Howdy, Stranger!

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

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Why Group Content doesn't work for the majority of the player base

11112141617

Comments

  • GrumpyMel2GrumpyMel2 Catskills, NYPosts: 1,832Member
    Originally posted by jpnz
    So we are back to 'you can't trust this data cause -reasons-' gotcha.

    I'd rather believe things like the official US census over your assertion. No offense.

    The US census hires people to go door to door and count the number of heads they see. It also uses things like official records for which there are legal penalties for falsifying.... and it ties people to real world physical addresses.

    This is night and day from what online services can do. When was the last time you had someone from Blizzard ring your doorbell to check that you were a 30 something guy rather then a 12 year old girl?

    Even with everything the US census does to try to insure it gets accurate information... it also has serious problems trying to report on some groups. For example,  it has difficulty reporting accurate information on groups of people who aren't supposed to legaly be in the country..... because alot of them go out of thier way to avoid being counted.

    The degree of trust we can place upon data is proportional to the quality of the collection methods for that data and application of that data to what we are studying.

    If you went into your backyard with an accurate thermometer every day last year and recorded the temperature at 9:00 AM... then we could trust what the average daily temperature in your backyard at 9:00 AM was for last year. If your grandma called you a few times last year and told you she was cold....we couldn't trust that to indicate the world was experiencing "global cooling".

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member
    So you don't trust the US census.
    I don't agree with that opinion but hey believe whatever you wish.

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Eglin AFB, FLPosts: 655Member Uncommon
    You're trolling at this point. It's been explained multiple times. You ignore those posts and repeat the exact same thing.

    image
  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member
    Originally posted by MadFrenchie
    You're trolling at this point. It's been explained multiple times. You ignore those posts and repeat the exact same thing.

    Thank you for the wonderful insight and contribution to this thread. /sarcasm

     

    I will admit I had way too many people say 'group content isn't decreasing! / US census data can not be trusted / I am not part of the majority so it doesn't exists' so I might have missed some.

    What's funny is that by the logic of this thread, MMO group content should be increasing but that's not what we see posted on this site.

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Eglin AFB, FLPosts: 655Member Uncommon
    And again, you completely miss the point that I and many other posters have been trying to convey in numerous ways.

    I've already given my wonderful insight and made a contribution using the same data you did. You ignored it because it wasn't easy to troll. Or because you couldn't be bothered to think critically about what I said. Either way, I won't say it again.

    image
  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member
    Originally posted by MadFrenchie
    And again, you completely miss the point that I and many other posters have been trying to convey in numerous ways.

    I've already given my wonderful insight and made a contribution using the same data you did. You ignored it because it wasn't easy to troll. Or because you couldn't be bothered to think critically about what I said. Either way, I won't say it again.

    Lets say you are right and I'm wrong. That the US Census somehow got it totally wrong. (Lets ignore how we would have a much larger problem than "MMOs" if this is true)

    Group content works for the majority of players and players play them.

    Why is it that everyday, we see 'Group content is decreasing in MMOs!' / 'LFG are the devil' threads on this site?

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • NilenyaNilenya TMIPosts: 364Member Uncommon

    Im in my 30s, and have raided hardcore in the past, and done lots of group content as well. It has allways been the main driving force that keeps me hooked to an mmo. Without it, I pretty much lose interest after a few months.

     

    While alot of adults in the 30s and 40s play mmo's and may even account for a large portion of the player base, I dont think I would call an mmo without group content, and raid content an mmo. - I also find time to enjoy these aspects of the mmo's I play despite being in my 30s. 

    There is alot of bite-sized gaming content to chew on for you if you cant sink your teeth into traditional mmo structured content, because of real life commitments. But instead of chopping mmo's down to size you could/should go elsewhere for entertainment that fits your needs, OR simply enjoy the bits of the mmo's that your schedule doesnt restrict you from enjoying.

     

    Im of the staunch opinion that mmo's should return to having few to no instances, be all about cooperative play and social abilities, and that they should teach accountability which is never a wasted thing if the mmo setting accomodates for it. 

    I completely disagree with changing an entire genre because some of the players have gotten older and married or had kids or work longer hours. - Take what you can and have fun with it, leave the rest for those who are able to enjoy that, and dont ruin it for them, just because you want it all to fit your personal life choices.

     

    I think a big part of the reason newer mmo's arent having great retention success, is that they fail at pumping up the strongest reason for sticking around: Social interaction and all it brings with it. Challenging yourself in relation to others, being able to handle communications with strangers, getting out of your shell and learning about others. All these things that made Everquest 1, swg and Vanilla Wow, such amasing successes when it came to retention rates. - I believe the fewer consequences your choices have, the less you need to deal with others and the easier content is delivered to you going around interactions with others, using ui inbuilt tools to avoid actually speaking to another human, ruins the social aspect of the game that would, if allowed, have kept you interested for longer. - A guild is not a large enough community, to be the exclusive social content in an mmo. - /shrug.

    Group content, without accountability (and there is none when everyone is far removed from you, behind tools to avoid actual interaction) is fraught with problems. And it doesnt teach kids anything about how to function in a social setting. It also doesnt hold any ramification for sociopathic behaviour - (in the past you'd simply not be able to find a group if you kept treating people poorly) . Buttom line is, social gameplay without accountability is bust. - It will never get truely social. Untill they stop harping on that model for the sake of convenience we wont have a great mmo with longevity.

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Eglin AFB, FLPosts: 655Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jpnz

    Originally posted by MadFrenchie
    And again, you completely miss the point that I and many other posters have been trying to convey in numerous ways.

    I've already given my wonderful insight and made a contribution using the same data you did. You ignored it because it wasn't easy to troll. Or because you couldn't be bothered to think critically about what I said. Either way, I won't say it again.

    Lets say you are right and I'm wrong. That the US Census somehow got it totally wrong. (Lets ignore how we would have a much larger problem than "MMOs" if this is true)

    Group content works for the majority of players and players play them.

    Why is it that everyday, we see 'Group content is decreasing in MMOs!' / 'LFG are the devil' threads on this site?

     

    That's not at all what I said. It's the words you're putting in everyone's mouths because it's the only argument you can counter with, "But it's the US census!" I won't argue a point I never made. So if you'd like to go back and read my previous posts to find my real argument, then we can discuss it.

    image
  • RhoklawRhoklaw Ft. Bliss, TXPosts: 3,484Member Uncommon

    There are pro's and con's to both sides and with that being said, there's no reason why a gaming company can't cater to one while another gaming company cater's to another. The worst ideas come from gaming companies that try to cater to everyone and end up with a hot mess that no one enjoys.

    image

  • ShaighShaigh Posts: 546Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jpnz

    Lets say you are right and I'm wrong. That the US Census somehow got it totally wrong. (Lets ignore how we would have a much larger problem than "MMOs" if this is true)

    Group content works for the majority of players and players play them.

    Why is it that everyday, we see 'Group content is decreasing in MMOs!' / 'LFG are the devil' threads on this site?

    I have zero doubt about US census accurately tracking the population in USA, but US census doesn't track mmorpg players. You can't use data that describes two different things and use it to calculate a third thing which means that data from US census is worthless.

     

    US census didn't get anything wrong, its you that have zero understanding in statistics, or you got the wrong agency. Its NSA and not the US census that tracks mmorpg populations.

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member
    Originally posted by Shaigh
     

    I have zero doubt about US census accurately tracking the population in USA, but US census doesn't track mmorpg players. You can't use data that describes two different things and use it to calculate a third thing which means that data from US census is worthless.

     

    US census didn't get anything wrong, its you that have zero understanding in statistics, or you got the wrong agency. Its NSA and not the US census that tracks mmorpg populations.

    Ahh.. So if we say a demographics of a certain game is XYZ, we can't use the US Census to describe what the average 'XYZ' would be like?

    Is that what I'm getting from this post?

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member
    Originally posted by MadFrenchie
     
    That's not at all what I said. It's the words you're putting in everyone's mouths because it's the only argument you can counter with, "But it's the US census!" I won't argue a point I never made. So if you'd like to go back and read my previous posts to find my real argument, then we can discuss it.

    If you don't have any constructive contributions to make in this thread, can you not post?

    I didn't realize how much you wanted me to read your argument but the thread is 38 pages long so I couldn't read every single post nor monitor it 24/7.

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • fivorothfivoroth LondonPosts: 3,664Member Uncommon
    Group only content is always tricky. Unless you have tons of time to play. And why do you think that people who are in their teens or twenties want to play for 3-4 hours straight or more?

    I think back in the EQ time MMO were an extremely niche market where the majority of people who played those games were people with 10-12 hours of spare time every day. Now you have people who play 5-7 hours a week. Basically MMOs became accessible to people with lives :)

    Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member
    Originally posted by jpnz
    Originally posted by MadFrenchie
    And again, you completely miss the point that I and many other posters have been trying to convey in numerous ways.

    I've already given my wonderful insight and made a contribution using the same data you did. You ignored it because it wasn't easy to troll. Or because you couldn't be bothered to think critically about what I said. Either way, I won't say it again.

    Lets say you are right and I'm wrong. That the US Census somehow got it totally wrong. (Lets ignore how we would have a much larger problem than "MMOs" if this is true)

    Group content works for the majority of players and players play them.

    Why is it that everyday, we see 'Group content is decreasing in MMOs!' / 'LFG are the devil' threads on this site?

     

    You have discovered one statistic, the average age of gamers, but are ignoring all the information that goes into making that statistic.  What is the average age of MMORPG players?  What about all the people on mobile devices; what is their average age?  Now that you have the average age, what's the Mean Age of Gamers?  What's the single larger group of gamers, by age?  What if there are a bunch of young players, and a bunch of old players, where the average is 31, but there aren't that many 31 year old players?  How does that change your theory?

     

    http://www.theesa.com/facts/gameplayer.asp

     

    The average age of gamers is 31, but 53% of gamers are on mobile devices.  What's the average age of gamers who are not on mobile devices?  Would that make the average, not on a mobile device, gamer even older?  Old enough to not have to worry about children? 

     

    Where are all the details for your theory?  Where is the robustness?  You are holding up a sign that says, "SCIENCE!", but you are not carrying on with the part where "SCIENCE!" expects to be challenged, and then has answers for those challenges.

     

    Here's an alternative theory, and it doesn't depend on demographic information.  The genre started with less than a million people.  It expanded, slowly, but wasn't what you would call "mainstream" until (wait for it).  World of Warcraft, which was heavy on group content, brought in many more millions of players, pushing MMORPGs into the "mainstream".  With the bulk of people playing MMORPGs being "mainstream" players, who weren't interested in dedicating scheduled time to video games, overall player preferences shifted to a more fluid setup, rather than the rigid setup that existed before.

    Players don't want rigid, time consuming content that has to be scheduled, but are kept away from it by other claims on their time.  The bulk of players never wanted rigid, time consuming content in the first place.  They are happy to spend four hours a night gaming, they just don't want to be tied down to a second job for their entertainment.

     

    **

     

    I considered getting into the definition of what "Average" means, but that seemed like overkill.  I mean, everyone knows what it means, right?  That if the average age of gamers is 31, it means that 50% of gamers could be 18 and 50% of gamers could be 44, and between the two groups the average age is 31.  The average age of gamers being 31 does not mean that gamers in general are 31 years old.  29% of gamers are under the age of 18 and they are hopefully not worrying about whether or not they are spending time with their children.

     

    Oh look, there I've gone into overkill.

     

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Eglin AFB, FLPosts: 655Member Uncommon
    Lizard, I think we're attempting an exercise in futility with the OP.

    I do think, however, you're right about players seeking a more fluid experience. Single player and non-massively multiplayer (e.g. CoD, Battlefield, etc.) games have been streamlining their experiences for a lot longer than have MMOs, and are much better at it. This is due in no small part to the nature of their games (much more easily done with fewer players interacting). However, MMOs are still trying to play catch up on an issue they didn't face until much more recently than other genres: market saturation.

    I not only hope and believe the market will see improvements in this area that become standard (LFD/LFG), but I also hope developers don't settle for standard and continue to improve the "intelligence" of such features to provide a deeper and more robust experience for the consumers.

    image
  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member
    Originally posted by MadFrenchie
    Lizard, I think we're attempting an exercise in futility with the OP.

    I do think, however, you're right about players seeking a more fluid experience. Single player and non-massively multiplayer (e.g. CoD, Battlefield, etc.) games have been streamlining their experiences for a lot longer than have MMOs, and are much better at it. This is due in no small part to the nature of their games (much more easily done with fewer players interacting). However, MMOs are still trying to play catch up on an issue they didn't face until much more recently than other genres: market saturation.

    I not only hope and believe the market will see improvements in this area that become standard (LFD/LFG), but I also hope developers don't settle for standard and continue to improve the "intelligence" of such features to provide a deeper and more robust experience for the consumers.

     

    I think "Exercise in futility" describes a lot of forum discussions. :-)

     

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • d4rkwingd4rkwing Tempe, AZPosts: 32Member

    I basically agree with the OP, which is why I find games you can just get in and get out to be so nice. Most of my gaming time is spent on Team Fortress 2. You can join a server and play for a bit. The matches aren't too long (most are finished in less than 30 minutes). If you have to leave there's usually someone waiting for a spot or autobalance is enabled so you won't hurt your team too badly if you log out. GW2 was good for this reason with its WvW for multiplayer or questing and exploration if you just wanted to play solo.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by MadFrenchie
    is area that become standard (LFD/LFG), but I also hope developers don't settle for standard and continue to improve the "intelligence" of such features to provide a deeper and more robust experience for the consumers.

    You don't have to hope.

    Isn't Destiny's seamless matching way ahead of the standard LFD/LFG? It is a AAA+ effort, no less.

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Eglin AFB, FLPosts: 655Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Originally posted by MadFrenchie
    is area that become standard (LFD/LFG), but I also hope developers don't settle for standard and continue to improve the "intelligence" of such features to provide a deeper and more robust experience for the consumers.

    You don't have to hope.

    Isn't Destiny's seamless matching way ahead of the standard LFD/LFG? It is a AAA+ effort, no less.

     

    It is, specifically for that game. I was underwhelmed by the content in the beta, though. Run here, your little robot will do the hack work, you just shoot things standing there, then shoot things running back. Boss fights are a simple matter of hiding behind things when they attack and unloading when they aren't. Outrageously large health pools lengthen this process to a mind-numbing rinse and repeat for 10 minutes straight.

    Hopefully the beta was just very limitedlimited in terms of content in store.. Otherwise I see this game as an average seller at best (mostly carried by Bungie's name, the PS4 sales and lack of other options ATM). But back to your point: the system is an excellent type of innovation. Proximity voice chat would be the cherry on top (obviously optional).

    image
  • Atis-nobAtis-nob BasementDwellTownPosts: 94Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Atis-nob
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by MadFrenchie
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by MadFrenchie
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by MadFrenchie
    It shouldn't be a fast track to success.. Anyone who's played with incompetent players will tell you it isn't. A single, integral player not doing they're job wrecks the progress of the entire group. This has nothing to do with the tendency of casual players to not want to wait for other players to organize. Because that's where solo optimization began. It wasn't because players bought a multiplayer game expecting to never interact with other players.

    That'd make about as much sense as a guy buying Infamous and bitching because he can't invite his buddy into his gameworld.

    The issue is that with more folks involved, the potential for disastrous results increases. This isn't an MMO-specific trait. In every endeavor, the more folks involved, the higher the chance of an overall failure.

    I think your jadedness toward some posters who DO think grouping should be the holy grail has caused you to read more into my post than what was intended.

    Grouping should provide a higher threshold for progression. Not because I want it that way, but because the risk of an overall failure falls to each player, individually...

    Can you share examples of the dev-created content or player behavior that focuses on player competence?

    I ask because the devs have been removing the player skill factor over time, primarily because players don't want it part of the equation in their MMOs. If players actually wanted that in their MMORPG (they actually do want it in some other genres), the   Puzzle Pirates progression system would probably be the norm. The 'challenge' of PUGs and group play isn't challenge for most. It's annoyance and frustration. You're heading into Ihmotep territory .

    I'm not sure, with aiming and the telegraph system and active dodge and the move away from tab-targetting, where you're getting the idea that developers are moving away from incorporating player skill into MMOs.  

    I was solely addressing your point regarding group content. Yes, there are more action RPGs and twitch gameplay. No one questions that. You brought up player skill, or lack thereof, is where the group experience has added challenge over single player. I was simply addressing the point you made. So, for your clarity on the matter:

    Can you share examples of the dev-created content or player behaviour that focuses on player competence in the group experience for the express purpose of making it more challenging than the solo experience?

    That's the nature of the beast, though: individual player skill challenge adds up exponentially for every person added to the group.  Maybe the tank makes a disastrous dodge roll into the bosses telegraph in Wildstar.  He goes down, not only does he fail and incur penalties; more than likely, his group is soon to follow.  Same for the healer.  Or maybe the DPS miss their skill shots.  The healer runs out of juice for the tank, the tank goes down, and the same wipe scenario occurs.  Using AoE CC against large group pulls?  CCer lays down a horrible CC, folks die.  And those folks need not fail in their roles whatsoever.  When you add folks, you do not simply add time and effort on the front end putting together the group.  You bring many variables that simply aren't there when soloing.  Higher risk, higher reward.

    And the reason group content generally (and I argue justifiably) leads to faster or larger rewards is due to the above fact, added in with this little fact: when you login, unless you've coordinated outside of the game to meet at that particular time, you have no guarantee you can even participate in such group content.  This should be obvious: many proponents of solo play insist they can't be bothered with finding groups, or that it's too much of a hassle.  Indeed, it is becoming increasingly difficult to piece together such groups in today's MMOs.  Therefore, groupers may engage in solo play because it's simply the easiest type of gameplay to find.  It's always available, so long as the servers are up.  There is no delay, no preparation, no chance that you cannot login and simply go it alone.

    So, for those groupers, you're adding variables the soloer doesn't have to deal with, you're frontloading time and effort the soloer doesn't, and you're not guaranteed you're playstyle's availability just because you've paid your $15.  You're contributing more to the game to experience content (or at least in experience it in a way) not made available to those who simply wish to login and have their gameplay style immediately 24/7, 365 days of the year.  Why, again, should there not be an increased reward threshold for participating in groups and/or group content?

    Wow, you not only went deep into that territory, but you planted a flag and set up shop. 

    I'm with Ceph and Veng. In my experience, adding more people and dividing up the work has proven to make mowing through mobs and completing content both easier and faster, requiring far less skill than attempting the same content solo. 

    Only if game is balanced around soloers. Basically, you pick a fight, which supposed to be fair duel, and bring small zerg of thugs with you. ofc, zerging is easy. If game is balanced around group, soloer will have hard time even surviving near strong opponent and most likely will find someone weaker next time. Yes, maybe you wont see some content because of that, but in good game subscription buys you access to challenge, not assured victory. If anything in game can be beaten by one-handed imbecile, just cause he payed sub, that means you picked game for one-handed imbeciles. Dont be surprised if somebody laugh at you for playing it with your 2 hands and whole brain.

    Exactly. If anything the solo player should get greater rewards because of the higher difficulty to complete the same task as the group. 

     

    Getting all exp and loot for themselves, saving time of finding group, insurance from playing with idiots are their rewards. No need to treat them like a heroes.

  • EdliEdli TiranaPosts: 941Member
    Seriously guys, you don't have to quote such a big chain. Just delete part of it and keep only the last part. Makes the discussion so hard to follow.
  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member

    Wow.. didn't expect this thread to still have discussion.

    Sorry but a move to another country/city just kept me out of commission.

    I'll copy-paste what I sent to a few folks who mailed me about this.

    Normally (in the academic world), proof of a 'faulty' study isn't done by 'cause I say so' by XYZ. Which you'll see a lot on this forum, especially my thread. vOv

    To prove a study is 'faulty' requires a study of its own. They generally have to be larger or better studies.

    Notice how the US Census / Daedalous project studies are being attacked in this thread by the logic of 'cause I say so' and not of 'here's another study that proves the US census / Daedalous project is wrong'.

    However, numbers are numbers and a study is a study. Whether you believe my interpretation of them or not is up to you. :)

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by MadFrenchie
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by MadFrenchie
    is area that become standard (LFD/LFG), but I also hope developers don't settle for standard and continue to improve the "intelligence" of such features to provide a deeper and more robust experience for the consumers.

    You don't have to hope.

    Isn't Destiny's seamless matching way ahead of the standard LFD/LFG? It is a AAA+ effort, no less.

     

    It is, specifically for that game. I was underwhelmed by the content in the beta, though. Run here, your little robot will do the hack work, you just shoot things standing there, then shoot things running back. Boss fights are a simple matter of hiding behind things when they attack and unloading when they aren't. Outrageously large health pools lengthen this process to a mind-numbing rinse and repeat for 10 minutes straight. Hopefully the beta was just very limitedlimited in terms of content in store.. Otherwise I see this game as an average seller at best (mostly carried by Bungie's name, the PS4 sales and lack of other options ATM). But back to your point: the system is an excellent type of innovation. Proximity voice chat would be the cherry on top (obviously optional).

    I haven't played the beta (cause i am waiting for the PC version) so I won't dispute your analysis of how good is the combat/gameplay (which i will reserve to judge it myself).

    However, I heard that it has already broken a lot of pre-order record, isn't it true? I doubt it will only be a so-so seller, but i guess time will tell.

    Lastly, didn't it have RPG elements, and "magic" type power? Didn't that help with the combat fun factor (which was done very well in games like Bioshock).

     

     

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member

    It has been a while and as the OP, I'll close this thread with; http://www.gameplanet.co.nz/pc/features/g53fbe9cf1d67e/World-of-Warcraft-Then-Now-Next/

    It is good when Tom Chilton (Game Director of WoW) validates your facts.

     

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • AlbatroesAlbatroes Posts: 786Member Uncommon
    Given all the OP said on the first page, maybe gamers just don't know what they want anymore. You have an older generation with more responsibilities and a newer generation that has too many choices to choose from. Couple that with companies trying to one-up each other in order to pull customers, just leaves chaos.
Sign In or Register to comment.