Originally posted by Scot

Oh lordy we can't have someone in a group getting one more xp than a solo guy can we? :D

Nope by Cephus's attitude all xp kills should give the same xp regardless of a group or solo,, and since it all has to be fair why don't we put extra cooldowns and significantly lower damage on people who are grouped so the rate of pull is equal to the soloer as well.

To toss out what I always say in these arguments that contiually get ignored despite how much they warrant response:

What would be the point to grouping if you can just solo everything and get the same rewards?

How is organized PvP, argueably one extremely sought after feature, going to work when you can solo everything?

How are you going to handle any sort of REAL depth to the game? IE politics, territory control, etc.

How are you going to allow guilds and gaming communities to get involved with the game in a meaningful way, at least to them?

Four questions that require good answers when considering solo play. There are others, these are just the most obvious and the ones people continue to ignore.

Originally posted by LynxJSA

Originally posted by SignusM

Because once upon a time, MMOs were a social game, and there was a reason for them to be online, and people grouped on their own. For seeking out people to team with, you got a small boost, or you could go off solo if you cared enough.

Making a social game more profitable to do things on your own is the death of socializing, and the game has no right charging 15 dollars a month for a single player game. 

 

And at the same time were other MMOs where you didn't get a boost and for some strange reason people socialized and grouped there as well.

Is your goal to force people to play with you or is it to encourage interaction?  If the latter, then forced grouping is certainly not the way to go. It never has been. Ever.

 This is what you probably won't ever get. I've never played a "forced grouping" game. You can't force the willing. I only play MMORPGs to group. How could you make a game then that "forces" me to group? If the game has other players like me, then why would we want you to play it at all? Nobody wants to force you to group with them. People that are only playing the game to group, can't be forced. Go play a solo game. We get you don't want to be "forced". No problem. Really dont' want you in the group if you feel "forced". But we still want a good grouping game. You just dont' get that I won't ever feel "forced", I just want great grouping game mechanics, because that's the game I want to play. Really, really, really, truly, do not want to make you play a grouping game. Really.

So-called Forced grouping games can have great communities, like EQ and DAoC.

Solo games like UO can have great communities too.

Neither one is the only answer.

 Sorry, I have to say so, but forced groupiong games don't naturally have good communities. Thay *can*, but also that's where elitists seem to go. "You need us, so our way, or no way to play". The more grouping was needed the more pricks I met, that looked for the best (fastest, less challenging) way to aquire things, were willing to kick you out of team if you weren't equipped FOTM-like, or you weren't a class contriuting DPS (lowering killspeed). Not everyone is like this, but those are the people I usually met when I got to those tiers. You couldn't do anything anymore that wasn't about loot or XP/h. Exploring? Tackle something for the fun, to check ones limits? I had to do those things alone, even thopugh I'd rather have some cool people with me.

 So forced grouping games can on the flip-side have some very elititsts on top, hard rules where you fit or are left out besides the nice people. Unfortunatly, when a community outlives itsel the first ones are those to stay.

Originally posted by berenim

 Sorry, I have to say so, but forced groupiong games don't naturally have good communities. Thay *can*, but also that's where elitists seem to go. "You need us, so our way, or no way to play". The more grouping was needed the more pricks I met, that looked for the best (fastest, less challenging) way to aquire things, were willing to kick you out of team if you weren't equipped FOTM-like, or you weren't a class contriuting DPS (lowering killspeed). Not everyone is like this, but those are the people I usually met when I got to those tiers. You couldn't do anything anymore that wasn't about loot or XP/h. Exploring? Tackle something for the fun, to check ones limits? I had to do those things alone, even thopugh I'd rather have some cool people with me.

 So forced grouping games can on the flip-side have some very elititsts on top, hard rules where you fit or are left out besides the nice people. Unfortunatly, when a community outlives itsel the first ones are those to stay.

I disagree.   EQ had the best community I have ever had in a game and it is a so called "forced grouping" game.   Everyone was helpful, sure you met a few asshats along the way but I met alot more people that i liked and became friends with then not.

Games that are geared towards soloing tend to have bad communities. Look at WoW, how many pugs do you run?  I never ran pugs in WoW because the community sucked... All I do is run PuGs in EQ because 9 times out of 10 the people are fun and cool to talk to.

The main question is "Why do you not want to group?"   That is the question that needs to be answered.

unacceptable answers to this question are "because I do not have time", "because I have a life and do not want to raid for 6 hours".

Originally posted by Lord_Ixigan

To toss out what I always say in these arguments that contiually get ignored despite how much they warrant response:

What would be the point to grouping if you can just solo everything and get the same rewards?

How is organized PvP, argueably one extremely sought after feature, going to work when you can solo everything?

How are you going to handle any sort of REAL depth to the game? IE politics, territory control, etc.

How are you going to allow guilds and gaming communities to get involved with the game in a meaningful way, at least to them?

 

Four questions that require good answers when considering solo play. There are others, these are just the most obvious and the ones people continue to ignore.

Those questions are repeatedly answered. Please reread the past five threads on this topic. Like Imhotepp, you see the loot and xp as the only reasons to interact and work together. Until you can get past that, there's no point in explaining any of what's already been said again to you.

Originally posted by LynxJSA

Originally posted by Lord_Ixigan

To toss out what I always say in these arguments that contiually get ignored despite how much they warrant response:

What would be the point to grouping if you can just solo everything and get the same rewards?

How is organized PvP, argueably one extremely sought after feature, going to work when you can solo everything?

How are you going to handle any sort of REAL depth to the game? IE politics, territory control, etc.

How are you going to allow guilds and gaming communities to get involved with the game in a meaningful way, at least to them?

 

Four questions that require good answers when considering solo play. There are others, these are just the most obvious and the ones people continue to ignore.

 

Those questions are repeatedly answered. Please reread the past five threads on this topic. Like Imhotepp, you see the loot and xp as the only reasons to interact and work together. Until you can get past that, there's no point in explaining any of what's already been said again to you.

Sigh. No, it's not what he is saying, and not what I am saying either.

YOu continually twist what I am saying into that.

I would be happy with a game that had no loot, (as in ZERO GEAR) but was a good grouping game. I would be happy with a game that did not use XP but was a good grouping game.

It's not abotu the loot, you make that argument. It's not about the XP, you make that argument.

It's about a worthwhile challenge for a group to overcome with team work. That's what makes a good grouping game, NOT just having a group window, not getting l33t loot, not fast leveling.

I"m never ina hurry to level. That's why I don't mind party wipes. I don't care about gear, and usually find it a pain in the arse when I have to upgrade all my gear.

I also don't see grouping as necessary for interaction. A good grouping game has game mechanics which reward teamwork. YOu can interact with anyone on the server by chatting, you don't need to group for that.

Originally posted by TdogSkal
 

I disagree.   EQ had the best community I have ever had in a game and it is a so called "forced grouping" game.   Everyone was helpful, sure you met a few asshats along the way but I met alot more people that i liked and became friends with then not.

And that is the exception, not the norm. This has been explained over and over again. The EQ community came from PnP gamers, LARPers and other groups of gamers who already were using their leisure time to meet up with other people for group adventuring in one form or another. Naturally, when they came to EQ, their goal was to play a certain class and gather with people of other classes to form the adventuring parties they were accustomed to. It was a different mindset and a different style of gameplay than most of today's gamers who grew up on single-player CRPGs and console games.

Their pre-existing desire for interaction and socializing is what made EQ's community great, not the grouping aspect. 

Originally posted by LynxJSA

Originally posted by TdogSkal
 

I disagree.   EQ had the best community I have ever had in a game and it is a so called "forced grouping" game.   Everyone was helpful, sure you met a few asshats along the way but I met alot more people that i liked and became friends with then not.

 

And that is the exception, not the norm. This has been explained over and over again. The EQ community came from PnP gamers, LARPers and other groups of gamers who already were using their leisure time to meet up with other people for group adventuring in one form or another. Naturally, when they came to EQ, their goal was to play a certain class and gather with people of other classes to form the adventuring parties they were accustomed to. It was a different mindset and a different style of gameplay than most of today's gamers who grew up on single-player CRPGs and console games.

Their pre-existing desire for interaction and socializing is what made EQ's community great, not the grouping aspect. 

 

Wrong, it was BOTH the people that were playing, AND the grouping aspect.

Why is that so hard for you to admit, that "forced grouping" can encourage a strong community, because people have to work together to accomplish goals?

That's true in every real life situation where people have to work together to accomplish goals, isn't it? Why wouldn't it be true in the game as well?

Actually originally MMO's were designed without grouping.  MEridian59 and Ultima Online did not have grouping options.

 If you wanted to play together you just ran together like a pack of dogs. 

Once MMO's started getting more popular, we started getting the kill stealers, gankers, hackers, etc....

So then EQ came along, and added grouping, and eliminated PvP.

 So now you just took all of the butt wads we didn't want to play with in the first place and made us need to group with them. How fun is that?

 To be honest, I solo most of the time, for reasons beyond what you mention. I play solo most of the time because I have a wife and three kids, which all come first. So when I find a quiet time to log in and play I do so, but I do so knowing that a member of my family may need me to log off and help them with something at any time.

 Is that fair to my group? In most games looking for a group can take a long time, so if you spent the last hour putting together a group, and I said, "oh sorry, my baby is crying, gotta go!" are you going to be, happy with that? or is it going to frustrate you, because now you need to find another person?

I seen some posts wondering why people group, and I shall try to answer those posts if no one has already.

1. Loot: It is ultimately one very good reason why people raid with groups. Depending on the game mechanics, you will get alot of loot in a group than as a soloer. A potential problem here is if the loot isn't distributed fairly, which can lead to massive arguments and dissention with a group.

2. XP: You can fight tougher mobs with a group. You therefore get more XP (if the game mechanics work that way, but many xp-leveling mmorpgs follow this idea).

3. Teamwork: Some people simply love groups because they like filling that "role" inside their group. They may also like working together with friends (or friendly strangers as long as they don't pull anything). They may also need the teamwork to survive areas and become an elite group. I would like to remind everyone that the reason the USA Navy SEALS  are the best elite force in the world is because of their teamwork. They are highly coordinated, and apply excellent teamwork to get the job done. Of course, there's also the brutal training they go through to see if they're SEAL material, but teamwork plays an important role here.

4. Challenge: Groups can be challenging to work with. You may end up with bad teammates, and you probably will go up against tougher opponents/mobs. Soloists have challenging aspects as well. Both sides, however, have different versions of their challenges. If groups cannot work together, or they are missing a vital role, grouping can be quite difficult, but challenging as well (of course you won't see me sticking with a group who has a 24/7 rager or a jackass that refuses to res someone because they think it's "funny").

I believe these four aspects is what helps determine if you like grouping (and raiding if you especially like the xp and loot parts).

Originally posted by lordtwisted

Actually originally MMO's were designed without grouping.  MEridian59 and Ultima Online did not have grouping options.

 If you wanted to play together you just ran together like a pack of dogs. 

Once MMO's started getting more popular, we started getting the kill stealers, gankers, hackers, etc....

So then EQ came along, and added grouping, and eliminated PvP.

 So now you just took all of the butt wads we didn't want to play with in the first place and made us need to group with them. How fun is that?

 To be honest, I solo most of the time, for reasons beyond what you mention. I play solo most of the time because I have a wife and three kids, which all come first. So when I find a quiet time to log in and play I do so, but I do so knowing that a member of my family may need me to log off and help them with something at any time.

 Is that fair to my group? In most games looking for a group can take a long time, so if you spent the last hour putting together a group, and I said, "oh sorry, my baby is crying, gotta go!" are you going to be, happy with that? or is it going to frustrate you, because now you need to find another person?

Honestly, not a problem. Did that in DAoC ALL the time.

We would say, thanks for grouping, hope the baby stops crying, see you next time! 

We'd have an opening for another person, and then try to replace you as soon as we could.

The great thing about group size in DAoC was you could have a strong party, and still room for one more. That way, we'd get someone to join before you even left, and wouldn't really be hurt when you were gone.

Then your spot would be taken by the next person, so we'd be ok when someone  else left.

Maybe it would bother you that you'd need to group with us, but we wouldn't care if you had to go take care of the baby.

PLayed that way a ton in DAoC. Great groups, great people, not a huge problem if you had to drop out, and we'd group with you next time we saw you if you were not an asshat.

Originally posted by RamenThief7

I seen some posts wondering why people group, and I shall try to answer those posts if no one has already.

1. Loot: It is ultimately one very good reason why people raid with groups. Depending on the game mechanics, you will get alot of loot in a group than as a soloer. A potential problem here is if the loot isn't distributed fairly, which can lead to massive arguments and dissention with a group.

2. XP: You can fight tougher mobs with a group. You therefore get more XP (if the game mechanics work that way, but many xp-leveling mmorpgs follow this idea).

3. Teamwork: Some people simply love groups because they like filling that "role" inside their group. They may also like working together with friends (or friendly strangers as long as they don't pull anything). They may also need the teamwork to survive areas and become an elite group. I would like to remind everyone that the reason the USA Navy SEALS  are the best elite force in the world is because of their teamwork. They are highly coordinated, and apply excellent teamwork to get the job done. Of course, there's also the brutal training they go through to see if they're SEAL material, but teamwork plays an important role here.

4. Challenge: Groups can be challenging to work with. You may end up with bad teammates, and you probably will go up against tougher opponents/mobs. Soloists have challenging aspects as well. Both sides, however, have different versions of their challenges. If groups cannot work together, or they are missing a vital role, grouping can be quite difficult, but challenging as well (of course you won't see me sticking with a group who has a 24/7 rager or a jackass that refuses to res someone because they think it's "funny").

I believe these four aspects is what helps determine if you like grouping (and raiding if you especially like the xp and loot parts).

I keep telling LynxJSA that for me it's 3 and 4, he keeps saying I must be lying, and it must be 1 and 2. :(

Also goes along with the fact that I don't raid, just like good grouping games.

Originally posted by lordtwisted

Actually originally MMO's were designed without grouping.  MEridian59 and Ultima Online did not have grouping options.

 If you wanted to play together you just ran together like a pack of dogs. 

Once MMO's started getting more popular, we started getting the kill stealers, gankers, hackers, etc....

So then EQ came along, and added grouping, and eliminated PvP.

 So now you just took all of the butt wads we didn't want to play with in the first place and made us need to group with them. How fun is that?

 To be honest, I solo most of the time, for reasons beyond what you mention. I play solo most of the time because I have a wife and three kids, which all come first. So when I find a quiet time to log in and play I do so, but I do so knowing that a member of my family may need me to log off and help them with something at any time.

 Is that fair to my group? In most games looking for a group can take a long time, so if you spent the last hour putting together a group, and I said, "oh sorry, my baby is crying, gotta go!" are you going to be, happy with that? or is it going to frustrate you, because now you need to find another person?

Again I have to disagree.... We have players in my current guild in EQ that have families.. They group up and if they have to run, they have to run.  If it is going to be a few mintues, they just afk and we work without them... If not they log out.   Its not a big deal.  Most of the time I invite people to group so I have people to talk to.
 

My roommate and I can handle pretty much anything in EQ besides the raids and high end zones... So most of the time we have a full group for the sake of having a full group.... Last night we had a husband and wife team join us, they had to afk to feed and then later put to bed their child, it was not a big deal, we just killed while they were afk and they joined in once they got back.

Again its all on who you play with and letting people know up front that you may have to go to do family things,, most players understand that RL is more important the the game.

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

Originally posted by LynxJSA

Originally posted by TdogSkal
 

I disagree.   EQ had the best community I have ever had in a game and it is a so called "forced grouping" game.   Everyone was helpful, sure you met a few asshats along the way but I met alot more people that i liked and became friends with then not.

 

And that is the exception, not the norm. This has been explained over and over again. The EQ community came from PnP gamers, LARPers and other groups of gamers who already were using their leisure time to meet up with other people for group adventuring in one form or another. Naturally, when they came to EQ, their goal was to play a certain class and gather with people of other classes to form the adventuring parties they were accustomed to. It was a different mindset and a different style of gameplay than most of today's gamers who grew up on single-player CRPGs and console games.

Their pre-existing desire for interaction and socializing is what made EQ's community great, not the grouping aspect. 

 

 

Wrong, it was BOTH the people that were playing, AND the grouping aspect.

Why is that so hard for you to admit, that "forced grouping" can encourage a strong community, because people have to work together to accomplish goals?

That's true in every real life situation where people have to work together to accomplish goals, isn't it? Why wouldn't it be true in the game as well?

I have to agree with Imhotepp on this. FF XI, EQ and EQ2 all were forced grouping games, yet from what I've heard so far the communities on these games are actually good and friendly. Forced grouping games seem to scare away soloists and groupies that don't like the "forced" aspect. This was probably the case with FF XI. So, then you create a community where you either work together with your group or die miserably. And from what I've heard, the death penalty in that game was harsh yet balanced. Therefore, only people that were fans of forced grouping stayed. These people bonded together excellently, which lead to a friendly community.

This also does apply to real life. In the workplace (and in this particular job you have to work together with others), you might want to become good friends with some of the people there, because chances are you might be working with them sometime. It doesn't help you at all if you act like a jackass, because then you will not be popular and endure hardships from others.

Originally posted by TdogSkal

Originally posted by lordtwisted

Actually originally MMO's were designed without grouping.  MEridian59 and Ultima Online did not have grouping options.

 If you wanted to play together you just ran together like a pack of dogs. 

Once MMO's started getting more popular, we started getting the kill stealers, gankers, hackers, etc....

So then EQ came along, and added grouping, and eliminated PvP.

 So now you just took all of the butt wads we didn't want to play with in the first place and made us need to group with them. How fun is that?

 To be honest, I solo most of the time, for reasons beyond what you mention. I play solo most of the time because I have a wife and three kids, which all come first. So when I find a quiet time to log in and play I do so, but I do so knowing that a member of my family may need me to log off and help them with something at any time.

 Is that fair to my group? In most games looking for a group can take a long time, so if you spent the last hour putting together a group, and I said, "oh sorry, my baby is crying, gotta go!" are you going to be, happy with that? or is it going to frustrate you, because now you need to find another person?

Again I have to disagree.... We have players in my current guild in EQ that have families.. They group up and if they have to run, they have to run.  If it is going to be a few mintues, they just afk and we work without them... If not they log out.   Its not a big deal.  Most of the time I invite people to group so I have people to talk to.
 

My roommate and I can handle pretty much anything in EQ besides the raids and high end zones... So most of the time we have a full group for the sake of having a full group.... Last night we had a husband and wife team join us, they had to afk to feed and then later put to bed their child, it was not a big deal, we just killed while they were afk and they joined in once they got back.

Again its all on who you play with and letting people know up front that you may have to go to do family things,, most players understand that RL is more important the the game.

Grouping with your friends or guild mates is different than grouping as a PUG. You don't need incentives to group with a guild and most people do it anyway. People like to socialize with those they like and can relate to.

PUGs are a completely different animal altogether. Hated by many, PUGs are a byproduct of forced grouping. People hate to socialize with those they dislike, which is exactly what forced grouping forces you to do if you cannot play with your friends for some reason.

EQ was not a forced grouping game at all.  I soloed a monk, bard, druid, and shadowknight till about 50 before I got bored with the game.

Very few classes actually had to group. 

People grouped because:

1.  It was fun.

2.  It was more efficient in terms of xp

3.  There was often better loot for grouping because you could then tackle tougher mobs.

But please do not say it was a forced grouping game.  Because it was only forced for a small amount of people.  Excepting raids and extremely tough mobs of course.

Venge Sunsoar

Originally posted by heartless

Originally posted by TdogSkal

Originally posted by lordtwisted

Actually originally MMO's were designed without grouping.  MEridian59 and Ultima Online did not have grouping options.

 If you wanted to play together you just ran together like a pack of dogs. 

Once MMO's started getting more popular, we started getting the kill stealers, gankers, hackers, etc....

So then EQ came along, and added grouping, and eliminated PvP.

 So now you just took all of the butt wads we didn't want to play with in the first place and made us need to group with them. How fun is that?

 To be honest, I solo most of the time, for reasons beyond what you mention. I play solo most of the time because I have a wife and three kids, which all come first. So when I find a quiet time to log in and play I do so, but I do so knowing that a member of my family may need me to log off and help them with something at any time.

 Is that fair to my group? In most games looking for a group can take a long time, so if you spent the last hour putting together a group, and I said, "oh sorry, my baby is crying, gotta go!" are you going to be, happy with that? or is it going to frustrate you, because now you need to find another person?

Again I have to disagree.... We have players in my current guild in EQ that have families.. They group up and if they have to run, they have to run.  If it is going to be a few mintues, they just afk and we work without them... If not they log out.   Its not a big deal.  Most of the time I invite people to group so I have people to talk to.
 

My roommate and I can handle pretty much anything in EQ besides the raids and high end zones... So most of the time we have a full group for the sake of having a full group.... Last night we had a husband and wife team join us, they had to afk to feed and then later put to bed their child, it was not a big deal, we just killed while they were afk and they joined in once they got back.

Again its all on who you play with and letting people know up front that you may have to go to do family things,, most players understand that RL is more important the the game.

Grouping with your friends or guild mates is different than grouping as a PUG. You don't need incentives to group with a guild and most people do it anyway. People like to socialize with those they like and can relate to.

PUGs are a completely different animal altogether. Hated by many, PUGs are a byproduct of forced grouping. People hate to socialize with those they dislike, which is exactly what forced grouping forces you to do if you cannot play with your friends for some reason.

I run PuGs alot in EQ.  One because the population is low and 2 because I enjoy grouping.   PUGs in EQ are for the most part great.  I meet a lot of cool people.   Its the same as grouping with friends and guildies.   Let them know up front that you may have to run for RL issues and most of the people will understand.

Again its all on YOU and how YOU want to play.   I understand why people solo, I do, I solo as well when I feel like it.. I just hate the excuse that it is because the soloer has a life and a family.  Those are not real reasons, those are excuses.

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

EQ was not a forced grouping game at all.  I soloed a monk, bard, druid, and shadowknight till about 50 before I got bored with the game.

Very few classes actually had to group. 

People grouped because:

1.  It was fun.

2.  It was more efficient in terms of xp

3.  There was often better loot for grouping because you could then tackle tougher mobs.

But please do not say it was a forced grouping game.  Because it was only forced for a small amount of people.  Excepting raids and extremely tough mobs of course.

Venge Sunsoar

So EQ isn't a forced grouping game? Being serious here, I always hear talks of it being forced grouping, but if what you're saying is the true concept of that game, then it's not forced grouping.

Still, from what I've heard, grouping was an important aspect of that game. Perhaps EQ set the first example for a game with solo and group playstyles that weren't watered down?

Originally posted by RamenThief7

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

EQ was not a forced grouping game at all.  I soloed a monk, bard, druid, and shadowknight till about 50 before I got bored with the game.

Very few classes actually had to group. 

People grouped because:

1.  It was fun.

2.  It was more efficient in terms of xp

3.  There was often better loot for grouping because you could then tackle tougher mobs.

But please do not say it was a forced grouping game.  Because it was only forced for a small amount of people.  Excepting raids and extremely tough mobs of course.

Venge Sunsoar

So EQ isn't a forced grouping game? Being serious here, I always hear talks of it being forced grouping, but if what you're saying is the true concept of that game, then it's not forced grouping.

Still, from what I've heard, grouping was an important aspect of that game. Perhaps EQ set the first example for a game with solo and group playstyles that weren't watered down?

You do not have to group in EQ.  You can solo to max level with a number of classes and now with the Merc system you can solo with any class.  Merc's are hired healers or tanks that will fight with you. 

I play a Necromancer, one of the better soloing classes in the game, my roommate plays a Beastlord, a okay solo class, we can both solo easily, just takes him longer to kill stuff then me and I can kill any mob that does not summon.

So no its not forced grouping but it is very highly recommended that you group.

Originally posted by RamenThief7

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

Wrong, it was BOTH the people that were playing, AND the grouping aspect.

Why is that so hard for you to admit, that "forced grouping" can encourage a strong community, because people have to work together to accomplish goals?

That's true in every real life situation where people have to work together to accomplish goals, isn't it? Why wouldn't it be true in the game as well?

I have to agree with Imhotepp on this. FF XI, EQ and EQ2 all were forced grouping games, yet from what I've heard so far the communities on these games are actually good and friendly. Forced grouping games seem to scare away soloists and groupies that don't like the "forced" aspect. This was probably the case with FF XI. So, then you create a community where you either work together with your group or die miserably. And from what I've heard, the death penalty in that game was harsh yet balanced. Therefore, only people that were fans of forced grouping stayed. These people bonded together excellently, which lead to a friendly community.

This also does apply to real life. In the workplace (and in this particular job you have to work together with others), you might want to become good friends with some of the people there, because chances are you might be working with them sometime. It doesn't help you at all if you act like a jackass, because then you will not be popular and endure hardships from others.

"Why is that so hard for you to admit, that "forced grouping" can encourage a strong community, because people have to work together to accomplish goals?"

Because we haven't seen any proof of that? Seriously. Forced grouping and encouraging interaction are two different things. Games that encourage interaction grow good communities. That brings me to Ramen's points...

What percentage of FFXI players are NA gamers? I'm asking because I do not know. I am willing to hazard a guess that the game is predominantly EU and Asian players, which would explain why grouping works well and why the community is more geared towards interacting. 

As for EQ2, if you look at the history of changes to the game, they have added more features that allow solo play and added more features to encourage intereaction and working together. Guild Status Points, the community window on startup and many other features have been added to help build and support the community aspect of the game.

Originally posted by TdogSkal

Originally posted by heartless

Originally posted by TdogSkal

Originally posted by lordtwisted

Actually originally MMO's were designed without grouping.  MEridian59 and Ultima Online did not have grouping options.

 If you wanted to play together you just ran together like a pack of dogs. 

Once MMO's started getting more popular, we started getting the kill stealers, gankers, hackers, etc....

So then EQ came along, and added grouping, and eliminated PvP.

 So now you just took all of the butt wads we didn't want to play with in the first place and made us need to group with them. How fun is that?

 To be honest, I solo most of the time, for reasons beyond what you mention. I play solo most of the time because I have a wife and three kids, which all come first. So when I find a quiet time to log in and play I do so, but I do so knowing that a member of my family may need me to log off and help them with something at any time.

 Is that fair to my group? In most games looking for a group can take a long time, so if you spent the last hour putting together a group, and I said, "oh sorry, my baby is crying, gotta go!" are you going to be, happy with that? or is it going to frustrate you, because now you need to find another person?

Again I have to disagree.... We have players in my current guild in EQ that have families.. They group up and if they have to run, they have to run.  If it is going to be a few mintues, they just afk and we work without them... If not they log out.   Its not a big deal.  Most of the time I invite people to group so I have people to talk to.
 

My roommate and I can handle pretty much anything in EQ besides the raids and high end zones... So most of the time we have a full group for the sake of having a full group.... Last night we had a husband and wife team join us, they had to afk to feed and then later put to bed their child, it was not a big deal, we just killed while they were afk and they joined in once they got back.

Again its all on who you play with and letting people know up front that you may have to go to do family things,, most players understand that RL is more important the the game.

Grouping with your friends or guild mates is different than grouping as a PUG. You don't need incentives to group with a guild and most people do it anyway. People like to socialize with those they like and can relate to.

PUGs are a completely different animal altogether. Hated by many, PUGs are a byproduct of forced grouping. People hate to socialize with those they dislike, which is exactly what forced grouping forces you to do if you cannot play with your friends for some reason.

 

I run PuGs alot in EQ.  One because the population is low and 2 because I enjoy grouping.   PUGs in EQ are for the most part great.  I meet a lot of cool people.   Its the same as grouping with friends and guildies.   Let them know up front that you may have to run for RL issues and most of the people will understand.

Again its all on YOU and how YOU want to play.   I understand why people solo, I do, I solo as well when I feel like it.. I just hate the excuse that it is because the soloer has a life and a family.  Those are not real reasons, those are excuses.

I think that has to do with the simple fact that since EQ is a much older game, the breed of gamers that still play it is much different than those that play newer MMOs like WoW. That's probably the reason for different experiences people have with PUGs and grouping in general.

But either way, just like our experiences, we're all different and have different tastes. A smart developer will recognize this and capitalize on it by making all play styles fun and equally viable.

I am sure I will get flamed for this, as these forums are hostile lately.  First I work, have a family and grand daughter.  I read alot of what was posted in this thread and just shake my head.

There are games that are designed for single play and games designed for group play.  Nothing is hidden and if you do not like to group go play a single player game or a game where you can hit max level going solo.  Pretty simple concept.  Yet because a player cannot get to do what a group does in a group game they get upset.  Well you made the choice not to play with groups. Yet you expect to to the same content a group of 6 can do and I honestly never think that will or should happen.  Why play a game that promotes grouping and then let everyone solo the whole game?

Does that mean the game should add a separate function to satisfy a solo player?  Absolutly not.  We can argue this on forums all we like.  A game that requires grouping is just that.  A game designed for you to level solo to max level is pretty much the norm today,  but the game designers never promised you the same experience as players that prefer to group.   Actually a great design.  You made the choice to not group and thus you pay the price for your decision.  It has nothing to do with time or your real life obligations.  You do not want to group and that is cool with me. 

It amazes me when players come here calling players that enjoy gaming and grouping no lifers, and no jobs.  That argument is honestly the stupidest argument and has been beaten to death.  If you honestly do not have the time to play and progress your character, why are you even playing when you know the requirements.  I play two to three hours, three or four times a week and never have a problem getting groups to do something.  Alot of folks state pug's suck and that is untrue.  Yes you will meet some bad players, but even guilds have bad players. 

Originally posted by LynxJSA

Originally posted by RamenThief7

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

Wrong, it was BOTH the people that were playing, AND the grouping aspect.

Why is that so hard for you to admit, that "forced grouping" can encourage a strong community, because people have to work together to accomplish goals?

That's true in every real life situation where people have to work together to accomplish goals, isn't it? Why wouldn't it be true in the game as well?

I have to agree with Imhotepp on this. FF XI, EQ and EQ2 all were forced grouping games, yet from what I've heard so far the communities on these games are actually good and friendly. Forced grouping games seem to scare away soloists and groupies that don't like the "forced" aspect. This was probably the case with FF XI. So, then you create a community where you either work together with your group or die miserably. And from what I've heard, the death penalty in that game was harsh yet balanced. Therefore, only people that were fans of forced grouping stayed. These people bonded together excellently, which lead to a friendly community.

This also does apply to real life. In the workplace (and in this particular job you have to work together with others), you might want to become good friends with some of the people there, because chances are you might be working with them sometime. It doesn't help you at all if you act like a jackass, because then you will not be popular and endure hardships from others.

 

"Why is that so hard for you to admit, that "forced grouping" can encourage a strong community, because people have to work together to accomplish goals?"

Because we haven't seen any proof of that? Seriously. Forced grouping and encouraging interaction are two different things. Games that encourage interaction grow good communities. That brings me to Ramen's points...

 

What percentage of FFXI players are NA gamers? I'm asking because I do not know. I am willing to hazard a guess that the game is predominantly EU and Asian players, which would explain why grouping works well and why the community is more geared towards interacting. 

As for EQ2, if you look at the history of changes to the game, they have added more features that allow solo play and added more features to encourage intereaction and working together. Guild Status Points, the community window on startup and many other features have been added to help build and support the community aspect of the game.

 

That yellow shaded part...um, I just said that FF XI was based solely on forced grouping and that spawned a strong community (you could technically solo for the first few levels, but then you really had no choice but to group later on). Forced grouping and encouraging interaction are two different things, but FF XI proves that forced grouping can spawn a helpful, nice, and strong community.

By the way, does it really matter what the culture of the people are that play the game? We're all humans, no matter what our culture is. So lets say the dominate culture of people playing are Asian. So what? They will have to work with other people. It doesn't matter if there are less Americans on that game, it just means that the game appealed to diverse people, and the dominate culture playing that game must've really liked the commercials in their region.