Since we are in the Hype post discussion, I'd like to address something that Disco34 posted about CoS in the hype.  First, let me quote what he wrote:

Disco34 writes:
It is going to need to totally redo all of its graphics if it wants to have a serious chance. People generally want more than just a good idea.

Everybody is welcome to their opinion, and from what he wrote, Disco34 is interested in graphics in a game,  Good for him.  But in reply it is important to know a few facts about the CoS development.  The screenshots you are seeing are about two years old.  The only reason we even posted them was that MMORPG required us to have screenshots before they would list the game.  You'll notice that there haven't really been any new shots posted (other than what MMORPG yanked off the net, we didn't give them the new shots).  But even those shots are from the same basic time period. 

And though we might agree with Disco34 that a good idea is not enough... we say, that a good idea is the most important part.  And that is how we have attacked the making of this new kind of MMO.  We concepted the game, wrote the design, built the technology and all without worrying about the graphics.  Why?  Because a game does not need graphics to be good.  This is not to say that we won't be devoting time and effort into making CoS look as good as possible, it's just that it is not important to us at this time.  It is the LAST thing we will do.  There are lots of reasons for this.  Probably the most important reason is that graphic cards and technology change quickly, and this game has a long development cycle planned.  If we ran out and made shiny graphics in 2008, by the time we wanted to release the game we would have to redo them all.   We'll do the graphic improvements last, thank you, and stick with making our good idea in the meantime.

So why show the game so early and be forced to show prototype screenshots and get people like Disco34 complaining?  Well, sometimes you need to take the good with the bad, as long as the good outweighs the bad.  Our game needed exposure, and early on.  We needed to get the name out there so that people would start talking about it.  We have writen our own story for the game instead of some licensed tie in like Lotr or Star Trek.  This means we don't have the advantage of people already recognizing our name.  This means we need to spend more time getting the name of the game out there, and thus, release information earlier than normal. 

When will the next official screenshots be released?  Unknown, and not for awhile still.  Be patient, we're busy turning our good idea into a reality.  Oh, and as for getting our name out there, type Citadel of Sorcery into Google and see how many hits you get.  Even comments like Disco34's help us more than hurt us, as long as people notice the game, we're happy.  We just want to start that little snowball rolling down the hill. 

in the Hype of MMORPG LynxJSA decided to tell everyone his opinion that we are, "hobbyists that call themselves developers".   He could have just asked instead of posting in a place where we can't easily respond.

But I'll answer his unasked question anyway.   We are a small developer.  This means (currently) around 20 people.  However, small does not mean inexperienced, nor does it in any way mean hobbyist.  Many of us have worked for multiple game companies and shipped many titles to market.  I got a good laugh at a meeting this morning when I jokingly called the team members present 'hobbyists" when the combined experience in the game industry sitting at that small meeting was over 100 years.

Originally posted by Jatar

in the Hype of MMORPG LynxJSA decided to tell everyone his opinion that we are, "hobbyists that call themselves developers".   He could have just asked instead of posting in a place where we can't easily respond.

But I'll answer his unasked question anyway.   We are a small developer.  This means (currently) around 20 people.  However, small does not mean inexperienced, nor does it in any way mean hobbyist.  Many of us have worked for multiple game companies and shipped many titles to market.  I got a good laugh at a meeting this morning when I jokingly called the team members present 'hobbyists" when the combined experience in the game industry sitting at that small meeting was over 100 years.

Care to share what MMORPG's the team members have worked on in their past?

I ask because of your response in my grouping thread, trying to figure out what your lineage is that has formulated your design thinking.

   This is one of those games I check in on once in awhile, and am always like"oh man, sounds pretty good, whens it come out?'....realize it is gonna still be a long while, then sort of forget about it.

   This thread definitely clicked my interest up a notch or 2.

   One thing that seems to not be getting adressed(unless I missed it, my research has been half assed at best) is If I have my own adventure going on...and you have your own adventure going on, what reason do I have to want anything to do with you? I guess my main concern right now is how fun is a world where everyone is doing their own thing, with no need to interact.  The world sounds interesting, and I love the way you broke down the way your quests work...but honestly it sounds like a game I would enjoy if it was just a single player offline game. What makes it an mMorpg?

Originally posted by lawnmowerman

   This is one of those games I check in on once in awhile, and am always like"oh man, sounds pretty good, whens it come out?'....realize it is gonna still be a long while, then sort of forget about it.

 

   This thread definitely clicked my interest up a notch or 2.

 

   One thing that seems to not be getting adressed(unless I missed it, my research has been half assed at best) is If I have my own adventure going on...and you have your own adventure going on, what reason do I have to want anything to do with you? I guess my main concern right now is how fun is a world where everyone is doing their own thing, with no need to interact.  The world sounds interesting, and I love the way you broke down the way your quests work...but honestly it sounds like a game I would enjoy if it was just a single player offline game. What makes it an mMorpg?

 

heh....you just summarized in one paragraph what it took me a couple of text walls to say in another post.

Why would people want to group in this game? Does sound like an amazing solo adventure though.

 /heads off to find that other thread...

Originally posted by Kyleran

Originally posted by Jatar

in the Hype of MMORPG LynxJSA decided to tell everyone his opinion that we are, "hobbyists that call themselves developers".   He could have just asked instead of posting in a place where we can't easily respond.

But I'll answer his unasked question anyway.   We are a small developer.  This means (currently) around 20 people.  However, small does not mean inexperienced, nor does it in any way mean hobbyist.  Many of us have worked for multiple game companies and shipped many titles to market.  I got a good laugh at a meeting this morning when I jokingly called the team members present 'hobbyists" when the combined experience in the game industry sitting at that small meeting was over 100 years.

Care to share what MMORPG's the team members have worked on in their past?

I ask because of your response in my grouping thread, trying to figure out what your lineage is that has formulated your design thinking.

 

We are protecting the privacy of our team, so there are limits to the details we are currently willing to share. However, I will list publishers that the team has worked with on shipped titles. You can fill in the gaps. Sony, Blizzard, Mircosoft, THQ, Disney, Mattel, Eidos, MGM Interactive, Panasonic Interactive, and more. It is a diverse group. The most experience is in programming and design.

But for this project, we have also brought in people from other industries as well. Besides the experience in the MMO game industry, we are also pulling from RPG games, table top game design, novelists and the movie industry. This is a different kind of game, and we have had to explore different areas of experience to fullfill our design goals. Experience on other MMOs is all well and good, but we're not trying to make a game like other MMOs. It is as important to us to have RPG experience as MMO, after all, we are attempting to make an MMORPG unlike any other.
 

 Jatar, any comment on my post right below kylerans  ? Sorry for pestering, but thinking you may have just missed it.

Originally posted by lawnmowerman

   This is one of those games I check in on once in awhile, and am always like"oh man, sounds pretty good, whens it come out?'....realize it is gonna still be a long while, then sort of forget about it.

 

   This thread definitely clicked my interest up a notch or 2.

 

   One thing that seems to not be getting adressed(unless I missed it, my research has been half assed at best) is If I have my own adventure going on...and you have your own adventure going on, what reason do I have to want anything to do with you? I guess my main concern right now is how fun is a world where everyone is doing their own thing, with no need to interact.  The world sounds interesting, and I love the way you broke down the way your quests work...but honestly it sounds like a game I would enjoy if it was just a single player offline game. What makes it an mMorpg?

 

That's a good question, lawnmowerman.  What makes a game an MMORPG?  Like many things, we are not going with what people have come to expect from other MMOs.  We've stated before, and will again, this is a new kind of MMO game.  To answer my own questions, what makes our game an MMO is simply that millions of players can join the game.  When you play you are not limited to a game where there are no other players to group with, socialize or form guilds.  You have the opportunity to do all of these things at any time.  An offlline RPG does not have this available to you.  You MUST solo, or find your own friends (if they offer small group linking).  In an MMO my list of potential guild or group members is huge.  That's what makes it an MMO.

Now, CAN I solo play the game?  Sure.  And IF I solo play the game is it like an RPG?  Sure!   What's wrong with that?

On the other hand, there are social people.  And, like myself, ususally I find playing with other people enjoyable.  The game is ususally more fun when I group up, and so, I WILL group up when I feel I want social interaction and group tactics.  And because this IS an MMO, there will be other people like minded who will want to group with me.  Many will form guilds so that they have a pool of people to group up with easily when they log onto the game.  You can't do that (easily) with an RPG solo game.

The idea that because some antisocial people (and sometimes I feel antisocial on a given day) want to play solo somehow takes away from the people who want to be social and group up, we don't understand.  Or to put it differently, we will not discriminate between social and antisocial players by forcing either method of play in our world.  We offer a world, enjoy it solo or in a group, it's your choice.

 Thank you for the response Jatar. I appreciate your up front and direct attitude even when giving an answer to someone that they may not like instead of just making some shit up. That said, I have to admit I am discouraged by what seems like a pretty significant de-emphasis on grouping. I mean, you mentioned anti social types a couple of times...well, If I was that antisocial, Id play dragon age right?

  I really feel like its gonna be a hard sell to the mmo community that grouping and guilds are merely for the social aspect. Have you played an mmo lately? People join guilds and groups to achieve common goals...social interaction is merely an extra perk. I am by no means trying to tell you "ur doin it rong" or anything like that. Its your game and many of your design concepts sound absolutely fascinating, but people like common goals. I don't wanna talk about raids really, because im gonna guess your response would be "this is a different type of game :) ", but theres a reason eq is still running. People love the idea that there is a big, bad ass dragon over there and me and 39 of my homies are gonna go muss his ass up. People aren't nearly as into "hey, wanna join me for this quest?, it doesn't benefit you at all but hey..we can chat!" 

 Sorry if I sound like I'm being overly negative...it really just strikes me that you guys could have made this game into one of the best single player rpgs ever for a lot less money, and with what sounds like a similar result.

Originally posted by lawnmowerman

 Thank you for the response Jatar. I appreciate your up front and direct attitude even when giving an answer to someone that they may not like instead of just making some shit up. That said, I have to admit I am discouraged by what seems like a pretty significant de-emphasis on grouping. I mean, you mentioned anti social types a couple of times...well, If I was that antisocial, Id play dragon age right?

 

  I really feel like its gonna be a hard sell to the mmo community that grouping and guilds are merely for the social aspect. Have you played an mmo lately? People join guilds and groups to achieve common goals...social interaction is merely an extra perk. I am by no means trying to tell you "ur doin it rong" or anything like that. Its your game and many of your design concepts sound absolutely fascinating, but people like common goals. I don't wanna talk about raids really, because im gonna guess your response would be "this is a different type of game :) ", but theres a reason eq is still running. People love the idea that there is a big, bad ass dragon over there and me and 39 of my homies are gonna go muss his ass up. People aren't nearly as into "hey, wanna join me for this quest?, it doesn't benefit you at all but hey..we can chat!" 

 

 Sorry if I sound like I'm being overly negative...it really just strikes me that you guys could have made this game into one of the best single player rpgs ever for a lot less money, and with what sounds like a similar result.

OK, lots here I need to straighten out.  

First off, everything you have stated as a reason to group up in other games is still true in CoS.  More so in many ways.  But let's take a look at your 'we group up for common goals' comment first.   What common goals?   Raids?   Just so you know we will be offering a type of Raid that requires MASS amounts of players to work together to accomplish.  Do you HAVE to go on a raid to play the game, NO!  Raids are for people who like raids, but are not required game play.  Again, we will not FORCE grouping, we just offer it to those who want a common goal. 

As for grouping for other reasons, social is one of them (even though you state you think this is a 'hard sell').  Don't underestimate the importance of social grouping.  How often do you see people go to the movies alone?  Even though they can't even talk during the movie?  Sharing an experience is important to people.  

However, there are other reasons to group in our game.  One is group tactics.  This isn't a social aspect, it is a strategy element.  When there are archers holding back behind a group of rocks pummeling you while their melee warriors keep you busy, it's kind of hard when soloing to have some of your team flank the archers and take them out.  So, CAN you solo that battle, sure.   But you'll have more options in a group, more strategies.  I didn't say that solo playing was easy, just possible.  You'll have to run from certain battles and avoid certain situations, and have more limited tactical choices when you solo.  This is a natural consequence of doing things alone, not one we contrived into the game to force grouping.  

As for we could have made this an RPG for less money and a better result, that's silly (sorry).  The entire point of making this game is to improve the game play in the MMO game genre.  That was our single goal in making the game.  We (as players) were tired of what we were getting in other MMO games.  And as developers, could do something about it.  So we did.  This is an RPG, and this is an MMO.  Removing either part would lessen the experience.

Finally, your other comment, "hey, wanna join me for this quest?, it doesn't benefit you at all but hey..we can chat!".  That one really bugs me (laugh).  What in the world makes you think that joining me on a quest in CoS doesn't benefit your character?  When I join you on a quest our stories combine and I get everything you get out of it.  We get the same benefits, and it furthers both our stories at once.  Not only that, but it isn't like joining a quest in another MMO (can I even call those quests?).  In most other MMOs you are fetching 50 goblin eyeballs when they call it a quest.  Your example of a Raid where you have to kill a dragon, is also pretty small beans compared to joining one of our quests.  When you join a quest in CoS you are signing on to do something like go to Mt. Doom to destroy the Ring of Power and all the evil of Middle Earth is out to get you (if we were LOTR, which we're not, but the example serves).  In that story, did Aragorn join Frodo to 'chat' and have no benefit?   Or did his story and Frodo's come together with common and important purpose?  That's what grouping up is like in CoS.

Originally posted by Jatar

Originally posted by lawnmowerman

   This is one of those games I check in on once in awhile, and am always like"oh man, sounds pretty good, whens it come out?'....realize it is gonna still be a long while, then sort of forget about it.

 

   This thread definitely clicked my interest up a notch or 2.

 

   One thing that seems to not be getting adressed(unless I missed it, my research has been half assed at best) is If I have my own adventure going on...and you have your own adventure going on, what reason do I have to want anything to do with you? I guess my main concern right now is how fun is a world where everyone is doing their own thing, with no need to interact.  The world sounds interesting, and I love the way you broke down the way your quests work...but honestly it sounds like a game I would enjoy if it was just a single player offline game. What makes it an mMorpg?

 

The idea that because some antisocial people (and sometimes I feel antisocial on a given day) want to play solo somehow takes away from the people who want to be social and group up, we don't understand.  Or to put it differently, we will not discriminate between social and antisocial players by forcing either method of play in our world.  We offer a world, enjoy it solo or in a group, it's your choice.

The problem with your last line is that if both solo and group get the same rewards players will not group even if they rather group because it provides them nothing extra.

Grouping needs better rewards.  Could be exp, loot, money whatever but it needs to be something.   Grouping adds in some bad aspects as well which is why grouping needs to be better rewarded.   When grouping you have to deal with others that might not be on the same page as yourself, which can be bad at times.  Group also has the downside of being "Slower" because you have to wait on others to go to the bathroom, go get something to drink, ect. 

Hmmm, the Lord of the Rings reference there is just getting me wondering, will there be epic-style quests? And will they be the majority of quests, or just the odd handful?

Originally posted by TdogSkal

The problem with your last line is that if both solo and group get the same rewards players will not group even if they rather group because it provides them nothing extra.

Grouping needs better rewards.  Could be exp, loot, money whatever but it needs to be something.   Grouping adds in some bad aspects as well which is why grouping needs to be better rewarded.   When grouping you have to deal with others that might not be on the same page as yourself, which can be bad at times.  Group also has the downside of being "Slower" because you have to wait on others to go to the bathroom, go get something to drink, ect. 

 

Players will not group even if they want to if they get nothing extra.  Hmm, I'd have to disagree.  The statement says that they want to, therefore, they will.  However your argument also fails in that you assume that treasure is your only reason to group.  I group with players for several reasons, shared fun and experience, group tactics and taking on goals that are bigger.  All of these things are true in CoS.   (And, rewards in the game are scaled by the group size, so you don't get less for grouping, you get an equal share to what you would get in solo).

As for groups being slower, if that annoys you then don't group.   You guys keep thinking that it is our duty to make people group up, it isn't.  It is our duty (or goal, if you wish) to make an enjoyable game that allows you to play however you wish.

Originally posted by Blazz

Hmmm, the Lord of the Rings reference there is just getting me wondering, will there be epic-style quests? And will they be the majority of quests, or just the odd handful?

All quests in CoS are Epic style quests (hopefully worthy of a novel).   This is the primary play of the game.  However, it is not the only kind of game play available.  Sometimes you don't want to be on an Epic quest that takes 12 hours of game play to complete.  Because of that we offer other forms of fun in the game.  There are Adventures.  These take about two hours, and though they are more interesting than 'fetch me ten rat tails' as in other MMOs, they are not as involved as a full quest.  An example might be, there is a siege going on of a castle of your allies, break the siege if you can.

Then there are Crises, which are things happening in real time at that moment.  A war party has come across out of No Mans Land and is assaulting a town, save the town if you can, but you have to drop everything and go NOW, or the town will fall.

But there is more.... bounty hunting, monster trapping, artifact recovery, etc.   These are all sub games outside the quest system...

and don't forget Raids.   These are generally war campaigns where large groups of players take on a large strategic goal.

Anyway, that's a lot to digest, but the simple answer is, quests are big stories, but you can do other things in between if you want.

Originally posted by Jatar

Originally posted by TdogSkal

The problem with your last line is that if both solo and group get the same rewards players will not group even if they rather group because it provides them nothing extra.

Grouping needs better rewards.  Could be exp, loot, money whatever but it needs to be something.   Grouping adds in some bad aspects as well which is why grouping needs to be better rewarded.   When grouping you have to deal with others that might not be on the same page as yourself, which can be bad at times.  Group also has the downside of being "Slower" because you have to wait on others to go to the bathroom, go get something to drink, ect. 

 

 

Players will not group even if they want to if they get nothing extra.  Hmm, I'd have to disagree.  The statement says that they want to, therefore, they will.  However your argument also fails in that you assume that treasure is your only reason to group.  I group with players for several reasons, shared fun and experience, group tactics and taking on goals that are bigger.  All of these things are true in CoS.   (And, rewards in the game are scaled by the group size, so you don't get less for grouping, you get an equal share to what you would get in solo).

As for groups being slower, if that annoys you then don't group.   You guys keep thinking that it is our duty to make people group up, it isn't.  It is our duty (or goal, if you wish) to make an enjoyable game that allows you to play however you wish.

I agree with you about the it is not your duty.   Your duty is to make a fun game that solo or group players have fun in.

From my experense with gamers in MMOs, without some reason to group most will not group.  Not all but most.  Look at WoW, sure some people group and do quest but most will not because the rewards are less for grouping.  This is what I was worring about more then anything else.   Grouping would not have rewards that would make grouping worth it.   Games like WoW had no reason to group outside certain places and for the most part players soloed and grouped when they had to.  Games like Classic EQ, players grouped more then they soloed because it was more rewarding. 

Grouping is slower because you have to wait for others, this is not a problem for me personally as I love grouping and get bored quickly soloing but for others that is not the case. 

Originally posted by TdogSkal

Originally posted by Jatar

Originally posted by TdogSkal

The problem with your last line is that if both solo and group get the same rewards players will not group even if they rather group because it provides them nothing extra.

Grouping needs better rewards.  Could be exp, loot, money whatever but it needs to be something.   Grouping adds in some bad aspects as well which is why grouping needs to be better rewarded.   When grouping you have to deal with others that might not be on the same page as yourself, which can be bad at times.  Group also has the downside of being "Slower" because you have to wait on others to go to the bathroom, go get something to drink, ect. 

 

 

Players will not group even if they want to if they get nothing extra.  Hmm, I'd have to disagree.  The statement says that they want to, therefore, they will.  However your argument also fails in that you assume that treasure is your only reason to group.  I group with players for several reasons, shared fun and experience, group tactics and taking on goals that are bigger.  All of these things are true in CoS.   (And, rewards in the game are scaled by the group size, so you don't get less for grouping, you get an equal share to what you would get in solo).

As for groups being slower, if that annoys you then don't group.   You guys keep thinking that it is our duty to make people group up, it isn't.  It is our duty (or goal, if you wish) to make an enjoyable game that allows you to play however you wish.

 

I agree with you about the it is not your duty.   Your duty is to make a fun game that solo or group players have fun in.

From my experense with gamers in MMOs, without some reason to group most will not group.  Not all but most.  Look at WoW, sure some people group and do quest but most will not because the rewards are less for grouping.  This is what I was worring about more then anything else.   Grouping would not have rewards that would make grouping worth it.   Games like WoW had no reason to group outside certain places and for the most part players soloed and grouped when they had to.  Games like Classic EQ, players grouped more then they soloed because it was more rewarding. 

Grouping is slower because you have to wait for others, this is not a problem for me personally as I love grouping and get bored quickly soloing but for others that is not the case. 

I don't get your argument, group takes longer to form but the 10 NPC enemies will fall a lot faster, you will also get parts of other peoples storyline within a group, and potential for variation.

Sounds to me like you have a win win situation where people can try a quest if they find it too hard they can group. But they get a chance to try it solo....

Jatar consistently explains the game system. I am not sure people get it, it is different but a game and MMO non the less and the concept is great..

 Jatar, again I have to commend your direct and honest answers. Your explanation definitely allayed most of my concerns about grouping which was really the only area of the game that didnt sound fantastic to me. I am not in the camp that enjoys fprced grouping but I do like the option to be there to group. Not just the option to group but a REASON to do it . There are of course also days I wanna log into a game and screw around on my own, at my own pace. Sounds like you guys are working to strike the right balance. I am also glad to hear there are raids. Old school eq guy here and what can i say?...i like raiding.

  I hope this game turns out to be a solid representation in fact that it is in your vision Jatar, it is not only the exact kind of game I'm looking for but what our stale and rehashed genre needs. Godspeed citadel of sorcery people(dont know your companies name offhand), godspeed!

Originally posted by lawnmowerman

 Jatar, again I have to commend your direct and honest answers. Your explanation definitely allayed most of my concerns about grouping which was really the only area of the game that didnt sound fantastic to me. I am not in the camp that enjoys fprced grouping but I do like the option to be there to group. Not just the option to group but a REASON to do it . There are of course also days I wanna log into a game and screw around on my own, at my own pace. Sounds like you guys are working to strike the right balance. I am also glad to hear there are raids. Old school eq guy here and what can i say?...i like raiding.

  I hope this game turns out to be a solid representation in fact that it is in your vision Jatar, it is not only the exact kind of game I'm looking for but what our stale and rehashed genre needs. Godspeed citadel of sorcery people(dont know your companies name offhand), godspeed!

Interesting how you and I interpret his responses. Despite reading sevearl posts on the subject, I'm still not convinced therre's reallyany decent reason to do the group content, might as well solo everything.

In another post Jatar mentioned he and 3 friend were playing together, which makes me wonder if he regularly has played MMO's with his real life friends. which is actually not how most people play these games. It may have colored their design decisions regarding grouping and they won't work out so well for people like myself who always enters these games alone and builds social interactions in each one.

I'm not convinced this game has enough incentives to get people to group, but it is a radically different design so I guess we'll have to wait and see what comes out to determine how it will play out.

Originally posted by Kyleran

Originally posted by lawnmowerman

 Jatar, again I have to commend your direct and honest answers. Your explanation definitely allayed most of my concerns about grouping which was really the only area of the game that didnt sound fantastic to me. I am not in the camp that enjoys fprced grouping but I do like the option to be there to group. Not just the option to group but a REASON to do it . There are of course also days I wanna log into a game and screw around on my own, at my own pace. Sounds like you guys are working to strike the right balance. I am also glad to hear there are raids. Old school eq guy here and what can i say?...i like raiding.

  I hope this game turns out to be a solid representation in fact that it is in your vision Jatar, it is not only the exact kind of game I'm looking for but what our stale and rehashed genre needs. Godspeed citadel of sorcery people(dont know your companies name offhand), godspeed!

Interesting how you and I interpret his responses. Despite reading sevearl posts on the subject, I'm still not convinced therre's reallyany decent reason to do the group content, might as well solo everything.

In another post Jatar mentioned he and 3 friend were playing together, which makes me wonder if he regularly has played MMO's with his real life friends. which is actually not how most people play these games. It may have colored their design decisions regarding grouping and they won't work out so well for people like myself who always enters these games alone and builds social interactions in each one.

I'm not convinced this game has enough incentives to get people to group, but it is a radically different design so I guess we'll have to wait and see what comes out to determine how it will play out.

Well, first off, I'm not the sole designer on this game, we have designers with a wide range of both play and development experience. 

But personally, I've played virtually every major MMO on the market, with every possible combination of play.  Solo, grouping with strangers, grouping with friends, grouping by guild, grouping for raids, grouping with stray dogs... you name it.  Er., well maybe not the stray dogs.

But anyway, convinced or not, CoS will not  force grouping.  We will make it advantageous at times, rewarding at times, and fun.  We will make it easy for people who like to group with strangers to find like minded people.  We're going beyond what you may be used to in this area, adding but not taking away, from existing systems for helping players to find players to join their group.  We WANT players who like to group to be able to find others.  We will go out of our way to help them, but we will never force a single person who wants to solo or only play with their friends to group with strangers.  The very idea of this just makes all of our design team shake our heads in puzzlement.  Anything that is forced on the entire community because a portion of the people like it is to be avoided if at all possible. And forcing people to do this kind of thing is a great way of driving off a lot of players.