What an MMO is

Alurria

I have a confession, I love solo content in massively multiplayer online games. There are many reasons i could give, many have said them in this thread. For me it's mostly a age thing. Yes I am your grandmother Luke! well i could be. I don't mind chatting and I learn from others but I'm old. So i solo, i love the story and quests and it takes my mind away from real life problems. I have played these games for many years and truly have waited for a game that realizes (ESO Im looking at you) that people have all kinds of reasons for playing solo in a multiplayer game. It's called OPTIONS, I have the option to do what I want when I want too. Be social or sit around and fish and chat. I love options and I'm old dag nabbit! Get off my lawn, or have a cookie!
Grandma
(still playing games)

CrimsonGTX

It's a massively multiplayer online game that's it. It technically could be solo or group, I personally enjoy/favor the solo-play & progression whether it's PvE or PvP, but many people thrive for group-play. It's all personal preference though and no one style of play is wrong. Just like how I also favor action combat games(BDO & ESO) along with fighting games(Mortal Kombat, Street fighter for example) and don't like tab target games(WoW) because I think it's outdated lol.

Alurria

CrimsonGTX wrote: »

It's a massively multiplayer online game that's it. It technically could be solo or group, I personally enjoy/favor the solo-play & progression whether it's PvE or PvP, but many people thrive for group-play. It's all personal preference though and no one style of play is wrong. Just like how I also favor action combat games(BDO & ESO) along with fighting games(Mortal Kombat, Street fighter for example) and don't like tab target games(WoW) because I think it's outdated lol.

Options it's all about options. No one flavor of options should be better than the other. Just scaled accordingly.

Sylvermynx

Kiralyn2000 wrote: »

The basic fact of the matter is that MMO devs want to make As Much Money As Possible. The pool of "hardcore" EQ-style "must always group for everything" players is pretty small - there aren't nearly enough of them to support all the MMOs out there, let alone provide millions of players / Maximum Profit™. So, they need to get All The Players. How do you do that? You make your game accessible to as wide a range of playstyles as possible. Which includes lots of solo & semi-solo players.

"MMOs are only for grouping" hasn't been a thing since before WoW.
(and yes, I played WoW back in vanilla. 98% of the time solo.)

Me too! A friend gave me vanilla WoW for Christmas in 2005 - and I was just retiring (again....) so I finished my last few weeks of work, and then installed the game. He worked days, and was on evenings; I had my little business (web design and management) which happened mostly in the evening (because my clients all worked days too), so we were on opposite schedules. I figured stuff out by myself, played solo all through vanilla. Then with LK, my sister and nephew as well as my daughter, SIL, and both granddaughters picked up the game, and we had a family guild for "endgame".

But I left WoW for RIFT in 2013 because it was heading in a direction that wasn't going to be fun in my PoV. I'd still BE in RIFT if Trion hadn't done what they did (and gamigo is just bad period....) because of the superlative housing. Left RIFT in 2016.

ESO is a lot better for soloing than either of those games were when I played, but then again my reflexes were a lot younger, and the combat was better for me than what we have here. Also.... the combat pets were much easier to deal with.... You could really direct them very handily, and my hunter's pets in WoW were superior tanks.

Maxx7410

SilverBride wrote: »

MMO
noun
an online video game which can be played by a very large number of people simultaneously.

This is what it is. This is all it is.

I am honestly over the arguement that playing an MMO means you need to actively play with others all the time. Players may choose to group for dungeons, trials, world bosses, Harrowstorms, etc., but they are in no way obligated to do so. They have complete free will how they want to play.

If someone chooses to log on and spend the day playing solo that does not in any way diminish the fact that multiple others are playing at the same time, or make it any less of an MMO. Nor does it mean that those playing solo aren't playing the game right. Yet I see this being complained about over and over.

It's time to drop that attitude and stop trying to push your way of playing on others. And stop using a misconstrued idea of what playing an MMO means to try to justify it.

Bravo 100% we need a constant progress in what we can do and not a new WOW that is beyond obsolete

Alurria

Games have evolved, this is a good thing. I remember the first day EQ opened up. You had to have a group for everything, fighting mobs along the road, everywhere. You could not progress solo. At first it was shiny and new there were a lot of players no lack of people to hang with. But as time moves on and people formed clans for the player who couldn't be in game as much got left behind. Until people left for other games with less restrictions for group play. I have absolutely nothing against group content but I absolutely know that as a games go you can not survive only serving one type of game play.

EQ was a great game for its time. There are many different models of games out there now. The one that offers everything and does it well wins. There is room for solo and group to coexist and its a win win for all.

Faylestar

SilverBride wrote: »

kathandira wrote: »

robertthebard wrote: »

DDO says "Hello". Hey, so does GW and GW 2, Neverwinter, Black Desert Online, Runes of Magic, Rappelz... I can stop here, every story driven MMO ever too. There's some blatant misinformation here, but I think it's more likely that I just quoted it, right? All of the games I listed here have group content as well, but a vast majority of their respective games can be played just fine solo.

That is a list of mmo's that are often regarded as, "Not good".

What about the ones I mentioned above? Ultima Online, Asheron's Call, Rift, WoW, Lord of the Rings Online, Guild Wars 2

Are you going to say that all of these are regarded as "Not good"? You can't seriously say WoW is "Not good", considering its ground breaking success.

Wait, what?

UO was designed specifically to be 'Ultima, but with other people all playing ultima with you', and focused on multiple-player skirmish based encounter design both pvp and pve to the point that player guilds were made specifically to stop people from merc'ing solo players over and over and over and over.

EQ was "Dungeons and Dragons but for multiple groups all playing in the same world".

Wow was "people cant always be in a group, so they can do some solo stuff while they wait for their group to be online and do the actual content we made".

Guild Wars required you to play in groups (have fun taking the original group of derpanions if you wanted to avoid that!) for everything except item farming with a couple specific builds (and even then, FoW and UW were the thing you did when your realm had HoH control) until their last expansion when they revamped that part of the game so you didnt have to. All PvP in the game was team v team as well.


Rappelz was "solo'able" unless you wanted to get new pets (unless you wanted to waste like 95 orc cards to get an orc or something, but oh god why), get gear, level faster than "WHY IS THIS A THING AND WHY AM I DOING IT", or see more than a few zones of content.

You could barely solo rift in rift in the early years, the solo heavy parts of it came after they started the sunsetting, so people who stick around arent endlessly waiting for people who are never logging in.

Runes of magic i guess was "soloable" unless you didnt want to be at a minimum 100% behind people who werent playing solo after level 15, and was a miserable experience fo.



These games arent SOLO games, they're games that had , "by accident" in the early era, something to do besides sitting around LFG while waiting for a group to do any sort of meaningful content.

Hell, the original books for the first era of MMO's even have etiquette chapters because "you're going to have to leave a party eventually to log off or sleep".

Its not until this current era of MMO's that we hit the point where theres any argument that you can make for MMO design moving away from group-based gameplay. And thats not-at-all-funnily coinciding with the MMO genre dovetailing off a cliff in terms of active population, as its core audience is significantly older than it was in the early 2000s.

Minyassa

It's been 20+ years since the early days of MMOs. Grouping for activites was the lure; people had found a new way to play a cooperative game, and reveled in it. The modern Internet was just starting to settle into routine, you still had young (into early 30s) adults who could remember a time before online games were a thing. It was still Big New Fun Thing.

Society and the Internet have both changed dramatically in 20 years. Selfishness is more prevalent in games as not just an accepted behavior, but the expected one. People casually drop excuses for being rude and cruel to strangers over nothing, and no one challenges them. Things that would have gotten someone banned from a game 20 years ago are straight-up ignored by in-game monitors, or there are just no game monitors at all, like in ESO. The online gaming community at large no longer values kindness. Instead, what young, new gamers are taught is that winning matters more than anything else, that being able to lord it over other people is the only way to avoid being bullied, and that the only purpose to playing a game is to be better than others at it.

I doubt we'll see a MMO that really inspires cooperative group activity without forcing it, because online gamers just don't think cooperatively anymore, don't think about other players as human beings that they should interact with and get feedback from. Sure, there are exceptions. There may even be a lot of exceptions. But that's not how the gaming community looks, to people outside it, to people who are new to it and learning how to navigate it, or to people who remember how it used to be. There have always been awful people online, but it used to be *wrong* to be like that. Now it's just something people are expected to tolerate if they want to play.

Sylvermynx

Awesome post @Minyassa. I'd like you to be wrong, but I really think you are spot on.

robertthebard

Faylestar wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

kathandira wrote: »

robertthebard wrote: »

DDO says "Hello". Hey, so does GW and GW 2, Neverwinter, Black Desert Online, Runes of Magic, Rappelz... I can stop here, every story driven MMO ever too. There's some blatant misinformation here, but I think it's more likely that I just quoted it, right? All of the games I listed here have group content as well, but a vast majority of their respective games can be played just fine solo.

That is a list of mmo's that are often regarded as, "Not good".

What about the ones I mentioned above? Ultima Online, Asheron's Call, Rift, WoW, Lord of the Rings Online, Guild Wars 2

Are you going to say that all of these are regarded as "Not good"? You can't seriously say WoW is "Not good", considering its ground breaking success.

Wait, what?

UO was designed specifically to be 'Ultima, but with other people all playing ultima with you', and focused on multiple-player skirmish based encounter design both pvp and pve to the point that player guilds were made specifically to stop people from merc'ing solo players over and over and over and over.

EQ was "Dungeons and Dragons but for multiple groups all playing in the same world".

Wow was "people cant always be in a group, so they can do some solo stuff while they wait for their group to be online and do the actual content we made".

Guild Wars required you to play in groups (have fun taking the original group of derpanions if you wanted to avoid that!) for everything except item farming with a couple specific builds (and even then, FoW and UW were the thing you did when your realm had HoH control) until their last expansion when they revamped that part of the game so you didnt have to. All PvP in the game was team v team as well.


Rappelz was "solo'able" unless you wanted to get new pets (unless you wanted to waste like 95 orc cards to get an orc or something, but oh god why), get gear, level faster than "WHY IS THIS A THING AND WHY AM I DOING IT", or see more than a few zones of content.

You could barely solo rift in rift in the early years, the solo heavy parts of it came after they started the sunsetting, so people who stick around arent endlessly waiting for people who are never logging in.

Runes of magic i guess was "soloable" unless you didnt want to be at a minimum 100% behind people who werent playing solo after level 15, and was a miserable experience fo.



These games arent SOLO games, they're games that had , "by accident" in the early era, something to do besides sitting around LFG while waiting for a group to do any sort of meaningful content.

Hell, the original books for the first era of MMO's even have etiquette chapters because "you're going to have to leave a party eventually to log off or sleep".

Its not until this current era of MMO's that we hit the point where theres any argument that you can make for MMO design moving away from group-based gameplay. And thats not-at-all-funnily coinciding with the MMO genre dovetailing off a cliff in terms of active population, as its core audience is significantly older than it was in the early 2000s.

Then it's not really "by accident", is it? What content was it on Trainee Island in Rappelz that had you wishing you had a group? I get that Blue Whistle was hell on newbies in the Gaia start zone, but really, even the entry level dungeons weren't all that bad, barring the random cap level gank parties that would roll through.

Lumenn

Back in my early days of EQ(its funny seeing people post about WOW here as we considered it a baby game that catered to casuals. Imagine our surprise when it dusted EQ so bad most don't even mention it) I loved the grouping. We were tied together. Everyone had a horror story about corpse runs, being borked by someone's train. OOC selling at the tunnel. 70-80 of us all on a raid and hoping it was enough....we were a community.

Those days are gone. Even back then though I never understood the hatred of solo players. I was in one of the top guilds on Brell but even I had my own character to just "breath" with and play w/o all the guild/group pressure.

This game has a nice mix. You can solo most content if you get good enough, have the cp and gear, and especially if you're playing before everything gets nerfed to the ground. It's a nice challenge for the person who has other time commitments to play, and pug if desired. There are also group challenges, trials etc. But the days of packing 90 people on a raid and still wiping? I don't think that's coming back. Those games/groups/guilds/content take way too much time and work for your average Joe(me included now. Been there, done that). Just the fear of solo "taking" over if given a chance shows there are more soloers than people who can play 18 hrs a day. Zos knows who spends more money, and it's usually the person who's got 1-2 hrs to relax, (who will buy skill shards for an alt instead of hunting them again) rather than the person who plays all day, every day. More people want solo. Solo tends to pay for convenience. Ergo zos ensures they play/get more.

SilverBride

I don't want to give the wrong idea with this thread. I absolutely think that some aspects of the game should require groups. A lot of players want an increased challenge and rewards and that's what veteran content is for.

On the same hand though I don't think it would be bad to have solo dungeons and trials with scaled down drops so everyone can enjoy every aspect of the game.

The players who play solo will continue to play solo, and the end game players will continue to group for veteran content. I see no downside to this.

Eedat

SilverBride wrote: »

Eedat wrote: »

This game is no longer an MMO. It's TES6 with multi-player.

It absolutely is an MMO because multiple people are playing simultaneously. Simultaneously doesn't mean together... it means at the same time. It has always meant this and every MMO I've ever played has been exactly this same way.

But for some reason there are players who think an MMO is a group game that should be played by grouping with others for everything. It's not.

And the point goes right over your head. The point isnt that there should be no solo content in an MMO. The point is that 95% of all content is ALREADY solo/casual focused and still gets everything handed to it. Group players have to pray for scraps and even that's not good enough. No no, solo players get group content too. Then they make the new system this year specifically tailored to push people away from doing group content.

Casual/solo players get everything then still complain the loudest. 95% isnt enough. That other 5% belongs to them as well. PvP players cant even play their content without skating across the screen like an Olympic figure skater. Don't worry though, it magically fixes itself for events for the casual players' enjoyment then it'll magically break itself when it's just PvPers again. Endgame PvE players cant even attempt their challenges without insta-losing due to random crashes. We pray for one new trial per year at this point. We pray for the "2020 year of performance AHEM we mean 2021 year of performance, trust us". Meanwhile they nerf dungeons to make them more casual friendly. Meanwhile the entire new system is to help wrangle a bit of that last 5% back to the solo/casual players.

It's like being starved for years while being sat across a table from someone who is gorging on cake after cake that they're being served. Then when you turn away, they reach across the table and snatch away half of the meager scraps you have before being served 5 more cakes.

Nobody is saying remove solo/casual content. But god damn can we get thrown a bone? Why does one portion of the playerbase get almost everything every single time? At the very least can our dwindling 5% actually function properly? Perhaps maybe not make a system that's entire point is to push people away from grouping in group content?

Jayroo

I never even knew this was an argument until I read some of these comments.

WOW. I know opinions cant be wrong, but damn

Lumenn

Eedat wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Eedat wrote: »

This game is no longer an MMO. It's TES6 with multi-player.

It absolutely is an MMO because multiple people are playing simultaneously. Simultaneously doesn't mean together... it means at the same time. It has always meant this and every MMO I've ever played has been exactly this same way.

But for some reason there are players who think an MMO is a group game that should be played by grouping with others for everything. It's not.

And the point goes right over your head. The point isnt that there should be no solo content in an MMO. The point is that 95% of all content is ALREADY solo/casual focused and still gets everything handed to it. Group players have to pray for scraps and even that's not good enough. No no, solo players get group content too. Then they make the new system this year specifically tailored to push people away from doing group content.

Casual/solo players get everything then still complain the loudest. 95% isnt enough. That other 5% belongs to them as well. PvP players cant even play their content without skating across the screen like an Olympic figure skater. Don't worry though, it magically fixes itself for events for the casual players' enjoyment then it'll magically break itself when it's just PvPers again. Endgame PvE players cant even attempt their challenges without insta-losing due to random crashes. We pray for one new trial per year at this point. We pray for the "2020 year of performance AHEM we mean 2021 year of performance, trust us". Meanwhile they nerf dungeons to make them more casual friendly. Meanwhile the entire new system is to help wrangle a bit of that last 5% back to the solo/casual players.

It's like being starved for years while being sat across a table from someone who is gorging on cake after cake that they're being served. Then when you turn away, they reach across the table and snatch away half of the meager scraps you have before being served 5 more cakes.

Nobody is saying remove solo/casual content. But god damn can we get thrown a bone? Why does one portion of the playerbase get almost everything every single time? At the very least can our dwindling 5% actually function properly? Perhaps maybe not make a system that's entire point is to push people away from grouping in group content?

Believe me, I understand your point. See my post above about my past. I fully understand the feeling you get with difficult group content. And just because I don't have the time/inclination for it anymore I don't begrudge anyone who does. I DO however think throwing story lines behind forced grouping is wrong. Most of the suggestions I've seen about a story mode involved weaker or no rewards other than seeing the content. The progressive groups would still get the "meat" of beating the ultra hard mode, gear, achievements, bragging rights. If I were zos though I'd cater to that 95% and dribble out what's left to the 5% unfortunately.

Eedat

Lumenn wrote: »

Eedat wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Eedat wrote: »

This game is no longer an MMO. It's TES6 with multi-player.

It absolutely is an MMO because multiple people are playing simultaneously. Simultaneously doesn't mean together... it means at the same time. It has always meant this and every MMO I've ever played has been exactly this same way.

But for some reason there are players who think an MMO is a group game that should be played by grouping with others for everything. It's not.

And the point goes right over your head. The point isnt that there should be no solo content in an MMO. The point is that 95% of all content is ALREADY solo/casual focused and still gets everything handed to it. Group players have to pray for scraps and even that's not good enough. No no, solo players get group content too. Then they make the new system this year specifically tailored to push people away from doing group content.

Casual/solo players get everything then still complain the loudest. 95% isnt enough. That other 5% belongs to them as well. PvP players cant even play their content without skating across the screen like an Olympic figure skater. Don't worry though, it magically fixes itself for events for the casual players' enjoyment then it'll magically break itself when it's just PvPers again. Endgame PvE players cant even attempt their challenges without insta-losing due to random crashes. We pray for one new trial per year at this point. We pray for the "2020 year of performance AHEM we mean 2021 year of performance, trust us". Meanwhile they nerf dungeons to make them more casual friendly. Meanwhile the entire new system is to help wrangle a bit of that last 5% back to the solo/casual players.

It's like being starved for years while being sat across a table from someone who is gorging on cake after cake that they're being served. Then when you turn away, they reach across the table and snatch away half of the meager scraps you have before being served 5 more cakes.

Nobody is saying remove solo/casual content. But god damn can we get thrown a bone? Why does one portion of the playerbase get almost everything every single time? At the very least can our dwindling 5% actually function properly? Perhaps maybe not make a system that's entire point is to push people away from grouping in group content?

Believe me, I understand your point. See my post above about my past. I fully understand the feeling you get with difficult group content. And just because I don't have the time/inclination for it anymore I don't begrudge anyone who does. I DO however think throwing story lines behind forced grouping is wrong. Most of the suggestions I've seen about a story mode involved weaker or no rewards other than seeing the content. The progressive groups would still get the "meat" of beating the ultra hard mode, gear, achievements, bragging rights. If I were zos though I'd cater to that 95% and dribble out what's left to the 5% unfortunately.

I could possibly see this point if the bar for normal difficulty content wasnt so insanely low. But people arent even willing to put forth even that effort and instead just demand it be catered to them. There is no difference in story between vet and normal. Instead we get a system that's sole purpose is to pull people out of group content

SilverBride

Eedat wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

... there are players who think an MMO is a group game that should be played by grouping with others for everything. It's not.

And the point goes right over your head. The point isnt that there should be no solo content in an MMO. The point is that 95% of all content is ALREADY solo/casual focused and still gets everything handed to it. Group players have to pray for scraps and even that's not good enough. No no, solo players get group content too. Then they make the new system this year specifically tailored to push people away from doing group content.

First of all, nothing went over my head.

Second, where did you get the 95% statistic?

Third, I don't see solo players asking to remove veteran content just because they don't participate in it. But I do see end game players complaining that a lot of people prefer to play solo, and asking for overland content to be made more difficult so they are forced to group.

Sylvermynx

Lumenn wrote: »

Believe me, I understand your point. See my post above about my past. I fully understand the feeling you get with difficult group content. And just because I don't have the time/inclination for it anymore I don't begrudge anyone who does. I DO however think throwing story lines behind forced grouping is wrong. Most of the suggestions I've seen about a story mode involved weaker or no rewards other than seeing the content. The progressive groups would still get the "meat" of beating the ultra hard mode, gear, achievements, bragging rights. If I were zos though I'd cater to that 95% and dribble out what's left to the 5% unfortunately.

Thanks for this post. 15 years ago.... I could handle group content in the games I played then (WoW, RIFT). Now..... I'm 73, and my reflexes are.... *sigh* - seriously, I have enough vertigo issues IRL that it's always a crap shoot if I can stand up and not - fall down kill self. Literally. And the combat in this game is.... not optimal for someone at my age, with my issues.

Regardless, I love this game. It gives me options that other games don't. Yep. I'm old. Seriously. But being old and not really able to use the "twitchy" combat in this game (eh, aging reflexes), still.... I will continue playing ESO until the curtain comes down.

Because the likelihood of me being able to play TES VI - is vanishingly small at this point. So.... ESO is my swan song. And so.... thank you devs for giving it to me.

kargen27

WhereArtThouVampires wrote: »

Faylestar wrote: »

Oh man, I've missed the "Water is a soft drink because it fits the technical definition of the words soft and drink, even though thats a label designed to be used on a specific subset of beverages to differentiate them in conversation" argument.

Technically, yes, Water is a soft drink.

Water, however, is not a soft drink, and everyone knows that.

This is probably the best argument I've seen used against these people.


MMOs are for playing with other players. Everybody knows that. If you aren't interacting and grouping up with other peeps then it isn't really an MMO is it? Similar to how if you start to add stuff to water, it no longer becomes 'water'

If you pick a flower you are competing with other players. If you are standing around by a writ board you are a part of all the other players around you experience. If other players can see you then you are a part of their world. If your actions affect the way others see the game you are a part of their experience. So doing something as mundane as snatching a butterfly out of the air for bait is participating and it could have direct impact on other players in the game.

robertthebard

Eedat wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Eedat wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Eedat wrote: »

This game is no longer an MMO. It's TES6 with multi-player.

It absolutely is an MMO because multiple people are playing simultaneously. Simultaneously doesn't mean together... it means at the same time. It has always meant this and every MMO I've ever played has been exactly this same way.

But for some reason there are players who think an MMO is a group game that should be played by grouping with others for everything. It's not.

And the point goes right over your head. The point isnt that there should be no solo content in an MMO. The point is that 95% of all content is ALREADY solo/casual focused and still gets everything handed to it. Group players have to pray for scraps and even that's not good enough. No no, solo players get group content too. Then they make the new system this year specifically tailored to push people away from doing group content.

Casual/solo players get everything then still complain the loudest. 95% isnt enough. That other 5% belongs to them as well. PvP players cant even play their content without skating across the screen like an Olympic figure skater. Don't worry though, it magically fixes itself for events for the casual players' enjoyment then it'll magically break itself when it's just PvPers again. Endgame PvE players cant even attempt their challenges without insta-losing due to random crashes. We pray for one new trial per year at this point. We pray for the "2020 year of performance AHEM we mean 2021 year of performance, trust us". Meanwhile they nerf dungeons to make them more casual friendly. Meanwhile the entire new system is to help wrangle a bit of that last 5% back to the solo/casual players.

It's like being starved for years while being sat across a table from someone who is gorging on cake after cake that they're being served. Then when you turn away, they reach across the table and snatch away half of the meager scraps you have before being served 5 more cakes.

Nobody is saying remove solo/casual content. But god damn can we get thrown a bone? Why does one portion of the playerbase get almost everything every single time? At the very least can our dwindling 5% actually function properly? Perhaps maybe not make a system that's entire point is to push people away from grouping in group content?

Believe me, I understand your point. See my post above about my past. I fully understand the feeling you get with difficult group content. And just because I don't have the time/inclination for it anymore I don't begrudge anyone who does. I DO however think throwing story lines behind forced grouping is wrong. Most of the suggestions I've seen about a story mode involved weaker or no rewards other than seeing the content. The progressive groups would still get the "meat" of beating the ultra hard mode, gear, achievements, bragging rights. If I were zos though I'd cater to that 95% and dribble out what's left to the 5% unfortunately.

I could possibly see this point if the bar for normal difficulty content wasnt so insanely low. But people arent even willing to put forth even that effort and instead just demand it be catered to them. There is no difference in story between vet and normal. Instead we get a system that's sole purpose is to pull people out of group content

As someone that did progression raiding for a few years, I can tell you what really pushes players out of group content: Players. Players that insist you have the gear that drops in a dungeon before they'll let you in the group to run the dungeon. (do you see the flaw with that logic?) Players that spend time while the group is filling complaining about another player's HP, only to be the first to die to a telegraphed mechanic. Players that spend the entire session ragging on another player for not using the "Board Certified Meta", regardless of how well they're performing, and ya' gotta feel bad for 'em if they're performing poorly, even if it's just because they don't know the content. Players that require everyone to have Vet level gear for Normal (insert archetype here).

Do you see what's going on? I mean, I saw it a decade ago, and longer in some games. This despite the fact that I don't believe we need solo dungeons. The biggest barrier to group play in MMOs is, more often than not, players in MMOs.

Lumenn

Sylvermynx wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Believe me, I understand your point. See my post above about my past. I fully understand the feeling you get with difficult group content. And just because I don't have the time/inclination for it anymore I don't begrudge anyone who does. I DO however think throwing story lines behind forced grouping is wrong. Most of the suggestions I've seen about a story mode involved weaker or no rewards other than seeing the content. The progressive groups would still get the "meat" of beating the ultra hard mode, gear, achievements, bragging rights. If I were zos though I'd cater to that 95% and dribble out what's left to the 5% unfortunately.

Thanks for this post. 15 years ago.... I could handle group content in the games I played then (WoW, RIFT). Now..... I'm 73, and my reflexes are.... *sigh* - seriously, I have enough vertigo issues IRL that it's always a crap shoot if I can stand up and not - fall down kill self. Literally. And the combat in this game is.... not optimal for someone at my age, with my issues.

Regardless, I love this game. It gives me options that other games don't. Yep. I'm old. Seriously. But being old and not really able to use the "twitchy" combat in this game (eh, aging reflexes), still.... I will continue playing ESO until the curtain comes down.

Because the likelihood of me being able to play TES VI - is vanishingly small at this point. So.... ESO is my swan song. And so.... thank you devs for giving it to me.

Np. I'm only in my mid 40's so am just STARTING to realize how bad I messed up in my youth ( I spent too many years working in a freezer-younger folk you WILL pay for what you do now-so my arthritis gets pretty bad at times ) but it's nice being able to play at your own pace and still progress.

Sylvermynx

Lumenn wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Believe me, I understand your point. See my post above about my past. I fully understand the feeling you get with difficult group content. And just because I don't have the time/inclination for it anymore I don't begrudge anyone who does. I DO however think throwing story lines behind forced grouping is wrong. Most of the suggestions I've seen about a story mode involved weaker or no rewards other than seeing the content. The progressive groups would still get the "meat" of beating the ultra hard mode, gear, achievements, bragging rights. If I were zos though I'd cater to that 95% and dribble out what's left to the 5% unfortunately.

Thanks for this post. 15 years ago.... I could handle group content in the games I played then (WoW, RIFT). Now..... I'm 73, and my reflexes are.... *sigh* - seriously, I have enough vertigo issues IRL that it's always a crap shoot if I can stand up and not - fall down kill self. Literally. And the combat in this game is.... not optimal for someone at my age, with my issues.

Regardless, I love this game. It gives me options that other games don't. Yep. I'm old. Seriously. But being old and not really able to use the "twitchy" combat in this game (eh, aging reflexes), still.... I will continue playing ESO until the curtain comes down.

Because the likelihood of me being able to play TES VI - is vanishingly small at this point. So.... ESO is my swan song. And so.... thank you devs for giving it to me.

Np. I'm only in my mid 40's so am just STARTING to realize how bad I messed up in my youth ( I spent too many years working in a freezer-younger folk you WILL pay for what you do now-so my arthritis gets pretty bad at times ) but it's nice being able to play at your own pace and still progress.

It is. I give thanks every day that I can play this game, have fun, and progress. I am always thankful for the blessings given to me.

[snip]

[Edited to remove Off-Topic content]

volkeswagon

Who on earth is he talking about?

Faylestar

robertthebard wrote: »

Then it's not really "by accident", is it?

In the first gen? Absolutely. The 'solo' content was stuff like crafting, socializing, building player communities, and the like.

People having UO setups that could survive solo in many areas, or quad kiting in EQ, were long held to be unintentional features that were the natural result of having a DnD toolkit in a rpg. Oh, you have a way to snare, a way to run faster, a way to do damage at range? Oh, I guess that means you can kill things you shouldnt (which is one reason non-raid mobs got the ability to summon players when damaged and now every stupid thing has it there and its awful trying to pull at times).

WoW was the first western game to embrace the solo aspect, and even the idea of solo content there was a way for you to get xp or make money when you -couldnt- get people together to do things. You were still expected to get groups for anything beyond fetch quests and kill x quests. And even some of THOSE were designed around having 2 or more people in era (usually the ones that rewarded items you might actually use)

Klad

Eedat wrote: »

Legit 95% of the entire game is casual/solo focused

Heaven forbid people fight for the scraps. I swear people won't be happy until they hand out Godslayer mounts to players solo clearing vSS with 5k dps.

Eedat wrote: »

Legit 95% of the entire game is casual/solo focused

Heaven forbid people fight for the scraps. I swear people won't be happy until they hand out Godslayer mounts to players solo clearing vSS with 5k dps.

Okay you're being sarcastic yes?

"Fight for the scraps" It's a game bro...your shot across the bow sounds like the old WoW vanilla tryhards that use to scream for the so called "scrubs" to make them mats and go away

is something as insignificant as a made up title or a couple flashy pixels that important to you? If getting bent out of shape knowing that somewhere someone is getting a flashy pixel and not.....you know forget it trying to discuss gameplay with leet gamers is a losing battle, they have to feel superior at something no matter how trivial it is.

Take heart my man there's a couple old school mmo's coming down the pipe, though there won't be any people fighting for scraps....they will be on other MMO's like eso playing a game that isn't bound to some digital "cool kids" table

DarcyMardin

robertthebard wrote: »

kathandira wrote: »

robertthebard wrote: »

DDO says "Hello". Hey, so does GW and GW 2, Neverwinter, Black Desert Online, Runes of Magic, Rappelz... I can stop here, every story driven MMO ever too. There's some blatant misinformation here, but I think it's more likely that I just quoted it, right? All of the games I listed here have group content as well, but a vast majority of their respective games can be played just fine solo.

That is a list of mmo's that are often regarded as, "Not good".

Oh look, more misinformation. GW is so popular that it's been on maintenance mode for over a decade, and there are still people playing it. This of course discounts the fact that even when they were in their prime, "group required to play" wasn't an accurate descriptor. There sure seem to be a lot of people in GW 2 as well, for a game that's considered "Not good". Let me guess, you're going to be feeding my daedric prince, the Daedric Prince of Melodrama, and cite "but all of my friends" or "everyone I know"?

Agreed. I played the original Guild Wars for years, and I joined groups just as rarely as I do here. The only time you really needed a group in PvE was for missions, and since there was a random group finder for those, you did not have to have social ties to get a group to complete the mission. And since we had henchies to help out, and, in later expansions of the game, even more specialized companions, you could do the missions solo as well.

I also solo’d my way through LOTRO for years, until joining a raiding guild, at which point I still played solo except when raiding. The same is true for the various other MMOs I played, which include most of them. I couldn’t always do all of the content, but unless forced to group up, I have always tended to follow my preference for playing alone in MMOs. Not sure why this is such a hot topic. Who cares how other people choose to play the game??

SshadowSscale

SilverBride wrote: »

SshadowSscale wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I'm not going to respond to everything you said because almost all of your post has to do with things I never even mentioned. But not once have I ever said there should not be group content.

yeah but still group content gets affected directly good example right now is pvp with proc meta.... end game pvp players who spent years learning pvp gets the middle finger because casual players cannot compete with the pvp players in the pvp zone....

That has absolutely nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

Yeah but I am just saying.... end game players gets affected a lot by casual players.... unlike you stated where endgame is not affected at all..... the truth is endgame gets hurt the most usually.... that being the reason end game players are getting more and more frustrated....

Aptonoth

I played GW and hated it. I have hated every mmo I ever played except tor for the story it had trash gameplay. Secret world has a great story too it’s just the combat was even worse than a typical mmo. Eso is the only mmo to have decent combat but on top of that a great story and solo experience. No other mmo can even hope to match its niche at this point. Every other mmo in existence is a soulless grind fest wow clone. I do like eso end game on occasion as well it doesn’t overstay its welcome. Every other mmo is about gear grind or endless level grind with crappy low budget stories.

Aptonoth

Minyassa wrote: »

It's been 20+ years since the early days of MMOs. Grouping for activites was the lure; people had found a new way to play a cooperative game, and reveled in it. The modern Internet was just starting to settle into routine, you still had young (into early 30s) adults who could remember a time before online games were a thing. It was still Big New Fun Thing.

Society and the Internet have both changed dramatically in 20 years. Selfishness is more prevalent in games as not just an accepted behavior, but the expected one. People casually drop excuses for being rude and cruel to strangers over nothing, and no one challenges them. Things that would have gotten someone banned from a game 20 years ago are straight-up ignored by in-game monitors, or there are just no game monitors at all, like in ESO. The online gaming community at large no longer values kindness. Instead, what young, new gamers are taught is that winning matters more than anything else, that being able to lord it over other people is the only way to avoid being bullied, and that the only purpose to playing a game is to be better than others at it.

I doubt we'll see a MMO that really inspires cooperative group activity without forcing it, because online gamers just don't think cooperatively anymore, don't think about other players as human beings that they should interact with and get feedback from. Sure, there are exceptions. There may even be a lot of exceptions. But that's not how the gaming community looks, to people outside it, to people who are new to it and learning how to navigate it, or to people who remember how it used to be. There have always been awful people online, but it used to be *wrong* to be like that. Now it's just something people are expected to tolerate if they want to play.

The most popular games of all time are all multiplayer games like mine craft and dots/league. Even fps games have team based gameplay or tdm. It’s only the battle royals genre that bucks the trend. If anything single player game experiences are getting worse and worse and harder to find any. I’m playing eso because of how crap single player games are these days barring the odd one I play. I play tons of very competitive shooters as well it’s pretty ironic I would be labled casual here when I play some of the hardest shooters known to mankind tactical teamwork shooters.

The truth of the matter is mmo pvp is complete crap anyone with real skill is playing another game that does it better. MOBA combat is like mmo combat and its team based. Also massive balance patch swings and the pay2win or insane amount of time it takes to get a pvp set. The entire month long time of grinding can be spent playing a pvp game you like. Pvp in mmo’s is *** and anyone who is truly competitive knows this. It’s too much work and time to pvp in an mmo when every other game does it better and faster. When you do get a set oops it was the wrong set of meta shifted time to waste more time grinding.

To this day my mind is boggled anyone would waste their time playing mmo pvp when the time spent could be getting better at a real competitive game of choice. There are some shooters on pc now with 100 person combat matches it feels bigger and funner than any mmo pvp combat I’ve tried.

SilverBride

SshadowSscale wrote: »

end game players gets affected a lot by casual players.... unlike you stated where endgame is not affected at all..... the truth is endgame gets hurt the most usually.... that being the reason end game players are getting more and more frustrated....

I don't see how someone logging on and playing solo could possibly hurt an end game player. Please give a specific example so I can understand where you are coming from.