Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

No group finder

168101112

Comments

  • Scott23Scott23 Member UncommonPosts: 293
    TENTING said:
    None of us writing on this forums can be considered antisocial, we defy the very premise of antisocial when we engage in conversation.

     Maybe food for thought, I dont know. :)

    Actually I don't know about that.  I consider myself anti-social.

    In MMOs I will generally duo with my wife or solo if she isn't interested in playing.  In my case I like the challenge of doing things I'm not supposed to do.

    I have done as little 'real' grouping as possible since moving on from EQ/early EQ2 (except for the afore-mentioned spousal grouping :) ).

    While I will occasionally contribute to chat - usually to answer questions I tend to treat MMOs as single player games played online with a back drop of many people logged on.

    Anyway the point of this post (if there is a point, lol) is to show that there are other types of gamers out there that will play even if they don't meet the target demographic.

    Another point (on topic this time) is I don't mind LFG tools, but I'm not a big fan of porting to a dungeon for a speed run.
  • goboygogoboygo Member RarePosts: 2,140
    edited January 2017
    Torval said:
    goboygo said:
    Group finders are for games that don't really need guilds, where all the content can be soloed  so people haven't taken the time to develop any relations in the game.  So the only way they can get a group is with a dungeon finder.
    Why would a solo player need a group finder? They play solo. If they used the group finder to play the game then they would be groupers waiting for a group. This isn't rocket science, or so I thought.

    You know who wants grouping tools? Groupers who like to play the game.
    Torval you know what I mean by this really...   They solo all the open world content or skip the open world content they cant do.  Then for dungeons where they need gear, they pug it using Group finder tools to get what they want until they are strong enough to solo whats left.  All the while skipping any sort of community involvement, guilds, coms, LFG to team up for X etc.  What did you think I meant?  I didn't say single player game I said solo as in trying to solo every possible thing they can without having to work with other filthy hominids.

    Complete social introverts playing MMO's. Something I never understood.
  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    goboygo said:
    Torval you know what I mean by this really...   They solo all the open world content or skip the open world content they cant do.  Then for dungeons where they need gear, they pug it using Group finder tools to get what they want until they are strong enough to solo whats left.  All the while skipping any sort of community involvement, guilds, coms, LFG to team up for X etc.  What did you think I meant?  I didn't say single player game I said solo as in trying to solo every possible thing they can without having to work with other filthy hominids.

    Complete social introverts playing MMO's. Something I never understood.
    Soloers don't group at all (or very rarely), you mean regular casual players, they play a little of most content without investing too much time or care into the game.

    Hardcore soloers never group, ever. I am not sure why they bother with MMOs at all. Games like Witcher and TES does what they want far better then any MMO.

    Personally don't I really care about dungeon finders, I only use them at times if the group me and my guldies (or just people I come to know in the game) lacks a member for a dungeon. I tend to use the guildchat to find most groups.
  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,182
    In my experience you're left with same type of socialization whether you promote it with forced group based content (EQ/DAOC/Pantheon) or group finders (modern MMOS). It's all the same reliance based need that spawns interaction. Both almost always devolve into pissing matches unless everyone is playing along in robotic form. So I really don't see the difference.

    In both types of systems the majority do their real socializing in guilds/guild alliances or with RL friends who also play. Hence why I prefer social structures done in more communal ways (UO/SWG/EVE, as well as survival games). Where meeting people is a lot more natural and free flowing,  it's not done on the basis of filling a needed roster or desired party make-up.




    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,182
    edited January 2017
    Loke666 said:
    goboygo said:
    Torval you know what I mean by this really...   They solo all the open world content or skip the open world content they cant do.  Then for dungeons where they need gear, they pug it using Group finder tools to get what they want until they are strong enough to solo whats left.  All the while skipping any sort of community involvement, guilds, coms, LFG to team up for X etc.  What did you think I meant?  I didn't say single player game I said solo as in trying to solo every possible thing they can without having to work with other filthy hominids.

    Complete social introverts playing MMO's. Something I never understood.
    Soloers don't group at all (or very rarely), you mean regular casual players, they play a little of most content without investing too much time or care into the game.

    Hardcore soloers never group, ever. I am not sure why they bother with MMOs at all. Games like Witcher and TES does what they want far better then any MMO.

    Personally don't I really care about dungeon finders, I only use them at times if the group me and my guldies (or just people I come to know in the game) lacks a member for a dungeon. I tend to use the guildchat to find most groups.
    Those you describe often belong to guilds and often excel at getting great loot (we had a number of them in my PVP guild in SWG) they rarely participated in day to day PVP activities yet filled the guild coffers with great dot weapons, hard to come by components, etc.. on a regular basis. They certainly serve a purpose. (I'd suspect it's these types that are often filling the auction vendors with a lot of those epic items you see daily in games like TOR, WOW, ETc....).

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • TENTINGTENTING Member UncommonPosts: 262
    edited January 2017
    Scott23 said:
    TENTING said:
    None of us writing on this forums can be considered antisocial, we defy the very premise of antisocial when we engage in conversation.

     Maybe food for thought, I dont know. :)

    Actually I don't know about that.  I consider myself anti-social.

    In MMOs I will generally duo with my wife or solo if she isn't interested in playing.  In my case I like the challenge of doing things I'm not supposed to do.

    I have done as little 'real' grouping as possible since moving on from EQ/early EQ2 (except for the afore-mentioned spousal grouping :) ).

    While I will occasionally contribute to chat - usually to answer questions I tend to treat MMOs as single player games played online with a back drop of many people logged on.

    Anyway the point of this post (if there is a point, lol) is to show that there are other types of gamers out there that will play even if they don't meet the target demographic.

    Another point (on topic this time) is I don't mind LFG tools, but I'm not a big fan of porting to a dungeon for a speed run.

    I think you like people around you ;), looking at the rest of us running around, riding our fancy mounts, looking at people passing you when we all travel around.

     You might not be eager to talk to every single person on your way, but you are social in your way and time, when motivation and energy is there? Am I right?

    In my terminology social is not one set thing, its fluent, with people in all areas of the spectrum of social. A spectrum from within even the single individual can travel back and fourth from minute to minute or year to year.

     Some desire to speak to everyone they see, some just like the presence of others without the need to talk much. 

     Who decides what kind of social should be allowed and who should not, yeah Im well aware some will try to dictate who are and who is not, but these dictators, if they dont know the one end of the spectrum to the other end of the spectrum, then how good a judge are they really? 

    Being social, in my humble opinion, does not automatically mean that someone has to be the chatty, always raid and group ready kind. 

     But it is ok, if you believe you are antisocial and appreciate the solitude, I wont argue against you.
    But I think there is a social observer in there, one who just travel along, observes and have fun, while at the same time you obviously lend yourself to a community as a guide.

     Id call you social, you are just not the kind of social that require constant company to have a good time, its enough with just a quiet companion every now and then.

     I think (whispers) a lot of older gamers are right there with you, in fact I know so (but dont tell anyone or those out there starts screaming at us) ;)        
     
  • GitmixGitmix Member UncommonPosts: 603
    Gdemami said:
    Scambug said:
    why on earth do they come in MMOs and whine about the games not being soloable?
    Because your premise "gamers who enjoy soloing everything shouldn't be playing MMOs" is false. Such line of thinking is "dumb and selfish beyond belief"....
    Looks like someone forgot what the second M in MMORPG stands for. MMORPGs were originally designed as multiplayer games, not games you solo from start to finish. Eventually console gamers got on board and managed to corrupt and pervert the genre by turning it into the opposite of what it was originally meant to be.

    So yes someone who comes in an MMO and fusses about the content being group oriented is dumb (because he doesn't understand what the acronym means) and selfish (because he's trying to impose his play style on a genre that isn't made for him).


  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 28,770
    Scambug said:
    Gdemami said:
    Scambug said:
    why on earth do they come in MMOs and whine about the games not being soloable?
    Because your premise "gamers who enjoy soloing everything shouldn't be playing MMOs" is false. Such line of thinking is "dumb and selfish beyond belief"....
    Looks like someone forgot what the second M in MMORPG stands for. MMORPGs were originally designed as multiplayer games, not games you solo from start to finish. Eventually console gamers got on board and managed to corrupt and pervert the genre by turning it into the opposite of what it was originally meant to be.

    So yes someone who comes in an MMO and fusses about the content being group oriented is dumb (because he doesn't understand what the acronym means) and selfish (because he's trying to impose his play style on a genre that isn't made for him).


    now wait a minute, that's different. "fusses about the content" is different than what you originally said.

    To that end there are a lot of "solo" players who play mmo's who don't "fuss about the content". They just accept that there are things they won't do or that they have to eventually find a group to do them.

    I have no problem with group only (or advised) activities in mmo's and I agree that people should know what they are getting into.

    But there are (usually) so many things to do in an mmo that not everything is about "grouping".
  • KxelemKxelem Member UncommonPosts: 27
    Craft in a group you get higher tier items and you get more xp from it.  Harvest in a group you get higher tier mats and more xp from it.  Fish in a group you get higher tier mats and more xp from it.  Lots to do in a group setting :) 
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 20,167
    Loke666 said:
    goboygo said:
    Torval you know what I mean by this really...   They solo all the open world content or skip the open world content they cant do.  Then for dungeons where they need gear, they pug it using Group finder tools to get what they want until they are strong enough to solo whats left.  All the while skipping any sort of community involvement, guilds, coms, LFG to team up for X etc.  What did you think I meant?  I didn't say single player game I said solo as in trying to solo every possible thing they can without having to work with other filthy hominids.

    Complete social introverts playing MMO's. Something I never understood.
    Soloers don't group at all (or very rarely), you mean regular casual players, they play a little of most content without investing too much time or care into the game.

    Hardcore soloers never group, ever. I am not sure why they bother with MMOs at all. Games like Witcher and TES does what they want far better then any MMO.

    Personally don't I really care about dungeon finders, I only use them at times if the group me and my guldies (or just people I come to know in the game) lacks a member for a dungeon. I tend to use the guildchat to find most groups.
    Harecore soloers still engage in social activities. Do you not get that after all this time that some people just like to game with others, but don't necessarily enjoy contrived facile group content?

    Not only that there are lots of preferences in between always solos and always groups. Some people people like to play in duos or small groups of 3 - 4. Some people like to do that without ever running "group" content.

    Your other comments are spot on, but it amazes me that long term posters on this site are still so obtuse to this fact.

    Let me know the last time you talked to, traded with, crafted for, or otherwise did something with other people in Skyrim, The Witcher, or Dragon's Dogma. DD: Dark Arisen feels so much like an mmo sometimes that I forget the others walking around aren't players. Then when I do I think, man this would be so much more interesting if other players were doing this instead of scripts. What we need is better RPG in online multiplayer games, not pushing people away from online games to offline RPGs because they want to play differently. Diversity is how you create an actual living breathing world ecosystem.

    The bottom line is there aren't just two groups of people (always groupers and always soloers). There isn't just one way to group or build social groups, but we try and distill the argument down to this.
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • Scott23Scott23 Member UncommonPosts: 293
    Sovrath said:
    Scambug said:
    Gdemami said:
    Scambug said:
    why on earth do they come in MMOs and whine about the games not being soloable?
    Because your premise "gamers who enjoy soloing everything shouldn't be playing MMOs" is false. Such line of thinking is "dumb and selfish beyond belief"....
    Looks like someone forgot what the second M in MMORPG stands for. MMORPGs were originally designed as multiplayer games, not games you solo from start to finish. Eventually console gamers got on board and managed to corrupt and pervert the genre by turning it into the opposite of what it was originally meant to be.

    So yes someone who comes in an MMO and fusses about the content being group oriented is dumb (because he doesn't understand what the acronym means) and selfish (because he's trying to impose his play style on a genre that isn't made for him).


    now wait a minute, that's different. "fusses about the content" is different than what you originally said.

    To that end there are a lot of "solo" players who play mmo's who don't "fuss about the content". They just accept that there are things they won't do or that they have to eventually find a group to do them.

    I have no problem with group only (or advised) activities in mmo's and I agree that people should know what they are getting into.

    But there are (usually) so many things to do in an mmo that not everything is about "grouping".
    Yeah wait a minute.  The original quote basically said that soloers had no business in an MMO.  Now that is changing to 'soloers shouldn't complain about group content'.  These are two entirely different things.

    I have been a soloer since midway through my time in EQ2 and not once have I complained that there shouldn't be group content, asking for more solo content, or asking for easier content.  That is like saying all raiders want is more raid content and screw the casual groupers - another statement that is patently false.

    I would think that people that like to group would love those of us that solo - we can't go after the group content very well and we pay to support the game.
  • Scott23Scott23 Member UncommonPosts: 293
    TENTING said:
    Scott23 said:
    TENTING said:
    None of us writing on this forums can be considered antisocial, we defy the very premise of antisocial when we engage in conversation.

     Maybe food for thought, I dont know. :)

    Actually I don't know about that.  I consider myself anti-social.

    In MMOs I will generally duo with my wife or solo if she isn't interested in playing.  In my case I like the challenge of doing things I'm not supposed to do.

    I have done as little 'real' grouping as possible since moving on from EQ/early EQ2 (except for the afore-mentioned spousal grouping :) ).

    While I will occasionally contribute to chat - usually to answer questions I tend to treat MMOs as single player games played online with a back drop of many people logged on.

    Anyway the point of this post (if there is a point, lol) is to show that there are other types of gamers out there that will play even if they don't meet the target demographic.

    Another point (on topic this time) is I don't mind LFG tools, but I'm not a big fan of porting to a dungeon for a speed run.

    I think you like people around you ;), looking at the rest of us running around, riding our fancy mounts, looking at people passing you when we all travel around.

     You might not be eager to talk to every single person on your way, but you are social in your way and time, when motivation and energy is there? Am I right?

    In my terminology social is not one set thing, its fluent, with people in all areas of the spectrum of social. A spectrum from within even the single individual can travel back and fourth from minute to minute or year to year.

     Some desire to speak to everyone they see, some just like the presence of others without the need to talk much. 

     Who decides what kind of social should be allowed and who should not, yeah Im well aware some will try to dictate who are and who is not, but these dictators, if they dont know the one end of the spectrum to the other end of the spectrum, then how good a judge are they really? 

    Being social, in my humble opinion, does not automatically mean that someone has to be the chatty, always raid and group ready kind. 

     But it is ok, if you believe you are antisocial and appreciate the solitude, I wont argue against you.
    But I think there is a social observer in there, one who just travel along, observes and have fun, while at the same time you obviously lend yourself to a community as a guide.

     Id call you social, you are just not the kind of social that require constant company to have a good time, its enough with just a quiet companion every now and then.

     I think (whispers) a lot of older gamers are right there with you, in fact I know so (but don't tell anyone or those out there starts screaming at us) ;)        
     

    Good points - under this definition I would say that I am social... just don't send me a blind group or guild invite and wonder why the answer is always 'no' :)

    I also think that you are probably right about the older gamers.  Our local group that all started in EQ do all still play MMOs, but they normally only group with each other if they group.  Of course I would never make a blanket statement to that effect ;)
  • delete5230delete5230 Member EpicPosts: 6,528
    Scott23 said:
    TENTING said:
    Scott23 said:
    TENTING said:
    None of us writing on this forums can be considered antisocial, we defy the very premise of antisocial when we engage in conversation.

     Maybe food for thought, I dont know. :)

    Actually I don't know about that.  I consider myself anti-social.

    In MMOs I will generally duo with my wife or solo if she isn't interested in playing.  In my case I like the challenge of doing things I'm not supposed to do.

    I have done as little 'real' grouping as possible since moving on from EQ/early EQ2 (except for the afore-mentioned spousal grouping :) ).

    While I will occasionally contribute to chat - usually to answer questions I tend to treat MMOs as single player games played online with a back drop of many people logged on.

    Anyway the point of this post (if there is a point, lol) is to show that there are other types of gamers out there that will play even if they don't meet the target demographic.

    Another point (on topic this time) is I don't mind LFG tools, but I'm not a big fan of porting to a dungeon for a speed run.

    I think you like people around you ;), looking at the rest of us running around, riding our fancy mounts, looking at people passing you when we all travel around.

     You might not be eager to talk to every single person on your way, but you are social in your way and time, when motivation and energy is there? Am I right?

    In my terminology social is not one set thing, its fluent, with people in all areas of the spectrum of social. A spectrum from within even the single individual can travel back and fourth from minute to minute or year to year.

     Some desire to speak to everyone they see, some just like the presence of others without the need to talk much. 

     Who decides what kind of social should be allowed and who should not, yeah Im well aware some will try to dictate who are and who is not, but these dictators, if they dont know the one end of the spectrum to the other end of the spectrum, then how good a judge are they really? 

    Being social, in my humble opinion, does not automatically mean that someone has to be the chatty, always raid and group ready kind. 

     But it is ok, if you believe you are antisocial and appreciate the solitude, I wont argue against you.
    But I think there is a social observer in there, one who just travel along, observes and have fun, while at the same time you obviously lend yourself to a community as a guide.

     Id call you social, you are just not the kind of social that require constant company to have a good time, its enough with just a quiet companion every now and then.

     I think (whispers) a lot of older gamers are right there with you, in fact I know so (but don't tell anyone or those out there starts screaming at us) ;)        
     

    Good points - under this definition I would say that I am social... just don't send me a blind group or guild invite and wonder why the answer is always 'no' :)

    I also think that you are probably right about the older gamers.  Our local group that all started in EQ do all still play MMOs, but they normally only group with each other if they group.  Of course I would never make a blanket statement to that effect ;)

    Many here will not agree but I think Vanilla World of Warcraft was the perfect mmo.  Maybe a year after release and several patches. EQ2 was the same, just that WoW was more user friendly.

    It really had an abundance of content for every type of player.  From extreme easy, easy, medium and hard for solo players.  And the same for group content......It covered the entire range !

    An mmo should do that, cover the entire spectrum.....problem is nothing does that at all anymore, even the classics are knocked down several pegs.  This leaves most with nothing at all to play.

     
  • kjempffkjempff Member RarePosts: 1,657
    You know you could argue that lacking a group finder makes a game less social because it makes players rely on the same tight group of people for everything, instead of meeting random new players.
    Tight bonds with fewer people is also being social, but at the same time you are not open to new people which is less social.
    So social can have several faces depending on how you look at it.
  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,012
    Lokero said:
    danwest58 said:
    Group Finders are one of the worst things that ever happened to MMORPGs.
    I wouldn't say group finders, I would say Automated Group Finders.  Having a tool where you could flag yourself for group content and others can browse for you is fine.  You still have to be Social and talk with people to join a group.  It also pushes you to make friends.  Automated Group Finders fucked MMOs.  
    I wonder how many of the people in this thread realize/remember that even good ol' Everquest had a primitive group-finder.
    It was definitely crude, but even so it played a HUGE part in finding people for groups.

    Later games simply took it too far(with the auto-joining and teleporting) as systems evolved in the genre.
    Yes today's LFD took grouping way too far.  Again I think a Flagging/Search system works well.  Let groups flag themselves looking for party members and what they are looking for.  This allows a player to search for a party.  Also allow players to flag themselves as looking for group so Parties can search for people.  If done right and the interface is easy to use there should be NO problem finding a group.  The Problem is everyone who seems to want a LFD tool want WOW.  It's time games stop being WOW.
  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,012
    gervaise1 said:
    danwest58 said:

    Grouping Centric MMORPGs do not work today because Developers spend $100+ Million on MMORPGs today, look at SWTOR, $250 Million, ESO is around $250 Million, Wildstar, and so on ALL are spending Hundreds of Millions of Dollars.  They HAVE TO be solo based games with Automated Group Finder tools.  WHY?  Because 100K or 250K subs will not pay the bills.  Pantheon is not going for a large budget MMO.  They will likely succeed and prove people wrong because everyone since WOW became a thing figured WOW was the new norm for MMORPGs.  Well none of succeed.  Yes FFXIV is doing well but that is mainly because how many FF fans there are.  
    We don't know game costs. A poster in another thread had much lower numbers. They were guesses as well. Simple enough to recognise that the cost to develop a game is a factor in the games long term financial health.

    And comments can be made about the games you list. Wildstar was heavily promoted as a group centric raid focused hard core old fashioned game. (Did I hit all the tight buttons?). SWTOR is touted by those who play as a group friendly game. ESO is not an "mmo that promotes solo play" - its a solo game and a co-op game and a group centred game. 

    And games don't have to be solo centric. Have you tried Respawn's Titanfall? Its mandatory group only. Star Wars Battle Field? You can solo but the biggest complaint against the game is its almost group only. Key points however: expensive successful titles and group centric.

    What developers have to do - easy to say very hard to do - is develop (and market) a game with a set of features that enough people will buy to allow them to recover their costs. However much they have spent.
    ESO, WildStart, and SWTOR all cost over $250 Million.  So they fucked themselves by having any group centric game play because they need to get every sale possible to recoup their investment.  If a MMORPG developer spends less on development they can get away with not having to need millions of subs.  Then they can cater to a niche group.  
  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,012
    Scambug said:
    Gdemami said:
    Phry said:
    Without a LFG tool in the game, it will force players to be more sociable
    How exactly do you force them to play the game and "socialize" instead of playing some other game...?
    You don't. Antisocial gamers who enjoy soloing everything shouldn't be playing MMOs in the first place, single player RPGs are made specifically for them why on earth do they come in MMOs and whine about the games not being soloable? It's dumb and selfish beyond belief.
    I hold the same belief.  IF you play an MMO you should be working on you social circle and not need a automated group finder.   This is something that has killed MMOs since WOTLK.  
  • Kayo83Kayo83 Member UncommonPosts: 399
    danwest58 said:

    I hold the same belief.  IF you play an MMO you should be working on you social circle and not need a automated group finder.   This is something that has killed MMOs since WOTLK.  
    I think group finders have gotten a shitty rep just because the tech started popping up at around the same time games were repeatedly dumbed down. IMO it doesnt make any sense that a simple server wide grouping feature that puts players together without requiring they stay in some popular hub would result in the non-sense we have now. Its much more likely that grouping is the mess it is now because dungeons are unbelievably easy, requiring little to no effort or coordination, and made to be done in 15-30 minutes.

    Sure, things like porting to dungeon doesnt help, but thats minor. At worst, porting just stops players from the "where are you" ... "who needs a port" conversations which, sure, serve as a decent ice breaker but very minor in the grand scheme. Also it devalues participating players, making them more expendable if a replacement can just port in within minutes. In actuality, the biggest culprit is the designs of the group content itself. Easy content = no coordination, more easily annoyed players with little to no tolerance for mistakes. 15 minute dungeons = "go go go" mentality, specially when coupled with farmable epics via participation tokens.

    On the other hand, Pantheon is a somewhat different game where you shouldnt expect to be able to do much on your own. Still, a same server group finder that simply puts players together based on roles, no porting, just a popup/chime informing players when the group is created, should suffice without taking away too much from the social game. I dont care how social you are or how awesome your guild is, there will be a time when no one you know will be available and willing to help, specially as content ages. Thats not fun, or even practical to require players waste who knows how long spamming random /who players who likely dont wan to be bothered at that time or stuck in town spamming LFG hoping 4-5 players of the correct class will bite.
  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,012
    Kayo83 said:
    danwest58 said:

    I hold the same belief.  IF you play an MMO you should be working on you social circle and not need a automated group finder.   This is something that has killed MMOs since WOTLK.  
    I think group finders have gotten a shitty rep just because the tech started popping up at around the same time games were repeatedly dumbed down. IMO it doesnt make any sense that a simple server wide grouping feature that puts players together without requiring they stay in some popular hub would result in the non-sense we have now. Its much more likely that grouping is the mess it is now because dungeons are unbelievably easy, requiring little to no effort or coordination, and made to be done in 15-30 minutes.

    Sure, things like porting to dungeon doesnt help, but thats minor. At worst, porting just stops players from the "where are you" ... "who needs a port" conversations which, sure, serve as a decent ice breaker but very minor in the grand scheme. Also it devalues participating players, making them more expendable if a replacement can just port in within minutes. In actuality, the biggest culprit is the designs of the group content itself. Easy content = no coordination, more easily annoyed players with little to no tolerance for mistakes. 15 minute dungeons = "go go go" mentality, specially when coupled with farmable epics via participation tokens.

    On the other hand, Pantheon is a somewhat different game where you shouldnt expect to be able to do much on your own. Still, a same server group finder that simply puts players together based on roles, no porting, just a popup/chime informing players when the group is created, should suffice without taking away too much from the social game. I dont care how social you are or how awesome your guild is, there will be a time when no one you know will be available and willing to help, specially as content ages. Thats not fun, or even practical to require players waste who knows how long spamming random /who players who likely dont wan to be bothered at that time or stuck in town spamming LFG hoping 4-5 players of the correct class will bite.
    Some of what you said is correct.  During WOTLK content became AOE 4 or 5 packs of mobs and keep moving on.  In WOTLK you seen skill levels of players drop down to AOE and max DPS Rotations and healer who could heal through stupid.  That didn't help at all and really killed the need to help other people.  

    LFD Did also play a role in killing the Social Aspect of the game though.  I know this was brought up in the WOD Blizzcon that people no longer are willing to wait for someone to even take 2 minutes to get a cup of coffee.  They just queue up and go.  I was saying nearly the same shit during WOTLK, my friends list became useless outside of my closes friends who played all the time.  Social ties I had to guild leaders of many guilds eroded because the game became too focused on making everyone happy and easy content.

    It also didnt help that LFD was cross server and people could queue and would be in a group in 5 to 10 minutes so why wait for someone.  


    As for server only LFD tools, SWTOR had that after launch and I can tell you I ran nearly 100 flashpoints and made no friends off it even though I tried.  The few people who did add me to their friends list Only did so to try to get me to join their guilds outside of that they wouldnt talk to me or try to group up with me for something else even though they wanted me as a Healer in their raid group.  They were the type that if you stopped playing for 2 weeks they would replace you, because they only wanted you around if you were going to help them right now.


    Another thing about same server LFD it also does not help people find groups that fit what they are looking for.  For example if you have a new player to the game and they are still learning, the LFD tool does not take into account it might add you to a group that has mostly high end raiders who do not want you there and will harass you.   No a system like I said where you can pick what you are looking for, your role and an explanation would end up getting you a FAR better group even if it takes you longer to find.  If this happens you have a greater chance of meeting more friends.

    The core problem with Pantheon is it is a group always game much like FFXI was, and yes has a core problem in the fact that some people will not find groups everytime they are on.  This is why Vanilla/TBC WOW was so popular.  Yea you might have a few easy group content quest in the world easy for people to get fairly fast help for 10 to 15 minutes and move on.   Dungeons were designed for you to not run daily multiple times a day.  They were designed that you put time aside to do.  Even if you had to schedule it a day or more ahead of time and yes even if you needed to find 1 more you would talk in trade or general chat for someone else.  But you would also say, learning party we are new to this instance.  Often times get someone learning it or doing it over for the 2nd or 3rd time and willing to work with new people.  Hell even the the hardcore players were able and willing to help because it was a social driven game not convenience based.  Hell that makes me think of the friends I made in Scion the only guild on my server to get into Naxx 1.0 and clear it.  I have friends in this guild that I helped out on countless times as a tank and healer yet I was in an average 40/20 man raiding guild.  I also had friends in leadership spots in nearly every raiding guild.

    You dont get to where I was as a player and leader with any kind of LFD tool.  A FFXIV Party Finder tool with more features, yep.  But not a LFD tool.

    Also let's add in that Blizzard developers during WOD and Yoshi-P in Square Enix's event have said that having any kind of hard content where a random group is put together does not work.  It is because Random grouping tools do not encourage socialization or communication in anyway, so if the boss requires communication the negative response will be overpowering.  Basically what it boils down to is Random groups cannot take on anything more challenging than hack n slash content.  

    I understand where you are coming from however the negatives of any LFD tool just hurts the game too much. 
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    I remember when WoW had like 8 million people playing, and no autogroup finding stuff.


  • AmatheAmathe Member LegendaryPosts: 7,483
    There seems to be a widely held belief that without group finder, players will walk up to other players and ask to group up to invade the haunted fortress on the outskirts of town. And in that conversation, they will bond and then go smoke some old Toby together outside the local Inn.

    Some will, sure.

    But many will form/join the type of huge, impersonal guilds we often see nowadays in GW2. Hundreds and hundreds of members. Nobody really knows anyone. Nobody cares. Guild chat is a LFG tool and little else.

    Some may see this as socializing, but I can't say I do.

    EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests

  • ForgrimmForgrimm Member EpicPosts: 2,996
    edited January 2017
    WoW has 2 different grouping tools. The LFD/LFR is the automated one that randomly groups you by role and ports you to the raid/dungeon and is used for casual content. Then there's the group finder tool, which you can use for organizing quest groups, dungeon runs, raids, etc. It doesn't port you to the instance and it doesn't randomly pick people. You set-up a group based on what you want to do, enter a title for people to browse, enter some info about what you're doing and what you're looking for, then you post it.

    Other people browsing the group finder can see your post and apply to the group, as well as leave a short message about their character. The leader then receives the invite request and decides to accept or reject. Everyone still has to manually make their way to the group. But it helps immensely for people running content like mythic dungeons, which can't be queued for via the LFD tool. And it's light years better than spamming a macro LFG message every 2 minutes.
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,987
    Kxelem said:
    Craft in a group you get higher tier items and you get more xp from it.  Harvest in a group you get higher tier mats and more xp from it.  Fish in a group you get higher tier mats and more xp from it.  Lots to do in a group setting :) 
    While in principle this sounds good, it just encourages people to bot.  Proximity has got to be important, otherwise you end up with a 'group' of people each acting and functioning independently, e.g., grouped but solo to get the 'bonus'.  Grouping should encourage, and even require, some degree of cooperative effort, not a series of independent activity.  Unless the urn you are crafting or the fishing pole is the size of a telephone pole, these are solo activities, not group actions.

    Original EQ1 had enough problems balancing XP between groups and solo.  The concept of a single mob is worth a finite number of XP causes problems when dividing this amount between multiple characters.  EQ1's solution (a totally unsatisfactory solution, in my opinion) was to add a modicum of bonus XP, from 1-to-10% for killing with a group.  For a group of 6, the experience per kill might be (baseXP * 1.10)/6.  A solo player always got baseXP (pets and charmed critters later took a substantial portion of this amount).  The theory was that the group could operate with less downtime than the solo player.  That wasn't always true, however.

    Along with waiting, these two ideas are things I really do not want to experience again.

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • BuccaneerBuccaneer Member UncommonPosts: 654
    IMO in this thread the LFG tool is getting a lot of blame for the limited social interactions which plague the more modern MMORPG.  I've used varying tools over the years, from chat channels to the dungeon finders and have had good and bad groups in all off the systems.

    I don't think the problem is the LFG/DF tool but more the content it is linked to.  In older games dungeons or good old fashion group camping had downtime, which gave the group loads of opportunity to socialise.  Grouping in modern MMO's now mostly consist of speed runs with minimal downtime, which is having the negative impact of the social aspects of grouping.  It will not matter if your group is formed in chat or auto grouped; if the content allows the players to rush through it, your still be lucky to just get a hello once in the dungeon.  Bringing back the downtime within dungeons or camping and making the content interesting and rewarding to explore will bring back (IMO) the missing social aspect of old MMO's.

    I prefer to see a robust grouping tool with options to help tailor the group without the dungeon finder aspect.  I wouldn't mind seeing quick travel to the dungeon once in the same zone as the entrance.  I don't think there is nothing wrong with allowing a little bit of convenience to aid groups getting to the action a little bit quicker.
  • HrimnirHrimnir Member RarePosts: 2,414
    Mendel said:
      


    Original EQ1 had enough problems balancing XP between groups and solo.  The concept of a single mob is worth a finite number of XP causes problems when dividing this amount between multiple characters.  EQ1's solution (a totally unsatisfactory solution, in my opinion) was to add a modicum of bonus XP, from 1-to-10% for killing with a group.  For a group of 6, the experience per kill might be (baseXP * 1.10)/6.  A solo player always got baseXP (pets and charmed critters later took a substantial portion of this amount).  The theory was that the group could operate with less downtime than the solo player.  That wasn't always true, however.

    Along with waiting, these two ideas are things I really do not want to experience again.

    Your experience was drastically different from most people's.  EQ's group and zone bonus XP setup was in my opinion one of if not the best that existed. It properly incentivized grouping and properly incentivized going into dungeons.

    With the exception of quad kiting druids and such, grouping was ALWAYS better XP than soloing, period, end of conversation.

    On top of all the XP bonuses, you actually had a chance at good gear.


    /mindboggled

    "The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."

    - Friedrich Nietzsche

Sign In or Register to comment.