo content i welcome as long as there's group content that is at least on par exp/loot gain as solo'ing. which it hasn't been latley
I would agree with that. The way solo is done now is typically grindy, easy or both.
However group content still has the best loot, coin and xp even in todays' games.
No, you are right. The problem is actually kind of complicated and I was speaking only to "stabby" content. Lineage was a very simple game in mechanics and only offered stabby stuff to do. It didn't have real crafting, although it did have an enchantment system that could (and typically did) lead to item loss. The non-stabby content was community generated politics that often led to stabby stuff.
By one type of content I'm referring to content designed as a single system. Current games split their stabby content into solo and group stuff. The non-stabby content is mostly all solo. Occasionally it requires you to do solo or group stabby content to progress. For example to craft a rare and powerful item you might need a raid dropped component even though you're still crafting it solo.
Until games stop dividing their content types between group and solo I don't really see an end to the problem. The even greater travesty with this sort of design is that it segregates players into regions where they play. Groupers are mostly in instances, soloers/duo players mostly overland with the occasional "semi-group" blotches on the map.
THe other problem is that mostly everything being made is all stabby and doesn't have deep engaging systems that include non-genocidal activities. Until the the game supports non-violent activities as much as the stabby stuff we won't see progress on that front either. That's what makes it even more complex in my opinion.
Ok, I follow where you're going with that now. Thanks for explaining that.
If it would be simple we would be all making highly successfull mmorpgs instead of raging on forums.
But it is very complicated and complex.
The stabby thing reminded me of one thing, in Runescape (once again), the devs have dedicated servers to enable players to circumvent game mechanics, like there is a dangerous area where there are good fishing spots (food == hp pot), so there are oficially selected servers where people kill the dangerous creatures so other people can fish, UNTHINKABLE, did you remember the uproar in swtor (was it?) about wintrading in pvp ?
So...
WHEN EXACTLY did the game, its mechanics, mobs and environment CEASED to be the enemy?
If you look around, not just here, on the forums, but in the game, it seems that every group of players has some persistent (he he he, sandbox) hatred towards an other group of players, solo vs group, noobs vs vets, raiders vs puggers, pve vs pvp...
When i remember when it was the bosses doing wiping the raid (maybe beign broken or OP), not the pvp players requesting nerfs in healing, and so on...
But enough of this, carry on the solo vs group forum pvp
Originally posted by gravesworn Skyrim or any of the Elder scrolls games would be a good choice, if you have an issue with mmos not being soloable then I would suggest the infinite amount of single player rpgs out there.
What if i want to solo fight mobs, but trade with massive number of people? Except Diablo 3, there aren' t any other single player RPG allowing me to do that out there, is it?
So i have to go to a MMO, if i want to solo adventure, but trade with lots of playres.
Trading is not popular and it is costly to produce, you should accept the evolution of mmos with bop and/or without trading, wow has 10m subs with a bop system, eve just 300k, your argument is invalid!
I could understand if you guys were trying to advocate for your own genre of game MSORPG massively single player rpg. but what your doing is trying to take something already established and change it into what you like.
gather data make graphs and do whatever you please to convince a company or some dev's that your idea would make them money and go from there. but please allow MMORPG to be multiplayer
If "multiplayer" the way you envision it is so popular and fun, why are you afraid of soloability (which is quite different from single-player-only) ?
Why do you care that someone can kill a boss in 100 minutes you and your group take down in 10?
Flame on!
because if everything is solo'able then all the tough content that people fail on, or takes a long time to complete most people will just go and do it themselves. and that changes the game for everyone else. and fine with being able to solo. just not the toughest of content. doesnt make sense at all that you can do the same thing me and 5 others just struggled to do and were the same level
So you feel that content that is soloable can't be tough? or you can't fail at?
It can fail, but it will always be the easiest out. you only have yourself to worry about, i have yet to find content ment for solo'ing that was as tough as things i needed groups to do.. maybe it isnt that the content is tougher in itself and the fact that 5 (or whatever makes a group in game) other people have to work together and leaves room for more human error.
Why will it always be the easiest way out. If it takes 100 x as long, that doesn't sound like the easiest way out. If it takes research or real strategy to solve, that doesn't sound like the easiest way out.
By and large (there are a few exceptions) I haven't found any group content that was any tougher than pushing 2 or 3 buttons every few seconds, you could train a bird to do that.
It's very very very conceivable that a more challenging content could be solo becaus they cant' produce the dps or have the healing/hp that a group can. So another strategy is needed.
buy you have found solo content in an mmo that was meant to be solo'ed tougher?
Not yet. But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or that it cant' exist.
I never had trouble with quests in MMO's (other than time) till TSW.
me either. and if the mmo genre can prove me wrong i'd be ok with that. but the way it is now thats why i dont want solo players doing endgame raid or being able to get every item/gear in game alone.
solo content i welcome as long as there's group content that is at least on par exp/loot gain as solo'ing. which it hasn't been latley
I would agree with that. The way solo is done now is typically grindy, easy or both.
However group content still has the best loot, coin and xp even in todays' games.
As it should be.
I agree with you but that flies in the face of this entire thread. Those that support this thread want to be able to get exactly what you and I would get for grouping. Otherwise they are being treated unfairly and you know that in America at least, everyone deserves to get their fair share even if they don't have to work to get it.
in response to the games you chosen as completely soloable or made for the single player I would disagree with you on one, lineage/2 and the oter runescape i haven't played so i will believe that is true. Both of these games however are over 10 years old. Let me rephase the quesion , name one recent major mmo that was made for the single player or that can be played completely soloable.
orginal post:
Originally posted by marlborz
Your honest view is appreciated. Answer this, name one major mmo that was made for single player or that a single player can solo all the way through.
orginal post was:
"If you want to play by yourself, go grab a single player game and have at it. MMORPG's are about interaction and socialization, amongst other things of course. Dont get why people want a single player console game as a mmorpg, its silly. You already ahve thousands of solo type games out there, why try to ruin the industry even more."
Lineage, Lineage 2 (back when 85 was maxlevel, dunno bout now), Runescape (doesnt even have groups per se )
As always the problem is defining the things we argue about, soloers generally do not want a singleplayer experience, they just prefer to do things on their own, which does not stop them from socializing, trading and helping other people.
Which is the biggest problem about newer mmos, people who are in a groups and raids 24/7 but dont talk, dont interact, dont care a rats butt, isnt that truly THE singleplayer experience?
Originally posted by LadyEuphei This thread should be closed on a mmo forum. This is rediculous. No mmo should be soloable, it is just AGH! I need to breathe...seriously this idea is rediculous and it makes no sense. If you want to solo and be by yourself go play a multiplayer card game in a corner with your imaginary friends....
This is a good example how narrow minded, burned out and jaded we have become as a community.
This person has never ever considered that the "soloability" could take , say, 10 times as long as the grouping, actually ENCOURAGING the grouping instead of FORCING it as the new mmos do and why everyone behaves like Dfense inside a pug raid.
Because in this twisted twilight zone we operate these days, the prolonged time required would be UNFAIR to all the soloers for some reason not even the soloers understand.
Flame on!
Your form of "encouragement" is what people would refer to as "forcing".
Originally posted by marlborz fyi - browser games do not count, period.
I can't think of a single modern game that isn't a browser game that is successful that is an MMO and was designed from the begining to be 100% soloable. If there are, they are PC versions of console games and not MMOs. Just because you can solo WoW from level 1 until you get to the endgame, that doesn't qualify either since the endgame is not soloable.
Besides, how boring would a raid be by yourself? Oh wait, there wont be raids, PvP (that is not soloable by definition. Even 1V1 requires another player to fight), but you could still have dungeons. Sounds more and more like Skyrim the more I write doesn't it?
I think people are mislead by who defines what an mmo/rpg is.
-an mmo does not have to require groups of people to complete objectives.
-an mmo does not have to require you joining groups to gain extra incentives that signle players cannot get. (such as extra stats for completeing guild quests.)
-an mmo does not have to require 5 people to complete a guild petition.
what is an mmo?
a game that more then one person/character/buildbot ect. can log into.
Comments
me either. and if the mmo genre can prove me wrong i'd be ok with that. but the way it is now thats why i dont want solo players doing endgame raid or being able to get every item/gear in game alone.
solo content i welcome as long as there's group content that is at least on par exp/loot gain as solo'ing. which it hasn't been latley
I would agree with that. The way solo is done now is typically grindy, easy or both.
However group content still has the best loot, coin and xp even in todays' games.
Currenlty in WoW the fastest way to get to end game is dungeon runs.
If you can solo it ,then how easy would it be for 5 or 6 or 24?
Scalable content is a dumb idea ruins everything from immersion to player advancement to creature identity.
How tough was that level 50 boss?Oh he was nothing i beat him at level 1 because he scales down to me........./sigh sad game design.
I am sure there are a lot of people who really have no idea how things are designed or accomplished,i do know and i can truly say the 5-6 man group idea works for a reason.More than that is NOT needed and solo just ruins everything.
Tank/DPS/CC/Healing there is 4 ,i am sure creative minds can think of a couple more ideas to fill in the 5/6 spots or just have 2 of any of those ROLE playing ideas.Bottom line is you can't fill ROLES with ONE role and you don't need 32 players to fill 4/5/6 roles.There is no real secret to why games for so long have gone with the 4/5/6 idea,it just works.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I played WoW up until WotLK, played RoM for 2 years and now Rift.
I am F2P player. I support games when I feel they deserve my money and I want the items enough.
I don't troll, and I don't take kindly to trolls.
Was easier just to copy the same answer as it applied to the whole post.
Torvaldr, the problem you just presented seems to be that some people only see murdering stuff as content. Either that you or made a mistake in your examples.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Doesn't sound right does it, but I guess those that want to play in a world with hundreds of thousands or million of other players without every saying a word to another player can still Role Play. They are role playing at being loners. Most games now-a-days are soloable until endgame anyway. Gotta love the only innovation WoW gave to the genre. Hurry up until the end then group and figure out how to deal with other people and play your class in a group vice solo environment.
What if i want to solo fight mobs, but trade with massive number of people? Except Diablo 3, there aren' t any other single player RPG allowing me to do that out there, is it?
So i have to go to a MMO, if i want to solo adventure, but trade with lots of playres.
Ok, I follow where you're going with that now. Thanks for explaining that.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
As it should be.
If it would be simple we would be all making highly successfull mmorpgs instead of raging on forums.
But it is very complicated and complex.
The stabby thing reminded me of one thing, in Runescape (once again), the devs have dedicated servers to enable players to circumvent game mechanics, like there is a dangerous area where there are good fishing spots (food == hp pot), so there are oficially selected servers where people kill the dangerous creatures so other people can fish, UNTHINKABLE, did you remember the uproar in swtor (was it?) about wintrading in pvp ?
So...
WHEN EXACTLY did the game, its mechanics, mobs and environment CEASED to be the enemy?
If you look around, not just here, on the forums, but in the game, it seems that every group of players has some persistent (he he he, sandbox) hatred towards an other group of players, solo vs group, noobs vs vets, raiders vs puggers, pve vs pvp...
When i remember when it was the bosses doing wiping the raid (maybe beign broken or OP), not the pvp players requesting nerfs in healing, and so on...
But enough of this, carry on the solo vs group forum pvp
Flame on!
Trading is not popular and it is costly to produce, you should accept the evolution of mmos with bop and/or without trading, wow has 10m subs with a bop system, eve just 300k, your argument is invalid!
He he he, sorry.
Flame on!
I agree with you but that flies in the face of this entire thread. Those that support this thread want to be able to get exactly what you and I would get for grouping. Otherwise they are being treated unfairly and you know that in America at least, everyone deserves to get their fair share even if they don't have to work to get it.
in response to the games you chosen as completely soloable or made for the single player I would disagree with you on one, lineage/2 and the oter runescape i haven't played so i will believe that is true. Both of these games however are over 10 years old. Let me rephase the quesion , name one recent major mmo that was made for the single player or that can be played completely soloable.
orginal post:
Lineage, Lineage 2 (back when 85 was maxlevel, dunno bout now), Runescape (doesnt even have groups per se
)
As always the problem is defining the things we argue about, soloers generally do not want a singleplayer experience, they just prefer to do things on their own, which does not stop them from socializing, trading and helping other people.
Which is the biggest problem about newer mmos, people who are in a groups and raids 24/7 but dont talk, dont interact, dont care a rats butt, isnt that truly THE singleplayer experience?
Flame on!
Your form of "encouragement" is what people would refer to as "forcing".
I can't think of a single modern game that isn't a browser game that is successful that is an MMO and was designed from the begining to be 100% soloable. If there are, they are PC versions of console games and not MMOs. Just because you can solo WoW from level 1 until you get to the endgame, that doesn't qualify either since the endgame is not soloable.
Besides, how boring would a raid be by yourself? Oh wait, there wont be raids, PvP (that is not soloable by definition. Even 1V1 requires another player to fight), but you could still have dungeons. Sounds more and more like Skyrim the more I write doesn't it?
I think people are mislead by who defines what an mmo/rpg is.
-an mmo does not have to require groups of people to complete objectives.
-an mmo does not have to require you joining groups to gain extra incentives that signle players cannot get. (such as extra stats for completeing guild quests.)
-an mmo does not have to require 5 people to complete a guild petition.
what is an mmo?
a game that more then one person/character/buildbot ect. can log into.