having said that, "forced grouping" to me means that I cannot continue evolving my character unless I do missions or something that requires a group. Same with gear. If I can only get decent gear through grouping then that is forced grouping.
So for you EQ and DAoC would not be considered "forced grouping" since you can solo to the cap in those games? Or you would only consider the raiding "end game" to be forced grouping in those games?
I think that's an extreme minority position, and that the majority of people would say EQ was a forced grouping game, even though you COULD solo to the cap. It wasn't fast or easy, but you could certainly do it.
For me, as long as I can evolve my character and get decent (but doesn't have to be god like) gear so that I'm not turned away when I want to group, then I dont' consider that forced grouping.
If however it takes a person in groups 6 months to get to cap and it would take me solo to get to cap 3 years then I would say that wasn't forced grouping but I wouldn't play the game as that pretty much leaves out the person who mostly solos.
If however it took a player, the same play time, 6 months in groups and me solo about 8 or 9 months then that is acceptable.
"leaves out the person who mostly solos" is pretty much the definition of "forced grouping".
Again, no game I know of stops players from playing the game solo, so "forced grouping" isn't some game where you log on and you're automatically put in a group, and you can't get out of it.
People have never used the term "forced grouping" to mean that as far as I know.
they have always used "forced grouping" to mean "leaves out the person who mostly solos".
The point of this post is, when do you feel left out?
For you it was 6 months versus 3 years? THAT is when you would feel "forced to group" or to put it in your terms, "left out if you mostly solo"?
So 6 months grouped versus 9 months solo would be ok, and NOT feel like forced grouping?
I think, but I'm not absolutely positive, that this is more of a ration than WoW has.
I don't think it takes an extra 3 months to make it to the cap if you don't group in WoW.
I think what the issue is is that you keep using the example of games that "you" know.
In lineage 2 there are several instances where not only do you need a group to advance your character, but in some cases a raid. yes a raid. Three in fact.
In Aion, there is gear that can only be gotten in a group by collecting these "hair" things in certain group only areas and in one instance that I know of, a very powerful skill that can only be gotten when doing group based quests
In LOTRO you need a group in order to do the instances where you can get the tokens for your radiance gear. One could say that radiance gear is not required but it does have the best stats regardless of whether you need the radiance.
So again, any of these things can be a bottle neck for the solo player.
Ok, I do understand your point, but I wasn't really so much concerned with "bottlenecks" but rather the majority of the game to the level cap.
I understand you that if you can't go past Zone A until you do this group dungeon, that for that tiny little part of the game, you are "forced to group".
But my question is about the general game play, not just a particular bottle neck in the game.
When would you feel "forced to group" for the entire game?
I think the only game I know of that is purported to have grouping throughout the entire game is final fantasy. Also parts of Vanguard though one can solo up but it did start out with more group only quests.
Oh, and also, one needs groups for certain book quests in lotro. They did make book one soloable so now I am actually following along the story. However, the later books do have group only areas.
The thing is, I am of the idea that not all soloers solo just because they like it or just because they have to. I think there are players who just feel uncomforable being forced in a situation with strangers where they are required to perform. Not to mentoin in some cases where they are expected to have certain builds or certain gear.
I know with myself, if I get a bottle neck then my tendency is just ot leave that at an end and not go back. I find it too large of a pain in the neck to get a group together for these things. Most of my completing group only content is usually dependant on serendipity.
edit: the other not so nice part of grouping is that if I want to take in the story the group either doesn' care (most of the time in my experience) or wants to rush through it.
This has happened in LOTRO, DDO (especialy DDO) and guild wars.
There I was reading everything and the group was either way up ahead or in the case of guild wars, they all opted out of the cut scene.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
The only MMOs I have ever considered as forced grouping were FFXI and Vanguard when they were released, unless I'm forgetting one or two somewhere. Both have since received some increase in soloable content so I don't know how either currently compares. There was a point in either one when you would not see your experience bar move an inch after hours of killing mobs solo. That is my definition of forced-grouping, when the time you would play soloing to max level is unreasonably and outrageously longer then any other method of play. I would still be leveling to max level if I started those at release soloing everything with that level of advancement, You're basically not even playing with the idea of advancing at that point, unless you're masochistic. I played EQ briefly, and played DAoC for quite awhile, and neither one would be forced-grouping MMOs in my opinion even comparing my definition to the time friends spent playing those two to max level. I had one max level Eldritch and halfway to max Bard in DAoC and only played a couple dozen levels of EQ (wasn't my thing back then).
If a developer asked me what they would have to do to not force grouping, I would say scale the leveling speed to max with no more then a few days of concentrated quests and killing mobs to reach the next level. If it goes on a week of average play time at the last level to reach max, then it's probably too slow for the majority of today's players to enjoy it solo. I'm sure everyone's opinion on this would differ a bit though. My average leveling time in WoW was a couple nights of casual play to reach max from the last level, and I haven't played EQ2 seriously enough to give an average but only have a couple mid-level characters. That's because I've spent a lot of time on getting AAs though, so I would probably have at least one max level in EQ2 without frozen XP. I think EQ2 has the right idea, offering people a faster way to max level or slower method with more rewards.
I personally think grouping should always have an advantage over soloing because it's a multi-player game and playing it that way should be promoted, but people shouldn't feel unreasonably punished either if they can't find a group for the time period they are able to play, or they just don't want to be social sometimes.
A big factor is how streamlined grouping is. In every other genre grouping isn't "forced", it's simple fun teamplay. You join a team and have fun.
In MMORPGs (historically) grouping involved excessive (and unnecessary) time-sinks. First to get the group together, and then to get to the same location. Both represent a Time cost to the player, but neither represents a concrete payout in Fun. Good game design is a process of delivering fun efficiently to players, so this high-cost low-payoff situation is fairly undesirable.
A second factor is how grouping is presented. If you basically present the player with two game modes (grouping and soloing) and neglect to inform them that soloing is a Terrible Idea (because it's under-rewarded) then players are going to feel a little betrayed by the game. Why provide the Terrible option at all if that's the case?
I can see games designed fun with or without "forced" grouping, but if you're going to do forced grouping then you better do it right.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Forced grouping + significant death penalty = community building
Yes but also = a fast decreasing player base in MMo's until you can group solo.
Just my opinion of course: everything that is "too harsh" is abandoned in the (not even ) long run.
Be that PvP, PVE, grouping.
We are weak. At least I am.
Its embarrassing when an NPC compliments you in an MMo, the only relevant, cool and epic things come from players whispering you Grtz, mate, we did it. copyright Pilnkplonk
There if forced, in the figuaratively sense, and then there is forced, in the literally sense. The latter one does not exist in MMORPGs as no game forces you to group.
However some games like EQ, FF XII and DAOC, for all practical purposes forces you to group, because advancing your character is either very, very slow compared to grouping or not possible at all (very rare).
I personally would say that when soloing gives you less than 25% of the EXP rate of grouping then it is no longer a practical, viable choice. If I need to spend more than four times the amount of time leveling than if I would group I dont feel that to be practical and hence I feel that I am "forced" to group.
I think a happy balance would be if soloing gave you 75% the EXP rate of grouping. Then the incentive of grouping would still be there but soloing would be a viable option as well when you dont have the time (or dont feel to) group.
Honestly I don't think this forced group is the right question. It's the ease of grouping. Do you know what discourages grouping for the majority of people? Time.
Exactly my feelings too, tired of wasting up to an hour sometimes to find a group for a single quest or instance.
I don't think it takes an extra 3 months to make it to the cap if you don't group in WoW.
If you only group in WoW, it will take a lot longer to hit cap. That`s going to be a lot of sitting around waiting for a group - even with the LFD tool.
I dont' think so, but in any case the point is, when would you feel forced to group?
It depends what you want from the game and the options you are setting for yourselves.
Someone would do dungeon runs on certain points to finish the quests (with mostly better gear and extra EXP). Someone would do dungeons to get the rare blue gear at the end of a X8/X9 bracket to run Bg's.
To get the better gear in WOW you need to do group content in 95% of the case (in both end game as in leveling). That's the difference with WOW pre 2010.
So why don't people run dungeons all the time? Various reasons: time (BRD takes hours), money (it is far more effective to get gold from quests and dungeons/raids are expensive), XP gains, professions, seasonal content, extra waiting time, etc...
It depends of what the player wants, the time he has and the kind of game he is after depending on his ... mood?
That's why the new LFG tool is a breath of fresh air: more options.
Its embarrassing when an NPC compliments you in an MMo, the only relevant, cool and epic things come from players whispering you Grtz, mate, we did it. copyright Pilnkplonk
Forced grouping + significant death penalty = community building
Yes but also = a fast decreasing player base in MMo's until you can group solo.
Just my opinion of course: everything that is "too harsh" is abandoned in the (not even ) long run.
Be that PvP, PVE, grouping.
We are weak. At least I am.
In PVE, if the death penalty is substantial (not crippling, but solid enough that you know it's there), immersion goes up and the presence of other players becomes more important.
Immersion goes up because you "feel", be it a tingling in your stomach as you make your way through that dark dangerous forest to the glee and sense of relief you get in making it to the other side.
Presence of other players becomes more important, because at any time, you might be able to intervene and save them or they you. Better yet, you might group together to travese that dark dangerous forest more safely.
I have not really seen folks in a PVE game quit because the death penalty was harsh; in fact it seems they stayed because of the reasons I have noted above.
I have seen people quit MMO's because the gameplay was too easy and lame, and the communities were so dead because no one really had a reason to interact with one another other than to spam stuff about "Chuck Norris".
Now, on the topic of PVP games, that's another story. Few folks can hang in a hardcore PVP game; definitely a niche market.
The only MMOs I have ever considered as forced grouping were FFXI and Vanguard when they were released, unless I'm forgetting one or two somewhere. Both have since received some increase in soloable content so I don't know how either currently compares. There was a point in either one when you would not see your experience bar move an inch after hours of killing mobs solo. That is my definition of forced-grouping, when the time you would play soloing to max level is unreasonably and outrageously longer then any other method of play. I would still be leveling to max level if I started those at release soloing everything with that level of advancement, You're basically not even playing with the idea of advancing at that point, unless you're masochistic. I played EQ briefly, and played DAoC for quite awhile, and neither one would be forced-grouping MMOs in my opinion even comparing my definition to the time friends spent playing those two to max level. I had one max level Eldritch and halfway to max Bard in DAoC and only played a couple dozen levels of EQ (wasn't my thing back then).
I think that many people on this forum ranting about "forced grouping" would happily play a game like DAoC, which IS considered a forced grouping game.
They insist a "forced grouping game" would absolutely fail, but I'm willing to bet they wouldn't even complain about the advancement rate in DAoC, even though it's considered "forced grouping".
They would find that "forced grouping" means they will level solo a bit slower than in WoW, but they can level to the cap solo just fine.
I think what the issue is is that you keep using the example of games that "you" know.
In lineage 2 there are several instances where not only do you need a group to advance your character, but in some cases a raid. yes a raid. Three in fact.
In Aion, there is gear that can only be gotten in a group based areas, one of them is done by collecting these "hair" things in a certain group only area and in one instance that I know of, a very powerful skill that can only be gotten when doing group based quests. Also, in Aion, in orderr to access a secluded area (forbidden library or some such thing on the asmo side, I believe Elyos have their version) you need to complete a quest chain that has several group only quests.
In LOTRO you need a group in order to do the instances where you can get the tokens for your radiance gear. One could say that radiance gear is not required but it does have the best stats regardless of whether you need the radiance.
So again, any of these things can be a bottle neck for the solo player.
You have a valid point. For YOU, forced grouping means you cannot level to the cap without ever grouping.
If you hit a "bottleneck" where you feel you need to do a group dungeon or content to progress, you quit the game.
The latter one does not exist in MMORPGs as no game forces you to group.
Off the top of my head, try playing Soul of the Ultimate Nation and Warrior Epic, then say they don't exist.
Did you read my entire post? Did you understand the part were I explained the difference being actually forced to and to be forced to for all practical purposes?
To my knowledge there is no MMORPG that forces you to group, in the literal sense, but rather it does it indirectly by making soloing very hard or not worthwhile.
There if forced, in the figuaratively sense, and then there is forced, in the literally sense. The latter one does not exist in MMORPGs as no game forces you to group.
However some games like EQ, FF XII and DAOC, for all practical purposes forces you to group, because advancing your character is either very, very slow compared to grouping or not possible at all (very rare).
I personally would say that when soloing gives you less than 25% of the EXP rate of grouping then it is no longer a practical, viable choice. If I need to spend more than four times the amount of time leveling than if I would group I dont feel that to be practical and hence I feel that I am "forced" to group.
I think a happy balance would be if soloing gave you 75% the EXP rate of grouping. Then the incentive of grouping would still be there but soloing would be a viable option as well when you dont have the time (or dont feel to) group.
I think a 25% xp bonus is probably worth the trouble of traveling, and chatting to get a group together.
Anything less, and more than likely it's just faster to solo, and everytime you group you'll feel like you're swimming upstream, and you might as well just solo.
The idea, IMO, is to make grouping rewarding enough that you don't resent chatting, or traveling.
I kill a mob solo, and make 100 xp points.
I spend time chatting, and traveling, and make ZERO xp points.
But then, I make 125 xp points, which makes up for the chatting and traveling. If someone says, our group would be good for the Blue zone, I don't mind traveling 5 minutes to get there. I'll make up that travel time in xtra xp.
But if there's no bonus, then the whole time I'm traveling, I'll be annoyed because it won't be worth going to Blue Zone. I could just solo right where i'm at, and make more XP. Which is what everyone does in that situation.
There if forced, in the figuaratively sense, and then there is forced, in the literally sense. The latter one does not exist in MMORPGs as no game forces you to group.
However some games like EQ, FF XII and DAOC, for all practical purposes forces you to group, because advancing your character is either very, very slow compared to grouping or not possible at all (very rare).
I personally would say that when soloing gives you less than 25% of the EXP rate of grouping then it is no longer a practical, viable choice. If I need to spend more than four times the amount of time leveling than if I would group I dont feel that to be practical and hence I feel that I am "forced" to group.
I think a happy balance would be if soloing gave you 75% the EXP rate of grouping. Then the incentive of grouping would still be there but soloing would be a viable option as well when you dont have the time (or dont feel to) group.
I think a 25% xp bonus is probably worth the trouble of traveling, and chatting to get a group together.
Anything less, and more than likely it's just faster to solo, and everytime you group you'll feel like you're swimming upstream, and you might as well just solo.
The idea, IMO, is to make grouping rewarding enough that you don't resent chatting, or traveling.
I kill a mob solo, and make 100 xp points.
I spend time chatting, and traveling, and make ZERO xp points.
But then, I make 125 xp points, which makes up for the chatting and traveling. If someone says, our group would be good for the Blue zone, I don't mind traveling 5 minutes to get there. I'll make up that travel time in xtra xp.
But if there's no bonus, then the whole time I'm traveling, I'll be annoyed because it won't be worth going to Blue Zone. I could just solo right where i'm at, and make more XP. Which is what everyone does in that situation.
As long as the "bonus" isn't artificial then I'm good. If you all think that solo player gets exactly half than the experience of a two-man group, you're wrong. The sum is always greater. Always.
If the game has mana/health regen over time, mobs will be killed with less effort and the whole group spends less or no time recovering from their last encounter
If mobs heal or regenerate, more DPS will kill it faster than in half the time when killed by a solo player. For example: If a mob heals 10 per second and dps from one character is 20 the mob dies three times faster with two man group than with a solo player.
Shutdown and specialization. For example anti-casters save energy/power/HP/mana for the whole group and enemies may fall faster than just kicking each other's shins like in those ancient simple MMOs. Specialization is also where the holy trinity kicks in (but for the love of god try to mix it up a little!).
Artificial bonuses are not needed since grouping is more efficient in virtually EVERY GAME. MMOs that allow soloing are not against grouping.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Imo, you are forced to group when you can no longer progress your character or gear him/her up without grouping with other people,has nothing to do with beeing able to solo up to max level as long as you dont find dexent loot solo the game forces you to group.
As long as the "bonus" isn't artificial then I'm good. If you all think that solo player gets exactly half than the experience of a two-man group, you're wrong. The sum is always greater. Always.
If the game has mana/health regen over time, mobs will be killed with less effort and the whole group spends less or no time recovering from their last encounter
If mobs heal or regenerate, more DPS will kill it faster than in half the time when killed by a solo player. For example: If a mob heals 10 per second and dps from one character is 20 the mob dies three times faster with two man group than with a solo player.
Shutdown and specialization. For example anti-casters save energy/power/HP/mana for the whole group and enemies may fall faster than just kicking each other's shins like in those ancient simple MMOs. Specialization is also where the holy trinity kicks in (but for the love of god try to mix it up a little!).
Artificial bonuses are not needed since grouping is more efficient in virtually EVERY GAME. MMOs that allow soloing are not against grouping.
Whoa whoa whoa...
Logic and reason in a MMORPG.com posting... where is my report button!
I can only say that you are "wrong" if you are questing and the quest requires you to pick up "X of item Y" because in most MMO's each player in the party has to pick up X of Y so it takes longer.
Now, does the time you save doing quests that are "kill Z of W" which go much much faster in a group make up for the collection quests? I don't know, maybe maybe not.
Make collections quests work for parties so if one person picks something up all party members get it, and grouping will always always always be more efficient and faster even in a solo-friendly quest based progression MMO.
How about I ask the OP when are you forced to solo?
For every main stream MMO you can group up. The amount of exp you get isn't that much different from soloing. And why does it bother you soloer get more exp or not.
And to me the reason why forced grouping is bad "before you reach endgame", is you can't guarantee the newbie zone will be full of people to party with. There are exception, for example wow or FFonline, but for most other games, the newbie zone tend to be empty after a few years.
The endgame for all MMORPG is forced grouping. There are crafting, farming, daily quests that can be soloed. But pretty much everything else require a group for progression.
How about I ask the OP when are you forced to solo?
For every main stream MMO you can group up. The amount of exp you get isn't that much different from soloing. And why does it bother you soloer get more exp or not.
And to me the reason why forced grouping is bad "before you reach endgame", is you can't guarantee the newbie zone will be full of people to party with. There are exception, for example wow or FFonline, but for most other games, the newbie zone tend to be empty after a few years.
The endgame for all MMORPG is forced grouping. There are crafting, farming, daily quests that can be soloed. But pretty much everything else require a group for progression.
You can't force the willing. The only reason I play MMORPGs is because I think grouping is fun. I have pretty much zero interest in soloing through any MMORPG, or even doing significant content solo, so I never feel "forced" to group.
I think it's human nature to place less value on activities that are pointless.
So if you make just as much XP solo as grouping, that makes the grouping pointless.
Why is it fun to group? to overcome an obstacle. How is it an obstacle if you can solo around it? It's not. So then it's just a a pointless activity, and therefore, at least for me, not near as fun or satisfying.
I will give you a candy bar if you write me a poem.
I will also give you the same candy bar, if you write me 10 poems.
Most of the human race will see writing the other 9 poems as pointless, and so would I.
I will give you 100 xp if you stand right here, and whack that mob.
I will also give you 100 xp, if you talk to a bunch of strangers, find out if they want to group with you, then travel to their location, then decide what you want to kill, then travel there and kill it.
I think most of the human race would see that as pointless, since I could just stand right there and solo whack a mob and get the same thing.
Just common sense really.
And of course, the reverse would be true. Why would it bother you if a group made more XP?
In what game can a solo player kill the same mob that would be challenging for 8 players in a group? I don't think I've seen such a game.
A game where a solo player can kill a mob, that 8 players together can barely kill? How is that even possible?
If a solo player can kill it, then why would it take 8 players to kill it? that makes no sense.
well you kinda can in Guild Wars, heroes/henchies, not really solo as the other players are replaced by AI teammates but still you can finish content designed for 8 people on your own.
I think a 25% xp bonus is probably worth the trouble of traveling, and chatting to get a group together.
Anything less, and more than likely it's just faster to solo, and everytime you group you'll feel like you're swimming upstream, and you might as well just solo.
The idea, IMO, is to make grouping rewarding enough that you don't resent chatting, or traveling.
I kill a mob solo, and make 100 xp points.
I spend time chatting, and traveling, and make ZERO xp points.
But then, I make 125 xp points, which makes up for the chatting and traveling. If someone says, our group would be good for the Blue zone, I don't mind traveling 5 minutes to get there. I'll make up that travel time in xtra xp.
But if there's no bonus, then the whole time I'm traveling, I'll be annoyed because it won't be worth going to Blue Zone. I could just solo right where i'm at, and make more XP. Which is what everyone does in that situation.
I dont' even know what you talking about. I always bother to do some group contents for FUN!
Even if I can get better exp for soloing, I always bother to do it for FUN!
If you are grouper bothered with soloer because you can't find a group. I can understand...
But if you just some person get jealous with soloer getting their tiny amount of fater exp over you... I have nothing more to say.
So if you make just as much XP solo as grouping, that makes the grouping pointless.
That's pointless? I thought you like grouping just for fun?
Anyway I'm neither a soloer or grouper. But I dont' see any problem soloer getting relative amount of same exp.
And it really depends game to game. I dont' see any problem with some MMO being easily soloable, and some being forced grouping. It's really only about choice.
Why is it fun to group? to overcome an obstacle. How is it an obstacle if you can solo around it? It's not. So then it's just a a pointless activity, and therefore, at least for me, not near as fun or satisfying.
But then why play an MMultiplayerORPG?
I just cant understand this ongoing discussions here on mmorpg about grouping, if you dont want to group there are way better single rpg's on the market then an solo friendly "mmo"
Why is it fun to group? to overcome an obstacle. How is it an obstacle if you can solo around it? It's not. So then it's just a a pointless activity, and therefore, at least for me, not near as fun or satisfying.
But then why play an MMultiplayerORPG?
I just cant understand this ongoing discussions here on mmorpg about grouping, if you dont want to group there are way better single rpg's on the market then an solo friendly "mmo"
I think it have more to do with carrot on a stick.
When I start playing an MMORPG, I get the feeling it's boundless, I'll be playing forever.
I pick up a single rpg's, I have no motivation to play, I mean what's the point, it'll be over in 5 days.
Comments
I think the only game I know of that is purported to have grouping throughout the entire game is final fantasy. Also parts of Vanguard though one can solo up but it did start out with more group only quests.
Oh, and also, one needs groups for certain book quests in lotro. They did make book one soloable so now I am actually following along the story. However, the later books do have group only areas.
The thing is, I am of the idea that not all soloers solo just because they like it or just because they have to. I think there are players who just feel uncomforable being forced in a situation with strangers where they are required to perform. Not to mentoin in some cases where they are expected to have certain builds or certain gear.
I know with myself, if I get a bottle neck then my tendency is just ot leave that at an end and not go back. I find it too large of a pain in the neck to get a group together for these things. Most of my completing group only content is usually dependant on serendipity.
edit: the other not so nice part of grouping is that if I want to take in the story the group either doesn' care (most of the time in my experience) or wants to rush through it.
This has happened in LOTRO, DDO (especialy DDO) and guild wars.
There I was reading everything and the group was either way up ahead or in the case of guild wars, they all opted out of the cut scene.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
The only MMOs I have ever considered as forced grouping were FFXI and Vanguard when they were released, unless I'm forgetting one or two somewhere. Both have since received some increase in soloable content so I don't know how either currently compares. There was a point in either one when you would not see your experience bar move an inch after hours of killing mobs solo. That is my definition of forced-grouping, when the time you would play soloing to max level is unreasonably and outrageously longer then any other method of play. I would still be leveling to max level if I started those at release soloing everything with that level of advancement, You're basically not even playing with the idea of advancing at that point, unless you're masochistic. I played EQ briefly, and played DAoC for quite awhile, and neither one would be forced-grouping MMOs in my opinion even comparing my definition to the time friends spent playing those two to max level. I had one max level Eldritch and halfway to max Bard in DAoC and only played a couple dozen levels of EQ (wasn't my thing back then).
If a developer asked me what they would have to do to not force grouping, I would say scale the leveling speed to max with no more then a few days of concentrated quests and killing mobs to reach the next level. If it goes on a week of average play time at the last level to reach max, then it's probably too slow for the majority of today's players to enjoy it solo. I'm sure everyone's opinion on this would differ a bit though. My average leveling time in WoW was a couple nights of casual play to reach max from the last level, and I haven't played EQ2 seriously enough to give an average but only have a couple mid-level characters. That's because I've spent a lot of time on getting AAs though, so I would probably have at least one max level in EQ2 without frozen XP. I think EQ2 has the right idea, offering people a faster way to max level or slower method with more rewards.
I personally think grouping should always have an advantage over soloing because it's a multi-player game and playing it that way should be promoted, but people shouldn't feel unreasonably punished either if they can't find a group for the time period they are able to play, or they just don't want to be social sometimes.
A big factor is how streamlined grouping is. In every other genre grouping isn't "forced", it's simple fun teamplay. You join a team and have fun.
In MMORPGs (historically) grouping involved excessive (and unnecessary) time-sinks. First to get the group together, and then to get to the same location. Both represent a Time cost to the player, but neither represents a concrete payout in Fun. Good game design is a process of delivering fun efficiently to players, so this high-cost low-payoff situation is fairly undesirable.
A second factor is how grouping is presented. If you basically present the player with two game modes (grouping and soloing) and neglect to inform them that soloing is a Terrible Idea (because it's under-rewarded) then players are going to feel a little betrayed by the game. Why provide the Terrible option at all if that's the case?
I can see games designed fun with or without "forced" grouping, but if you're going to do forced grouping then you better do it right.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Forced grouping + significant death penalty = community building
Yes but also = a fast decreasing player base in MMo's until you can group solo.
Just my opinion of course: everything that is "too harsh" is abandoned in the (not even ) long run.
Be that PvP, PVE, grouping.
We are weak. At least I am.
Its embarrassing when an NPC compliments you in an MMo, the only relevant, cool and epic things come from players whispering you Grtz, mate, we did it. copyright Pilnkplonk
There if forced, in the figuaratively sense, and then there is forced, in the literally sense. The latter one does not exist in MMORPGs as no game forces you to group.
However some games like EQ, FF XII and DAOC, for all practical purposes forces you to group, because advancing your character is either very, very slow compared to grouping or not possible at all (very rare).
I personally would say that when soloing gives you less than 25% of the EXP rate of grouping then it is no longer a practical, viable choice. If I need to spend more than four times the amount of time leveling than if I would group I dont feel that to be practical and hence I feel that I am "forced" to group.
I think a happy balance would be if soloing gave you 75% the EXP rate of grouping. Then the incentive of grouping would still be there but soloing would be a viable option as well when you dont have the time (or dont feel to) group.
My gaming blog
Exactly my feelings too, tired of wasting up to an hour sometimes to find a group for a single quest or instance.
It depends what you want from the game and the options you are setting for yourselves.
Someone would do dungeon runs on certain points to finish the quests (with mostly better gear and extra EXP). Someone would do dungeons to get the rare blue gear at the end of a X8/X9 bracket to run Bg's.
To get the better gear in WOW you need to do group content in 95% of the case (in both end game as in leveling). That's the difference with WOW pre 2010.
So why don't people run dungeons all the time? Various reasons: time (BRD takes hours), money (it is far more effective to get gold from quests and dungeons/raids are expensive), XP gains, professions, seasonal content, extra waiting time, etc...
It depends of what the player wants, the time he has and the kind of game he is after depending on his ... mood?
That's why the new LFG tool is a breath of fresh air: more options.
Its embarrassing when an NPC compliments you in an MMo, the only relevant, cool and epic things come from players whispering you Grtz, mate, we did it. copyright Pilnkplonk
Off the top of my head, try playing Soul of the Ultimate Nation and Warrior Epic, then say they don't exist.
In PVE, if the death penalty is substantial (not crippling, but solid enough that you know it's there), immersion goes up and the presence of other players becomes more important.
Immersion goes up because you "feel", be it a tingling in your stomach as you make your way through that dark dangerous forest to the glee and sense of relief you get in making it to the other side.
Presence of other players becomes more important, because at any time, you might be able to intervene and save them or they you. Better yet, you might group together to travese that dark dangerous forest more safely.
I have not really seen folks in a PVE game quit because the death penalty was harsh; in fact it seems they stayed because of the reasons I have noted above.
I have seen people quit MMO's because the gameplay was too easy and lame, and the communities were so dead because no one really had a reason to interact with one another other than to spam stuff about "Chuck Norris".
Now, on the topic of PVP games, that's another story. Few folks can hang in a hardcore PVP game; definitely a niche market.
I think that many people on this forum ranting about "forced grouping" would happily play a game like DAoC, which IS considered a forced grouping game.
They insist a "forced grouping game" would absolutely fail, but I'm willing to bet they wouldn't even complain about the advancement rate in DAoC, even though it's considered "forced grouping".
They would find that "forced grouping" means they will level solo a bit slower than in WoW, but they can level to the cap solo just fine.
You have a valid point. For YOU, forced grouping means you cannot level to the cap without ever grouping.
If you hit a "bottleneck" where you feel you need to do a group dungeon or content to progress, you quit the game.
Did you read my entire post? Did you understand the part were I explained the difference being actually forced to and to be forced to for all practical purposes?
To my knowledge there is no MMORPG that forces you to group, in the literal sense, but rather it does it indirectly by making soloing very hard or not worthwhile.
My gaming blog
-There is no such thing as forced grouping-
It is a term poorly chosen to described games that emphasize grouping.
I think a 25% xp bonus is probably worth the trouble of traveling, and chatting to get a group together.
Anything less, and more than likely it's just faster to solo, and everytime you group you'll feel like you're swimming upstream, and you might as well just solo.
The idea, IMO, is to make grouping rewarding enough that you don't resent chatting, or traveling.
I kill a mob solo, and make 100 xp points.
I spend time chatting, and traveling, and make ZERO xp points.
But then, I make 125 xp points, which makes up for the chatting and traveling. If someone says, our group would be good for the Blue zone, I don't mind traveling 5 minutes to get there. I'll make up that travel time in xtra xp.
But if there's no bonus, then the whole time I'm traveling, I'll be annoyed because it won't be worth going to Blue Zone. I could just solo right where i'm at, and make more XP. Which is what everyone does in that situation.
As long as the "bonus" isn't artificial then I'm good. If you all think that solo player gets exactly half than the experience of a two-man group, you're wrong. The sum is always greater. Always.
If the game has mana/health regen over time, mobs will be killed with less effort and the whole group spends less or no time recovering from their last encounter
If mobs heal or regenerate, more DPS will kill it faster than in half the time when killed by a solo player. For example: If a mob heals 10 per second and dps from one character is 20 the mob dies three times faster with two man group than with a solo player.
Shutdown and specialization. For example anti-casters save energy/power/HP/mana for the whole group and enemies may fall faster than just kicking each other's shins like in those ancient simple MMOs. Specialization is also where the holy trinity kicks in (but for the love of god try to mix it up a little!).
Artificial bonuses are not needed since grouping is more efficient in virtually EVERY GAME. MMOs that allow soloing are not against grouping.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Imo, you are forced to group when you can no longer progress your character or gear him/her up without grouping with other people,has nothing to do with beeing able to solo up to max level as long as you dont find dexent loot solo the game forces you to group.
Whoa whoa whoa...
Logic and reason in a MMORPG.com posting... where is my report button!
I can only say that you are "wrong" if you are questing and the quest requires you to pick up "X of item Y" because in most MMO's each player in the party has to pick up X of Y so it takes longer.
Now, does the time you save doing quests that are "kill Z of W" which go much much faster in a group make up for the collection quests? I don't know, maybe maybe not.
Make collections quests work for parties so if one person picks something up all party members get it, and grouping will always always always be more efficient and faster even in a solo-friendly quest based progression MMO.
How about I ask the OP when are you forced to solo?
For every main stream MMO you can group up. The amount of exp you get isn't that much different from soloing. And why does it bother you soloer get more exp or not.
And to me the reason why forced grouping is bad "before you reach endgame", is you can't guarantee the newbie zone will be full of people to party with. There are exception, for example wow or FFonline, but for most other games, the newbie zone tend to be empty after a few years.
The endgame for all MMORPG is forced grouping. There are crafting, farming, daily quests that can be soloed. But pretty much everything else require a group for progression.
You can't force the willing. The only reason I play MMORPGs is because I think grouping is fun. I have pretty much zero interest in soloing through any MMORPG, or even doing significant content solo, so I never feel "forced" to group.
I think it's human nature to place less value on activities that are pointless.
So if you make just as much XP solo as grouping, that makes the grouping pointless.
Why is it fun to group? to overcome an obstacle. How is it an obstacle if you can solo around it? It's not. So then it's just a a pointless activity, and therefore, at least for me, not near as fun or satisfying.
I will give you a candy bar if you write me a poem.
I will also give you the same candy bar, if you write me 10 poems.
Most of the human race will see writing the other 9 poems as pointless, and so would I.
I will give you 100 xp if you stand right here, and whack that mob.
I will also give you 100 xp, if you talk to a bunch of strangers, find out if they want to group with you, then travel to their location, then decide what you want to kill, then travel there and kill it.
I think most of the human race would see that as pointless, since I could just stand right there and solo whack a mob and get the same thing.
Just common sense really.
And of course, the reverse would be true. Why would it bother you if a group made more XP?
well you kinda can in Guild Wars, heroes/henchies, not really solo as the other players are replaced by AI teammates but still you can finish content designed for 8 people on your own.
I dont' even know what you talking about. I always bother to do some group contents for FUN!
Even if I can get better exp for soloing, I always bother to do it for FUN!
If you are grouper bothered with soloer because you can't find a group. I can understand...
But if you just some person get jealous with soloer getting their tiny amount of fater exp over you... I have nothing more to say.
But then why play an MMultiplayerORPG?
I just cant understand this ongoing discussions here on mmorpg about grouping, if you dont want to group there are way better single rpg's on the market then an solo friendly "mmo"
I think it have more to do with carrot on a stick.
When I start playing an MMORPG, I get the feeling it's boundless, I'll be playing forever.
I pick up a single rpg's, I have no motivation to play, I mean what's the point, it'll be over in 5 days.