Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

Viable incentive to party?Follow

#102 Jun 17 2009 at 11:13 PM Rating: Default
**
572 posts
PrinnyFlute wrote:
Agreeing on the party-stance. My repeated statement is that I simply want to be able to get ahead at an acceptable rate on days when I don't feel like partying. Not that I want to be able to do everything on my own (especially not end-game content), or that soloing should be as good as or better than partying... Just that I'd like to have it as an option.

And though it might be picking nits at this point, I still think you could call Japan "polite"; it's simply somewhat of a result of the community-centric culture you've mentioned, which I am aware of.


Again, as many have said before me you can’t just make solo "an option" without changing the game fundamentally, and thus it will conflict against party and group play. There are so many areas that will be affected once you implement a solo option. Let me just bring up two of a long list of problems that will arise when you implement solo. One is that people will go for the solo option if available in the game, making all content obsolete from level 1 to max. The second aspect of solo play is that some classes will have to be rendered useless or add a dps aspect to them in order to let them solo as well.

For example a bard and a white mage should be able to have a "dps" build to be able to dps, exactly like how WoW have solved it with all the classes in the game having a "DPS build". Once you start on this road, again, there will be a lot of changes in the game and in the end you might end up with a "WoW" copy that everyone hate but there is no escaping it really. Also there should not be _any_ discrimination once you implement solo, and that means ALL CLASSES should have equal speed in leveling up solo regardless of being a bard, white mage, ranger, paladin, black mage or a dark knight.

I’m personally very very interested in how SE has solved this issue, but implementing solo game play without it ending up similar to how WoW is today is beyond me. It’s almost as good as impossible.



Edited, Jun 18th 2009 3:16am by Maldavian
#103 Jun 17 2009 at 11:25 PM Rating: Default
***
3,416 posts
homogenization(sp?) of jobs. Helps soloing, helps partying.

Edited, Jun 18th 2009 9:25am by Hyanmen
____________________________
SE:
Quote:
We really want to compete against World of Warcraft and for example the new Star Wars MMO.

#104 Jun 17 2009 at 11:26 PM Rating: Default
**
572 posts
Hyanmen wrote:
homogenization(sp?) of jobs. Helps soloing, helps partying.

Edited, Jun 18th 2009 9:25am by Hyanmen


^"homogenization" aka WoW copy ^^
Also, the need of 20 classes disappears, as you don’t really need 16 different classes for buffing since they all will do the same thing, just make it into 4 classes, 1 tank 1 heal 1 dps and 1 buffer. That would do nicely ^^

Edited, Jun 18th 2009 3:30am by Maldavian
#105 Jun 17 2009 at 11:31 PM Rating: Default
***
3,416 posts
They got the right idea to make both solo and party work, but implementation could be better!

SE did say they're probably gonna add less jobs this time.. there's no need for so many jobs in this kind of system, indeed.

Edited, Jun 18th 2009 9:32am by Hyanmen
____________________________
SE:
Quote:
We really want to compete against World of Warcraft and for example the new Star Wars MMO.

#106 Jun 17 2009 at 11:32 PM Rating: Default
**
572 posts
Hyanmen wrote:
They got the right idea to make both solo and party work, but implementation could be better!


They have implemented it as good as it can get, there isn’t a better way that WoW have done it, or do you have a revolutionary idea that no one knows of and want to share with us ?

Edited, Jun 18th 2009 3:33am by Maldavian
#107 Jun 17 2009 at 11:35 PM Rating: Default
***
3,416 posts
WoW's system still leaves a need for tanks and healers....

So make everyone be able to deal damage, and everyone able to heal.

Then there'd be 2 roles. One deals more damage, one heals better.

The role that deals more damage tanks.

Maybe 10 jobs, 5 for each role, depending if they can make them diverse enough of course.
____________________________
SE:
Quote:
We really want to compete against World of Warcraft and for example the new Star Wars MMO.

#108 Jun 17 2009 at 11:47 PM Rating: Default
**
572 posts
Hyanmen wrote:
WoW's system still leaves a need for tanks and healers....

So make everyone be able to deal damage, and everyone able to heal.

Then there'd be 2 roles. One deals more damage, one heals better.

The role that deals more damage tanks.

Maybe 10 jobs, 5 for each role, depending if they can make them diverse enough of course.


Or, to make it even easier, make all classes in WoW to have 4 talent builds, the build represents tank/heal/dps/buff. That way everyone can spec anything in the game and that will solve party and solo to 100%, great idea right ? ^^
#109 Jun 17 2009 at 11:49 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
181 posts
I just don't want to grind... I had enough of that for my entire life >_<
____________________________
XIV
Bosco Firebrander, Gladiator of Thanalan.

XI
(Retired) 2004-2008 ( He lies in Uleguerand Range, under the cold white snow ).
#110 Jun 17 2009 at 11:55 PM Rating: Default
***
3,416 posts
Quote:
Or, to make it even easier, make all classes in WoW to have 4 talent builds, the build represents tank/heal/dps/buff. That way everyone can spec anything in the game and that will solve party and solo to 100%, great idea right ? ^^


Then they could only do one thing at time... that doesn't really solve it D:
____________________________
SE:
Quote:
We really want to compete against World of Warcraft and for example the new Star Wars MMO.

#111 Jun 18 2009 at 12:03 AM Rating: Excellent
*
192 posts
Quote:
Again, as many have said before me you can’t just make solo "an option" without changing the game fundamentally, and thus it will conflict against party and group play.


I...I don't know why I'm responding to you, because I've done it multiple times without getting a real response back. No offense, I just mean...literally.

1) No. That's wrong. I've played MMOs where I could feasibly run off and solo, where partying was the better leveling option, and many, many people would still choose to party. I'm not talking about WoW and for god's sake I do not care about WoW. It's hardly a tough act to arrange, especially if FFXIV has a stepped up LFG system.

Also, have you never, ever played an MMO and made a friend when not in a party? Because I have. Many, many people have. You don't need to be tethered to 3+ other players for the entire game just to make friends. You don't need to be forced together just to meet people and enjoy having people around.

2) I said nothing about homogenizing jobs or giving them sources of DPS, or making soloing "equal" for all jobs. I don't know about other players, but I have no problem with the idea that some jobs solo better than others. Heck, some games even have different areas where some jobs just level better than others so multiple jobs -can- solo at the same rate without making them all exactly the same.

****, maybe that's the solution: More enemy variety! Having enemies that warriors can go toe to toe with but eat other classes. Having ones that are vulnerable to ranged attacks and walk slowly but powerful at close range to keep melee DPS away and tricky enough to make it a challenge for ranged attackers. Maybe not these at all; just SOMETHING. There are boundless possibilities out there in the great blue yonder.

3) You understand that if soloing is not feasible many many people will not play the game. Period. End of sentence.

You might be fine with that, maybe you don't care who has fun or doesn't. But I'm pretty sure SquareEnix wants that delicious money, and I'm pretty sure the developers do want as many people as possible to enjoy themselves.

Quote:

I’m personally very very interested in how SE has solved this issue, but implementing solo game play without it ending up similar to how WoW is today is beyond me. It’s almost as good as impossible.


I apologize if this comes off as rude, but... How many games have you made, again?
____________________________
The Other Castle
#112 Jun 18 2009 at 1:23 AM Rating: Default
**
572 posts
PrinnyFlute wrote:

I...I don't know why I'm responding to you, because I've done it multiple times without getting a real response back. No offense, I just mean...literally.


Then don’t bother, no one is forcing you to :D

Quote:
1) No. That's wrong. I've played MMOs where I could feasibly run off and solo, where partying was the better leveling option, and many, many people would still choose to party. I'm not talking about WoW and for god's sake I do not care about WoW. It's hardly a tough act to arrange, especially if FFXIV has a stepped up LFG system.


Give me an example then. What game have you played where a good solo option is available and yet the majority is grouping to level up ?

Quote:
Also, have you never, ever played an MMO and made a friend when not in a party? Because I have. Many, many people have. You don't need to be tethered to 3+ other players for the entire game just to make friends. You don't need to be forced together just to meet people and enjoy having people around.


We are not having a discussion on how to make friends, read our discussion again to comprehend what we are talking about.

Quote:
2) I said nothing about homogenizing jobs or giving them sources of DPS, or making soloing "equal" for all jobs. I don't know about other players, but I have no problem with the idea that some jobs solo better than others. Heck, some games even have different areas where some jobs just level better than others so multiple jobs -can- solo at the same rate without making them all exactly the same.


So, you want to give preferential treatment to the class that you play to be able to solo, yet fu*k over other classes that can’t solo? How is that fair? Or you want all people to just pick a dps class if they want to solo. No thank you. You seem to forget that everyone is not the same as you and thus everyone don’t want to pick the same class as you. If you can solo you **** class, so should everyone else, they are also paying the monthly fee and should also be able to solo. One could go even further in this argument and say what if the class that you are soloing is not viable in group play? How would you fu*king feel about that discrimination? I think you would be pretty ****** off, I know I would be.

Quote:
****, maybe that's the solution: More enemy variety! Having enemies that warriors can go toe to toe with but eat other classes. Having ones that are vulnerable to ranged attacks and walk slowly but powerful at close range to keep melee DPS away and tricky enough to make it a challenge for ranged attackers. Maybe not these at all; just SOMETHING. There are boundless possibilities out there in the great blue yonder.


If developers bother with this, but I doubt that they would make 20 different "types of build" of each mob to suit every class so that they can solo them.

Quote:
3) You understand that if soloing is not feasible many many people will not play the game. Period. End of sentence.


I understand that you don’t get 10 million users as WoW but you can get 2 million. Again numbers mean jack sh*t here.

Quote:
You might be fine with that, maybe you don't care who has fun or doesn't. But I'm pretty sure SquareEnix wants that delicious money, and I'm pretty sure the developers do want as many people as possible to enjoy themselves.


If they did care about making a game to appeal to the entire world I think the WoW path is the one to go. There are a few co*kblocks already in FF14 that won’t make it as popular as you claim it might be.

1. No PvP system (A huge co*kblock to the path of world domination of the MMO market)

2. No localization except NA, EU and JP (Again HELLO CHINA, where WoW has fuc*ing 6 million players, not counting Korea and many many other regions).

As you see SE doesn’t care ONLY IN TERMS OF $$$$$ as you claim.

Quote:
I apologize if this comes off as rude, but... How many games have you made, again?


I have not made any games but I have played "countless" MMO's and have seen what works and what doesn’t.



Edited, Jun 18th 2009 7:32am by Maldavian
#113 Jun 18 2009 at 4:53 AM Rating: Excellent
*
192 posts
Quote:

Give me an example then. What game have you played where a good solo option is available and yet the majority is grouping to level up ?


Wait, majority? Why majority? Who said anything about majority? Don't you go adding words into the conversation all of a sudden. I don't care if the majority party. As long as people want to party and are partying, it doesn't matter if it's 90% or 20%.

Why should the majority be partying if they don't want to? I've played games where you could solo feasibly but still encounter parties fairly regularly. It doesn't mean most people are partying; there's just a large portion of the playerbase that's choosing to do so. 30% of the playerbase still constitutes "many" players.

Quote:

We are not having a discussion on how to make friends, read our discussion again to comprehend what we are talking about.


Honestly, I tried to go back to the beginning of this schizophrenic BS. But you've never said why exactly it is so incredibly important to you that people group.

You have never said what you are "talking about" outside of talking about "end-game" this and "WoW" that.

I'll pose this question for the 50th time: I think people should be able to solo if they want. That is all. You want to make it so that players have to group up. Why should they have to group up?

Don't pull the social card: That's the entire reason I said the friends thing. That's been addressed.

Quote:

So, you want to give preferential treatment to the class that you play to be able to solo, yet fu*k over other classes that can’t solo? How is that fair? Or you want all people to just pick a dps class if they want to solo. No thank you. You seem to forget that everyone is not the same as you and thus everyone don’t want to pick the same class as you.


Pardon me what? Did I say "Only one class can solo"? Did I say, "I will play the best soloing class"?

No, explain to me how the statement "some jobs solo better than others" means "only a few jobs can solo at all."

I've played "countless" MMO's as well, and I've always had the understanding that some classes just don't do as well on their own as others.

As far as I've ever known, it's an acceptable and logical system. And just because, say, healers aren't as good at solo leveling as warriors doesn't mean they can't get by.

I don't like systems where classes are homogenized either. Being a terrible soloing class with the option to solo at a mediocre pace is better than not having it at all.

Quote:
If developers bother with this, but I doubt that they would make 20 different "types of build" of each mob to suit every class so that they can solo them.


They're different creatures entirely. Archers run from turtles and pelt them with arrows. Healers bomb the undead. Etcetera etcetera. Been done before. Adds flavor to zones and creatures, really. And it's not like people can't still party up on these creatures, too. I'd love to keep throwing ideas out there for no good reason, but.

Quote:
I understand that you don’t get 10 million users as WoW but you can get 2 million. Again numbers mean jack sh*t here.


There's a big difference between 10 mill and 2 mill. And yes, Square does want more people to play their game. They're both a developer and a business. They want to make money, and they want to entertain.

You do realize, in those shades of gray between (called 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 million) that all SquareEnix has to do is make the game a liiittle bit more palatable and they raise that number substantially.

There are games and numbers other than those matching WoW or FFXI.

Quote:
If they did care about making a game to appeal to the entire world I think the WoW path is the one to go. There are a few co*kblocks already in FF14 that won’t make it as popular as you claim it might be.

1. No PvP system (A huge co*kblock to the path of word domination of the MMO market)

2. No localization except NA, EU and JP (Again HELLO CHINA, where WoW has fuc*ing 6 million players, not counting Korea and many many other regions).

As you see SE doesn’t care ONLY IN TERMS OF $$$$$ as you claim.


I didn't say the entire world.

I didn't say they care "ONLY IN TERMS OF $$$$$".

I did not say a single freaking word about WoW or the WoW path. I do not care about WoW, I do not care about FFXIV being "as big as WoW". Please cease obsessing over that game. It's not even part of this conversation.

There are things between black and white, here and there. FFXI and WoW aren't the only two MMO's or qualifiers for talking about MMO's in the universe.

Fact: They want FFXIV to be more popular than FFXI.
Because: They have already acknowledged that they want it to be more accessible to a wider variety of playstyles than FFXI, including people who like to solo. Therefor: They care about the numbers.

Quote:
I have not made any games but I have played "countless" MMO's and have seen what works and what doesn’t.


People who know about making games, let alone making good ones, don't usually say things like this:

Quote:
I’m personally very very interested in how SE has solved this issue, but implementing solo game play without it ending up similar to how WoW is today is beyond me. It’s almost as good as impossible.


Which doesn't make sense in game design terms. It could be shot apart in a thousand ways. There are so many different ways of implementing solo gameplay out there that exist, let alone the myriad unimplemented ways of doing it that simply haven't been tried yet in a working MMORPG.

It's hardly a secret that MMORPGs aren't evolving in terms of gameplay at anything resembling a quick rate.

Let alone the fact that any one "solo" system still has to combine with the "grouping" system which means even more possible combinations and possible wins or losses.
____________________________
The Other Castle
#114 Jun 18 2009 at 5:56 AM Rating: Decent
31 posts
maldavian wrote:
Give me an example then. What game have you played where a good solo option is available and yet the majority is grouping to level up ?

I don't know about you, but I would prefer that SE didn't attempt to follow any magic formula for MMO's. The problem is, you state that you don't want FF XIV to be similar to WoW, but also, to not attempt to seemingly attempt something new? The point is that no other game has done such a thing and SE will attempt to make it a viable option to party and solo. Just because FF XI tended to be a more party focused game and WoW is presumably a more solo-oriented game, does not mean FF XIV has to follow either route. FF XIV does not have to follow suit with any previous MMO either, SE wants to make a revolutionary game- and guess what? Making both solo and party options viable would be pretty revolutionary.
Also:
Quote:
The second aspect of solo play is that some classes will have to be rendered useless or add a dps aspect to them in order to let them solo as well.

Umm... NO ONE is saying a whm should be able to solo. Most of the times whm and brd do not have a hard time finding a party whatosever. Why do they need an incentive to solo when partying is viable and readily available? Soloing would be an option for the numerous DDs that just sit around waiting for a party.
Also, there are some people that want to solo even if they could get a party. That's why they choose a DD class. Honestly, WHM heal. When choosing that class, most are aware that WHM heal. Most do not want the game homogenized... and though I cannot state what SE will do, I am confident that they will not homogenize the game. Tanks, healers, DD's, etc. will be available in one form or another though not necessarily provided the same job labels.

Another point you made against Prinny was:

Quote:
Quote:
****, maybe that's the solution: More enemy variety! Having enemies that warriors can go toe to toe with but eat other classes. Having ones that are vulnerable to ranged attacks and walk slowly but powerful at close range to keep melee DPS away and tricky enough to make it a challenge for ranged attackers. Maybe not these at all; just SOMETHING. There are boundless possibilities out there in the great blue yonder.


If developers bother with this, but I doubt that they would make 20 different "types of build" of each mob to suit every class so that they can solo them.


Ok... You do realize that in FF XI, SE already has something similar to this implemented. Paladins do more damage against the undead. Certain classes have traits such as "bird-killer" etc. implemented. Developers at SE have already "bothered themselves" with this suggestion as you see it in not only FF XI, but other FF's such as FF 9... Clearly you are unaware of the functions of even FF XI let alone other FF games.

Hmm to make this simpler for you to understand- SE doesn't even have to borrow from other games to come up with ways to Solo, methods are present in FF XI and other FF games... And I'd prefer that SE revolutionized the genre and made both viable options... I don't get why you want to play FF XI-2? I loved FF XI... still, I want to play a more improved game because welll... That's the point of making new games... This is why SE didn't make every FF after FF 7 a sequel of that game. Know why? SE likes to try new things.
#115 Jun 18 2009 at 6:20 AM Rating: Default
**
572 posts
Dappunisher wrote:

I don't know about you, but I would prefer that SE didn't attempt to follow any magic formula for MMO's. The problem is, you state that you don't want FF XIV to be similar to WoW, but also, to not attempt to seemingly attempt something new? The point is that no other game has done such a thing and SE will attempt to make it a viable option to party and solo. Just because FF XI tended to be a more party focused game and WoW is presumably a more solo-oriented game, does not mean FF XIV has to follow either route. FF XIV does not have to follow suit with any previous MMO either, SE wants to make a revolutionary game- and guess what? Making both solo and party options viable would be pretty revolutionary.


I agree with you but, I’m all in for that SE tries to make the a revolutationary move that will allow solo and group option equally viable, but at the same time this process can make the game a total flop. If you make something revolutionary, that doesn’t mean it’s going to be in a good way. It can turn out to be a major letdown instead, again we won’t know until we have the game or at least a beta in front of us to see what they have done.

Quote:
Umm... NO ONE is saying a whm should be able to solo. Most of the times whm and brd do not have a hard time finding a party whatosever. Why do they need an incentive to solo when partying is viable and readily available? Soloing would be an option for the numerous DDs that just sit around waiting for a party.
Also, there are some people that want to solo even if they could get a party. That's why they choose a DD class. Honestly, WHM heal. When choosing that class, most are aware that WHM heal. Most do not want the game homogenized... and though I cannot state what SE will do, I am confident that they will not homogenize the game. Tanks, healers, DD's, etc. will be available in one form or another though not necessarily provided the same job labels.


You are dead wrong here, why would the DD's want to party when they can solo?
That leaves the WHM,BRD at the same situation as DD's are in today meaning they will have a hard time to form groups since no DD's are interested in grouping since the majority of the DD's will opt for solo, since it’s a lot less hassle and in the end you didn’t solve the problem. This will ultimately lead to classes like WHM and BRD and other support classes demanding the same right to be able to solo as the DD's. Again, no discrimination please.

Quote:
Ok... You do realize that in FF XI, SE already has something similar to this implemented. Paladins do more damage against the undead. Certain classes have traits such as "bird-killer" etc. implemented. Developers at SE have already "bothered themselves" with this suggestion as you see it in not only FF XI, but other FF's such as FF 9... Clearly you are unaware of the functions of even FF XI let alone other FF games.


I have seen very little of this in FFXI to change the game in any way, and I doubt they would make this a prime objective to make all classes solo able.

Quote:
Hmm to make this simpler for you to understand- SE doesn't even have to borrow from other games to come up with ways to Solo, methods are present in FF XI and other FF games... And I'd prefer that SE revolutionized the genre and made both viable options... I don't get why you want to play FF XI-2? I loved FF XI... still, I want to play a more improved game because welll... That's the point of making new games... This is why SE didn't make every FF after FF 7 a sequel of that game. Know why? SE likes to try new things.


I have never said I want a FFXI-2, what I said is that implementing a very balanced group/solo game is extremely hard if not impossible. We just have to wait and see what SE has to surprise us with.


#116 Jun 18 2009 at 6:41 AM Rating: Decent
31 posts
maldavian wrote:
Quote:
Umm... NO ONE is saying a whm should be able to solo. Most of the times whm and brd do not have a hard time finding a party whatosever. Why do they need an incentive to solo when partying is viable and readily available? Soloing would be an option for the numerous DDs that just sit around waiting for a party.
Also, there are some people that want to solo even if they could get a party. That's why they choose a DD class. Honestly, WHM heal. When choosing that class, most are aware that WHM heal. Most do not want the game homogenized... and though I cannot state what SE will do, I am confident that they will not homogenize the game. Tanks, healers, DD's, etc. will be available in one form or another though not necessarily provided the same job labels.


You are dead wrong here, why would the DD's want to party when they can solo?
That leaves the WHM,BRD at the same situation as DD's are in today meaning they will have a hard time to form groups since no DD's are interested in grouping since the majority of the DD's will opt for solo, since it’s a lot less hassle and in the end you didn’t solve the problem. This will ultimately lead to classes like WHM and BRD and other support classes demanding the same right to be able to solo as the DD's. Again, no discrimination please.

Again, the point is to make both viable options. This does not mean that both will be equally awarded. As SE seems to favor group play, groups will receive more "exp" than a person soloing. There will be an incentive to party, however, for those that cannot immediately get parties (re: the numerous DD's) soloing for exp will be a viable option while waiting for a party.
Also, soloing will be viable for those that do not have time to get into a party... But, this does not mean that a whm will have to solo. Whm is a class that heals... You mention discrimination? So, seemingly you are all for homogenization? Because, giving any one class certain advantages over another is discrimination. The fact of the matter is, certain "classes" will be provided advantages over others.
Again, the "problem" of whm and brd being placed in the same position as DD are in FF XI should be inapplicable with the above mentioned system.
Quote:
Quote:
Ok... You do realize that in FF XI, SE already has something similar to this implemented. Paladins do more damage against the undead. Certain classes have traits such as "bird-killer" etc. implemented. Developers at SE have already "bothered themselves" with this suggestion as you see it in not only FF XI, but other FF's such as FF 9... Clearly you are unaware of the functions of even FF XI let alone other FF games.


I have seen very little of this in FFXI to change the game in any way, and I doubt they would make this a prime objective to make all classes solo able.

As a paladin, I found my job trait useful... When inside areas such as Necropolis, I was confident in my ability to deal with the undead. Again, this is at a much smaller scale than what would be necessary in FF XIV to make it viable. Nonetheless, the foundation to make this system work is readily available for SE.

Ahh, and your point about the gaming being a flop? Well that's the risk any game designer takes. It is more likely that the game will be a flop if they just went with the system established in FF XI or in WoW. SE has proven to be a brazen company. Granted, they have become more structured and, some say, less willing to take risks, but, I still expect SE to make this game epic.

#117 Jun 18 2009 at 6:50 AM Rating: Good
*
230 posts
I don't understand what the whole argument is about. The viable incentive to party is to share experiences with others. I think FFXI had it half-way: parties had access to things like skill chains, which lead to bonuses like XP chains. The problem with FFXI was that you couldn't kill anything without doing this.

A good balance would be to make some zones more party friendly and some more solo friendly. Not even complete zones. Some zones could have rival monster tribes, some of which are weaker than others. The weaker ones would be more for soloing, and there would be more of them (otherwise, the stronger tribe would just take them over). The stronger ones would be a little less dense, and more party-oriented. With the right terrain set up, you could tackle whichever area of the zone you had the group for.

Just a basic, interesting idea imo
____________________________
Future FFXIV Player
Anguish - 80 Death Knight (Retired)
Vor - 60 Warlock (pre-BC) (Retired)
#118 Jun 18 2009 at 7:02 AM Rating: Default
**
572 posts
Dappunisher wrote:

Again, the point is to make both viable options. This does not mean that both will be equally awarded. As SE seems to favor group play, groups will receive more "exp" than a person soloing. There will be an incentive to party, however, for those that cannot immediately get parties (re: the numerous DD's) soloing for exp will be a viable option while waiting for a party.
Also, soloing will be viable for those that do not have time to get into a party... But, this does not mean that a whm will have to solo. Whm is a class that heals... You mention discrimination? So, seemingly you are all for homogenization? Because, giving any one class certain advantages over another is discrimination. The fact of the matter is, certain "classes" will be provided advantages over others.
Again, the "problem" of whm and brd being placed in the same position as DD are in FF XI should be inapplicable with the above mentioned system."


The problem here as I see it is that you _ASSUME_ that the DD's want to party if they have an option to solo, whereas my stance is that the DD's does not want to party. What is the point in making an option viable is it created problems for other classes? As you said yourself, Bards and Whm have no problem with getting groups in FFXI now. When solo is available for the DD's, then no DD's want to make party ( yes they CAN but they DONT WANT TO ) that leaves BRD,WHM in the cold and in the same situation as the DD's are in atm.
You didn’t SOLVE the problem, you just MOVED it onto the support classes.
#119 Jun 18 2009 at 7:22 AM Rating: Decent
31 posts
maldavian wrote:
appunisher wrote:

Again, the point is to make both viable options. This does not mean that both will be equally awarded. As SE seems to favor group play, groups will receive more "exp" than a person soloing. There will be an incentive to party, however, for those that cannot immediately get parties (re: the numerous DD's) soloing for exp will be a viable option while waiting for a party.
Also, soloing will be viable for those that do not have time to get into a party... But, this does not mean that a whm will have to solo. Whm is a class that heals... You mention discrimination? So, seemingly you are all for homogenization? Because, giving any one class certain advantages over another is discrimination. The fact of the matter is, certain "classes" will be provided advantages over others.
Again, the "problem" of whm and brd being placed in the same position as DD are in FF XI should be inapplicable with the above mentioned system."


The problem here as I see it is that you _ASSUME_ that the DD's want to party if they have an option to solo, whereas my stance is that the DD's does not want to party. What is the point in making an option viable is it created problems for other classes? As you said yourself, Bards and Whm have no problem with getting groups in FFXI now. When solo is available for the DD's, then no DD's want to make party ( yes they CAN but they DONT WANT TO ) that leaves BRD,WHM in the cold and in the same situation as the DD's are in atm.
You didn’t SOLVE the problem, you just MOVED it onto the support classes.

Lol. The problem here is that you _ASSUME_ DD's will not want to party. See what happens? We are all making assumptions at the moment. My assumption is that most people will choose to be social in the game- hence take part in parties. Furthermore, I clarify that SE will provide a larger incentive to party. As Aurelius had previously stated, a party that functions well will receive a lot more exp than someone that is soloing. However, soloing will be more beneficial than say a crappy party. It's all relative because, well, that's how little info we have right now.
What I am surprised about is the fact that you so vehemently state that DD's will not want to party. Though, I am convinced that SE will provide an incentive to party, I still feel that many will want to party regardless of any incentives.
The problem is not moved; simply, more options are offered for the the benefit of the gamers.
#120 Jun 18 2009 at 9:25 AM Rating: Default
**
572 posts
Dappunisher wrote:

Lol. The problem here is that you _ASSUME_ DD's will not want to party. See what happens? We are all making assumptions at the moment. My assumption is that most people will choose to be social in the game- hence take part in parties.


I base my assumption on the human nature and a good example of that behavior is to put it to the test. Let move over to WoW and see what people "choose" when faced with being able to solo compared to grouping and 99% will opt to solo. Or, are you saying that the players that will play FF14 are totally different humans with different psychology? You also need to understand as to _why_ people do choose solo over party, and the simple answer to that is that it is _always_ easier to go and solo yourself, instead of making parties, and the complications of being in parties compare with being totally alone.

Quote:
Furthermore, I clarify that SE will provide a larger incentive to party. As Aurelius had previously stated, a party that functions well will receive a lot more exp than someone that is soloing. However, soloing will be more beneficial than say a crappy party. It's all relative because, well, that's how little info we have right now.


WoW also has a large incentive, yet not large enough it seems. In the end solo is a lot simpler and less complicated.

Quote:
What I am surprised about is the fact that you so vehemently state that DD's will not want to party. Though, I am convinced that SE will provide an incentive to party, I still feel that many will want to party regardless of any incentives. The problem is not moved; simply, more options are offered for the the benefit of the gamers.


I base my assumption on WoW and how that game has turn out, and to be frank with you I don’t see FF14 being any different in that aspect unless you make solo extremely less profitable, which would offset bothering with looking for group, trying to make a party and bear the burden if the members of that party doesn’t perform well, or someone have to go after 10 min, people dying right and left or having rude people in it. All this for a few more xp ? Not going to happen.

Of, course there will always be those that will XP with the same people or the people that they really know well, but that will count for a very small % if you are making the game for a huge audience (aka WoW).

The real question as you put it is what kind of incentive SE had in mind to convince people to party over solo in term of leveling up. As far as the incentive that WoW has offered its player base with gaining more xp/hour that hasn’t worked out at all. If SE has something up their sleeves that I don’t know of and will work then I’m all for it, I will praise and salute them, but if they don’t have or are going to walk a similar path as WoW has then we end up with a broken game.
#121 Jun 18 2009 at 1:59 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
21 posts
I personally feel it's a bit too early to have this discussion at a deeper more specific level. In all honesty, we do not know anything about the combat system, the leveling system, the character development, party size or anything else. We know NOTHING about the game. There's little need to go lashing out at eachother when we don't even know the slightest thing about how the game is.

In the past, the incentive to group has either been more experience/hour, better loot or to accomplish challenges you can not overcome on your own. Of course, as in any almost all MMO's, there's a different degree of incentive to actually try and bother finding other people to form a group and do something. Some tune it to be only slightly more rewarding than soloing, some don't even allow soloing, and some others have grouping as almost the only viable option to get around in the game.

How far S-E will put FFXIV on this scale remains to be seen. I'll be the first guy to admit that the emphasis in grouping up to do things in FFXI was one of the most appealing aspects of the game, and yet it could be one of the most frustrating things as well. Not because I hated being all set with the group, being at the spot we were supposed to be and doing the things we were planning on doing, because that was one of the most fun parts. Instead, it was mostly logistical, balance and gameplay issues that were frustrating and time consuming in FFXI. Like I suggested before, if S-E only had proper support for it, with better tools for finding and making groups and improved travel times it would have gone a long way in making people appriciate and embrace grouping up for the majority of the content. Furthermore, having jobs a bit more balanced, and having more options when it came to tanking classes and healers, as well as allowing a bit more flexability in choice of jobs when you're creating a party would greatly enhance the group aspect of the game.

Edited, Jun 18th 2009 6:01pm by muppenz
#122 Jun 19 2009 at 12:16 AM Rating: Good
*
192 posts
Maldavian wrote:
I base my assumption on the human nature and a good example of that behavior is to put it to the test. Let move over to WoW and see what people "choose" when faced with being able to solo compared to grouping and 99% will opt to solo. Or, are you saying that the players that will play FF14 are totally different humans with different psychology? You also need to understand as to _why_ people do choose solo over party, and the simple answer to that is that it is _always_ easier to go and solo yourself, instead of making parties, and the complications of being in parties compare with being totally alone.


Have you considered the fact that perhaps there are reasons other than simple laziness why someone might choose to solo and not party? I never partied in WoW because I never met anyone I honestly wanted to spend hours partying with. It had nothing to do with being too lazy.

And so what if 90% of players are soloing to level up? What's so terrible about that? Again, why should everyone have to party?

Maldavian wrote:
When solo is available for the DD's, then no DD's want to make party ( yes they CAN but they DONT WANT TO ) that leaves BRD,WHM in the cold and in the same situation as the DD's are in atm.


This is a strawman argument. You're basing your point on something that hasn't even come to pass yet.

Besides, that's not even logical. It's practically a universal MMO truth that support classes (assuming that they couldn't solo?) are always in demand. Even in a completely solo-dependent game, a healer could still find someone to party with by sitting around with a flag up in leveling territory; What sane melee DPS class wouldn't pair up with a healer and greatly increase their efficiency if there's no hassle to do so because they're already sitting right there next to you?

I'm assuming anyone with more than a little experience in online gaming will tell you that they've simply become tuned to automatically give great preference toward support classes that are LFG in the field over other ones.

I know when I see a poor little Priest/White Mage whatever sitting on their lonesome when I'm soloing I do give real consideration to partying up; unlike other sorts of classes (who are usually more solo-capable anyway).

muppenz wrote:
I personally feel it's a bit too early to have this discussion at a deeper more specific level. In all honesty, we do not know anything about the combat system, the leveling system, the character development, party size or anything else. We know NOTHING about the game. There's little need to go lashing out at eachother when we don't even know the slightest thing about how the game is.


The funny thing is, I agree completely. My entire, reoccurring thought is simply a speculative "I really hope I have the option to get ahead via soloing when I just don't feel like partying", but somehow this opinion keeps getting flamed with people (mostly just one poster) who want to vehemently say that this is completely wrong, can't work, would make a terrible game, and that I'm playing MMORPG's wrong and they have the right to govern how other people play the game.

Admittedly people have been taking the bait and getting their ire pretty high in response. There's something pretty frustrating about being repeatedly and rudely told you're wrong with a severe lack of evidence and then ignored when you make a capable point.

The funny thing here is: I don't even think the idea of a group-centric game is a bad one at all. Though there are many ways to enjoy a player-filled world, the idea of pushing through with allies is a classic and powerful one. I do feel it's not an idea that's well geared towards Western audiences, and I will keep saying that I myself would only keep playing so long as I had enjoyable companions; unlike a solo-friendly game, wherein I can at least feel good about my progress even if friends aren't around, and there's something to fill the gaps between the comings and goings of those people.

It just comes back to my central point. If SquareEnix wants me and many other players to stick to the game, they'll need some solo-friendly bits here and there. They're professionals; I don't see any reason why that request can't be made to not interfere with traditional party mechanics and isn't therefor a reasonable one.

Heck, there are a lot of great systems that could be implemented and tried in order to make partying extremely painless while still allowing people to do their own thing. What about having an up-by-default "Open to the idea of Grouping" flag. Those names could be set lower on the list than people who are actively LFG, so people who don't want to party can turn the flag off, people who really do can turn on LFG, and ambivalent folks (most players, honestly) can just do their own thing and get buzzed by party leaders once in a while.

There's some truth to the idea that some people are too lazy to LFG if they don't have to, or too lazy to even put up the LFG flag if they think partying might be okay. So why not work with that laziness and have party leaders come to them? Even easier, make it so that if the player agrees to party, they can "ping" their location on the party leaders map so they can come to them if they're nearby? Or vice versa?

It's a basic theory of game design: roll with the punches. Use what players know and what they will do to make everything flow better. If we know that many players are ambivalent about partying then make it so that partying is not only desirable but also as easy as possible for those players. Set players who are LFG as more visible on lists so that they get picked first; players who are just "open" to grouping will be able to solo in somewhat peace because they're on a partying B-list, but will still be out there as potential party-mates. And hey, if you're a party leader who refuses to do all the work, then you'll be able to see who really cares about partying and who's just "meh" on it, so it's not like you wouldn't have choices.

See, speculating is fun, and reasonably discussing those ideas is fun. Yelling back and forth? Not so much.
____________________________
The Other Castle
#123 Jun 19 2009 at 1:25 AM Rating: Default
**
572 posts
PrinnyFlute wrote:


Have you considered the fact that perhaps there are reasons other than simple laziness why someone might choose to solo and not party? I never partied in WoW because I never met anyone I honestly wanted to spend hours partying with. It had nothing to do with being too lazy.

And so what if 90% of players are soloing to level up? What's so terrible about that? Again, why should everyone have to party?


90% is soloing BECASUE THEY CAN. Every class in WoW is solo able and that is exactly what I’m saying and asking for is that every class should be viable for solo, not just DD's exclusively.

Quote:
This is a strawman argument. You're basing your point on something that hasn't even come to pass yet.


You don’t build a car or an airplane without doing a simulation first, which is pretty standard nowadays for everything you build/make. With the simulation you can easily read the outcome.

Quote:
Besides, that's not even logical. It's practically a universal MMO truth that support classes (assuming that they couldn't solo?) are always in demand.
Even in a completely solo-dependent game, a healer could still find someone to party with by sitting around with a flag up in leveling territory; What sane melee DPS class wouldn't pair up with a healer and greatly increase their efficiency if there's no hassle to do so because they're already sitting right there next to you?


Haha, right, a sane DD that doesn’t take the unnecessary risk of getting with a bad healer that will only slow him down, a sane DD that sees no real benefit in having a healer tagging along getting half if his xp, or being rude to him or that you need to share your loot with. There are a million reasons why you DONT party when you have solo option and you simply don’t get it and refuse to believe it.

Again you are defending the right for DD's so be completely solo viable and I will again and again defend the rights of support class being able to solo as well. What if I’m a support class and feel one day that I want to solo a bit?

Quote:
I'm assuming anyone with more than a little experience in online gaming will tell you that they've simply become tuned to automatically give great preference toward support classes that are LFG in the field over other ones.


This is only true in case of there is no solo availability as in FFXI. If solo exists then there is no meaning to invite support classes, people tend to solo instead.

Quote:
I know when I see a poor little Priest/White Mage whatever sitting on their lonesome when I'm soloing I do give real consideration to partying up; unlike other sorts of classes (who are usually more solo-capable anyway).


So why not solve the problem by giving them solo viability as well? That would solve the problem. Again you are for discrimination here.

Quote:
muppenz wrote:
I personally feel it's a bit too early to have this discussion at a deeper more specific level. In all honesty, we do not know anything about the combat system, the leveling system, the character development, party size or anything else. We know NOTHING about the game. There's little need to go lashing out at eachother when we don't even know the slightest thing about how the game is.


The funny thing is, I agree completely. My entire, reoccurring thought is simply a speculative "I really hope I have the option to get ahead via soloing when I just don't feel like partying", but somehow this opinion keeps getting flamed with people (mostly just one poster) who want to vehemently say that this is completely wrong, can't work, would make a terrible game, and that I'm playing MMORPG's wrong and they have the right to govern how other people play the game.

Admittedly people have been taking the bait and getting their ire pretty high in response. There's something pretty frustrating about being repeatedly and rudely told you're wrong with a severe lack of evidence and then ignored when you make a capable point.

The funny thing here is: I don't even think the idea of a group-centric game is a bad one at all. Though there are many ways to enjoy a player-filled world, the idea of pushing through with allies is a classic and powerful one. I do feel it's not an idea that's well geared towards Western audiences, and I will keep saying that I myself would only keep playing so long as I had enjoyable companions; unlike a solo-friendly game, wherein I can at least feel good about my progress even if friends aren't around, and there's something to fill the gaps between the comings and goings of those people.

It just comes back to my central point. If SquareEnix wants me and many other players to stick to the game, they'll need some solo-friendly bits here and there. They're professionals; I don't see any reason why that request can't be made to not interfere with traditional party mechanics and isn't therefor a reasonable one.

Heck, there are a lot of great systems that could be implemented and tried in order to make partying extremely painless while still allowing people to do their own thing. What about having an up-by-default "Open to the idea of Grouping" flag. Those names could be set lower on the list than people who are actively LFG, so people who don't want to party can turn the flag off, people who really do can turn on LFG, and ambivalent folks (most players, honestly) can just do their own thing and get buzzed by party leaders once in a while.

There's some truth to the idea that some people are too lazy to LFG if they don't have to, or too lazy to even put up the LFG flag if they think partying might be okay. So why not work with that laziness and have party leaders come to them? Even easier, make it so that if the player agrees to party, they can "ping" their location on the party leaders map so they can come to them if they're nearby? Or vice versa?

It's a basic theory of game design: roll with the punches. Use what players know and what they will do to make everything flow better. If we know that many players are ambivalent about partying then make it so that partying is not only desirable but also as easy as possible for those players. Set players who are LFG as more visible on lists so that they get picked first; players who are just "open" to grouping will be able to solo in somewhat peace because they're on a partying B-list, but will still be out there as potential party-mates. And hey, if you're a party leader who refuses to do all the work, then you'll be able to see who really cares about partying and who's just "meh" on it, so it's not like you wouldn't have choices.

See, speculating is fun, and reasonably discussing those ideas is fun. Yelling back and forth? Not so much.


I'm still not getting an clear answer from you why you are against all classes having a fair chance to solo level up if they want to ? You have eluded that question in all your posts and only want the DD's to be able to solo, and in all my posts I have defended the rights of support classes and others that don’t have a proper way to DPS be able to solo.
#124 Jun 19 2009 at 1:57 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
Maldavian wrote:
I'm still not getting an clear answer from you why you are against all classes having a fair chance to solo level up if they want to ? You have eluded that question in all your posts and only want the DD's to be able to solo, and in all my posts I have defended the rights of support classes and others that don’t have a proper way to DPS be able to solo.


Healing and tanking are group roles. They sacrifice the option to kill things quickly for the option to survive and/or help the rest of the group to survive. If FFXIV ends up with the diverse character development SE is talking about, players will likely end up with toons adequately rounded to function as a specialized role in a group (ie. healer/tank) as well as have the dps tools available to solo efficiently because they'll develop skills suited to solo play while they solo and specialized skills for tanking/healing in group play.
#125 Jun 19 2009 at 2:38 AM Rating: Excellent
*
192 posts
Quote:

90% is soloing BECASUE THEY CAN. Every class in WoW is solo able and that is exactly what I’m saying and asking for is that every class should be viable for solo, not just DD's exclusively.


I wasn't talking about which classes can and can't solo in the quote you used. Your response doesn't match up to what I said. I was talking about why people solo, period, their motivations; whether all classes are equal or not is irrelevant.

You're talking about something completely unrelated to what I just said.

Quote:
You don’t build a car or an airplane without doing a simulation first, which is pretty standard nowadays for everything you build/make. With the simulation you can easily read the outcome.


A simulation is something that has actually been tested in some capacity and has data to back it up; what you said was not a simulation, you presented no evidence that you've run any tests to this effect. It was closer to a guess, and guess or a fantasy that is thought up and used solely to support an argument is called a straw man, in that you've created it simply as something to attack and use as an example.

Quote:
Haha, right, a sane DD that doesn’t take the unnecessary risk of getting with a bad healer that will only slow him down, a sane DD that sees no real benefit in having a healer tagging along getting half if his xp, or being rude to him or that you need to share your loot with.


A sane melee DPS knows that a healer will greatly reduce his/her downtime and enable him/her to take on larger enemies for greater XP and loot. There's a good chance an average melee DPS player in something approximating at least a decent mood will seriously consider the risk of getting a bad or rude healer against these sizable benefits especially when, as I said, the healer is nearby and partying is quick and takes little effort. That is all if you are playing a game where support classes cannot effectively solo which is not what I'm advocating.

Quote:
There are a million reasons why you DONT party when you have solo option and you simply don’t get it and refuse to believe it.


For one, I have partied in environments where soloing was an option. If you make partying quick and painless, people will still party even if they can solo.

For another, your repeated aggression (even in the face of reasonable statements), insults, and cherry-picking is practically getting to be trolling at this point. You should probably just cool down for a bit.

Quote:
Again you are defending the right for DD's so be completely solo viable and I will again and again defend the rights of support class being able to solo as well. What if I’m a support class and feel one day that I want to solo a bit?


I'm playing devil's advocate, for one. If there was a system (and there could be, certainly) where all classes could solo equally without being homogenized, that would be my first choice.

But you have in the past attacked soloing on the principle that a "party-only" system is preferable to a system wherein not all classes can solo equally, and I disagree.

All classes can solo equally without being homogenized.


is better than

All classes can solo, but some are better at it than others because of class differences.

which is then better than

No one can solo.


But I'll play devil's advocate again, for the heck of it: If the best non-homogenized system we can come up with means that it's harder for support classes to solo than damage dealing classes (but not impossible! Just harder!) than that's still a reasonable answer and preferable over no soloing at all. Sub-par support class soloing is better than no soloing. Period.

Quote:
This is only true in case of there is no solo availability as in FFXI. If solo exists then there is no meaning to invite support classes, people tend to solo instead.


I'm not talking about going out of your way to group up with support classes. I'm saying that if grouping is incredibly convenient because that class is already on screen and LFG then that class will get invites without having to wait long at all, even in a solo-filled environment.

There are obvious benefits to having a support character around for melee DPS classes that people will consider grouping with one person if it is completely painless and easy to do.

Again, I'll make this an open question to everyone: If you're playing a melee DPS class, heading into a dungeon to solo, and saw a support class sitting by the dungeon mouth with a LFG flag up, would you seriously consider asking them if they'd like to come along? You only need a few people to answer this question with a "Yes!" to prove that, indeed, people will take low-hanging fruit in terms of party risks and benefits even if they could otherwise solo.

Quote:
So why not solve the problem by giving them solo viability as well? That would solve the problem. Again you are for discrimination here.


Thank you for putting words in my mouth. I am "for discrimination", as I've said, when it is the only option other than 1) no soloing and 2) homogenized equal soloing.

I am simply trying to make the point, classical Devil's Advocate style, that having unequal soloing capabilities isn't that terrible if the gaps aren't that huge, and that most players will not have an issue with this.

I know people who regularly play healers who are simply at peace with the fact that their role can be a harder one to solo, and who would prefer it that way over having capable DPS spells and muddling their "support" flavor or not being able to solo at all. Even support class-players take up their jobs knowing they won't be as good at some things as others; which is, still, in the sub-ideal situation that we cannot manage non-homogenized, equal solo capabilities.

Quote:
I'm still not getting an clear answer from you why you are against all classes having a fair chance to solo level up if they want to ? You have eluded that question in all your posts and only want the DD's to be able to solo, and in all my posts I have defended the rights of support classes and others that don’t have a proper way to DPS be able to solo.


For the third or fourth time, I've never said that I "only want the DD's to be able to solo". I dare you, I absolutely dare to find where I said that I only want damage dealers to have soloing capabilities. You're putting words in my mouth here.

I also never said that I was "against all classes having a fair chance to solo level up". You'll have to find that for me. I have said that I am against homogenizing classes. But there are ways for multiple classes to solo relatively well without making them all the same. I have said that I think that unequal soloing capability is better than no soloing.

My statement on the issue is that "In the absence of the option to have non-homogenized classes all solo at equal capacity, a system where it is harder (but not impossible!) for some classes to solo is preferable to a system where no classes can solo at all, and, in my eyes, preferable to a system where classes lose identity via homogenization."

As I've said, I believe a system wherein some classes solo less capably than others is preferable to a system with no soloing because:

1) The idea of some classes soloing better than others (but where everyone can still solo in some decent capacity) is logical: it makes sense that a warrior can take on monsters alone better than a healer. It is also an ideology already widely accepted by players: many MMO players accept the fact that there are differences between classes.

2) Being able to solo at a mediocre rate, in the case of a healer, is highly preferable to not having the option to solo whatsoever. There are support character players who will agree with this statement and are glad for the option. There are also many support players that will attest that they'd rather not be given magician/blaster style spells and dilute their class identity just so they can level as well as a mage.

I already said these things earlier in the forms of this statement:

PrinnyFlute wrote:
As far as I've ever known, it's an acceptable and logical system. And just because, say, healers aren't as good at solo leveling as warriors doesn't mean they can't get by.

I don't like systems where classes are homogenized either. Being a terrible soloing class with the option to solo at a mediocre pace is better than not having it at all.


So, your attempt at what seems to be turning the tables on me and calling me out is incorrect: I have already stated why I'm saying the things that I am, and have not been dodging the statements you've been making.

I would also like to add that even though you've said this: "I have defended the rights of support classes and others that don’t have a proper way to DPS be able to solo." You are still trying to attack soloing as a whole and insisting that no one be able to solo.

Edited, Jun 19th 2009 5:39am by PrinnyFlute
____________________________
The Other Castle
#126 Jun 19 2009 at 3:43 AM Rating: Default
***
3,825 posts
I just wanted to thank Mal and the few others who completely destroyed this thread. I was contemplating not even posting again in this one. Also, sorry forgot the name already but, sorry to the guy who says he posted this same idea in another thread... I never saw it.

Any way the entire point was that in XI if you solo it takes HOURS to do what a party of 3-6 can do in about 20 minutes. It's absurd to say that I have to live with 2k xp per hour if I want to solo (mind you I only did end game solo in Sky as THF, I don't have any experiance above level 37 solo with any other job).

If mobs give the same ammount of xp whether killed by a group or solo, it nulls the above situation. A party killing the same mob will kill it faster thus more xp per hour, however because certain people think we'd all be hermits if this was the case I included the idea of extra loot drops or something to further enforce grouping.

As I've said before, I think people should feel like their time in game isn't wasted and this is one way I see of making that happen. If the world is big enough you don't need to have solo and group specific areas or instances. If the right balance is found people will be able to accomplish things and thus would be more likely to stick with the game. This (hopefully) isn't going to be a WoW clone, it should be to some extent more XIish with lots of improvements and different mechanics.

Stop using WoW as the basis for your arguments. There ARE other MMOs.

Also on a semi-final note you don't have to balance classes for solo play, you just have to balance the xp given. To put it in XI terms... a WHM LFG can solo slowly but with decent XP, the WHM would know he's not gonna kill crap in the same ammount of time a DD would, but at least he would be getting the same XP per mob a group would. A DD on the other hand, he will have downtime between fights to heal and thus xp per hour would be faster in a group, but he doesn't have time for a group that day. His limmited time to play that day aren't wasted as he kills faster than the WHM and even with the downtime to heal he kills more mobs per hour than the WHM. ETC.......

____________________________
FFXI:Sylph - Perrin 75 Hume THF; Retired (At least from my use any way)
EVE Online:ScraperX; Retired
WAR:IronClaw- Peryn SW;SkullThrone- Grymloc BO; Retired


#127Maldavian, Posted: Jun 19 2009 at 4:12 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) If you have a system that the classes have been made homogenized in order to create an environment for all classes to solo, why is that such a bad thing?
#128 Jun 19 2009 at 4:23 AM Rating: Good
*
230 posts
Quote:
If you have a system that the classes have been made homogenized in order to create an environment for all classes to solo, why is that such a bad thing?
No one have said that is bad, on the contrary look at how WoW has made the classes homogenized in order to meet the criteria of letting all classes being able to solo.


This is exactly what everyone is arguing against. The class homogenization in WoW is horrible. Classes are constantly being revised in an effort to balance the field, and people are constantly getting the shaft (read the current public test realm notes if you don't believe me). Not only that, but as a result of every class being able to solo, there's NO REASON to party until you're level 80. Period. The most efficient way to hit 80 is to solo quests. That's not what I'd like to see in FFXIV, for sure.

Quote:
if you do a job do it properly cause in the end a halfassed job will bring you more trouble than it is worthwhile.


I agree with your sentiment completely. I think SE will end up putting in solo content in a different manner than we've seen in previous MMOs. Whether it appears half-assed or not, we can only speculate on. But I'm sure they'll address this issue while still putting the focus on team play.
____________________________
Future FFXIV Player
Anguish - 80 Death Knight (Retired)
Vor - 60 Warlock (pre-BC) (Retired)
#129 Jun 19 2009 at 5:11 AM Rating: Good
*
192 posts
Quote:
If you have a system that the classes have been made homogenized in order to create an environment for all classes to solo, why is that such a bad thing?
No one have said that is bad, on the contrary look at how WoW has made the classes homogenized in order to meet the criteria of letting all classes being able to solo.

And yes I do argue for equality, rather have the classes getting a bit more homogenized since I dont see any dangers in that.

Actually, homogenization is what most MMO's will go for when implementing solo, and that IS the only viable way tbh. You idea is to have a crappy solo, something sloppy that really isn’t solo, yet it is.

If you are saying that you have a _viable_ solo option to your customers that plays the game then it should be _viable_, not something halfassed made like " Sure you can have solo, but you need to have x class y talent z race. Not going to work in a miles way mate. You either have a good solo option or leave the solo out complete, don’t give preferential treatment to certain classes so that they can get the "privilege" of having solo added to their class AS well as being viable for group and fu*k over other classes that cant dps and thus not being able to solo.

The bottom line is, IF you decide to make your MMO in support of solo then do it wholeheartedly and not halfassed. The cost of making classes _homogenized_ is the PRICE you pay for the implementation of solo play, there is NO escaping from it. Your idea is that lets not ruin the classes with homogenization, but we let a few classes have "special treatment" in terms of letting them solo. Oh I forgot to tell you we also need to have special zones and monsters that are "tuned" towards these special solo privileged players so that they can actually solo them, and even further we need to add "solo content" not just xp to cater these solo players.

And where does that leave the bard or the white mage that wants to experience those content solo as well?

I can argue for ages with you and I can find a million errors in the way you are thinking but I'll just say this, if you do a job do it properly cause in the end a halfassed job will bring you more trouble than it is worthwhile.


God what is your deal. Either you're just the worst communicator ever or the best troll ever. I mean I don't even get this flabbergasted at the obvious or offensive trolls.

Where does a sane person even get off on saying things like "No that sounds dumb and halfassed" without even stopping to consider the thing they're calling halfassed!?

I mean, tell me, have you actually played more than two MMORPGs in your entire life!? Do you know where I'm getting half of the crap I'm saying? From ones I've played. Ones I've played that have done exactly the things I'm saying and were actually FUN TO PLAY in which people could ACTUALLY SOLO. There's no way in **** you couldn't have seen at least good, decent solo-friendly gameplay that didn't homogenize the classes into one big messy DPS lump unless you have literally only played WoW, FFXI and I guess Warhammer?

And more importantly than that, you're being a huge jerk. Stop being a huge jerk.

And stop acting like you are the sole authority on how to make MMORPGs. You are not a game developer.
____________________________
The Other Castle
#130Maldavian, Posted: Jun 19 2009 at 5:23 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) So in the end by losing the base of your argument you start to call me a jerk?
#131 Jun 19 2009 at 5:29 AM Rating: Good
*
192 posts
Losing what base? What base have I lost? You haven't proven anything, you just called me dumb for a few paragraphs and then said my points were halfassed without any logic or proof for that statement.

I'm calling you a jerk because you're being freaking insulting. It's not immature of me to say that when you literally fit the bill of being wholly inconsiderate and insulting. Therefor, in plain English, a jerk.

Edited, Jun 19th 2009 8:30am by PrinnyFlute
____________________________
The Other Castle
#132 Jun 19 2009 at 5:39 AM Rating: Excellent
*
230 posts
Don't worry Prinny, I got your back. ;)

Quote:
You either have a good solo option or leave the solo out complete, don’t give preferential treatment to certain classes so that they can get the "privilege" of having solo added to their class AS well as being viable for group and fu*k over other classes that cant dps and thus not being able to solo.


Why? What's wrong with different class mechanics that make certain classes better at certain things? Isn't that the whole REASON for even picking a class? Before the game-changing "ground breaking" expansions came out for WoW, rogues were THE BEST solo class in the game. At the cost of not being very necessary in raids, but they were **** good in PvP. Priests were the opposite. They were hard as **** to level because they weren't great at soloing, but they payoff was that raids needed you, you were the first to get geared at 60, and everyone wanted you to tag along. Warriors were somewhere in the middle. They soloed okay (albeit slowly before Execute reared its head), made great tanks for grouping along the way and were needed to fill a few different spots in raids.

Then Blizzard made the mistake of listening to the players. Sure, they have a ton of players now, but nobody is ever *REALLY* happy, because there's 3-4 (out of 9) other classes that are competing with you, no matter what you're doing. The class people chose a long time ago to play and master isn't even the same class any more. People who just hit 80 can now get the emblems that buy them the best gear (read the PTR notes). WoW caters to the masses instead of providing a unique, interesting experience. Every class can fill MULTIPLE roles. It's pointless. Literally pointless.

Edited, Jun 19th 2009 9:40am by Kharmageddon
____________________________
Future FFXIV Player
Anguish - 80 Death Knight (Retired)
Vor - 60 Warlock (pre-BC) (Retired)
#133 Jun 19 2009 at 6:06 AM Rating: Excellent
*
192 posts
Kharmageddon wrote:
Don't worry Prinny, I got your back. ;)


Thanks, I just... This whole cherry pickin', makes-no-sense, ignores-all-valid-points style discussion is just starting to really make my head spin. There doesn't seem to be a single point that can actually be made that'll actually get listened to, concerning the situation.

I really don't like the concept of class homogenization, considering the differences in classes is the entire reason you, I don't know, make characters? Play online with other people? It's practically part of the foundation of the entire MMORPG genre as we know it.

Not that I'm even unwilling to consider a small degree of "everyone can DPS" as one of many soloing solutions, even though I like others better. But the conversation here obviously hasn't been about compromise.

Anyway, I'll just get to the bare facts. One of my favorite things about Ragnarok Online was that just about every class could solo, but they also all maintained very different class profiles and feels. They didn't mitigate "firebolts" to healers so they could level up the same as mages; they had a special trait that meant that they actually had to seek out different places to level (undead areas) and use different strategies from other classes (healbomb in different combinations, some Turn Undead once you were a Priest). You can argue it wasn't the best MMORPG ever, but each class had very distinctive roles, definitely weren't homogenized, but could also all solo in their own ways using different strategies and actually get some XP. And no, it wasn't "halfassed".

And by god we still got together and probed dungeons with the ol' party like real troopers, too.

Now quick, somebody tell me how RO was crappy and soloing in the game was stupid. Right here on the chin.
____________________________
The Other Castle
#134 Jun 19 2009 at 6:13 AM Rating: Excellent
31 posts
This thread has lost it's relevance. Honestly, countless] people have listed why homogenization is bad. **** I don't even know what Mal's argument is. Mal- You have jumped from arguing for forced group play to a homogenization of the classes. A big jump there no? You say Prinny has lost the base of his argument? I strongly advise you to go back and read what he said. No, don't just glance at it, copy it, then post something totally irrelevant. I mean, actually read the **** posts.
I cannot even argue against homogenization and the necessity of balanced group and solo play. Know why Mal? IT HAS BEEN BASHED OVER IT'S BLOODY HEAD FOR 3 PAGES ALREADY. Ugh... for anyone else just joining this discussion... Look at:
kharmageddon wrote:
Don't worry Prinny, I got your back. ;)

Quote:
You either have a good solo option or leave the solo out complete, don’t give preferential treatment to certain classes so that they can get the "privilege" of having solo added to their class AS well as being viable for group and fu*k over other classes that cant dps and thus not being able to solo.


Why? What's wrong with different class mechanics that make certain classes better at certain things? Isn't that the whole REASON for even picking a class? Before the game-changing "ground breaking" expansions came out for WoW, rogues were THE BEST solo class in the game. At the cost of not being very necessary in raids, but they were **** good in PvP. Priests were the opposite. They were hard as **** to level because they weren't great at soloing, but they payoff was that raids needed you, you were the first to get geared at 60, and everyone wanted you to tag along. Warriors were somewhere in the middle. They soloed okay (albeit slowly before Execute reared its head), made great tanks for grouping along the way and were needed to fill a few different spots in raids.

Then Blizzard made the mistake of listening to the players. Sure, they have a ton of players now, but nobody is ever *REALLY* happy, because there's 3-4 (out of 9) other classes that are competing with you, no matter what you're doing. The class people chose a long time ago to play and master isn't even the same class any more. People who just hit 80 can now get the emblems that buy them the best gear (read the PTR notes). WoW caters to the masses instead of providing a unique, interesting experience. Every class can fill MULTIPLE roles. It's pointless. Literally pointless.


Prinny... As per your discussion for different classes leveling up in different areas... Sylph and I discussed this at the end of the last page before Mal decided that no developer would "bother" with that... You mention Ragnarok Online using this method, but, as I stated in that post, FF XI does the same thing... Undead killer for Paladin etc.

Edited, Jun 19th 2009 10:16am by Dappunisher
#135 Jun 19 2009 at 6:39 AM Rating: Excellent
*
192 posts
Quote:
**** I don't even know what Mal's argument is. Mal- You have jumped from arguing for forced group play to a homogenization of the classes. A big jump there no? You say Prinny has lost the base of his argument? I strongly advise you to go back and read what he said. No, don't just glance at it, copy it, then post something totally irrelevant. I mean, actually read the **** posts.


Dear god thank you. For a while there I started to think I was just going insane and I was the one making no sense.

Quote:
Prinny... As per your discussion for different classes leveling up in different areas... Sylph and I discussed this at the end of the last page before Mal decided that no developer would "bother" with that... You mention Ragnarok Online using this method, but, as I stated in that post, FF XI does the same thing... Undead killer for Paladin etc.


I remember, and very much appreciate the point. It just goes to show that there are solutions and flexible ways to tackle problems from every walk. Just turning up the volume on those types of effects seems like it would go a long ways towards helping give classes special areas/enemies to solo on.

And not just "Is it WoW Y/N"



In all seriousness I think this thread might be better off closed and left to the void at this point. Most of these three pages have been something approaching incoherent. Even when I thought the danger had died down and the rest of us could talk normally, it freaking turned around and pulled a sneak attack on me.
____________________________
The Other Castle
#136 Jun 19 2009 at 6:53 AM Rating: Excellent
31 posts
PrinnyFlute wrote:
I remember, and very much appreciate the point. It just goes to show that there are solutions and flexible ways to tackle problems from every walk. Just turning up the volume on those types of effects seems like it would go a long ways towards helping give classes special areas/enemies to solo on.

And not just "Is it WoW Y/N"


Exactly why I chose to not use WoW as an example and provided examples from the FF series.
In all honesty, I'm tired of the repetitive argument, "well _____ (Insert MMO here) tried it and it didn't work." As I told Mal, the point isn't to travel on the same path to success as other MMO's, it's to create one's own MMO. I think SE will do that here and I hope that they do revolutionize the MMO genre by making solo and party play viable options.
(Could I say MMO any more times?)

Quote:
In all seriousness I think this thread might be better off closed and left to the void at this point. Most of these three pages have been something approaching incoherent. Even when I thought the danger had died down and the rest of us could talk normally, it freaking turned around and pulled a sneak attack on me.

I considered that as well... but this thread has some interesting ideas mixed into all the incoherent b.s. If there was some way to organize this so those ideas were prevalent over the nonsense, that would be ideal. Also, don't mind Mal, I just read a post of his in another thread where he "quoted" the developers as stating there would be no PvP in this game. Yeah... seems like a troll to me.
#137 Jun 19 2009 at 7:19 AM Rating: Excellent
*
192 posts
Quote:
Exactly why I chose to not use WoW as an example and provided examples from the FF series.
In all honesty, I'm tired of the repetitive argument, "well _____ (Insert MMO here) tried it and it didn't work." As I told Mal, the point isn't to travel on the same path to success as other MMO's, it's to create one's own MMO. I think SE will do that here and I hope that they do revolutionize the MMO genre by making solo and party play viable options.


Exactly. MMO's are, indeed, something of a stale genre, so it's not exactly out of this world to imagine the SquareEnix could actually pull out some unique solutions to these problems. Really, it seems even easier for these seasoned professionals when you think about how few people are even doing new, interesting things with the genre in the first place.

If we all just put our heads together like reasonable people and started coming up with theories on balancing solo and party play I'm sure we could come up with a whole bunch of ideas that could all work given the right professional treatment. That's the funny thing about game design: in reality, you've got a huge leeway in terms of making things work, just because implementation and execution are so much more important than the simple, raw idea at the heart of the matter.

Of course, SE surely already has their path plotted out, and I look forward to hearing about how they handle it.

Quote:
I considered that as well... but this thread has some interesting ideas mixed into all the incoherent b.s. If there was some way to organize this so those ideas were prevalent over the nonsense, that would be ideal. Also, don't mind Mal, I just read a post of his in another thread where he "quoted" the developers as stating there would be no PvP in this game. Yeah... seems like a troll to me.


Maybe if we just keep having real discussions and ignore anything that doesn't resemble an actual, purposeful response, things will get back on track.
____________________________
The Other Castle
#138 Jun 19 2009 at 7:41 AM Rating: Default
**
572 posts
Dappunisher wrote:
Also, don't mind Mal, I just read a post of his in another thread where he "quoted" the developers as stating there would be no PvP in this game. Yeah... seems like a troll to me.


No there won’t be a PvP system unless they lied at E3.





Edited, Jun 19th 2009 11:42am by Maldavian
#139 Jun 19 2009 at 7:46 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
Maldavian wrote:
Dappunisher wrote:
Also, don't mind Mal, I just read a post of his in another thread where he "quoted" the developers as stating there would be no PvP in this game. Yeah... seems like a troll to me.


No there won’t be a PvP system unless they lied at E3.


I believe they mentioned that if there was PvP, it would be similar in scope to Ballista which is to suggest not a significant part of FFXIV. That, however, is not the same as "no PvP".
#140 Jun 19 2009 at 7:50 AM Rating: Excellent
*
192 posts
Quote:
I believe they mentioned that if there was PvP, it would be similar in scope to Ballista which is to suggest not a significant part of FFXIV. That, however, is not the same as "no PvP".


I'm most certain they simply said that there wouldn't be PvP "like WoW," but that PVP would probably, yes, take a form similar to what it did in FFXI, and they'd look into more than that.

They did imply that there wouldn't be any PK, but that's a little bit different.
____________________________
The Other Castle
#141 Jun 19 2009 at 7:54 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
PrinnyFlute wrote:
Quote:
I believe they mentioned that if there was PvP, it would be similar in scope to Ballista which is to suggest not a significant part of FFXIV. That, however, is not the same as "no PvP".


I'm most certain they simply said that there wouldn't be PvP "like WoW," but that PVP would probably, yes, take a form similar to what it did in FFXI, and they'd look into more than that.

They did imply that there wouldn't be any PK, but that's a little bit different.


Ya, I remembered a brief blurb about it but wasn't willing to go sift through the interview material again. All I remembered was that they didn't fully dismiss the notion of any kind of PvP in FFXIV. I would have been extremely shocked if they had made FFXIV with support for world PvP, but small scale voluntary events wouldn't be unheard of.

Edit: Kharmageddon already did the sifting and quoting in a thread about PvP (here) which currently is right next to this one on the thread list. Go figure :P


Edited, Jun 19th 2009 8:56am by AureliusSir
#142 Jun 19 2009 at 7:55 AM Rating: Excellent
31 posts
Ok... I decided to scourge this thread for productive comments (not related to WoW bashing or simply addressing Mal's point's). Here is the list I procured:

AureliusSir wrote:
The solution that has been implemented in other MMOs to make both solo and group content rewarding and viable is to tune content so that it's possible to achieve better rewards for participating in group content, but you don't get the rewards for just showing up in a group. You (and your group) have to perform. You have to succeed. You have to accomplish something that merits a reward. If you are incapable of doing that because you and/or the others in your group aren't focused and/or skilled enough to make it happen, a solo player will come out ahead.


KarlHungis wrote:
IMO the incentive should simply be the ability to tackle tougher/more rewarding mobs or to go into instances. Ultimately, partying should give faster advancement, whatever form that takes.

Solo should be an option for when you can't find a party, or you've reached your daily limit of tolerance for other people.

Since a party of 5-6 can kill mobs 5-6 times as quickly/efficiently, I'm not sure that increasing item drops dramatically would be a good idea. However you tune that, you're either going to end up with parties being a crafting loot pinata, or solo farming is going to become impossible/pointless.


Xentok wrote:
I have no idea, but the best way in my opinion would be to make fewer people parties, maybe a 3-4 person party to have things done(questing, item gathering...), and of course, make it fun an enjoyable, no the senseless pull-kill-rest that FFXI has us accustomed to.


Muppenz wrote:
You can look at soloing and partying as 2 balloons next to each other, sharing the same amount of air. If you inflate one of the balloons, the other one will shrink. This will hold true in almost every case. Since resources are limited, and the fact that there's only so much a developer can do to try and satisfy a broad variety of players, it'll always be an issue to try and balance the two in harmony. We can all remember some of the more tedious things we had to be forced to do in FFXI, which pretty much always required us to find a group for and complete. On the other hand, having the same things tuned as 1-player events might not have yielded nearly the same amount of enjoyment and sense of accomplishment once you did them.

What for example SirAurelies says about segregating content, some with grouping and the rest with soloing in mind doesn't really work out. Isn't there a game which kind of did like that already? Yes, hello WoW. If you want to group for XP and a few better drops, go to instances. 95% opt to solo their way through anyway. Why? Why the **** would you bother trying to find people who mostly suck at playing their class in a group environment for a few "blue" quality items when you'll replace those in a few levels anyway? What is the result of said game? Empty desolate zones where you once grinded, just so you could get to the next zone. The majority of the gaming population at max level, where barely 10% knows how to utilize and play their class to the fullest when it comes to grouping and raiding. A terrible community with people shouting in public channels, with no regard or respect for anyone else. If you ever felt slightly offended in FFXI, come check out WoW, and you'll wonder what the **** is going on. It has by FAR the worst community of any game I've previously played.

Someone mentioned earlier that party-oriented mmo's are a thing of the past, and that the casual/solo market is the only way to go when it comes to MMO's, but I'll have to disagree on that one. I don't think nearly as many players would object to grouping all the time if they only fixed so that many classes are left in the cold, and they made travel times much shorter than they currently are. Making a better looking for group tool would also help out. We've seen other mmo's come and go, which tried the route of WoW, but really failed in the end. Why would we play a game when there's a game that's similar yet miles ahead in all areas?

While grouping was one of the aspects people had many issue with in FFXI, it was also one of the things that really has kept the game interesting throughout the years. Unlike WoW, where you embark on that journey alone, quickly grinding all the zones off with the "kill x, deliver y, collect z" quests throughout the game with the crappy music turned off, always completing with that "******" that killed your quest mobs. FFXI made those things quite enjoyable once you got started. The long journey towards max-level, the experience and the milestones along the way made the game truly fun and deep (like most Final Fantasies). The diversity of the classes, the beautiful and interesting scenery, the music, the lore and the missions made the game what it is. Even before TP-burns, where we actually did do skill-chains and magic burst because it was somewhat worthwhile made FFXI what it is.

What about now? What will happen to all that? Instead of even having the 3-4 player(I'd prefer 5-6 players) parties in previous Final Fantasies, people come in here and suggest that they remove the need to group in favour of becoming a tuned 1-man killing machine, regardless of class. No offence, but a bard or similar class in FFXIV won't be able to sing a mob to death without some heavy altering to the core mechanics of the class and the game itself. What people must start to understand now is that it's hard to have every good thing from both worlds. You'd arrive at where World of Warcraft is to today, with all caster-type classes being carbon copies of each other, one shooting an orange ball of fire instead of a black swirly ball of shadow. A game where so many things have been homogenized in order to appeal to the broad mass with seemingly have no time on their hands and yetwishes to accomplish everything and be amongst the best geared and furthest progressed on the server.

Even with the recent Q & A's, interviews and articles, we still know really nothing about how "growth" of your character is accomplished, and what things you must do in order to "level up". I fear it'll just become another form of WoW clone, just with the FF music and possibly lore (mostly in form of missions and cut scenes). I keep getting this idea of Final Fantasy 12 in my head all the time, just in an MMO world. A game where there was no real "clear-cut" classes, but instead a license board with a myriad of abilities, spells and skills, which you could get all of in a short amount of time. You ended up with the healing katana-wielding thief and that wouldn't be the weirdest thing. Or how about the bow-using black mage and group-buffer, that was really a nice thing. After having finished it, I thought to myself that it was a somewhat boring experience and absolutely one of the lesser ones I've had from any Final Fantasy as I removed the disc from my PS2.

In the end, I do hope S-E can find some kind of middle ground. Even with FFXI today, they've tried to implement some solo-aspects into the game, but it's always a struggle in a dying MMO with aged technology. It was also mostly done to be able to help the few people that still actually pick up the game, an ever decreasing number I might add. If they fixed the class-balance issues amongst DPS, lessened the need to have class x or y in every group, and perhaps added another tank-class or two, things might not be as bad. With improved travelling times, and adding a better looking for group tool, things will vastly improve. There's also many other areas which can be improved upon, and only time will tell if S-E manages to make another compelling MMO, just like FFXI back in the days.


Ascorbic wrote:
AureliusSir wrote:
abzzuk wrote:
maybe theyll implement something where there are certain skillsets for example that can only be attained in group play like skillchain skill? or something lol that is a bad example but yeh if you get where im coming from



There's a lot of speculation right now about how characters will actually develop. Based on what SE has said and what they've implemented in recent releases as well as the systems offered by other successful RPGs, an on-use character progression system is not all that far fetched. SE has said they prefer the idea of balanced parties going into FFXIV (ie. tank, healer, dps/support). Combine an on-use development system with party roles and it's not too hard to see how players would develop differently in groups than they would in a solo environment. Tanks and healers would likely see the most substantial difference over time in how their character develops in groups compared to solo play. Group players would likely end up more specialized, whereas solo players would tend to be more rounded.


This fits pretty well with what little we know from the dev team's cryptic references so far, and isn't a bad idea in it's own right. It brings up the question if the solo focused player would have the skillset they are expected to bring to an end game function at a level where they would be as effective as their group focused conterpart would.

Personally, I wouldn't like to spend my time soloing most of my advancement period only to find that I'm less able to perform than others more able to group. In that instance, many more specialized jobs would seem to be "solo-unfriendly".


PrinnyFlute wrote:
Agreeing on the party-stance. My repeated statement is that I simply want to be able to get ahead at an acceptable rate on days when I don't feel like partying. Not that I want to be able to do everything on my own (especially not end-game content), or that soloing should be as good as or better than partying... Just that I'd like to have it as an option.

And though it might be picking nits at this point, I still think you could call Japan "polite"; it's simply somewhat of a result of the community-centric culture you've mentioned, which I am aware of.


****, maybe that's the solution: More enemy variety! Having enemies that warriors can go toe to toe with but eat other classes. Having ones that are vulnerable to ranged attacks and walk slowly but powerful at close range to keep melee DPS away and tricky enough to make it a challenge for ranged attackers. Maybe not these at all; just SOMETHING. There are boundless possibilities out there in the great blue yonder.


PrinnyFlute wrote:
****, maybe that's the solution: More enemy variety! Having enemies that warriors can go toe to toe with but eat other classes. Having ones that are vulnerable to ranged attacks and walk slowly but powerful at close range to keep melee DPS away and tricky enough to make it a challenge for ranged attackers. Maybe not these at all; just SOMETHING. There are boundless possibilities out there in the great blue yonder.


dappunisher wrote:
in FF XI, SE already has something similar to this implemented. Paladins do more damage against the undead. Certain classes have traits such as "bird-killer" etc. implemented. Developers at SE have already "bothered themselves" with this suggestion as you see it in not only FF XI, but other FF's such as FF 9...


Kharmageddon wrote:
I don't understand what the whole argument is about. The viable incentive to party is to share experiences with others. I think FFXI had it half-way: parties had access to things like skill chains, which lead to bonuses like XP chains. The problem with FFXI was that you couldn't kill anything without doing this.

A good balance would be to make some zones more party friendly and some more solo friendly. Not even complete zones. Some zones could have rival monster tribes, some of which are weaker than others. The weaker ones would be more for soloing, and there would be more of them (otherwise, the stronger tribe would just take them over). The stronger ones would be a little less dense, and more party-oriented. With the right terrain set up, you could tackle whichever area of the zone you had the group for.


Well, there you have it. I hope we can seriously continue this discussion and be productive. Again, we are all speculating here, so let's not try to be definitive about anything and please don't bash other games...

Edit: Got poster name wrong. Also, main point is presented in Slyph's OP.




Edited, Jun 19th 2009 12:25pm by Dappunisher
#143 Jun 19 2009 at 8:20 AM Rating: Default
***
3,825 posts
Thanks for the summary, but I don't think I wrote what you qouted ~.^
____________________________
FFXI:Sylph - Perrin 75 Hume THF; Retired (At least from my use any way)
EVE Online:ScraperX; Retired
WAR:IronClaw- Peryn SW;SkullThrone- Grymloc BO; Retired


#144 Jun 19 2009 at 8:23 AM Rating: Decent
Sage
*
131 posts
Seems like a lot of you just want to play WoW with Final Fantasy characters and story...
#145 Jun 19 2009 at 8:32 AM Rating: Good
31 posts
To the above poster- the discussion was sidelined to a WoW vs. FF XI war of words. But, if you look at my previous post, you will see that there was a lot of productive discussion on how to make both party play and solo play viable.
Btw- no one has stated that they want the game to be WoW with FF story. Actually, I've heard more people call for FF XI-2 than anyone calling for WoW. This is not about WoW. This is about how to make party and solo play viable options in FF XIV.
#146 Jun 19 2009 at 8:37 AM Rating: Decent
Sage
*
131 posts
Dappunisher wrote:
To the above poster- the discussion was sidelined to a WoW vs. FF XI war of words. But, if you look at my previous post, you will see that there was a lot of productive discussion on how to make both party play and solo play viable.
Btw- no one has stated that they want the game to be WoW with FF story. Actually, I've heard more people call for FF XI-2 than anyone calling for WoW. This is not about WoW. This is about how to make party and solo play viable options in FF XIV.

Okay I never said anyone stated they want WoW with a FF story, I said it seemed like that. Also I didn't say everyone was talking positive more about WoW over FFXI... I am sorry I made a personal observation that was different then yours.
#147 Jun 19 2009 at 8:39 AM Rating: Excellent
*
192 posts
Quote:
Seems like a lot of you just want to play WoW with Final Fantasy characters and story...


What makes you say that? The only WoW-like feature anybody's expressly shown interest in in this thread is the homogenization of classes.
____________________________
The Other Castle
#148 Jun 19 2009 at 8:47 AM Rating: Decent
Sage
*
131 posts
PrinnyFlute wrote:
Quote:
Seems like a lot of you just want to play WoW with Final Fantasy characters and story...


What makes you say that? The only WoW-like feature anybody's expressly shown interest in in this thread is the homogenization of classes.

When people praise WoW it sticks out a little more in my head and it irks me. So since it sticks in my head more so then the other posts, probably why I made that observation.

Edited, Jun 19th 2009 12:47pm by Parade
#149 Jun 19 2009 at 9:00 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
180 posts
WoW keeps getting brought up because ever since its release, most game developers have looked at its success and tried to copy its formula in some way or another. What they don't realize is that the forumla is intended solely to build a massive player base, not to provide a deep and exciting gaming experience, and most of the games that have come out since then have been failures.

WoW is a great example of what happens when you offer players a choice between grouping or soloing. As an EQ2 player at the time when they tried to copy WoW, I can speak from experience in that case. Once soloing was a viable method of advancement, forming a group became just about impossible. I got tired of paying to play by myself all the time and quit. It's just common sense that if 90% of the population is soloing, there will be less people to group with and it will be harder to form a group, pushing even more players toward solo.

Extra xp or loot is not enough of an incentive to get people to try to cooperate with others, unless the benefit is so great the solo players begin to complain. The majority of people are going to use whichever method that allows them to progress the fastest. You're never going to see a balance between the two. So in a multiplayer game it just makes sense to cater to the crowd that values team play and cooperation over anti-social behavoir.

This thread is about incentive to party, but I mostly see people just arguing over play style and not offering a solution. Earlier in the thread I mentioned that I thought it would only be possible to offer both if each playstyle was striving for different goals, so that a mix of both would be necessary to fully advance your character. An example is solo mission rank ups or quest story lines that would offer your character benefits in combat, but combat skill ups (or whatever SE replaces EXP with) that are gained primarily through cooperative play.

I've just been waiting for a long time for a new online FF experience and I'm going to be extremely disappointed if they follow the recent trends. Nobody is going to beat WoW at the single player MMO experience. SE is not typically a company to go with the flow, so here's hoping they've deeply considered the impact of the casual experience on the rest of their game.
#150 Jun 19 2009 at 9:06 AM Rating: Good
31 posts
Quote:

I've just been waiting for a long time for a new online FF experience and I'm going to be extremely disappointed if they follow the recent trends. Nobody is going to beat WoW at the single player MMO experience. SE is not typically a company to go with the flow, so here's hoping they've deeply considered the impact of the casual experience on the rest of their game.


Agreed. SE will create a game of it's own right. This is why I think that WoW need not be mentioned. WoW is a great game for some, but SE doesn't need to copy WoW at all. Just because people think WoW is a "solo" experience (not that it's true) doesn't mean SE needs to copy them. SE is perfectly capable of making solo play viable while also encouraging party play.
#151 Jun 19 2009 at 9:19 AM Rating: Decent
**
572 posts
Calispel wrote:

I've just been waiting for a long time for a new online FF experience and I'm going to be extremely disappointed if they follow the recent trends. Nobody is going to beat WoW at the single player MMO experience. SE is not typically a company to go with the flow, so here's hoping they've deeply considered the impact of the casual experience on the rest of their game.


I think a lot of people will be disappointed in the solo that they will see within FF14. As you have said as well, I don’t think SE is going to follow the trend in making a solo friendly game as possible, rather I think they will probably implement the same solo they had in FF11, with a little more improvement, nothing more.
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 15 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (15)