I don’t know about you, but I’m getting annoyed that MMORPGs are increasingly turning into RPGs that just happen to have other people running around in them and which want a monthly fee of US$15. 
Timely example: Age of Conan. You play the first 20 levels, set on the island of Tortage, pretty much by your lonesome. This is partly due to the fact that there’s a whole quest series set during nighttime which you can only do as a solo character, and partly because the levelling’s pretty quick on the island, so it’s unlikely that any of your mates are hanging around to do all the quests again with you, anyway.
Once you get off the island however… nothing changes. Age of Conan is an MMORPG where you can pretty much make it to Level 80 without ever grouping. Now, pardon me for this next outlandish thought… but isn’t grouping one of the key reasons we wanted to play MMORPGs instead of RPGs in the first place? I thought it was!
Now, don’t get me wrong. A game doesn’t have to go to the extremes of, say, Dungeons & Dragons Online – where you pretty much needed to form a party just to pick your nose – but an element of needing to group with people for a decent portion of the content would be nice. Currently, I think Lord of the Rings Online probably has the best mix of solo-ing and grouping that I’ve seen. A very good mix, indeed.
You might think that’s where today’s rant might end… but you’d be wrong! You know what else is annoying about this new breed of MMORPGs that have forgotten the MMO part of their name? It’s that the players out there are condoning this! More and more I’m seeing people suggest that this is perfectly normal. They want their MMORPGs to be, essentially, an RPG… but with people hanging around on the /occ and /guild channels – presumably so they can link to their lastest lame piece of loot and get kudos from other people.
It’s really sad, actually, that the promise of MMORPGs (which, to my mind, is the promise of living in a virtual world moreso than it is about hitting a level cap, raiding or PvP), is getting pissed up against the wall as consumers increasingly vote with their feet to play games that aren’t very different to the RPGs they could get just as much amusement from, without the US$15/month pricetag to boot!
Have MMORPGs been dumbed down that badly? Or has the environment been invaded by gamers who don’t really understand what MMORPGs are supposed to be and, in turn, are happy for them to be glorified single-player outings that they have to pay for, simply because they don’t know any better? Is there any hope for the industry? Are there developers out there, right now, who realise that the current path MMORPGs are on is, essentially, the wrong path?
PS: Morninglark has some interesting thoughts in a similar vein:
We have seen the worlds become more linear. You are born here. You do X number of newbie quests, then are ‘encouraged by NPC’s’ to go to the next area that is level appropriate for you. In this way, the designers are herding us like cattle through the gaming environment.
I totally agree, Morninglark – and MMORPGs are the worse for it.
Hell, I *wish* MMO’s were actually RPG’s with other people in them. Then they’d feel more like an RPG perhaps instead of this Kill Ten Million Foozles garbage.
I’m a huge grouper, former raider, and also a big advocate of soloing. MMO’s were never “about” grouping, they were “about” having all those other players to interact with.
Interacting != Grouping.
Even if I’m solo, I still have those players in chat, guild-mates, alliance-mates, plus the players I get to actually see adventuring. Just like in life, I can interact with them, should I choose to. Just like in life, I can group with them and accomplish something together, should I choose to. I fully realize there are things in life best, or only, done with others. Similarly there are things better left to be done myself, though others could help. The point is, I have the choice to solo or to group. To do this or that. All these options, all these activities, and it’s my personal choice which to partake of, how to partake of them, and who to partake of them with. Isn’t that “the promise of living in a virtual world” as you put it, rather than being hedged into only certain paths?
Sure, players can solo to level cap. So? Is that hurting your game? Worry about your own game, your own enjoyment, and less (actually, not at all) about what anyone else is doing. The exclusive solo-ers are cutting themselves out of the group content, and from learning group dynamics and a whole other sphere of game play. But they know that. To them, obviously it’s worth their $15/month for the experience they’re getting. To you and I, perhaps that’s not enough, but there’s plenty of group-only content in most, if not all, MMO’s.
Solo to group balancing, yeah I’d give LOTRO top billing there, though Vanguard is pretty darn high up there too. I loved how it has group content and even dungeons starting from level 4!
“Or has the environment been invaded by gamers who don’t really understand what MMORPGs are supposed to be”
I’ve heard this complaint a lot of times over the years… but honestly, any game is only required to BE one thing: fun.
I mean… MMORPG’s are the way they are partially because they’ve learned from other’s mistakes.
Remember EQ2? Remember access quests that had to be done in groups? Remember people voting with their feet over the “forced grouping” throughout the game?
I’ve been playing these games since UO, but as I’ve gotten older, my patience with restriction on my limited gameplay time has definitely eroded.
More casual players have “invaded” our once pristine interwebs… and old “hard-core” players have already been there and done that… so whatcha gonna do? Make a game for the hard-core and be the next Shadowbane or allow players to sidestep the group content and still advance?
I could not agree with you or Morninglark more.
One of the other things I really hate about most MMO’s are the servers. Splitting the population in to smaller chunks. I love how Eve, Guildwars and Hellgate London have no separate servers. I must know about 100 people who play wow. A lot of people in the Navy played. Not a single one was on the same server, let alone on my server when i played.
Right now I’m playing Hellgate London. Despite their financial problems, the game is fun. Its not as polished as WoW, its still got some annoying bugs. But its fun. It actually takes a little bit of skill. The hunter classes play like an FPS. Even there though, there is not much grouping, no real need for it.
So I just started up a HCE charchter. Hard Core (Permadeath) Elite (Harder difficulty). In the one hour playing HCE, I have already met and grouped with just as many people as I have with my level 45 (of 50) that I played for the last month.
Couldn’t disagree more.
As a regular, long-term MMORPG player, who has played all styles from solo to group to raid over the years, I see the optimum path for MMOs to be very close to the one the genre has taken.
Prior to playing Online, I played offline RPGs and I began playing MMOs in 1999 in the hope of finding an open-ended, persistent version of that gameplay. At the time, choice was limited and I had to make compromises, one of which was accepting either a degree of enforced grouping or accepting quite sever limitations on the content I could use.
Over time, the decision on whether or not to join up with others in order to progress my characters has become a much more relaxed and unstressful one. There is generally plenty to do and plenty to achieve directly within my own control, making joining up with others an option, not a necessity.
Consequently, grouping is a much more “fun” choice, something I do willingly and with enjoyment, rather than grudgingly because I have little choice.
Its not about MMOs or players condoning “this” or “that” or that these games are more or less designed around solo play, the makers of these games simply try to provide the game experience that their customer base wants.
Why what players want mostly soloable content is the interesting issue here.
We all know that if you have a good group in just about any human activity that our intrinsic enjoyment increases, however; if we have a bad group in just about any human activity then intrinsic enjoyment decreases.
So the problem is actually a matter of human behavior and not design, after all every one of these games can be played, experienced, and conquered, more easily and at a great level of personal satisfaction while playing with friends.
This suggests that the problem is in identifying compatible personalities to play with, not that the games are designed one way or the other.
There are of course other reasons to avoid grouping.
Grouping necessitates a level of commitment for a portion of time, your time is valuable how it is used best is up to you.
You may have logged on for a short session, in this case grouping is not only a waste of your time but generally a waste of your would-be group mates.
Generally speaking you are far more likely to end up in a bad group than in a good functional group, this becomes more true the more popular the game your are playing is.
Its hard to be the “hero” of your adventure if you need a whole group to accomplish anything.
I see no problems with solo play at all, in fact, it is apparently my own preference and has been so ever since I first MMO’d in Pre-Kunark Everquest .
-Gooney
I love soloing. I love grouping sometimes too. What I like to see is encouraged grouping, not forced grouping or discouraged grouping.
World of Warcraft actively discourages grouping during normal play by making it less efficient than soloing. That’s dumb.
Dungeons & Dragons essentially forced grouping, and I hate that even more than discouraging grouping.
Something in-between is what I like. EverQuest II did an okay job of encouraging grouping by making it more efficient to do so.
I think there’s a happy place for “encouraged grouping” that hasn’t been introduced in any MMO I’ve played to this point, which would include absolute solo viability but increased reward for being social.
Your right on with Lotro being probably one of the best MMOs out there that mixes solo and group play. And although I don’t mind soloing so much, in AoC i reached lev 35 with only grouping once. Having a good balance of solo and group play is hugely important which AoC seemed to miss.
Whilst no MMORPGer myself, we have the same effect occuring in MMORTS now we have RTS players joining in larger numbers. The play as if single gaming, something I am now unable to tolerate – think Thief 2 was the last time I did. I think some clever dev thinking needs to be there from the concept stage about making dependancy desireable, something lacking in the RTS arena totally until recently. Co-operative play is discussed like its a new shiny toy still.
One game I am testing atm, Beyond Protocol, has definately actively approached this head on and taken a lot of tester views on board over this. The socketed factions mean higher players suffer a lack of research bonuses unless they cultivate a group of lower rank players with similar or not opposed interests outside of any guild structure. Also the game is so huge, so like 5-6 games within one, that soloing is just plain pointless once you grasp just how big the game is and how complex you can make it with the tech cloud(not tree). Also allies and guildies can ‘alias’ each other – whereby a player grants another access to his account with easily imposed limitations. This allows a team to take control of a number of fleets or coordinate supplies whilst the main player is still on. The penalty is their empire goes inactive for that period but allows players to help each other research/ trade/ send spy missions or plain command a fleet each.
Then we have the guild interface and guild aliasing , the senate similar to Eves council and the persistent nature of MMORTS and the need to have timezone cover – all imposes a ‘soft cap’ on one player dominating without a hard rule saying they ‘cant’. The very active dev team and testers are very focused on the need for mutually dependant play that still allows a degree of soloing with success. Tricky balance for sure. One server, one reality, many communities we hope.
When they released MMORPG – I too thought of property, guilds, traders, wars and such all existing in one world, requiring mature repsonses as the effect of losing would be severe etc. Instead I found single player gaming captured within instancing and mages hitting cows on the head for experience…. I withdrew back into MMORTS and FPS.
It is interesting, that you mention that players seem to want it to be an RPG with OOC channels. I was in a game the other day and thought to myself, “Oh my God, this is just Diablo2 with a chat room”.
I agree with Ryan Shwayder, that we need solo friendly games, that encourage grouping with perks.
Grouping is only a small part of the MMO experience.
The precursor to MMO’s, MUD’s, had virtually no group concept.
Sure you could be in the same room, and attack the same monster, but it was mostly worthless and you got no bonus for doing so.
No, grouping is not what attracted people to MUD’s. It was just being around other people. The social experience.
If LOTRO was not so god awful boring, it would work.
But, I agree with the poster who stated the Guild Wars comment.
This game, on busy days can be so FULL of people, and the option of solo or group quests is the best in my opinion.
And with the new Hero system, you are NEVER bored either.
The challenge now in Guild Wars to run the dungeons and Missions on hard mode adds some challenge that is missing in a lot of games also.
If AoC would have followed the one server many instances setup of Guild Wars, I honestly think we would see less whining about how bad of a game it is.
I just wrote a response to this article.
http://www.morninglark.com/dear-designers-fix-grouping.html
It is an interesting topic to be sure. I think many players feel that games lack the dynamics for good grouping.
“When they released MMORPG – I too thought of property, guilds, traders, wars and such all existing in one world, requiring mature repsonses as the effect of losing would be severe etc. Instead I found single player gaming captured within instancing and mages hitting cows on the head for experience…. I withdrew back into MMORTS and FPS.”
*Chuckle* That’s about the size of it.
Honestly, I just can’t get my head around people who want to play solo in a multi-user environment. It doesn’t make sense to me. It seems to be, as I said in the piece, that they want the benefits of playing solo, and only seem to want other people around to show off their “phat lewt” to.
“Can’t” get your head around it, or “won’t?”
It’s because we’re humans, and humans spend the majority of their lives solo. MMO’s aren’t like loading up a game of TF2 where the game groups you and there’s shoot shoot, bang bang and that’s all there is to the entire game.
When you login to your MMO are you automatically grouped every moment until you logout? If not, then “zomg, you’re playing solo in a multi-user environment.”
The group-only crowd loves to say “MMO’s are for grouping, soloers should play Oblivion.” It’s all or nothing. Ok, what if I reverse that: everyone (per faction) on the entire server must be grouped at all times. All or nothing. One huge-ass group, no choice in the matter. You still gonna tell me people won’t solo while grouped? Happens all the time already. Not to mention: login to WoW, GW or any other game with a questionable community and tell me with a straight face: you *want* to group with *all* those people? Seriously?
Some people only PvE. Some PvP. Some only solo. Some only group. And finally, some like myself, do it all. That’s allowed, right?
Scott is so wrong its funny – we evolved in communitites and family groups and its a small snapshot period of gaming, where games transferred to computers that soling became popular. Prior to that all games involved teams or another opponent and there was no AI in chess pieces. Silly statement sorry.
Its the nature of humans to group together and socialise and the computer world is going to have to catch up if it wants to attract spenders and players outside of a small clique who take games seriously. Believe me – most folk on this planet would think we are crazy just for bothering to reply to a internet story – we are the minority as per.
Yes I can imagine some soloing is fun, maybe, and its should not be discouraged, but like real life, you get more benefits when you cooperate. It could also be mooted that those who prefer solo play might not like the inevitable comparisons that social gaming brings and we all know the cliche that this ‘fashion’ for solo gaming was created and supported by the typically least social folk in the 70’s and 80’s. Now the majority is joining these pioneering loners and outcasts there are more social folk within such groupings. This leads to more demand for net 2.0 interactions and such – which is happening now.
:)
No, I’m not “wrong.” You may disagree with my outlook, my opinion, or both, but that makes neither of us “wrong” nor “right.”
Add up your time from waking til you sleep. How much time is spent more or less alone? Many people even have jobs where, yes we’re working or near other people, but everyone is doing their own jobs. Solo. But able to interact.
That’s the key. MMOG’s are about many people playing and being able to *interact* which does not mean grouping and grouping alone. I’ve known many people in different games who were the most friendly, outgoing and social people in-game you could want, yet they exclusively soloed; refusing to group with anyone, or perhaps only their spouse, whatever. Similarly, I’ve known many players who grouped constantly but never said a word, never contributed much to the group other than (hopefully) fulfilling the (minimum usually) tasks of their role/class. We’ve all met those people, I’m certain.
Note your last paragraph: you’re talking “interacting” just like I am. The difference is that I’m not latching onto the “interaction = grouping” mentality that so many group-only people have.
Offhand, I’m not recalling ever seeing so many posts on blogs and forums from the solo crowd. Why do the group-only crowd worry so much about how other people play their game? Are soloers affecting your game at all? No? Didn’t think so. Are groupers affecting the soloers game? Of course not; they’re not grouped with them. We’re all paying $15/month to enjoy the game. Being unique individuals, we each enjoy the game and its various aspects differently. That’s ok, unlike more narrow-focused game like shooters, RTS, etc. these RPG’s are built to encourage that.
Look at it this way: you can group for so-called “solo content” but you can’t solo group content. Therefore, don’t the groupers “win” by having so much more groupable content available?
Great article! I’ve commented a few times on this over at Random Battle. I’ve also written extensively on the solo phenomenon of new MMO’s like WoW at my blog. It’s great to see the blogosphere starting to get concerned about this issue.
The fact that anyone now can solo from level 1 to level 70 in a Massively Multi-player Online Game without ever once acknowledging another player or grouping is perplexing and frankly cause for alarm.
Upon closer investigation, Blizzard has admitted that the real WoW starts at the level cap which I discussed at length in a previous blog article:
http://www.wolfsheadonline.com/?p=119
They key point here is that according to Blizzard solo players aren’t really playing the real WoW. Those solo levels are the loss leader which entices the player to get caught up and even addicted to the whole thing. Of course many players at the level cap turn to grouping/raiding as they want to keep advancing their characters. Blizzard is counting on this.
MMO’s seem to be devolving to the point where they are nothing more then glorified single-player games that just happen to have other people playing playing the same game and experiencing the exact same content as you.
In another article I talked about how the easy solo part of WoW is not adequately preparing players to play the “real” WoW which starts at the level cap.
http://www.wolfsheadonline.com/?p=108
Soloing is a guilty pleasure but it comes at a cost. You end up with a community of players who lack social skill and who are largely ignorant and inept at playing their classes effectively in groups and raids.
Ultimately it’s going to come full circle as the community starts to further erode, those players that are running around and giving your solo MMO experience “flavor” and “life” are going to be more of a detriment then they are a positive. This is why I have used said that MMO’s are in a state of devolution today in an article I did on the recent Richard Bartle controversy.
http://www.wolfsheadonline.com/?p=129
I predict if the current trends continue MMO’s will be all but unrecognizable in 10 years. This will largely be the result of bringing in more of the lowest common denominator calibre of people into the fold. The MMO community back in the days of UO and EQ was unique and amazing due to it being a niche market at the time.
Today the current community in MMO’s like WoW are now a part of popular culture and have gone mainstream. Mix that with the anonymity of the Internet and you have a less then desirable community of players that I personally really don’t want to associate with otherwise known as the Bnet kiddies and Counterstrike FPS crowd.
The only hope for MMO’s to return to a state of quality is for them to return to more of a niche based focus. The problem here is that the current funding model favors development of McMMO’s like WoW. I think what we really need are better development tools so that better and more interesting MMO’s can be made without having to worry about the overhead of programming and setting up the infrastructure. Much like what Photoshop did for computer generated art. It will be interesting to see what Raph Koster’s Metaplace does in this area.
Scott pretty much sums up what I was going to point out. I’ll add a quick clarification that might give perspective:
Are we playing MMORPGs or exploring persistent online worlds? A persistent online world is just as interesting to solo players as groupies. Why should any gameplay, in either direction, be forced?
If you want to play the MMORPG game, join an RP server, grab some friends, and play the way you want to. Don’t ask that an entire online world be altered to fit your vision. (Which goes for the other side, too, but in my research, the group advocates are far more fussy about this.) Just as people choose to live differently out here in the real world, they should be able to play the game differently. They are paying customers, after all.
The lure of “emergent social gameplay” is more on the players’ shoulders than the designers’ anyways. If content is there for all players, play the parts that you like and don’t fuss that someone else enjoys a different part.