Alright, I'll stick my head back in the noose so many people seem to want to pull tight. First off, I have played video games for over 30 years (I'll be 46 this year), so yes, I have experience with gaming. I have played, to varying degrees, UO, AO, AoC, EQ, EQII, CoH, TR, LotRO, WoW, Ryzom, Eve, and probably a few others I can't remember. I mention this only to show that yeah, I have experience with MMOs. And let me humbly correct some of you. There is NO part of the definition of MMO that means forced grouping. None. This is simply the way many of them have been designed, and I suggest that design needs to change. There are many aspects of an MMO I enjoy, including the large cities filled with lots of people, the auction houses, the massive persistant world. All these things and more make a game feel alive in a way a single player game never can. Just because I'd rather solo most of the time is no justification whatsoever for not enjoying an MMO. I am not anti-social or anti-grouping, I'm against forcing people to group to see content. I'm against a game forcing players to do stuff they don't want to do, just to get a content they do, like clearing trash en route to a boss, which, AFAIK, no one enjoys. I do not enjoy PvP. I am not against having it in a game, just against it being a main focus. This is for two reasons: 1. All those people who are pvp'ing are not available to PvE, and since so many MMOs require groups, that just makes it that much harder to find one. 2. Skills. Everyone likes to go on about how they want to be challenged, of how they want skills to have a much bigger part vs gear. The problem for me is that most of these required skills are twitch-based, and not strategy-based. This is problematic in a online game, because it can give advantages to those with a faster connection. I do ok (not uber) in single-player twitch games, but as I live in a remote area, I do not do well in online pvp.
I did not make this post to bash Warhammer, in fact I stated quite clearly that it is probably a very fine game. I merely pointed out that many of the virtues of the game which people are extolling are, for me, mostly negative ones. Practically every post on these forums so far around this game was, at the time, praising it like the be-all and end-all. I only wanted to offer another point-of-view, which is the purpose of a forum. If you disagree with me, then fine, say so. But in a forum like this, try to argue the points of the argument, and not make ad hominem statements deriding the character of the person making them as a way of undermining their beliefs.
Hey Rob,
Thanks for your opinion and thank you for putting it in such a mature and honest manner. I understand where you are coming from but I do disagree with you on one major point: MMO's and grouping. Let me explain.
By definition, MMO's require groups. Now granted certain more recent games have taken this to a new level so now there is grouping and there is GROUPING. I have no issues with a game requiring you to get 4-6 of your friends together to group. This is the philosophy in WAR just like it was in DAOC. I like this type of grouping because it makes the game social and its also risk versus reward. Should I be able to see everything in the game by taking the exact same risk as everyone else? I do not believe so - there should be areas that are harder to get too and require the group (therefore more risk); and in turn, they should provide more reward for taking the time and trouble to find a group.
Now, I hate grouping to the new level where you need 20 or 40 people to see stuff. To me, that is just a new form of grind and frustration. it is almost like the devs are being lazy and want to make stuff harder so it requires more people and thats they only way they can think to make it harder. Hell I remember mob fights in other games that had 6-8 people fight a mob and it is 10 times harder than anything you can do with 20 or 40.
So to me, the first type of grouping is fine and its part of the philosopy of MMO's. The second type isn't.
With that said, WAR is a great balance of grouping and not grouping. I am a teacher so there are nights when I get home and want to play that I do not want to group or be social (since I was being social all day). There is plenty in WAR to do. There is tons of single player content. However, WAR rewards you for taking the time to find a group and ever to explore the game (look at tentonhammer and the blog from Jeff about lairs).
One of the great things with WAR is the "open group" feature. Basically you get into an area say for a public quest. You can bring up a list of open groups in the area (sorted by distance) and join one near by, get the quest done and leave. It makes grouping wonderfully simple - none of this spamming "LFG".
Hope this helps and I hope you do not write off WAR for just the grouping reason. It is a great game and has a lot more going for it and I would hate for someone not to experience what the game has to offer for a reson that is, to me, not an issue.
Templarga, that was one of the most constructive posts I have ever seen on MMORPG.com. I must say, WAR's system of grouping is awesome, especially the part I highlighted in your post. Being able to enter an area, see groups that are open and what classes they have in it, and then being able to join in on the fly... it's awesome.
This definitely takes away my worries I had about this game, concerning MMOs becoming solo games with included chat windows instead of MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER online games.
It's hard to take a post seriously when it starts with such a mind numblng stupid statement.
Massively Multiplayer not Massively Grouping.
I have to agree with th OP that being forced to group is extremely annoying.
But I understand that there are people who feel that going out without a group is like going out without weapons. I know there are people who argue that everyone should be forced to group, because they can't find a group (some of whom cannot find a group 'cause they are jerks). But there is nothing about the MMO that requires groups, jsust lots of people. WAR handles it quite nicely, I think. i.e. /group is optional, but teaming up with your fellows doesn't require it.
MMO isn't about grouping, certainly not by definition. RPG, on the other hand, has a strong background of parties, but still supports solo play. And just because you're killing MOBs solo doesn't mean you're not socializing. Heck I usually see less socializing in groups than when I'm solo. The groups are typically oriented on a goal, and go for it, with less time for idle chatter, unless you are doing something dead easy.
Alright, I'll stick my head back in the noose so many people seem to want to pull tight. First off, I have played video games for over 30 years (I'll be 46 this year), so yes, I have experience with gaming. I have played, to varying degrees, UO, AO, AoC, EQ, EQII, CoH, TR, LotRO, WoW, Ryzom, Eve, and probably a few others I can't remember. I mention this only to show that yeah, I have experience with MMOs. And let me humbly correct some of you. There is NO part of the definition of MMO that means forced grouping. None. This is simply the way many of them have been designed, and I suggest that design needs to change. There are many aspects of an MMO I enjoy, including the large cities filled with lots of people, the auction houses, the massive persistant world. All these things and more make a game feel alive in a way a single player game never can. Just because I'd rather solo most of the time is no justification whatsoever for not enjoying an MMO. I am not anti-social or anti-grouping, I'm against forcing people to group to see content. I'm against a game forcing players to do stuff they don't want to do, just to get a content they do, like clearing trash en route to a boss, which, AFAIK, no one enjoys. I do not enjoy PvP. I am not against having it in a game, just against it being a main focus. This is for two reasons: 1. All those people who are pvp'ing are not available to PvE, and since so many MMOs require groups, that just makes it that much harder to find one. 2. Skills. Everyone likes to go on about how they want to be challenged, of how they want skills to have a much bigger part vs gear. The problem for me is that most of these required skills are twitch-based, and not strategy-based. This is problematic in a online game, because it can give advantages to those with a faster connection. I do ok (not uber) in single-player twitch games, but as I live in a remote area, I do not do well in online pvp.
I did not make this post to bash Warhammer, in fact I stated quite clearly that it is probably a very fine game. I merely pointed out that many of the virtues of the game which people are extolling are, for me, mostly negative ones. Practically every post on these forums so far around this game was, at the time, praising it like the be-all and end-all. I only wanted to offer another point-of-view, which is the purpose of a forum. If you disagree with me, then fine, say so. But in a forum like this, try to argue the points of the argument, and not make ad hominem statements deriding the character of the person making them as a way of undermining their beliefs.
I have to say I understand where you are coming from, it seems like 95% of the people who talk about PvP are using PvP as an abbrieviation for "Let me kill people far weaker than me, without risk" The gank fests (open pvp) do not interest me because I'm not interested in forming a gang and wandering around a fantasy world picking on those weaker than me.
I have to say, however, that WAR is a different critter, from what I could se on the preview weekend. You don't have to group, but you can still participate in group content. I have to say I've been playing FPS games since DOOM came out, and I ALS like that genre. So the scenarios are kind of like the team based CTF shooters out there, but using your character. The big RvR parts are a lot more strategic in nature, which seems to annoy some of the PvP crowd, but I found it fun and purposeful, instead of a chaotic slugfest. (though sometimes it turned into one, which was also kind of fun) There are several threads about making the death penalty higher, which I think would reduce the fun factor of the big RvR battles.
I make my post to say, it's possible you may like this game. I've played a number of the same games as you, and share a number of your views vis-a-vis grouping, and I enjoyed the heck out of myself.
Find a different type of game, say a single player MMORPG maybe? If anything these games don't force grouping enough, the entire point of the game is a social online experience.
If they force you to group, and you can't get a group, then you are forced to do something else. The MMO companies have been learning that forced grouping really only benefits people who can't otherwise get a group. Some games I group in some I don't.
What I never do is accept a blind invite.
There is nothing that prevents me from socializing outside a group, and there is nothing forcing people to socialize when they are in a group. Guilds tend to socialize more, but only when they are on at the same time as you.
(I joined a aussie giuld in CoH once 'cause I was on late at night for a couple of months, they were entertaining to be around, but when I reverted to normal hours I never go to socialize anymore.)
I don't think I would call WAR a forced grouping game.
And I have absolutely no hesitation to use that term and do not like it as a feature.
First off there is supposedly a good amount of solo-ish questing.
Second off the public quests are sort of a compromise area that I do not consider forced grouping.
Third off in RvR it is perfectly possible to operate outside of a groups, you simply need to be smart enough to understand that groups will be out there and are part of the environment. For example you could be a solo rune priest and heal whomever you like whenever you like (not true of all healers).
Now if you want to be completely alone in an MMO then even I would say yeah don't play an MMORPG. But you can certainly be solo and interact with groups and make a contribution in RvR. And yes a well put together group in WAR will be able to do more than some guy running and gunning alone. But that is not the same as forced grouping.
Please do not take this as a flame or bash post, as I'm sure many will enjoy this game. But even though I am an avid gamer, I've yet to hear anything about this MMO that makes me want to play it. First off, it obviously has a heavy pvp focus. Pvp has never interested me; in fact I've never partaken of it in any of the mmo's I've played, including a few years of Wow. So, all this talk of RvR is empty to me. More importantly, it seems (from what I've read on the game), that this mmo is chock full of forced grouping. Arrrgh! Those two words always cause me ire in any game. Here is an excerpt from the latest PCGamer: "Each wind of a dungeon has a boss at the end, and at the final stage of a dungeon, you'll encounter the six-man end boss. In Mount Gunbad, this is a giant squig; he happens to have a Morcane artifact nearby that powers him up. That Morcane artifact also provides you with the boss battle's main challenge: if you let the squig stay too close to it he'll become empowered to erupt projectile vomit and other equally lovely substances, but keep him away too long and he becomes enraged, upping his damage-dealing level." Now, this sounds to me an awful lot like any typical boss-fight from almost any popular MMO. The boss has abilities x and y, and the party must act in a predetermined and pretested strategy to receive the same successful result. Worse, the party is required to slog through a goodly amount of trash mobs just to be able to get to this boss. This does not sound to me like anything innovative. This sounds exactly like every other fantasy MMO. It's safe to assume that the party will require a healer, and a tank, and several dpsers. I'm sorry, but yaaawn. I've never met anyone who enjoyed clearing trash. And you can be sure that, once again, the forming group will have to wait for one key class to join before they can proceed. I am so sick to death of MMOs forcing players to group, forcing them to socialize just to experience the content. Every player, regardless of their playstyle, should be able to experience ALL the content of a game, with the game adjusting to accomodate the player, and not the other way around. So again, I reiterate, I am not saying that WAR online will be a bad game. But personally, I wouldn't play it even if it were F2P. Doubtless I'll get bashed for this, but I felt that the blind love gone rampant for this game in most threads needed a warning for the playstyle of some.
Swamprob, yes, it's very focused to RvR. I am sorry this isnt a game for you.
I am happy you could discover this game isnt for you.
This is one thing Mythic did great. All the info they gave and the lifting of the NDA had allow people to know what this game is about.
The concept of "forced" grouping is pretty slippery.
Now, this may be debatable to some, but one of the core concepts of an MMO is joining up with other players to accomplish any of a variety of goals. Without the grouping, there is little reason to play in a persistent world. Perhaps a decade ago, (although, most would agree that MMOs weren't exactly 'solo-friendly' back then anyway) it would be a reasonable excuse that you simply wanted to socialize while gaming via the integrated chat. But with messengers and VoIP such as Vent or TS it really isn't necessary for a group of friends (or even acquaintances) to play the same vapid and generally story-lite or -less content just so they can /tell each other. The are better ways to communicate while playing more rewarding (on an individual level) single-player fare. Even newer consoles are supporting cross-game messaging or voice chat between friends.
So that brings us back to grouping. There are three general ways to approach this: Forced, Encouraged, and Optional.
Forced grouping is when the developers implement a series of mechanical roadblocks that a single player is highly unlikely to (or virtually incapable of) overcome(ing). This could be through difficulty of content/mob encounters or even more blatant in terms of switches or some other device that must be activated all at once. The game (if it is at all modern) will usually never force grouping for the entirety of its content, reserving such cases only sporadically, for particular milestones, or to act as a gateway to high-end equipment or abilities. EQ1 is a solid example of a very-strict forced grouping game. Very little of the content is soloable at all unless you are one of a small handful of classes and even then it's an arduous task typically not worth the effort and risk involved.
Encouraged grouping is typically more forgiving, with content scaling to the number of people attempting it. Almost all of the game (if not all) can be solo'd with patience, skill, and thorough knowledge of the game's mechanics. The 'trick' is that adding group members not only speeds up progress toward the particular objective (get exp, get loot, whatever) but in doing so the reward becomes substaintially better. City is the best example of encouraged grouping that I've played. Sure, you can solo. You can make decent progress (which, until the somewhat recent addition of loot and crafting, was only 'get moar levelz!') doing it, sure, but nothing could stop the leveling machine that was a full, well balance hero or villain team tearing through missions at the highest difficulty settings. When a group worked with good balance and synergy (and perhaps was tank defender controller blaster blaster blaster blaster blaster) no amount of skilled solo play could hope to match the rate of advancement. So in the end, only die-hard RPers, lore-nuts, or people that, sadly, can't find a group are the only ones that end up soloing. It's still "forced grouping" when its all said and done. It's just a lot more sneaky.
Optional grouping is purely what it sounds like. You can group, or not. It doesn't really matter. Exp or loot bonuses aren't high enough (or simply don't even exist) to overcome the division of reward when factoring in people other than the individual player. Tabula Rasa and Age of Conan (and, of course, the monster that is WoW) all fall into this category. The caveat is that, at the "endgame", all of these games (and indeed pretty much all 'optional grouping' games) end up forcing grouping in order to accomplish anything. This format is especially poor because most newer MMOs have a "quest grind" focus moreso than a "mob grind" focus. In other words, the bulk of your progress comes from completing quests, not actually killing things. Since the best way to advance is to do quests, most quests are soloable, and no two individuals will never ever have the exact same quest log (except multi-boxers), what does this mean? Nobody bloody groups. And it sucks. Playing through TR or WoW is among the most boring, sad, and lonely experiences in gaming. The only thing these games have to offer to a pure-soloer is size of world and its contents (items, etc). The average single player experience will usually have far better story, depth of combat or mechanics, character-skill development, and interaction with the world. Developers of these kinds of MMOs [i]know[/i] this and so in order to keep a person playing after they soloed all the way to the end, they turn on the hardcore raid switch right at level 6070 level cap.
And that leads to the "WoW community" that people tend to (perhaps overly stereotypically) dis when talking about Warcraft or any other MMO. People that play on an individual level all the way to the level cap, doing what they want and they need for the entirety of their playtime, to hell with anyone else, and then suddenly cap out and hit that wall where they have to learn to work with other people, both mechanically and mentally, to do anything. It's simply an entirely different concept of play within the same game, and is especially rough if an "optional grouping" MMO is the first MMO played by someone.
So, basically, after all that rambling, "forced grouping" isn't as bad as people make it out to be. It helps players work together as they progress and learn (rather than only at the end of the game after establishing solo-only mindsets and playstyles) but it can be admittedly annoying when you can't find a group and become locked out of advancement, though as I and others have said pretty much no modern MMO is 100% forced group content. "Encouraged grouping" is simply a more subtle, more convenient way of forcing grouping while at the same time allowing the soloers to not feel as bad about themselves and/or their groupless state. And optional grouping is trash because it promotes entire subsets of gamers to play games at their most difficult point with other people that have no desire, business, or sometimes even the basic interpersonal skills required. Not to mention how lonely the ride is to the top when no one wants to group because it only slows them down.
No forced grouping is exactly as terrible as its made out to be because it stops me from doing what I want.
So screw any game that tries to tell me how to have my fun.
Also it does not teach anyone to group well. The people who would stick with a forced grouping game would be grouping a game like City of Heroes anyway. The people talked about as playing solely for themselves would just leave a forced grouping game anyway. And many other people like who both group and solo would leave as well.
Forced grouping is possibly the worst feature any MMO can have. It dooms the MMORPG to being niche and is completely unnecessary as proved by City of Heroes. All sorts of good groupers and extremely easy to get a group in CoX yet its the most solo friendly MMO in existence.
Anyone who thinks you can beat a person into being a good grouper is deluding themselves. Either they will persue or they won't. Trying to beat people into will just give you one more cancellation.
Besides there are plenty of bad ream players in forced grouping games anyway. Actually I see the more team friendly people in open games like CoX. Sounds strange but people feel worse when they are messing with people's fun then a forced grouping game where everything has an undertone of need and greed and business.
In CoX everyone knows that everyone is there because they want to be there not because they need to be. No more coercsion, no more primadonas. Makes it work better, much less tense. Forced grouping is as bad as it gets. You can't overstate how bad it is. It is the worst.
No forced grouping is exactly as terrible as its made out to be because it stops me from doing what I want. So screw any game that tries to tell me how to have my fun.
Also it does not teach anyone to group well. The people who would stick with a forced grouping game would be grouping a game like City of Heroes anyway. The people talked about as playing solely for themselves would just leave a forced grouping game anyway. And many other people like who both group and solo would leave as well.
Forced grouping is possibly the worst feature any MMO can have. It dooms the MMORPG to being niche and is completely unnecessary as proved by City of Heroes. All sorts of good groupers and extremely easy to get a group in CoX yet its the most solo friendly MMO in existence.
Anyone who thinks you can beat a person into being a good grouper is deluding themselves. Either they will persue or they won't. Trying to beat people into will just give you one more cancellation.
Besides there are plenty of bad ream players in forced grouping games anyway. Actually I see the more team friendly people in open games like CoX. Sounds strange but people feel worse when they are messing with people's fun then a forced grouping game where everything has an undertone of need and greed and business. In CoX everyone knows that everyone is there because they want to be there not because they need to be. No more coercsion, no more primadonas. Makes it work better, much less tense. Forced grouping is as bad as it gets. You can't overstate how bad it is. It is the worst.
I was also heavily involved in CoX and I fully agree with this post. If CoX can do it, so can other MMOs.
Well, I didn't need as much flameproof clothing as I thought I might have. I tip my hat with respect to all those non-reactionary and intelligent posters, whether you agree with my opinion or not.
At no point did I intend my post to sound trollish, and I apologize if it came off that way. I guess I got a little exasperated with a zillion posts lauding this game as the second coming for MMOs. I was merely trying to show that many of the new features that so many were extolling did not entice all players and playstyles.
At the least, it is incumbent for us all to remember that we each enjoy different aspects of gaming, and no one way is more or less of value than another, save perhaps for those few who game only to grief others.
Lastly, remember this is a forum, which exists for the intent of discussing differing opinions. It would be pointless for it to exist only to have everyone agree on everything.
Please do not take this as a flame or bash post, as I'm sure many will enjoy this game. Ok, as long as you don't post any flame or bash comments I won't take it as thus. But even though I am an avid gamer, I've yet to hear anything about this MMO that makes me want to play it. Ok, so why are you reading these forums and taking the time to post here? I am not looking forward to Aion, but I don't go on the Aion forums and post "Hey, I'm not going to play this game." If you could explain to me the reason you felt the need to come on a forum for a game you have no interest in and post this thread for a reason other than trolling, please, let me know, because I don't understand. First off, it obviously has a heavy pvp focus. Well, it's RvR focused. Main purpose to play the game. Pvp has never interested me; in fact I've never partaken of it in any of the mmo's I've played, including a few years of Wow. So, all this talk of RvR is empty to me. I say again, why you are you here then? This game is for people who want to compete in RvR. If you have no interest in the point of the game... why... are you here. Are you going to do the same thing on the Hello Kitty Online forum. "Hey, this game isn't for me.. it's too cartoony and girly.. why does it have to apeal to little kids?" More importantly, it seems (from what I've read on the game), that this mmo is chock full of forced grouping. Arrrgh! Those two words always cause me ire in any game. There is absolutely no forced grouping in the game. There is certain content that you can not see without being in a group, but you are never "forced" to experience that content. Now, this sounds to me an awful lot like any typical boss-fight from almost any popular MMO. The boss has abilities x and y, and the party must act in a predetermined and pretested strategy to receive the same successful result. Worse, the party is required to slog through a goodly amount of trash mobs just to be able to get to this boss. Yep, you are 100% correct. And everyone looking forward to the game expects this. This does not sound to me like anything innovative. It's not. This sounds exactly like every other fantasy MMO. It is. It's safe to assume that the party will require a healer, and a tank, and several dpsers. Yep. You're on a roll! I'm sorry, but yaaawn. If that sounds boring to you, don't play the game. Yay, problem solved! I've never met anyone who enjoyed clearing trash. I do, it's part of the game and something I expect to be there. If it wasn't there, it would be too easy to "beat" the boss. Where would the sense of accomplishment be? And you can be sure that, once again, the forming group will have to wait for one key class to join before they can proceed. If you want to experience that content (again, no one is forcing you to go to the dungeon and take on the boss) then yes you will have to have a balanced group in order to do it. I am so sick to death of MMOs forcing players to group, forcing them to socialize just to experience the content. Err... You do know what MMO games are right? They are social games. If we didn't need to group or socialize, then I wouldn't be paying $15 a month to play the game. The number of great single player games FAR outweighs the number of even "ok" MMO games. If I didn't want to group or socialize, I would be playing one of those. Every player, regardless of their playstyle, should be able to experience ALL the content of a game, with the game adjusting to accomodate the player, and not the other way around. This statement made me laugh, and is nothing more then trolling. If you honestly don't understand that then you really should not be playing any games in this genre. So again, I reiterate, I am not saying that WAR online will be a bad game. But personally, I wouldn't play it even if it were F2P. Ok, thanks for your opinion. Doubtless I'll get bashed for this, but I felt that the blind love gone rampant for this game in most threads needed a warning for the playstyle of some. Right... the playstyle of someone who isn't going to be playing WAR and is not interested in anything that the game has to offer.
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
It's hard to take a post seriously when it starts with such a mind numblng stupid statement.
Massively Multiplayer not Massively Grouping.
Thanks for the constructive comment. Multiplayer to me implies grouping.
Ah, now you're saying it's your opinion, yet what you said was: By definition, MMO's require groups.
Opinions are not facts, you have the personal misunderstanding that if multiple people are playing they should have to group. This is not the case, you don't even have to "group up" to do activities with multiple other people. Grouping is a fine way to do some stuff, it is not the be-all end-all of MMO games though.
[snip]
I guarantee if you go and talk to EVERY single developer out there, the first thing they will tell you is that MMO's are meant to require groups.
I guarantee you are wrong.
Half of the allure, is to meet up with others online and group up. I have friends all over the world that I have met through MMO's and I enjoy being able to group up with them and try new things and succeed together.
Yes, grouping is not forbidden, and yet somehow people in groups are the same as people who aren't, they are all players, they are all part of the massively multiplayer world.
I think this is where the modern MMO has gone wrong - they feel like single player games in a large, populated world and I for one, hate that. This is why the old school games like EQ, DAOC and other appeal to me more than the modern game. THis is one reason I love Vanguard and if not for WAR, that is the game I would be playing.
Vanguard was fun, I don't recall much forced grouping though, like EQ did. I don't understand how an MMO can feel like a single player game to you, if you are grouping with your friends. What is it that you hate, that other people are free to not group with you?
One of the greatest things about WAR is the idea of the "living guild" and working together. This is a CORE element in the game. Without a strong guild, your role in WAR will be diminished. It is designed this way and it should be because its about teamwork and working together to defeat the enemy.
Ah, here it is, you want everyone who doesn't play how you want them to to be relegated to second class status. With the exception of abilities that only work on group-mates, how is a soloer's ability to contribute diminished in a given RvR action? That's the beauty here, as a healer I'd want to make sure I was in a group, but as an archer/range DPS I'm fine solo. Because nobody is every wholly solo, unless there isn't anyone else around. Guilds are an important part of Warhammer, certainly, I saw several members of one during PW the really shook up the opposing team in a keep action.
At least WAR does a good job balancing the content of single versus group. It has a little something for everyone. And with the emphasis on guilds and guild development, along with the core designs of the game (like open groups), groups will be easily formed yet needed but not required.
Please do not take this as a flame or bash post, as I'm sure many will enjoy this game. But even though I am an avid gamer, I've yet to hear anything about this MMO that makes me want to play it. First off, it obviously has a heavy pvp focus. Pvp has never interested me; in fact I've never partaken of it in any of the mmo's I've played, including a few years of Wow. So, all this talk of RvR is empty to me. More importantly, it seems (from what I've read on the game), that this mmo is chock full of forced grouping. Arrrgh! Those two words always cause me ire in any game. Here is an excerpt from the latest PCGamer: "Each wind of a dungeon has a boss at the end, and at the final stage of a dungeon, you'll encounter the six-man end boss. In Mount Gunbad, this is a giant squig; he happens to have a Morcane artifact nearby that powers him up. That Morcane artifact also provides you with the boss battle's main challenge: if you let the squig stay too close to it he'll become empowered to erupt projectile vomit and other equally lovely substances, but keep him away too long and he becomes enraged, upping his damage-dealing level." Now, this sounds to me an awful lot like any typical boss-fight from almost any popular MMO. The boss has abilities x and y, and the party must act in a predetermined and pretested strategy to receive the same successful result. Worse, the party is required to slog through a goodly amount of trash mobs just to be able to get to this boss. This does not sound to me like anything innovative. This sounds exactly like every other fantasy MMO. It's safe to assume that the party will require a healer, and a tank, and several dpsers. I'm sorry, but yaaawn. I've never met anyone who enjoyed clearing trash. And you can be sure that, once again, the forming group will have to wait for one key class to join before they can proceed. I am so sick to death of MMOs forcing players to group, forcing them to socialize just to experience the content. Every player, regardless of their playstyle, should be able to experience ALL the content of a game, with the game adjusting to accomodate the player, and not the other way around. So again, I reiterate, I am not saying that WAR online will be a bad game. But personally, I wouldn't play it even if it were F2P. Doubtless I'll get bashed for this, but I felt that the blind love gone rampant for this game in most threads needed a warning for the playstyle of some.
why didnt you just name this post "why would anyone on the war forums care about how i feel?" becuase trust me no one here gives two shakes about your conveluded dillusional ass and wouldnt stop to help if they saw you run down in the street and lynched by the fan boys!
Comments
Hey Rob,
Thanks for your opinion and thank you for putting it in such a mature and honest manner. I understand where you are coming from but I do disagree with you on one major point: MMO's and grouping. Let me explain.
By definition, MMO's require groups. Now granted certain more recent games have taken this to a new level so now there is grouping and there is GROUPING. I have no issues with a game requiring you to get 4-6 of your friends together to group. This is the philosophy in WAR just like it was in DAOC. I like this type of grouping because it makes the game social and its also risk versus reward. Should I be able to see everything in the game by taking the exact same risk as everyone else? I do not believe so - there should be areas that are harder to get too and require the group (therefore more risk); and in turn, they should provide more reward for taking the time and trouble to find a group.
Now, I hate grouping to the new level where you need 20 or 40 people to see stuff. To me, that is just a new form of grind and frustration. it is almost like the devs are being lazy and want to make stuff harder so it requires more people and thats they only way they can think to make it harder. Hell I remember mob fights in other games that had 6-8 people fight a mob and it is 10 times harder than anything you can do with 20 or 40.
So to me, the first type of grouping is fine and its part of the philosopy of MMO's. The second type isn't.
With that said, WAR is a great balance of grouping and not grouping. I am a teacher so there are nights when I get home and want to play that I do not want to group or be social (since I was being social all day). There is plenty in WAR to do. There is tons of single player content. However, WAR rewards you for taking the time to find a group and ever to explore the game (look at tentonhammer and the blog from Jeff about lairs).
One of the great things with WAR is the "open group" feature. Basically you get into an area say for a public quest. You can bring up a list of open groups in the area (sorted by distance) and join one near by, get the quest done and leave. It makes grouping wonderfully simple - none of this spamming "LFG".
Hope this helps and I hope you do not write off WAR for just the grouping reason. It is a great game and has a lot more going for it and I would hate for someone not to experience what the game has to offer for a reson that is, to me, not an issue.
Templarga, that was one of the most constructive posts I have ever seen on MMORPG.com. I must say, WAR's system of grouping is awesome, especially the part I highlighted in your post. Being able to enter an area, see groups that are open and what classes they have in it, and then being able to join in on the fly... it's awesome.
This definitely takes away my worries I had about this game, concerning MMOs becoming solo games with included chat windows instead of MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER online games.
It's hard to take a post seriously when it starts with such a mind numblng stupid statement.
Massively Multiplayer not Massively Grouping.
I have to agree with th OP that being forced to group is extremely annoying.
But I understand that there are people who feel that going out without a group is like going out without weapons. I know there are people who argue that everyone should be forced to group, because they can't find a group (some of whom cannot find a group 'cause they are jerks). But there is nothing about the MMO that requires groups, jsust lots of people. WAR handles it quite nicely, I think. i.e. /group is optional, but teaming up with your fellows doesn't require it.
MMO isn't about grouping, certainly not by definition. RPG, on the other hand, has a strong background of parties, but still supports solo play. And just because you're killing MOBs solo doesn't mean you're not socializing. Heck I usually see less socializing in groups than when I'm solo. The groups are typically oriented on a goal, and go for it, with less time for idle chatter, unless you are doing something dead easy.
I have to say I understand where you are coming from, it seems like 95% of the people who talk about PvP are using PvP as an abbrieviation for "Let me kill people far weaker than me, without risk" The gank fests (open pvp) do not interest me because I'm not interested in forming a gang and wandering around a fantasy world picking on those weaker than me.
I have to say, however, that WAR is a different critter, from what I could se on the preview weekend. You don't have to group, but you can still participate in group content. I have to say I've been playing FPS games since DOOM came out, and I ALS like that genre. So the scenarios are kind of like the team based CTF shooters out there, but using your character. The big RvR parts are a lot more strategic in nature, which seems to annoy some of the PvP crowd, but I found it fun and purposeful, instead of a chaotic slugfest. (though sometimes it turned into one, which was also kind of fun) There are several threads about making the death penalty higher, which I think would reduce the fun factor of the big RvR battles.
I make my post to say, it's possible you may like this game. I've played a number of the same games as you, and share a number of your views vis-a-vis grouping, and I enjoyed the heck out of myself.
If they force you to group, and you can't get a group, then you are forced to do something else. The MMO companies have been learning that forced grouping really only benefits people who can't otherwise get a group. Some games I group in some I don't.
What I never do is accept a blind invite.
There is nothing that prevents me from socializing outside a group, and there is nothing forcing people to socialize when they are in a group. Guilds tend to socialize more, but only when they are on at the same time as you.
(I joined a aussie giuld in CoH once 'cause I was on late at night for a couple of months, they were entertaining to be around, but when I reverted to normal hours I never go to socialize anymore.)
I don't think I would call WAR a forced grouping game.
And I have absolutely no hesitation to use that term and do not like it as a feature.
First off there is supposedly a good amount of solo-ish questing.
Second off the public quests are sort of a compromise area that I do not consider forced grouping.
Third off in RvR it is perfectly possible to operate outside of a groups, you simply need to be smart enough to understand that groups will be out there and are part of the environment. For example you could be a solo rune priest and heal whomever you like whenever you like (not true of all healers).
Now if you want to be completely alone in an MMO then even I would say yeah don't play an MMORPG. But you can certainly be solo and interact with groups and make a contribution in RvR. And yes a well put together group in WAR will be able to do more than some guy running and gunning alone. But that is not the same as forced grouping.
Swamprob, yes, it's very focused to RvR. I am sorry this isnt a game for you.
I am happy you could discover this game isnt for you.
This is one thing Mythic did great. All the info they gave and the lifting of the NDA had allow people to know what this game is about.
No misleading here. This is a RvR focused MMO.
Much fun in any game you play or whatever you do!
The concept of "forced" grouping is pretty slippery.
Now, this may be debatable to some, but one of the core concepts of an MMO is joining up with other players to accomplish any of a variety of goals. Without the grouping, there is little reason to play in a persistent world. Perhaps a decade ago, (although, most would agree that MMOs weren't exactly 'solo-friendly' back then anyway) it would be a reasonable excuse that you simply wanted to socialize while gaming via the integrated chat. But with messengers and VoIP such as Vent or TS it really isn't necessary for a group of friends (or even acquaintances) to play the same vapid and generally story-lite or -less content just so they can /tell each other. The are better ways to communicate while playing more rewarding (on an individual level) single-player fare. Even newer consoles are supporting cross-game messaging or voice chat between friends.
So that brings us back to grouping. There are three general ways to approach this: Forced, Encouraged, and Optional.
Forced grouping is when the developers implement a series of mechanical roadblocks that a single player is highly unlikely to (or virtually incapable of) overcome(ing). This could be through difficulty of content/mob encounters or even more blatant in terms of switches or some other device that must be activated all at once. The game (if it is at all modern) will usually never force grouping for the entirety of its content, reserving such cases only sporadically, for particular milestones, or to act as a gateway to high-end equipment or abilities. EQ1 is a solid example of a very-strict forced grouping game. Very little of the content is soloable at all unless you are one of a small handful of classes and even then it's an arduous task typically not worth the effort and risk involved.
Encouraged grouping is typically more forgiving, with content scaling to the number of people attempting it. Almost all of the game (if not all) can be solo'd with patience, skill, and thorough knowledge of the game's mechanics. The 'trick' is that adding group members not only speeds up progress toward the particular objective (get exp, get loot, whatever) but in doing so the reward becomes substaintially better. City is the best example of encouraged grouping that I've played. Sure, you can solo. You can make decent progress (which, until the somewhat recent addition of loot and crafting, was only 'get moar levelz!') doing it, sure, but nothing could stop the leveling machine that was a full, well balance hero or villain team tearing through missions at the highest difficulty settings. When a group worked with good balance and synergy (and perhaps was tank defender controller blaster blaster blaster blaster blaster) no amount of skilled solo play could hope to match the rate of advancement. So in the end, only die-hard RPers, lore-nuts, or people that, sadly, can't find a group are the only ones that end up soloing. It's still "forced grouping" when its all said and done. It's just a lot more sneaky.
Optional grouping is purely what it sounds like. You can group, or not. It doesn't really matter. Exp or loot bonuses aren't high enough (or simply don't even exist) to overcome the division of reward when factoring in people other than the individual player. Tabula Rasa and Age of Conan (and, of course, the monster that is WoW) all fall into this category. The caveat is that, at the "endgame", all of these games (and indeed pretty much all 'optional grouping' games) end up forcing grouping in order to accomplish anything. This format is especially poor because most newer MMOs have a "quest grind" focus moreso than a "mob grind" focus. In other words, the bulk of your progress comes from completing quests, not actually killing things. Since the best way to advance is to do quests, most quests are soloable, and no two individuals will never ever have the exact same quest log (except multi-boxers), what does this mean? Nobody bloody groups. And it sucks. Playing through TR or WoW is among the most boring, sad, and lonely experiences in gaming. The only thing these games have to offer to a pure-soloer is size of world and its contents (items, etc). The average single player experience will usually have far better story, depth of combat or mechanics, character-skill development, and interaction with the world. Developers of these kinds of MMOs [i]know[/i] this and so in order to keep a person playing after they soloed all the way to the end, they turn on the hardcore raid switch right at level 60 70 level cap.
And that leads to the "WoW community" that people tend to (perhaps overly stereotypically) dis when talking about Warcraft or any other MMO. People that play on an individual level all the way to the level cap, doing what they want and they need for the entirety of their playtime, to hell with anyone else, and then suddenly cap out and hit that wall where they have to learn to work with other people, both mechanically and mentally, to do anything. It's simply an entirely different concept of play within the same game, and is especially rough if an "optional grouping" MMO is the first MMO played by someone.
So, basically, after all that rambling, "forced grouping" isn't as bad as people make it out to be. It helps players work together as they progress and learn (rather than only at the end of the game after establishing solo-only mindsets and playstyles) but it can be admittedly annoying when you can't find a group and become locked out of advancement, though as I and others have said pretty much no modern MMO is 100% forced group content. "Encouraged grouping" is simply a more subtle, more convenient way of forcing grouping while at the same time allowing the soloers to not feel as bad about themselves and/or their groupless state. And optional grouping is trash because it promotes entire subsets of gamers to play games at their most difficult point with other people that have no desire, business, or sometimes even the basic interpersonal skills required. Not to mention how lonely the ride is to the top when no one wants to group because it only slows them down.
No forced grouping is exactly as terrible as its made out to be because it stops me from doing what I want.
So screw any game that tries to tell me how to have my fun.
Also it does not teach anyone to group well. The people who would stick with a forced grouping game would be grouping a game like City of Heroes anyway. The people talked about as playing solely for themselves would just leave a forced grouping game anyway. And many other people like who both group and solo would leave as well.
Forced grouping is possibly the worst feature any MMO can have. It dooms the MMORPG to being niche and is completely unnecessary as proved by City of Heroes. All sorts of good groupers and extremely easy to get a group in CoX yet its the most solo friendly MMO in existence.
Anyone who thinks you can beat a person into being a good grouper is deluding themselves. Either they will persue or they won't. Trying to beat people into will just give you one more cancellation.
Besides there are plenty of bad ream players in forced grouping games anyway. Actually I see the more team friendly people in open games like CoX. Sounds strange but people feel worse when they are messing with people's fun then a forced grouping game where everything has an undertone of need and greed and business.
In CoX everyone knows that everyone is there because they want to be there not because they need to be. No more coercsion, no more primadonas. Makes it work better, much less tense. Forced grouping is as bad as it gets. You can't overstate how bad it is. It is the worst.
I was also heavily involved in CoX and I fully agree with this post. If CoX can do it, so can other MMOs.
Well, I didn't need as much flameproof clothing as I thought I might have. I tip my hat with respect to all those non-reactionary and intelligent posters, whether you agree with my opinion or not.
At no point did I intend my post to sound trollish, and I apologize if it came off that way. I guess I got a little exasperated with a zillion posts lauding this game as the second coming for MMOs. I was merely trying to show that many of the new features that so many were extolling did not entice all players and playstyles.
At the least, it is incumbent for us all to remember that we each enjoy different aspects of gaming, and no one way is more or less of value than another, save perhaps for those few who game only to grief others.
Lastly, remember this is a forum, which exists for the intent of discussing differing opinions. It would be pointless for it to exist only to have everyone agree on everything.
Good gaming to all.
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
anything that has "forced" in it cant be good, or could it ....
It's hard to take a post seriously when it starts with such a mind numblng stupid statement.
Massively Multiplayer not Massively Grouping.
Thanks for the constructive comment. Multiplayer to me implies grouping.
Ah, now you're saying it's your opinion, yet what you said was: By definition, MMO's require groups.
Opinions are not facts, you have the personal misunderstanding that if multiple people are playing they should have to group. This is not the case, you don't even have to "group up" to do activities with multiple other people. Grouping is a fine way to do some stuff, it is not the be-all end-all of MMO games though.
[snip]
I guarantee if you go and talk to EVERY single developer out there, the first thing they will tell you is that MMO's are meant to require groups.
I guarantee you are wrong.
Half of the allure, is to meet up with others online and group up. I have friends all over the world that I have met through MMO's and I enjoy being able to group up with them and try new things and succeed together.
Yes, grouping is not forbidden, and yet somehow people in groups are the same as people who aren't, they are all players, they are all part of the massively multiplayer world.
I think this is where the modern MMO has gone wrong - they feel like single player games in a large, populated world and I for one, hate that. This is why the old school games like EQ, DAOC and other appeal to me more than the modern game. THis is one reason I love Vanguard and if not for WAR, that is the game I would be playing.
Vanguard was fun, I don't recall much forced grouping though, like EQ did. I don't understand how an MMO can feel like a single player game to you, if you are grouping with your friends. What is it that you hate, that other people are free to not group with you?
One of the greatest things about WAR is the idea of the "living guild" and working together. This is a CORE element in the game. Without a strong guild, your role in WAR will be diminished. It is designed this way and it should be because its about teamwork and working together to defeat the enemy.
Ah, here it is, you want everyone who doesn't play how you want them to to be relegated to second class status. With the exception of abilities that only work on group-mates, how is a soloer's ability to contribute diminished in a given RvR action? That's the beauty here, as a healer I'd want to make sure I was in a group, but as an archer/range DPS I'm fine solo. Because nobody is every wholly solo, unless there isn't anyone else around. Guilds are an important part of Warhammer, certainly, I saw several members of one during PW the really shook up the opposing team in a keep action.
At least WAR does a good job balancing the content of single versus group. It has a little something for everyone. And with the emphasis on guilds and guild development, along with the core designs of the game (like open groups), groups will be easily formed yet needed but not required.
Agreement
comments above
why didnt you just name this post "why would anyone on the war forums care about how i feel?" becuase trust me no one here gives two shakes about your conveluded dillusional ass and wouldnt stop to help if they saw you run down in the street and lynched by the fan boys!
to the OP i didnt read anything else, but it sounds like oblivion is your type of game.