why is there no solo end-game content?

[Ashen.2907]

23 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Engaging and rewarding endgame solo content.  You know this as it's been discussed in multiple threads.  Fighting enemies that are bullet-sponges designed for five players isn't fun to me (and a lot of others).

Then why not play the rest of the solo content?

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

14 minutes ago, Einsof.1457 said:

The same reason why I think having first person shooter gameplay in a JRPG is a bad idea. 95% of GW2 is single player. Get all the single player achievement points, then do /age, report that number, then complain there is a lack of soloable content. 

Okay firstly, Deus Ex came out over two decades ago (I'm ignoring the "J").  Genre merging is a thing, and it produces some phenomenal games.  Secondly, how can you argue that solo content doesn't belong in a game that you yourself claim is 95% single player?

 

Finally, I'm not complaining about a lack of soloable content.  There's loads of it.  I'm saying that I, and many others, would enjoy engaging and rewarding endgame solo content. 

Edited September 27, 2022 by CrashTestAuto.9108

[Einsof.1457]

1 minute ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Okay firstly, Deus Ex came out over two decades ago (I'm ignoring the "J").  Genre merging is a thing, and it produces some phenomenal games.  Secondly, how can you argue that solo content doesn't belong in a game that you yourself claim is 95% single player?

 

Finally, I'm not complaining about a lack of soloable content.  There's loads of it.  I'm saying that I, and many others, would enjoy engaging and rewarding endgame solo content. 

Great. Then go play deus ex. 

[yoni.7015]

3 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

I'm saying that I, and many others, would enjoy challenging and rewarding endgame solo content. 

How many others are we talking about here? How many fractals, dungeons or strikes have you done solo? It’s a pretty big challenge to solo a fractal or a strike mission and the rewards aren’t bad as well. 

Edited September 27, 2022 by yoni.7015

[Ashen.2907]

6 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

  I'm saying that I, and many others, would enjoy engaging and rewarding endgame solo content. 

And there is a lot of that. What you are asking for is that resources, you claim very little but we do not know how much, from a finite supply of resources being currently directed toward group content be diverted to creating even more solo content.

[Sobx.1758]

11 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Okay firstly, Deus Ex came out over two decades ago (I'm ignoring the "J").  Genre merging is a thing, and it produces some phenomenal games.  Secondly, how can you argue that solo content doesn't belong in a game that you yourself claim is 95% single player?

 

Finally, I'm not complaining about a lack of soloable content.  There's loads of it.  I'm saying that I, and many others, would enjoy engaging and rewarding endgame solo content. 

You can already pick your difficulty level of said content by soloing things like drms, dungeons, fractals, bounties and so on. If harder soloable content is what you want, then you already have it available.

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

31 minutes ago, Ashen.2907 said:

And there is a lot of that. What you are asking for is that resources, you claim very little but we do not know how much, from a finite supply of resources being currently directed toward group content be diverted to creating even more solo content.

You argue that I don't know how much resourcing it would take, but you do claim to know that whatever team/dev that is asked to do this is currently working on group content?  How do you know what they're being directed towards?

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

39 minutes ago, Einsof.1457 said:

ib4 "buT tHaT cOnTeNt WaSnT mAdE fOr SoLo."

It's nice that people are starting to read and remember the arguments 🙂 

[Sobx.1758]

2 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

It's nice that people are starting to read and remember the arguments 🙂 

It's also good they understand they're bad non-arguments, which is pretty clearly why it was brought up in the way it was. 😉 It "technically not being made for solo" doesn't change the fact that some of that content easly qualifies as "harder soloable content".

Edited September 27, 2022 by Sobx.1758

[ArchonWing.9480]

58 minutes ago, Beast Sos.1457 said:

How about I play what I want... Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it shouldn't be in the game.

Just because you like something doesn't mean it should be in the game either.

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

7 minutes ago, ArchonWing.9480 said:

Just because you like something doesn't mean it should be in the game either.

True, but when a lot of people (many of whom buy things in the gem store) like something, then it makes sense for the devs to consider it.

[Sobx.1758]

1 hour ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

True, but when a lot of people (many of whom buy things in the gem store) like something, then it makes sense for the devs to consider it.

You're not a lot of people.

And you clearly already refuse to play hard soloable content, so why would the devs suddenly believe you'd play the new addition catering to what you're avoiding for now anyways?

Edited September 27, 2022 by Sobx.1758

[yoni.7015]

2 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

True, but when a lot of people (many of whom buy things in the gem store) like something, then it makes sense for the devs to consider it.

Come back when you have a lot of people. 

[Vilin.8056]

Is this becoming some form of a forum trolling? Seriously. The same pattern of spamming over multiple threads all by the same person.

Edited September 27, 2022 by Vilin.8056

[Beast Sos.1457]

1 hour ago, yoni.7015 said:

Trying to turn a multiplayer game into a single player game because that’s what you like is very selfish. Do you order Pizza at a Chinese restaurant because that’s what you want? Why not go to an Italian restaurant? 

The fact that you think by adding solo instance content would turn this game into a single player game is asinine...If I go to a buffet, yes I would expect pizza and sushi in the same place. MMOs are buffets. 

[Beast Sos.1457]

1 hour ago, kharmin.7683 said:

Just as selfish as asking a game studio to change their vision and adapt to what you like in what is a MMO?

Yes is vary selfish for people to want more variety in a game, in turn attracting more people to it. 5 head logic. 

[Luks.4230]

People want MORE SOLO CONTENT in a MMORPG besides the game is pretty much SOLO CONTENT ONLY because all group content is pretty much dead looooool. Lmao

[Cyninja.2954]

9 hours ago, Beast Sos.1457 said:

Yes is vary selfish for people to want more variety in a game, in turn attracting more people to it. 5 head logic. 

Asking for more solo content is not asking for more variety. It is literally the opposite when the majority of content is already solo friendly/able.

You are basically at a buffet with 2 apples, 3 oranges and 90 bananas asking for more bananas of different sizes. 

The fact you dont enjoy the provided bananas as much while still asking for more, hoping the next batch will taste different, seems to not even enter your mind.

The developers meanwhile look at what gets eaten and wonder: why are we throwing away so much money on bananas when 50% of them are just rotting away at the end of each day.

Edited September 28, 2022 by Cyninja.2954

[Astralporing.1957]

10 hours ago, ArchonWing.9480 said:

Just because you like something doesn't mean it should be in the game either.

On individual basis, you are right. On the other hand, when enough players in the target group like (or dislike) something, that definitely should impact the design.

Edited September 28, 2022 by Astralporing.1957

[Luks.4230]

Dude its an MMORPG. You get it?

[Astralporing.1957]

1 minute ago, Luks.4230 said:

Dude its an MMORPG. You get it?

Yes, i do. I also realize that all "MMO" means is that there is a lot of players playing in the game - not that they necessarily have to group together. And of the RPG part, not much is remaining actually, to the point where actual, real RPGers quite often become a target of ridicule. Besides, the games are for players. They are not there to uphold some sacred meanings of tags attached to them at the cost of those players' enjoyment (and possibly to developers' income).

So, you were saying?

[CrashTestAuto.9108]

23 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

You are basically at a buffet with 2 apples, 3 oranges and 90 bananas asking for more bananas of different sizes. 

I think there's too much variety in solo content for this analogy to be accurate.  Instead I'd say that we're at a buffet that has 90 pieces of fruit (mostly different) and a few vegetables.  The chefs keep encouraging people to eat the vegetables, which have been beautifully presented and seasoned, but most don't want them still.  A few people have noticed how good the seasoning is on the vegetables is though, and are asking for some new fruits with similar treatment.

 

Meanwhile, a few people are angrily yelling that the restaurant is called Broccoli Joe's, and therefore needs to keep investing in the vegetable dishes and that all the customers who like the fruit are entitled.

[Astralporing.1957]

To reiterate my point:

If at some point developers of a MMORPG game find out, that a certain part of their playerbase likes playing solo content, FPS shooters, or, say, fishing simulators over the group content, then they have a choice. They can either introduce more solo content, first person mode, or (again) fishing, or they can decide to tell those players that this is not a game for them, and that they should seek fun elsewhere, and concentrate on their remaining part of playerbase.

How should they choose? Well, if the game was to be considered a piece of art, or an ideological statement on the side of the devs, then they should definitely stick to their guns and keep with their original vision, even if next to noone would be willing to follow it. If they were to treat their game as a business that's there to bring them money however, they should consider the business perspective as well. In which case the ultimate decision would depend on how significant that part of the playerbase that likes a certain something is, how costly implementing it would be, how much potential increased income it might bring, and (to balance it) how big of a negative impact it might have on the rest of the game. Without being slavishly devoted to some narrow (and subjective) definition of the game based on the original genre tag they attached to it in the beginning.

You obviously think, that devs should act according to the first approach, and completely disregard business consequences in the name of strict adherence to your vision of the genre. I'm afraid however, that the devs might not necessarily agree with you on this (to put it mildly).

[Cyninja.2954]

32 minutes ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

I think there's too much variety in solo content for this analogy to be accurate.  Instead I'd say that we're at a buffet that has 90 pieces of fruit (mostly different) and a few vegetables.  The chefs keep encouraging people to eat the vegetables, which have been beautifully presented and seasoned, but most don't want them still.  A few people have noticed how good the seasoning is on the vegetables is though, and are asking for some new fruits with similar treatment.

 

Meanwhile, a few people are angrily yelling that the restaurant is called Broccoli Joe's, and therefore needs to keep investing in the vegetable dishes and that all the customers who like the fruit are entitled.

That's why I referenced different sized bananas, because that is quite literally the extent of how different single player content is.

In either case, it is not asking for more variety in the scope of it all when 1 group of players demand only fruit on a buffet which is already composed of 90% fruit.

Edited September 28, 2022 by Cyninja.2954

[Urud.4925]

12 hours ago, CrashTestAuto.9108 said:

Finally, I'm not complaining about a lack of soloable content.  There's loads of it.  I'm saying that I, and many others, would enjoy engaging and rewarding endgame solo content. 

11 hours ago, Beast Sos.1457 said:

The fact that you think by adding solo instance content would turn this game into a single player game is asinine...If I go to a buffet, yes I would expect pizza and sushi in the same place. MMOs are buffets. 

As you both noticed, there is already a lot of soloable content and I think we can all agree that adding few more options wouldn't destroy the game. The problem is indeed in that "rewarding": if you add... let's say, the usual tower with floors to clean, that is also rewarding, then many players will start to play that instead of group events, like HoT metas. And this won't benefit the game, since it's still an MMO after all, and it shines in those group open world contents (while you already have plenty of options for solo players, in many games nowadays). Don't forget that most of the people play video games to farm gold; this is their goal. So if a soloable content is also rewarding, you'll remove a lot of people from the open world.

 

ArenaNet could add some soloable tower or similar, but the reward shouldn't be higher than cleaning a dungeon. Would you play it in that case? Would you clean a soloable tower if the reward is around 50 silver for 30 minutes? ArenaNet should spend their time on something that it's designed to be niche and not rewarding. They might find the time at some point, but this is something that must not be designed as good/rewarding content.

Edited September 28, 2022 by Urud.4925