I'm curious. I mostly group up with my friends (local) and secondarily, with my guild members (when I belong to one), or I solo. How many people spend most of their time in their MMO of choice, grouping with strangers? I'm not judging here, just curious as to what people like to do.
CoS seems to have the mentality that many other MMOs never bother to develop: that player choice is what makes a game fun, as opposed to some games where the grind for rep, gold and exp is more like a job than an escape. There is no 'best possible way' here -- there is only 'your way'.
There are more than a few examples of why it is sometimes better (and possibly necessary) to group in a game like this. The campaign that Jatar mentioned is one such case. This is where multiple groups form together as a raid in order to take on one of Morphael's armies, a castle, a huge monster, etc. In no way, shape, or form should this be something that a solo player could accomplish. When you're at war, you don't send one guy (sorry guys, you don't get to play Rambo in an MMO; then you'd have 10,000 Rambos running around CoS and programmers would hang themselves from all the 80's headbands they'd have to model); you send a warband -- maybe even an army.
Now it is entirely possible with the quest system as it has been described that a lone individual could find himself scouting for an army as part of an on-going storyline, and in that role could accomplish some pretty impressive things. Scouting, assassination, or sabotage missions are meant for solo play, just like wars and battles are MEANT for group/raid play -- they provide more than enough fun in both scenarios.
In the above example, the players who participate in the campaign should receive some hefty rewards -- such a thing is not easy to accomplish, and the leaders of the citadel would naturally reward your feats. But that doesn't mean that players who do nothing else but campaign are going to level, gear, or skill up faster or more efficiently than those who choose to spend their time questing or adventuring. Everything they have mentioned on their site, and here on this forum speaks to the balance of play they want to give us. I doubt they would spend so much time making CoS everything they say it is going to be and then flub the dice over simple game-balance issues.
Grouping is a great way to enjoy certain content the way YOU want to enjoy it. On the other side of the argument, the same could be said about solo play. But having enemies whose AI, numbers and maybe even relative strength changes depending on what they are facing absolutely changes things from MMOs we've played previously. CoS isn't heading down the grind path, or down the end-game path. Those terms have no place here-- the devs seem to care more about making gameplay second-to-none. Too many games sacrifice fun for playing hours -- they don't make enough content for all types of players and end up handing out a 'dungeon a week', or a new daily quest or a new faction to brown-nose. Grouping becomes mandatory for ANY end-game content and as much fun as it can be at first, it ends up being more like a job than a game.
I have a job already, and it pays a heck of a lot more than gaming does......... sob....
I'll say again, there will be no forced grouping in CoS. There will be benefits to grouping, but that is not the same thing. 1) Solo players who cannot win a battle against a larger group or more powerful opponents and sneak by or skip it will not get the same rewards as a group to takes it on. There will be challenges that require a group... but you will not have to take on these challenges to go through the game or complete the quest. You will not reach a point where you cannot progress your quest, where you cannot continue unless you are grouped. This is what we consider 'forced grouping'. Let me give you a real world example. I was playing LORTO and I got to a point in the Epic Quest line where the next piece of the quest was IMPOSSIBLE to complete without a group. 2) In fact, it was impossible without a large group. After several frustrating attempts solo, and then several frustrating attempts with three group members, we finally quit the game, permanently. I am not alone in this feeling. I cannot always have a group, I do not always like playing with strangers, but I ALWAYS want to be able to play the game when I want. That's what I was paying for, I was not paying to be forced to interact with some strangers when I don't feel like it. CoS will NEVER do this, no matter how many arguments we hear to the contrary.
1) OK, regarding this point, fair enough, as long as there's an incentive to take the time to form a group in order to obtain greater reward, without impeding a players progress, I'm all for that and its a good idea.
2) Let's examine number two carefully. I ran into the exact same situation in LotRO, and experienced the same frustration. But the real issue isn't the content you came up against, but the fact that for several reasons you were unable to get past it.
This is primarily caused by the fact that there is no incentive (in game mechanic) for you and your 3 friends to set aside your "fear" of strangers (who can really be quite nice if you have a reason to get to know them) and group up to master the content. Same for those strangers, why should they want to help you, especially if they already did it and get nothing for doing so. (This is the key flaw with games based on quest based content btw, one that was not quite so severe in the earlier camp and grind game models)
Now, if the game mechanics had made it extremely rewarding for you to get past this content (and not be merely another notch on your quest log) and made it just as rewarding for anyone who chose to help you, then it is likely you would have gotten together.
if you had played a game like DAOC in the early days you would have experience this mechanic, where strangers routinely grouped togetther and even helped each other (single open world, no instances) when they got in trouble. I suspect your MMO experience doesn't include a game like this because most people who don't understand what me and others aretalking about haven't either.
The game can be designed so that players are encouraged to group up in order to play nice together, but of course, that's just one road to success. You appear to have decided that its better to let players chose to skip the group content by providing them an alternate path to the end. Might be better, might not be, all depends on a players past experiences I suppose.
We'll have to see how it goes, you might be on to the next big thing or just another good idea that didn't work out as intended.
Oh well, nothing ventured, nothing gained.
Putting the condescending nature of your post to one side, first you should read Jatars' reply more closely. There are rewards for grouping and it is clear in his post more content and better rewards.
But what is important is that people have a choice... and a lot will group once they realise that they get better rewards. But in reality what is good about the COS approach is the choice and focus on Gameplay fun and storyline. People will likely form smaller groups which will be more community based....
I will elaborate on your DAOC theory, in the days when the player base was smaller and internet access was a lot more costly people used to play nice because generally you needed to have money to play online or rich parents. SO a core group of more intelligent players who were all acheivers in real life existed ,so playing nice was in their natur.
The flip coin of this is that access to the internet is so inexpensive now, it is a great form of entertainment for unemployed loosers who dont want to work and havent acheived and their idea of fun is to acheive in games by being idiots(These are the types you get forced to group with these days!!!).
It wasn't DAOC but the playerbase demographic that caused and resulted in grouping.
As for the assumption about "you must have never played these types of games, please read up a little on the developers of this games they are all very very experienced vets.
I hope you play COS for what it is and not what you think it should be when it releases sounds like a breath of fresh air giving people choice. WHile having a core storyline.
________________________________________________________ Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
Putting the condescending nature of your post to one side, first you should read Jatars' reply more closely. There are rewards for grouping and it is clear in his post more content and better rewards.
But what is important is that people have a choice... and a lot will group once they realise that they get better rewards. But in reality what is good about the COS approach is the choice and focus on Gameplay fun and storyline. People will likely form smaller groups which will be more community based....
I will elaborate on your DAOC theory, in the days when the player base was smaller and internet access was a lot more costly people used to play nice because generally you needed to have money to play online or rich parents. SO a core group of more intelligent players who were all acheivers in real life existed ,so playing nice was in their natur.
The flip coin of this is that access to the internet is so inexpensive now, it is a great form of entertainment for unemployed loosers who dont want to work and havent acheived and their idea of fun is to acheive in games by being idiots(These are the types you get forced to group with these days!!!).
It wasn't DAOC but the playerbase demographic that caused and resulted in grouping.
As for the assumption about "you must have never played these types of games, please read up a little on the developers of this games they are all very very experienced vets.
I hope you play COS for what it is and not what you think it should be when it releases sounds like a breath of fresh air giving people choice. WHile having a core storyline.
Actually, I'm not sure COS's approach is much different with regards to grouping than any other game of recent memory, I can't recall a single game that forced me to group, I could always skip it and keep playing. Sure, you can skip the group content, but that's true in WOW or most any game (maybe not FFXI)
I disagree with your assessment of DAOC, it wasn't the player base, the game's mechanics encouraged more socialization by strongly rewarding group play, making sure that most anyone could be an effective participant regardless of their skill at playing, and the forced downtime between fights gave players lots of time to chat.
Today's players are just as capable of such interaction, if only a game would give them time to develop them. Unfortunately they are all so busy "playing the game' to actually get to know one another and bond.
I used to run 8 mans on Mordred and we intentionally sat out 30 minutes or more waiting for our cool downs to come back up so we would be at maximum killing effectiveness. Did a lot of socialization during those sessions, and made some really great friends that I still game with today.
And regardless what you think about the developers experience, I don't get any indication from Jatar's responses that he played DAOC and if he did, he didn't enjoy it because they are designing their game w/o any of the mechanics that I mentioned.
That's all well and good, and perhaps COS will be as unique as he says it is and that will make it fun. I'll be glad to give it a chance, but asking me to set aside my preferences for game play is asking a bit much.
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
You are right, Kyleran. We're not really trying to be different from all other games when it comes to grouping. The truth is very simple, we just want players to have the choice. There is content you will not see if you don't group, and things you will not experience if you don't group, however, there is NO content you MUST experience as a group in order to play through the game to the epic conclusion of the grand climax. Everyone can experience that flow through the game, just in different ways depending on what they choose to do. What we EXPECT most players to do is play a mix of solo and group, and this is NOT different than many other games.
Now, if any you complain to us that you won't be able to see all content unless you group, and therefore, this is forced grouping... we're going to laugh at you. NO ONE is going to see all the content of CoS, no matter what they do. Just like real life, you won't experience everything someone else does. Your life is not their life, and so it goes in this game. Each person's experience through this game will be unique in many ways. And though you will certainly share some experiences that others do, overall, your life will be quite different. This is the spice of life, especially in this game. One of the main points of all this design and technology being put behind this game was to make it so that you didn't do exactly what the other players do. The world changes, your life is different, time moves on, blaze your own path and enjoy your individuality. Or... play some other game.
Actually, I'm not sure COS's approach is much different with regards to grouping than any other game of recent memory, I can't recall a single game that forced me to group, I could always skip it and keep playing. Sure, you can skip the group content, but that's true in WOW or most any game (maybe not FFXI)
I disagree with your assessment of DAOC, it wasn't the player base, the game's mechanics encouraged more socialization by strongly rewarding group play, making sure that most anyone could be an effective participant regardless of their skill at playing, and the forced downtime between fights gave players lots of time to chat.
Today's players are just as capable of such interaction, if only a game would give them time to develop them. Unfortunately they are all so busy "playing the game' to actually get to know one another and bond.
I used to run 8 mans on Mordred and we intentionally sat out 30 minutes or more waiting for our cool downs to come back up so we would be at maximum killing effectiveness. Did a lot of socialization during those sessions, and made some really great friends that I still game with today.
And regardless what you think about the developers experience, I don't get any indication from Jatar's responses that he played DAOC and if he did, he didn't enjoy it because they are designing their game w/o any of the mechanics that I mentioned.
That's all well and good, and perhaps COS will be as unique as he says it is and that will make it fun. I'll be glad to give it a chance, but asking me to set aside my preferences for game play is asking a bit much.
I made no comments about the Developers Experience someone else did !!!!!
I feel the developers are doing a great job here , I just dislike the spin... the game has some great ideas and the content and gameplay options sound great.
I never started the DAOC reference, but my ref to playerbase as now is a reference to the overall state of the MMO genre and the real reason it has changed is spot on. The player quality has been thinned to a point where people who like immersive games with real content are no longer the majority they used to be.
________________________________________________________ Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
And regardless what you think about the developers experience, I don't get any indication from Jatar's responses that he played DAOC and if he did, he didn't enjoy it because they are designing their game w/o any of the mechanics that I mentioned. That's all well and good, and perhaps COS will be as unique as he says it is and that will make it fun. I'll be glad to give it a chance, but asking me to set aside my preferences for game play is asking a bit much.
As for my experience in the game industry, I've been in it a long time, and been to every E3 there has been, as both a developer and publisher. In fact, I was watching DAOC from its earliest displays at the first E3 show where it was available to view. I've also played the game, as I play ALL major examples of MMOs or RPGs as they come out. That's part of my job, and also my enjoyment.
As for designing it without the mechanics you mentioned, Citadel of Sorcery has nothing to do with DAOC or any other MMO. CoS is designed to be a different concept in MMO gaming from the ground up. We aren't trying to be like any other MMO, including DAOC. This is not a comment on those games, just a note that we are something different. Just because one game has concepts in it that are good does not make that the only way to do something, or the only way that is fun to play. We're just taking a different path.
As for my experience in the game industry, I've been in it a long time, and been to every E3 there has been, as both a developer and publisher. In fact, I was watching DAOC from its earliest displays at the first E3 show where it was available to view. I've also played the game, as I play ALL major examples of MMOs or RPGs as they come out. That's part of my job, and also my enjoyment.
Ok, now you've piqued my curiosity. You regularly say you work in the industry but you will never say, even when directly asked, who you are or what games you've worked on.
Why?
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
As for my experience in the game industry, I've been in it a long time, and been to every E3 there has been, as both a developer and publisher. In fact, I was watching DAOC from its earliest displays at the first E3 show where it was available to view. I've also played the game, as I play ALL major examples of MMOs or RPGs as they come out. That's part of my job, and also my enjoyment.
Ok, now you've piqued my curiosity. You regularly say you work in the industry but you will never say, even when directly asked, who you are or what games you've worked on.
Why?
It was decided early on that we would keep our team anonymous to protect their privacy. There is no need or advantage in posting our names on these forums, but there are disadvantages. We don't need the distraction of personal attacks or people trying to email team members (or contact them in any way). The names of the people who worked on this title will be included in the credits when the game releases.
Now, if any you complain to us that you won't be able to see all content unless you group, and therefore, this is forced grouping... we're going to laugh at you. Ah c'mon Jatar, I don't complain, I just offer my "input" on things. Or... play some other game. oohh..., never dare potential customers to play other games, they might just do that.... and no telling what the butterfly effect (i.e. how many people can they convince to play or not play) of that might be.
In the end, sounds like the grouping mechanics are going to be pretty standard fare with most modern MMO's today. (pretty much optional)
Of course, the game play is going to be quite a bit different according to you so as I mentioned, we'll just have to see how the finished game turns out.
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
As for my experience in the game industry, I've been in it a long time, and been to every E3 there has been, as both a developer and publisher. In fact, I was watching DAOC from its earliest displays at the first E3 show where it was available to view. I've also played the game, as I play ALL major examples of MMOs or RPGs as they come out. That's part of my job, and also my enjoyment.
Ok, now you've piqued my curiosity. You regularly say you work in the industry but you will never say, even when directly asked, who you are or what games you've worked on.
Why?
It was decided early on that we would keep our team anonymous to protect their privacy. There is no need or advantage in posting our names on these forums, but there are disadvantages. We don't need the distraction of personal attacks or people trying to email team members (or contact them in any way). The names of the people who worked on this title will be included in the credits when the game releases.
Richard, is that you? (or maybe its Brad)
I agree, not all games need to be the same, and in fact, I think we really need "something different" right now to shake up the genre.
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
Well, I don't care if this 'is the one' or not, as long as its just fun to play. As for grouping mechanics (back to the OP's original question) I'm definitly of the camp that wants the game to give me the choice. Now, this thread is a little old, so MMO Magic hadn't released the information that there are both community Reflected Worlds as well as private ones. This suites me quite well, when I want to go on an adventure along (or with some buddies) I can jump into a world just for us and keep the pesky people away, but when I'm feeling 'guildish' and social (rare, I admit) I can go into a community Reflected world. But in neither case do I want to be forced to group up with people in order to complete a quest.
Well, I don't care if this 'is the one' or not, as long as its just fun to play. As for grouping mechanics (back to the OP's original question) I'm definitly of the camp that wants the game to give me the choice. Now, this thread is a little old, so MMO Magic hadn't released the information that there are both community Reflected Worlds as well as private ones. This suites me quite well, when I want to go on an adventure along (or with some buddies) I can jump into a world just for us and keep the pesky people away, but when I'm feeling 'guildish' and social (rare, I admit) I can go into a community Reflected world. But in neither case do I want to be forced to group up with people in order to complete a quest.
Well Jatar has explained in detail a few times no one will be forced but there will be limits as to what you can do solo and in a group .... Your choice.
But Agree with you 100%. I just love the idea of a group of 8 conquering a reflected instance or our own realitie
________________________________________________________ Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
This was a VERY good question by the op,because it is very important to the design of a game.
IMO you cannot have both,there is no way,if you try to have both it will mean there is no true grouping,but there might end up being some cheap form of xp bonus by grouping,either or the content will just be too easy in a group.
The op is without question 100% correct when he explains that MOST if not 90+% will just solo everything if it is possible,they will not care to group *EVEN* if they love grouping.I love grouping,i play FFXI,but if i can solo something,why woudl i waste time to form a group if i don't need it?Answer is i won't and most likely neither will anyone else.
Here is the problem now,you have a game that is played online with thousands of others,but you have no game mechanics to actually interact with others,so how is this going to be labeled a MMO then?You can't call a game an MMO just because thousands can connect to the same game,you have to actually have interaction,the game has to revolve around players working together,otherwise i can call EVERY single game that is online a MMO.
I could play Unrealtournament or COD or Quake and get more player interaction than i would if i played to solo a game full of quests.This imo would make these games more of a MMO than most of these other MMORPG's.There is no intrigue for myself,just because i can see another player run by me on screen,it is the interactio nthat brings a true mmo to life,making the online part useful.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
This was a VERY good question by the op,because it is very important to the design of a game.
IMO you cannot have both,there is no way,if you try to have both it will mean there is no true grouping,but there might end up being some cheap form of xp bonus by grouping,either or the content will just be too easy in a group.
The op is without question 100% correct when he explains that MOST if not 90+% will just solo everything if it is possible,they will not care to group *EVEN* if they love grouping.I love grouping,i play FFXI,but if i can solo something,why woudl i waste time to form a group if i don't need it?Answer is i won't and most likely neither will anyone else.
Here is the problem now,you have a game that is played online with thousands of others,but you have no game mechanics to actually interact with others,so how is this going to be labeled a MMO then?You can't call a game an MMO just because thousands can connect to the same game,you have to actually have interaction,the game has to revolve around players working together,otherwise i can call EVERY single game that is online a MMO.
I could play Unrealtournament or COD or Quake and get more player interaction than i would if i played to solo a game full of quests.This imo would make these games more of a MMO than most of these other MMORPG's.There is no intrigue for myself,just because i can see another player run by me on screen,it is the interactio nthat brings a true mmo to life,making the online part useful.
I'd have to disagree. I don't ever believe in forcing anything on anyone in a game. Besides, you don't need to force grouping to get grouping. I'll give you an example: The devs have stated that the plan group tactics by your opponents. In order to counter those tactics (or even have the fun of using them at all) you would want to group up. How can I use a decoy to draw a group of monsters that are tracking me into my own ambush if I don't have a group? This is an example of how to encourage grouping without forcing grouping, which is the way I understand this game is being built. To me this is the perfect scenario, I will WANT to group because of the added game play, but I'm not forced to group when there are no people around who I like. There is nothing I hate more in a game than being forced to group with a bunch of asswhipes because I cannot progress and play the game unless I do. I leave those games, perminently.
I like grouping, but I do understand that people want to make others group up with them or they can't find people to make a group. If they make the game play enhanced (like Bookkeeper said) when you group, that is one thing that will help. I also think that a good Guild system promots grouping.
I like the sound of the player villages that will spring up around Guild Halls. This will promote joining a guild, and that will promote grouping.
I think that the idea of having challenge in the game that require a group is also a good idea, but not something that you MUST do to go through the game. This game sounds like they are staying away from linear game play, in which case there won't be any particular adentures that you must do, and therefore, they can have some that require groups without forcing grouping. I think this is a middle ground that I will like in this game.
This was a VERY good question by the op,because it is very important to the design of a game.
IMO you cannot have both,there is no way,if you try to have both it will mean there is no true grouping,but there might end up being some cheap form of xp bonus by grouping,either or the content will just be too easy in a group.
You are wrong you can have both and as described by the developer their intention is to provide choice.
The op is without question 100% correct when he explains that MOST if not 90+% will just solo everything if it is possible,they will not care to group *EVEN* if they love grouping.I love grouping,i play FFXI,but if i can solo something,why woudl i waste time to form a group if i don't need it?Answer is i won't and most likely neither will anyone else.
Not so sure about this normally i would agree, but in COS there is a lot of benefit from grouping with respect to gaining faction you need in certain areas from other peoples quests. And whilst soloing will suffice you will miss a lot of loot experience and content. Yes you can complete game elements but you miss out. A lot of people will play this with a group of friends 2-8 players. Solo maybe for skulking around in your own reflected world instance if you see fit but I am not so sure about the 90% will solo everything as again the game mechanics here will promote community within reflected worlds and tight groups of players.
Here is the problem now,you have a game that is played online with thousands of others,but you have no game mechanics to actually interact with others,so how is this going to be labeled a MMO then?You can't call a game an MMO just because thousands can connect to the same game,you have to actually have interaction,the game has to revolve around players working together,otherwise i can call EVERY single game that is online a MMO.
There is no problem you are inventing it in your mind. Grouping is in Raiding is in , central hub for quests and storyline exists i.e. The citadel of Sorcery is all about people working togtether what makes you think it isn't ???
The difference is is that once i have my group in my reflected world which is multi player you can't ruin the fun. It is just my friends and companions that I invited along for the ride.
Reflected world (Your Own) - 1-8 Player groups where a lot of questing is done.
Reflected worlds(Global) - All players allowed required for higher end encounters Raids
COS - Shared environment and hub for questing which this game is built around(go read the lore)
I could play Unrealtournament or COD or Quake and get more player interaction than i would if i played to solo a game full of quests.This imo would make these games more of a MMO than most of these other MMORPG's.There is no intrigue for myself,just because i can see another player run by me on screen,it is the interactio nthat brings a true mmo to life,making the online part useful.
You can play as you see fit but COS is an MMO no doubt whatever spin you try to put on it. Your perception of what you want in an MMO and the reality of what happens in an MMO are two different things. It is all really about your ability to communicate because I for sure under no circumstance will I play with anyone I dont want to. Life is too short to put up with idiots... And COS will give that choice if the deliver on their concept, like most other AAA - MMOs
If this game releases I will be playing with 5-6 good friends probably 2 nights a week so the current COS format as is now will suit us all which is great.
But for COS you can:
Play solo (In you reflected world) - Just chilling out or questing
Play in groups (other players reflected world) questing from COS
Play in groups (Your reflected world) questing from COS
Play in World instance for raids
________________________________________________________ Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
This was a VERY good question by the op,because it is very important to the design of a game.
IMO you cannot have both,there is no way,if you try to have both it will mean there is no true grouping,but there might end up being some cheap form of xp bonus by grouping,either or the content will just be too easy in a group.
The op is without question 100% correct when he explains that MOST if not 90+% will just solo everything if it is possible,they will not care to group *EVEN* if they love grouping.I love grouping,i play FFXI,but if i can solo something,why woudl i waste time to form a group if i don't need it?Answer is i won't and most likely neither will anyone else.
Here is the problem now,you have a game that is played online with thousands of others,but you have no game mechanics to actually interact with others,so how is this going to be labeled a MMO then?You can't call a game an MMO just because thousands can connect to the same game,you have to actually have interaction,the game has to revolve around players working together,otherwise i can call EVERY single game that is online a MMO.
I could play Unrealtournament or COD or Quake and get more player interaction than i would if i played to solo a game full of quests.This imo would make these games more of a MMO than most of these other MMORPG's.There is no intrigue for myself,just because i can see another player run by me on screen,it is the interactio nthat brings a true mmo to life,making the online part useful.
Wizardry,
You know, we appreciate your concerns, this is not an easy area of design, and we have found that the community is very divided on this issue. Though we are unwilling to force people to do anything since our game is literally about player choices (even in quests) we do appreciate that there are players out there who feel that unless there is very good reason to group up they won't be able to find enough players to group with them.
Our way of solving this issue is not to force grouping to play the game, but to make grouping so much fun that most players out there wouldn't even consider not grouping up. This is true in both our Questing Reflections and our Community Reflections worlds.
In the Questing Reflections you and up to eight of your friends can group up and go on an adventure. There the group tactics and strategic options will increase by using a group rather than going it solo, or in other words, it's just more fun in a group.
In the Community worlds it become even more interesting. There are challenges that cannot possibly be attempted without a group, and even better, challenges that require many groups to cooperate. I'm not talking about our Campaigns, (which are similar to a Raid), these are situations of the war between Morphael's forces and the Citadel forces (of which you are part) that just come about in the world through the normal course of the war, and just one player has no chance... and in many cases, even just one group of players has no chance, many groups will need to work together. Is this forced grouping? You could call it that, if you want, but the truth is you don't have to take on these challenges to play the game, but they are a whole bunch of fun, and if you don't group up you will never be able to have that fun. In these conflicts there are objectives given out by battle commanders that no solo player could achieve, it will take a group working together with tactics to achieve the goal.
Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that we are concerned with the part of the gaming community that wants the game to promote grouping, and we are taking steps to make that happen without making it so that a person who chooses to solo can't play other parts of the game. It's their choice, but we believe that players will choose to group up quite often in CoS.
This was a VERY good question by the op,because it is very important to the design of a game.
IMO you cannot have both,there is no way,if you try to have both it will mean there is no true grouping,but there might end up being some cheap form of xp bonus by grouping,either or the content will just be too easy in a group.
The op is without question 100% correct when he explains that MOST if not 90+% will just solo everything if it is possible,they will not care to group *EVEN* if they love grouping.I love grouping,i play FFXI,but if i can solo something,why woudl i waste time to form a group if i don't need it?Answer is i won't and most likely neither will anyone else.
Here is the problem now,you have a game that is played online with thousands of others,but you have no game mechanics to actually interact with others,so how is this going to be labeled a MMO then?You can't call a game an MMO just because thousands can connect to the same game,you have to actually have interaction,the game has to revolve around players working together,otherwise i can call EVERY single game that is online a MMO.
I could play Unrealtournament or COD or Quake and get more player interaction than i would if i played to solo a game full of quests.This imo would make these games more of a MMO than most of these other MMORPG's.There is no intrigue for myself,just because i can see another player run by me on screen,it is the interactio nthat brings a true mmo to life,making the online part useful.
Wizardry,
You know, we appreciate your concerns, this is not an easy area of design, and we have found that the community is very divided on this issue. Though we are unwilling to force people to do anything since our game is literally about player choices (even in quests) we do appreciate that there are players out there who feel that unless there is very good reason to group up they won't be able to find enough players to group with them.
Our way of solving this issue is not to force grouping to play the game, but to make grouping so much fun that most players out there wouldn't even consider not grouping up. This is true in both our Questing Reflections and our Community Reflections worlds.
In the Questing Reflections you and up to eight of your friends can group up and go on an adventure. There the group tactics and strategic options will increase by using a group rather than going it solo, or in other words, it's just more fun in a group.
In the Community worlds it become even more interesting. There are challenges that cannot possibly be attempted without a group, and even better, challenges that require many groups to cooperate. I'm not talking about our Campaigns, (which are similar to a Raid), these are situations of the war between Morphael's forces and the Citadel forces (of which you are part) that just come about in the world through the normal course of the war, and just one player has no chance... and in many cases, even just one group of players has no chance, many groups will need to work together. Is this forced grouping? You could call it that, if you want, but the truth is you don't have to take on these challenges to play the game, but they are a whole bunch of fun, and if you don't group up you will never be able to have that fun. In these conflicts there are objectives given out by battle commanders that no solo player could achieve, it will take a group working together with tactics to achieve the goal.
Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that we are concerned with the part of the gaming community that wants the game to promote grouping, and we are taking steps to make that happen without making it so that a person who chooses to solo can't play other parts of the game. It's their choice, but we believe that players will choose to group up quite often in CoS.
Just wanted to confirm, group mechanics are designed around 8 man parties instead of the traditional 5 since WOW released? (I miss DAOC's 8 man design)
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
This was a VERY good question by the op,because it is very important to the design of a game.
IMO you cannot have both,there is no way,if you try to have both it will mean there is no true grouping,but there might end up being some cheap form of xp bonus by grouping,either or the content will just be too easy in a group.
The op is without question 100% correct when he explains that MOST if not 90+% will just solo everything if it is possible,they will not care to group *EVEN* if they love grouping.I love grouping,i play FFXI,but if i can solo something,why woudl i waste time to form a group if i don't need it?Answer is i won't and most likely neither will anyone else.
Here is the problem now,you have a game that is played online with thousands of others,but you have no game mechanics to actually interact with others,so how is this going to be labeled a MMO then?You can't call a game an MMO just because thousands can connect to the same game,you have to actually have interaction,the game has to revolve around players working together,otherwise i can call EVERY single game that is online a MMO.
I could play Unrealtournament or COD or Quake and get more player interaction than i would if i played to solo a game full of quests.This imo would make these games more of a MMO than most of these other MMORPG's.There is no intrigue for myself,just because i can see another player run by me on screen,it is the interactio nthat brings a true mmo to life,making the online part useful.
Wizardry,
You know, we appreciate your concerns, this is not an easy area of design, and we have found that the community is very divided on this issue. Though we are unwilling to force people to do anything since our game is literally about player choices (even in quests) we do appreciate that there are players out there who feel that unless there is very good reason to group up they won't be able to find enough players to group with them.
Our way of solving this issue is not to force grouping to play the game, but to make grouping so much fun that most players out there wouldn't even consider not grouping up. This is true in both our Questing Reflections and our Community Reflections worlds.
In the Questing Reflections you and up to eight of your friends can group up and go on an adventure. There the group tactics and strategic options will increase by using a group rather than going it solo, or in other words, it's just more fun in a group.
In the Community worlds it become even more interesting. There are challenges that cannot possibly be attempted without a group, and even better, challenges that require many groups to cooperate. I'm not talking about our Campaigns, (which are similar to a Raid), these are situations of the war between Morphael's forces and the Citadel forces (of which you are part) that just come about in the world through the normal course of the war, and just one player has no chance... and in many cases, even just one group of players has no chance, many groups will need to work together. Is this forced grouping? You could call it that, if you want, but the truth is you don't have to take on these challenges to play the game, but they are a whole bunch of fun, and if you don't group up you will never be able to have that fun. In these conflicts there are objectives given out by battle commanders that no solo player could achieve, it will take a group working together with tactics to achieve the goal.
Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that we are concerned with the part of the gaming community that wants the game to promote grouping, and we are taking steps to make that happen without making it so that a person who chooses to solo can't play other parts of the game. It's their choice, but we believe that players will choose to group up quite often in CoS.
Just wanted to confirm, group mechanics are designed around 8 man parties instead of the traditional 5 since WOW released? (I miss DAOC's 8 man design)
I can answer that one 2-8 yes. Jatar has answered this in one of his posts. That is 2-8 in your own reflected instance can't remember if you can have groups of groups to form raids in the world instance but in general 2-8.
Ignore this didn't spot Jatar answering.(Uhm I must learn to read)
________________________________________________________ Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
Comments
I'm curious. I mostly group up with my friends (local) and secondarily, with my guild members (when I belong to one), or I solo. How many people spend most of their time in their MMO of choice, grouping with strangers? I'm not judging here, just curious as to what people like to do.
CoS seems to have the mentality that many other MMOs never bother to develop: that player choice is what makes a game fun, as opposed to some games where the grind for rep, gold and exp is more like a job than an escape. There is no 'best possible way' here -- there is only 'your way'.
There are more than a few examples of why it is sometimes better (and possibly necessary) to group in a game like this. The campaign that Jatar mentioned is one such case. This is where multiple groups form together as a raid in order to take on one of Morphael's armies, a castle, a huge monster, etc. In no way, shape, or form should this be something that a solo player could accomplish. When you're at war, you don't send one guy (sorry guys, you don't get to play Rambo in an MMO; then you'd have 10,000 Rambos running around CoS and programmers would hang themselves from all the 80's headbands they'd have to model); you send a warband -- maybe even an army.
Now it is entirely possible with the quest system as it has been described that a lone individual could find himself scouting for an army as part of an on-going storyline, and in that role could accomplish some pretty impressive things. Scouting, assassination, or sabotage missions are meant for solo play, just like wars and battles are MEANT for group/raid play -- they provide more than enough fun in both scenarios.
In the above example, the players who participate in the campaign should receive some hefty rewards -- such a thing is not easy to accomplish, and the leaders of the citadel would naturally reward your feats. But that doesn't mean that players who do nothing else but campaign are going to level, gear, or skill up faster or more efficiently than those who choose to spend their time questing or adventuring. Everything they have mentioned on their site, and here on this forum speaks to the balance of play they want to give us. I doubt they would spend so much time making CoS everything they say it is going to be and then flub the dice over simple game-balance issues.
Grouping is a great way to enjoy certain content the way YOU want to enjoy it. On the other side of the argument, the same could be said about solo play. But having enemies whose AI, numbers and maybe even relative strength changes depending on what they are facing absolutely changes things from MMOs we've played previously. CoS isn't heading down the grind path, or down the end-game path. Those terms have no place here-- the devs seem to care more about making gameplay second-to-none. Too many games sacrifice fun for playing hours -- they don't make enough content for all types of players and end up handing out a 'dungeon a week', or a new daily quest or a new faction to brown-nose. Grouping becomes mandatory for ANY end-game content and as much fun as it can be at first, it ends up being more like a job than a game.
I have a job already, and it pays a heck of a lot more than gaming does......... sob....
Greystaff Legends RPG
1) OK, regarding this point, fair enough, as long as there's an incentive to take the time to form a group in order to obtain greater reward, without impeding a players progress, I'm all for that and its a good idea.
2) Let's examine number two carefully. I ran into the exact same situation in LotRO, and experienced the same frustration. But the real issue isn't the content you came up against, but the fact that for several reasons you were unable to get past it.
This is primarily caused by the fact that there is no incentive (in game mechanic) for you and your 3 friends to set aside your "fear" of strangers (who can really be quite nice if you have a reason to get to know them) and group up to master the content. Same for those strangers, why should they want to help you, especially if they already did it and get nothing for doing so. (This is the key flaw with games based on quest based content btw, one that was not quite so severe in the earlier camp and grind game models)
Now, if the game mechanics had made it extremely rewarding for you to get past this content (and not be merely another notch on your quest log) and made it just as rewarding for anyone who chose to help you, then it is likely you would have gotten together.
if you had played a game like DAOC in the early days you would have experience this mechanic, where strangers routinely grouped togetther and even helped each other (single open world, no instances) when they got in trouble. I suspect your MMO experience doesn't include a game like this because most people who don't understand what me and others aretalking about haven't either.
The game can be designed so that players are encouraged to group up in order to play nice together, but of course, that's just one road to success. You appear to have decided that its better to let players chose to skip the group content by providing them an alternate path to the end. Might be better, might not be, all depends on a players past experiences I suppose.
We'll have to see how it goes, you might be on to the next big thing or just another good idea that didn't work out as intended.
Oh well, nothing ventured, nothing gained.
Putting the condescending nature of your post to one side, first you should read Jatars' reply more closely. There are rewards for grouping and it is clear in his post more content and better rewards.
But what is important is that people have a choice... and a lot will group once they realise that they get better rewards. But in reality what is good about the COS approach is the choice and focus on Gameplay fun and storyline. People will likely form smaller groups which will be more community based....
I will elaborate on your DAOC theory, in the days when the player base was smaller and internet access was a lot more costly people used to play nice because generally you needed to have money to play online or rich parents. SO a core group of more intelligent players who were all acheivers in real life existed ,so playing nice was in their natur.
The flip coin of this is that access to the internet is so inexpensive now, it is a great form of entertainment for unemployed loosers who dont want to work and havent acheived and their idea of fun is to acheive in games by being idiots(These are the types you get forced to group with these days!!!).
It wasn't DAOC but the playerbase demographic that caused and resulted in grouping.
As for the assumption about "you must have never played these types of games, please read up a little on the developers of this games they are all very very experienced vets.
I hope you play COS for what it is and not what you think it should be when it releases sounds like a breath of fresh air giving people choice. WHile having a core storyline.
________________________________________________________
Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
Putting the condescending nature of your post to one side, first you should read Jatars' reply more closely. There are rewards for grouping and it is clear in his post more content and better rewards.
But what is important is that people have a choice... and a lot will group once they realise that they get better rewards. But in reality what is good about the COS approach is the choice and focus on Gameplay fun and storyline. People will likely form smaller groups which will be more community based....
I will elaborate on your DAOC theory, in the days when the player base was smaller and internet access was a lot more costly people used to play nice because generally you needed to have money to play online or rich parents. SO a core group of more intelligent players who were all acheivers in real life existed ,so playing nice was in their natur.
The flip coin of this is that access to the internet is so inexpensive now, it is a great form of entertainment for unemployed loosers who dont want to work and havent acheived and their idea of fun is to acheive in games by being idiots(These are the types you get forced to group with these days!!!).
It wasn't DAOC but the playerbase demographic that caused and resulted in grouping.
As for the assumption about "you must have never played these types of games, please read up a little on the developers of this games they are all very very experienced vets.
I hope you play COS for what it is and not what you think it should be when it releases sounds like a breath of fresh air giving people choice. WHile having a core storyline.
Actually, I'm not sure COS's approach is much different with regards to grouping than any other game of recent memory, I can't recall a single game that forced me to group, I could always skip it and keep playing. Sure, you can skip the group content, but that's true in WOW or most any game (maybe not FFXI)
I disagree with your assessment of DAOC, it wasn't the player base, the game's mechanics encouraged more socialization by strongly rewarding group play, making sure that most anyone could be an effective participant regardless of their skill at playing, and the forced downtime between fights gave players lots of time to chat.
Today's players are just as capable of such interaction, if only a game would give them time to develop them. Unfortunately they are all so busy "playing the game' to actually get to know one another and bond.
I used to run 8 mans on Mordred and we intentionally sat out 30 minutes or more waiting for our cool downs to come back up so we would be at maximum killing effectiveness. Did a lot of socialization during those sessions, and made some really great friends that I still game with today.
And regardless what you think about the developers experience, I don't get any indication from Jatar's responses that he played DAOC and if he did, he didn't enjoy it because they are designing their game w/o any of the mechanics that I mentioned.
That's all well and good, and perhaps COS will be as unique as he says it is and that will make it fun. I'll be glad to give it a chance, but asking me to set aside my preferences for game play is asking a bit much.
"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
You are right, Kyleran. We're not really trying to be different from all other games when it comes to grouping. The truth is very simple, we just want players to have the choice. There is content you will not see if you don't group, and things you will not experience if you don't group, however, there is NO content you MUST experience as a group in order to play through the game to the epic conclusion of the grand climax. Everyone can experience that flow through the game, just in different ways depending on what they choose to do. What we EXPECT most players to do is play a mix of solo and group, and this is NOT different than many other games.
Now, if any you complain to us that you won't be able to see all content unless you group, and therefore, this is forced grouping... we're going to laugh at you. NO ONE is going to see all the content of CoS, no matter what they do. Just like real life, you won't experience everything someone else does. Your life is not their life, and so it goes in this game. Each person's experience through this game will be unique in many ways. And though you will certainly share some experiences that others do, overall, your life will be quite different. This is the spice of life, especially in this game. One of the main points of all this design and technology being put behind this game was to make it so that you didn't do exactly what the other players do. The world changes, your life is different, time moves on, blaze your own path and enjoy your individuality. Or... play some other game.
Actually, I'm not sure COS's approach is much different with regards to grouping than any other game of recent memory, I can't recall a single game that forced me to group, I could always skip it and keep playing. Sure, you can skip the group content, but that's true in WOW or most any game (maybe not FFXI)
I disagree with your assessment of DAOC, it wasn't the player base, the game's mechanics encouraged more socialization by strongly rewarding group play, making sure that most anyone could be an effective participant regardless of their skill at playing, and the forced downtime between fights gave players lots of time to chat.
Today's players are just as capable of such interaction, if only a game would give them time to develop them. Unfortunately they are all so busy "playing the game' to actually get to know one another and bond.
I used to run 8 mans on Mordred and we intentionally sat out 30 minutes or more waiting for our cool downs to come back up so we would be at maximum killing effectiveness. Did a lot of socialization during those sessions, and made some really great friends that I still game with today.
And regardless what you think about the developers experience, I don't get any indication from Jatar's responses that he played DAOC and if he did, he didn't enjoy it because they are designing their game w/o any of the mechanics that I mentioned.
That's all well and good, and perhaps COS will be as unique as he says it is and that will make it fun. I'll be glad to give it a chance, but asking me to set aside my preferences for game play is asking a bit much.
I made no comments about the Developers Experience someone else did !!!!!
I feel the developers are doing a great job here , I just dislike the spin... the game has some great ideas and the content and gameplay options sound great.
I never started the DAOC reference, but my ref to playerbase as now is a reference to the overall state of the MMO genre and the real reason it has changed is spot on. The player quality has been thinned to a point where people who like immersive games with real content are no longer the majority they used to be.
________________________________________________________
Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
As for my experience in the game industry, I've been in it a long time, and been to every E3 there has been, as both a developer and publisher. In fact, I was watching DAOC from its earliest displays at the first E3 show where it was available to view. I've also played the game, as I play ALL major examples of MMOs or RPGs as they come out. That's part of my job, and also my enjoyment.
As for designing it without the mechanics you mentioned, Citadel of Sorcery has nothing to do with DAOC or any other MMO. CoS is designed to be a different concept in MMO gaming from the ground up. We aren't trying to be like any other MMO, including DAOC. This is not a comment on those games, just a note that we are something different. Just because one game has concepts in it that are good does not make that the only way to do something, or the only way that is fun to play. We're just taking a different path.
Ok, now you've piqued my curiosity. You regularly say you work in the industry but you will never say, even when directly asked, who you are or what games you've worked on.
Why?
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
Ok, now you've piqued my curiosity. You regularly say you work in the industry but you will never say, even when directly asked, who you are or what games you've worked on.
Why?
It was decided early on that we would keep our team anonymous to protect their privacy. There is no need or advantage in posting our names on these forums, but there are disadvantages. We don't need the distraction of personal attacks or people trying to email team members (or contact them in any way). The names of the people who worked on this title will be included in the credits when the game releases.
In the end, sounds like the grouping mechanics are going to be pretty standard fare with most modern MMO's today. (pretty much optional)
Of course, the game play is going to be quite a bit different according to you so as I mentioned, we'll just have to see how the finished game turns out.
"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
Ok, now you've piqued my curiosity. You regularly say you work in the industry but you will never say, even when directly asked, who you are or what games you've worked on.
Why?
It was decided early on that we would keep our team anonymous to protect their privacy. There is no need or advantage in posting our names on these forums, but there are disadvantages. We don't need the distraction of personal attacks or people trying to email team members (or contact them in any way). The names of the people who worked on this title will be included in the credits when the game releases.
Richard, is that you? (or maybe its Brad)
I agree, not all games need to be the same, and in fact, I think we really need "something different" right now to shake up the genre.
Perhaps this will be "the one".
We'll see.
"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
Well, I don't care if this 'is the one' or not, as long as its just fun to play. As for grouping mechanics (back to the OP's original question) I'm definitly of the camp that wants the game to give me the choice. Now, this thread is a little old, so MMO Magic hadn't released the information that there are both community Reflected Worlds as well as private ones. This suites me quite well, when I want to go on an adventure along (or with some buddies) I can jump into a world just for us and keep the pesky people away, but when I'm feeling 'guildish' and social (rare, I admit) I can go into a community Reflected world. But in neither case do I want to be forced to group up with people in order to complete a quest.
Well Jatar has explained in detail a few times no one will be forced but there will be limits as to what you can do solo and in a group .... Your choice.
But Agree with you 100%. I just love the idea of a group of 8 conquering a reflected instance or our own realitie
________________________________________________________
Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
This was a VERY good question by the op,because it is very important to the design of a game.
IMO you cannot have both,there is no way,if you try to have both it will mean there is no true grouping,but there might end up being some cheap form of xp bonus by grouping,either or the content will just be too easy in a group.
The op is without question 100% correct when he explains that MOST if not 90+% will just solo everything if it is possible,they will not care to group *EVEN* if they love grouping.I love grouping,i play FFXI,but if i can solo something,why woudl i waste time to form a group if i don't need it?Answer is i won't and most likely neither will anyone else.
Here is the problem now,you have a game that is played online with thousands of others,but you have no game mechanics to actually interact with others,so how is this going to be labeled a MMO then?You can't call a game an MMO just because thousands can connect to the same game,you have to actually have interaction,the game has to revolve around players working together,otherwise i can call EVERY single game that is online a MMO.
I could play Unrealtournament or COD or Quake and get more player interaction than i would if i played to solo a game full of quests.This imo would make these games more of a MMO than most of these other MMORPG's.There is no intrigue for myself,just because i can see another player run by me on screen,it is the interactio nthat brings a true mmo to life,making the online part useful.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I'd have to disagree. I don't ever believe in forcing anything on anyone in a game. Besides, you don't need to force grouping to get grouping. I'll give you an example: The devs have stated that the plan group tactics by your opponents. In order to counter those tactics (or even have the fun of using them at all) you would want to group up. How can I use a decoy to draw a group of monsters that are tracking me into my own ambush if I don't have a group? This is an example of how to encourage grouping without forcing grouping, which is the way I understand this game is being built. To me this is the perfect scenario, I will WANT to group because of the added game play, but I'm not forced to group when there are no people around who I like. There is nothing I hate more in a game than being forced to group with a bunch of asswhipes because I cannot progress and play the game unless I do. I leave those games, perminently.
I like grouping, but I do understand that people want to make others group up with them or they can't find people to make a group. If they make the game play enhanced (like Bookkeeper said) when you group, that is one thing that will help. I also think that a good Guild system promots grouping.
I like the sound of the player villages that will spring up around Guild Halls. This will promote joining a guild, and that will promote grouping.
I think that the idea of having challenge in the game that require a group is also a good idea, but not something that you MUST do to go through the game. This game sounds like they are staying away from linear game play, in which case there won't be any particular adentures that you must do, and therefore, they can have some that require groups without forcing grouping. I think this is a middle ground that I will like in this game.
Originally posted by Wizardry
This was a VERY good question by the op,because it is very important to the design of a game.
IMO you cannot have both,there is no way,if you try to have both it will mean there is no true grouping,but there might end up being some cheap form of xp bonus by grouping,either or the content will just be too easy in a group.
You are wrong you can have both and as described by the developer their intention is to provide choice.
The op is without question 100% correct when he explains that MOST if not 90+% will just solo everything if it is possible,they will not care to group *EVEN* if they love grouping.I love grouping,i play FFXI,but if i can solo something,why woudl i waste time to form a group if i don't need it?Answer is i won't and most likely neither will anyone else.
Not so sure about this normally i would agree, but in COS there is a lot of benefit from grouping with respect to gaining faction you need in certain areas from other peoples quests. And whilst soloing will suffice you will miss a lot of loot experience and content. Yes you can complete game elements but you miss out. A lot of people will play this with a group of friends 2-8 players. Solo maybe for skulking around in your own reflected world instance if you see fit but I am not so sure about the 90% will solo everything as again the game mechanics here will promote community within reflected worlds and tight groups of players.
Here is the problem now,you have a game that is played online with thousands of others,but you have no game mechanics to actually interact with others,so how is this going to be labeled a MMO then?You can't call a game an MMO just because thousands can connect to the same game,you have to actually have interaction,the game has to revolve around players working together,otherwise i can call EVERY single game that is online a MMO.
There is no problem you are inventing it in your mind. Grouping is in Raiding is in , central hub for quests and storyline exists i.e. The citadel of Sorcery is all about people working togtether what makes you think it isn't ???
The difference is is that once i have my group in my reflected world which is multi player you can't ruin the fun. It is just my friends and companions that I invited along for the ride.
Reflected world (Your Own) - 1-8 Player groups where a lot of questing is done.
Reflected worlds(Global) - All players allowed required for higher end encounters Raids
COS - Shared environment and hub for questing which this game is built around(go read the lore)
________________________________________________________
Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
Wizardry,
You know, we appreciate your concerns, this is not an easy area of design, and we have found that the community is very divided on this issue. Though we are unwilling to force people to do anything since our game is literally about player choices (even in quests) we do appreciate that there are players out there who feel that unless there is very good reason to group up they won't be able to find enough players to group with them.
Our way of solving this issue is not to force grouping to play the game, but to make grouping so much fun that most players out there wouldn't even consider not grouping up. This is true in both our Questing Reflections and our Community Reflections worlds.
In the Questing Reflections you and up to eight of your friends can group up and go on an adventure. There the group tactics and strategic options will increase by using a group rather than going it solo, or in other words, it's just more fun in a group.
In the Community worlds it become even more interesting. There are challenges that cannot possibly be attempted without a group, and even better, challenges that require many groups to cooperate. I'm not talking about our Campaigns, (which are similar to a Raid), these are situations of the war between Morphael's forces and the Citadel forces (of which you are part) that just come about in the world through the normal course of the war, and just one player has no chance... and in many cases, even just one group of players has no chance, many groups will need to work together. Is this forced grouping? You could call it that, if you want, but the truth is you don't have to take on these challenges to play the game, but they are a whole bunch of fun, and if you don't group up you will never be able to have that fun. In these conflicts there are objectives given out by battle commanders that no solo player could achieve, it will take a group working together with tactics to achieve the goal.
Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that we are concerned with the part of the gaming community that wants the game to promote grouping, and we are taking steps to make that happen without making it so that a person who chooses to solo can't play other parts of the game. It's their choice, but we believe that players will choose to group up quite often in CoS.
Just wanted to confirm, group mechanics are designed around 8 man parties instead of the traditional 5 since WOW released? (I miss DAOC's 8 man design)
"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
Actually, I kind of said that wrong, but yes, you and seven other people (for a total of eight) can form a group.
I can answer that one 2-8 yes. Jatar has answered this in one of his posts. That is 2-8 in your own reflected instance can't remember if you can have groups of groups to form raids in the world instance but in general 2-8.
Ignore this didn't spot Jatar answering.(Uhm I must learn to read)
________________________________________________________
Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel