Lack of Solo End-Game

[b k.1648]

@Julischka Bean.7491 said:

@particlepinata.9865 said:Perfect solution. Play singleplayer games. They are made exactly for this.

Nope. People who solo like to read and join in on mapchat, look at how other people dress their characters, we like to look forward to updates, join in on forum discussions...what solo game does all this???

Hmm. Diablo 3 or Path of Exile might be a start, though I'm not sure how big the fashion metagame is.

[Konig Des Todes.2086]

@"Amaranthe.3578" said:Your answer makes zero sense. You will find the best solo content in SP games. Many SP games have a vibrant community...a good example would be most aRPGs(games like Diablo) that focus on the solo content/experience (yes, it is the same thing) yet gives you plenty of reason to get involved with the community like build sharing and occasionally Co-Op.GW2, and any other MMORPG pays certain costs(in terms of design)to offer good multiplayer gameplay. Solo content is the last of its priorities (and rightfully so) because it can never do it to the max.

You say solo content is the last of GW2's priorities. But we get 2-3 hours worth of solo content every 3 months. The only issue - to me - is that it isn't "end-game" content.

Like I said, there is a difference between "solo content" and "solo experience". Solo experience is isolation, no community in the game. Sure, there might be some forums out there, but that isn't the same. Diablo you can play with others online, even if you're not doing the same quests at the same time.

Playing GW2 as a solo experience would be the same as finding a completely empty map, turning off all chat, and never once interacting with people.

That is not the same as going into the SAB hub, then entering World 1 without a party. You still interact with folks in the hub, you still have guild chat, you can even be in a party or squad while doing SAB and talking to folks there.

Surely you see what the difference is now? If not, I cannot help you.

@mindcircus.1506 said:

@"Julischka Bean.7491" said:All seriousness. As Vayne and everyone has said, there are many, many, many varied reasons why people play solo in an MMO.

I am a clutz. Very poor hand-eye coordination here, and in a small forced group of five people I would probably get kicked.

However, I have fun with the unforced grouping. Lost in a crowd I can play without feeling like I am holding back the group and I have a blast :)

I would relish more endgame content like this.

Congratulations, you have just described the overwhelming majority of the content created for this game outside core Tyria.Lucky you, you get exactly what you want.

Your sarcasm would be correct, if not for the word "endgame".

[Vayne.8563]

@particlepinata.9865 said:Perfect solution. Play singleplayer games. They are made exactly for this.

Except for the desire to be around other people without interacting with them. NPCs are not people. You don't actually get to see conversations in map chat. An MMO to a solo player provides a completely different type of experience than an MMO to a solo player. There are simply too many solo players to ignore, even if you may think there are not.

Even the Guild Wars 2 FAQ, before launch, had a question about solo play and whether it was possible, so the devs must have been aware of the size of that demographic.

[Vayne.8563]

@Amaranthe.3578 said:

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Amaranthe.3578 said:

@Mortifera.6138 said:

@Linken.6345 said:What about world bosses and map meta events?You can do them without being in group with anyone.

You /can/ do them without a group, but you /will/ run into people who want to do them just as much as you do!

If youre looking for a solo experience why are you here? Im honestly baffled by the question...A single player RPG can give you a solo experience GW2 (or any other mmorpg)will never be able to compete with.A mmorpg should focus on MP content.

I've seen this answer many times on forums, and it seems like people who post it are always answered in similar ways, but they ignore those answers because they believe this statement to be true. But it's not true.

There are people who play MMOs to have other people around without desiring to group with those people. MMOs provide a completely different type of experience, almost a voyeuristic one when compared to a single player game.

One of my sons never groups but still plays MMOs because he likes to watch what's going on in map chat while he's playing. My wife likes joining events without communicating with other players. Being in small instanced group content is very very different from the game a lot of people play which is open world. No single game I've ever played has experiences like Dragon Stand or Auric Basin meta, but you don't have to communicate or group to do those things. You're remaining isolated while still having people around. You can go to a bar alone and watch people. You're not obligated to chat or make friends.

There are many reasons why people might want to play a multiplayer game. Some people are lonely and like having people around, just being there, but not participating actively. Some people have social phobias and don't want to talk but they still want to experience the types of content MMOs offer, in this case things like World Bosses. Feeling like you're part of something without the communication is important to some people. And there are people who feel they're not good at the game, and they're embarrassed to be in parties with people who they'd be holding back but they still like to get into a world boss event, or even regular dynamic events in the world. It's easier than soloing because other people can show up.

Long gone are the days where people think others don't solo MMOs. Before Rift was launched, Scott Hartsman did an interview in which he said MMO developers ignore solo players at their own peril. Wildstar once released an announcement saying they apologized for not having more solo content, because they didn't realise how many people wanted that sort of thing.

I run a casual guild and it blows me away how many people solo, never group and never get involved. I'm pretty sure far under half my guild have ever been in a fractal or a dungeon, and most don't want to. They run around the open world, doing events, completing zones, making alts. But a lot of those same people spend quite a bit of money on the game, because they want a new skin from the gem store, or they want more bank storage because they're pack rats.

Skyrim was a great game for me, but it still doesn't provide the kinds of experience an MMO can give me, even if I'm often not playing in groups.

So ..youre basically saying that there are some vouyers/creeps who wanna play around other people but not with them? Jeez I wonder why nobody cares about them and their needa/wants.

A person who likes to watch stuff without participating isn't necessarily a creep. But there is an element of liking to watch. The problem is that group is much larger than you think it is. Anyway I gave multiple reasons for multiple groups.

There are plenty of people who don't like to socialize themselves, but like to see other people socialize without calling attention to themselves. I loosely used the word voyeur as an analogy. You don't want to participate you want to watch. Hell half the people watching other people play games on Twitch never type anything, they're just there watching, and enjoying the interaction without partaking of it. That's all I meant. Trying to take that out of context to get traction for something that is essentially wrong isn't going to win this argument. There was enough text surrounding it to emphasize my meaning.

[trev.1045]

Although i am definitely of the view that there is a heck of a lot of 'solo' players (and by that i mean they dont like formal grouping) and that ignoring them would be a bad business mistake

I have to say i am just coming to the end of the personal story- and there was a heck of a lot of solo content, the differing storylines actually make me interested in alts too..

[MoriMoriMori.5349]

@Konig Des Todes.2086 said:That is not the same as going into the SAB hub, then entering World 1 without a party. You still interact with folks in the hub, you still have guild chat, you can even be in a party or squad while doing SAB and talking to folks there.

If you don't do any content with those people, your talking with them is hardly related to your tasks at hand anyway. Then why can't you play a single-player game, while chatting with some people in Telegram / Whatsapp / Discord? Can be people playing the same single-player game, or just random people - what's the difference? If you don't cooperate with those people, why it's even important whether or not they play the same game?

[Konig Des Todes.2086]

@"trev.1045" said:I have to say i am just coming to the end of the personal story- and there was a heck of a lot of solo content, the differing storylines actually make me interested in alts too..

Differing storylines comes to an end with the penultimate story step of the initial personal story, sadly. And the PS doesn't have a lot of replayability nor challenge. Thus it lacks the "end-game" feel.

@MoriMoriMori.5349 said:If you don't do any content with those people, your talking with them is hardly related to your tasks at hand anyway. Then why can't you play a single-player game, while chatting with some people in Telegram / Whatsapp / Discord? Can be people playing the same single-player game, or just random people - what's the difference? If you don't cooperate with those people, why it's even important whether or not they play the same game?

Thing is, sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. Same as the fact I sometimes play single player games, and sometimes I play online games. Further, why would I just chat with completely random people I don't know and don't have any known relatable interests with? At least in-game, I know one thing: We all play GW2 here.

It just isn't the same; if you think it is, then I'm glad you think it is but I don't. And as we can see with this thread, a sizeable amount of people would agree with me saying it isn't.

Playing a single-player game is a drastically different experience than doing challenging content designed for not needing a group in an online game. No matter how much extra work you put in, like chat apps, to make it feel the same.

And it isn't like GW2 doesn't provide solo content gameplay; it's just that it doesn't provide any end-game / challenging / replayable solo content gameplay.

[Obtena.7952]

I can't get my head around these ideas. If you limit your options to soloing, of course you restrict yourself for content in a significant way in an MMO. I mean, you have to appreciate that when a studio sells something as an MMO, the have a set number of resource to deliver content to the market in an MMO format right? That's NOT a significant level of solo end game content.

The idea that an MMO lacks solo end game content ... I'm sort of lost for words. It's like asking for a coffee and wondering why it's hot.

[IndigoSundown.5419]

Why doesn't ANet make more solo end-game content? They have limited resources and need to engage as many people as possible with each release. Solo content still has to have rewards, and rewards take as much effort to produce whether they are for group or solo content. Difficult, solo content is not for a large percentage of the player-base. Hence, it's not high on ANet's list.

[MoriMoriMori.5349]

@Konig Des Todes.2086 said:Further, why would I just chat with completely random people I don't know and don't have any known relatable interests with?Assuming you know your own interests, you can join a Telegram channel dedicated to those, there will be a lot of ppl with same interest - problem solved.

@Konig Des Todes.2086 said:It just isn't the same; if you think it is, then I'm glad you think it is but I don't. And as we can see with this thread, a sizeable amount of people would agree with me saying it isn't.It may be not the same, but it's quite close. And to thousands of ppl it's enough. What you seem to ask is Anet to develop content which is really needed for a very few ppl (those who will effectively play almost-single player game, which is quite mediocre at the same time, comparing to really good single-player games), what results in horrible ROI.

@Konig Des Todes.2086 said:And it isn't like GW2 doesn't provide solo content gameplay; it's just that it doesn't provide any end-game / challenging / replayable solo content gameplay.Then why not consider everything except Raids and Fractals "solo content"? As other mentioned, people manage to beat dungeons in solo too. You could solo legendary event bosses in OpenWorld as well, it's quite a challenge. If it doesn't qualify as solo-content, then what does?

[Linken.6345]

@Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

@"Amaranthe.3578" said:Your answer makes zero sense. You will find the best solo content in SP games. Many SP games have a vibrant community...a good example would be most aRPGs(games like Diablo) that focus on the solo content/experience (yes, it is the same thing) yet gives you plenty of reason to get involved with the community like build sharing and occasionally Co-Op.GW2, and any other MMORPG pays certain costs(in terms of design)to offer good multiplayer gameplay. Solo content is the last of its priorities (and rightfully so) because it can never do it to the max.

You say solo content is the last of GW2's priorities. But we get 2-3 hours worth of solo content every 3 months. The only issue - to me - is that it isn't "end-game" content.

Like I said, there is a difference between "solo content" and "solo experience". Solo experience is isolation, no community in the game. Sure, there might be some forums out there, but that isn't the same. Diablo you can play with others online, even if you're not doing the same quests at the same time.

Playing GW2 as a solo experience would be the same as finding a completely empty map, turning off all chat, and never once interacting with people.

That is not the same as going into the SAB hub, then entering World 1 without a party. You still interact with folks in the hub, you still have guild chat, you can even be in a party or squad while doing SAB and talking to folks there.

Surely you see what the difference is now? If not, I cannot help you.

@mindcircus.1506 said:

@"Julischka Bean.7491" said:All seriousness. As Vayne and everyone has said, there are many, many, many varied reasons why people play solo in an MMO.

I am a clutz. Very poor hand-eye coordination here, and in a small forced group of five people I would probably get kicked.

However, I have fun with the unforced grouping. Lost in a crowd I can play without feeling like I am holding back the group and I have a blast :)

I would relish more endgame content like this.

Congratulations, you have just described the overwhelming majority of the content created for this game outside core Tyria.Lucky you, you get exactly what you want.

Your sarcasm would be correct, if not for the word "endgame".

How is level 80 max level aka end of the game level not endgame content?

[Rod.6581]

@Sylosi.6503 said:

@Rod.6581 said:

@Mortifera.6138 said:

@"MrRuin.9740" said:I think you may be in a minority. I don't think too many people buy an MMO expecting an in depth solo experience as they tend to be built around the 'massively multiplayer' part.

Guild Wars was described by its own developers as a "non-MMO." I've come to expect certain things from that, one of which is that this game be much more solo-friendly than other MMORPGs. Yes, at end-game too.

Guild Wars 2 is a massively multiplayer online role-playing game developed by ArenaNet and published by NCSOFT. - WikipediaNow, developers said many things and lied, so even if they really said that, don't trust them on that.

If you want solo content go search for solo games. Don't force it here, we lack content as it is, no need to humor snowflakes like you.

Yet the funny thing is MMORPG's humor "snowflakes" who want things that are non-MMORPG all the time. (including many of those who bang on about solo aspects not belonging in an MMORPG)

Take 'massively multiplayer' for example, the only things in this game that actually are massively multiplayer are the economy, the zone events / world bosses in some zones, WvW, etc. If the game were truly about being "massively multiplayer" then you wouldn't have instanced 5 man mini-games like PvP, Dungeons, Fractals, etc that are simply normal multiplayer and outside the persistent world, we'd still have public dungeons like real MMORPGs had.

And all of those are common for every game labeled as MMO. What you are doing is going outside of the norm and trying to emphasize 'massively multiplayer', as the game must have vast amount of players is required for each activity. Poor attempt to make discussion in your favor.

[Sylosi.6503]

@Rod.6581 said:

@Sylosi.6503 said:

@Rod.6581 said:

@Mortifera.6138 said:

@"MrRuin.9740" said:I think you may be in a minority. I don't think too many people buy an MMO expecting an in depth solo experience as they tend to be built around the 'massively multiplayer' part.

Guild Wars was described by its own developers as a "non-MMO." I've come to expect certain things from that, one of which is that this game be much more solo-friendly than other MMORPGs. Yes, at end-game too.

Guild Wars 2 is a massively multiplayer online role-playing game developed by ArenaNet and published by NCSOFT. - WikipediaNow, developers said many things and lied, so even if they really said that, don't trust them on that.

If you want solo content go search for solo games. Don't force it here, we lack content as it is, no need to humor snowflakes like you.

Yet the funny thing is MMORPG's humor "snowflakes" who want things that are non-MMORPG all the time. (including many of those who bang on about solo aspects not belonging in an MMORPG)

Take 'massively multiplayer' for example, the only things in this game that actually are massively multiplayer are the economy, the zone events / world bosses in some zones, WvW, etc. If the game were truly about being "massively multiplayer" then you wouldn't have instanced 5 man mini-games like PvP, Dungeons, Fractals, etc that are simply normal multiplayer and outside the persistent world, we'd still have public dungeons like real MMORPGs had.

And all of those are common for every game labeled as MMO. What you are doing is going outside of the norm and trying to emphasize 'massively multiplayer', as the game must have vast amount of players is required for each activity. Poor attempt to make discussion in your favor.

Nonsense, I'm not emphasising anything, you are the one that brought that up when you quoted this from the wiki - "Guild Wars 2 is a massively multiplayer online role-playing game". I am just observing that a 5 man instance is not 'massively multiplayer' either, that it is simply multiplayer like any of the zillion team/co-op games you can get.

Now has having co-op/normal multiplayer content set outside the persistent world become the norm in most themepark MMORPGs, sure, but it only became the norm because they decided it made good business sense to cater to those "snowflakes", in exactly the same way MMORPG's have increasingly catered to solo/duo players over the years.

I am just pointing out the hypocrisy (in most cases) of those that say solo content does not belong in an MMORPG, but are fine with small multiplayer set outside the persistent world, if you don't like that, that is your problem.

[Yumenei.7943]

My stance is that this game has 90% or even more of content that can be done solo or with little help of fortuitously met people that you don’t even have to group up with or talk to. What MMORPGs are lacking these days (and also the reason why Classic WoW gets so much attention even though it is so outdated) is the absence of group content that brings community even closer. This is the major complain about MMORPGs nowadays and I’m not surprised that many people furiously speak up against solo content.

End game content is usually related with better or more valuable rewards and those should be rewarded mainly by a solid group play, which always will be more challenging than any singleplayer experience, because it requires cooperation. If ANet adds end game content for solo players that could rival group play, then even less people will do group content, which will only result in more people calling this a dead game and it will also accelerate loss of playerbase (including solo players that want to have people around them, but not interact with them).

Just because we all spend most of our time in Guild Wars 2 not as part of a group, doesn’t mean that solo play should be promoted any more than it is now. It should be quite opposite - we should have more incentive to group up, have more guild related events, have GvG mode just like in Guild Wars 1. Maybe put a bit less focus on PUGs which are more toxic and focus more on stuff that can be done with guild mates, which usually are more friendly and patient towards other people that do things in their own pace.

[mindcircus.1506]

@Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

@mindcircus.1506 said:

@"Julischka Bean.7491" said:All seriousness. As Vayne and everyone has said, there are many, many, many varied reasons why people play solo in an MMO.

I am a clutz. Very poor hand-eye coordination here, and in a small forced group of five people I would probably get kicked.

However, I have fun with the unforced grouping. Lost in a crowd I can play without feeling like I am holding back the group and I have a blast :)

I would relish more endgame content like this.

Congratulations, you have just described the overwhelming majority of the content created for this game outside core Tyria.Lucky you, you get exactly what you want.

Your sarcasm would be correct, if not for the word "endgame".

What map outside Core Tyria isn't end game?

[sigur.9453]

@mindcircus.1506 said:

@Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

@mindcircus.1506 said:

@"Julischka Bean.7491" said:All seriousness. As Vayne and everyone has said, there are many, many, many varied reasons why people play solo in an MMO.

I am a clutz. Very poor hand-eye coordination here, and in a small forced group of five people I would probably get kicked.

However, I have fun with the unforced grouping. Lost in a crowd I can play without feeling like I am holding back the group and I have a blast :)

I would relish more endgame content like this.

Congratulations, you have just described the overwhelming majority of the content created for this game outside core Tyria.Lucky you, you get exactly what you want.

Your sarcasm would be correct, if not for the word "endgame".

What map outside Core Tyria isn't end game?

That's a point, ever map feels the same. Doesn't matter if you Play a level 5 map or a level 80 map. In other mmos the pace/diffuculy /map design change when you hit max level. We have a lot of solo content in this game. to much honestly, and the rest is playing alone with other people present. Almost no interaction whatsoever. but there is nothing where you are "forced to test your skill". If you take the world "endgame" literally, you are correct, but then also literally everything you do with lvl 80 is endgame... Beeing afk in LA, sorting your inventory, etc.... I also don't know what op meant with his definition of "endgame", for me besides raids, fractal cm there is none. Nothing designed for solo play. There are other mmos or similar genres where such additions are very well done.

[Linken.6345]

@Sylosi.6503 said:

@Rod.6581 said:

@Sylosi.6503 said:

@Rod.6581 said:

@Mortifera.6138 said:

@"MrRuin.9740" said:I think you may be in a minority. I don't think too many people buy an MMO expecting an in depth solo experience as they tend to be built around the 'massively multiplayer' part.

Guild Wars was described by its own developers as a "non-MMO." I've come to expect certain things from that, one of which is that this game be much more solo-friendly than other MMORPGs. Yes, at end-game too.

Guild Wars 2 is a massively multiplayer online role-playing game developed by ArenaNet and published by NCSOFT. - WikipediaNow, developers said many things and lied, so even if they really said that, don't trust them on that.

If you want solo content go search for solo games. Don't force it here, we lack content as it is, no need to humor snowflakes like you.

Yet the funny thing is MMORPG's humor "snowflakes" who want things that are non-MMORPG all the time. (including many of those who bang on about solo aspects not belonging in an MMORPG)

Take 'massively multiplayer' for example, the only things in this game that actually are massively multiplayer are the economy, the zone events / world bosses in some zones, WvW, etc. If the game were truly about being "massively multiplayer" then you wouldn't have instanced 5 man mini-games like PvP, Dungeons, Fractals, etc that are simply normal multiplayer and outside the persistent world, we'd still have public dungeons like real MMORPGs had.

And all of those are common for every game labeled as MMO. What you are doing is going outside of the norm and trying to emphasize 'massively multiplayer', as the game must have vast amount of players is required for each activity. Poor attempt to make discussion in your favor.

Nonsense, I'm not emphasising anything, you are the one that brought that up when you quoted this from the wiki - "Guild Wars 2 is a massively multiplayer online role-playing game". I am just observing that a 5 man instance is not 'massively multiplayer' either, that it is simply multiplayer like any of the zillion team/co-op games you can get.

Now has having co-op/normal multiplayer content set outside the persistent world become the norm in most themepark MMORPGs, sure, but it only became the norm because they decided it made good business sense to cater to those "snowflakes", in exactly the same way MMORPG's have increasingly catered to solo/duo players over the years.

I am just pointing out the hypocrisy (in most cases) of those that say solo content does not belong in an MMORPG, but are fine with small multiplayer set outside the persistent world, if you don't like that, that is your problem.

co op games are 2-4 players mate so why lump them in with team games?

[Glacial.9516]

Solo content is just as important to an MMO experience as multiplayer and mass multiplayer content. Solo content (read: Content that is playable solo, not content that MUST be done solo) provides players with the means to enjoy the game without waiting for or relying on others. Let's face it, you're not always going to have friends around nor will you always want to party with strangers. Sometimes you just want to roam around Tyria by yourself gathering from a few nodes, jumping through a few puzzles or depriving Centaurs of their ill-gotten Krytan goods. It is important that your players not require the constant presence of others to have fun and even more important that they not be hindered by them (I'm looking at you games with shared gathering nodes!).

I'm a strong believer of encouraging but not enforcing group experiences. The content is designed for 5-10 players but you are skilled enough to complete it solo? (despite it taking significantly longer). Fantastic. Unable to progress because you arbitrarily need to step on two switches at once, which one boulder could have remedied? Frustrating.

As a primarily solo player in MMOs I have very few gripes with GW2. It provides plenty of content that I can do solo or with a group (and even 'solo' while in a group without the need to be social or interact if I just want to put my head down and play for a bit). Could it be better? Sure. I'd love to see Fractals and Raids flexible enough to accommodate differing group sizes. ie. You can do fractals well enough with a group of 4, but if you have 6 someone is left out. Meanwhile 6 is [probably] too few for raids especially if you are new. Though I accept that this is a very difficult balancing act to achieve and likely not worth the time to implement.

[Stalkingwolf.6035]

@"thehipone.6812" said:Because I like playing a game with other people around, but I REALLY hate wasting my available game time looking for a group, waiting for a healer, finally getting a group and having someone go "BRB smoke break" and just wasting everyone's time.

Destiny, Anthem style. a pseudo MMO feeling for singleplayer.

Maybe you should try Elder Srolls Online.

[beeftotem.4137]

Good challenging solo content is rare in mmos for one huge reason, balancing.

Take something like soloing bounties for example. I imagine that there are probably 3-4 classes or spec that do extremely well compared to other ones. Why is this?

Making challenging content would mean encounter tuning based on the strengths and weaknesses of at least one spec of every class, which would be a huge undertaking if you planned on doing more than 1 or 2 of them.

Balancing around group content is easier because you don't have to take strengths and weaknesses into account as much, and you also have to consider tanks and healers.

[trev.1045]

Some interesting posts....

I agree group content should be encouraged, but not forced- there should be a mix of group and solo content in my opinion. I actually think the informal events are a brill concept for players that want to work with others, but not formally group.

I am still levelling so cant comment really on other solo activities, but they are pretty easy to put in i imagine (faction reputation would be easy to implement for instance)

I do understand why raiders etc rail against solo players or those who prefer informal grouping. They feel the game is not being played properlyHowever, the people not playing 'properly' are probably a majority of the games player base (they are on wow certainly). Urging them to 'go play another game' isnt a brill idea really as without them the game would have a lot less funding.

[beeftotem.4137]

@"trev.1045" said:Some interesting posts....

I agree group content should be encouraged, but not forced- there should be a mix of group and solo content in my opinion. I actually think the informal events are a brill concept for players that want to work with others, but not formally group.

I am still levelling so cant comment really on other solo activities, but they are pretty easy to put in i imagine (faction reputation would be easy to implement for instance)

I do understand why raiders etc rail against solo players or those who prefer informal grouping. They feel the game is not being played properlyHowever, the people not playing 'properly' are probably a majority of the games player base (they are on wow certainly). Urging them to 'go play another game' isnt a brill idea really as without them the game would have a lot less funding.

Boy could i tell you some stories about what happens to a game when "the vast majority" get their way.

[Graymalkyn.8076]

I agree with the OP, but for different reasons. I am in a not unknown, but relatively rare, position of being a full-time caretaker for my wife's parents. I can easily sit and play for several hours, or be called away at a moment's notice. I love the game, but this really restricts my ability to do things like raids, PvP, fractals, etc. I can do PvE at my pace (just restart an instance if I get called away), or WvW where I can come and go as needed. So having more solo stuff would be nice. Although, lately a lot of the story stuff takes 30-60 minutes to complete as well, so I frequently have to restart those. Shorter personal story instances would be my first request.

That being said, I know I'm in the minority, and don't expect the game to change for me, but thought this would be a good place to throw in my 2 cents.

[Fundor.2098]

@Adul.1520 said:Adding a solo mode to raids (with reduced/different rewards) would be a good way to add high-quality, repeatable, rewarding soloable end-game content.

And the great thing about it is that they wouldn't need to develop it from scratch, since they could reuse maps, story, lore, voice acting, art assets, etc. from the 10-man versions.

This would also help people who are afraid of failing the group to learn the mechanics on their own, which in turn would encourage more people to join raiding in squads later.

@Raknar.4735 said:

@"Blur.3465" said:In any case, I support OP and I truly hope we do get some content that can be done solo or with a group depending on our choice.

Joining in on this sentiment, I'd also add that the content should be repeatable with meaningful rewards (doesn't have to be gold, unique skins preferred).

I've also always wondered why some people are "against" the idea of solo-content in a MMORPG, citing the "massively", yet they defend instanced content like dungeons / fractals / raids. 5-10 man groups aren't something i'd describe as "massively", it's more or less something i'd expect in a lobby-based game, like PoE, GW1 and even shooters like CSGO, Battlefield and Overwatch.

I've always thought the game really needs farmable locations for specific rare (unbound) skins and other rewards. Sure some people might find it a boring grind, but there's a lot of people who actually like it too. I found it enjoyable in GW1 after exhausting days at work, when I just wanted to play my favourite game but just didn't have the energy to do anything social. There aren't many things like that in GW2 besides story content, which in turn doesn't offer any rewards after the first time.

[Rasimir.6239]

@Fundor.2098 said:

@"Adul.1520" said:Adding a solo mode to raids (with reduced/different rewards) would be a good way to add high-quality, repeatable, rewarding soloable end-game content.

And the great thing about it is that they wouldn't need to develop it from scratch, since they could reuse maps, story, lore, voice acting, art assets, etc. from the 10-man versions.

This would also help people who are afraid of failing the group to learn the mechanics on their own, which in turn would encourage more people to join raiding in squads later.Unfortunately a good many encounter mechanics used in group content (raids or fractals) can't be transported into a single player instance without seriously altering them. There is a lot of moving as a group, using abilities in concert with other players and so on. It's actually a reason why I hardly raid or t4 fractal any more, as with my health going down over the last couple of years I find myself needing significantly more practice for "group mechanics" than others and don't feel good dragging four or even nine others down with me, but all the stuff I need to practice is stuff that I effectively can't practice without other players around nor on altered encounters.

@Raknar.4735 said:

@"Blur.3465" said:In any case, I support OP and I truly hope we do get some content that can be done solo or with a group depending on our choice.

Joining in on this sentiment, I'd also add that the content should be repeatable with meaningful rewards (doesn't have to be gold, unique skins preferred).

I've also always wondered why some people are "against" the idea of solo-content in a MMORPG, citing the "massively", yet they defend instanced content like dungeons / fractals / raids. 5-10 man groups aren't something i'd describe as "massively", it's more or less something i'd expect in a lobby-based game, like PoE, GW1 and even shooters like CSGO, Battlefield and Overwatch.

I've always thought the game really needs farmable locations for specific rare (unbound) skins and other rewards. Sure some people might find it a boring grind, but there's a lot of people who actually like it too. I found it enjoyable in GW1 after exhausting days at work, when I just wanted to play my favourite game but just didn't have the energy to do

anything

social. There aren't many things like that in GW2 besides story content, which in turn doesn't offer any rewards after the first time.But we already have a lot of solo-farmable special skins. Just take a look at all the stuff required for the

Exotic Hunter

and the

Treasure Hunter

collections. How about the

Lightward's Battlestaff

? The PoF specialization minis like

Mini Scourge Akesi Xuni

?

And then there is stuff like the Wayfarer's Henge, the Mark Y Golem, the Requiem Armor or the Dragonsblood Weapons. There's Tequatl's Hoard and the Pile of Regurgitated Armor. All of those, while bound, certainly fit the requirement of being soloable and special while requiring a good bit of what you might call farming.