Howdy, Stranger!

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

A good grouping game must create good groups

124»

Comments

  • AntiquatedAntiquated Member RarePosts: 1,415
    edited November 2015
    Kiyoris said:

    All MMO vets already know what makes a good grouping game, all EQ players already know.
    Actually, there is significant disagreement among mmo vets... And the other 98% of mmo players who did not play EQ as their first experience.

    Baffling, I'm sure. If the turn of the century is the only definition you'll accept, you're likely to be waiting for a very long time indeed, if not forever.

    That's a very provincial view of the topic you've got, though. Sure you don't want to chose FFXI instead? UO maybe? DAoC? SWG?
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    edited November 2015
    I have played a few games that I felt had good balance that encouraged grouping. complementry skills etc. 
    what ended up happening in those cases is that unless you found a group of friends you like and trust, people are more often then not just asshats. so it becomes more of a social problem than a game design problem

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Quizzical said:

    Making it so that any arbitrary set of players can group fine regardless of class is one way to get around required class problems.  But some games want to have combat mechanics that really don't allow that.  That's why I proposed an alternate solution for those games:  make alternate versions of dungeons (same map, different mob spawns) that assume different class composition.
    The question is .. is this a problem worth solving? If not enough players care, why should devs?
  • holdenhamletholdenhamlet Member EpicPosts: 3,756
    One of the things I enjoyed in ffxi was specializing in a specific role.  That wouldn't be important in the system you're proposing.

    I still believe you can have specialty roles and still have decent lfg times.

    FFXIV had a system in the queue where certain jobs got bonuses based on if they're needed or not.  I think that's a good system that could be improved further.

    Maybe a system where classes could do one main thing really well and a couple of other things kind of well.  2 dps that were half-healers would be as good as having a healer, or 2 healers that were half tank would be as good as having a tank.

    I just think there should be some semblance of specialization that remains in grouping games.  It makes you feel, well, special.
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 21,160
    Kiyoris said:
    Formula for a good grouping MMO:

    -trinity
    -slow meaningful strategic combat
    -well defined one-dimensional classes
    -restrictions to soloing
    -no mechanics that allow autogrouping
    -death penalty
    -slow travel

    basically, EQ

    It's not some mystery what makes a good grouping MMO.

    Everyone knows it. It's just that most MMO players today, are casuals.

    MMO players today, care more about flashy action, character customization, cash shops, and meaningless PVP, than actual RPG and solid PVE content.

    MMO players today, want easymode games like Black Desert where you can solo instead of a meaningful PVE game.

    "Look mom, we can all do DPS and spam healing potions" = today's MMO


    So basically, you want to chase away most of the players and hope that the few who remain figure out how to group with each other?

    Your points (1), (3), and (4) are to make it so that people have to group in order to play the game.  But they do nothing to help players actually find the group that they need.  Your points (5) and (7) actively make it harder for players to get a group.  Thus, you're pushing toward the lethal combination of:

    a)  you have to get a group to play the game, and
    b)  you can't get a group.

    That combination quickly leads to "you can't play the game".  Players figure this out pretty quickly and quit.  Fifteen years ago, there were far fewer options on the market, but today, very few people are going to be willing to spend half of their time trying to find a group.  Chasing away most of your potential players is a recipe for commercial disaster, so it shouldn't be surprising that developers shy away from this.

    Meanwhile, your points (2) and (6) have nothing to do with group versus solo.  That doesn't mean they're intrinsically bad in themselves (I don't want to derail this thread with the pros and cons of a hefty death penalty), but they do nothing to mitigate the problems created by your other preferences.
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,061
    Fantastic post, Quiz, as often.
    "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.

  • TalulaRoseTalulaRose Member RarePosts: 1,247
    Kyleran said:
    No, in the beginning there was tanking, DPS, Healing, Pulling, Buffing/debuffing, and crowd control.

    It got later dumbed down into the "Trinty."
    And then it became the GW2 model.....everyone can do everything....but we will change the names and no one will notice that there is only one class. The only difference being how well you do the same thing vs the person beside you.
  • VardahothVardahoth Member RarePosts: 1,472
    edited November 2015
    Best groups I had when there was a reason for it plain and simple.

    In ragnarok online, you wanted to kill boss monsters, you formed a group and went as a hunting party.

    In lineage 2, if you didn't like leveling for 3 minutes then resting for 10 minutes, form a party, level at better exp spots, do raids, pvp, ect, ect...

    There was no system to do it for you, you just got out, met people, and did it. There was no set numbers allowed to participate (except within 1 group, but you could form an unlimited raid party). There was no window to start picking people from to add to a group or listed groups. There was no rock to talk to in front of some instance and wait until some random joins your group. You just went to the town and started shouting/socializing to find groups. Based on the quality of players you would have a friends list and keep grouping with the same people who matched well for you.


    This lack of grouping is just another cause-and-affect from the casual solo play these games offer today.

    I Quit.

    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/436845/page/1 -> http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/436845/what-killed-mmorpgs-for-you/p1

    http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2316034
    .............
    Retired Gamer: all MMORPG's have been destroyed by big business, marketing of false promises, unprofessional game makers, and a generation of "I WIN and GIVE ME NOW" (brought to you by pokeman).

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Kyleran said:
    No, in the beginning there was tanking, DPS, Healing, Pulling, Buffing/debuffing, and crowd control.

    It got later dumbed down into the "Trinty."
    And then it became the GW2 model.....everyone can do everything....but we will change the names and no one will notice that there is only one class. The only difference being how well you do the same thing vs the person beside you.
    As long as play styles are different, what is the problem? Don't tell me you think melee dps, range dpes and pet dps all play the same?

    In fact, isn't it a good thing to get rid of role dependencies and replace that with play style varieties?

    Look at D3. Every class dps but they all play very differently. Heck, even just the wiz class can play different depending on whether you kite, channel, or melee. 
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772

    Vardahoth said:



    This lack of grouping is just another cause-and-affect from the casual solo play these games offer today.
    Or the cause-and-effect of the fact that much of the audience like casual solo play. 

    BTW, isn't the bigger market team pvp instanced games? You really can't claim that casual solo is the dominant play-style when (team) e-sports are big now. 
  • VardahothVardahoth Member RarePosts: 1,472
    edited November 2015

    Vardahoth said:



    This lack of grouping is just another cause-and-affect from the casual solo play these games offer today.
    Or the cause-and-effect of the fact that much of the audience like casual solo play. 

    BTW, isn't the bigger market team pvp instanced games? You really can't claim that casual solo is the dominant play-style when (team) e-sports are big now. 
    Your talking about moba's not mmo"rpg" games. And yes, instanced pvp killed games (it's in my sig) for me.

    I Quit.

    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/436845/page/1 -> http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/436845/what-killed-mmorpgs-for-you/p1

    http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2316034
    .............
    Retired Gamer: all MMORPG's have been destroyed by big business, marketing of false promises, unprofessional game makers, and a generation of "I WIN and GIVE ME NOW" (brought to you by pokeman).

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Vardahoth said:

    Vardahoth said:



    This lack of grouping is just another cause-and-affect from the casual solo play these games offer today.
    Or the cause-and-effect of the fact that much of the audience like casual solo play. 

    BTW, isn't the bigger market team pvp instanced games? You really can't claim that casual solo is the dominant play-style when (team) e-sports are big now. 
    Your talking about moba's not mmo"rpg" games. And yes, instanced pvp killed games (it's in my sig) for me.
    Not all instanced pvp games are MOBAs. For example, World of Tank is not a MOBA and in fact, classified as a MMOTPS here.

    And they don't kill games .. they only kill those you may like. 
  • VardahothVardahoth Member RarePosts: 1,472
    edited November 2015
    Vardahoth said:

    Vardahoth said:



    This lack of grouping is just another cause-and-affect from the casual solo play these games offer today.
    Or the cause-and-effect of the fact that much of the audience like casual solo play. 

    BTW, isn't the bigger market team pvp instanced games? You really can't claim that casual solo is the dominant play-style when (team) e-sports are big now. 
    Your talking about moba's not mmo"rpg" games. And yes, instanced pvp killed games (it's in my sig) for me.
    Not all instanced pvp games are MOBAs. For example, World of Tank is not a MOBA and in fact, classified as a MMOTPS here.

    And they don't kill games .. they only kill those you may like. 
    I never said they were, but I am saying all e-sports are on moba games. I don't see clans fighting at some castle siege in an mmorpg with thousands of crowds gathering to watch at a local center (in a real life location, not talking about from their moms basement). The only e-sports I see are off moba games.

    I Quit.

    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/436845/page/1 -> http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/436845/what-killed-mmorpgs-for-you/p1

    http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2316034
    .............
    Retired Gamer: all MMORPG's have been destroyed by big business, marketing of false promises, unprofessional game makers, and a generation of "I WIN and GIVE ME NOW" (brought to you by pokeman).

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Vardahoth said:

    I never said they were, but I am saying all e-sports are on moba games. I don't see clans fighting at some castle siege in an mmorpg with thousands of crowds gathering to watch at a local center (in a real life location, not talking about from their moms basement). The only e-sports I see are off moba games.
    Well, you are not paying attention then.

    http://mmos.com/editorials/the-biggest-esports

    MOBAs are indeed big .. but they are NOT the only ones. Out of the 8 cited in this "biggest e-sports" article, FIVE are NOT MOBAs. (To be fair, MOBAs did take the top 2 spots).
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    regarding the MOBA topic.

    Is it 'group gaming' in every sense of the word? yes
    does it provide evidence that it (group gaming) is in high demand? yes
    does it provide evidence that its MORE popular than solo gaming? no

    hope that helps

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,384
    Kyleran said:
    No, in the beginning there was tanking, DPS, Healing, Pulling, Buffing/debuffing, and crowd control.

    It got later dumbed down into the "Trinty."
    And then it became the GW2 model.....everyone can do everything....but we will change the names and no one will notice that there is only one class. The only difference being how well you do the same thing vs the person beside you.
    As long as play styles are different, what is the problem? Don't tell me you think melee dps, range dpes and pet dps all play the same?

    In fact, isn't it a good thing to get rid of role dependencies and replace that with play style varieties?

    Look at D3. Every class dps but they all play very differently. Heck, even just the wiz class can play different depending on whether you kite, channel, or melee. 
    You should try Ryzom, @nariusseldon.  Everyone can do everything, it's really just a matter of setting up your skills and wearing the right gear.

    Kiting isn't really a good mechanic for killing in groups.  It's much more suited to solo play, and this thread is about grouping.  Besides, kiting requires adequate space that isn't always available, depending upon the content design.

    The problem with getting rid of role dependencies is the loss of support roles.  Everyone can do everything, and entirely too much is AOE spamming -- healing or damage (I'm looking at you, Neverwinter).  This tends to make the support functions obsolete.

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

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Mendel said:


    Kiting isn't really a good mechanic for killing in groups.  It's much more suited to solo play, and this thread is about grouping.  Besides, kiting requires adequate space that isn't always available, depending upon the content design.

    The problem with getting rid of role dependencies is the loss of support roles.  Everyone can do everything, and entirely too much is AOE spamming -- healing or damage (I'm looking at you, Neverwinter).  This tends to make the support functions obsolete.
    nah .. kiting would be a GREAT mechanics for groups if people have to coordinate the kites. As for space .. if it can be done in instanced dungeons of D3, it can be done in any MMOs. And BTW, there are a lot more to DPS than just kiting.

    Melee, range, pet, AOE ... all play differently.

    And yes, getting rid of role dependencies is the loss of support roles .. but why is this a problem? People are complaining that support roles are not popular and hence cannot form groups. So getting rid of them is actually the solution. It is not like most people want to play support roles .. otherwise there won't be a shortage of healers. 
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 21,160
    Wizardry said:
    By content we mean what,linear questing or instancing?Bah crap gaming 101.

    All you need is grouping through camping and killing nothing more.Always people dropping from groups and the group needing replacements.Mentoring allows level barriers to be removed,so their really is no excuse if the game offers the idea behind grouping to be non stop.

    If your ONLY content for grouping is something. that takes a lot of organizing or waiting for a 24 man raid group,your wasting a lot of time.If all you need is a healer a tank and some 3-4 others,you really should not have too tough a time forming a group.

    The excuses i have always heard are usually BS,you can't tell me there is 5k people online and not several of each class to choose from.What i found is the people who were afraid to be proactive were the complainers.Well yeah imagine if the entire server was full of passive people,a group would never get started.

    That is why you need group reinforcement from very early levels so players become comfortable with it,you don't do like WOW and just group to Raid and  99% of the time everyone solos.It's like asking someone who has never skated before to play hockey.


    I'm not trying to say, this is what combat has to be like, or this is what your content has to consist of.  Quite the opposite, really.  By "group content", all that I really mean is "whatever it is that people create a group to do".  It could be raids, small group instanced dungeons, open world farming, or even non-combat activities.

    What I want is to let game designers make whatever group content they want to make, and then make it easy for players to get a group for that content.

    The usual problem with needing particular classes is that the mismatch means that you can't find one particular class.  I organized many dozens of groups in WoW back in Vanilla when the auto-matchmaker didn't exist, and later when it was basically a joke.  Finding people willing to join a group, and then waiting for everyone to get to the dungeon entrance could easily take half an hour on a good day.  Some people would join, then ignore the content and half an hour later, you kick them to get someone who might actually show up.  Sometimes you ask every single healer online of your faction on the entire server and in the reasonable level range and get not a single person willing to join.

    I put up with the hassle in WoW.  I'm not willing to put up with it any more--and indeed, that's one of the (many) reasons why I quit WoW.  I want to skip the half an hour to organize a group, but just get a group in a few minutes and go.  If a game could make it take half an hour to get a group, or take five minutes to get a group, what's the advantage to making it take half an hour?
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    Quizzical said:


    I put up with the hassle in WoW.  I'm not willing to put up with it any more--and indeed, that's one of the (many) reasons why I quit WoW.  I want to skip the half an hour to organize a group, but just get a group in a few minutes and go.  If a game could make it take half an hour to get a group, or take five minutes to get a group, what's the advantage to making it take half an hour?
    Don't worry ... most modern games are not going to make people "socialize" for 30 min just to form a group.
  • thinktank001thinktank001 Member UncommonPosts: 2,144
    Quizzical said:

    That combination quickly leads to "you can't play the game".  Players figure this out pretty quickly and quit.  Fifteen years ago, there were far fewer options on the market, but today, very few people are going to be willing to spend half of their time trying to find a group.  Chasing away most of your potential players is a recipe for commercial disaster, so it shouldn't be surprising that developers shy away from this.


    Except FFXI had all seven and was very successful.  

    I don't think most of the points you brought up really have any bearing on whether or not an MMORPG will make it in the past, present, or future.  As long as the production value is somewhat high and the MMORPG has a functional and working economy, then it has a chance of success.   
     
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,061

    Except FFXI had all seven and was very successful.  
     
    Question is, isn't that success only due to the popularity of the FF franchise, notably in Asia ?
    I mean, if you wanted to play a FF based MMORPG, you had NO choice.
    "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.

  • zekeofevzekeofev Member UncommonPosts: 240
    The solution is to let players play on multiple classes/roles.

    Why? This retains strong role mechanics in dungeons/raids which make group content better while also mitigating the fact that many players want to play dps in MMOs which leaves a shortage of tank and healer roles (and other roles in games that have an expanded trinity role system).

    FF14 does this decently, but perhaps not optimally. You can have multiple roles all leveled on one character so you can swap class as needed at the click of a button. However, you need to gear and level each class separately and when you queue, you queue as one role which does not alleviate queues (except for the bonus gold and xp offered for queueing as a role in need into the duty finder system).

    The only issue this causes is differences in player skill due to practice or desirability in the various roles.
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,772
    zekeofev said:


    Why? This retains strong role mechanics in dungeons/raids which make group content better while also mitigating the fact that many players want to play dps in MMOs which leaves a shortage of tank and healer roles (and other roles in games that have an expanded trinity role system).


    If people want to play DPS, how is letting them play multi-roles help? They will just choose DPS. Now you can already have multiple toons in multiple roles. I don't see that helping at all.

    It is much better to get rid of role-dependencies. You can choose to group, not to group, big group, small groups .. all options are now open. 
Sign In or Register to comment.