Request: I don't want to solo the main scenario

[Hyrist]

Dragon, Cenders

Both of you need to get a room and make out with each other or something. There's enough tension between you to write a fanfic romance about.

You both have concerns, and where you get them from is rather irrelevant. The point of the matter is that we can really have it both ways, when the conversation is broken down to this thread's base subject matter. There's no point in attacks or posturing from either one of you - as all it really does is distracts from the questions that we should be asking, and the suggestions we should be making to Yoshi-P.

So, are the two of you just going to stand here all night fluffing each other's tails or are we going to have some constructive discussion?

[Elexia]

I don't know what you mean by core players, but I also wanted Abyssea to succeed. I like the way the content was laid out, but also saw flaws in the design (mainly the proc system and the jobisms it encouraged).

See this is where people are heavily misinformed. The proc system encouraged bringing A VARIETY OF PEOPLE lol, it was the typical "no I want to do this with only 2 people" players ruined it. What's funny about the proc system though? Dagger can be done by THF, DNC, DRK, COR for example. Yet people still left out DNCs unless they want a tank. Voidwatch as well encouraged a variety, but of course you can't fix stupid as they say.

[LillithaFenimore]

Dragon, Cenders

Both of you need to get a room and make out with each other or something. There's enough tension between you to write a fanfic romance about.

You both have concerns, and where you get them from is rather irrelevant. The point of the matter is that we can really have it both ways, when the conversation is broken down to this thread's base subject matter. There's no point in attacks or posturing from either one of you - as all it really does is distracts from the questions that we should be asking, and the suggestions we should be making to Yoshi-P.

So, are the two of you just going to stand here all night fluffing each other's tails or are we going to have some constructive discussion?

This post has so much I could say but won't cause it's the official forums and will most likely be blocked Thanks for the mental chuckle

[Cendres]

Honestly....it does mean group play sometimes. For example it would be balanced with the idea 8 people will be beating on it, which means you will be destroyed solo, no ifs ands or buts. Tougher content in terms of solo means absolutely nothing but what accomplishment would be given? You beat a solo challenge...hooray? What should you be rewarded with for doing it? Hopefully nothing you'd get for doing tough group content.

So while it doesn't ALWAYS mean group content, in general game design yes tougher content is indeed group content. Even offline games with tough challenges usually have some form of aide lol.

It may not mean anything to you but to me it would be a great deal. It would mean I can accomplish something on my own time, which is usually pretty sporadic and little at a time. And get some kind of reward for it. I don't care if it's huge or anything but it's nice to have as a gamer that my time is rewarded somehow.

I do not expect everything to be solo, that would be utterly pointless, I fully expect to group up at some point and especially to obtain the best rewards.

Honestly people in the recent previous pages have said it far more eloquently then I can already... So I'll refer you to those pages.

Last notes on this thread for me as my message is completely being muddled and twisted around: The main scenario should containt both solo and group content, with both parts having some challenge. The CURRENT missions are far too easy and are that way so crafters and gatherers could do them, however this will change. I for one am looking forwards to better balanced content and I do not think it is a good idea to follow 100% what the OP suggests but let's meet somewhere in the middle where effort is actually rewarded.

Dragon, Cenders

So, are the two of you just going to stand here all night fluffing each other's tails or are we going to have some constructive discussion?

LOL!! ^_^

I'm going to save myself the headache that is sure to follow and block Dragon. Welcome to my b list it's been lonely anyway.

Sorry guys I let myself get entangled in that. heee... o/ I'm done.

[Elexia]

I just don't get why can't both play styles exist in this game. Why does one have to be forced upon another. Why can't their be choice? I still have yet to see anyone answer my question from another post...

Problem is, one style can and will overtake the other. Just look at the replies here. "I don't want to solo the main scenario" NO GTFO YOU MASOCHIST! IDIOT! BEHIND IN THE TIMES! MMOS EVOLVED GO AWAY! NO ONE LIKES GROUP PLAY!

So on. If both styles can exist, why is it so wrong to not let the main storyline be unsoloable when you can already solo 90% of the side quests?

Not to mention, as much as the XIV community may mock those of us who like XI, they already did "both styles" perfectly:

Majority of the early missions are soloed, the rest required help, the final fight was almost always a group effort to take down before cap raises.

Then CoP came out and it was done in a way that even low levels can enjoy an amazing story thanks to level capping. In XIV, you can't even do some with people even if you wanted to because it forces you to be solo due to NPC additions, or in such a low group number you may as well be solo.

[Hyrist]

Honestly....it does mean group play sometimes. For example it would be balanced with the idea 8 people will be beating on it, which means you will be destroyed solo, no ifs ands or buts. Tougher content in terms of solo means absolutely nothing but what accomplishment would be given? You beat a solo challenge...hooray? What should you be rewarded with for doing it? Hopefully nothing you'd get for doing tough group content.

So while it doesn't ALWAYS mean group content, in general game design yes tougher content is indeed group content. Even offline games with tough challenges usually have some form of aide lol.

Elexia, I actually have a idea about this, if you'll entertain me. But I would like to keep this on the grounds with the current subject in the thread.

If you would like to talk about the broader subject of Single vs Multiplayer and difficulty variance awards, I would be glad to follow you to another thread specifically on that topic.

But for now, could we at least acknowledge that we need to keep the subject in here about Storyline difficulty, multiplayer story and and storyline rewards?

[LillithaFenimore]

Problem is, one style can and will overtake the other. Just look at the replies here. "I don't want to solo the main scenario" NO GTFO YOU MASOCHIST! IDIOT! BEHIND IN THE TIMES! MMOS EVOLVED GO AWAY! NO ONE LIKES GROUP PLAY!

So on. If both styles can exist, why is it so wrong to not let the main storyline be unsoloable when you can already solo 90% of the side quests?

That is not legit. Who is to say one style can and will overtake the other. The option route hasn't even been tried in this game to assume that. The overly easy solo route has been tried to allow DOH and DOL to play, that obviously will change.

I still think the difficulty adjustment route for main scenario should be tried here. It hasn't been given a shot. I think when it comes to seeing the story of the world and how our characters fit in it, options here are very much so a plus. Because then party players will have that option to gather together and participate while soloers or light partiers can still have that option and have the difficulty scaled accordingly. I do not see how having this implemented will make one overshadow the other, ESPECIALLY since we are strictly discussing progressing through main scenario and not raids and side quests.

[LillithaFenimore]

Problem is, one style can and will overtake the other. Just look at the replies here. "I don't want to solo the main scenario" NO GTFO YOU MASOCHIST! IDIOT! BEHIND IN THE TIMES! MMOS EVOLVED GO AWAY! NO ONE LIKES GROUP PLAY!

So on. If both styles can exist, why is it so wrong to not let the main storyline be unsoloable when you can already solo 90% of the side quests?

Not to mention, as much as the XIV community may mock those of us who like XI, they already did "both styles" perfectly:

Majority of the early missions are soloed, the rest required help, the final fight was almost always a group effort to take down before cap raises.

Then CoP came out and it was done in a way that even low levels can enjoy an amazing story thanks to level capping. In XIV, you can't even do some with people even if you wanted to because it forces you to be solo due to NPC additions, or in such a low group number you may as well be solo.

It isn't wrong to let the main story be unsoloable, but to ask for that solo option to be taken off the board completely is I believe doing a disservice to players who want that option, just like forcing you to solo is a disservice to you. SE when creating the core of this game, obviously didn't think things like this through.

Hence a very major problem in this game that could be fixed and IMO draw in many players and turn out to be a very very great game. They just need to think outside the box...but not far outside that we end up with a very awful game like it was at launch.

[Hyrist]

Problem is, one style can and will overtake the other. Just look at the replies here. "I don't want to solo the main scenario" NO GTFO YOU MASOCHIST! IDIOT! BEHIND IN THE TIMES! MMOS EVOLVED GO AWAY! NO ONE LIKES GROUP PLAY!

So on. If both styles can exist, why is it so wrong to not let the main storyline be unsoloable when you can already solo 90% of the side quests?

Not to mention, as much as the XIV community may mock those of us who like XI, they already did "both styles" perfectly:

Majority of the early missions are soloed, the rest required help, the final fight was almost always a group effort to take down before cap raises.

Then CoP came out and it was done in a way that even low levels can enjoy an amazing story thanks to level capping. In XIV, you can't even do some with people even if you wanted to because it forces you to be solo due to NPC additions, or in such a low group number you may as well be solo.

If I may be blunt, Elexia, what you are saying is the equivalent of this:

"Nobody will party with me if Square Enix doesn't force them to."

To which I not only disagree with heavily, but must also counter by saying that in no circumstances should multiplayer content feel forced rather than encouraged.

This can be done by creating multiplayer unique rewards, or difficulty unique rewards that players will desire, rather than imposing a lack of progress upon them.

Also, any conversation about Chains of Promithia should be discarded. The scripting of the fights were done well, but the difficulty scaling of that expansion was the subject of ongoing debate through its entire lifespan. If you have to argue your example, then your point loses strength.

[Duelle]

See this is where people are heavily misinformed. The proc system encouraged bringing A VARIETY OF PEOPLE lol, it was the typical "no I want to do this with only 2 people" players ruined it.

I am well aware of the intention of the proc system. What resulted was the opposite. As I said, the Abyssea party was WAR, NIN, BLM/BRD, WHM, THF, BLU. What is possible and the way the players use and do the content need to be in synch with each other. That was not the case.

If both styles can exist, why is it so wrong to not let the main storyline be unsoloable when you can already solo 90% of the side quests?

Because the main scenario is the meat and potatoes of an RPG, and as such should be viewable by more than just those who have people falling over each other to group up with? I'd hate to once again be stuck on chapter X of a story due to not being able to find a group.