Howdy, Stranger!

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

Do you think forced-grouping could work if...

1568101115

Comments

  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 3,952
    It's not that communities in older games had better player.  It's the fact that they existed.  Most games now there is no community because there is no interdependency.  There have always been ass holes in MMORPG since I first started in the mid 90's.  

    Forced grouping is one form of interdependency.  Easy because most players come to games for combat. Troublesome when this activity is limited because of inability to find a group. If you make groups automated you defeat the purpose of forced grouping. 

    I think SWG had it right when you had interdependency in trade, crafting, player towns and long term healing.  Grouping to take down tougher foes. It's a more natural approach.  
  • DeathofsageDeathofsage Member UncommonPosts: 1,102
    edited November 2015
    Replying to: "If you make groups automated you defeat the purpose of forced grouping."

    While I agree with what you said and even agree with this line, Vermilion, there has to be some concessions. Noone likes waiting for a group.

    From firsthand experience, no matter how much I loved FFXI, I didn't love it so much when I was searching and couldn't find a group. I was always willing to be the leader and find members. Some days it just wouldn't happen. The ability to progress with NPC helpers, at a slower pace vs a group of real people, is not a bad thing.

    If by "automated" grouping, you mean dungeon finders. There's nothing wrong with a tool facilitating meeting of people. It should either be per-server, or cross-server WITH all the appropriate tools (friendlist, blacklist, the ability to send invites cross-server, and maybe even the ability to phase to the other server and play open-world with the people you've met).

    Solo-ability is part of the casualization of MMORPGs. Effective party finders are not. Cross-server finders are not necessarily, it just sucks when they're half-baked implementations.
    Post edited by Deathofsage on

    Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
    12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.

  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 3,952
    Replying to: "If you make groups automated you defeat the purpose of forced grouping."

    While I agree with what you said and even agree with this line, Vermilion, there has to be some concessions. Noone likes waiting for a group.

    From firsthand experience, no matter how much I loved FFXI, I didn't love it so much when I was searching and couldn't find a group. I was always willing to be the leader and find members. Some days it just wouldn't happen. The ability to progress with NPC helpers, at a slower pace vs a group of real people, is not a bad thing.

    If by "automated" grouping, you mean dungeon finders. There's nothing wrong with a tool facilitating meeting of people. It should either be per-server, or cross-server WITH all the appropriate tools (friendlist, blacklist, the ability to send invites cross-server, and maybe even the ability to phase to the other server and play open-world with the people you've met).

    Solo-ability is part of the casualization of MMORPGs. Effective party finders are not. Cross-server finders are not necessarily, it just sucks when they're half-baked implementations.
    I disagree because Everquest was one of few games that had heavy grouping. Even that could be gotten around by some classes.  Most games had solo combat.

    Convenience is the biggest casual factor in MMORPG.  When you no longer have to interact with other players to do anything is what makes MMORPG community no longer exist.  Excluding the outside factors such as VoIP.  
  • LynxJSALynxJSA Member RarePosts: 3,188
    Convenience is the biggest casual factor in MMORPG.  When you no longer have to interact with other players to do anything is what makes MMORPG community no longer exist.  Excluding the outside factors such as VoIP.  
    Do you feel Asheron's Call, ATITD, Puzzle Pirates, and UO communities "didn't exist" or were "bad communities"? 

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    People trying to dismiss the correlation between group oriented games and strong communities:

    Until a study proves otherwise, the connection is obvious. Communities went downhill when games became more soloable, and the thing is, communities aren't improving.


    No. People are just dismissing that strong communities are important.

    In fact, it is quite clear that MMOs are solo-able, and also disposable because players are looking for gameplay fun, and communities are just incidental. Otherwise games with toxic communities (like LoL0 would not be so popular.
    MMO aren't being made may say something as well.  LoL is a death match game. All death match style games have toxic communities.  It's the nature of anonymous competitive gaming.
    Yes .. and it looks like players like (or even love0 competitive gaming to the extent that they have no problem with toxic communities (or even like it).


  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,070
    Forced grouping is one form of interdependency.  Easy because most players come to games for combat. Troublesome when this activity is limited because of inability to find a group. If you make groups automated you defeat the purpose of forced grouping.  
    I'm always appalled by people who seem to need to be forced to interact with other players. A quite frequent trait of EQ players...
    LynxJSA said:
    Convenience is the biggest casual factor in MMORPG.  When you no longer have to interact with other players to do anything is what makes MMORPG community no longer exist.  Excluding the outside factors such as VoIP.  
    Do you feel Asheron's Call, ATITD, Puzzle Pirates, and UO communities "didn't exist" or were "bad communities"? 

    Exactly. Those games had fantastic communities and no forced grouping or forced interaction at all.
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming - RAM: 16GB Kingston HyperX Savage DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Philips 40PUK6809 4K 3D TV - Second display: Philips 273v 27" gaming monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset and Razer Hydra controllers - Soundcard: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.

  • khanstructkhanstruct Member UncommonPosts: 756
    Yes .. and it looks like players like (or even love0 competitive gaming to the extent that they have no problem with toxic communities (or even like it).
    That's an entirely different type of game and community from MMOs. Competitive, aggressive games have competitive, aggressive communities, which is fine, but the same attitude rapidly decays social and cooperative communities such as those in MMOs.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
      
    I'm always appalled by people who seem to need to be forced to interact with other players. A quite frequent trait of EQ players...

    Exactly. Those games had fantastic communities and no forced grouping or forced interaction at all.
    Great .. so you have no problem when games are soloable and interactions with others are purely optional?
  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 3,952
    LynxJSA said:
    Convenience is the biggest casual factor in MMORPG.  When you no longer have to interact with other players to do anything is what makes MMORPG community no longer exist.  Excluding the outside factors such as VoIP.  
    Do you feel Asheron's Call, ATITD, Puzzle Pirates, and UO communities "didn't exist" or were "bad communities"? 

    Of the ones that I played, yes.  Those games had interdependency though.

  • DeathofsageDeathofsage Member UncommonPosts: 1,102
    Yes .. and it looks like players like (or even love0 competitive gaming to the extent that they have no problem with toxic communities (or even like it).
    That's an entirely different type of game and community from MMOs. Competitive, aggressive games have competitive, aggressive communities, which is fine, but the same attitude rapidly decays social and cooperative communities such as those in MMOs.
    This!

    When the sole objective of the game is to kill enemy players, a community that hates everyone outside of their group works. Just like in pvp when you /dance on the corpse of a slain enemy.

    However, in forced-grouping games, you want friends and lots of them.

    Forced grouping is one form of interdependency.  Easy because most players come to games for combat. Troublesome when this activity is limited because of inability to find a group. If you make groups automated you defeat the purpose of forced grouping.  
    I'm always appalled by people who seem to need to be forced to interact with other players. A quite frequent trait of EQ players...

    Exactly. Those games had fantastic communities and no forced grouping or forced interaction at all.
    It's been said a dozen times but "forced grouping" is the best moniker for this. It's not that players in forced-grouping games are so against grouping that they must be forced. It's that to take down most content, and even to do daily activities, you need a group.

    Seriously, noone would play a forced grouping game if they were against grouping and had to be forced.

    "Required grouping" doesn't carry the meaning as well and "Suggested grouping" doesn't fit the bill.

    Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
    12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.

  • waynejr2waynejr2 Member EpicPosts: 7,768
    It's not that communities in older games had better player.  It's the fact that they existed.  Most games now there is no community because there is no interdependency.  There have always been ass holes in MMORPG since I first started in the mid 90's.  

    Forced grouping is one form of interdependency.  Easy because most players come to games for combat. Troublesome when this activity is limited because of inability to find a group. If you make groups automated you defeat the purpose of forced grouping. 

    I think SWG had it right when you had interdependency in trade, crafting, player towns and long term healing.  Grouping to take down tougher foes. It's a more natural approach.  

    I agree with what you are saying however, you must admit there is a certain element who would scream that those situations where it takes grouping to confront tougher foes is "forced grouping".

    I say there can be solo content for those who want to solo and group content for those tough encounters.  Group content shouldn't be considered solo content by definition and thus shouldn't be called 'forced grouping'.  If someone doesn't want to play group content, then they should simply ignore it. 

    If someone has a need to be a completionist then they must do group content rather than complain that it isn't solo content.  They could also change their definition of complete. :D
    http://www.youhaventlived.com/qblog/2010/QBlog190810A.html  

    Epic Music:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1

    https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1

    Kyleran:  "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."

    John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."

    FreddyNoNose:  "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."

    LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"




  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    waynejr2 said:


    I agree with what you are saying however, you must admit there is a certain element who would scream that those situations where it takes grouping to confront tougher foes is "forced grouping".


    I would say .. ignore them. If they can't realize that they don't have to play a game if it is not fun, it is their problem, not ours. 
  • fistormfistorm Member UncommonPosts: 868
    There are some negative things that happen when grouping that will still make grouping a negative experience for some people.  Personalities that don't play well with others, people with less then optimum builds getting kicked or causing the group to die, people who have to leave because the baby started crying, the group wanting to play for another two hours when you were ready to leave an hour ago, etc.

    You want people in groups who like to group.  Forced grouping means having people who are grouping mostly because they have to.  Some people just like to play alone sometimes.
    I seen most of this in past, even in ffxi.   But eventually you just pick up a new member from group finder and get back to xping

    Im 100% agree with OP, I really miss hours of open world xp parties.
  • EronakisEronakis Member UncommonPosts: 2,220
    edited November 2015
    sorry double post
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Yes .. and it looks like players like (or even love0 competitive gaming to the extent that they have no problem with toxic communities (or even like it).
    That's an entirely different type of game and community from MMOs. Competitive, aggressive games have competitive, aggressive communities, which is fine, but the same attitude rapidly decays social and cooperative communities such as those in MMOs.
    Who says all MMOs need or have social & cooperative communities. World of Tank clearly does not. It is a competitive and some what aggressive game (although you do play in teams, but no different than LoL).
  • EronakisEronakis Member UncommonPosts: 2,220
    The problem with forced grouping is simply that you have to have certain roles in order in your  group in order to progress. The issue is not with forced grouping but how the trinity gameplay and combat mechanics are used. The solution is to redefine the tank role and allow players to have other defensive means that would be acted as utility or support to help them you and your group alive. If you would like to check out the solution to forced grouping but still encourage grouping view my "Reinventing the Trinity Gameplay thread here: http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/442172/reinventing-the-trinity-gameplay#latest
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Eronakis said:
    The problem with forced grouping is simply that you have to have certain roles in order in your  group in order to progress. 
    Not true for games like World of Tank. Everyone controls a tank. There is no other roles.
  • EronakisEronakis Member UncommonPosts: 2,220
    Eronakis said:
    The problem with forced grouping is simply that you have to have certain roles in order in your  group in order to progress. 
    Not true for games like World of Tank. Everyone controls a tank. There is no other roles.
    sigh, World of Tanks is not an MMORPG...it's an MMO for sure but not an MMORPG...I hope you can see the distinction.
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Eronakis said:
    Eronakis said:
    The problem with forced grouping is simply that you have to have certain roles in order in your  group in order to progress. 
    Not true for games like World of Tank. Everyone controls a tank. There is no other roles.
    sigh, World of Tanks is not an MMORPG...it's an MMO for sure but not an MMORPG...I hope you can see the distinction.
    Yes. So? We are talking about MMOs, not MMORPGs.

     Let me quote the first sentence of the FIRST post in this topic:

    "Do you think forced-grouping for decent experience-gain would be acceptable in a modern MMO if the game had a cross-server dungeon finder as a counter-balance to open-world parties*."

    The OP said "modern MMO", not "modern MMORPG".
  • ArchlyteArchlyte Member RarePosts: 1,405
    Games with "forced" grouping (like e.g. EQ1) will never work again since people now know better.
    It only worked back then because there was little alternative.
    With todays large choice of games, if people are forced to do something they don't enjoy, they will simply go play another game.
    It will never work again for those who are are opposed to mandatory grouping to the point of crossing their particular threshold of participation. I don't think it can be claimed that all post eq1 players are players of a monolithic anti grouping mindset
    MMORPG players are often like Hobbits: They don't like Adventures
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,516
    The fact that people discussing massively multiplayer online games now refer to multiplayer gameplay and content as "forced grouping", is really indicative of exactly how far this genre has fallen.


  • DMKanoDMKano Member LegendaryPosts: 21,674
    Dullahan said:
    The fact that people discussing massively multiplayer online games now refer to multiplayer gameplay and content as "forced grouping", is really indicative of exactly how far this genre has fallen.

    The people have changed - look around you, people are glued to their smartphones, tablets etc... people text each other instead of talking even in the same room sometimes.

    Games are a reflection of the current player, it's not the genere that had fallen, it's the players who have lost interest in interacting like they did 15 years ago.
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,516
    edited November 2015
    DMKano said:
    Dullahan said:
    The fact that people discussing massively multiplayer online games now refer to multiplayer gameplay and content as "forced grouping", is really indicative of exactly how far this genre has fallen.

    The people have changed - look around you, people are glued to their smartphones, tablets etc... people text each other instead of talking even in the same room sometimes.

    Games are a reflection of the current player, it's not the genere that had fallen, it's the players who have lost interest in interacting like they did 15 years ago.
    Nope. Its just about chasing the almighty dollar. People have been emulating the game that made megabucks for a decade, and I can tell you people did not change that much between '98 and '04. There also hasn't been a new game resembling those of the first gen in over a decade.

    Meanwhile, the games that have changed with the modern player are losing players faster than ever, so there goes that theory.


  • Azaron_NightbladeAzaron_Nightblade Member EpicPosts: 4,742
    IMO if grouping is forced then the game was not meant to be group based.

    Grouping should happen naturally in mmos, but the system should definitely be group friendly/focused.
    ^Pretty much this. Build the entire MMO around it, advertise it honestly for what it is, and the players who like that kind of stuff will play it.

    Just don't expect to have a massive player base. It'd be more of a niche game.

    My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)

    https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/

  • AntiquatedAntiquated Member RarePosts: 1,415
    edited November 2015
    Dullahan said:
    The fact that people discussing massively multiplayer online games now refer to multiplayer gameplay and content as "forced grouping", is really indicative of exactly how far this genre has fallen.
    Er, the term came from the EQ message boards, you know. So did the idea that leveling should be considerably faster.

    Exactly why Blizzard "won" in 2004. Their new game corrected or ameliorated many of the things Everquest players most commonly complained about.
Sign In or Register to comment.