| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (14)

Posted: Sep 4th 2008 2:55PM Scopique said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"As I said before this wouldn't have been a problem if modern MMOs encouraged a mix of grouping and soloing as a player leveled up."

You've actually PLAYED modern MMOs, correct? So far, every one I've played in recent memory (and my memory is pretty good) HAS this mix of solo and group quests.

I have to say, as a soloist, I'd prefer if the designers don't try to push me to group up. I'm not anti-group; I'm anti PUG for all the reasons you mentioned above. Plus, sometimes you don't have a lot of time during your session. LFG/M CAN force you to sit around spamming the channels, with no guarantee that you'll get what you need.

I think too many people still think that the MAIN reason people play these games is to socialize. If that were the case, Second Life would have more members then WoW. People are after the advancement, the loot and the "personal glory", no matter how illusory that notion is. People still like to play the game on their own terms. Sometimes groups can get in the way of that, so developers shouldn't force people to play in a way that's counter to his or her enjoyment.
Reply

Posted: Sep 4th 2008 2:21PM J Brad Hicks said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well said. On the design of quests making grouping a pain, also consider that the standard MMO design gives quests in a random order, depending on which yellow exclamation points you find in what order. And that means that the odds of any other person you might team with having the same quests as you are basically nill, which hardly encourages cooperation. After all, only one person on the team is getting quest bonuses.

Other than that, I love grouping, but what I really hate is looking for a group, or recruiting for a group. It ends up taking longer to put together a team than it takes to just plain play the game. That's the real reason I end up treating most MMOs as single player games with a chat system. I'm just as curious as to how the open groups function will turn out in WAR as I am about the public quests.
Reply

Posted: Sep 4th 2008 2:34PM Greeen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If I take DDO as a comparison, there is so little solo content, that you have to group. That per se isn't a problem, the integrated tool works pretty well, although even there one finds LFG in the chat channels. Problem in DDO is, that while you are searching, or don't feel like grouping (by choice or by circumstances) there is not much for you to do in this specific game :( At least in e.g. you could do other things, like crafting.
(very vell described in a massively article a couple or so months back).

Re - InfamousBrad: there is in most MMOs a ShareQuest function. Works though o/c only if it is not chainquest.

Reply

Posted: Sep 4th 2008 8:30PM J Brad Hicks said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm aware that most games have a function to share quests. Having lead pick-up groups in several MMOs lately, I've been in a position to see what other quests the people on my team had. Sharing wouldn't have done any of us any good, because never -- not even once -- did any two of us have even one quest in common. So I stand by what I said: we could be doing my quest, your question, person #3's quest, doesn't matter whose quest we do, only one of us is going to get the quest completion bonus at any given time.
Reply

Posted: Sep 4th 2008 3:35PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah.. your experiences don't really match with my own. Ever try switching guilds? Also.. geared to soloing? *rolls eyes* If anything, the games you mention are geared for both, a bare necessity in this Age of Expansions. Sure there have been games more focussed on grouping only, but often that was actually one of their biggest obstacles.

In regards to the WoW tool, it's not that bad but was a case of too little - too late, should have been in there from the start. Mythic's got that going for them, but saying that'll fix grouping is a bit much. Similarly, public quests sound great, but strike me as actually more appealing to players used to soloing/casual grouping (as there's less commitment required, which I don't mean in a desparaging way) and I doubt they'll influence things like raiding or (especially) PvP at all.

As is, I personally prefer grouping and prefer doing it with friends over trying to get a random group because a) it's fun and b) pugs aren't always fun. The latter could be because people don't have a lot of experience, but I think that's an oversimplification. I've had great fun wiping all night and have had bad experiences with "elite" players cruising through an instance (or, again, wiping all night) as well.

The fun factor determines how I look for my next group first and a tool can't pick that for me, which is why I suspect we'll still see plenty of premades.

Which is not to say these features aren't nice to have. The biggest appeal WAR has to me besides being shiny and new and hopefully heavy on immersion is the quick access to fun factor. But I'm not expecting this to reform players on the scale you're talking about at all.
Reply

Posted: Sep 4th 2008 3:47PM Anatidae said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
WoW has screwed up player grouping pretty darn bad. Plain and simple. In almost every other game out there grouping has benefits.

There are a lot of factors to WoW that make it work, but I would actually say that the unfriendly grouping is a big problem. One they don't see now, but is a serious crack in their empire.

The fact is, WoW is an unfriendly place to be. Like you mentioned, only WoW has "PuGs." which are supposed to be all bad. Yet just last night I was rocking in a PuG (or I guess PuT) in City of Villains. Totally fun.

Heck, every time I sign up on Team Fortress 2 I am in a PuG of some sort. Yet that game is hugely successful.


WoW seriously blows in the community department. Their party tools suck, their guild tools suck, and they lack serious community building gameplay elements. They even go so far as to offer RP servers but ignore any features that might actually encourage RP itself.


Look, Netscape - right company at the right time. There was no way anyone was going to replace that browser yet somehow it was. Then they said IE can't be beat with Microsoft pushing it they way it does, but look at Firefox making huge inroads every day.

WoW is not the end all of MMOs. Period. There is plenty of room for improvement.
Reply

Posted: Sep 4th 2008 4:55PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
For those that have not yet had a chance to play WAR; the open party grouping system, and public quests are ridiculously good and easy to use. You can open a window and immediately see and search through all groups in the same zone as you. You can automatically join those groups then travel to meet them. Also, public quests are basically PUG raids with out the need to actually PUG. Just by helping out in a public quest you are basically treated as being part of a raid consisting of everyone in the public quest area. You get rewarded for participation (including healing and tanking) and you don't even have to stay to the end to get a reward.
Reply

Posted: Sep 4th 2008 5:19PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well, I wasn't expecting this article to turn into a Warhammer advertisement.

From that aside, the worst thing is to have grouping actually make you level slower. Grouping together means you get all the quests done faster, but then you only get 2 levels from quests that would give you 5 levels if you had solo'd them. So now you have 3 levels to make up some way because now you've run out and are forced to go to the next leveling area way too early.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2008 2:32AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Interesting comments! Personally I really think the LFG tool in WoW is a big pain in the ... For example let's assume I play my healer and I like to go into an instance. Actually I do not care about which instance. Any instance would be ok. Now, the funny thing is, you cannot do this in WoW. This stupid tool wants a specific instance. But what if someone searches a healer for a raid? What people do is they spam LFM healer on the trade or other channels.
Now let's take it a step further. Assume I am on my twink because I do not want to stand around waiting for a group. WoW's LFG tool will not work for me because, frankly, it only allows me to register for instances of my own level.
Why can't I log in, open the tool and do a quick scan about what is going on? That would be cool! Like: Hey, they're search a healer for Kara. Or: Hey, they're searching a tank for Scarlet Monestary. Let's relog. That would be cool!
Reply

Posted: Sep 4th 2008 6:20PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"In fact, the concept of the bad pick-up-group or "PUG" never really existed until modern MMOs made it possible to solo to the end game. "

You've led a very sheltered existence. Nightmare PUGs were a common feature of my EQ gaming.
Reply

Posted: Sep 4th 2008 7:54PM Thac0 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I personally dont take games too seriously and find even nightmare pugs provide me with a good time. I laugh at the disaster and have a story to tell after.

I'm really looking forward to WAR because of its group friendliness because its really hard to find even a bad PUG sometimes in games due to everyone playing solo.

I play MMOs for the people not the levels.
Reply

Posted: Sep 4th 2008 7:17PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Some nice responses in this thread and it looks like a lot of people have varying experiences with the MMOs I talked about. I going to clarify a couple points I brought up.

World of Warcraft does have a lot of group quests involving dungeons and elite mobs to kill. However, these type of quests seem more designed to encourage temporary grouping. Everyone wants to team up for the elite mob in the area, but no one wants to stay grouped for the collection quest which comes afterwards. Players should be able to solo to max level, but there shouldn't be game design which automatically breaks up a group after the "hard" part.

I should also mention that I played EverQuest from Kunark to Gates of Dischord and that the game was very group oriented at that time. There wasn't really a concept of PUGs being bad since grouping with strangers was a requirement to level. It was just sometimes you had bad luck and unstable connections. I tried the game again recently during the living legacy promotion and its much more friendly to solo though the combat is still too slow for my tastes.


Reply

Posted: Sep 4th 2008 8:42PM wjowski said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
People make solo-friendly games because people want solo-friendly games. And as long as MMOs rely upon a level-treadmill based system that ends up with top-heavy playerbases this trend is not going away anytime soon.
Reply

Posted: Sep 5th 2008 5:19AM Jeromai said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think one anchor that we'll see again in future MMOs is the open grouping system.

The flexibility for the person desiring a group to choose on his own initiative what he wants to do now - depending on what's going on around him - is great.

Unfortunately there's a caveat to open grouping. The game design has to support the formation of PUGs that aren't nightmares (on average) and encourage groups as more fun/interesting/complex than simple soloing.

Easy to understand team role function, a clear group objective which can be easily accepted by all, bonus rewards for grouping, and minor penalties for people not performing at max effectiveness seem to be the key to encouraging inclusiveness.

I can only think of three MMOs where I'd join a PUG in a heartbeat.

LOTRO's PvE has much of the same grouping problem of its precursor MMOs. But in Monster Play in the Ettenmoors, I note a more inclusive mindset at work. An open group is almost always present to grab any monster player for enough critical mass to defeat an objective - be it gathering enough people to fight freeps or take back keeps.

PvE in CoX has the benefit of a group objective that doesn't turn into a squabble over whose quest to do. Whatever mission being done will still offer xp rewards. Practically any combination of classes will succeed (as long as 3-4 players actually know what they're doing, there's room for laggards of any stripe, newbies or 'leeches' alike.)

It's still not ideal, there's still the perceived problem of fair contribution, the onus is on the team leader to spend effort to form up a team, and invites send up a 'popup' that can get in the way.

But there's a big group of people who PUG all the time, find it fun and contribute to the critical mass acceptance of PUGs as a valid playstyle.

WAR's grouping hinges on a very clever design element. Geography. People don't want to run from one corner of the land to another just to meet up, in order to do something together. So the people closest to each other are more likely to group up.

WAR's public quests and RvR 'lakes' also work on the geography principle. Stand near a public quest area and voila, you're participating in it. May as well join the open group there. Ditto for RvR areas, having a guild group is all very well, but if you're a stranger alone in a hostile land, grouping up with other loners at least gives a little more safety in numbers.

The other PvE quests in WAR still fall back on the same age-old MMO principles, so they're trickier to do in a group. You can share them, the item lottery is gone in favor of 'you killed it, you get the item/quest update,' but you're still going to be running back and forth doing something one guy has picked.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Joystiq

WoW

TUAW