The style which might work would be a game where grouping was as effortless as it is in League of Legends (so effortless you probably didn't consider LoL's gameplay "grouping" until I mentioned it.)
"might work"?
It does work .. LoL, WoT, CS, even WoW ... lobby one click grouping is quite popular, i will have to say. LoL clearly is NOT harmed by it.
First, I take "can work" as a title that can support itself and a reasonable update schedule over the course of its life. Assuming a title or theorized idea "can't work" because it doesn't/couldn't bring in hundreds of thousands of people is a bad argument IMO.
I think a forced group MMO can prosper long term as long as there are mechanics to keep the majority of players playing together. Systems such as strait leveling that fracture the playerbase is playing with fire IMO. Finding ways to benefit players playing together, regardless of level (if there are levels) or standing, like the sub jobs of FF can fix this however.
In short, as long as it's easy to play with others having an MMO focused around grouping can definitely work IMO. Not only that, having codependence on others heightens the chance of social connections, which can keep players playing a title longer, fostering playerbase stability.
I am pretty sure that "forced" is a 4-Letter word in the mmo community.
Nobody likes to be forced to do anything, but freedom comes at a cost.
"Forced" just describes the way the game is played. Chess is a "forced strategy" game. If you don't like strategic play, you're not going to play it. But that doesn't make it a bad game.
People in this thread seem to think WoW has achieved the ultimate formula of offering everything. It does offer a lot, but because it does, almost all of it sucks balls.
The solo content sucks, the grouping content is sparse, the pvp is unbalanced because the focus is on PVE. That's all not to mention the game is freaking ancient in video-game terms, so the graphics and the combat system are terrible.
I too would love an all-in-one MMO that offered the best of everything, but I'm far past believing that's possible.
Since it's not, I'd like to see MMOs focus on the different things MMO's have to offer. WoW has the solo content covered- we don't need any more solo-centric MMOs. What the community could use is an MMO that focuses on grouping for pve and one that focuses on grouping for pvp.
Back to chess- one could argue, "I don't need chess, WoW has combat pets- that's kind of strategic gameplay!" Well, sure it's kind of strategic, but compared to chess it's piss-balls.
And any attempts at making a forced grouping game have not failed, ever.
The opposite is true for forced-soloing games (or what you would call "optional grouping" games). Most of them have failed.
Moving goalposts. "Failure" is never defined, but appears to be verrrrry flexible, as spin requires.
Mkay, then tell us a few examples of any "forced" grouping games in the last, say, decade.
I await your response from this movie theater with forced seating.
Whooo, you moved them again! Good for you, you're learning how to master this!
Nice, using references to a fallacy to perpetrate another fallacy. I don't have anything on you!
I literally dumped concrete around the goalposts, sport.
No, you introduced a new variable. "in the last decade," again, in an effort to "win" by changing the parameters. Does 'in the last decade' matter? No, but it's clearly unassailable. So, yay, you win!
Speaking of fallacy, you're clearly familiar with "Shifting the burden of evidence."
Good try, Scooter. /popcorn
----
Now let's get back to defining "failed," the value judgement on which so much of this thread hinges.
In what ways were FFXI and EQ not failures? Financially they've certainly been eclipsed a dozen times. They're getting eclipsed today by phone aps.
We know how badly they got buried if you judge by subscriptions. That must still sting.
Watching their hard-core die hard player audiences drift away to other titles? Yep, that happened.
All that's left appears to be 'way back when' nostalgia.
Holden claims no forced grouping title has ever failed. We need to define failure, apparently. Is it just an "everybody knows" sort of thing?
Or does it need that very careful date bracketing spin "look back ten years, but not fifteen!" in order to work?
---
"If "everybody knows" such-and-such, then it ain't so, by at least ten thousand to one."--RAH
It does work .. LoL, WoT, CS, even WoW ... lobby one click grouping is quite popular, i will have to say. LoL clearly is NOT harmed by it.
Yes, "might work". Because for every game that makes it work there are a bunch of other games that fail to make it work because they're just bad games.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
It does work .. LoL, WoT, CS, even WoW ... lobby one click grouping is quite popular, i will have to say. LoL clearly is NOT harmed by it.
Yes, "might work". Because for every game that makes it work there are a bunch of other games that fail to make it work because they're just bad games.
You can say that for anything in a game.
Several games that require groups are dominating at the top 10 of MMO revenue charts.
In EQ the majority of people preferred to group, yet there were a good number of solo players (mainly Necros) that mainly liked to solo and they were pretty good at it. Soloing EQ required actually a good sets of personal skills that not everyone had. Everyone else preferred groups because it was just more convenient, and in my opinion more fun. Listening to other people bullshit while we were playing was priceless for me.
There also hasn't been a new game resembling those of the first gen in over a decade.
There hasn't been a car like a first generation Ford Mustang since 1973.
Why ?
Simple. Modern cars are much more reliable, faster, much much safer, pollute much less and use less fuel too. They also have many comfort elements that didn't even exist back then.
Apply that to MMORPGs, and it works too.
No one but a very small group of nostalgia struck old players want to go back to those tedious and boring grind games with boring downtime mechanics and forced grouping. And you can be sure that among those who ask for such a game to be made today thinking they will play it, most would have quit after a couple of months, realizing that actually, that MMO model sucked, and also that they don't have the kind of time to invest waste in such a game anymore.
Proof being that all the games who attempted to emulate those old, tedious and boring mechanics since 2004 have all failed. Because players, even old timers like me and many others, know better now. And given the choice, which they didn't have back then, they will play a FUN game where they aren't forced into one specific play style.
But that's not really what happened.
To be accurate to the MMORPG scene... you had Toyota Camry sell so much better than any other car and every car made their version of Toyota Camry exclusively. People want updated versions of Mustangs and Camaros with all the latest features and high performance engines. Not just drive generic family car X based off the Camry.
Translanted into the MMORPG genre we want games like EQ or UO with updated graphics, mechanics and usability. Some of us want more hardcore. Just not the generic WoW clone where you know what's going to happen before you play it.
To be accurate to the MMORPG scene... you had Toyota Camry sell so much better than any other car and every car made their version of Toyota Camry exclusively. People want updated versions of Mustangs and Camaros with all the latest features and high performance engines. Not just drive generic family car X based off the Camry.
Not accurately at all. Many exit MMORPG scenes and go with other types of online games like shooters and MOBAs.
In your analogy, that is like people go drive SUVs, electric cars, and even just ride public transportation.
Not liking Camry does not mean one has to go back to Mustangs.
To be accurate to the MMORPG scene... you had Toyota Camry sell so much better than any other car and every car made their version of Toyota Camry exclusively. People want updated versions of Mustangs and Camaros with all the latest features and high performance engines. Not just drive generic family car X based off the Camry.
Not accurately at all. Many exit MMORPG scenes and go with other types of online games like shooters and MOBAs.
In your analogy, that is like people go drive SUVs, electric cars, and even just ride public transportation.
Not liking Camry does not mean one has to go back to Mustangs.
And many exit the MMORPG scene because they're largely unserved by the MMORPG genre. Majority of my MMORPG circle stop playing almost entirely. Many are looking towards the newer more niche games that are trying to incorporate older play style.
The point was that in my scenario that the market suddenly went unservered. Other types if MMORPG didn't make it out of 2004 but majority of the clones did no better or worst than those games did in a smaller market.
To be accurate to the MMORPG scene... you had Toyota Camry sell so much better than any other car and every car made their version of Toyota Camry exclusively. People want updated versions of Mustangs and Camaros with all the latest features and high performance engines. Not just drive generic family car X based off the Camry.
Not accurately at all. Many exit MMORPG scenes and go with other types of online games like shooters and MOBAs.
In your analogy, that is like people go drive SUVs, electric cars, and even just ride public transportation.
Not liking Camry does not mean one has to go back to Mustangs.
And many exit the MMORPG scene because they're largely unserved by the MMORPG genre. Majority of my MMORPG circle stop playing almost entirely. Many are looking towards the newer more niche games that are trying to incorporate older play style.
The point was that in my scenario that the market suddenly went unservered. Other types if MMORPG didn't make it out of 2004 but majority of the clones did no better or worst than those games did in a smaller market.
That is the point .. you do not know if the market went under-served. How do you know the market is not well served by MOBAs, shooters, CCGs and other online games?
After people exit MMORPG (guess there is no disagreement here), they don't have to be under-served, or wait for niche MMORPGs .. they can forget MMORPGs and play other online games. How do you know the bulk of the players did not just do that?
LoL .. clearly is dominating (#1) and it is forced grouping. Aside from LoL, WoT, CSO and DOTA2 also require groups.
So 4 out of top 10 require grouping. You don't think grouping is popular?
My statement was that streamlined grouping might work. The alternative would be an absolute statement: "streamlined grouping always works". That absolute statement would be wrong, because there are examples of streamlined grouping failing to work in some less successful games.
Nothing I said implied grouping wasn't popular, so that's just your own straw man.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
LoL .. clearly is dominating (#1) and it is forced grouping. Aside from LoL, WoT, CSO and DOTA2 also require groups.
So 4 out of top 10 require grouping. You don't think grouping is popular?
My statement was that streamlined grouping might work. The alternative would be an absolute statement: "streamlined grouping always works". That absolute statement would be wrong, because there are examples of streamlined grouping failing to work in some less successful games.
Nothing I said implied grouping wasn't popular, so that's just your own straw man.
no .. your statement is, and i quote "Right you can and should make careful, truthful statements rather than use reckless absolutism" .. implying that my statement is not truthful.
To be accurate to the MMORPG scene... you had Toyota Camry sell so much better than any other car and every car made their version of Toyota Camry exclusively. People want updated versions of Mustangs and Camaros with all the latest features and high performance engines. Not just drive generic family car X based off the Camry.
Not accurately at all. Many exit MMORPG scenes and go with other types of online games like shooters and MOBAs.
In your analogy, that is like people go drive SUVs, electric cars, and even just ride public transportation.
Not liking Camry does not mean one has to go back to Mustangs.
And many exit the MMORPG scene because they're largely unserved by the MMORPG genre. Majority of my MMORPG circle stop playing almost entirely. Many are looking towards the newer more niche games that are trying to incorporate older play style.
The point was that in my scenario that the market suddenly went unservered. Other types if MMORPG didn't make it out of 2004 but majority of the clones did no better or worst than those games did in a smaller market.
That is the point .. you do not know if the market went under-served. How do you know the market is not well served by MOBAs, shooters, CCGs and other online games?
After people exit MMORPG (guess there is no disagreement here), they don't have to be under-served, or wait for niche MMORPGs .. they can forget MMORPGs and play other online games. How do you know the bulk of the players did not just do that?
Those players didn't suddenly disappear. The fact is that WoW's market sized dwarfed the rest of the genre 26 times over. This caused the perception that if you create a game like WoW you will approach WoW numbers.
The previous market average mainstream MMORPG were in the 250k to 500k range before 2004. The post 2004 average MMORPG is in the 250k to 500k even free. Meaning despite chasing the gold of WoW the average MMORPG still brought in around the same numbers. While chasing the goal of WoW almost all development in other type of MMORPG stopped instantaneously.
A person like me who wants a UO experience is not playing MOBA or shooters or whatever for that experience. I do play other games but that choice is for its own reason. It doesn't cure my MMORPG itch.
no .. your statement is, and i quote "Right you can and should make careful, truthful statements rather than use reckless absolutism" .. implying that my statement is not truthful.
Now you agree my statements are truthful?
I never claimed they weren't. Clearly I meant the vague non-specific "you" there. You can replace it with "one can and should make careful, truthful statements" if it helps you.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I believe what he is talking about is both innovation and complexity. This is something that isn't likely to happen in what is quickly becoming and old technology. Once rules and guide lines are in place in terms of what people want you don't have much room for innovation. Most of the early innovation in games came from people having the freedom to experiment with their own ideas instead of collecting data to find out what other people wanted. There was a much more limited precedent for data collection and analysis. These days that seems to be all people do in their computer related jobs.
I believe what he is talking about is both innovation and complexity. This is something that isn't likely to happen in what is quickly becoming and old technology. Once rules and guide lines are in place in terms of what people want you don't have much room for innovation. Most of the early innovation in games came from people having the freedom to experiment with their own ideas instead of collecting data to find out what other people wanted. There was a much more limited precedent for data collection and analysis. These days that seems to be all people do in their computer related jobs.
Experimenting with their own ideas is not as efficient as collecting data if the goal is to please a large audience.
If you are a dev, do you want to know what the audience like (data) or do you want to spend time to make 10 prototypes to test them out?
If you are a dev, do you want to know what the audience like (data) or do you want to spend time to make 10 prototypes to test them out?
There's no automatic answer to that question, given that Angry Birds was the result of a developer making 51 prototypes ("The Heds had developed 51 titles before Angry Birds.")
Several companies are built on a model of making a lot of experimental games to see what sticks. These companies don't work on giant, crushingly expensive MMOs, but the experimentation model is a viable game business model.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
It's true, but I think there's a substantial market for it. All forced grouping MMOs were successful ~
City of Heroes. Despite it having one of the first lfg tools, (which was simply a modified /who system that allowed you to add extra information.) I often found myself waiting around for a few hours to find something to do. Probably because I stuck to my guns with Empathy instead of hopping aboard the Pain Domination train. When you look back at it CoH barely lasted 8 years. That being said you could also say that 8 years is a success, and to that I would point out that Warhammer Online lasted 5 years. Do the extra 3 years make a difference?
I still liked CoH, however not being able to do anything on your own kinda sucked.
Moreover DFO competes with WoW, and that's definitely a "solo" game.
FFXI had this problem too.
Certain jobs, or at certain times, it was more difficult to find a group.
That's why I've been saying all along: MMOs have learned a dozen ways to mitigate this problem.
Level-sync/sidekicking/capping a players level in a zone. (Even if they're 50, or whatever, they're brought down to 35). This lets friends play together, and just as importantly, let's the 43 tank play with the 35 healer and 34 damage-dealers.
Cross-server group finders, with appropriate tools to moderate misconduct and cross-server friendlists/blacklists. This is important because some servers are more active at certain times, so you might be able to find a group from another server's pool.
The ability to LFG for one job/role ("I'll tank either on my ninja, paladin or warrior.") while doing something on another job/role. It's important for this that you can have all jobs on the same character.
Making crafting real jobs. That was the smartest thing FFXIV did. Craft-jobs have no combat capability but it made it easier to pop over to your crafter and craft while LFG.
One NPC helper that you can define a job for. Allow multiple of these to be summoned in group to fill the slots. A dd can use a healer-npc to solo "even match" mobs. A tank can use a DD NPC to solo. FFXIV did good with this, kinda, your chocobo [mount] was your npc. It just wasn't very good, and you couldn't summon another mount (even of a different variety) while it was out. If a dd and tank teamed up, the dd could summon a healer and the tank could summon another dd.
At level 75. Tanks, DDs, Support, and Healers loved pink birds for meriting (exp earned at cap to increase the potency of skills/traits). Black Mages (nukers) weren't welcome in these parties because the birds cast any spell at you that it cast at him, and superfast. So if the blm spent 5 seconds casting Blizzard IV, the bird spent half a second casting it back at the tank. Ew.
So BLMs merited on other things, "puddings", that had high resistance to melee, and moved slow. They formed their own groups.
Finding a group for a geared melee was pretty easy, finding a group for a geared blm wasn't always easy depending on the number of other blms online (Red mages and support were welcome in these groups too).
FFXI also added campaign which was like primitive RIFTs and they worked well for soloers who could ... dun dun dun ... earn decent exp while looking for a group that would get them better exp. I'm a hardcore-paladin and paladin wasn't really welcome in bird parties (ninja or dancer tanks killed faster and took less damage) and was useless on puddings. So when I felt like playing paladin I solo'd in campaign.
But please, and I seriously mean this, if another forced grouping game came out, and you don't like it, don't play it. I'm not saying ALL MMOs MUST GROUP. I'm saying some should.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug. 12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
There's still no logical answer to why (some) people need others to be forced to group with them.
Game design. Many mmos offer solo options with group incentivized content for leveling. Then the end game is group content (either small groups or raids). The result is many people who played solo not being able to perform well in group content and getting frustrated at either the players who don't want a poor performing player there or at the devlopers for why there is no solo endgame.
Forced grouping MMOs get rid of that, FF11 had it for leveling but I like FF14s design better where certain dungeons have to be cleared in story quests in order to unlock more story/dungeons. In fact the entire expansion (besides the new race) is gated behind the story quests which involves dungeons (4 man group play) starting at level 15.
Its very easy to find a group in FF14 (cross server duty finder that is able to be queued into solo).
There's still no logical answer to why (some) people need others to be forced to group with them.
There's still no logical answer to why you keep deliberately misinterpreting the moniker. It's not like I'm looking for a game to burden someone with the weight of grouping, I'm looking for a game that brings back the multiplayer to mmo.
It's not forcing people to group with others if they don't want to (don't play if you don't like a core feature of a game), it's designing a game where grouping is necessary at all but the earliest levels.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug. 12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
"I'm looking for a game that brings back the multiplayer to mmo."
Any game with OPTIONAL grouping has that multiplayer part you crave for. The only difference is that you have to go towards other people, since they aren't forced to endure you just because they have no choice. If you are unable to do that, then the problem lies with YOU, and not with the game design.
I think we're different type of people, and that's fine.
I do gravitate towards other people. I like tanks, and tanks work best in parties. I don't like tanks because "I like to lead", though people usually expect that of tanks. I like tanks because I like to protect. That's also why I play healers and don't usually play damage dealers.
But I've found that the strongest communities, with the most likable people (on a large scale) are groups where grouping matters.
One thing that I hope you will not deny about any solo game where grouping is necessary at endgame: People get to endgame and have no idea how to play their class. None at all. This does a lot of damage to the community. When party play is necessary/desirable for all but the first few levels, a shocking thing happens, people learn in the easy content how to play their job in a party and the transition to endgame isn't so abrupt.
The problem isn't with me, the problem isn't with my friends. The problem is with the randoms that I end up playing with in games like FFXIV and WoW that are either soooo noobily that they are stopping the group from progressing or sooooo hardcore that they'll hold a group back til the noob is kicked.
(Edit: You can't tell either of these people anything, no matter how nice you are. Both will basically say "It's my sub, I do what I want.")
There certainly were asinine linkshells (guilds) in FFXI, but they clustered together. Friendly LS's had friendly and simultaneously skilled players. It's a shocking thing. That's not unheard of in solo-focused games, but you typically end up with a lot of people that show up only when they need a group and can't help anyone that doesn't benefit them in some way.
All this is based on personal experience. I have no statistical data for you. I'm sure there's some in barrens chat with their anal-ogies.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug. 12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
Comments
It does work .. LoL, WoT, CS, even WoW ... lobby one click grouping is quite popular, i will have to say. LoL clearly is NOT harmed by it.
First, I take "can work" as a title that can support itself and a reasonable update schedule over the course of its life. Assuming a title or theorized idea "can't work" because it doesn't/couldn't bring in hundreds of thousands of people is a bad argument IMO.
I think a forced group MMO can prosper long term as long as there are mechanics to keep the majority of players playing together. Systems such as strait leveling that fracture the playerbase is playing with fire IMO. Finding ways to benefit players playing together, regardless of level (if there are levels) or standing, like the sub jobs of FF can fix this however.
In short, as long as it's easy to play with others having an MMO focused around grouping can definitely work IMO. Not only that, having codependence on others heightens the chance of social connections, which can keep players playing a title longer, fostering playerbase stability.
"Forced" just describes the way the game is played. Chess is a "forced strategy" game. If you don't like strategic play, you're not going to play it. But that doesn't make it a bad game.
People in this thread seem to think WoW has achieved the ultimate formula of offering everything. It does offer a lot, but because it does, almost all of it sucks balls.
The solo content sucks, the grouping content is sparse, the pvp is unbalanced because the focus is on PVE. That's all not to mention the game is freaking ancient in video-game terms, so the graphics and the combat system are terrible.
I too would love an all-in-one MMO that offered the best of everything, but I'm far past believing that's possible.
Since it's not, I'd like to see MMOs focus on the different things MMO's have to offer. WoW has the solo content covered- we don't need any more solo-centric MMOs. What the community could use is an MMO that focuses on grouping for pve and one that focuses on grouping for pvp.
Back to chess- one could argue, "I don't need chess, WoW has combat pets- that's kind of strategic gameplay!" Well, sure it's kind of strategic, but compared to chess it's piss-balls.
Speaking of fallacy, you're clearly familiar with "Shifting the burden of evidence."
Good try, Scooter. /popcorn
----
Now let's get back to defining "failed," the value judgement on which so much of this thread hinges.
In what ways were FFXI and EQ not failures? Financially they've certainly been eclipsed a dozen times. They're getting eclipsed today by phone aps.
We know how badly they got buried if you judge by subscriptions. That must still sting.
Watching their hard-core die hard player audiences drift away to other titles? Yep, that happened.
All that's left appears to be 'way back when' nostalgia.
Holden claims no forced grouping title has ever failed. We need to define failure, apparently. Is it just an "everybody knows" sort of thing?
Or does it need that very careful date bracketing spin "look back ten years, but not fifteen!" in order to work?
---
"If "everybody knows" such-and-such, then it ain't so, by at least ten thousand to one."--RAH
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Several games that require groups are dominating at the top 10 of MMO revenue charts.
In EQ the majority of people preferred to group, yet there were a good number of solo players (mainly Necros) that mainly liked to solo and they were pretty good at it.
Soloing EQ required actually a good sets of personal skills that not everyone had.
Everyone else preferred groups because it was just more convenient, and in my opinion more fun.
Listening to other people bullshit while we were playing was priceless for me.
To be accurate to the MMORPG scene... you had Toyota Camry sell so much better than any other car and every car made their version of Toyota Camry exclusively. People want updated versions of Mustangs and Camaros with all the latest features and high performance engines. Not just drive generic family car X based off the Camry.
Translanted into the MMORPG genre we want games like EQ or UO with updated graphics, mechanics and usability. Some of us want more hardcore. Just not the generic WoW clone where you know what's going to happen before you play it.
In your analogy, that is like people go drive SUVs, electric cars, and even just ride public transportation.
Not liking Camry does not mean one has to go back to Mustangs.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
http://www.engadget.com/2014/10/23/league-of-legends-tops-mmo-revenue-list-hearthstone-no-10/
LoL .. clearly is dominating (#1) and it is forced grouping. Aside from LoL, WoT, CSO and DOTA2 also require groups.
So 4 out of top 10 require grouping. You don't think grouping is popular?
The point was that in my scenario that the market suddenly went unservered. Other types if MMORPG didn't make it out of 2004 but majority of the clones did no better or worst than those games did in a smaller market.
After people exit MMORPG (guess there is no disagreement here), they don't have to be under-served, or wait for niche MMORPGs .. they can forget MMORPGs and play other online games. How do you know the bulk of the players did not just do that?
Nothing I said implied grouping wasn't popular, so that's just your own straw man.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Now you agree my statements are truthful?
The previous market average mainstream MMORPG were in the 250k to 500k range before 2004. The post 2004 average MMORPG is in the 250k to 500k even free. Meaning despite chasing the gold of WoW the average MMORPG still brought in around the same numbers. While chasing the goal of WoW almost all development in other type of MMORPG stopped instantaneously.
A person like me who wants a UO experience is not playing MOBA or shooters or whatever for that experience. I do play other games but that choice is for its own reason. It doesn't cure my MMORPG itch.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
If you are a dev, do you want to know what the audience like (data) or do you want to spend time to make 10 prototypes to test them out?
Several companies are built on a model of making a lot of experimental games to see what sticks. These companies don't work on giant, crushingly expensive MMOs, but the experimentation model is a viable game business model.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Certain jobs, or at certain times, it was more difficult to find a group.
That's why I've been saying all along: MMOs have learned a dozen ways to mitigate this problem.
- Level-sync/sidekicking/capping a players level in a zone. (Even if they're 50, or whatever, they're brought down to 35). This lets friends play together, and just as importantly, let's the 43 tank play with the 35 healer and 34 damage-dealers.
- Cross-server group finders, with appropriate tools to moderate misconduct and cross-server friendlists/blacklists. This is important because some servers are more active at certain times, so you might be able to find a group from another server's pool.
- The ability to LFG for one job/role ("I'll tank either on my ninja, paladin or warrior.") while doing something on another job/role. It's important for this that you can have all jobs on the same character.
- Making crafting real jobs. That was the smartest thing FFXIV did. Craft-jobs have no combat capability but it made it easier to pop over to your crafter and craft while LFG.
- One NPC helper that you can define a job for. Allow multiple of these to be summoned in group to fill the slots. A dd can use a healer-npc to solo "even match" mobs. A tank can use a DD NPC to solo. FFXIV did good with this, kinda, your chocobo [mount] was your npc. It just wasn't very good, and you couldn't summon another mount (even of a different variety) while it was out.
At level 75. Tanks, DDs, Support, and Healers loved pink birds for meriting (exp earned at cap to increase the potency of skills/traits). Black Mages (nukers) weren't welcome in these parties because the birds cast any spell at you that it cast at him, and superfast. So if the blm spent 5 seconds casting Blizzard IV, the bird spent half a second casting it back at the tank. Ew.If a dd and tank teamed up, the dd could summon a healer and the tank could summon another dd.
So BLMs merited on other things, "puddings", that had high resistance to melee, and moved slow. They formed their own groups.
Finding a group for a geared melee was pretty easy, finding a group for a geared blm wasn't always easy depending on the number of other blms online (Red mages and support were welcome in these groups too).
FFXI also added campaign which was like primitive RIFTs and they worked well for soloers who could ... dun dun dun ... earn decent exp while looking for a group that would get them better exp. I'm a hardcore-paladin and paladin wasn't really welcome in bird parties (ninja or dancer tanks killed faster and took less damage) and was useless on puddings. So when I felt like playing paladin I solo'd in campaign.
But please, and I seriously mean this, if another forced grouping game came out, and you don't like it, don't play it. I'm not saying ALL MMOs MUST GROUP. I'm saying some should.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
Forced grouping MMOs get rid of that, FF11 had it for leveling but I like FF14s design better where certain dungeons have to be cleared in story quests in order to unlock more story/dungeons. In fact the entire expansion (besides the new race) is gated behind the story quests which involves dungeons (4 man group play) starting at level 15.
Its very easy to find a group in FF14 (cross server duty finder that is able to be queued into solo).
It's not forcing people to group with others if they don't want to (don't play if you don't like a core feature of a game), it's designing a game where grouping is necessary at all but the earliest levels.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
I do gravitate towards other people. I like tanks, and tanks work best in parties. I don't like tanks because "I like to lead", though people usually expect that of tanks. I like tanks because I like to protect. That's also why I play healers and don't usually play damage dealers.
But I've found that the strongest communities, with the most likable people (on a large scale) are groups where grouping matters.
One thing that I hope you will not deny about any solo game where grouping is necessary at endgame: People get to endgame and have no idea how to play their class. None at all. This does a lot of damage to the community. When party play is necessary/desirable for all but the first few levels, a shocking thing happens, people learn in the easy content how to play their job in a party and the transition to endgame isn't so abrupt.
The problem isn't with me, the problem isn't with my friends. The problem is with the randoms that I end up playing with in games like FFXIV and WoW that are either soooo noobily that they are stopping the group from progressing or sooooo hardcore that they'll hold a group back til the noob is kicked.
(Edit: You can't tell either of these people anything, no matter how nice you are. Both will basically say "It's my sub, I do what I want.")
There certainly were asinine linkshells (guilds) in FFXI, but they clustered together. Friendly LS's had friendly and simultaneously skilled players. It's a shocking thing. That's not unheard of in solo-focused games, but you typically end up with a lot of people that show up only when they need a group and can't help anyone that doesn't benefit them in some way.
All this is based on personal experience. I have no statistical data for you. I'm sure there's some in barrens chat with their anal-ogies.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.