I believe in one of the last two streams Joppa mentioned that he has big plans for crafting but they just aren't there yet to begin discussing it. So I don't believe it will be simple or easy. I actually never crafted in VG, why I don't know, but many say they liked it and I'm pretty sure it was a robust system. So I doubt the team would go backwards.
My favorite crafting system was vanilla EQ2's crafting system. One of the most complex crafting systems I've seen in an MMO.
But I don't see a problem with giving players a good reason to do crafting. If you don't want to do it then simply don't craft. But giving players more options as well as features that create more lanes for individuality is always welcome in my eyes.
NoobieDoo said:I believe in one of the last two streams Joppa mentioned that he has big plans for crafting but they just aren't there yet to begin discussing it. So I don't believe it will be simple or easy. I actually never crafted in VG, why I don't know, but many say they liked it and I'm pretty sure it was a robust system. So I doubt the team would go backwards.
My favorite crafting system was vanilla EQ2's crafting system. One of the most complex crafting systems I've seen in an MMO.
But I don't see a problem with giving players a good reason to do crafting. If you don't want to do it then simply don't craft. But giving players more options as well as features that create more lanes for individuality is always welcome in my eyes.
I'm waiting with baited breath about any news about crafting. The last newsletter was great because they finally released some information regarding it. Now I just want to hear even more about their plans. It sounds really good and I have high hopes for the system.
With the idea in mind that raids are just progressively larger groups... and noting that my post is about killing stuff, not crafting stuff...
1) I would love end game group progression. Stuff where me and a few guild members can go test our mettle - with some of that content being exceedingly diffcult (only the best of the best can complete)
2) I would love to see larger groups be a component of the game (raids) - I do love a good raid.
3) I would like all of that content to make sense progression wise...
In terms of how much of each I would like to see - To be honest, I think I would love to see much more small group / non-raid content. Vast dungeons supporting many, many groups of people doing different things at the same time, in the same open world dungeon space. I would be happy if "raids" were a special occasion you built up to and looked forward to, rather than content that became a daily or weekly requirement. Something you go in to test your mettle against... realize you fail utterly, and try again next month or whatever.
Why would I prefer that? I have played these games since 2000... more or less non-stop. In that time, I have come to feel that finding a small group of people you love playing with - who you learn to play with very well... learning each other's capabilities and limitations... can be much more rewarding on a regular basis than killing dragons.
For this to work though, the group content has to be compelling enough to really hold the attention of the player base...
Amsai said:@NoobieDoo
Somewhat agree with you. Not that I wouldnt want to see Raids, but as this is a group focussed game, I would like to see more emphasis on high end single group content. Not just group content, but hard, challenging group content that is every bit as much as hard and rewarding as Raids, same with crafting etc. Just a very mixed approach to what we consider endgame.
I agree completely. Big raid events with dozens of people can be a great experience when it's a special event/rare occasion. Such as 7 day spawns on dragons or multiple guilds banding together for something huge and exciting. When the biggest & hardest fights are served up and available nightly it just becomes a less intimate/personal version of grouping and the new normal. At that stage single group content soon has little value in comparison.
Ideally I'd love to see really challenging group content as the primary means of advancement, with the occasional rare raid/event spawn as a high point to really look forward to. I'll cross my fingers that Pantheon finds a way to avoid a situation in which the only thing worthwhile in a high level adventurers life is raid grinding.
Kyridel said:Amsai said:@NoobieDoo
Somewhat agree with you. Not that I wouldnt want to see Raids, but as this is a group focussed game, I would like to see more emphasis on high end single group content. Not just group content, but hard, challenging group content that is every bit as much as hard and rewarding as Raids, same with crafting etc. Just a very mixed approach to what we consider endgame.
I agree completely. Big raid events with dozens of people can be a great experience when it's a special event/rare occasion. Such as 7 day spawns on dragons or multiple guilds banding together for something huge and exciting. When the biggest & hardest fights are served up and available nightly it just becomes a less intimate/personal version of grouping and the new normal. At that stage single group content soon has little value in comparison.
Ideally I'd love to see really challenging group content as the primary means of advancement, with the occasional rare raid/event spawn as a high point to really look forward to. I'll cross my fingers that Pantheon finds a way to avoid a situation in which the only thing worthwhile in a high level adventurers life is raid grinding.
THIS!
Group content has to be king otherwise you'll get Fully Raid geared group just face rolling group content.
I think Brad mentioned that we are going to have to acquire situational gear for various dungeons and encounters IE going to go fight the fire giant lord, well better have giant bane weapons and armor with high fire resistance because your standard gear will not cut it. The fire resist gear might not have as good stats as the standard adventuring gear but without it, your Fire Giant hunting will end in a fiery death….. So part of the equation of Ending the End Game is ending gear that takes the Swiss army knife approach and has high resistances vs everything and + to all stats and abilities….. this includes Raid Gear as well. Maybe killing the Fire Giant Lord nets you a SWEET Looking Broadsword of Fire that does +fire damage when it hits (maybe even has a fire proc as well) and a Chest Plate that has some good + vs Cold Resistance (really why would the Fire Giant Lord have items with high fire resists when he should already be immune to fire based attacks as it is.)
The Broadsword of Fire might already do bane damage vs Ice Dragons and is a step up from group content gear but its not something you would use vs creatures with high fire resists. So when you enter another dungeon that requires armor with good poison resistance, now your armor with fire resistance is not worth using and you'll need something suitable for this dungeon.
If they take this approach and keep group content as king in mind…. I think it will be a very fun game to play.
I like the idea of group content soaking up the majority of gameplay. Raiding should have it's place too, though. Moreso than being an occassional once a week dragon. There should be at least 1 full raid zone (ideally 2) and then a range of overland contested that spawn all over the world. The gear obtained from raiding shouldn't trivialize group content either. Raid gear should offer plenty of "situational BiS" gear but it should never get to the point where group content requires raid gear to progress. If you have it, great, your group should have a slight advantage while dealing with group content ... the same advantage you might get from having "situational BiS" crafting gear. I would like to see a big focus on group dungeon exploration, and in a way that can encourage multiple groups to work together.
Perhaps a labyrinth that opens up new areas or special bosses under specific circumstances (4 groups defeat all 4 mini bosses within 5 minutes of each other) -- but also a blend of contested raid mobs sprinkled in for added danger/flavor. They shouldn't block off entrances or anything like that, but it would be cool if there were raid bosses that roamed a pit or underground body of water. If you see them up, gather your friends to take them down kind of feel, rather than "Oh crap, Mob X is up and we can't get to Corridor Z until it's killed." You can add in group-based bosses for that kind of stuff but raid bosses shouldn't block out groups from content unless it's in a designated raid area/zone. There should definitely be plenty of raid content though ... I enjoy playing with other tanks and having friends who I can't necessarily do "group content" with but still be able to play with them cooperatively as much as possible. Vanguard only had Rahz Inkur and Temple of Tehatamani for raid content when I played. It wasn't nearly enough and it's very important that there is enough raid content in game to satisfy that share of the playerbase.
Vanguard had plenty of group content but that doesen't solve the issue of entire guilds wanting to play together cooperatively. Raid content shouldn't be put on the backburner. It doesen't need to be the primary focus, but it should definitely be considered an important aspect of overall gameplay. 2 big raid zones (APW size, not Rahz Inkur) and a bunch of overland contested would be plenty, I think. Smaller areas like Rahz Inkur & Temple of Tehatamani would be welcomed as well but we need a zone like APW available at launch ... not 6 months later. As has been mentioned in other threads, it doesen't necessarily need to be fully complete, either. It can have wings, levels, floors, etc, that can be expanded upon in the future, but the foundation of these areas should be in tact, and the itemization done properly ... (No lobster claws "that can be redeemed for something cool in the future.") I would happily wait another 6 months beyond whatever the current plan/goal is for release if it means that raid content will be fully functional in the game.
I would much rather wait for a finished product than get in the game and settle for little to no raid content. Just my personal preference of course but I know there are plenty who view things similarly. When I played Vanguard, I tried talking my guild into waiting for APW to be released. Very few people were willing so we ultimately went back to EQ2 so that we could continue experiencing raid content. Vanguard, at release, is a prime example of what I do NOT want to see happen with Pantheon. If you can squeeze in APW and have the overland stuff itemized, that would be enough to last a while I suppose. I'm wondering if VR will do "adventure packs" like EQ2 did? Not quite an expansion, but enough content to keep folks busy for a few months. The Fallen Dynasty was an excellent adventure pack. Acts of War (Splitpaw) was also pretty good but TFD was the best one they did. It contained Nizara (one of the most difficult group zones ever) and Matron/Chel'Drak, 2 raid bosses (no raid zones.) It also had Roost (a small zone with a X2 boss) and a bunch of questlines full of rich lore.
Wandidar said:With the idea in mind that raids are just progressively larger groups... and noting that my post is about killing stuff, not crafting stuff...
1) I would love end game group progression. Stuff where me and a few guild members can go test our mettle - with some of that content being exceedingly diffcult (only the best of the best can complete)
2) I would love to see larger groups be a component of the game (raids) - I do love a good raid.
3) I would like all of that content to make sense progression wise...
In terms of how much of each I would like to see - To be honest, I think I would love to see much more small group / non-raid content. Vast dungeons supporting many, many groups of people doing different things at the same time, in the same open world dungeon space. I would be happy if "raids" were a special occasion you built up to and looked forward to, rather than content that became a daily or weekly requirement. Something you go in to test your mettle against... realize you fail utterly, and try again next month or whatever.
Why would I prefer that? I have played these games since 2000... more or less non-stop. In that time, I have come to feel that finding a small group of people you love playing with - who you learn to play with very well... learning each other's capabilities and limitations... can be much more rewarding on a regular basis than killing dragons.
For this to work though, the group content has to be compelling enough to really hold the attention of the player base...
Couldn't agree more. We have nostalgia about raids, but realistically it is a limiting concept in game development catering to less people. I want compelling, difficult group content that makes raiding more of a special activity than the 'end game.' To your point on 1) I said something similar: I want EQ2 Nizara type group encounters/dungeons that challenge a group so much that skill is the limiting factor to 'progression,' and not how many people you bring. The caveat is that in some instances, I think it's fun, rewarding, and super useful to cause people to join together (a la public events/quests or perception-based triggers that have the game say 'you and this other group caused a rare, ultra-tough encounter, would you like to band together and take it on?!) You are social, you are raiding, and it's not necessarily based on guild (although obviously people will spawn these encounters as a guild as well.)
R/
Zain
oneADseven said:I would much rather wait for a finished product than get in the game and settle for little to no raid content. Just my personal preference of course but I know there are plenty who view things similarly. When I played Vanguard, I tried talking my guild into waiting for APW to be released. Very few people were willing so we ultimately went back to EQ2 so that we could continue experiencing raid content. Vanguard, at release, is a prime example of what I do NOT want to see happen with Pantheon. If you can squeeze in APW and have the overland stuff itemized, that would be enough to last a while I suppose. I'm wondering if VR will do "adventure packs" like EQ2 did? Not quite an expansion, but enough content to keep folks busy for a few months. The Fallen Dynasty was an excellent adventure pack. Acts of War (Splitpaw) was also pretty good but TFD was the best one they did. It contained Nizara (one of the most difficult group zones ever) and Matron/Chel'Drak, 2 raid bosses (no raid zones.) It also had Roost (a small zone with a X2 boss) and a bunch of questlines full of rich lore.
You and I may disagree on how much raid focus there should be. I don't begrudge you that opinion. However, The Fallen Dynasty was absolutely my favorite. It had flavorful encounters for more than a single group, some requiring access quests to get into. I think flavor/lore, group content, challenging group content, and raid activities had a solid blend there. Including an open dungeon that was very diffuclt for its level (but not for the max level when it was released). I mention Nizara all the time, mostly because of how engaging that expansion pack was. It wasn't even a full expansion, but it packed a punch with 3-5 zones and raid instances.
dorotea said:That 20-60-20 quote has me in the same boat as the raiders for one of the few times in my life (I have raided - been in raiding guilds, even - but always preferred groups to raids).
The only difference is polarity - I would like some of the group "60" to move to the left (solo) whereas they want some of it to move to the right (raids).
Actually I think the 20-60-20 quote may not be as relevant as some people think. The game as a whole may aim for 20-60-20 but will each phase of it? I think not. Thus the starter zones may be much more than 20% solo to let people get their feet wet and make friends, and maybe have no level 5 raids at all. Whereas at level cap there may be a lot more gouping and a lot less raiding than in some MMOs but I would guess that raiding may be over 20% and soloing may be less than 20% (alas).
I actually think it should be more 0 / 90 / 10
Under no circumstances should solo content be designed for PROTF....if players devise ways to solo with the given skills im fine with that, but no designed solo content. Just about every single mmo since EQ1 has been nothin but a boring solo grindfest to end level when you are then expected to switch over to raiding. I really hope they dont make 20% of the freaking game designed as solo content! Damn there are a million and one games out there that cater to the solo'ers. Let us have our group game
Sevens said:dorotea said:That 20-60-20 quote has me in the same boat as the raiders for one of the few times in my life (I have raided - been in raiding guilds, even - but always preferred groups to raids).
The only difference is polarity - I would like some of the group "60" to move to the left (solo) whereas they want some of it to move to the right (raids).
Actually I think the 20-60-20 quote may not be as relevant as some people think. The game as a whole may aim for 20-60-20 but will each phase of it? I think not. Thus the starter zones may be much more than 20% solo to let people get their feet wet and make friends, and maybe have no level 5 raids at all. Whereas at level cap there may be a lot more gouping and a lot less raiding than in some MMOs but I would guess that raiding may be over 20% and soloing may be less than 20% (alas).
I actually think it should be more 0 / 90 / 10
Under no circumstances should solo content be designed for PROTF....if players devise ways to solo with the given skills im fine with that, but no designed solo content. Just about every single mmo since EQ1 has been nothin but a boring solo grindfest to end level when you are then expected to switch over to raiding. I really hope they dont make 20% of the freaking game designed as solo content! Damn there are a million and one games out there that cater to the solo'ers. Let us have our group game
I agree that no solo content should be made. Class questlines are fine, but I would prefer that the entire game be designed for 2+ players. If you are geared properly and play the right class, you may be able to solo through some of it. This game is all about playing with others ... why the heck should solo content have as much emphasis as raiding? Perhaps 5/75/20 would be better.
Personally i like the open world raid bosses like in Lineage 2. Where you had to fight through caves to even check the spwn of the boss and how it was random spawn times. (anywhere between 12-48 hours it would spawn) That was amazing. No set times was great because it afforded the oppurtunity to stumble upon and call your guild in mass for rapid response.
oneADseven said:Sevens said:I actually think it should be more 0 / 90 / 10
Under no circumstances should solo content be designed for PROTF....if players devise ways to solo with the given skills im fine with that, but no designed solo content. Just about every single mmo since EQ1 has been nothin but a boring solo grindfest to end level when you are then expected to switch over to raiding. I really hope they dont make 20% of the freaking game designed as solo content! Damn there are a million and one games out there that cater to the solo'ers. Let us have our group game
I agree that no solo content should be made. Class questlines are fine, but I would prefer that the entire game be designed for 2+ players. If you are geared properly and play the right class, you may be able to solo through some of it. This game is all about playing with others ... why the heck should solo content have as much emphasis as raiding? Perhaps 5/75/20 would be better.
Don't forget fellas that crafting is probably something they are considering as 'solo' content. So that hopefully takes up a large chunk of that hypothetical '20%'. I'd like to think that the 20% solo content will cover crafting, maybe some of the perception system, and then newbie zones/racial starting cities for level 1s to have some content to chew through until they start to meet friends and start to group. Then maybe a very small percentage towards higher level solo mobs in specific areas for players who are waiting for a group to form or for players who maybe don't have time for a group and want to solo a few mobs.
I agree though, most if not all mobs should be designed to be quite difficult for the average player/class to defeat. This way, some classes will excel soloing these mobs while others not so much. I really hope they don't spend '20%' on solo quests and solo zones and what have you like you guys have said. And fortunately I just can't see them really doing anything like this other than the occasional solo quest because, again, I think VG can be used as an example here. I think VG could easily fit the 20/60/20 model give or take a few %. Maybe a tad higher than 20% solo content because they had solo mobs througout most of the levels for at least a few classes, some solo quests throughout all the levels, crafting obviously, harvesting, and then diplomacy. I guess harvesting can be considered both a solo feature as well as a group feature since VG had group harvesting.
What we should be asking ourselves is why do we want to remove (actual) solo play from the game. At first glance the answer is easy, because most of us here want group content and trust me when I say I am all for that. However here is the other side of the coin to the matter. Whether solo content is in a game by design or people just do it because they can it isn't something that should be ommitted from the game entirly. I think one of the post above stated there should be zero solo play and somebody else mentioned it should be an arbitrary number of no less then 2 people.
What do you say to the people who enjoy both aspects? This is where I tend to think balance in a game like Pantheon is important. We all know what Brad said the game is going to be. We also know that he did in fact say they were planning to add "some" solo content to the game. So if I were a dev and I was presented a problem like this how would I apporach it.
For me the answer is easy I just have to look to my left and see the most beutiful person in the world (my wife) She played a necro in everquest she was in the top 3 necros on our server. She was a solo player and a community player. She was a Grandmaster crafter, and rather then buy anything from the Bazaar that was outrageously priced she farmed it herself. You were lucky if you were one of the ones she actually talked to in the game. Yet somehow she always got invited to groups and was well known as a team player.
Solo play isn't evil unless you can solo the entire game (we get that) but to completely omit solo content from this game would be doing just what other MMO companies did to the hardcore or community players, and that was alienating them or orphaning them. (this is just my opinion) Solo play gives (some) people the courage to eventually group and do harder stuff. There will be kids playing this game rest assured. Just look at somebody like Bazgrim he started playing Everquest when he was 6 years old. Devs have to think about stuff like that and so should we as gamers. (don't you dare say little kids shouldn't be playing this game) games are for everybody and this one will have 6 year olds running around in it too I will guarantee that.
I want some solo play myself even. Maybe I am just having an off day and I want to escape to a game (Pantheon) and go fishing or maybe I just want to farm mats, or do a perception quest that (might) be a significant solo quest. The last thing I will say is while I love team work somedays I just don't want to group with or play nice with anybody so the next best thing is to (solo) At the end of the day you can't and you will not force people to group if they do not want to. So a devs perspective will be all about balance with an issue such as group vs. solo content. Just my 2p on the matter.
Edit: This particular post is in ref. to several post above mine. I didn't want to quote anybody in particular.
guitarsmasher said:
At least for me personally, it isn't that I don't want there to be classes/clever folks able to solo so much as it is that I want soloers/solo content to be noticably slower to level than grouping. I don't want to see the speed level soloing of EQ or anything close to it.
Iksar said:guitarsmasher said:
At least for me personally, it isn't that I don't want there to be classes/clever folks able to solo so much as it is that I want soloers/solo content to be noticably slower to level than grouping. I don't want to see the speed level soloing of EQ or anything close to it.
This, I agree with you on this 100%
I'm fine with seeing some solo content sprinkled around here and there just to give people an option of something to do when they can't commit to playing in a group, but for the most part, I'd like to see the majority of content (even what is considered "easy" content) to be designed for 2+ players. For me, I think soloing should be a close fight every fight. Sitting down to eat/drink after every encounter. If you are decently geared or have some nice buffs/consumables, maybe you can kill a few without having to stop to med in between. I wouldn't mind seeing some named bosses that only really well geared players can solo, with some classes obviously faring better at this than others. I imagine monks being one of the better solo classes as it will be easier for them to navigate through content due to feign death. Hopefully invis pots will be very important to carry around if someone wants to solo/duo or even trio farm.
guitarsmasher said:What we should be asking ourselves is why do we want to remove (actual) solo play from the game. At first glance the answer is easy, because most of us here want group content and trust me when I say I am all for that. However here is the other side of the coin to the matter. Whether solo content is in a game by design or people just do it because they can it isn't something that should be ommitted from the game entirly. I think one of the post above stated there should be zero solo play and somebody else mentioned it should be an arbitrary number of no less then 2 people.
What do you say to the people who enjoy both aspects? This is where I tend to think balance in a game like Pantheon is important. We all know what Brad said the game is going to be. We also know that he did in fact say they were planning to add "some" solo content to the game. So if I were a dev and I was presented a problem like this how would I apporach it.
For me the answer is easy I just have to look to my left and see the most beutiful person in the world (my wife) She played a necro in everquest she was in the top 3 necros on our server. She was a solo player and a community player. She was a Grandmaster crafter, and rather then buy anything from the Bazaar that was outrageously priced she farmed it herself. You were lucky if you were one of the ones she actually talked to in the game. Yet somehow she always got invited to groups and was well known as a team player.
Solo play isn't evil unless you can solo the entire game (we get that) but to completely omit solo content from this game would be doing just what other MMO companies did to the hardcore or community players, and that was alienating them or orphaning them. (this is just my opinion) Solo play gives (some) people the courage to eventually group and do harder stuff. There will be kids playing this game rest assured. Just look at somebody like Bazgrim he started playing Everquest when he was 6 years old. Devs have to think about stuff like that and so should we as gamers. (don't you dare say little kids shouldn't be playing this game) games are for everybody and this one will have 6 year olds running around in it too I will guarantee that.
I want some solo play myself even. Maybe I am just having an off day and I want to escape to a game (Pantheon) and go fishing or maybe I just want to farm mats, or do a perception quest that (might) be a significant solo quest. The last thing I will say is while I love team work somedays I just don't want to group with or play nice with anybody so the next best thing is to (solo) At the end of the day you can't and you will not force people to group if they do not want to. So a devs perspective will be all about balance with an issue such as group vs. solo content. Just my 2p on the matter.
Edit: This particular post is in ref. to several post above mine. I didn't want to quote anybody in particular.
My post is probally what you were mentioning and its cool you can call me out :)
I never said No solo...I said no solo designed content (and yeah noobie thats a good point about Tradeskills being considered solo content)
Here is the problem with designing solo content....humans are lazy, in fact most things in the universe are lazy and will without fail follow the path of least resistance. If you CAN solo you WILL solo, the majority of players today are of an instant gratification breed, To quote the greatest rock band of all times "I want it all, and I want now!" -Queen) This has been from day 1 touted as a GROUP centric game, so keep it a group centric game. Every single last MMO in the last 10 ro more years has been nothing but a boring SOLO grindfest to max level, so why cant these soloers go play them games? why do you have to cater this game,that was from its core conception to be a GROUP game, to the soloers? Oh, I know its not PC to say this game isnt for them, but thats one of the fundamental concepts of this game....Its a niche game and is NOT meant to be for everyone! You start CAPITULATING to every single game style and soon enough you end up with your run of the mill solofest WoW clone which is what this game has promised it would never be
Sevens said:guitarsmasher said:What we should be asking ourselves is why do we want to remove (actual) solo play from the game. At first glance the answer is easy, because most of us here want group content and trust me when I say I am all for that. However here is the other side of the coin to the matter. Whether solo content is in a game by design or people just do it because they can it isn't something that should be ommitted from the game entirly. I think one of the post above stated there should be zero solo play and somebody else mentioned it should be an arbitrary number of no less then 2 people.
What do you say to the people who enjoy both aspects? This is where I tend to think balance in a game like Pantheon is important. We all know what Brad said the game is going to be. We also know that he did in fact say they were planning to add "some" solo content to the game. So if I were a dev and I was presented a problem like this how would I apporach it.
For me the answer is easy I just have to look to my left and see the most beutiful person in the world (my wife) She played a necro in everquest she was in the top 3 necros on our server. She was a solo player and a community player. She was a Grandmaster crafter, and rather then buy anything from the Bazaar that was outrageously priced she farmed it herself. You were lucky if you were one of the ones she actually talked to in the game. Yet somehow she always got invited to groups and was well known as a team player.
Solo play isn't evil unless you can solo the entire game (we get that) but to completely omit solo content from this game would be doing just what other MMO companies did to the hardcore or community players, and that was alienating them or orphaning them. (this is just my opinion) Solo play gives (some) people the courage to eventually group and do harder stuff. There will be kids playing this game rest assured. Just look at somebody like Bazgrim he started playing Everquest when he was 6 years old. Devs have to think about stuff like that and so should we as gamers. (don't you dare say little kids shouldn't be playing this game) games are for everybody and this one will have 6 year olds running around in it too I will guarantee that.
I want some solo play myself even. Maybe I am just having an off day and I want to escape to a game (Pantheon) and go fishing or maybe I just want to farm mats, or do a perception quest that (might) be a significant solo quest. The last thing I will say is while I love team work somedays I just don't want to group with or play nice with anybody so the next best thing is to (solo) At the end of the day you can't and you will not force people to group if they do not want to. So a devs perspective will be all about balance with an issue such as group vs. solo content. Just my 2p on the matter.
Edit: This particular post is in ref. to several post above mine. I didn't want to quote anybody in particular.
My post is probally what you were mentioning and its cool you can call me out :)
I never said No solo...I said no solo designed content (and yeah noobie thats a good point about Tradeskills being considered solo content)
Here is the problem with designing solo content....humans are lazy, in fact most things in the universe are lazy and will without fail follow the path of least resistance. If you CAN solo you WILL solo, the majority of players today are of an instant gratification breed, To quote the greatest rock band of all times "I want it all, and I want now!" -Queen) This has been from day 1 touted as a GROUP centric game, so keep it a group centric game. Every single last MMO in the last 10 ro more years has been nothing but a boring SOLO grindfest to max level, so why cant these soloers go play them games? why do you have to cater this game,that was from its core conception to be a GROUP game, to the soloers? Oh, I know its not PC to say this game isnt for them, but thats one of the fundamental concepts of this game....Its a niche game and is NOT meant to be for everyone! You start CAPITULATING to every single game style and soon enough you end up with your run of the mill solofest WoW clone which is what this game has promised it would never be
Have to agree with Sevens on this one, its group centric game, certain materials i say can be soloed to get to but i say at least 30% of mats required to make certain items should also be grouped worthy, keep the challenge up, like one of the devs said on the last stream they want to keep the difficulty up high like with the wizard getting one shotted and things like this that way no class is a simply snooze fest while grping, also like Seven said is that their have been 15 years of WoW clones, simly content you basically steamroll til max level at an alarming rate and forgot about the zone once you progressed past it in level. Keep the Difficulty up as possible, make every zone have hold a memory with all us, even the bad ones, if we make a lot fo solo content it will ruin the nostagia and adventure from venturing to different zones.
Why is <> end game?
Why can't we have logical level caps with suspended leveling while farming pertinent content that is ONLY OBTAINABLE FOR A CERTAIN LVEL RANGE?
If I'm playing a bard, why cant there be a drop (item or material) that is only obtainable within a certain level range (TLC). In fact, you could make leveling your character totally dependent on obtaining these items (read epic quest or class advancement). Wouldn't that totally eliminate power leveling?
What if there were items that, if obtained at a lower level, scaled with your character through its class advancement ... Wouldn't that perhaps make people want to level more slowly? Perhaps you could only obtain a while in a certain level range, but could use that item throughout your character's advancement.
Hell, I might WANT to play a level 20 cleric long enough to obtain the object of my epic quest, or farm an item that would no longer be obtainable 5 levels from now. What if I could optionally turn off experience advancement?
End-game EPEEN is just that. It feeds the need for more "end-er" game content. To eliminate the race for Leet lewt, one must eliminate the mind-set that leet lewt requires a race to some pre-determined end game content. Why cant leet loot be obtained, and only obtained within a certain level range BEFORE max level?
While raiding can be fun,it shouldnt be the end all be all of current mmos. I really dislike the hamster wheel gear grind that is "end game " nowadays. There has to be a better way. Here are the problems i see with "end game" content being the driving force :
1. Rush to where the "real game starts"
2. High level guilds crush the raids, farm it and then only come back to the game when new content is added
3. Grind gear to get gear that lets you do more content to get more gear which becomes obsolete when an exapnsion is released.
4. If you come to the game late it is hard to "flag" your character for end game content
5. Guilds become fragmented into those who can raid current content and those who cannot.
6. Guides and videos appear on youtube showing you every step of the way and what to do in the raid. The raids are the same everytime you do them. If the bosses had a list of possible tactics and randomly employed them, that would provide at least a variety encounters.
7. Eventually difficult group content is affected because a player may not have the optimum raid gear.
8. Raid encounters become places to rush thru and farm gear. Little patience is shown to newer raiders. " didnt you watch the tutorial on youtube?"
Personally, I think if i have to go outside the game to watch other people do a raid to "learn" the encounter prior to running it myelf. it is cheating.
Some folks here like the gear grind but it's just lazy game development in my mind. There has to be some other form of reward other than just better gear with better stats. Maybe new abilities etc
I never felt while leveling that I had to raid when I played EQ. I knew it was going on of course , but it wasnt something I rushed to do.When I finally did do it, you had to learn the encounter yourself while the raid boss explained what your job was. There was no voice chat either. Somehow we managed.
There has got to be something more than just gear for raids.
Raids have their places but I usually end up in tiny, IRL friends guilds that have zero chance of doing big raids. I have had enough ridiculous guild drama for one life from EQ, WoW, and RIFT. I would like to see good single group endgame content too. It gets really frustrating when you get to a point that you might as well not bother playing anymore unless you are in an uber guild. That was a problem with the old EQ epics too. You had to be able to raid or you just couldn't get them and not everyone is going to be in a big guild.
I think too many people are viewing raids as they are in newer MMOs.
If the devs produce a game more in line with old school MMO, then raids will not be just repeatative zerg fests.
IMHO, raids in EQ1 were more like events, than just what you did as you reached the higher levels, at least for the first few years. You did, say a 40 man raid, to be part of killing that named, and to get cool loot. Now maybe that has changed over the past 15+ years, but intially, it could take you 150+ raids on a for a 40 man raid to all obtain s0ome awesome loot. Considering that only 1 or 2 pcs dropped per named.
This was so different from now, when just a few raids is enough to pretty much outfit the majority of the raiders to move on. Not even taking into account the amount of strategy an planning raids in earlier MMOs took, and the coordination of the raiders to work as a team. And then add in the failures and deaths along the way, that with old style death penalties hurt. Yes 96% rez softened that blow, but that didn't come until later either.
Ultimately, people are going to "raid", becuase that is what the genre has come to expect you do, but if VR makes this right, then "raiding" will have a new definition and change what it means to raid.
lilibat said:Raids have their places but I usually end up in tiny, IRL friends guilds that have zero chance of doing big raids. I have had enough ridiculous guild drama for one life from EQ, WoW, and RIFT. I would like to see good single group endgame content too. It gets really frustrating when you get to a point that you might as well not bother playing anymore unless you are in an uber guild. That was a problem with the old EQ epics too. You had to be able to raid or you just couldn't get them and not everyone is going to be in a big guild.well, old EQ had group end-game content: pretty much everything was group content except giants and dragons, and those didn't drop much armor, and not many weapons either. in kunark we had sebilis, and many of the kunark armor pieces were group drops. i don't see why epics should be different from other endgame items. you also couldn't get VP items without being in a big guild. some content is made for those, at least until it becomes easier with later expansions. i'd say from velious on, the end content was raids only, but you could still get many interesting items in groups, thurgadin armor for example and much of the shawl and ring quest. yes it was worse than ToV armor and the full shawl/ring, but if you didn't raid it was good enough.
I think there is massive potential with Progeny in regards to delaying what people consider the "end-game." FFXI is a great example of a game where all content felt relevant for an end-game player. I remember leveling up my sub-classes ... even though I was in a level 25-30 zone, I was still working on progression for my main character. If VR can figure out a way to pull something like that off in Pantheon, I will be very pleased. It all comes down to having a super deep progression path and preventing content from becoming obsolete.