Originally posted by FrostWyrm

Originally posted by Venger

Originally posted by FrostWyrm

Originally posted by Venger

Wasn't that vanguards claim to fame.  Remind me again how did that do?  Tank and spank grouping is dead.

Vanguard crashed for completely unrelated reasons to this. If thats your argument, there are plenty of games that were perfectly soloable that have failed as well.

If I had a nickel, yes a single nickel, for every time I've heard (insert your point of view) had nothing to do with the down fall of (insert game) it was (insert this bug or that flaw).  I'd be pretty rich.

Static tank and spank grouping is dead.  Dynamic events that bring people together are the future.

If I had a nickel for every time someone said "a duck is a bird" I'd be rich too. Funny how often the truth goes around.

Duck is the common name for a large number of species in the Anatidae family of birds, which also includes swans and geese.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck

:D

FFXI had forced grouping, the downside there was that it could take a long time to get a whole group filled within your level range. They eventually implemented a level sync feature though, which made it so everyone could group together and receive experience regardless of level range.

Forced grouping is a lost art. Personally I love it, I can't understand why someone buys an MMO to play the entire thing through solo. That's insane to me.

GW2 seems to be taking an interesting approach. They don't 'force' grouping, but they make it seemingly painless for independent people to work together as seperate parties. The game promotes more of an interdependence which might be the next step.

Personally I prefer outright grouping but at least that's better than everyone soloing.

Forcing grouping is AWFUL. Period.

In FFXI, grouping was fun, yes, but there were many times that I would log into the game for upwards of 5 hours and never find a single group to play with, so I'd just sit on the game watching TV and messaging people over and over and over with no luck.

Sitting around isn't fun. At least with a lot of solo content, I could do things while waiting for a group, and then tackle the group content when possible. So that's how games have progressed, and it's for the best, imo.

What the op doesnt like is that when given the choice between soloing and grouping -- all things equal or even close to equal -- people will tend to take the solo route.

Hence to get people to group the game has to significantly encourage grouping over soloing -- the push that becomes a shove.

Thing is, there recently was a game that was released that is very much like what the OP is wanting.

That game is Tera.

Tera has the harder monsters that require a group to kill or someone with the best equipment taking a completely unreasonable amount of time.

Tera has dungeons that you really do not want to enter without a group.  And even if you do enter them at a higher level, the drop rates TANK -- you have to be of the proper level range to get any drops of note.

Tera has the items you want only in group areas by late in the game and more importantly the fodder you need to enchant such items.  So not only will someone who is more group averse have a worse base item, BUT he will have a real hard time enchanting the item to any reasonable enchantment level.

Even the better essential crafting items ONLY come from boss monsters. 

Tera has lots of features that make it easier to group.

Oh and in Tera the best grouping classes are pretty pathetic solo while the good solo classes are less desired for groups.  This further keeps the healing classes and lancers grouped up.

Don't know if it is the hive mind or something similar, but I have been musing about the same thing and wrote last night about it (with the intention of it being my first blog post here) and after posting it I come to the forums and find two posts about it.

I say it's weird :P

Anyways, you can find my thoughts here if you fancy reading them: http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/Don-Quixote

Originally posted by FrostWyrm

"Forced" grouping IS the way some players like. Those that dont are free to choose a game that better suits them.

The problem is that those who do dont have such freedom, because these games just aren't out there.

Because those games have failed miserably in the market.  There just aren't enough people who want "forced grouping" in a game to warrant those games to exist.  Games are expensive to create.  They need to make a profit.  Nobody is stupid enough to make a game to cater to a tiny niche audience who won't even pay the development costs.

Maybe someone may try developing an mmo that has servers with different dificulty setting, Casual solo or hard grouping servers, could be viable option.  I dont mind forced grouping because thats the way I prefer to play MMO's, and probably why I liked FFXI so much.

Originally posted by nomatics856

These "solo" mmorpgs today are failing hard, and are nothing more but online action games than any thing else, a company needs to try something different by focusing more on grouping and less on soloing, not getting rid of soloing all together, but maybe go the EQ route were there are more benefits to grouping than soloing.

 

mmorpgs today if you solo, you get more exp per mobs, no fighting over loot, a faster way to level, if you group up, there is a exp shared pentaty, fighting over loot, etc etc.

 

I dont like how mmorpgs are going these days, in SWTOR I can take on 6-7 mobs and kill almost everything in one to two hits, and really its not even SWTOR fault, its how most mmorpgs are today, how is that fun? This is how these "mmorpgs" of today are becoming boring. Trying to balance soloing and grouping in one game is proving too difficult for these companys today. One side will cry nerf, one side will cry buff. Generally the solo crowd wins and the mobs become easier.

What we need is a mmorpg whos focus is on grouping seeing as its an "RPG" and "Online". Did companys seem to forget that RPGS were almost always about partying even in single player rpgs.  So what we need is a mmorpg that focuses on grouping but gives soloing options, like a couple classes that excel at soloing, like EQ did with the beastlord and necromancer.

I would say there was FFXI, buuuttt...since its only lasted 8 years and has never had a sub above 500k its a failure.. so yeah...don't waist your time with that game.

/sarcasm off.

Calling the game design "forced grouping" sounds terible on its own. It conveys a negative image of playing with people or in a way you do not like. However there has been too much rewarding for solo players as of late.

Forming groups take time, reward those who do it. Don't make the game just as easy or in many cases easier to solo than to group. A good community makes a good MMO. Successful players in an MMO rewarding grouping likely will have teamwork as a core value. Successful players in an MMO that rewards solo players likely will have self interest as a core value. Think what happens to the community then?

I will not lie, grouping, taking the time to learn to work together as a team, takes far more time than going on your own. But the difference would be between playing a game among people, which could be an fulfilling experience lasting years. From a game that would be played in a few weeks/months with little lasting memories of the experience.

Originally posted by Venger

Wasn't that vanguards claim to fame.  Remind me again how did that do?  Tank and spank grouping is dead.

Vanguard crashed for completely unrelated reasons to this. If thats your argument, there are plenty of games that were perfectly soloable that have failed as well.

The game crashes and bugs was a major reason I think, but to be fair I remember plenty of players with complaints about the grouping, the running, the lack of flying mounts, even the XP rate. I think even without the crashes and bugs, Vanguard wouldn't have done very well, forced grouping, death penalties and extended travel times seem to have become a niche market.

Originally posted by biggarfoot

Maybe someone may try developing an mmo that has servers with different dificulty setting, Casual solo or hard grouping servers, could be viable option.  I dont mind forced grouping because thats the way I prefer to play MMO's, and probably why I liked FFXI so much.

Path of Least Resistance will win.

your topic title already says it.

the part in the titel that says forced is what many mmo players hate 

Guild Wars 2 you can solo up to 80 and still group alot but your never forced always get reward and loot even when you kill on mob with many other players. No holding hands with dynamic events that your not forced into but its so much fun and total strangers help you or revive you and you still get full reward and loot. Seem perfect for you OP.

Originally posted by waynejr2

Originally posted by biggarfoot

Maybe someone may try developing an mmo that has servers with different dificulty setting, Casual solo or hard grouping servers, could be viable option.  I dont mind forced grouping because thats the way I prefer to play MMO's, and probably why I liked FFXI so much.

Path of Least Resistance will win.

THis....

Thing is the average MMO players gets that grouping is apart of the game, but no matter how much XP bonus dev's stack on grouping or whatever. Soloing beats out the ignorance other player might bring to a group or raid.. 

Life as it is, is aggrevating enough already why make your game experience be..

Also the different server choice maybe a good and bad choice.. Eg, person who are not so skill don't want to be or play with the not so skill crowd, so more than likely they go to the hard servers and try as they might to become skilled...

As it is now in Tera, grouping gives more XP, but hardly anyone want to stay with you until you finish your step of a quest.. Most have the menality "I'm done now lets move on..."

Originally posted by Unlight

I'll never play a game where my personal freedom is arbitrarily subsumed into the will of a group automatically.  Playing by committee is just about the last way I'd ever want to experience a game.  In short bursts, with defined objectives and a finite timespan, yes.  Otherwise, no thank you, comrade.

Exactly my sentiments. 

Apart from maybe ToR, which makes grouping unnecesasrily inconvenient and clunky, most MMORPGs out there tend to reward grouping better than soloing.  It was certainly true in WOW.

Seems to me they've tried that. When players found out what jackasses people could be, they either soloed or quit playing. If you have to have someone MAKE people play with you, guess where the problem is?

Originally posted by Cephus404

Because those games have failed miserably in the market.  There just aren't enough people who want "forced grouping" in a game to warrant those games to exist.  Games are expensive to create.  They need to make a profit.  Nobody is stupid enough to make a game to cater to a tiny niche audience who won't even pay the development costs.

Where's the evidence of that? Since the original EverQuest the only forced grouping game I've actually seen has been FFXI and both are still up and running with a large subscriber base. The majority of solo based MMO's start off high then drop to very low figures. Why? Because people are playing them like single player games - play them for a month then move on.

The problem I think we're seeing with all these solo based MMO's is that companies are trying to copy WoW. Now that's a given, but what I mean by that is they look at what WoW has and try to make a replica in a different world with different graphics. The fact is, they don't know what they're trying to make, what the basis of an MMORPG actually is. Original EverQuest was created by people who wanted to see their favourite MUD's in graphical 3D. They made worlds they wanted to see, monsters they wanted to fight, heroes they wanted to play..

to the OP --> GW2 seems to be the answer to your post.

I'm a recent convert to the GW world, post WoW, Rift, SWTOR