Home › Miscellaneous › LFGame
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
LFG w/ Forced Grouping
I am looking for a game that requires players to group up from an early level, such as Everquest was before the advent of hirelings. One or two soloable classes would be fine as long as the majority of players are unable to solo in order to advance. Someone mentioned Final Fantasy XI and DAoC in another thread, and I was just curious (since I have not played either one) if those are in fact forced-grouping games, and if anyone knows of any other ones I could check out, it would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Comments
AoC - Tyranny server there is your forced grouping.
Actually if you haven't played it yet, give Conan a go and really Tyranny wise it's FFA PvP so to survive long enough to do a quest in some places grouping is the only way to be productive. /halfjokingbut
Thanks, Aericyn. I have played AoC and basically soloed up to level 55 before I quit.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
I played FFXI back 2003 for 3 months and you can forget about doing anything solo in FFXI except grinding on green con mobs that net you like no xp. Not sure how much it has changed since then, but from what I hear that hasn't really changed on the forced grouping thing.
The problem with most forced grouping games is that you can waste a lot of time just trying to find a group, havn't seen a single one that didn't suffer from hours wasted just looking.
But, Soul of the Ultimate Nation is pretty group reliant with it's self labeled "Party Required" instances, which are mostly needed to complete to unlock the next set of quests, these start popping up pretty soon at around lv7.
As of now the game suffers pretty badly because of this setup, but the good news is that they are releasing a new class in the next day or two, so now or soon would be a good a time as any to start, all the lower level areas will be prettty packed once they release it.
FFXI is forced grouping, tho I couldnt recomend starting that game right now with ffxiv around the corner. I would say keep an eye on ffxiv if you can do without pvp. It releases around the end of september. From what I have heard its going to be a strong grouping game.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI
EQ most classes could solo up until PoP expansion. Druid, Enchanter, Bard, Wizard, Necromancer, Shadow Knight etc. Only classes that had difficulties was warriors rogues and clerics. Same with DaoC. Most of the classes in DaoC could solo to max level.
I have yet to see a game where you couldn't solo at all.
Yeah XI is as group based as it gets, but its hard to find low level people to group with at this point in it's lifespan. The game is very top-heavy.
XIV will be quite group heavy, although not in the same scale as XI. The game is clearly designed with group play in mind.
Not sure why all MMOs are not made to force grouping in order to be productive for all classes. After all, the whole genre is based upon the creation of servers that allow people from all over to play together. If you want to solo then there are games like Dragon Age to handle that for you.
The beauty of MMO games that are forced-group is that you respected the world so much more as your life is always in peril if you traveled alone. Most new games the outdoors is so solo-friendly that you basically just travel freely across the zones and whatever you encounter you can kill if you are in a level-appropriate zone. You can level from 1-50 without ever having to group. To me, that is nonsense.
Developers need to realize that relying on others is critical to a game's success. If a player can level up solo as easy as it would be to do in a group then they are more likely to find the game boring or not challenging and leave. If they are forced to group, however, they are more likely to make more connections with other players, have more fun interacting and develop friendship and loyalties that will motivate them to keep playing and keep their subs active.
I was serious with a PvP server suggestion though, the PvP dynamic in Conan was great for groups. (if you let it be, many folks took it too serious and hurt their play exp)
Sieges were some of the best times I had in a PvP game, both defense and offense. Siege groups needed great leaders and followers to win. Some of the end game raids were the toughest (learning curve) things I went through since EQ (Velious days) But I am no end game pro in any MMO.
I know Conan is not all roses and you can solo PvE content through max, I did with 2 characters at least.
Were you on PvP or PvE?
Far as a true group only game on PvE the only released one I can think of is FF11 - but it was long ago and I suppose that may have changed. Eve Online would be the other one where to really experience all it has to offer you want to group often and with the same folks.
I get tired of hearing this... Playing together doesn't just mean grouping together.
Anyway this has been talked to the point ad nauseum... and isn't the point of the thread.
DAOC - no. I have a few maxed out toons there. Grouping is not required. You can solo most of the game. Now that they have tasks dungeons it is even easier to solo. If you play a pure healer, then yes you'll have a hard time leveling but it's not impossible. Grouping makes it go faster, but it's not required. If you do the epic quests those will require a group.
City of Heroes/Villians can be soloed. However, they do have TaskForce missions that are popular. Those require a group to even accept the mission. You can normally find groups doing those. If you play a defender type class you'd probably get group invites all day. I can speak to that because I re-activited my account about a month ago.
I was on a PvP server, playing as an Assassin. I think I might try out FFXIV when it comes out, though. I'm not really comfortable jumping into an older game such as FFXI or DAoC, as I know from playing Everquest how hard they can be to get into, especially since the majority of players are max level and the archaic controls and interfaces.
As some have stated, the main drawback of group dependent gaming is waiting for groups to form. And honestly, I do not have a lot of time to play, so devoting a large chunk to waiting around will be disappointing, but I think it would be worth it over the long run. I think a developer could make group dependent games with little wait time, but am oblivious to how that would work. Thank you all for the suggestions and discussion.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
That was not my experience at all with regards to soloing in EQ. I found only Necromancers and Druids could really solo effectively. Wizards and Bards could solo at higher levels (and even quad kite), but you had to be pretty good and lucky to be effective at it. Never heard of SK soloing at all.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Forced? dont know. City of Heroes has many classes that are hard to solo and a lot of content that is (or can be made with the difficulty slider) hard to solo. People group a lot as a result. Big Xpac coming out in a few weeks too.
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
That might be interesting. I never have played the game, but I may give it a shot. Thanks for the suggestion.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Sure.
Some things to note:
People very often do use the LFG tool. Etiquite is a little different there, you will likely get blind invites if you flag yourself as looking for group.
You can temporarily raise or lower your level (sidekicking, and exemplaring) so you may well find teams of varying levels.
Mission XP is automatically shared. You don't have to have the mission to get most rewards.
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
I've always liked the idea of sidekicking. I'm surprised more games do not incorporate such a feature.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
So far we have:
Soul of the Ultimate Nation
FFXI
CoX
There's probably others. I can't bring myself to look through that games list though.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Ever since they introduced field guide books in FFXI it has gotten way easier and quite soloable so I personally wouldn't say its that forceful on grouping any longer. I would agree on Soul of the Ultimate Nation to a point, those party/group missions are a bitch to solo if ya not high enough, ie at least 5 levels above the mobs, which then is kinda pointless to do except for item rewards. Other than that, all I can think of is as most have said, Everquest 1 or Vanguard, I found Vanguard was somewhat a pain to solo so I would say its somewhat forceful, many say Vanguard is how Everquest 2 should have been since its difficulties are similar to that of Everquest 1. Oh and Dungeons and Dragons Online is quite group orientated, certainly wouldn't wanna try Elite solo at mid levels heh x.x
Yeah, I forgot about D&D. I've only played it a little bit, but I've heard its is very group reliant. Thanks again for everyone's suggestions.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.