Howdy, Stranger!

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

EverQuest Next: How Do You Like to Group?

SBFordSBFord Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,126

The latest EverQuest Next Roundtable question has been posted that simply asks players their preferences for grouping when multiple players are required to complete content, for instance, in dungeons.

For content that requires multiple players to complete, such as a dungeon, how would you like to group up?


  • I only want to complete small group content with pre-formed groups.

  • I want the option to complete small group content with pre-formed groups or to be randomly matched up with other players.

  • The game should create groups based on matched user preferences or content needs.

Cast your vote on the EverQuest Next site.

image


¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 


«13

Comments

  • DamonVileDamonVile Member CommonPosts: 4,818

    Why would anyone not pick B ?

     

  • spawn12345spawn12345 Member UncommonPosts: 169
    Originally posted by DamonVile

    Why would anyone not pick B ?

     

    hardcore elitist.

    yeah those people that make most mmos die a horrible death and then they leave themselfs because there is no one else playing.

     

  • TygranirTygranir Member Posts: 741
    Originally posted by DamonVile

    Why would anyone not pick B ?

     

     I feel random matchmaking has led to the degradation of grouping quality. When players can be randomly grouped into parties, it removes the accountability for their behavior. I feel this has led to the quality of social behavior we currently experience in large scale MMOs.

    The reason EVE works so well is that it's social situation is conductive to personal accountability. If you decide to alienate others with your behavior, you will be very hard pressed to advance at a reasonable pace.

    This is just my opinion, and not factual, so please do not flame. I will not respond to any criticism that is neither constructive nor warrented.

    SWTOR Referral Bonus!
    Referral link
    7 day subscriber level access
    Returning players get 1 free server transfer

    Leveling assistance items given to new player!

    See all perks Here

  • KarteliKarteli Member CommonPosts: 2,646

    Regardless of how anyone votes, they will probably go with option "B".

     

    EQN is being designed into a console game and would need to be extremely simple, have an intuitive interface, and be very casual (just like the rest of the features this game offers).

     

     

     

     

    Want a nice understanding of life? Try Spirit Science: "The Human History"
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8NNHmV3QPw&feature=plcp
    Recognize the voice? Yep sounds like Penny Arcade's Extra Credits.

  • DamonVileDamonVile Member CommonPosts: 4,818
    Originally posted by Tygranir
    Originally posted by DamonVile

    Why would anyone not pick B ?

     

     I feel random matchmaking has led to the degradation of grouping quality. When players can be randomly grouped into parties, it removes the accountability for their behavior. I feel this has led to the quality of social behavior we currently experience in large scale MMOs.

    The reason EVE works so well is that it's social situation is conductive to personal accountability. If you decide to alienate others with your behavior, you will be very hard pressed to advance at a reasonable pace.

    This is just my opinion, and not factual, so please do not flame. I will not respond to any criticism that is neither constructive nor warrented.

    I hate pugging and almost never do it, but some games it works. I will take a premade group of friends into a dungeon any day over a random, but I can't always do that. They aren't always online when I have time to play. Asking in general chat is really no better than just a random assignment of people, a queue just lets you skip the LFM shouts.

    But all that being said if anyone ever asks me do you want A all the time B the choice to pick between a or c when you feel like it or C all the time....I'll pick B every time.

  • fantasyfreak112fantasyfreak112 Member Posts: 499
    I like how EQN marketed being the biggest sandbox ever but makes every decision to appeal to the masses. This will end up being WoW Next or Guild Wars Next because so far the round table results are pointing the game in exactly that direction.
  • KanethKaneth Member RarePosts: 2,283
    Originally posted by fantasyfreak112
    I like how EQN marketed being the biggest sandbox ever but makes every decision to appeal to the masses. This will end up being WoW Next or Guild Wars Next because so far the round table results are pointing the game in exactly that direction.

    Ironically, I get the feeling that the Landmark game will be a bigger success overall than the traditional mmo game. 

  • theniffrigtheniffrig Member UncommonPosts: 351
    How about making the players walk to a dungeon & meet people outside of it or in a nearby tavern who also want to go into the dungeon & then just group up that way? Anything that makes the MMO an MMO and not some lobby based loading screen fest.
  • TibernicuspaTibernicuspa Member UncommonPosts: 1,199
    Originally posted by DamonVile

    Why would anyone not pick B ?

     

    For people who don't want dungeons to be tucked away little instances that you get matched up for like an FPS round??

    The options on this poll paint a bleak picture. Dungeons are going to be instanced scripted affairs, not big sprawling places that you can explore and dynamically form a group or continue solo in.

  • VidirVidir Member UncommonPosts: 963
    You should not have to group at all.
  • TibernicuspaTibernicuspa Member UncommonPosts: 1,199
    Originally posted by Kaneth
    Originally posted by fantasyfreak112
    I like how EQN marketed being the biggest sandbox ever but makes every decision to appeal to the masses. This will end up being WoW Next or Guild Wars Next because so far the round table results are pointing the game in exactly that direction.

    Ironically, I get the feeling that the Landmark game will be a bigger success overall than the traditional mmo game. 

    Yeah with every dev video the EQ folks go

     

    "Yeah, it seems a clear majority wants the game to be more like EQ1 and that's cool.. we think EQ1 was great! But... we're going to make it a themepark game instead.

  • azarhalazarhal Member RarePosts: 1,364

    The only thing that question tells me is that EQNext is going to be a full themepark MMO with a LFDungeons, in turn it means that they lied about the game having no instances, limited fast travel and not being for the mass (said by Georgeson a bit before the August reveal in an interview).

    I'm starting to think that the August reveals was just them trying to get the more hardcore crowd that is starving for a game to spread the hype online than do a 180 degree turn in marketing to show the full glory of their WoW-clone with gimmicky voxel and AI.

  • purpherbpurpherb Member Posts: 6

    As crazy as it may seem to most of the people here, there is a community of people who want a different experience in an MMO. They don't want a game where no one communicates and soloing is the norm until you hit the couple times where you mindlessly run a dungeon with random players. If thats what you want than nearly every MMO out now has that so why do you insist that every new MMO adopt these policies. People on this site act like they are being victimized when a MMO does not cater to their playstyle when in reality they are ruining the MMO scene by asking for watered down, boring systems. If you want to play WoW than play it, it exists. But if you want to try something new than stop suggesting they add in systems that literally almost every MMO in the decade has.

    MMORPG's used to have great communities because the game was designed to foster group play. Pressing a button and automatically creating an optimal group is not the same experience as asking players around you to group up together. And stop saying that a game should simply offer both experiences and than everyone will be happy because that is not true. Players are going to play the game how it is designed to be played. It is not simply a matter of how hard you try to talk to other players, the community will depend on the systems of the MMO.

    It is ridiculous how people start off the thread accusing people that don't want B to be elitists. There are people who have experienced MMO's that offered so much more than the crap that we get to play today and there is a large group of people lurking on this site hoping that something can improve upon the old games they got addicted to. But as we have seen over and over again, these developers will pander to each type of player and than release the same rehashed crap. And each time a system is released that players deem 'hardcore', people will moan how they are the victim because they cant play the game how they want tom play it. People are seriously idiots and don't even see how they are helping to create the crap is the modern MMO market.

  • SabbicatSabbicat Member UncommonPosts: 290
    My preference is to be grouped together. Its much more fun than being grouped apart.
  • JustsomenoobJustsomenoob Member UncommonPosts: 877

    This is a game where the dungeons aren't really all instanced content though isn't it?

    I know the game doesn't share a lot in common with EQ 1, but in EQN this seemed more like an /ooc LFG kinda deal.  

  • Aldous.HuxleyAldous.Huxley Member, Newbie CommonPosts: 418
    If everyone wasn't racing to end game, they wouldn't mind taking a bit of time & social interaction to form a group during the 'leveling' process in 'modern' MMO's.

    If these games were more about the virtual world & the journey & less about end game (whatever that actually means), players wouldn't really notice or mind what is often referred to as 'time sinks' in MMO's.

    Where's the beef? Where's the real content? Who am I? Why am I here?

    Whatever...
  • fantasyfreak112fantasyfreak112 Member Posts: 499

    Here we go,

    If you aren't willing to travel across a few areas, get a group together and chat about tactics you don't deserve the loot in the dungeon. Instant gratification has all but killed both immersion and the genre itself.

    If I hand you1000 gold for free tell me how much it means to you compared to if you crafted for days on end to earn that 1000 gold. If you get loot or max level with no effort it means about as much to you as being lv 1 and naked does. Learn this and vote accordingly.

  • nuttobnuttob Member Posts: 291
    I want to be able to group and solo every way possible.  I don't get why people complain about random matching.  If you don't like it, make sure you are in a large guild, and grouping almost is never a problem. I also don't think random matching has destroyed socializing.  Once again, join a good guild, and there are a bunch of people in it ready to be friendly, group up, and have a great time.  Every MMO I have played is that way.  All this talk about socialization going down the drain seems silly to me...
  • fantasyfreak112fantasyfreak112 Member Posts: 499
    Originally posted by nuttob
    I want to be able to group and solo every way possible.  I don't get why people complain about random matching.  If you don't like it, make sure you are in a large guild, and grouping almost is never a problem. I also don't think random matching has destroyed socializing.  Once again, join a good guild, and there are a bunch of people in it ready to be friendly, group up, and have a great time.  Every MMO I have played is that way.  All this talk about socialization going down the drain seems silly to me...

    Wrong, random matching kills the social aspect of grouping and large guilds will all just random match anyways and drop group as soon as the boss dies. You need to build a game that encourages socializing or we can just continue to recycle terrible communities like WoW and GW2 where you mine as well be playing solo with alot of angry bots running around.

  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,934

    I'm not a huge fan of formal grouping or instanced dungeons if I have a choice. I would rather see old school public dungeons like they were presented in Lineage. People helped each other there and shared rewards. You didn't have to "form a group".

    Groups are okay for the private chat aspect, but formal grouping feels very forced and contrived to me.

    The zone event finder in Rift is sort of cool but less of an LFG tool and more of an instant teleport to the action.

    If the game needs a grouping tool then that signals to me that content will be designed with contrived roles in mind and scripted preset ways of completing it. I don't mind that for some games, but I hoped this game would depart from that more.

    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • Fly666monkeyFly666monkey Member UncommonPosts: 161
    ~70% in favor of a PUG system. Something tells me the old guard are not going to get what they want this time.
  • xAPOCxxAPOCx Member UncommonPosts: 869
    Originally posted by Fly666monkey
    ~70% in favor of a PUG system. Something tells me the old guard are not going to get what they want this time.

    They were never goin to get what they wanted in the first place. 

    image

  • muffins89muffins89 Member UncommonPosts: 1,585
    Originally posted by fantasyfreak112
    I like how EQN marketed being the biggest sandbox ever but makes every decision to appeal to the masses. This will end up being WoW Next or Guild Wars Next because so far the round table results are pointing the game in exactly that direction.

    Landmark is the sandbox.  Next has always been a themepark.

  • xAPOCxxAPOCx Member UncommonPosts: 869
    Originally posted by muffins89
    Originally posted by fantasyfreak112
    I like how EQN marketed being the biggest sandbox ever but makes every decision to appeal to the masses. This will end up being WoW Next or Guild Wars Next because so far the round table results are pointing the game in exactly that direction.

    Landmark is the sandbox.  Next has always been a themepark.

    Wrong. Next was always marketed at the next huge sandbox. I wont bother linking the many quotes from those over at SOE that said it.

    image

  • AldersAlders Member RarePosts: 2,170

    The more important question is how grouping will actually work combat and interdependence wise.

    If i see anymore of this 4-man party size nonsense, i think I'm going to lose it.

Sign In or Register to comment.