Breakdown of all MMORPGs?

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
16 answers Last reply
More about breakdown mmorpgs
  1. 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.
  2. 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
  3. 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.
  4. 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
  5. 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.
  6. 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
  7. 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
  8. 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!)
  9. 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.
  10. 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
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. 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'
  15. 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.
  16. 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...
Ask a new question

Read More

PC gaming Games IBM RPG Video Games