Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
EQN has an ideal layout for forced grouping
Dracock
Member Posts: 75
Skip to second part of the post if you have ADD. But the first part does provide context of forced grouping in the genre.
History
Before World of Warcraft dominated the genre, groups were required for most progression in MMORPGs. This is back when Everquest still rained supreme. Soloing was dangerous and only certain classes could efficiently gain experience by doing it. By the time players neared the level cap, they knew dozens of people that they had grinded and chatted with for days worth of playtime. Most players worked hard at preserving their reputation, because jerk players wouldn't be asked back to groups or invited to guilds.
However, there were some big issues with this system. A person could spend hours looking for a group before finding one. The trinity was required for any good experience grinding to take place; which had to be within a few levels of you. People that played for only short sessions or at off times, would sometimes end up quitting in frustration.
Blizzard, which was a much different company before people like Bobby Kotick got his grubby hands on it, thought outside the box in this regard. Everyone knows the story, the solo questing system was extremely popular. Players that never played or stuck with MMORPGs poured in. And even all the WoW critics in the forum must admit it was pretty fun for awhile.
By the time it became apparent to the MMORPG veterans that soloing to level 60 was doing a lot of damage to the sense community, it was already over. These players were now the minority and the new generation of players couldn't care less. They didn't want more group content to prepare them for the endgame groups and raids. They wanted easier groups and raids. So that's what they got.
Many tried to copy the WoW formula. At the end of the day however, its hard to compete against the original when they have much more funding and a proven brand. The only way any serious competition could enter the market, is by introducing something different than what WoW was offering.
The thing is, no one these days is willing to sit around for hours waiting. We live in a fast pace information era where people simply refuse to do this "for fun." So any MMO project simply assumes that they need the ability for everyone to solo efficiently to prevent this.
Enter EQN
Some of the big ideas of EQN are: horizontal progression, no levels, and no trinity requirement. These are precisely the things that used to hamper the game play of "forced grouping" games. Anyone should be able to quickly find a group, or perhaps even raids. Newer players will not be sent to desolate zones to try to get a trinity group together; playing until one person logs and the group disbands.
Even if grouping isn't "forced" strictly speaking, it could be highly incentivized. This way if it does take a little bit, at least players can solo exp at a slower than group rate, while they're waiting. The devs could also make a few classes with soloing in mind. This way, players that truly love to solo could play solo friendly classes that are particularly good at it.
Not only can EQN be a group centered game. SoE should make EQN a group centered game. They themselves have stated the importance of community. The goal is to make EQN the kind of game you play for years, not months. The market is already saturated with solo MMORPGs. This would make it truly stand out as different and more mature.
If anyone has a counter argument to make. I'd love to hear.
Comments
I am playing a game that doesn't have the group system all all, it's great, something less to go wrong, if someone wants a heal they ask for it in voice comms. Takes communication skills, which in itself makes better players, better teams and enhances the community aspect.
See, games have been dumbed down to the point where players are not required to actually play and pay attention. This in itself is detrimental to the game, players get bored and loose attention. Some games with the grouping systems you can make macros where auto healing is easy to script. Comes down to who has the best script.
What is there to counterargument, you made no arguments as to why it promotes grouping.
A multiclass system where everyone can solo because everyone can multispec is going to be a solo game.
We will likely be able to solo some content. I would bet some content will get you slaughtered as solo or even a bunch of solo's trying to zerg content.
The ability to multi-spec is not mutually exclusive to soloing. Just because you can does not mean you should.
"Youre in our world now!"
you call it forced but when EQN launches Ill call it bringin back the magic.
EQ Next has done nothing to give the impression that they will be restoring the sense of community to the genre. Everything that created a sense of interdependence, and therefore community has been not only removed, but obliterated. They have already said multiple times EQ Next won't be a hardcore game, and that almost every convention previously used to bring players together like class diversity and necessary roles are gone. They already said "no end game" but I expect there to be group content though soloing will most likely always be viable according to their design philosophy. Furthermore, forced anything is specifically against their philosophy.
The golden days of MMOs will never come back until mmo stop trying to please everyone simultaneously with one game. I wouldn't be surprised if with all the great features lined up for EQ Next, it doesn't even maintain over 1 million active players. You simply can't do casual better than WoW, not even with a fully destructible sandbox world.
EQN has an ideal layout for being a huge zergfest.
Played-Everything
Playing-LoL
I wouldn't say this game has true horizontal progression. According to developer comments it seems to me they have simply removed progression from your character sheet and applied it as a concept to your inventory by means of gear which is why they can get away with calling it an RPG rather than an adventure game. They have stated gear will be very important. To me that means you are going to need decent gear to go nab better gear to go nab the best gear with cash shop options along the way I'd wager. I can already envision situations where people might well get kicked from a group for having too low a gear score rather than being too low a level. Its kind of like the issue everyone is used to end game WOW except its been applied as a mechanic throughout the game.
Over the years we the players have taught developers that the only reason we do things in a game over time is go kill things and take their stuff to be better to the point of stealing gear drops with random need rolls more needed by our own group mates. The whole reason we raid in PUGs so much is to get a nifty sword rather than have fun with pals. At end game level was in the way, irrelevant as everyone was level capped, and it was more a question of if you had played dungeon X or had a friend craft item Y. Talk about killing content locusts, forget making a new dungeon just introduce a new gear set. It's kind of a brilliant thing to do from a developer standpoint if entirely more jaded than even I as a player would conceive.
Why is everyone parroting what that firefall developer said? You realize the guy was just advertising his game firefall right? It's fairly obvious and I for one called him on his BS half way through. Hell I bet he was just some low level programmer when he worked there.
Ruins community? How so? By giving you choices? I can still group level if I wanted to and did. It wasn't hard to see another level X and whisper him to join you. Yes, it's true that people don't have their hand held and are babied right into using a group. Now they have to be big boys and girls and acually talk to people. This is why you see less of them, too many people are too lazy to bother talking to anyone. That's their problem, not the game's. Besides, the endgame was everything anyways. There was loads of community in the endgame, you couldn't exactly Solo a 40-man raid.
Cause he was spot-on. "WoW" damaged a genre by catering too much to infantile players without clue about what is driving a virtual reality at its core.
Others just shoot the zombies which are chasing us. Whereas I try to talk to them.
If the brainless realized that it is dead, maybe, just maybe, it would lay itself down to rest...
Instead of making huge statements like that why don't you actually address the bulk of my argument which explains how stupid it is to say you're killing a game by allowing a TEMPORARY option to not group if you want to. Anyone who thinks WoW had no community is either mentally challenged or never played the game.
I do think the overly simplified and repetitive quests were boring as hell though, one thing they forgot to bring from EQ that they should have.
You realize people complained about the same thing the Firefall developer did years before that article..right? I've never encountered someone that claimed that the reason people think WoW is too easy, is because of an article from the summer of 2013. Are you new to MMORPGs?
Yes you could group while leveling in WoW. But it was completely counterproductive and unnecessary. The most efficient leveling was solo questing the content; that become more face roll after every expansion.
By the time anyone reached the late game, they had spent 60+ levels soloing and had no idea how to group. Then the player base complained rather than "being big boys and girls and actual[ly] talk to people." So they made raids easier. They added auto find tools that worked across servers, lowered the amount of people required for raids, and destroyed the stat gap between casual gear and that of hardcore players.
I'm not sure where the "choice" is in linear questing to the level cap. I guess you could ignore the part of the game that makes you level 60% faster and gives you all your gear and money for no reason. Perhaps you could do it while grouping to make the exp even less efficient.
You also seem to be arguing that everyone was super social in EQ, but then "got lazy" out of the blue. And that the game creating an environment for solo questers and auto matched people (cross server) has nothing to do with it. Or perhaps you concede that this does change the level of social interaction, but game companies shouldn't address it anyway. Either way, its a pretty stupid argument.
As I peer into my crystal ball the future of group dynamics and how often people will group or choose to group is foggy. Unfortunately unlikel so many on these forums I'm not a time traveller that knows with absolute certainty how things will turn out.
That said, I will look at what's been done before and currently and try to make a comparison. Back in the days of EQ1 players were not bogged down with quest logs (chore lists) of things to do in order to speed up leveling. We simply logged on in an attempt for forge our own adventures. During which time we weren't worried with whether or not someone was working on the same quest lines. If someone actually was working on a quest and needed help because they were often long, and involved. People would come together to help them. However most times We just played, played to have fun. The content was more difficult the world more dangerous, and the entire concept of playing with thousands of other people was still new and pretty exciting. All of these things combined made for a game where grouping became the standard.
Another thing of note is there were no instances. The entire world was broken up into open world zones. Where you and your group would hang out for as long as you wished. If you needed to leave. Finding a replacement many times was easy to do due to the the world being open world and there were usually others in the area. Then Lost Dungeons of Norrath launched bringing with it instancing. And things began to change. It was considered to leave a group in the middle of the instance. Unlike the open dungeons where you could find a replacement if you needed. The instancing also seemed to have second side effect. It caused cliques to form. The entire idea of not being able to come and go from groups or hold spots In a group for a friend due to the demands of the instance meant that players were less likely to get involved with people they didn't know. Meaning they were making less friends. Also with instances came the instant gratification, which appealed to so many.
Now insert WOW. The fastest way to level was quest grinding. Content was simplified for quests meaning for easy solo or possibly duo play. Groups actually seemed to slow you down. Not only that trying to ensure everyone was on the same step could be annoying. Almost the only reason to group was for instances, which could be alot of fun, but were usually very long. Meaning you many times would wait for friends you already had to join one. The fact so many new players were getting involved as first time MMOers combined with the fact they went thru so much of the game solo. Meant that when they finally did group they many times were lost on how to work with one. PUGs became a dirty word due to this.
With WOWs success by making things more accessible other game developers latched on. The new generation of gamers wanted things handed to them faster and faster. That's just what the developers have been doing. All of this combined I feel has been a melting pot that has caused games to actually discourage grouping. Unfortunately so many of the gamers today were introduced to MMOs and that's all they know.
Now onto EQN. Why could it be different? Lack of instancing for one and the demands they bring. Vanguard showed me that communities indeed are better in games with no instancing. Groups gather in challenging areas and just enjoy each others company. Granted the game had alot of problems and a terrible launch which it never recovered from. The lack of need to power level, especially by using solo oriented quests is not even part of the equation. Allowing for players to just enjoy the game. We can only hope that there is enough challenging content in game for people to need or want to band together to face it.
Until we know more about how the game plays its impossible to say. I know I will sit with my glass half full for now. I think IF implemented right EQN looks to be a game that will once again encourage grouping, but I've been wrong on upcoming games before.
No but it can have content that requires it. That way those that want to group have that choice. I say make 50% of the content solo and 50% require a group. Sounds like equal choice to me.
I don't know why people kept arguing about this...
I never understood it in EQ or WoW, but lots of people really LIKE to have "forced grouping mechanics" in their games!! People want to feel special and needed. They enjoy it when they see others spamming LFG in the chat for hours. They also want others to have a hard time if they are playing the game "wrong", "inefficient" or "solo".
Why do you think people are SO against free to play and pay to win? The need to enjoy superiority and being prestigious in a MMO. This is why you see people cling to this enjoyment by decrying common accessibility to their game. It does sound kind of selfish, but this is the ugly truth of online gaming: Most people don't care if others can find a group or not, and they prefer if others can't.
Yeah I always felt the phrase massively multiplayer is overrated...
EQ had forced grouping for a lot of the content. I joined a guild and made several friends outside of the guild because of that. I remember the fun chats we had in Highhold Pass waiting for respawns to get a PGT. IN the games since then I haven't really joined any guilds and made no friends in the game. I didn't need to make friends and for the most part, I didn't need to group.
The new games don't have a community because the mechanics are not there to build them and encourage people to build them.
I have mixed emotions on 'forced grouping'. Some times I like to solo, other times I like to be in a group.
In Tera (wich is pretty good if you haven't tried it) you could solo most of the content, but then every few levels there were 'dungeons' you needed a group for. I liked the balance there. This way you got some group experience before 'end game' but didn't have to be lfg your whole life.
I couldn't tell from any of the many EQN videos I watched how grouping will work, but I do hope there is plenty of both solo and group content.
I thought the point of being in a game with 1000's of actual people was so that you could buy the gear you couldn't get yourself off the ah.
This was explicitly brought up in one of the panels. Being able to multi-class does not mean you won't need other people. You are still one person, no matter what skills you shuffle around. They will have content that requires grouping.
Back to the OP: There will undoubtedly be content that requires grouping. However, forced grouping as a global mechanic? Not going to happen in today's market.
This is blatantly untrue.
In multiple panels the Dev's spoke about the need for player interdependence, not only for grouping to overcome encounters with strategy and tactics, but in the importance of crafting to the community (briefly mentioned). Even now, even though the game hasn't launched, they are doing community building exercises with the Roundtable by drawing us in for discussion and opinion on how we want the game to develop. Removed? Obliterated? Not even close to what is happening now or their plans for later.
and when there is content wich needs grouping there will be a need of players with certain skillsets. thus needing a certain type of player again. trinity revived in a diffrent form. but more rediculous.
As I am reading through the posts an idea occurred to me. I am not sure if this idea is new (eureka!), or if it was used elsewhere but here it is:
A way encourage grouping could be based around the loot. If you solo a quest you earn a +1 strength mace. But if there are 2 people on the same quest you get a +2 strength mace, 3 group members and now the mace is +6 strength, and with 4 members you get a +12 strength mace.
Or maybe even drop the mace, and make it a points system. If the 4 group members finish the quest, each member gets +12 points, to allocate how they feel fit. I can put +9 Agility to my bow, and +3 agility to my boots. But If I solo'd this same mission, I get +1 point to put where I want.
I like it.
/Seems legit