Breakdown of all MMORPGs?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

I'm thinking of giving one a try, but I really don't
know a damned thing about them. Are there any pages
out there that list a bunch along with general
information? I'm especially interested in games that
can be largely played solo. I don't have any particular
genre preference, but I understand that it's mostly
fantasy out there.

Pete

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Peter Meilinger wrote:
> I'm thinking of giving one a try, but I really don't
> know a damned thing about them. Are there any pages
> out there that list a bunch along with general
> information? I'm especially interested in games that
> can be largely played solo. I don't have any particular
> genre preference, but I understand that it's mostly
> fantasy out there.

If you're mainly interested in playing solo, I'd strongly reconsider
getting into an MMORPG, unless you're desperate for a new game or
something. The main reason to play one is to group with other people.
If you're not interested in that, you can get basically the same
experience with a single player RPG and it'll be a lot cheaper ($50 vs.
$50 + $10-15/month - 6 months of play and you're paying $110-140 for
one game - of course most single player RPGs don't last 6 months, but
still).

However, if you do decide you want to play an MMORPG, the one I would
recommend is World of Warcraft. It's a very solo-friendly game and it's
a lot of fun. It's a much "nicer" game than most MMORPGs out there. For
example, you don't lose anything when you die - it just costs you a few
minutes while you run back to your corpse.

Keep in mind, though, that while it is possible to play solo most of
the time, you'll be handicapping yourself somewhat by doing so, since
in order to complete certain quests, you'll either need to get a group
together, or level up past the level of the quest, making the reward
less significant. The bright side is that ALL the quests in the game
are optional, so you don't have to do anything you don't want to do
(though skipping quests will mean you'll miss out on some really nice
rewards).

So anyway, that's the one I'd suggest. Make sure your computer will run
it before you buy, though - it's a fairly high-end game, hardware wise.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Peter Meilinger <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote in
news:d3v4q8$blc$2@news3.bu.edu:

> Are there any page out there that list
> a bunch along with general information?

www.mmorpg.com
www.mmorpg.net

Gandalf Parker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

burt1112@hotmail.com wrote in
news:1113795482.454617.121920@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> If you're mainly interested in playing solo, I'd strongly reconsider
> getting into an MMORPG, unless you're desperate for a new game or
> something. The main reason to play one is to group with other people.

Im not sure that Id agree with that. Interaction with people, yes. But
not necessarily grouping.

Such as, Ultima Online would provide a large world, many things to do,
the same "run back to corpse" you mentioned, and a player-run economy
for things that are crafted or found. Plus now you can play with no
crowds, and for free, on the player-run shards

Gandalf Parker
-- Hey my wife loves me playing Ultima Online.
I get to pack-rat, try my hand at making things, visit other peoples
junk sales, kill & skin animals... all the things she hates me doing in
our garage.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In article <1113795482.454617.121920@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
burt1112@hotmail.com says...
> Peter Meilinger wrote:
> > I'm thinking of giving one a try, but I really don't
> > know a damned thing about them. Are there any pages
> > out there that list a bunch along with general
> > information? I'm especially interested in games that
> > can be largely played solo. I don't have any particular
> > genre preference, but I understand that it's mostly
> > fantasy out there.
>
> If you're mainly interested in playing solo, I'd strongly reconsider
> getting into an MMORPG, unless you're desperate for a new game or
> something. The main reason to play one is to group with other people.
> If you're not interested in that, you can get basically the same
> experience with a single player RPG and it'll be a lot cheaper ($50 vs.
> $50 + $10-15/month - 6 months of play and you're paying $110-140 for
> one game - of course most single player RPGs don't last 6 months, but
> still).
>
> However, if you do decide you want to play an MMORPG, the one I would
> recommend is World of Warcraft. It's a very solo-friendly game and it's
> a lot of fun. It's a much "nicer" game than most MMORPGs out there. For
> example, you don't lose anything when you die - it just costs you a few
> minutes while you run back to your corpse.

I started my first MMORPG last weekend, and I picked World of Warcraft,
for exactly those reasons. I think it's a good choice. I would
describe the solo experience as a cross between Morrowind and Diablo 2,
and mostly I've been soloing. But it's fun to join up with a group now
and again.

- Gerry Quinn

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Peter Meilinger wrote:
> I'm thinking of giving one a try, but I really don't
> know a damned thing about them. Are there any pages
> out there that list a bunch along with general
> information? I'm especially interested in games that
> can be largely played solo. I don't have any particular
> genre preference, but I understand that it's mostly
> fantasy out there.

I know exactly what kind of resource you're looking for, and I promise
you, such a thing doesn't exist. Someone already posted a couple links
to well known MMOG sites- and I would recommend them as well- but even
those sites don't give you a side-by-side comparison of features,
requirements, death penalties, or anti-abuse measures. I'm about to
start compiling just such a list for my own personal reference, in case
I get bored with WoW before the single-player games I'm waiting for are
published. If I ever collect enough useful information I'm sure I'll
publish it somewhere- but I really wouldn't mind if one of the more
established sites beat me to it. The main problem is finding OBJECTIVE
information about an MMOG, as the communities built around all of these
games are pretty fanatical- and information from the publishers becomes
outdated rapidly, as patches often make significant changes to game
mechanics.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

burt1112@hotmail.com looked up from reading the entrails of the porn
spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:

>Peter Meilinger wrote:
>> I'm thinking of giving one a try, but I really don't
>> know a damned thing about them. Are there any pages
>> out there that list a bunch along with general
>> information? I'm especially interested in games that
>> can be largely played solo. I don't have any particular
>> genre preference, but I understand that it's mostly
>> fantasy out there.
>
>If you're mainly interested in playing solo, I'd strongly reconsider
>getting into an MMORPG, unless you're desperate for a new game or
>something. The main reason to play one is to group with other people.

Er no.
The main reason to play an MMORPG (or any other game) is to have fun.

I play City of Heroes, I usually play solo.

Other people being around in a MMO games means that I *can* group if I
want or need to, an option not present in single player games.
I can also stand around and chat with people if I want to, or just
wander around sightseeing.

There have been multiplayer online games (Muds and such) that have no
grouping mechanism - you're simply a solo player in a shared world and
may not be able to affect another player directly at all (but could
trade items, kill a monster that killed them and is standing on their
corpse, so they can get their stuff back, etc.)

MMO just means there's lots and lots of people in a shared online
environment, it doesn't imply grouping at all.

The other main reason to play an MMORPG is that they are in constant
development/evolution.
IE COH has had some fairly major changes in the time i've been playing
it - new areas, new animations (for some existing powers), new character
class - soon to get more costume options, eventually to have 4 more new
"classes" and other power sets, non-combat skills, etc.

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Gandalf Parker wrote:
>
> Such as, Ultima Online would provide a large world, many things to do,
> the same "run back to corpse" you mentioned, and a player-run economy
> for things that are crafted or found. Plus now you can play with no
> crowds, and for free, on the player-run shards

Is there a free client too?


--KG

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Konrad Gaertner <kgaertner@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
news:42642A4E.E0D029FB@worldnet.att.net:

> Gandalf Parker wrote:
>>
>> Such as, Ultima Online would provide a large world, many things to do,
>> the same "run back to corpse" you mentioned, and a player-run economy
>> for things that are crafted or found. Plus now you can play with no
>> crowds, and for free, on the player-run shards
>
> Is there a free client too?

There is work on one. I heard that one was avaialable under a different
name also but I never bothered to track down if it was some warez or not.

Most people I mention it to had some old UO disc laying around. I think you
can still find it sometimes being offered on Ebay.

Gandalf Parker
-- I was asked "Do you think playing games is a life?"
And I responded "Dont you think living life is a game?"
(and by the way, Im winning!)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Peter Meilinger <mellnger@bu.edu> once tried to test me with:

> I'm thinking of giving one a try, but I really don't
> know a damned thing about them. Are there any pages
> out there that list a bunch along with general
> information? I'm especially interested in games that
> can be largely played solo. I don't have any particular
> genre preference, but I understand that it's mostly
> fantasy out there.

The only thing you need to know is World of Warcraft. It's easy and it's
aimed for soloers.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Gandalf Parker <gandalf@most.of.my.favorite.sites> looked up from
reading the entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good,
the signs say:

>Konrad Gaertner <kgaertner@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
>news:42642A4E.E0D029FB@worldnet.att.net:
>
>> Gandalf Parker wrote:
>>>
>>> Such as, Ultima Online would provide a large world, many things to do,
>>> the same "run back to corpse" you mentioned, and a player-run economy
>>> for things that are crafted or found. Plus now you can play with no
>>> crowds, and for free, on the player-run shards
>>
>> Is there a free client too?
>
>There is work on one. I heard that one was avaialable under a different
>name also but I never bothered to track down if it was some warez or not.

There's the UOGold 15 day trial that can be downloaded from fileplanet.
Since free shards don't use registration codes, it can act as a client
for free shards with no time limit.

>Most people I mention it to had some old UO disc laying around. I think you
>can still find it sometimes being offered on Ebay.

The only problem being that so many shards include newer content and
require Age of Shadows. But the UOGold download takes care of that.

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

World of Warcraft for sure, although you can have a lot of fun in City
of Heroes too, both great games and solo-friendly. World of Warcraft
is fantasy while City of Heroes is just an alternate present day where
everyone is a superhero.
Everquest 2 is a great game too, but definitely not the best option for
soloers.
I actually think that MMORPGs are cheaper than standard games. Before
MMORPGs I used to buy a game a month, so about $30/month average, and
games I would normally finish in at most a couple of weeks. Now I pay
$40-50 for the game and $15/month.
Now, an even better option for the OP, try to make someone you know
play with you, that's where MMORPGs really shine, playing with friends.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

burt1112@hotmail.com writes:

> Peter Meilinger wrote:
>> I'm thinking of giving one a try, but I really don't
>> know a damned thing about them. Are there any pages
>> out there that list a bunch along with general
>> information? I'm especially interested in games that
>> can be largely played solo. I don't have any particular
>> genre preference, but I understand that it's mostly
>> fantasy out there.
>
> If you're mainly interested in playing solo, I'd strongly reconsider
> getting into an MMORPG, unless you're desperate for a new game or
> something. The main reason to play one is to group with other people.
> If you're not interested in that, you can get basically the same
> experience with a single player RPG and it'll be a lot cheaper ($50 vs.
> $50 + $10-15/month - 6 months of play and you're paying $110-140 for
> one game - of course most single player RPGs don't last 6 months, but
> still).

Well, Guild War is a semi-MMORPG with no monthly fee, and no "random"
player interaction outside towns, as it is fully instantiated. You
can play solo (or rather with NPC henchmen) in all the combat areas
and never meet another player. Might be a good choice for people who
are not quite ready for a full-blown shared world MMORPG yet.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Knight37 wrote:
> Peter Meilinger <mellnger@bu.edu> once tried to test me with:
>
> > I'm thinking of giving one a try, but I really don't
> > know a damned thing about them. Are there any pages
> > out there that list a bunch along with general
> > information? I'm especially interested in games that
> > can be largely played solo. I don't have any particular
> > genre preference, but I understand that it's mostly
> > fantasy out there.
>
> The only thing you need to know is World of Warcraft. It's easy and
it's
> aimed for soloers.

Aimed for soloers? I'm not sure about that. It's certainly possible to
solo, yes, but there are a LOT of quests (particularly the dungeon
quests) where you simply must have a group if you want to do them at
anything even close to the level you're supposed to do them at. Sure,
you can wait until level 25 and solo that dungeon quest you got back at
level 20 - but by then, the reward will be nearly insignificant.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

or you can just abandon those quests (a big minority) and just do the
other hundreds of quests that you can solo. Just because 1 of every 50
quests requires a group doesn't mean the game is not 'solo oriented'

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

wolfing1@yahoo.com wrote:
> or you can just abandon those quests (a big minority) and just do the
> other hundreds of quests that you can solo. Just because 1 of every
50
> quests requires a group doesn't mean the game is not 'solo oriented'

The problem is, as you go up in levels, more and more of the quests you
get revolve around the dungeons. This makes it much more difficult to
solo at the higher levels. By the time you hit 55-60, there's basically
nothing to do BUT dungeon quests.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

burt1112@hotmail.com wrote:
> The problem is, as you go up in levels, more and more of the quests you
> get revolve around the dungeons. This makes it much more difficult to
> solo at the higher levels. By the time you hit 55-60, there's basically
> nothing to do BUT dungeon quests.

Not true. I'm level 59 now and my journey from 55-59 has been primarily
on the strength of NON-dungeon quests in Winterspring, the Plaguelands,
Burning Steppes, Blasted Lands and Silithus.

Cheers!
David...