The challenge ina grouping game is not using your twitch skillz to put your cross hairs on some pixels.
the challenge, is working with other people.
If you like DF, then play it and have fun, and I'm very glad the developers made a game you like.
I have zero interest in twitch games unless they are FPS games.
I do play them sometimes, but I have very bad twitch skillz which are not going to improve, so I don't play them alot.
well that is a fair point and I understand. With that said I do think solo and grouping can coexist just fine together. in fact the game I am currently playing Fallen Earth despite its strong solo playing base actually has quests that are impossible to do without a group. Sure you can go back once you are level a billizion and do the lower group quests but as it turns out you would get no experience for it.
now in all fairness many of the group quests are very solo possible but they do have some that are impossible without a group, they just need more.
EQ2 also has a group system where its impossible to even get in the zone without a set number of people or more. I guess I am unclear as to what games you must be playing that feel non-group friendly
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
The challenge ina grouping game is not using your twitch skillz to put your cross hairs on some pixels.
the challenge, is working with other people.
If you like DF, then play it and have fun, and I'm very glad the developers made a game you like.
I have zero interest in twitch games unless they are FPS games.
I do play them sometimes, but I have very bad twitch skillz which are not going to improve, so I don't play them alot.
well that is a fair point and I understand. With that said I do think solo and grouping can coexist just fine together. in fact the game I am currently playing Fallen Earth despite its strong solo playing base actually has quests that are impossible to do without a group. Sure you can go back once you are level a billizion and do the lower group quests but as it turns out you would get no experience for it.
now in all fairness many of the group quests are very solo possible but they do have some that are impossible without a group, they just need more.
Well, it's all a matter of degree.
The important thing is you can't argue someone into having fun.
I don't have fun in WoW because I think it's to easy, because ti's so solo friendly.
I do have fun in games like DaoC, because I find the emphasis on grouping to be more challenging, and more fun.
I can't argue a solo lover to have fun in DAoC or EQ types of games.
They can't argue me into having fun in a solo type game such as WoW.
If they could, that would be great, I'd just go get a WoW account, and play that.
So if you like solo games, that's great, there are plenty to play. But you can't argue group players into having fun in those games.
The challenge ina grouping game is not using your twitch skillz to put your cross hairs on some pixels.
the challenge, is working with other people.
If you like DF, then play it and have fun, and I'm very glad the developers made a game you like.
I have zero interest in twitch games unless they are FPS games.
I do play them sometimes, but I have very bad twitch skillz which are not going to improve, so I don't play them alot.
well that is a fair point and I understand. With that said I do think solo and grouping can coexist just fine together. in fact the game I am currently playing Fallen Earth despite its strong solo playing base actually has quests that are impossible to do without a group. Sure you can go back once you are level a billizion and do the lower group quests but as it turns out you would get no experience for it.
now in all fairness many of the group quests are very solo possible but they do have some that are impossible without a group, they just need more.
Well, it's all a matter of degree.
The important thing is you can't argue someone into having fun.
I don't have fun in WoW because I think it's to easy, because ti's so solo friendly.
I do have fun in games like DaoC, because I find the emphasis on grouping to be more challenging, and more fun.
I can't argue a solo lover to have fun in DAoC or EQ types of games.
They can't argue me into having fun in a solo type game such as WoW.
If they could, that would be great, I'd just go get a WoW account, and play that.
So if you like solo games, that's great, there are plenty to play. But you can't argue group players into having fun in those games.
No offense, but this is a bit outside the meaning of my thread. There's plenty of "solo vs group" threads here and they all end up pretty much the same...
Please, if I may ask of you, how do you guys think games can be made to better encourage something which is in most newer games is seen as lacking - namely grouping!
And don't impose the limit of exactly what YOU want, say what you would accept while also accomodating the most amount of players, some of them with widely different opinions than you. Lets not turn this thread into pointing out everything that's wrong with every single game, let's try, for once, to state how things potentially can be better, and use examples of what's actually done right in some games.
The challenge ina grouping game is not using your twitch skillz to put your cross hairs on some pixels.
the challenge, is working with other people.
If you like DF, then play it and have fun, and I'm very glad the developers made a game you like.
I have zero interest in twitch games unless they are FPS games.
I do play them sometimes, but I have very bad twitch skillz which are not going to improve, so I don't play them alot.
well that is a fair point and I understand. With that said I do think solo and grouping can coexist just fine together. in fact the game I am currently playing Fallen Earth despite its strong solo playing base actually has quests that are impossible to do without a group. Sure you can go back once you are level a billizion and do the lower group quests but as it turns out you would get no experience for it.
now in all fairness many of the group quests are very solo possible but they do have some that are impossible without a group, they just need more.
Well, it's all a matter of degree.
The important thing is you can't argue someone into having fun.
I don't have fun in WoW because I think it's to easy, because ti's so solo friendly.
I do have fun in games like DaoC, because I find the emphasis on grouping to be more challenging, and more fun.
I can't argue a solo lover to have fun in DAoC or EQ types of games.
They can't argue me into having fun in a solo type game such as WoW.
If they could, that would be great, I'd just go get a WoW account, and play that.
So if you like solo games, that's great, there are plenty to play. But you can't argue group players into having fun in those games.
see I have a problem. When I say that games like Fallen Earth and EQ2 have areas and quests that are impossible to do alone I mean exactly that. I dont mean the system doesnt allow you to, I mean its...wait for it...WAY TO HARD to do solo and yes some actually require x number of players so you do have that dynamic as well I grant. Group game content is not affected because some guy on the other side of the server is by himself hitting rats. More than likely the entire game is too easy for you.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
The challenge ina grouping game is not using your twitch skillz to put your cross hairs on some pixels.
the challenge, is working with other people.
If you like DF, then play it and have fun, and I'm very glad the developers made a game you like.
I have zero interest in twitch games unless they are FPS games.
I do play them sometimes, but I have very bad twitch skillz which are not going to improve, so I don't play them alot.
well that is a fair point and I understand. With that said I do think solo and grouping can coexist just fine together. in fact the game I am currently playing Fallen Earth despite its strong solo playing base actually has quests that are impossible to do without a group. Sure you can go back once you are level a billizion and do the lower group quests but as it turns out you would get no experience for it.
now in all fairness many of the group quests are very solo possible but they do have some that are impossible without a group, they just need more.
Well, it's all a matter of degree.
The important thing is you can't argue someone into having fun.
I don't have fun in WoW because I think it's to easy, because ti's so solo friendly.
I do have fun in games like DaoC, because I find the emphasis on grouping to be more challenging, and more fun.
I can't argue a solo lover to have fun in DAoC or EQ types of games.
They can't argue me into having fun in a solo type game such as WoW.
If they could, that would be great, I'd just go get a WoW account, and play that.
So if you like solo games, that's great, there are plenty to play. But you can't argue group players into having fun in those games.
see I have a problem. When I say that games like Fallen Earth and EQ2 have areas and quests that are impossible to do alone I mean exactly that. I dont mean the system doesnt allow you to, I mean its...wait for it...WAY TO HARD to do solo and yes some actually require x number of players so you do have that dynamic as well I grant. Group game content is not affected because some guy on the other side of the server is by himself hitting rats. More than likely the entire game is too easy for you.
Yes, that's nice. But how much of the game is that content? 10%, 20, 50?
Again, it's a matter of degree.
WoW has dungeons like that too.
People solo 90% of the game leveling up, they find a group dungeon, get in a group, whack the mobs, kthx bye, and there you go.
Not really quite the same thing as a DAoC or EQ type of game.
So that's nice and all, but I'd like the majority of the game to be like that, not 10%.
No it is not pretending. Your are not pretending those mobs are there. They actually are. You are not pretending they have more higher/better stats/skills, they actually do. You are not pretending there are more bosses, there actually are. The game is actually harder. You need to fight differently than you do if you choose to do it at an easier level and will require a group should your choose to make it hard enough.
Play by the rules, thats fine. The rules alter the games difficulty depending on what you choose. The game changes what it throws at you when you choose to make it harder.
You're pretending they have to be there. They don't. You can just decide there should be less mobs.
Why don't you?
Because you want to pretend the game is harder than it really is.
The game isn't more difficult, because you pretend it is.
The game more difficult if there is an obstacle, and there is only one way to overcome that obstacle.
To get past this point, you can jump over a two foot pole, a five foot pole, a ten foot pole, or a twenty foot pole.
How difficult is that obstacle? It is as difficult as jumping over a two foot pole. Everyting else is pretend, because thats' all you really have to do to make it farther.
Now, compare that to this.
To get past this point, you must jump over this twenty foot pole. If you don't do that, you dont' go any further.
How difficult is that? Well, it's pretty fucking difficult.
You think those two are equal?
Deciding a 20 foot pole is to high, so you jump over a two foot pole to get the same thing, and that's equally difficult as you dont' go any futher until you learn to jump over this 20 foot pole.
Really?
that's a great imagination you got there.
You're pretending they have to be there. They don't. You can just decide there should be less mobs.
Once again, I'm not pretending. I can choose to have more or less mobs there. The game changes depending on my choice becoming harder or easier. There is no pretending. They are in the game, the code is written, they are there on my screen. I'm not pretending anything. I have to play different when facing 10 bosses than I do when fighting 5 minions.
Fighting 10 bosses is more difficult that fighting 10 minions. I can take 10 minions easiliy without event thinking. Taking one boss requires a bit more thought, I have to use more of the abilities on my hotbar. Taking more than 1 boss I have to manage my stamina, and will probably have to kite quite a bit. A significant difference that is real and measurable, there is no pretending there.
The game more difficult if there is an obstacle, and there is only one way to overcome that obstacle.
To get past this point, you can jump over a two foot pole, a five foot pole, a ten foot pole, or a twenty foot pole.
How difficult is that obstacle? It is as difficult as jumping over a two foot pole. Everyting else is pretend, because thats' all you really have to do to make it farther. Thats all you have to do if thats all you choose to do? You could change the settings to jump over the 20 foot pole, and you still only have the few abilities you had with 2 foot pole. You are just choosing not to.
Deciding a 20 foot pole is to high, so you jump over a two foot pole to get the same thing, and that's equally difficult as you dont' go any futher until you learn to jump over this 20 foot pole.
Really?
that's a great imagination you got there.
There is no imagination in this scenario. Did you miss the part where I said you don't the same things. Choosing to make it more difficult means you get more rewards and more xp.
Edit: Sorry Aercus.
Back to topic. I think most games are going in the right directions. They are discovering ways to eliminate the harderst part of grouping - forming the group. Through lfg tools, and ports this eliminates a lot of the waiting that is required.
Getting people to want to form groups is as simple as increasing the rewards for them. Like many others I also feel that most people want to group (not always but often) because their is always better rewards, but getting them is a pain.
Now add the ability to customize to some extend the challenge you like, and have the appropriate rewards given for that challenge and you have a game winner that can satisfy most people.
Venge Sunsoar
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
The challenge ina grouping game is not using your twitch skillz to put your cross hairs on some pixels.
the challenge, is working with other people.
If you like DF, then play it and have fun, and I'm very glad the developers made a game you like.
I have zero interest in twitch games unless they are FPS games.
I do play them sometimes, but I have very bad twitch skillz which are not going to improve, so I don't play them alot.
well that is a fair point and I understand. With that said I do think solo and grouping can coexist just fine together. in fact the game I am currently playing Fallen Earth despite its strong solo playing base actually has quests that are impossible to do without a group. Sure you can go back once you are level a billizion and do the lower group quests but as it turns out you would get no experience for it.
now in all fairness many of the group quests are very solo possible but they do have some that are impossible without a group, they just need more.
Well, it's all a matter of degree.
The important thing is you can't argue someone into having fun.
I don't have fun in WoW because I think it's to easy, because ti's so solo friendly.
I do have fun in games like DaoC, because I find the emphasis on grouping to be more challenging, and more fun.
I can't argue a solo lover to have fun in DAoC or EQ types of games.
They can't argue me into having fun in a solo type game such as WoW.
If they could, that would be great, I'd just go get a WoW account, and play that.
So if you like solo games, that's great, there are plenty to play. But you can't argue group players into having fun in those games.
No offense, but this is a bit outside the meaning of my thread. There's plenty of "solo vs group" threads here and they all end up pretty much the same...
Please, if I may ask of you, how do you guys think games can be made to better encourage something which is in most newer games is seen as lacking - namely grouping!
And don't impose the limit of exactly what YOU want, say what you would accept while also accomodating the most amount of players, some of them with widely different opinions than you. Lets not turn this thread into pointing out everything that's wrong with every single game, let's try, for once, to state how things potentially can be better, and use examples of what's actually done right in some games.
Simple. Give groups 4x xp as solo play.
Done.
People will group, and they will group like crazy.
And make it so that even though groups are getting 4x xp, it takes them a long time to make it to the level cap.
Problem solved, people will group all day long.
But, make all the content soloable.
Solo players can do all the content groups do, and get all the rewards.
but it will work like this.
There is a dungeon.
With a full group, at level 10 you can go to the bottom, get tons of xp, and cool loot.
If you are solo, you will have to be level 15, and then you can do the same dungeon, solo, get the same loot.
Of course, at this point the loot will be a little bit dated for you, since you're level 15. But if you want to, you can do it like this all the way to the level cap.
Believe me, whenever you can find a group, you will.
No it is not pretending. Your are not pretending those mobs are there. They actually are. You are not pretending they have more higher/better stats/skills, they actually do. You are not pretending there are more bosses, there actually are. The game is actually harder. You need to fight differently than you do if you choose to do it at an easier level and will require a group should your choose to make it hard enough.
Play by the rules, thats fine. The rules alter the games difficulty depending on what you choose. The game changes what it throws at you when you choose to make it harder.
You're pretending they have to be there. They don't. You can just decide there should be less mobs.
Why don't you?
Because you want to pretend the game is harder than it really is.
The game isn't more difficult, because you pretend it is.
The game more difficult if there is an obstacle, and there is only one way to overcome that obstacle.
To get past this point, you can jump over a two foot pole, a five foot pole, a ten foot pole, or a twenty foot pole.
How difficult is that obstacle? It is as difficult as jumping over a two foot pole. Everyting else is pretend, because thats' all you really have to do to make it farther.
Now, compare that to this.
To get past this point, you must jump over this twenty foot pole. If you don't do that, you dont' go any further.
How difficult is that? Well, it's pretty fucking difficult.
You think those two are equal?
Deciding a 20 foot pole is to high, so you jump over a two foot pole to get the same thing, and that's equally difficult as you dont' go any futher until you learn to jump over this 20 foot pole.
Really?
that's a great imagination you got there.
You're pretending they have to be there. They don't. You can just decide there should be less mobs.
Once again, I'm not pretending. I can choose to have more or less mobs there. The game changes depending on my choice becoming harder or easier. There is no pretending. They are in the game, the code is written, they are there on my screen. I'm not pretending anything. I have to play different when facing 10 bosses than I do when fighting 5 minions.
Fighting 10 bosses is more difficult that fighting 10 minions. I can take 10 minions easiliy without event thinking. Taking one boss requires a bit more thought, I have to use more of the abilities on my hotbar. Taking more than 1 boss I have to manage my stamina, and will probably have to kite quite a bit. A significant difference that is real and measurable, there is no pretending there.
The game more difficult if there is an obstacle, and there is only one way to overcome that obstacle.
To get past this point, you can jump over a two foot pole, a five foot pole, a ten foot pole, or a twenty foot pole.
How difficult is that obstacle? It is as difficult as jumping over a two foot pole. Everyting else is pretend, because thats' all you really have to do to make it farther. Thats all you have to do if thats all you choose to do? You could change the settings to jump over the 20 foot pole, and you still only have the few abilities you had with 2 foot pole. You are just choosing not to.
Deciding a 20 foot pole is to high, so you jump over a two foot pole to get the same thing, and that's equally difficult as you dont' go any futher until you learn to jump over this 20 foot pole.
Really?
that's a great imagination you got there.
There is no imagination in this scenario. Did you miss the part where I said you don't the same things. Choosing to make it more difficult means you get more rewards and more xp.
If you mean a design like DAoC or EQ, great!
If you mean a design like WoW, or scaling dungeons in CoH, I thnk that's boring.
Yes, that's nice. But how much of the game is that content? 10%, 20, 50?
Again, it's a matter of degree.
WoW has dungeons like that too.
People solo 90% of the game leveling up, they find a group dungeon, get in a group, whack the mobs, kthx bye, and there you go.
Not really quite the same thing as a DAoC or EQ type of game.
So that's nice and all, but I'd like the majority of the game to be like that, not 10%.
I agree that its small but I dont agree that an entire new game engine that only allows grouping is really the answer. There are some modest changes that can be put into most MMO's that could make the group experience better without an entire re-vamp of the game.
With that said, most of us do what we like to do without a great deal of measurement toward reward. I mean crafting in most games is usually not the best way to reach an end game status but a lot of people like to do it for the process. It could very well be that most gamers simply dont like grouping as much as they think they do. So if you represent 10% of the market even with a game that is 100% group focused your options are going to be fairly limited anyway.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Make all the mobs in the game too hard to kill solo.
Problem solved.
All the "I wanna solo to endgame then..." people, can go back to Halo and CS or whatever FPS is big at the moment, where they belong. And the MMO players who enjoy the games for what they are, and the fun that can only be had in these games playing in a group can continue on their merry way.
"If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse." - Henry Ford
Make all the mobs in the game too hard to kill solo.
Problem solved.
All the "I wanna solo to endgame then..." people, can go back to Halo and CS or whatever FPS is big at the moment, where they belong. And the MMO players who enjoy the games for what they are, and the fun that can only be had in these games playing in a group can continue on their merry way.
stop and think about that for a moment. You are implying that people really would perfer not to group up in the first place if they had their way.
hmmmmm, intresting maybe even thought provoking dont you think?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please, if I may ask of you, how do you guys think games can be made to better encourage something which is in most newer games is seen as lacking - namely grouping!
DDO offers user-selectable difficulty levels for quest areas. The player(s) can choose the level of difficulty that they want to engage in. If aplayer wants to blow through a dungeon on easy mode, alone or with friends, they can do so. If they want to take on a dungeon at a hard or 'elite' level that option is there as well. Soloing a hard dungeon provides high difficulty with high rewards (more loot, xp, bonuses, etc), while doing the hard dungeon with a group is much easier and a divsion of the loot. It's balanced to accomodate each group. Elite is extremely difficult for most solo players, requiring them to either buy hirelings (dumb ass rocks) or travel with others. Elite offers additional bonuses in the form of points that can be spent within the game.
Players who can't enjoy their group experience because someone somewhere someday might be soloing the experience are players who cannot and will not be satisfied by any design that offers viable solo gameplay. Attempting to accomodate them is futile because if someone can solo the content, the knowledge alone that it can be done is enough to 'cheapen' their personal experience.
DDO seems to have done very well with their design, and the issue of fairness doesn't seem to be a problem.
EVE Online offers various tiers of gameplay, allowing solo players and group oriented players to both feel accomplishment and advancement within the game world. As it is a game heavily focused on social interaction, the encouragement to band together with others is the access tothe higher tiers of each aspect of gameplay. The best part is that 'grouping' in EVE doesn't necessarily mean being tethered to a predetermined number of people. Most EVE activities require collaborative work to be done efficiently, where players can complete their contributions to the group alone or with others.
ATITD, UO, AC and several other MMOs offer content that encourages working together through collaborative tasks. Players can contribute to their team/faction/guild/village/etc alone or together. This allows time-limited players and solo players to actively participate in the 'big picture' content along with the group oriented player. They are all working toward the same goal together.
There are many effective solutions already out there, none of which will satisfy those who want to force others to play with them. It seems like the msot effective route is to cater to the players that want ways to go play with others, and that group includes many people who primarily play solo.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I think City of Heroes is a great example of a game where you can easily group, but the grouping game is not very good, not very satisfying.
I didn't need "encouragement" to group in city of heroes. I grouped most of the time in that game, and indeed it was fun.
But did it feel like a challenging group game? Not in the least. It felt like grouping through a solo game.
Fun, but no where near the satisfaction in grouping in a good group game like Dark Age of Camelot for example.
I'm not complaining in any of these group versus solo threads that I can't get in a group. I make groups, and play tanks and healers, so it's usually not that hard to get a group going.
I'm complaining about the game play, once you're in a group.
Just getting in a group isn't my agenda, but some people continually argue that this is what a "grouper" wants, just to get in a group. hey, you CAN group in so and so game. Well you CAN group in EVERY game, just like you CAN solo in EVERY game.
There's no point in getting in a group if there's no real challenge for that group in the game. Unless you want to wait for raids, but then you get DKP and all that crap, which I dont' particularly like.
Hmm? Were you in 8-man groups doing max-difficulty content and still finding it easy? With pickup teammates? With non-perfect class composition?
What do mobs cap out at? +6 levels above you? If you were clearing massive packs of purple +6 mobs without feeling any sort of challenge, then I'm impressed. It was pretty damn dangerous, even with relatively solid class comp.
Honestly when it comes to how hard a MMORPG can be while leveling, COH is the only one I know of where you can actually set things up to be challenging (and on top of that you're actually rewarded more, for as much additional challenge as you can tackle.)
Most other MMORPGs have one set difficulty, which sadly (but logically) gets set to the lowest common denominator.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I think City of Heroes is a great example of a game where you can easily group, but the grouping game is not very good, not very satisfying.
I didn't need "encouragement" to group in city of heroes. I grouped most of the time in that game, and indeed it was fun.
But did it feel like a challenging group game? Not in the least. It felt like grouping through a solo game.
Fun, but no where near the satisfaction in grouping in a good group game like Dark Age of Camelot for example.
I'm not complaining in any of these group versus solo threads that I can't get in a group. I make groups, and play tanks and healers, so it's usually not that hard to get a group going.
I'm complaining about the game play, once you're in a group.
Just getting in a group isn't my agenda, but some people continually argue that this is what a "grouper" wants, just to get in a group. hey, you CAN group in so and so game. Well you CAN group in EVERY game, just like you CAN solo in EVERY game.
There's no point in getting in a group if there's no real challenge for that group in the game. Unless you want to wait for raids, but then you get DKP and all that crap, which I dont' particularly like.
Hmm? Were you in 8-man groups doing max-difficulty content and still finding it easy? With pickup teammates? With non-perfect class composition?
What do mobs cap out at? +6 levels above you? If you were clearing massive packs of purple +6 mobs without feeling any sort of challenge, then I'm impressed. It was pretty damn dangerous, even with relatively solid class comp.
Honestly when it comes to how hard a MMORPG can be while leveling, COH is the only one I know of where you can actually set things up to be challenging (and on top of that you're actually rewarded more, for as much additional challenge as you can tackle.)
Most other MMORPGs have one set difficulty, which sadly (but logically) gets set to the lowest common denominator.
In CoH the dungeons scale, which means it's nothing more than an Iwin button.
It's not really hard, it's just an illusion.
If you "set it up to be challenging" that's not really a challenge is it?
that's a pretend challenge, since you just admitted, "you set it up".
A real challenge exists or does not exist. you have no control over it, you cannot "set it up".
Of course you set it to the lowest common denominator. Why wouldn't you? So you can pretend it's harder than it really is?
It's has hard as the easiest setting, and no harder.
How about instead of constantly focusing on "encouraging grouping", you simply allow people to play the way they want? Soloists have a variety of reasons for wanting to play the way they want to and it's not like they are totally apart from the other people playing in a persistent world world with them. I fail to understand why people who like to be grouped with others feel the need to dictate how someone else plays. What's the matter? Does their presence of those who walk to the beat of their own drum somehow threaten and invaildate the way you choose to conduct yourself?
Groupers will group naturally, but confirmed soloists will resist whatever new carrot you want to dangle in front of them until, finally disinterested and frustrated, they quit. Maybe that's what you're after when it's all said and done, excise what you perceive to be the aberrant element. Unfortunately for you, game developers are gradually recognizing that trying to make a group-centric game will not draw a sustainable playerbase. Could it be that all this flailing about trying to shunt people into playing like you do is based from a realization that thing are changing and eventually you'll have to accept that others won't be forced to play by your rules?
"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
Make all the mobs in the game too hard to kill solo.
Problem solved.
All the "I wanna solo to endgame then..." people, can go back to Halo and CS or whatever FPS is big at the moment, where they belong. And the MMO players who enjoy the games for what they are, and the fun that can only be had in these games playing in a group can continue on their merry way.
Ive said it many times before... Your reason is not the only reason for playing MMOs. Not everyone is interested in them for grouping with others, some play for the crafting/trading/economics involved, some play for the competition/pvp, some play so that if/when they feel like it, they can play with others, and some play for the sake of playing with a specific person or group of people and anyone outside of that group they dont care to interact with.
Not only that, but your go play FPS games is a horrible way to win your argument, considering that FPS games in most cases require a hell of a lot more group effort and coordination than like 99% of MMOs. Sure, there are those times when 1 skilled player just owns everyone repeatedly without any help from their team, but thats a matter of skill not levels & gear like MMOS. But the majority of the time, it comes down to which group plays better together. Ever play an FPS and get stuck on a team thats a PUG vs a long standing top clan that knows what theyre doing? Very little in an MMO can compare to what a group of talented players who know eachother well can do to their enemies in an FPS. My clan used to be a great example of that when i played FPS games a lot.
How about instead of constantly focusing on "encouraging grouping", you simply allow people to play the way they want? Soloists have a variety of reasons for wanting to play the way they want to and it's not like they are totally apart from the other people playing in a persistent world world with them. I fail to understand why people who like to be grouped with others feel the need to dictate how someone else plays. What's the matter? Does their presence of those who walk to the beat of their own drum somehow threaten and invaildate the way you choose to conduct yourself?
Groupers will group naturally, but confirmed soloists will resist whatever new carrot you want to dangle in front of them until, finally disinterested and frustrated, they quit. Maybe that's what you're after when it's all said and done, excise what you perceive to be the aberrant element. Unfortunately for you, game developers are gradually recognizing that trying to make a group-centric game will not draw a sustainable playerbase. Could it be that all this flailing about trying to shunt people into playing like you do is based from a realization that thing are changing and eventually you'll have to accept that others won't be forced to play by your rules?
So, let me get this straight.
Your idea for letting people play the way they want, is to force me to group in a solo game?
And that's "choice"?
Really?
What if I really want to play a grouping game, and not group in a solo game?
Where's my "choice"?
You don't think I should have one, nad I should play your solo game and like it right?
How about instead of constantly focusing on "encouraging grouping", you simply allow people to play the way they want? Soloists have a variety of reasons for wanting to play the way they want to and it's not like they are totally apart from the other people playing in a persistent world world with them. I fail to understand why people who like to be grouped with others feel the need to dictate how someone else plays. What's the matter? Does their presence of those who walk to the beat of their own drum somehow threaten and invaildate the way you choose to conduct yourself?
Groupers will group naturally, but confirmed soloists will resist whatever new carrot you want to dangle in front of them until, finally disinterested and frustrated, they quit. Maybe that's what you're after when it's all said and done, excise what you perceive to be the aberrant element. Unfortunately for you, game developers are gradually recognizing that trying to make a group-centric game will not draw a sustainable playerbase. Could it be that all this flailing about trying to shunt people into playing like you do is based from a realization that thing are changing and eventually you'll have to accept that others won't be forced to play by your rules?
So, let me get this straight.
Your idea for letting people play the way they want, is to force me to group in a solo game?
And that's "choice"?
Really?
What if I really want to play a grouping game, and not group in a solo game?
Where's my "choice"?
You don't think I should have one, nad I should play your solo game and like it right?
But I thought you were all about choice
I don't know what you're reading, must be something different than what i see, cause i dont see how what he said restricts your choice, it allows groupers to group, and soloers to solo, and he says one shouldnt dictate what the other type chooses to do.
BTW, to my recollection there is no such thing as a Solo MMORPG. The content may be soloable, but until you find a game where there is no such thing as a party/group/fellowship/whatever you want to call it, they all offer you a choice of soloing or grouping. The difference is in the rewards given, and its really up to you to decide which route you want to take. I dont see why people are even complaining to begin with. If youre a grouper, then go ahead and group, the soloers arent bothering you and your group. Why is it anyones business how anyone else plays, unless they are cheating?
I would add a couple of barriers to grouping that could be removed:
groups can consist of toons from any class, build or skill. No class is essential as is the case in most grouping games.
quests can be shared and you get credit for completion of quests, even if you have not completed earlier quests in the chain
some mechanism for players to temporarily lower or raise their levels, so that they can group with players of different levels in a fun and challenging way.
a mechanism for quickly replacing players or resuming play if a player has to log and appropriate rewards for the replacement. No one wants to join a half completed dungeon if they get no reward.
the ability to group with players from other servers
the ability to set the level of difficulty
You could refine some of the suggestions:
The dungeon scales according to the level and number of players in the team. Linking it to the first person is open to exploits.
In addition to scaling the the dungeon for the size and levels of team members, the team leader can set a difficulty level as well.
as mentioned in earlier posts, possible exploits also needs to considered and addressed.
This type of scalable gameplay seems to work best in instances. I have not seen a good implementation of scalable encounters in the open world in any game. Those games that I have seen attempt scalable encounters in the open world, had all sorts of problems when groups of different sizes and levels were running around in the same area.
Here is my question, how many people would use such a system you have described here to exploit themselves to the end game? I personally dont care about end gamers but I can see many holes.
I could for example, have a friend that is level 80 take my level 2 player on a little trip with the difficult setting set to low.
CoH is an example of a game where this has been successfully. Sure, players have found some ways to get better than normal experience, but in CoH it is not so massive I would consider it an exploit.
What is wrong with a level 80 taking their level 2 friend into a level 80 dungeon with difficulty setting to low?
All you have to do is make sure each player has fun, and that rewards for each are scaled according to their real levels. In CoH, the level 2 would have their current level 2 skills temporarily raised to level 79, so that they can help with fighting. There are many different checks that could be included in the code. Some examples which, depending on the game, might be used to prevent exploits:
you only get xp if your level is not more than 5 levels lower than the highest level person in the team.
xp is scaled up or down to match a players real level.
loot can have minimum level requirements to equip
each player could have an individual loot table based on their real level.
CoH is the best implementation I have seen of this type of system. There are many other ways it might have been done.
How do you encourage grouping? Easy. Make it required. And make it required from the getgo.
A challenging game needs - I say needs - to allow players to fail. Otherwise there's no challenge. It's an artificial challenge at best. I want a challenge because I want the feeling of accomplishment that comes from successfully completing something - and there is no sense of accomplishment if all I have to do to complete the challenge in front of me is to lower the difficulty setting.
Someone said that a game is all about hit points and levels and player skill is not involved, and I say, that is fundamentally not true. Player skill is involved, and I can tell the difference between a player who has powerleveled up to max level versus someone who has taken their time to learn how to play their character. So can everyone that I group with. I'm a healer in all the games that I play, and at the risk of sounding arrogant, I'm a damn good healer. I know my skills inside and out; cast time, delay time, how much they heal, how much aggro each will cost me - I don't overheal, I don't waste mana, I don't grab aggro. I may have the exact same gear and level as joe schmoe healer who overheals, but I will perform significantly better than he does because the tank doesn't have to fight to keep mobs from attacking me, and he doesn't have to worry that I'll let him die. This is skill.
This is why grouping needs to be required from the beginning, so players can learn how to group. Trust needs to be built in order for groups to succeed - why will most people solo if they get the chance? It's because of players who powerlevel to the top, and then have no idea how to play and cause everyone to die. Failure must be allowed. You must give people reasons to group, reasons to learn, and the only way to do that is to make them fail. If you can progress simply by lowering the difficulty, then there's no reason, no impetus to learn and improve.
In CoH the dungeons scale, which means it's nothing more than an Iwin button.
It's not really hard, it's just an illusion.
If you "set it up to be challenging" that's not really a challenge is it?
that's a pretend challenge, since you just admitted, "you set it up".
A real challenge exists or does not exist. you have no control over it, you cannot "set it up".
Well I can either
(A) totally disagree that this form of challenge is an "illusion" (challenge is challenge,)
or
(B) agree that this challenge is "illusion", and in fact all challenge in all of gaming is illusion by nature of games always being "set up" by someone (usually a game designer.)
Whichever you choose, it amounts to the same thing: COH dungeons were really damn challenging if you set them up that way, and rewarded you with superior progression if you chose to make things challenging for yourself.
Personally I think it's silly to call the challenge "illusion". The challenge is real, and resulted in tangible rewards.
To me, COH's setup is perfect:
Everyone can choose a difficulty level appropriate to their skill.
Skilled players are rewarded for choosing higher difficulty.
Everyone is encouraged to push their difficulty even higher, as a result of superior rewards (progression) coming from higher difficulty.
That's basically the epitome of a well-designed game. It's effort vs. reward.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Random responses to random posts so far in this thread.. wall of text incoming..
Forced grouping? Forget it. You might think you'll only lose the "Massively Single Player" crowd, and you don't want them anyway, but you won't. You'll lose players like me, who love to group, whose favourite moments in MMOs have always been group PvE or PvP.. but who won't play a game that doesn't offer robust solo play, because there are simply times when I'm online for half an hour at an odd time of day, and forming a group for a group activity is just not practical.
Why do you want to encourage grouping, someone else asked, instead of just letting people do whatever they want to do? I'll give you two reasons, one idealistic and one cynical.
Idealistic: I believe, and I'm sure many agree with me, that a good group experience in an MMO simply has the potential to be more entertaining and fulfilling than a solo experience can possibly be. Yes there are bad groups and bad experiences but the best ones are the best that MMOs have to offer. Players who are new to a game and have been playing solo may never have had the opportunity to experience this. Encouraging grouping, making it easy, making it unthreatening, gives them a chance to experience it.
Cynical: everyone gets tired of a game sooner or later. Developers know well that there is a period where gamers are tired of a game, but stay subscribed and keep playing due to social ties within the game, to their guild/corp/nation, their raid group, their arena team, etc. Encouraging people to group up and play together encourages these social ties to form, and thus is clearly good business sense since it will keep people subscribed longer than they would stay if they were eternally solo.
As for scaling content, scaling by level, by group size, etc.. I dunno. I'm not a huge fan of the idea. I appreciate the benefits but it just seems a bit too gamey, it really moves you away from the virtual world feeling.
Rather, I'd like to see designs that were a bit more flexible without actually needing to scale. Take WoW's instances as a counter-example: they are tuned for 5 players of a certain level, one of them tanking, one healing, and three others. This is pretty darned inflexible. Could you do it with four slightly higher level players? Sure. But they'd be better off finding a fifth and running a higher level instance where the xp and loot would be aimed at their level. Could you do it with six or seven lower level players? Nope, the rules prohibit it. Zerging used to be possible back when the game was first released (ah the good old 10-man Strat runs) but they shut it down.
A more flexible comparison to how instances work: Atlantica Online. Guild dungeons and nation dungeons require a certain amount of killing power (since you need to clear them out, killing every mob, within a certain time limit). But it's really rather flexible between whether you have a bunch of lower level players, hunting in groups of two or three, or a smaller number of high level players running solo. And since, at endgame, gear progression isn't too focused on dropped loot, the dungeons are valuable to both lower and higher level players, since both are after loot than can be easily converted to gold.
Ultimately, to encourage grouping, I think the areas you need to look at are:
* Making it easy: powerful, easy-to-use LFG tools.
* Making it flexible: avoiding rigid group sizes or character levels, both enforced ones (no more than 5 in an instance) and effective ones (the loot in here is worthless to anyone over level 25)
* Avoiding mechanics that interfere with grouping, like long multi-step quest chains. Save them for your solo content. The solo players love them, and it's just too inflexible expecting people to find groupmates at exactly the right stage of some mega-quest.
* Look for ways to make group play more fun, not just more effective or more rewarding. Things like those skill chains in LOTRO (forget the name) that rely on players executing moves one after another. Have interesting interactions between different classes' skills.
Comments
well that is a fair point and I understand. With that said I do think solo and grouping can coexist just fine together. in fact the game I am currently playing Fallen Earth despite its strong solo playing base actually has quests that are impossible to do without a group. Sure you can go back once you are level a billizion and do the lower group quests but as it turns out you would get no experience for it.
now in all fairness many of the group quests are very solo possible but they do have some that are impossible without a group, they just need more.
EQ2 also has a group system where its impossible to even get in the zone without a set number of people or more. I guess I am unclear as to what games you must be playing that feel non-group friendly
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Well, it's all a matter of degree.
The important thing is you can't argue someone into having fun.
I don't have fun in WoW because I think it's to easy, because ti's so solo friendly.
I do have fun in games like DaoC, because I find the emphasis on grouping to be more challenging, and more fun.
I can't argue a solo lover to have fun in DAoC or EQ types of games.
They can't argue me into having fun in a solo type game such as WoW.
If they could, that would be great, I'd just go get a WoW account, and play that.
So if you like solo games, that's great, there are plenty to play. But you can't argue group players into having fun in those games.
No offense, but this is a bit outside the meaning of my thread. There's plenty of "solo vs group" threads here and they all end up pretty much the same...
Please, if I may ask of you, how do you guys think games can be made to better encourage something which is in most newer games is seen as lacking - namely grouping!
And don't impose the limit of exactly what YOU want, say what you would accept while also accomodating the most amount of players, some of them with widely different opinions than you. Lets not turn this thread into pointing out everything that's wrong with every single game, let's try, for once, to state how things potentially can be better, and use examples of what's actually done right in some games.
see I have a problem. When I say that games like Fallen Earth and EQ2 have areas and quests that are impossible to do alone I mean exactly that. I dont mean the system doesnt allow you to, I mean its...wait for it...WAY TO HARD to do solo and yes some actually require x number of players so you do have that dynamic as well I grant. Group game content is not affected because some guy on the other side of the server is by himself hitting rats. More than likely the entire game is too easy for you.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Yes, that's nice. But how much of the game is that content? 10%, 20, 50?
Again, it's a matter of degree.
WoW has dungeons like that too.
People solo 90% of the game leveling up, they find a group dungeon, get in a group, whack the mobs, kthx bye, and there you go.
Not really quite the same thing as a DAoC or EQ type of game.
So that's nice and all, but I'd like the majority of the game to be like that, not 10%.
You're pretending they have to be there. They don't. You can just decide there should be less mobs.
Once again, I'm not pretending. I can choose to have more or less mobs there. The game changes depending on my choice becoming harder or easier. There is no pretending. They are in the game, the code is written, they are there on my screen. I'm not pretending anything. I have to play different when facing 10 bosses than I do when fighting 5 minions.
Fighting 10 bosses is more difficult that fighting 10 minions. I can take 10 minions easiliy without event thinking. Taking one boss requires a bit more thought, I have to use more of the abilities on my hotbar. Taking more than 1 boss I have to manage my stamina, and will probably have to kite quite a bit. A significant difference that is real and measurable, there is no pretending there.
The game more difficult if there is an obstacle, and there is only one way to overcome that obstacle.
To get past this point, you can jump over a two foot pole, a five foot pole, a ten foot pole, or a twenty foot pole.
How difficult is that obstacle? It is as difficult as jumping over a two foot pole. Everyting else is pretend, because thats' all you really have to do to make it farther. Thats all you have to do if thats all you choose to do? You could change the settings to jump over the 20 foot pole, and you still only have the few abilities you had with 2 foot pole. You are just choosing not to.
Deciding a 20 foot pole is to high, so you jump over a two foot pole to get the same thing, and that's equally difficult as you dont' go any futher until you learn to jump over this 20 foot pole.
Really?
that's a great imagination you got there.
There is no imagination in this scenario. Did you miss the part where I said you don't the same things. Choosing to make it more difficult means you get more rewards and more xp.
Edit: Sorry Aercus.
Back to topic. I think most games are going in the right directions. They are discovering ways to eliminate the harderst part of grouping - forming the group. Through lfg tools, and ports this eliminates a lot of the waiting that is required.
Getting people to want to form groups is as simple as increasing the rewards for them. Like many others I also feel that most people want to group (not always but often) because their is always better rewards, but getting them is a pain.
Now add the ability to customize to some extend the challenge you like, and have the appropriate rewards given for that challenge and you have a game winner that can satisfy most people.
Venge Sunsoar
Simple. Give groups 4x xp as solo play.
Done.
People will group, and they will group like crazy.
And make it so that even though groups are getting 4x xp, it takes them a long time to make it to the level cap.
Problem solved, people will group all day long.
But, make all the content soloable.
Solo players can do all the content groups do, and get all the rewards.
but it will work like this.
There is a dungeon.
With a full group, at level 10 you can go to the bottom, get tons of xp, and cool loot.
If you are solo, you will have to be level 15, and then you can do the same dungeon, solo, get the same loot.
Of course, at this point the loot will be a little bit dated for you, since you're level 15. But if you want to, you can do it like this all the way to the level cap.
Believe me, whenever you can find a group, you will.
If you mean a design like DAoC or EQ, great!
If you mean a design like WoW, or scaling dungeons in CoH, I thnk that's boring.
I agree that its small but I dont agree that an entire new game engine that only allows grouping is really the answer. There are some modest changes that can be put into most MMO's that could make the group experience better without an entire re-vamp of the game.
With that said, most of us do what we like to do without a great deal of measurement toward reward. I mean crafting in most games is usually not the best way to reach an end game status but a lot of people like to do it for the process. It could very well be that most gamers simply dont like grouping as much as they think they do. So if you represent 10% of the market even with a game that is 100% group focused your options are going to be fairly limited anyway.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
How to "encourage" grouping...
Simple.
Make all the mobs in the game too hard to kill solo.
Problem solved.
All the "I wanna solo to endgame then..." people, can go back to Halo and CS or whatever FPS is big at the moment, where they belong. And the MMO players who enjoy the games for what they are, and the fun that can only be had in these games playing in a group can continue on their merry way.
"If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse." - Henry Ford
stop and think about that for a moment. You are implying that people really would perfer not to group up in the first place if they had their way.
hmmmmm, intresting maybe even thought provoking dont you think?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
DDO offers user-selectable difficulty levels for quest areas. The player(s) can choose the level of difficulty that they want to engage in. If aplayer wants to blow through a dungeon on easy mode, alone or with friends, they can do so. If they want to take on a dungeon at a hard or 'elite' level that option is there as well. Soloing a hard dungeon provides high difficulty with high rewards (more loot, xp, bonuses, etc), while doing the hard dungeon with a group is much easier and a divsion of the loot. It's balanced to accomodate each group. Elite is extremely difficult for most solo players, requiring them to either buy hirelings (dumb ass rocks) or travel with others. Elite offers additional bonuses in the form of points that can be spent within the game.
Players who can't enjoy their group experience because someone somewhere someday might be soloing the experience are players who cannot and will not be satisfied by any design that offers viable solo gameplay. Attempting to accomodate them is futile because if someone can solo the content, the knowledge alone that it can be done is enough to 'cheapen' their personal experience.
DDO seems to have done very well with their design, and the issue of fairness doesn't seem to be a problem.
EVE Online offers various tiers of gameplay, allowing solo players and group oriented players to both feel accomplishment and advancement within the game world. As it is a game heavily focused on social interaction, the encouragement to band together with others is the access tothe higher tiers of each aspect of gameplay. The best part is that 'grouping' in EVE doesn't necessarily mean being tethered to a predetermined number of people. Most EVE activities require collaborative work to be done efficiently, where players can complete their contributions to the group alone or with others.
ATITD, UO, AC and several other MMOs offer content that encourages working together through collaborative tasks. Players can contribute to their team/faction/guild/village/etc alone or together. This allows time-limited players and solo players to actively participate in the 'big picture' content along with the group oriented player. They are all working toward the same goal together.
There are many effective solutions already out there, none of which will satisfy those who want to force others to play with them. It seems like the msot effective route is to cater to the players that want ways to go play with others, and that group includes many people who primarily play solo.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Hmm? Were you in 8-man groups doing max-difficulty content and still finding it easy? With pickup teammates? With non-perfect class composition?
What do mobs cap out at? +6 levels above you? If you were clearing massive packs of purple +6 mobs without feeling any sort of challenge, then I'm impressed. It was pretty damn dangerous, even with relatively solid class comp.
Honestly when it comes to how hard a MMORPG can be while leveling, COH is the only one I know of where you can actually set things up to be challenging (and on top of that you're actually rewarded more, for as much additional challenge as you can tackle.)
Most other MMORPGs have one set difficulty, which sadly (but logically) gets set to the lowest common denominator.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
In CoH the dungeons scale, which means it's nothing more than an Iwin button.
It's not really hard, it's just an illusion.
If you "set it up to be challenging" that's not really a challenge is it?
that's a pretend challenge, since you just admitted, "you set it up".
A real challenge exists or does not exist. you have no control over it, you cannot "set it up".
Of course you set it to the lowest common denominator. Why wouldn't you? So you can pretend it's harder than it really is?
It's has hard as the easiest setting, and no harder.
Anything else is just an illusion.
How about instead of constantly focusing on "encouraging grouping", you simply allow people to play the way they want? Soloists have a variety of reasons for wanting to play the way they want to and it's not like they are totally apart from the other people playing in a persistent world world with them. I fail to understand why people who like to be grouped with others feel the need to dictate how someone else plays. What's the matter? Does their presence of those who walk to the beat of their own drum somehow threaten and invaildate the way you choose to conduct yourself?
Groupers will group naturally, but confirmed soloists will resist whatever new carrot you want to dangle in front of them until, finally disinterested and frustrated, they quit. Maybe that's what you're after when it's all said and done, excise what you perceive to be the aberrant element. Unfortunately for you, game developers are gradually recognizing that trying to make a group-centric game will not draw a sustainable playerbase. Could it be that all this flailing about trying to shunt people into playing like you do is based from a realization that thing are changing and eventually you'll have to accept that others won't be forced to play by your rules?
"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
Ive said it many times before... Your reason is not the only reason for playing MMOs. Not everyone is interested in them for grouping with others, some play for the crafting/trading/economics involved, some play for the competition/pvp, some play so that if/when they feel like it, they can play with others, and some play for the sake of playing with a specific person or group of people and anyone outside of that group they dont care to interact with.
Not only that, but your go play FPS games is a horrible way to win your argument, considering that FPS games in most cases require a hell of a lot more group effort and coordination than like 99% of MMOs. Sure, there are those times when 1 skilled player just owns everyone repeatedly without any help from their team, but thats a matter of skill not levels & gear like MMOS. But the majority of the time, it comes down to which group plays better together. Ever play an FPS and get stuck on a team thats a PUG vs a long standing top clan that knows what theyre doing? Very little in an MMO can compare to what a group of talented players who know eachother well can do to their enemies in an FPS. My clan used to be a great example of that when i played FPS games a lot.
So, let me get this straight.
Your idea for letting people play the way they want, is to force me to group in a solo game?
And that's "choice"?
Really?
What if I really want to play a grouping game, and not group in a solo game?
Where's my "choice"?
You don't think I should have one, nad I should play your solo game and like it right?
But I thought you were all about choice
I don't know what you're reading, must be something different than what i see, cause i dont see how what he said restricts your choice, it allows groupers to group, and soloers to solo, and he says one shouldnt dictate what the other type chooses to do.
BTW, to my recollection there is no such thing as a Solo MMORPG. The content may be soloable, but until you find a game where there is no such thing as a party/group/fellowship/whatever you want to call it, they all offer you a choice of soloing or grouping. The difference is in the rewards given, and its really up to you to decide which route you want to take. I dont see why people are even complaining to begin with. If youre a grouper, then go ahead and group, the soloers arent bothering you and your group. Why is it anyones business how anyone else plays, unless they are cheating?
Yes, that works - until someone leaves the group due to crash or RL commitments.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
CoH is an example of a game where this has been successfully. Sure, players have found some ways to get better than normal experience, but in CoH it is not so massive I would consider it an exploit.
What is wrong with a level 80 taking their level 2 friend into a level 80 dungeon with difficulty setting to low?
All you have to do is make sure each player has fun, and that rewards for each are scaled according to their real levels. In CoH, the level 2 would have their current level 2 skills temporarily raised to level 79, so that they can help with fighting. There are many different checks that could be included in the code. Some examples which, depending on the game, might be used to prevent exploits:
you only get xp if your level is not more than 5 levels lower than the highest level person in the team.
xp is scaled up or down to match a players real level.
loot can have minimum level requirements to equip
each player could have an individual loot table based on their real level.
CoH is the best implementation I have seen of this type of system. There are many other ways it might have been done.
How do you encourage grouping? Easy. Make it required. And make it required from the getgo.
A challenging game needs - I say needs - to allow players to fail. Otherwise there's no challenge. It's an artificial challenge at best. I want a challenge because I want the feeling of accomplishment that comes from successfully completing something - and there is no sense of accomplishment if all I have to do to complete the challenge in front of me is to lower the difficulty setting.
Someone said that a game is all about hit points and levels and player skill is not involved, and I say, that is fundamentally not true. Player skill is involved, and I can tell the difference between a player who has powerleveled up to max level versus someone who has taken their time to learn how to play their character. So can everyone that I group with. I'm a healer in all the games that I play, and at the risk of sounding arrogant, I'm a damn good healer. I know my skills inside and out; cast time, delay time, how much they heal, how much aggro each will cost me - I don't overheal, I don't waste mana, I don't grab aggro. I may have the exact same gear and level as joe schmoe healer who overheals, but I will perform significantly better than he does because the tank doesn't have to fight to keep mobs from attacking me, and he doesn't have to worry that I'll let him die. This is skill.
This is why grouping needs to be required from the beginning, so players can learn how to group. Trust needs to be built in order for groups to succeed - why will most people solo if they get the chance? It's because of players who powerlevel to the top, and then have no idea how to play and cause everyone to die. Failure must be allowed. You must give people reasons to group, reasons to learn, and the only way to do that is to make them fail. If you can progress simply by lowering the difficulty, then there's no reason, no impetus to learn and improve.
FFXI encourages grouping together, because they force you; You can't level up well otherwise. Hell, you can't do jack without a party.
Well I can either
(A) totally disagree that this form of challenge is an "illusion" (challenge is challenge,)
or
(B) agree that this challenge is "illusion", and in fact all challenge in all of gaming is illusion by nature of games always being "set up" by someone (usually a game designer.)
Whichever you choose, it amounts to the same thing: COH dungeons were really damn challenging if you set them up that way, and rewarded you with superior progression if you chose to make things challenging for yourself.
Personally I think it's silly to call the challenge "illusion". The challenge is real, and resulted in tangible rewards.
To me, COH's setup is perfect:
Everyone can choose a difficulty level appropriate to their skill.
Skilled players are rewarded for choosing higher difficulty.
Everyone is encouraged to push their difficulty even higher, as a result of superior rewards (progression) coming from higher difficulty.
That's basically the epitome of a well-designed game. It's effort vs. reward.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Random responses to random posts so far in this thread.. wall of text incoming..
Forced grouping? Forget it. You might think you'll only lose the "Massively Single Player" crowd, and you don't want them anyway, but you won't. You'll lose players like me, who love to group, whose favourite moments in MMOs have always been group PvE or PvP.. but who won't play a game that doesn't offer robust solo play, because there are simply times when I'm online for half an hour at an odd time of day, and forming a group for a group activity is just not practical.
Why do you want to encourage grouping, someone else asked, instead of just letting people do whatever they want to do? I'll give you two reasons, one idealistic and one cynical.
Idealistic: I believe, and I'm sure many agree with me, that a good group experience in an MMO simply has the potential to be more entertaining and fulfilling than a solo experience can possibly be. Yes there are bad groups and bad experiences but the best ones are the best that MMOs have to offer. Players who are new to a game and have been playing solo may never have had the opportunity to experience this. Encouraging grouping, making it easy, making it unthreatening, gives them a chance to experience it.
Cynical: everyone gets tired of a game sooner or later. Developers know well that there is a period where gamers are tired of a game, but stay subscribed and keep playing due to social ties within the game, to their guild/corp/nation, their raid group, their arena team, etc. Encouraging people to group up and play together encourages these social ties to form, and thus is clearly good business sense since it will keep people subscribed longer than they would stay if they were eternally solo.
As for scaling content, scaling by level, by group size, etc.. I dunno. I'm not a huge fan of the idea. I appreciate the benefits but it just seems a bit too gamey, it really moves you away from the virtual world feeling.
Rather, I'd like to see designs that were a bit more flexible without actually needing to scale. Take WoW's instances as a counter-example: they are tuned for 5 players of a certain level, one of them tanking, one healing, and three others. This is pretty darned inflexible. Could you do it with four slightly higher level players? Sure. But they'd be better off finding a fifth and running a higher level instance where the xp and loot would be aimed at their level. Could you do it with six or seven lower level players? Nope, the rules prohibit it. Zerging used to be possible back when the game was first released (ah the good old 10-man Strat runs) but they shut it down.
A more flexible comparison to how instances work: Atlantica Online. Guild dungeons and nation dungeons require a certain amount of killing power (since you need to clear them out, killing every mob, within a certain time limit). But it's really rather flexible between whether you have a bunch of lower level players, hunting in groups of two or three, or a smaller number of high level players running solo. And since, at endgame, gear progression isn't too focused on dropped loot, the dungeons are valuable to both lower and higher level players, since both are after loot than can be easily converted to gold.
Ultimately, to encourage grouping, I think the areas you need to look at are:
* Making it easy: powerful, easy-to-use LFG tools.
* Making it flexible: avoiding rigid group sizes or character levels, both enforced ones (no more than 5 in an instance) and effective ones (the loot in here is worthless to anyone over level 25)
* Avoiding mechanics that interfere with grouping, like long multi-step quest chains. Save them for your solo content. The solo players love them, and it's just too inflexible expecting people to find groupmates at exactly the right stage of some mega-quest.
* Look for ways to make group play more fun, not just more effective or more rewarding. Things like those skill chains in LOTRO (forget the name) that rely on players executing moves one after another. Have interesting interactions between different classes' skills.