I'm for forced grouping. Playing alone, watching other players passing by is not so much exiting anyway. it's not really multiplayer. You can always replace players with bots and not feel the difference.
Gonna disagree here. Having other people around gives you opportunities to socialize and work together. As an example I was solo questing I'n Lotro when I came across a champion that pulled too many mobs so I jumped In and helped. We decided to group to clear up a couple deeds and we went along our merry way. You wouldn't get that if a game just had bits running around. Even if I solo the option to socialize and band together is there. A mmo needs other players to share the same world whether they choose to interact should be up to the player.
I'm for forced grouping. Playing alone, watching other players passing by is not so much exiting anyway. it's not really multiplayer. You can always replace players with bots and not feel the difference.
I agree, esecially when you send them tells or /wave at them and they don't respond at all.
In some games, the only chatting I could every get was in /ooc or /zone /global.
You walk up to someone and stare at each other for 5 minutes, and even then they still don't reply. And if they do? It's one line and *poof*
Grouping is even worse.
It got so bad in Vanguard that I actually freaked out one time (and so did my nephew) when we were in a full group.
"ARE YOU GUYS MIMES OR WHAT? HELLO????? WHY DONT YOU SPEAK? EVER?" and I went ballistic, because for the past 4 months every group I joined was silent, with me being the only one talking (and my nephew, if he was there). My best friend is a mime IRL so he never helped in groups to chat, but did agree with me people are boring mimes in groups.
In City of Heroes, people were a bit more friendly, almost ALWAYS having a tons of conversation in the group. Loads of it! Never a single problem in that game.
Any other game though? Mimes. Mimes. Mimes. It was horrendously Mime-filled. No one ever speaks in groups anymore, even when 2/3rds of the group are friendly.
It is worse than playing with bots, because at least bots (like in Tribes 2) say stuff like "I will attack the enemy generator." "Thank You." "You are Welcome." in robot.
If being a developer means being quiet, mature, well-spoken, and disconnected from the community, then by all means do me a favor and believe I'm not one.
I don't know what world you live in, but REAL LIFE is the biggest case of Forced Grouping in the entire universe.
Especially in Western Culture (USA & Europe) EVERYTHING and EVERYONE is completely dependent on other people for survival in every way.
Your car (making it, maintaining it) as well as gas, oil, all of these things. Production, harvesting, resource allocation, transportation... you are completely reliant on thousands of other human beings just in a single item in your life.
Now multiple those thousands by the amount of vital things in you rlife. Refrigeration. Electricity. Internet, Cable, Computers, TV's, Cars, Gas, Housing, Plumbing, Garbage Men, Sanitation, Policemen, Firemen, Teachers, Parents, Friends, Community, Government, Military.
Wow, you're forced into grouping with millions upon millions of people, who without you would shrivel up and die because the majority of people not only don't know how to supply food for themselves, there is no nearby food source to supply you or anyone else in your city!
So unless you live on a farm where you built the house yourself and make all the food yourself, living a completely sustained life, you're not only dependent on others but you're forced into grouping with them forever.
Just because you want to "solo" socially without a social group doesn't mean you solo life at all. Not. Even. Close.
If being a developer means being quiet, mature, well-spoken, and disconnected from the community, then by all means do me a favor and believe I'm not one.
I started playing MMOs when EQ came out in 1999 and I never felt forced to group in any game I have ever played. You could solo from start to max level in any class. EQ did encourage grouping by giving bonuses to exp and different loot, but I could still level faster by soloing. If I wanted to make lots of money, soloing was the way to do it so that I didnt have to split every thing six ways.
I really wish newer games gave players incentives to group up at lower levels. WoW killed their own communities by teaching players it was faster and more efficient to solo from lvl 1-80. Even when people do group, they do it in 15 minute bursts and the content is so easy it requires zero talking or coordination. Even PUG raids have turned into join raid, ask for summons, click ready, kill boss or wipe, leave raid.
Until a quality grouping game comes along, most new players will never understand the appeal to a game that encourages grouping.
What is the point of an mmorpg if you can solo it.
Living in a game world with other players. Noone said mmos had to force players to group for them to be considered mmorpgs.
Pretty much this answer. That question keeps getting asked and this answer keeps getting stated. This answerneeds to be stickied somewhere in life.
Never tried to define what an mmorpg is, I just said whats the point of playing one if you soloing through it by yourself? you may aswell buy a single player rgg and load up IRC...
Living in a game world with other players.
Doing what exactly?
Originally posted by Dragon71UK Life is like an MMO, and you can solo that. It`s about choices.
Are you really "Living" if you don't interact with other people?
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
I won't play a game that forces grouping, I enjoy grouping but sometimes I also enjoy going it alone. Amazingly as a social person I can socialize within a game without being in a group. its almost like the dev's think "omg if we don't force em to group they won't talk!!"
Are you really "Living" if you don't interact with other people?
Yep. Many people choose to be recluse. There are over a million hikikomori in Japan.
People still live fine with little social contant, social contant is not something one needs to survive, unlike what others believe. If that was the case, recluse wouldn't exist. It's just a way of life.
Animals are the same way, in similar species, some choose to be part of a pack, others live on their own.
Animals are the same way, in similar species, some choose to be part of a pack, others live on their own.
humans are a social specie though as are our closest relatives, the apes and the majority of the mammals.. We do live in colonies. Loneliness usually causes stress to us. No wonder facebook is so popular.
Never seen a game that you couldn't solo in. Even EQ and FFXI, solo-play was possible just terribly slow.
Keep a very small chunk of the game for solo players, or make mobs tough enough that to solo players would need to fight mobs a good bit below them. Some people honestly just don't have the time to group with others.
Make say..80% of the rest of the game group-oriented and i'd be happy.
A balaced game provides opportunity for both solo and group play. But, I don't think game developers have to plan this balance, it simply comes as a result of making a good game that takes place in a realistic environment. End-game battles are going to have to require group cooperation, not sure why anyone would object to that, but along the way I want ample opportunities to solo or group, as I feel like it. If I have to group to get past level 25 or something I will quit that game. I want a choice. And why do I want a choice? Because, random groups and even guild groups can suck because the people in them suck. I want to solo that day if the group forming to whack the big boss are the people I have hated for the past 60 levels.
If the people who have such a hard on for forced or more grouping can guarantee me that there will be a group available to me anytime and everytime I log into the game and said group wants to do the content I want to do, then I'm ok with it. If not, which I know is the case for every mmo out there, then advancing through the game solo has to be made available.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
I enjoy both styles of gameplay so I prefer a game that has both available to it. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 50/50 or 60/40 favoring grouping works great to me.
One thing I will say though is that when it comes to chained quests or group intended areas in general developers do need to be careful though. Simply because once a game has been out a while it seems a lot of games run into a problem where newer players have a hell of a time trying to find groups for a lot of content. So either there needs to be some sort of tweaking done to allow for higher level players to want to make alts or help lower levels on their mains, or the areas need to be revamped on a continual basis to a degree. So new players don't get completely left behind and miss out on the content because they simply cannot find a group.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
I think "forced" anything especially when it comes to a game like the vast number of MMO's we have is complete and utter horse shit. Nobody is forcing you to do anything you don't like. You are paying them money and if they're doing something you don't like then stop paying them money and go elsewhere where you might find what you like.
It is completely selfish to demand that developers ONLY cater to your whims in regards to the game play features they create.
I don't mind that there are tons of solo friendly games out there that many people like which I don't. Do you see me sitting in there and bitching up a storm asking the developers to make it so it's a Group only game? No.
Self entitlement abounts in this genre.
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-
Originally posted by Illius I think "forced" anything especially when it comes to a game like the vast number of MMO's we have is complete and utter horse shit. Nobody is forcing you to do anything you don't like. You are paying them money and if they're doing something you don't like then stop paying them money and go elsewhere where you might find what you like. It is completely selfish to demand that developers ONLY cater to your whims in regards to the game play features they create. I don't mind that there are tons of solo friendly games out there that many people like which I don't. Do you see me sitting in there and bitching up a storm asking the developers to make it so it's a Group only game? No. Self entitlement abounts in this genre.
People are actually entitled to voice their gaming opinions and gaming preferences. People are even entitled to say what kind of game they would like to play. They are even entitled to have their demands (in the economic sense of the word, as in, they are entitled to say what they have a burning desire to pay for). What they are not entitled to is having those demands met. It is every publishers and developers choice to meet those demands or not.
You are just as entitled to demand a group only game. But the meeting of that demand is not something you are entitled to. Secondly, any time you want something that pleases you, you are being selfish. Groupers that feel that grouping should yield the most powerful loot are selfish. But here's the kicker, there is nothing wrong with that. There is nothing morally wrong with having different games for different groups of people. It's no more wrong than having racing games for racing gamers and golf games for golf gamers.
Are golf gamers bad because they don't want automobile racing in their golf games? No. Likewise, soloers are not bad because they want mmorpgs that are solo-centric. They are just describing the kind of mmorpg they would happily pay for. Nothing wrong with that.
Well, no one responded to my lovely post on the first page. It makes me a sad panda.
Anyhow, I think GW2 provides a good example of community friendly mechanics that don't require forced grouping. Hopefully we'll see some more community reinforcing mechanics from them as well.
Forced grouping creates better community? Really? Honestly, what universe do some of you live in? When people hook up with you only for what they get from it, that's not community! Some people can't seem to take two steps without having a full group with them. That's fine, but that's dependency, not community.
Forced grouping is a mechanic used to slow down players, nothing more, nothing less. Slower progression means less needing to be developed.
"Soloists and those who prefer small groups should never have to feel like they''re the ones getting the proverbial table scraps, as it were." - Scott Hartsman, Senior Producer, Everquest II "People love groups. Its a fallacy that people want to play solo all the time." - Scott Hartsman, Executive Producer, Rift
Well, no one responded to my lovely post on the first page. It makes me a sad panda.
Anyhow, I think GW2 provides a good example of community friendly mechanics that don't require forced grouping. Hopefully we'll see some more community reinforcing mechanics from them as well.
What about Guild Wars 2 is more community friendly than the other 100 MMORPGs? I'm not being sarcastic. I really want to know.
WoW has a bad community for dozens of reasons, but they all boil down to the fact Blizzard Devs don't think fostering a good community is a Design issue when it actually is. Hence there is basically nothing that encourages good behavior to strangers and a lot that encourages or doesn't punish bad behavior. Extreme anonymity is one aspect of WoW that makes things bad, and things like the cross-server Dungeon Finder is one of the many things that allows bad behavior and doesn't encourage good behavior. There are lots of others. It most certainly is NOT a size issue, as WoW has tons of servers to make up for the game's population, whereas other games with fewer subs have correspondingly fewer servers.
Forced grouping is ONE possible system to encourage good behavior and punish bad, but it is an extremely forced solution. I think there are better and more subtle ways to go that still can be solo friendly, as long as you think about the game design from a community perspective. Add in things that reward people for being nice and punish people for being jerks. Make sure GMs are around to monitor public chat (this is seperate from reward/punish systems). Don't do it in a ham-fisted manner, because that isn't necessary. We're pretty social creatures, so making that work for a game isn't THAT hard.
I'lle indulge.
WoW seems to have a bad community, simply because it's so popular. I've seen the same "socially handicapped" players in numerous other games, whether they are MMO's or other online genres. The trick with WoW (And any other game for that amtter) is to find a guild/clan/corps with a mature and friendly following. And believe me, they're out there. they just don't flood the chatchannels like certain individuals do.
I find it silly to blame a game's design for people acting like arses. Reminds me of how a videogame can be blamed when a teenager starts shooting his peers.
How we behave is our own responsibility. No one else forces us to behave like we do, we choose to do so. Should the matter get out of hand for some reason, you can contact a GM and discuss your issue with him/her. What more do you need?
After reading your post again, it seems you're looking for some kind of police-state, where people are monitored for any type of "bad" behaviour. I think this will only make the social aspect of gaming less attractive, since everyone is so damn nice and friendly. Believe it or not, you need the occasional jerk to remind you just how good of a person you are :P.
Oh, and I don't need to be rewarded for my behaviour, I've passed Kindergarten ages ago.
WoW has a bad community for dozens of reasons, but they all boil down to the fact Blizzard Devs don't think fostering a good community is a Design issue when it actually is. Hence there is basically nothing that encourages good behavior to strangers and a lot that encourages or doesn't punish bad behavior. Extreme anonymity is one aspect of WoW that makes things bad, and things like the cross-server Dungeon Finder is one of the many things that allows bad behavior and doesn't encourage good behavior. There are lots of others. It most certainly is NOT a size issue, as WoW has tons of servers to make up for the game's population, whereas other games with fewer subs have correspondingly fewer servers.
Forced grouping is ONE possible system to encourage good behavior and punish bad, but it is an extremely forced solution. I think there are better and more subtle ways to go that still can be solo friendly, as long as you think about the game design from a community perspective. Add in things that reward people for being nice and punish people for being jerks. Make sure GMs are around to monitor public chat (this is seperate from reward/punish systems). Don't do it in a ham-fisted manner, because that isn't necessary. We're pretty social creatures, so making that work for a game isn't THAT hard.
I'lle indulge.
WoW seems to have a bad community, simply because it's so popular. I've seen the same "socially handicapped" players in numerous other games, whether they are MMO's or other online genres. The trick with WoW (And any other game for that amtter) is to find a guild/clan/corps with a mature and friendly following. And believe me, they're out there. they just don't flood the chatchannels like certain individuals do.
I find it silly to blame a game's design for people acting like arses. Reminds me of how a videogame can be blamed when a teenager starts shooting his peers.
How we behave is our own responsibility. No one else forces us to behave like we do, we choose to do so. Should the matter get out of hand for some reason, you can contact a GM and discuss your issue with him/her. What more do you need?
After reading your post again, it seems you're looking for some kind of police-state, where people are monitored for any type of "bad" behaviour. I think this will only make the social aspect of gaming less attractive, since everyone is so damn nice and friendly. Believe it or not, you need the occasional jerk to remind you just how good of a person you are :P.
Oh, and I don't need to be rewarded for my behaviour, I've passed Kindergarten ages ago.
The fact the environment you are in affects how you behave is a psychological fact. Since an MMO is providing an environment, the game design WILL affect how people behave. Acting like this isn't the case is silly, as is accusing me of wanting a police state merely because I think community-based games should actually reward good behavior and punish bad behavior (rather than be neutral or worse, as some games do, the opposite).
I know there are people that like to pretend they are completely independent and their actions are totally unaffected by the people and environment around them. That, however, is a fantasy and quite far from the truth. Are some people better able to resist certain social pressures an environment or group might place on them? Sure there are, and I don't deny it. However, when considering a game about community, you can't base the design on the idea that everyone is going to be such an exceptional person. Indeed, some mechanics have to be designed with the lowest common denominator in mind.
Real life is no different. We NEED laws against killing people. It isn't because everyone is some raving lunatic, but because there ARE a very small number of people who end up killing others. That's surely a gross example of my point in real life, but others abound. People behave differently in different social settings as well, such as the difference between how you act among old high school friends and friends you made 10 years later, and a decent bit of this has to do with environmental factors, mores, and other such stuff.
Taking this into games, and you'll find a community varies quite a lot depending on the rules of the game. Old school UO servers with stealing, etc, etc, had many people justifying such behavior because the game allowed it, whereas people who played FFXI, for instance, would find generally find such ideas disturbing. For a more subtle example, how people view PvP, killing other players, the opposing faction, etc, etc, in WoW varies quite a bit between PvP, PvE, and Role-playing servers. Social context MATTERS, and the rules in a game matter and affect how people act, just like the laws and other social phenomenon in real life do.
So one can chant "Each man is a god! Each man is free!" as much as you want, but it doesn't change that fact that people, their environment, and their behavior have complex relationships. The world is not as simple as you pretend.
Well, no one responded to my lovely post on the first page. It makes me a sad panda.
Anyhow, I think GW2 provides a good example of community friendly mechanics that don't require forced grouping. Hopefully we'll see some more community reinforcing mechanics from them as well.
What about Guild Wars 2 is more community friendly than the other 100 MMORPGs? I'm not being sarcastic. I really want to know.
One of the big things in their design is they want you to always be happy to see another player (outside of PvP, of course). Hence in the PvE environment there's no pvp, if another player comes and helps kill a mob, you both get normal loot roles and full experience (no reduced experience or loot for either). If someone shows up at a dynamic event, then it scales up in difficulty (and again, when it is over you get the same loot chance by yourself as you do with 50 other people). You don't need to group for any of this benefit, it is just part of the game. You certainly can group if you want though.
That should make for a pretty friendly environment, imho, because you aren't competing with other players for mobs, loot, or anything else (again, outside of pvp). Dungeon runs follow a similar philosophy.
Well, no one responded to my lovely post on the first page. It makes me a sad panda.
Anyhow, I think GW2 provides a good example of community friendly mechanics that don't require forced grouping. Hopefully we'll see some more community reinforcing mechanics from them as well.
What about Guild Wars 2 is more community friendly than the other 100 MMORPGs? I'm not being sarcastic. I really want to know.
One of the big things in their design is they want you to always be happy to see another player (outside of PvP, of course). Hence in the PvE environment there's no pvp, if another player comes and helps kill a mob, you both get normal loot roles and full experience (no reduced experience or loot for either). If someone shows up at a dynamic event, then it scales up in difficulty (and again, when it is over you get the same loot chance by yourself as you do with 50 other people). You don't need to group for any of this benefit, it is just part of the game. You certainly can group if you want though.
That should make for a pretty friendly environment, imho, because you aren't competing with other players for mobs, loot, or anything else (again, outside of pvp). Dungeon runs follow a similar philosophy.
So basically every event will feel like a zerg......great =_=
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
Well, no one responded to my lovely post on the first page. It makes me a sad panda.
Anyhow, I think GW2 provides a good example of community friendly mechanics that don't require forced grouping. Hopefully we'll see some more community reinforcing mechanics from them as well.
What about Guild Wars 2 is more community friendly than the other 100 MMORPGs? I'm not being sarcastic. I really want to know.
One of the big things in their design is they want you to always be happy to see another player (outside of PvP, of course). Hence in the PvE environment there's no pvp, if another player comes and helps kill a mob, you both get normal loot roles and full experience (no reduced experience or loot for either). If someone shows up at a dynamic event, then it scales up in difficulty (and again, when it is over you get the same loot chance by yourself as you do with 50 other people). You don't need to group for any of this benefit, it is just part of the game. You certainly can group if you want though.
That should make for a pretty friendly environment, imho, because you aren't competing with other players for mobs, loot, or anything else (again, outside of pvp). Dungeon runs follow a similar philosophy.
So basicly every event will feel like a zerg......great =_=
Open-world PvE content, so there will be less organization, sure, though some stuff will be pretty difficult, they say -- and we are talking about some content designed for upwards of 50+ people (like the Shatterer) and other content designed for people randomly passing through. If you want heavily organized stuff, you do dungeons with a group. Anyhow, I wasn't saying it was going to make the open world like forced grouping, my argument was it will make the community more open and friendly (which is something forced grouping does, though it also makes the game hard to play).
That said, unlike most games, there's a lot of skill interactions in the game. Make a wall of fire and people shooting arrows or tossing axes through it will have their missile weapons encased in fire for instance. There's supposedly hundreds of things like that, IIRC, which helps provide some framework for group interaction.
What about Guild Wars 2 is more community friendly than the other 100 MMORPGs? I'm not being sarcastic. I really want to know.
The idea is that they have taken away things like mob stealing and ninja looting, together with giving full XP and having scaling quest. They also have skill combos that makes it possible for a elementalist to make the rangers arrows fire-arrows and similar things.
We havn't seen that it makes the community better yet however but they are trying at least. We wont truly know until the community actually formed and that usually take something like 6 months after launch.
I also like the idea that you don't have to group in GW2 but can jump in and help some folks out with healing, rezzing or other stuff without any problems. But as I said we wont know the reality before after launch.
What about Guild Wars 2 is more community friendly than the other 100 MMORPGs? I'm not being sarcastic. I really want to know.
The idea is that they have taken away things like mob stealing and ninja looting, together with giving full XP and having scaling quest. They also have skill combos that makes it possible for a elementalist to make the rangers arrows fire-arrows and similar things.
We havn't seen that it makes the community better yet however but they are trying at least. We wont truly know until the community actually formed and that usually take something like 6 months after launch.
I also like the idea that you don't have to group in GW2 but can jump in and help some folks out with healing, rezzing or other stuff without any problems. But as I said we wont know the reality before after launch.
One of the neat things about GW2 is that you do not even have to be grouped with people to be part of the group!
Comments
Gonna disagree here. Having other people around gives you opportunities to socialize and work together. As an example I was solo questing I'n Lotro when I came across a champion that pulled too many mobs so I jumped In and helped. We decided to group to clear up a couple deeds and we went along our merry way. You wouldn't get that if a game just had bits running around. Even if I solo the option to socialize and band together is there. A mmo needs other players to share the same world whether they choose to interact should be up to the player.Playing: Rift, LotRO
Waiting on: GW2, BP
I agree, esecially when you send them tells or /wave at them and they don't respond at all.
In some games, the only chatting I could every get was in /ooc or /zone /global.
You walk up to someone and stare at each other for 5 minutes, and even then they still don't reply. And if they do? It's one line and *poof*
Grouping is even worse.
It got so bad in Vanguard that I actually freaked out one time (and so did my nephew) when we were in a full group.
"ARE YOU GUYS MIMES OR WHAT? HELLO????? WHY DONT YOU SPEAK? EVER?" and I went ballistic, because for the past 4 months every group I joined was silent, with me being the only one talking (and my nephew, if he was there). My best friend is a mime IRL so he never helped in groups to chat, but did agree with me people are boring mimes in groups.
In City of Heroes, people were a bit more friendly, almost ALWAYS having a tons of conversation in the group. Loads of it! Never a single problem in that game.
Any other game though? Mimes. Mimes. Mimes. It was horrendously Mime-filled. No one ever speaks in groups anymore, even when 2/3rds of the group are friendly.
It is worse than playing with bots, because at least bots (like in Tribes 2) say stuff like "I will attack the enemy generator." "Thank You." "You are Welcome." in robot.
If being a developer means being quiet, mature, well-spoken, and disconnected from the community, then by all means do me a favor and believe I'm not one.
I don't know what world you live in, but REAL LIFE is the biggest case of Forced Grouping in the entire universe.
Especially in Western Culture (USA & Europe) EVERYTHING and EVERYONE is completely dependent on other people for survival in every way.
Your car (making it, maintaining it) as well as gas, oil, all of these things. Production, harvesting, resource allocation, transportation... you are completely reliant on thousands of other human beings just in a single item in your life.
Now multiple those thousands by the amount of vital things in you rlife. Refrigeration. Electricity. Internet, Cable, Computers, TV's, Cars, Gas, Housing, Plumbing, Garbage Men, Sanitation, Policemen, Firemen, Teachers, Parents, Friends, Community, Government, Military.
Wow, you're forced into grouping with millions upon millions of people, who without you would shrivel up and die because the majority of people not only don't know how to supply food for themselves, there is no nearby food source to supply you or anyone else in your city!
So unless you live on a farm where you built the house yourself and make all the food yourself, living a completely sustained life, you're not only dependent on others but you're forced into grouping with them forever.
Just because you want to "solo" socially without a social group doesn't mean you solo life at all. Not. Even. Close.
If being a developer means being quiet, mature, well-spoken, and disconnected from the community, then by all means do me a favor and believe I'm not one.
I started playing MMOs when EQ came out in 1999 and I never felt forced to group in any game I have ever played. You could solo from start to max level in any class. EQ did encourage grouping by giving bonuses to exp and different loot, but I could still level faster by soloing. If I wanted to make lots of money, soloing was the way to do it so that I didnt have to split every thing six ways.
I really wish newer games gave players incentives to group up at lower levels. WoW killed their own communities by teaching players it was faster and more efficient to solo from lvl 1-80. Even when people do group, they do it in 15 minute bursts and the content is so easy it requires zero talking or coordination. Even PUG raids have turned into join raid, ask for summons, click ready, kill boss or wipe, leave raid.
Until a quality grouping game comes along, most new players will never understand the appeal to a game that encourages grouping.
you may aswell buy a single player rgg and load up IRC... Doing what exactly?
Are you really "Living" if you don't interact with other people?
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
We already have plenty of game genre's that "force" players, MMORPG's should be about choices and options.
I won't play a game that forces grouping, I enjoy grouping but sometimes I also enjoy going it alone. Amazingly as a social person I can socialize within a game without being in a group. its almost like the dev's think "omg if we don't force em to group they won't talk!!"
Yep. Many people choose to be recluse. There are over a million hikikomori in Japan.
People still live fine with little social contant, social contant is not something one needs to survive, unlike what others believe. If that was the case, recluse wouldn't exist. It's just a way of life.
Animals are the same way, in similar species, some choose to be part of a pack, others live on their own.
Collector's editions are scams.
humans are a social specie though as are our closest relatives, the apes and the majority of the mammals.. We do live in colonies. Loneliness usually causes stress to us. No wonder facebook is so popular.
Never seen a game that you couldn't solo in. Even EQ and FFXI, solo-play was possible just terribly slow.
Keep a very small chunk of the game for solo players, or make mobs tough enough that to solo players would need to fight mobs a good bit below them. Some people honestly just don't have the time to group with others.
Make say..80% of the rest of the game group-oriented and i'd be happy.
A balaced game provides opportunity for both solo and group play. But, I don't think game developers have to plan this balance, it simply comes as a result of making a good game that takes place in a realistic environment. End-game battles are going to have to require group cooperation, not sure why anyone would object to that, but along the way I want ample opportunities to solo or group, as I feel like it. If I have to group to get past level 25 or something I will quit that game. I want a choice. And why do I want a choice? Because, random groups and even guild groups can suck because the people in them suck. I want to solo that day if the group forming to whack the big boss are the people I have hated for the past 60 levels.
Old topic is old...but I'll play your game.
If the people who have such a hard on for forced or more grouping can guarantee me that there will be a group available to me anytime and everytime I log into the game and said group wants to do the content I want to do, then I'm ok with it. If not, which I know is the case for every mmo out there, then advancing through the game solo has to be made available.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
I enjoy both styles of gameplay so I prefer a game that has both available to it. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 50/50 or 60/40 favoring grouping works great to me.
One thing I will say though is that when it comes to chained quests or group intended areas in general developers do need to be careful though. Simply because once a game has been out a while it seems a lot of games run into a problem where newer players have a hell of a time trying to find groups for a lot of content. So either there needs to be some sort of tweaking done to allow for higher level players to want to make alts or help lower levels on their mains, or the areas need to be revamped on a continual basis to a degree. So new players don't get completely left behind and miss out on the content because they simply cannot find a group.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
I think "forced" anything especially when it comes to a game like the vast number of MMO's we have is complete and utter horse shit. Nobody is forcing you to do anything you don't like. You are paying them money and if they're doing something you don't like then stop paying them money and go elsewhere where you might find what you like.
It is completely selfish to demand that developers ONLY cater to your whims in regards to the game play features they create.
I don't mind that there are tons of solo friendly games out there that many people like which I don't. Do you see me sitting in there and bitching up a storm asking the developers to make it so it's a Group only game? No.
Self entitlement abounts in this genre.
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-
You are just as entitled to demand a group only game. But the meeting of that demand is not something you are entitled to. Secondly, any time you want something that pleases you, you are being selfish. Groupers that feel that grouping should yield the most powerful loot are selfish. But here's the kicker, there is nothing wrong with that. There is nothing morally wrong with having different games for different groups of people. It's no more wrong than having racing games for racing gamers and golf games for golf gamers.
Are golf gamers bad because they don't want automobile racing in their golf games? No. Likewise, soloers are not bad because they want mmorpgs that are solo-centric. They are just describing the kind of mmorpg they would happily pay for. Nothing wrong with that.
Guild Wars 2 is my religion
Well, no one responded to my lovely post on the first page. It makes me a sad panda.
Anyhow, I think GW2 provides a good example of community friendly mechanics that don't require forced grouping. Hopefully we'll see some more community reinforcing mechanics from them as well.
Forced grouping creates better community? Really? Honestly, what universe do some of you live in? When people hook up with you only for what they get from it, that's not community! Some people can't seem to take two steps without having a full group with them. That's fine, but that's dependency, not community.
Forced grouping is a mechanic used to slow down players, nothing more, nothing less. Slower progression means less needing to be developed.
"Soloists and those who prefer small groups should never have to feel like they''re the ones getting the proverbial table scraps, as it were." - Scott Hartsman, Senior Producer, Everquest II
"People love groups. Its a fallacy that people want to play solo all the time." - Scott Hartsman, Executive Producer, Rift
What about Guild Wars 2 is more community friendly than the other 100 MMORPGs? I'm not being sarcastic. I really want to know.
I'lle indulge.
WoW seems to have a bad community, simply because it's so popular. I've seen the same "socially handicapped" players in numerous other games, whether they are MMO's or other online genres. The trick with WoW (And any other game for that amtter) is to find a guild/clan/corps with a mature and friendly following. And believe me, they're out there. they just don't flood the chatchannels like certain individuals do.
I find it silly to blame a game's design for people acting like arses. Reminds me of how a videogame can be blamed when a teenager starts shooting his peers.
How we behave is our own responsibility. No one else forces us to behave like we do, we choose to do so. Should the matter get out of hand for some reason, you can contact a GM and discuss your issue with him/her. What more do you need?
After reading your post again, it seems you're looking for some kind of police-state, where people are monitored for any type of "bad" behaviour. I think this will only make the social aspect of gaming less attractive, since everyone is so damn nice and friendly. Believe it or not, you need the occasional jerk to remind you just how good of a person you are :P.
Oh, and I don't need to be rewarded for my behaviour, I've passed Kindergarten ages ago.
The fact the environment you are in affects how you behave is a psychological fact. Since an MMO is providing an environment, the game design WILL affect how people behave. Acting like this isn't the case is silly, as is accusing me of wanting a police state merely because I think community-based games should actually reward good behavior and punish bad behavior (rather than be neutral or worse, as some games do, the opposite).
I know there are people that like to pretend they are completely independent and their actions are totally unaffected by the people and environment around them. That, however, is a fantasy and quite far from the truth. Are some people better able to resist certain social pressures an environment or group might place on them? Sure there are, and I don't deny it. However, when considering a game about community, you can't base the design on the idea that everyone is going to be such an exceptional person. Indeed, some mechanics have to be designed with the lowest common denominator in mind.
Real life is no different. We NEED laws against killing people. It isn't because everyone is some raving lunatic, but because there ARE a very small number of people who end up killing others. That's surely a gross example of my point in real life, but others abound. People behave differently in different social settings as well, such as the difference between how you act among old high school friends and friends you made 10 years later, and a decent bit of this has to do with environmental factors, mores, and other such stuff.
Taking this into games, and you'll find a community varies quite a lot depending on the rules of the game. Old school UO servers with stealing, etc, etc, had many people justifying such behavior because the game allowed it, whereas people who played FFXI, for instance, would find generally find such ideas disturbing. For a more subtle example, how people view PvP, killing other players, the opposing faction, etc, etc, in WoW varies quite a bit between PvP, PvE, and Role-playing servers. Social context MATTERS, and the rules in a game matter and affect how people act, just like the laws and other social phenomenon in real life do.
So one can chant "Each man is a god! Each man is free!" as much as you want, but it doesn't change that fact that people, their environment, and their behavior have complex relationships. The world is not as simple as you pretend.
One of the big things in their design is they want you to always be happy to see another player (outside of PvP, of course). Hence in the PvE environment there's no pvp, if another player comes and helps kill a mob, you both get normal loot roles and full experience (no reduced experience or loot for either). If someone shows up at a dynamic event, then it scales up in difficulty (and again, when it is over you get the same loot chance by yourself as you do with 50 other people). You don't need to group for any of this benefit, it is just part of the game. You certainly can group if you want though.
That should make for a pretty friendly environment, imho, because you aren't competing with other players for mobs, loot, or anything else (again, outside of pvp). Dungeon runs follow a similar philosophy.
So basically every event will feel like a zerg......great =_=
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
Open-world PvE content, so there will be less organization, sure, though some stuff will be pretty difficult, they say -- and we are talking about some content designed for upwards of 50+ people (like the Shatterer) and other content designed for people randomly passing through. If you want heavily organized stuff, you do dungeons with a group. Anyhow, I wasn't saying it was going to make the open world like forced grouping, my argument was it will make the community more open and friendly (which is something forced grouping does, though it also makes the game hard to play).
That said, unlike most games, there's a lot of skill interactions in the game. Make a wall of fire and people shooting arrows or tossing axes through it will have their missile weapons encased in fire for instance. There's supposedly hundreds of things like that, IIRC, which helps provide some framework for group interaction.
The idea is that they have taken away things like mob stealing and ninja looting, together with giving full XP and having scaling quest. They also have skill combos that makes it possible for a elementalist to make the rangers arrows fire-arrows and similar things.
We havn't seen that it makes the community better yet however but they are trying at least. We wont truly know until the community actually formed and that usually take something like 6 months after launch.
I also like the idea that you don't have to group in GW2 but can jump in and help some folks out with healing, rezzing or other stuff without any problems. But as I said we wont know the reality before after launch.
One of the neat things about GW2 is that you do not even have to be grouped with people to be part of the group!