Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Is Grouping and being social the same thing?

135

Comments

  • XiaokiXiaoki Member EpicPosts: 4,047


    Originally posted by Kenze
    Originally posted by Loke666 Dungeonfinder is good but not cross server dungeon finders. The reason for that is that when you play with other people from your server you will run into them again, making lots of opportunity to learn to know new people. In a cross server DF you probably never will see them again which really takes away the social point of it.
    this doesnt work either. Dungeonfinder on servers with Low populations or massively top heavy pops is practicly useless if its not cross server. everquest 2's dungeon finder comes to mind.

    When Rift first introduced their Dungeon Finder tool it was server only because of feedback from the forums and PTR.


    They quickly made it cross server due to complaints.


    The Dungeon Finders in WoW and Rift will look for people on your server first.

  • JaedorJaedor Member UncommonPosts: 1,173

    Responding to subject question: No, grouping and being social are not the same thing.


    Just like being married can make you feel more lonely than when you were single. I've pugged dungeons where no one spoke the entire run. It takes effort to be social. Dungeon finders remove the necessity of making even that effort.


    So these days, I follow some old advice - "Be the change you want to see." - and always start a conversation when I join a group.


  • TorikTorik Member UncommonPosts: 2,342
    Originally posted by Loktofeit

    Two of FB's most powerful tools on that front were the Poke and Groups.

    While Poke is universally despised currently, it served the very distinct purpose of allowing people to make the leap from wanting to interact to actually interacting when they aren't necessrily sure how to. Poke gave people a tool to initiate interaction with others. Despite it currently being the bane of FB features, it fulfilled a much needed role in getting people communicating.

    The Group feature allows people to not only divide but a way find those subgroups. Not only does this allow people to share common interests and bond with new people, but it also allows these groups to do so with minimal atangonism from those who have absolutely no interest in or flat out dislike the discussion matter. Groups based on religion, hobby, nationality, locale, gender, age, etc formed so as new people joined FB they could search and find these groups in order to become part of the community and interact with others more.

    A player created chat channel system like AOL's room system with search, invites and other features would facilitate players being social much more than any combat group system.

    It kinda reminds me of the time when I would still talk to telemarketers who called me on the phone.  These days I have Call Display and do not even pick up the phone if it is an unkown area code.  Does that make me less social?

     

    I am actually a firm believer in allosing players to be members of multiple guilds at once.  It was my favorite feature in A Tale in the Desert and I can't believe that most MMORPGs are not using it.  It does not lock me into one social circle and allows me to participate in other activities that might not be that popular in my main guild.

  • DerrosDerros Member UncommonPosts: 1,216

    Lack of socialization is more due to lack of downtime that games like EQ used to have, as well as the elimination of spawn camping. 

     

    When you are sitting in 1 place for hours, waiting on mana, or spawns, of course you are going to talk to others, to help relieve the boredom.

     

    Let's also not forget older MMOs were much harder to break into for the average person, and asked much more.  The higher threshold for playing and a smaller population, to me, would mean that it would be more likely that you would meet other people more like you, therefore be easier to socialize with.

  • TorikTorik Member UncommonPosts: 2,342
    Originally posted by BlitzVF

    2. Invest into each other by doing things they dont want to do for the other people.  If you only do things you already want to do with or for someone, there is Zero investment in the social relationship.  

     

    Investment example:   John likes combat but dislikes exploring. Mary likes to explore but dislikes combat.  If John ends up exploring with Mary with little combat to help her out, John will be investing emotionaly into Mary.  If Mary helps John out with lots of combat, but doesnt get to see any new things, she will be investing in John.   Its counter intituitive but it is how our frontal lobe/hedonic system works.   Investment doesnt mean happy, it means they will miss each other and probably not know why.

     

    -Blitz

    The investment thing can really turn on you real quick.  If you are doing stuff you do not like to help another person, you quickly build up resentment if you feel that the other person is not reciprocicating the help.  Some people might be completely selfless in this aspect but that tends to be exploited by leeches.    That kind of social connnection can easily turn to hatred. 

  • itgrowlsitgrowls Member Posts: 2,951

    So like yeah. If you mean that required grouping is something that makes people have to talk to one another. No. Unless you include statements like "GET OUT OF THE FIRE NOOB!" or "LEETSAUCE" as conversation pieces because that's usually what I've seen. Three guesses which game I saw conversations like that in. It starts with a W.

    No I'm one of those who rarely uses the keyboard in games. I play with a gamer keypad and the talking I am doing, is to the friends i'm either playing or not playing with while gaming. With Skypes new ten person conversation enhancement who needs to type any longer. Multiple accounts (one for gaming only) and you've got the perfect communication app for free.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by Derros

    Lack of socialization is more due to lack of downtime that games like EQ used to have, as well as the elimination of spawn camping. 

    When you are sitting in 1 place for hours, waiting on mana, or spawns, of course you are going to talk to others, to help relieve the boredom.

    Did you just really advocate boring your players to get them to talk to one another out of sheer lack of anything else to do?

    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

  • ThorbrandThorbrand Member Posts: 1,198
    Nope it can be if you make is so but plenty of PUGs just run through and never talk to each other. That doesn't have to be the case to socializing is all up to you as a player and other players of course.
  • JimmyYOJimmyYO Member UncommonPosts: 519
    Unfortunatly a game has to force players to be social through rewards/progression w/e aka EQ1 style. As that game proved it is possible but infinitely harder in todays market. If it's one thing GW2 proved it's that grouping /= socializing.
  • JerYnkFanJerYnkFan Member UncommonPosts: 342

    This is an excellent topic.  Should be the discussion of the week thingy. 

    IMO grouping and being social are not the same thing.  I've been in groups where people have said hello and then the next words are good job after we've accomplished our goals with maybe some instructions sprinkled in along the way.  I really hate to keep beating a dead horse in SWG, but there whether it was in line waiting for doc buffs or in the cantina waiting for wounds to heal, waiting for shuttles, etc people seemed to interact more with each other.  In most games I have played since unless I was in a guild most conversations in game were very limited.  Perhaps it's due to mechanics that you just pretty much blow through most stuff in light speed mode.

  • NaughtyPNaughtyP Member UncommonPosts: 793
    Back in the Middle Ages when I played WoW, I think there were some PUGs where I'd be lucky to get a "hi" from people. So yeah, grouping doesn't always mean being social.

    Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.

  • VirusDancerVirusDancer Member UncommonPosts: 3,649
    I'm kind of surprised at the folks that appear to have been surprised with GW2... PQs et al in previous games did not create socialization either.  They just create zergs - you can end up with folks that have no idea what they're doing, don't care to ask or don't want to look foolish asking, and everybody just runs around following others - sometimes helping, sometimes just randomly whacking things, etc.  At times they could look like a stream of army ants - at times they can look like an old Keystone Cops movie...lol.

    I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?

    Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%

  • kilunkilun Member UncommonPosts: 829

    No grouping and being social are not the same.  You don't have to say a word other than, hello if you know the instance.  You may if tanking ask if anyone has not been here before so you can explain the fights.  Any of that is not being social.

     

    Games are not built on being social anymore.  There are no "non-combat activites" that happen.  Why is this?  Because the whole focus of the game is to get you to go grind in a dungeon to continually go on a treadmill until your eyes and brain both bleed.

    Social functions need to do two things.  Help combat characters.  And be take a set amount of time and require other players to participate.  SWG had this right when you required buffs from doctors and muscians/dancers.  You had required interaction among other players.  That is the key word, required.

    Games have decided that boring and lame stuff isn't want the majority of society want (see other people's post on the speed of society in everthing has to happen now)  Make things required some patience and you lose players (I myself am guilty of this as well)  but bring back some slower mentality to where not everything is cut and dry and its can brought back into game experience.

  • evolver1972evolver1972 Member Posts: 1,118
    Originally posted by Aerowyn
    this is a good discussion.. but poll has way to many options.. for me more options that can bring people together in a MMO the better. I don't feel forcing people to NEED to talk = making the game social. I view social as playing with others in reach of a common goal. Not everyone likes to talk all the time but still enjoy playing alonside other people.. when you can balance that and having options that require people to socialize to complete content I think that's a winning combination.

    You hit the nail on the head, there, Aerowyn.  I like the social aspect of a game, but I don't feel I should be pressured into it, wait for an inordinate amount of time for it, or be withheld from socializing if I want to.  Games that allow for the three of those things are the best IMO.  Some do one aspect better than others, so finding a good balance is the key, I think.

     

    As an example, the way GW2 does things with people being out in the world (PvE) in a cooperative way is great socially.  One drawback for some people is that people don't socialize much before, during, or after events.  However, I don't see this as a problem cause by the way the game is made, I see it as a failure on the part of the players.  If the players are put in a social atmosphere, but don't interact, I don't think that's because of a flaw in the game.  So, maybe people in general just aren't very social anymore.

     

    On the flip side, being forced to group has its drawbacks also.  I want to complete content but I don't feel like being social today.  Why should a game force me to be that way?

     

    To me, choice is where it's at.  IMO the more options about everything, the better.

    image

    You want me to pay to play a game I already paid for???

    Be afraid.....The dragons are HERE!

  • aRtFuLThinGaRtFuLThinG Member UncommonPosts: 1,387
    Originally posted by Asuran24

    Actually being social i just the interaction good or bad of two organims valentary or not, and pro-social is most activities that are good for society, while anti-social is well actions bad for society, but regardless both sets of actions you are interacting with others for better or worse which i being social at the very basic level of what being social is about.. The ue of pro or anti is more tto do with how it affects society, and not with actually interacting with people or thosse around you.

    There is no such thing as "pro" social.

    Anti in Anti-social is a prefix to mean that you are already NOT trying to form a society or prevent the formation of a society or against the concept of society or cooperation all together. From dictionary:

    an·ti·so·cial

    image /?ænti?so???l, ?ænta?-/ Show Spelled[an-tee-soh-shuhl, an-tahy-] Show IPA

    adjective

    1. unwilling or unable to associate in a normal or friendly way with other people: He's not antisocial, just shy.

    2. antagonistic, hostile, or unfriendly toward others; menacing; threatening: an antisocial act.

    3. opposed or detrimental to social order or the principles on which society is constituted: antisocial behavior.

     

    I know it sounds good to try to be able to define things like the D&D's alignment system (good, neutral, evil, etc) however, this is not how words and dictions always works.

    For example, anti-matter is NOT a form of matter, it is not a bad or evil form of matter, it is the particles which is opposite to what is required to form matter altogether, hence the term anti-matter. Antidepressants is NOT from a family of depressants or a kind of depressants, it is totally different chemical compound and different type of medicine.

    Had you said being anti-social is purely one way to INTERACT with people as oppose to other, more friendly ways then your definition would make sense.

     

     
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775

    Necessity to talk? A game that rely on "talking" to entertain is NOT a game i want to play.

    I will NOT play games without a LFD function.

  • ZBergzZBergz Member Posts: 20

    Grouping is completely independent of being social.  I have been through so many dungeons where no one types a single word.  Might as well be playing with NPCs on my team... least having an AFK healer would not be an issue! 

  • QuirhidQuirhid Member UncommonPosts: 6,230

    The type of socializing some players seem to want is referred to as "bonding" in my VOIP - the VOIP where I log into even when I'm not playing anything - to socialize. Every now and again someone would comment:

    Friend in Mumble: "Hold on guys this one dude in my group wants to bond with me."

    Another friend jokingly: "Making friends, eh?"

    ...

    You see we are not rude on the chat or anything, but we are often not genuine either. So would you rather have a disingenious conversation than no converstation at all?

    Some of us do our socializing in VOIP and just want to play the game. I don't want any extra baggage. The #1 thing I hate about games is drama, and it is bound to happen in every game where a large group of players need to rely on each other. I don't want that. Drama brings out all the things I hate about people. Their selfishness, their ignorance, their stupidity... Its not worth it.

    The amount of friends I've made in online games is dwarfed by the amount of people I regret to having met.

     

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • daltaniousdaltanious Member UncommonPosts: 2,381
    Originally posted by Johnie-Marz

    I started this discussion in order to open it up to being about more than one specific game.

     

    My personal expirience with this issue came from when I played World of Warcraft. After the dungeon finder came out, I grouped with more random people than I had in the previously years I had played. I completed every dungeons from Ragefire Chasm on up.

    But in many groups, after the initial, "Hello" there wasn't really a ton of talking. (and when it was, it was arguing)

    Now recently, there is talk about the DE's in GW2 on these forums, that people work together in DE's but there isn't a ton of chat going on. 

    The Dungeon finder and Dynamic Events are becoming the standard in MMO's, so this is an issue that is just starting and persists through more than one specific game.

     

    So the question; is grouping in and of itself being social? or for a game to truely be social, do people need to be talking as well?

    I'm altholic, I love only pve environment and enjoy questing. So I do not care for chat but for helping somebody or exhange from time to time some joke or information.

    I think is very wrong having games as base for social live. Who want socialise should do this far from computer keyboard. And I do follow this my own advice for very long time when i have realised this. For some time after starting to play mmo games I have realised I was barely seeing people I care for them. Add also here effects of phones, emailing, .... Very bad for socialising. 

    If I want to share something usefull, fun, ... I go to friends or invite them to come to me. Ok, still using a lot emailing, sms, .... but is much better then I was before.

    And yes, nearly forgot. DE design in GW2 is even much much worse then wow or others group finder. Now not even "hello" is necesarry. :-) Jump in, fight, leave. Go to next DE. But as I said I have no problem with that. i enjoy GW2 and enjoy eye-to-eye socialising.

  • rockraprockrap Member UncommonPosts: 8
    Modern gameplay is so fast that there is very little time to connect via the keyboard as that interupts the progression thru the dungeon.
  • VirusDancerVirusDancer Member UncommonPosts: 3,649
    Originally posted by rockrap
    Modern gameplay is so fast that there is very little time to connect via the keyboard as that interupts the progression thru the dungeon.

    Add in the fact that you've been in that dungeon a hundred times already and you're likely going to be in it at least another hundred times...

    ...it's a grind.  Folks don't enjoy it.  They just want to get through it as fast as possible so they can get whatever shiny carrot they're chasing.

    I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?

    Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%

  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 24,445
    No it is not. But Grouping helps us to be social.
  • majimaji Member UncommonPosts: 2,091
    Nope, grouping and being social is not the same. And dungeon finders are annoyng. If I want quick action, I play TF2.

    Let's play Fallen Earth (blind, 300 episodes)

    Let's play Guild Wars 2 (blind, 45 episodes)

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    Originally posted by maji
    Nope, grouping and being social is not the same. And dungeon finders are annoyng. If I want quick action, I play TF2.

    Why limit yourself to ONE game for quick action?

    When i want quick action, i play WOW, DCUO, D3, TF2, Borderland (2 soon) ... and many others depending on my mood.

    And i love dungeon finders. Won't play a MMO without one.

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 44,065
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by maji
    Nope, grouping and being social is not the same. And dungeon finders are annoyng. If I want quick action, I play TF2.

    Why limit yourself to ONE game for quick action?

    When i want quick action, i play WOW, DCUO, D3, TF2, Borderland (2 soon) ... and many others depending on my mood.

    And i love dungeon finders. Won't play a MMO without one.

    You play almost every game, meaning you actually don't enjoy any game.

    And you've made it pretty clear that being social in MMO's is not why you are there.

     

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






Sign In or Register to comment.