The Solo disease?

[Rentahamster]

And also playing isn't just doing content. You play a game just be logging turning it on or participating in it.

It's painfully obvious to anyone who has a grasp of the English language that doing battle content is what the OP meant by "playing". Just because it's not your definition doesn't mean you have to force the OP to use it too.

I try to never judge people by their posts.

So far All i see is a person with a chip on their shoulder who felt a need to declare who he is, and that he hates grouping and tried to avoid it.

Does not compute.

[Kilta_Firelotus]

@Rentahamster
I'm just saying What I see. I do not hate him for it. And I do know the english langue very well. I was going on a face value approch. As to point how how it looks. I knew it was about content when you read deeper. into it. (and no i'm not back peddling either)

I tried to explain based on the deeper meaning , and no one understood what I was trying to. So i looked at it with a face value approch. And try to explain it from a face value approch. Again no one understood it.

Everyone here is too concern into shielding the OP to really take notice on how "angry" or "rude" his posts really are. And has yet presented evidence in these cases where he seen too many topic stating people hate solo'ers.

As for my stance on soloing, i do not give a dam. I do not care how a person plays, just to not be rude about it. And for the record I wasn't forcing anyone to do anything. But in my opinion, solo'ers are those who go into mmo but refuse to play or communitcate with other players.

[Azurus]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiped...erning_content

"As a consequence of the open structure, Wikipedia "makes no guarantee of validity" of its content, since no one is ultimately responsible for any claims appearing in it.[110] Concerns have been raised regarding the lack of accountability that results from users' anonymity,[111] the insertion of spurious information,[112] vandalism, and similar problems.

Wikipedia has been accused of exhibiting systemic bias and inconsistency;[16] additionally, critics argue that Wikipedia's open nature and a lack of proper sources for much of the information makes it unreliable.[113] "

feel free to double check any of that info, just because wikipedia is incorrect in some things does not mean that it often does not carry legitimate and accurate knowledge. Next time ill be sure to find a scholarly journal or case study, perhaps ill write a grad school dissertation on moms, muds and dnd that way there is some scholarly sources for this subject. until then i believe the info contained in those particular wiki articles are legitimate and accurate.

[Kilta_Firelotus]

feel free to double check any of that info, just because wikipedia is incorrect in some things does not mean that it often does not carry legitimate and accurate knowledge. Next time ill be sure to find a scholarly journal or case study, perhaps ill write a grad school dissertation on moms, muds and dnd that way there is some scholarly sources for this subject. until then i believe the info contained in those particular wiki articles are legitimate and accurate.

Or just go look up dungeon and dragons. The wiki info is correct though many rpg do base their style off D&D much like "dice roll" or the newly used "RGN". But it is said the D7D paved the way for rpg and co-op rpg.
Even several MUD do credit D&D when you look up the "what are MUD?"

[Leeloo]

But is it the soloers being a virus and wanting to change the genre? Or is it the developers wanting a bigger piece of the pie and changing the genre to attract more people?

Reminds me of Caddyshack 2 when they open up Bushwood to the general public and the members freak out.

[Anty]

But is it the soloers being a virus and wanting to change the genre? Or is it the developers wanting a bigger piece of the pie and changing the genre to attract more people?

Reminds me of Caddyshack 2 when they open up Bushwood to the general public and the members freak out.

might be a bit of both but someone who enjoys solo rpgs a lot and doenst want to group at all or doenst fee like communicating won't be very happy with any mmo. I think Guild wars 2 pretty much caters to exact these people.
In a good way, so you can solo and do group ONLY when you feel like it but its not necessary at all...

FFXIV and other mmorpgs are not designed that way.

I simply don't understand why someone likes mmorpgs if not for group play and communication... and group achievements with friends. Thats what it is mainly about.

Its as if i buy streetfighter and complain because i cant parley lol... its just not your game then...

Solo content in addition to an mmorpg content/group content is all fine since everyone (some more some less) has moments where one doesn't feel chatty or like grouping. So thats why theres solo content to me.

This discussion is a bit pointless to me since some people got the meaning of mmorpg wrong and expect a different game.
If you don't like grouping then an mmorpg isnt for you guys... honestly. Guildwars 1 (soon 2) or classic solo rpgs (dragon age 1&2, witcher 1 &2 etc. are the way to go but don't hope for mmorpg fans to understand or support you guys...

.. or do you buy sing-star for the playstation and complain that you wanted a sports game...

[Kilta_Firelotus]

But is it the soloers being a virus and wanting to change the genre? Or is it the developers wanting a bigger piece of the pie and changing the genre to attract more people?

Reminds me of Caddyshack 2 when they open up Bushwood to the general public and the members freak out.

no one on this forum or in game said soloing is a virus.... OP just got defensive for the sake of. This topic proves that no one thinks of soloing is a virus. And only proves OP has a (what is seen) as a chip on his shoulder about forming/joining parties. To you I ask what was the point of the OP? to get us to understand his pov? Or is he just telling us he hates grouping or forming parties. And it is more the devs wanting to appeal to others or give players things to do both solo or group wise as it can be hard to find a group right away. So solo content is there as you wait to get people for the group stuff. Pretty much giving ppl stuff to do while waiting/ looking for a group vs just waiting.

[Leeloo]

no one on this forum or in game said soloing is a virus.... OP just got defensive for the sake of. This topic proves that no one thinks of soloing is a virus. And only proves OP has a (what is seen) as a chip on his shoulder about forming/joining parties. To you I ask what was the point of the OP? to get us to understand his pov? Or is he just telling us he hates grouping or forming parties. And it is more the devs wanting to appeal to others or give players things to do both solo or group wise as it can be hard to find a group right away. So solo content is there as you wait to get people for the group stuff. Pretty much giving ppl stuff to do while waiting/ looking for a group vs just waiting.

This is going to sound rude but there isnt a better way in my mind to express this thought. Yes, soloists are a radically evolving virus to the MMO community. When MMOs first came out, highly inspired by DnD(a group based game), they were promoted as group games and only people ready for this group mechanic played them as this is what they wanted to play. Then people got more and more impatient or whatever that made them think they should be able to solo everything, so they have been radically changing MMOs over the years. Now they think they have the right to change an entire genre because they think they should be able to solo everything and avoid playing with other people, im sorry but thats the genre. Its like me hopping on a fps and be like yaaaa i like fps but i wanna use my fists only and then why tot he point where CoD is just an open map beat em up. It changes the genre. MMOs generally dont have nearly as an engaging story as most single player rpgs, regardless of the ever expanding world, so i dont understand why one would avoid groups on an mmo considering that is their point, a co op rpg built around interaction to take down the giant evil.

That's what I was replying to...
And that started the whole DnD, MUD talk which you took part in Kilta

Ya know, my wacky ability to follow a thread = D

[BruceyBruceyBangBang]

I do not actually type with my emotion. You guys just think I do, if you got to know me you can tell the difference. And I am not here to debate or argue. I do not care if Anyone solos (as in joining in/forming parties). I just care how they express it as I dislike people who go out of their way to be rude/ insult people. If I saw someone insult the OP, I would stick up for him. Unless he was rude first.

1) Yes, you do. Which is why your argument is now "if they are rude". That isn't the discussion. That is just an emotion you feel when people look at you and go, "No, thanks, buddy" (Which I'm sure they do usually, and good on you taking down your character signature to prolong players finding out who you are and avoiding you).

2) Of course you are an emotional person when I make posting gold at your expense and then it gets deleted, but again this isn't the discussion. It doesn't matter if you're an emotional person. It does matter when you run your points in this thread on emotions. "Being rude", is an emotional reaction from soloers that you've imagined in your head. You're bringing this into a totally different and more intelligent debate. We don't have room for what you bring.

[zaviermhigo]

you shouldn't be able to solo end game content. if you dont party till end game your dont know your class role half as well. end of story