Most people have time to group in MMO, they just don't want to because they refuse to make the effort.
Off topic: Anyone know if you can still embed a video on the forum?
I think it depends on how long the 'time to group' is.
Like I said in my OP, '2-3 hours 3,4 times a week?'. If you are in the demographic that is the biggest, then odds are that 'no you cannot due to RL commitments.' At least according to the US Census.
20 -30 mins? Probably yes.
Some people want to 'make the effort' but when a child calls his/her mommy/daddy, most people will tend to the child.
RL > MMO
Like I said, the demographics that started the mainstream MMO (aka, My First MMO is WoW) were the GenX (1960~1980) and the early GenY (1980-2000). Guess what? Both aged. I know! Mindblowing isn't it?!
This is why it's important for developers to simply make interacting with guildies (such as grouping) easier than ever before. The idea is to minimize the time to find the group, and maximize the potential for progression and fun for participating.
LFG/LFD can work, but honestly, when it pulls from megaservers with no priority given to guildmates or alliance-mates, it falls flat on its face. You play for 45 minutes without ever doing anything but spamming 2-3 abilities in the same scenery over and over. That's about as boring as it gets, personally.
You play for 45 minutes without ever doing anything but spamming 2-3 abilities in the same scenery over and over. That's about as boring as it gets, personally.
That is an issue of making combat fun, and has nothing to do with groups. Just make fun combat like in SP co-op games.
You play for 45 minutes without ever doing anything but spamming 2-3 abilities in the same scenery over and over. That's about as boring as it gets, personally.
That is an issue of making combat fun, and has nothing to do with groups. Just make fun combat like in SP co-op games.
True story, but it gets exacerbated during group content where the trinity is so rigidly applied that one player spams taunt, another spams heal, and the rest spam nukes.
I believe in a player character not being able to fulfill all roles at once.. But when fulfilling a certain role becomes so boring, I can definitely understand why some players dislike the idea.
Most people have time to group in MMO, they just don't want to because they refuse to make the effort.
Off topic: Anyone know if you can still embed a video on the forum?
I think it depends on how long the 'time to group' is.
Like I said in my OP, '2-3 hours 3,4 times a week?'. If you are in the demographic that is the biggest, then odds are that 'no you cannot due to RL commitments.' At least according to the US Census.
20 -30 mins? Probably yes.
Some people want to 'make the effort' but when a child calls his/her mommy/daddy, most people will tend to the child.
RL > MMO
Like I said, the demographics that started the mainstream MMO (aka, My First MMO is WoW) were the GenX (1960~1980) and the early GenY (1980-2000). Guess what? Both aged. I know! Mindblowing isn't it?!
This is why it's important for developers to simply make interacting with guildies (such as grouping) easier than ever before. The idea is to minimize the time to find the group, and maximize the potential for progression and fun for participating.
LFG/LFD can work, but honestly, when it pulls from megaservers with no priority given to guildmates or alliance-mates, it falls flat on its face. You play for 45 minutes without ever doing anything but spamming 2-3 abilities in the same scenery over and over. That's about as boring as it gets, personally.
Yet you have lots of people who don't want grouping to be easy, they don't want LFG, they don't want people to be able to cross-server group, they want it to be as difficult as possible, such that people only group with those that they know and there are no pick-up groups at all so that grouping requires that you become connected to the same people over time.
Hardly anyone wants to do that these days. Grouping is just a means to an end, not a method to socialize. Combat in these games is often spamming the same keystroke shortcuts over and over and over. That's a problem with the combat, not with the grouping mechanism.
Since OP likes to imagine the majority of players have kids and that's why they no longer want group content let's put down some facts.
The bitesize content trend started with wotlk, but according to a studiy posted in 2010 only 20-25% of wow-players had kids. Blizzard didn't change to shorter dungeons because players started to have kids, they changed it because players prefer shorter dungeons.
In swtor the average player spent 40 hours per week playing the game during the first month. If that's the average person, they aren't taking care of kids and they definitely have time to play group-content.
Its the minority that can't play group content, the majority have the needed time but just don't want to play it.
People prefer shorter dungeons because they have lives, not necessarily kids. They don't have the time to spend on long dungeons or long raids or long content and Blizzard wanted to keep those people playing, therefore they changed their content to reflect the playing styles of a huge portion of their playerbase.
It doesn't change anything, people still don't play the long content, that's why things changed. Things didn't change first and people had to adapt to it.
Plus, with so much entertainment option today, people may not want to stuck in just one game for a long time.
What about the players that view the genre as a hobby instead of throw away entertainment? The ones that actually enjoy figuring stuff out and getting lost in long complex dungeons with other like minded players.
I'm getting pretty sick of the "i don't have the time to invest in something that requires it" nonsense that i keep hearing. That's what other genres are for.
Most people have time to group in MMO, they just don't want to because they refuse to make the effort.
Off topic: Anyone know if you can still embed a video on the forum?
I think it depends on how long the 'time to group' is.
Like I said in my OP, '2-3 hours 3,4 times a week?'. If you are in the demographic that is the biggest, then odds are that 'no you cannot due to RL commitments.' At least according to the US Census.
20 -30 mins? Probably yes.
Some people want to 'make the effort' but when a child calls his/her mommy/daddy, most people will tend to the child.
RL > MMO
Like I said, the demographics that started the mainstream MMO (aka, My First MMO is WoW) were the GenX (1960~1980) and the early GenY (1980-2000). Guess what? Both aged. I know! Mindblowing isn't it?!
This is why it's important for developers to simply make interacting with guildies (such as grouping) easier than ever before. The idea is to minimize the time to find the group, and maximize the potential for progression and fun for participating.
LFG/LFD can work, but honestly, when it pulls from megaservers with no priority given to guildmates or alliance-mates, it falls flat on its face. You play for 45 minutes without ever doing anything but spamming 2-3 abilities in the same scenery over and over. That's about as boring as it gets, personally.
Yet you have lots of people who don't want grouping to be easy, they don't want LFG, they don't want people to be able to cross-server group, they want it to be as difficult as possible, such that people only group with those that they know and there are no pick-up groups at all so that grouping requires that you become connected to the same people over time.
Hardly anyone wants to do that these days. Grouping is just a means to an end, not a method to socialize. Combat in these games is often spamming the same keystroke shortcuts over and over and over. That's a problem with the combat, not with the grouping mechanism.
Honestly, if cross-server grouping is needed, then your MMO is either failing miserably, or a server merge is in order. Cross-server grouping in LFD actively prevents players from finding players that they can count on to be available to play with consistently if they wish.
I don't know anyone who's said or implied that there should be no pick-up groups. In fact, aside from the flawed method of cross-server group queues that I mentioned above, I say developers should be searching for ways to make pickup grouping faster and easier. A way that encourages players to "bookmark" those players they enjoyed playing with for future play sessions. That doesn't mean a lack of pickup groups. That means a way to passively connect characters to one another because they simply share the same playtimes, are open to grouping, and enjoyed their past sessions grouping with one another.
If you're going to do LFD, give priority to guild and alliance-mates in the matchmaking system (no need to even spam guild chat asking for buddies to group with). Allow players to easily bookmark players they specifically enjoyed playing with (as I mentioned), and give extra priority to those players when available. Pretty soon, players that play consistently at the same time begin seeing one another over and over. They recognize one another, and it makes it that much easier for a conversation to start that could end with one player getting invited to another's guild. Then, that player has an entire guild (and, ideally, an entire alliance as well) worth of other folks that are awarded priority when he LFDs. These players are already connected to him in a certain way that naturally invites cooperation and interaction. It also provides a higher level of accountability, should any player in that alliance act like a jerk. Then, add in another player that consistently plays at the same time, but isn't a part of the alliance.
Now, the first player has joined a new guild and recognizes this new player from multiple groups. This new player has a guild of his own, but no alliance. Networking does its thing, naturally, and a new guild is welcomed into an alliance (ideally). Hell, you could even have a method by which guilds and alliances "bookmark" entire alliances and guilds. A simple, easy-to-use system of networking that provides a behind-the-scenes way for players to target other players or groups of players they enjoy playing with for LFD. These bookmarks can be used as a sort of "trial" run for new guilds being considered for invite by the alliance, without the commitment of placing the alliance name on potential addition's crest.
Automate networking, while allowing players to give the system input on which instances/players they particularly enjoyed for future reference. THAT'S a LFD/LFG system I can get behind. Not one that actively works against such interaction.
You play for 45 minutes without ever doing anything but spamming 2-3 abilities in the same scenery over and over. That's about as boring as it gets, personally.
That is an issue of making combat fun, and has nothing to do with groups. Just make fun combat like in SP co-op games.
True story, but it gets exacerbated during group content where the trinity is so rigidly applied that one player spams taunt, another spams heal, and the rest spam nukes.
I believe in a player character not being able to fulfill all roles at once.. But when fulfilling a certain role becomes so boring, I can definitely understand why some players dislike the idea.
That is a problem with the trinity. GW2, or D3 combat can still be enjoyed in groups, but no trinity, so it can be done.
Group content in wow is working perfectly for the player base you can do a dungeon in 15-20 mins how can you ask for shorter than that? If you can't devote time to raiding that is no big deal there are thousands of solo quests that you can do on your own time and dungeon/scenarios are fun.
Don't feel bad because you don't have the top of the line raiding equipment, since you only need raiding equipment for raiding.... It's an endless cycle there.
Your gear doesn't even matter if you just start doing normal groups and if you don't want to spend the time getting gear for heroic dungeons (which isn't hard whatsoever) you could always just continue on happily playing alts and soloing for years.
Raiding does still work fine for many of us who keep doing it. We happen to be 20-50 yrs old, and we still schedule it in and love it!
In fact, WoW made raiding so rediculously easy after Everquest 1, how can you even complain? The raid zones are split into parts, so they are shorter and easy to schedule in, and a 2-3 hr raid was unheard of for Everquest 1, raids used to take 4-8 hrs plus back in the old days...
I mean losing your corpse and needing a ressurection? Actually losing experience and having to get it back ? Having to grind alternate ability points? Unheard of!!! WoW is as easy as you can possibly get, and if you're to busy for WoW, there is no shame in that, there are plenty of thousands of great single player / multi player co-op online games that you can play, it just means you are not a true mmo gamer.
MMO Gamers expect things to take several hours, we know that the game is meant to be a time drain, otherwise we'd be playing MOBAs and other shorter single player affairs.
The causal market destroyed mmos, by thinking everything has to be quicker, no it doesn't. We want social interaction and communitys back, we want loyal members who hang out and have fun, instead of constant hotbar rotationals, and people to busy with actiony combat to communicate... Or to obsessed with the parser, to just chill out and have fun...
In fact , the longer raids and groups on Everquest 1 had more communication and communitys than we have had on most mmos other than Lord of the Rings Online these days... simply because they had more downtime and long camping sessions!
Honestly, if cross-server grouping is needed, then your MMO is either failing miserably, or a server merge is in order. Cross-server grouping in LFD actively prevents players from finding players that they can count on to be available to play with consistently if they wish.
No, if your game needs cross-server grouping, that just means that the majority of people playing the game have no use for grouping at all. It doesn't actively prevent anything because nobody is required to use the LFD/LFG system in any MMO at all. If you want to put together a group of friends that you regularly group with, knock yourself out. You act like this is a conspiracy to keep people from doing that. Anyone who wishes to, can. The fact that most people don't only shows that this gameplay preference isn't popular and you can't blame the game for that.
I don't know anyone who's said or implied that there should be no pick-up groups. In fact, aside from the flawed method of cross-server group queues that I mentioned above, I say developers should be searching for ways to make pickup grouping faster and easier. A way that encourages players to "bookmark" those players they enjoyed playing with for future play sessions. That doesn't mean a lack of pickup groups. That means a way to passively connect characters to one another because they simply share the same playtimes, are open to grouping, and enjoyed their past sessions grouping with one another.
You need to look around here some more because there are plenty of people, especially when WoW implemented LFG, that complained long and hard that any and all PUGs were an affront to their preferred gameplay. All groups should be picked from people you already know, random groups, put together by the game are always a bad thing, it gets in the way of being social. Don't ask me, I think it's a stupid argument too.
If you're going to do LFD, give priority to guild and alliance-mates in the matchmaking system (no need to even spam guild chat asking for buddies to group with). Allow players to easily bookmark players they specifically enjoyed playing with (as I mentioned), and give extra priority to those players when available. Pretty soon, players that play consistently at the same time begin seeing one another over and over. They recognize one another, and it makes it that much easier for a conversation to start that could end with one player getting invited to another's guild. Then, that player has an entire guild (and, ideally, an entire alliance as well) worth of other folks that are awarded priority when he LFDs. These players are already connected to him in a certain way that naturally invites cooperation and interaction. It also provides a higher level of accountability, should any player in that alliance act like a jerk. Then, add in another player that consistently plays at the same time, but isn't a part of the alliance.
If you're going to do that, why have LFD in the first place? Just get on guild chat and find a group on your own. The reason LFD/LFG exists is because people don't want to do that, in fact, more and more people are foregoing giulds at all. You're trying to force people to do things that they clearly don't want to do. Most people, if they're going to group at all, just want to get into a quick group, go consume some content, and ultimately just use the other people in the group for their own purposes because that's really what grouping is. It's using other people to do things that you can't do yourself. If they end up making friends along the way, they can and many do. It shouldn't be required.
Now, the first player has joined a new guild and recognizes this new player from multiple groups. This new player has a guild of his own, but no alliance. Networking does its thing, naturally, and a new guild is welcomed into an alliance (ideally). Hell, you could even have a method by which guilds and alliances "bookmark" entire alliances and guilds. A simple, easy-to-use system of networking that provides a behind-the-scenes way for players to target other players or groups of players they enjoy playing with for LFD. These bookmarks can be used as a sort of "trial" run for new guilds being considered for invite by the alliance, without the commitment of placing the alliance name on potential addition's crest.
That assumes anyone wants to be in a guild in the first place. Many don't, myself included.
Automate networking, while allowing players to give the system input on which instances/players they particularly enjoyed for future reference. THAT'S a LFD/LFG system I can get behind. Not one that actively works against such interaction.
There are none that actively work against interpersonal interaction, anyone *CAN* do it if they want, it's not rocket science. You want a system that ENCOURAGES it, not ALLOWS it. That's where we part company. I want people to be able to do what they want without coercion.
The causal market destroyed mmos, by thinking everything has to be quicker, no it doesn't. We want social interaction and communitys back, we want loyal members who hang out and have fun, instead of constant hotbar rotationals, and people to busy with actiony combat to communicate... Or to obsessed with the parser, to just chill out and have fun...
Who are "we"? I certainly don't want social interaction and communities.
Does the mass market want that? If so, why are lobby games so popular?
Everyone here makes it sound like those "good old days" of WoW was this great, community-driven experience where we all helped each other out. It wasn't. In fact, even in games which were designed around interdependence and community, the most significant players in our community (the most successful, largest guilds) wanted none of it.
When we had opportunities for interdependence, what we did was buffbot and alt it, like in SWG. When we had opportunities for 40 man raids, what we did was get picky with who we wanted. And when we had these massive subscriber numbers of players come in to games like WoW, what we did was ignore the vast majority of folks in favor of our guilds.
No...the time when everyone says was so "social" was only social in the sense of the old "society culture" that was great for some, but not for all. If you were an achiever who played these games to be the best, this society was for you. If you were someone who liked to think of these games as a kind of "team sport", this society was for you. And if you were someone who was committed to doing whatever it took to master the content and make a name for yourself as a player (not as a character, mind you), this society was for you.
But if you were a roleplayer, this society wasn't for you. That's because everybody worth knowing was logged onto TS and Vent, and you didn't want to do that. If you were a housewife, this society wasn't for you. Because it was a society based around content consumption and min/maxing, and you just didn't have any place. If you were a crafter or support character, this society wasn't for you. Because those roles were botted, and your only real worth was whether you could get it done in the loot department. If you liked to meet new people in pick up groups, this society wasn't for you. Because everybody was so interested in success and efficiency, people had more reason not to group with people than to group with people.
We can go on and on, lamenting the loss of that old "guildarchy" that existed over the last ten years, talking about how the content and the culture forced people to work together, talking about the funny stuff said on TeamSpeak, and talking about things like the market. But if it was such a utopia, why did we have the applications, the "must have TeamSpeak," the "Dragon Kill Points," the PUG-bashing, and the standard, boiler plate advice of "The most important thing to do is to find a good guild?" How many people has this genre scared off, because nobody wanted to play with them? I think a lot more than we'd like to accept.
Methinks it has a lot to do with the idea that we weren't as social as we think we were towards each other in the "old days," and that we had to take measures to artificially make the games more social. And those who didn't fit in got drummed out...for no other reason than they didn't have the "right stuff."
I don't see today's MMO as an anti-social MMO. I see it as a way to repair the antisocial atmosphere we (yes we, not the devs) created over the last ten years.
__________________________ "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it." --Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints." --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls." --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
No, if your game needs cross-server grouping, that just means that the majority of people playing the game have no use for grouping at all. It doesn't actively prevent anything because nobody is required to use the LFD/LFG system in any MMO at all. If you want to put together a group of friends that you regularly group with, knock yourself out. You act like this is a conspiracy to keep people from doing that. Anyone who wishes to, can. The fact that most people don't only shows that this gameplay preference isn't popular and you can't blame the game for that.
You need to look around here some more because there are plenty of people, especially when WoW implemented LFG, that complained long and hard that any and all PUGs were an affront to their preferred gameplay. All groups should be picked from people you already know, random groups, put together by the game are always a bad thing, it gets in the way of being social. Don't ask me, I think it's a stupid argument too.
If you're going to do that, why have LFD in the first place? Just get on guild chat and find a group on your own. The reason LFD/LFG exists is because people don't want to do that, in fact, more and more people are foregoing giulds at all. You're trying to force people to do things that they clearly don't want to do. Most people, if they're going to group at all, just want to get into a quick group, go consume some content, and ultimately just use the other people in the group for their own purposes because that's really what grouping is. It's using other people to do things that you can't do yourself. If they end up making friends along the way, they can and many do. It shouldn't be required.
That assumes anyone wants to be in a guild in the first place. Many don't, myself included.
There are none that actively work against interpersonal interaction, anyone *CAN* do it if they want, it's not rocket science. You want a system that ENCOURAGES it, not ALLOWS it. That's where we part company. I want people to be able to do what they want without coercion.
It actively discourages it because when players are pulled from a pool across the entire gaming population, not only are they dismally unlikely to ever see that person again but, even if they did, they could not interact outside of that instanced content. My entire point about the LFG/LFD system I described was about providing easy ways for players to mark and play together with players they enjoyed playing with. Pulling from across servers for instanced dungeons (ala WoW) actively prevents any lasting connections because the players do not zone back out to the same server. And what's your beef with LFG? You consistently rail against it like implementing easier ways for folks to find other players with similar interests will somehow render your preferred playstyle obsolete. As I've said time and time again, solo play should be viable. I merely described a method by which I think developers could help players interact more easily and consistently with players they enjoy playing with. A way to improve the LFG/LFD system to help promote social connections within the game. Not sure why that strikes a nerve with you.
If you'd like to take the time, please point me in the direction of those posts railing against PUGs and claiming them to be "an affront" to anyone's gameplay. If the thread is active, I'll gladly chime in with why I think they're wrong and agree with you here.
You have it because it's even easier to group with guildies if you can hit one button and have the game automatically add you together? It's all about making things easy, because even (especially) in large guilds, the majority of folks are uneasy (at least at first) with the idea of spamming their guild channel looking for help. This isn't limited to MMOs; this sort of hesitance to speak out in front of large groups of people occurs throughout every facet of society. It's a natural part of the transition between a group of strangers and a group of friends/acquaintances. The system I propose enables the player to take a step towards friends/acquaintances in a much smaller (initially) and more comfortable manner. They can simply flag themselves and the system can do the rest of the work for them. That's what LFG/LFD was originally built for; I'm simply prioritizing the list so they are less likely to get thrown in with random folks they don't enjoy playing with. After being paired with guild/alliance-mates, the discussion becomes small-group, where folks are much more likely to open up and begin conversation. Sue me for that if you like.
It's fine if you do not want to become a part of a guild. The system I described still allows you to easily flag players you enjoyed playing with and prioritizes those players. Heck, you could even prioritize an entire guild without being a part of said guild (if you liked). Use the system enough, and pretty soon you should be seeing familiar faces pretty often (if you wish). And again, the system promotes accountability here. Dicks that hatemonger or have an elitist attitude will end up grouping with themselves, while the rest of the folks on the server who aren't pricks will enjoy a much wider availability.
As I described above, LFD across servers actively prevents anything but the shortest of interactions between players. Nothing lasting comes out of it by the very nature of its pool of players. The system I describe has no such limitations. It encourages social connections that can be used repeatedly throughout the game to both avoid undesirable players and provide the easiest means for connecting with desirable ones.. It doesn't coerce anyone into anything. As you like to point out about grouping: it's simply an option. You don't have to use it if you don't want to, and if you don't, it won't affect you in any way. Not sure how you made the jump from encourage to coercion.
The causal market destroyed mmos, by thinking everything has to be quicker, no it doesn't. We want social interaction and communitys back, we want loyal members who hang out and have fun, instead of constant hotbar rotationals, and people to busy with actiony combat to communicate... Or to obsessed with the parser, to just chill out and have fun...
Who are "we"? I certainly don't want social interaction and communities.
Does the mass market want that? If so, why are lobby games so popular?
Why are FPSs? Why are mobile games? Why are singleplayer RPGs?
They are for a myriad of reasons, not just the ones that suit your argument.
I've seen plenty of social interaction in my time with Smite. It's a lobby game. I don't like it for the lack of interaction. I like it for its skill-based combat, its unique take on God vs. God, and its replayability due to the many Gods available (with more coming out every month or so). That has nothing to do with preferences for social interaction.
People play certain genres for different reasons. Not just your reasons.
Casuals are nit the ones that obsess over rotations or parsers. Those are what the hard-core players do. Casuals are the ones that are just chilling out and having fun.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
It actively discourages it because when players are pulled from a pool across the entire gaming population, not only are they dismally unlikely to ever see that person again but, even if they did, they could not interact outside of that instanced content. My entire point about the LFG/LFD system I described was about providing easy ways for players to mark and play together with players they enjoyed playing with. Pulling from across servers for instanced dungeons (ala WoW) actively prevents any lasting connections because the players do not zone back out to the same server. And what's your beef with LFG? You consistently rail against it like implementing easier ways for folks to find other players with similar interests will somehow render your preferred playstyle obsolete. As I've said time and time again, solo play should be viable. I merely described a method by which I think developers could help players interact more easily and consistently with players they enjoy playing with. A way to improve the LFG/LFD system to help promote social connections within the game. Not sure why that strikes a nerve with you.
No, people put themselves into the cross-server LFG system because it's fast and pretty much guaranteed to produce a group in very little time so people can just play the game and not sit around waiting. That's all most people care about. They don't care who is in their group, only that they get playing, get XP, get drops and get finished. What you are describing is something most players couldn't care less about. They don't care about finding people to group with again and again. You might care about it. Most players do not. You're trying to impose your own desires on others and it doesn't work that way. Again, I have no horse in this race, I only play solo, I virtually never group so I couldn't care less about PUGs, cross-server matching or anything of the sort. It doesn't affect me one bit. I'm just pointing out that things work the way they work because they are preferred by the majority of players. In fact, I'd say you are trying to protect your preferred playstyle more than anything else, by pushing others to play like you do and care about the things you do. You want more social connections in the game but that is not what most people want, that's why these games have consistently moved away from more social connections.
If you'd like to take the time, please point me in the direction of those posts railing against PUGs and claiming them to be "an affront" to anyone's gameplay. If the thread is active, I'll gladly chime in with why I think they're wrong and agree with you here.
It's been a couple of years but you're welcome to go looking if you want.
You have it because it's even easier to group with guildies if you can hit one button and have the game automatically add you together? It's all about making things easy, because even (especially) in large guilds, the majority of folks are uneasy (at least at first) with the idea of spamming their guild channel looking for help. This isn't limited to MMOs; this sort of hesitance to speak out in front of large groups of people occurs throughout every facet of society. It's a natural part of the transition between a group of strangers and a group of friends/acquaintances. The system I propose enables the player to take a step towards friends/acquaintances in a much smaller (initially) and more comfortable manner. They can simply flag themselves and the system can do the rest of the work for them. That's what LFG/LFD was originally built for; I'm simply prioritizing the list so they are less likely to get thrown in with random folks they don't enjoy playing with. After being paired with guild/alliance-mates, the discussion becomes small-group, where folks are much more likely to open up and begin conversation. Sue me for that if you like.
It can only add you together if you're all on at the same time but as many people, perhaps most people, don't have a regular gaming time set aside where they are on at the same time every day or even on the same day of the week, such a system would be effectively pointless and you'd have to go to the LFG system to fill in the holes in the group anyhow virtually every time. It's been my experience in the past, even with very large guilds, that people are not at all uneasy about spamming guild chat, in fact we've had to tell some people to shut up because they were being too obnoxious asking for help at every single possible turn. In fact, you have people who join guilds just to ask others to give them things, which is annoying in and of itself. And, of course, you're still assuming that most people have any interest in making friends in a game. Lots do not.
It's fine if you do not want to become a part of a guild. The system I described still allows you to easily flag players you enjoyed playing with and prioritizes those players. Heck, you could even prioritize an entire guild without being a part of said guild (if you liked). Use the system enough, and pretty soon you should be seeing familiar faces pretty often (if you wish). And again, the system promotes accountability here. Dicks that hatemonger or have an elitist attitude will end up grouping with themselves, while the rest of the folks on the server who aren't pricks will enjoy a much wider availability.
And how could you not do the same thing in a LFG system? Have it prioritize people online in your friend list and if they are not available, it matches you with others who are online? You can easily do both, but you can do the same thing by just looking at who is online from your friend list and inviting them to a group on your own. Why does the game have to do it for you if you're too lazy to do it yourself?
As I described above, LFD across servers actively prevents anything but the shortest of interactions between players. Nothing lasting comes out of it by the very nature of its pool of players. The system I describe has no such limitations. It encourages social connections that can be used repeatedly throughout the game to both avoid undesirable players and provide the easiest means for connecting with desirable ones.. It doesn't coerce anyone into anything. As you like to point out about grouping: it's simply an option. You don't have to use it if you don't want to, and if you don't, it won't affect you in any way. Not sure how you made the jump from encourage to coercion.
No, you're just thinking that people are too stupid and lazy to do things on their own and if they are, screw 'em. You're trying to construct a system that actively encourages your preferred means of play. You want people to do things your way. I want things to do things however they want to do it. You are most certainly trying to coerce people. Let's not pretend otherwise.
Recently 2 of my friends got married and found out afterwards that their wives were ex-WoW players.
This started a series of events that ended up with 9 players in Karazhan cause most of us left during the BC/Wrath era and no one knew what the heck was going on.
Where are my talents? Why is there a pokemon game in WoW? I was told there is farmville in WoW now. Where is it? F it! Lets pile into Kara for old times sake!
While it was a fun run of 9 people for '2-3 hours' something struck me. Not one of us actually managed to play for the full 2-3 hours.
Baby feeding / baby bath / wife aggro / Non-scheduled downtime at work etc all meant people had to take breaks while others went ahead. Now Kara is solo content so we didn't have any issues as we made our way through but what if it wasn't?
What if we were in 'current Raid content' in WoW? Would any one of us actually be able to play?
Now, back in the BC/Wrath days, most of us were single so we could. Now? Married + kids? I don't think so. And I don't think i'm alone in this. The large portion of people who played WoW on release were in their 20s. They grew up and are doing things that most people do when they grow up; have a child / start a family.
This limitation for us means 'bite sized content' which starts the whole 'lack of grouping' in modern MMOs. If you only have 20mins consecutively, you are not going to be able to group with other people.
Here's the thing, I'm pretty sure we represent the largest portion of the MMO playerbase; middle class or higher, aged around 30-50. As someone from that playerbase, sorry but this 'group content' isn't more important than my baby's meal / baby's bath / Wife aggro / whatever.
MMO players grew up, deal with it.
I agree with the "bite size content" statement, which is exactly what instancing is for most.. Too many don't have the time to do 6 hour raids anymore.. I did the raiding in EQ1 that took all night and then some, and WoW wasn't all that much better.. Raiding felt more like a job, then a game.. Personally I hate instancing, and wish devs would use that lump 3 feet above their butts and design good OPEN WORLD content that allows for solo, grouping and raiding to co-exist on the same maps.. I know I could if given the opportunity.. It really isn't that hard..
I've seen plenty of social interaction in my time with Smite. It's a lobby game. I don't like it for the lack of interaction. I like it for its skill-based combat, its unique take on God vs. God, and its replayability due to the many Gods available (with more coming out every month or so). That has nothing to do with preferences for social interaction.
It does. You just made an implicit choice that even a lack of social interaction is not as important as the skill based combat (and setting), and hence you play it.
If you truly value social interactions above all those, you would not have even played SMITE.
You can argue whatever reasoning you may have in your head and no one knows if that is true. But your choice pretty much tells about your true preference.
I agree with the "bite size content" statement, which is exactly what instancing is for most.. Too many don't have the time to do 6 hour raids anymore.. I did the raiding in EQ1 that took all night and then some, and WoW wasn't all that much better.. Raiding felt more like a job, then a game.. Personally I hate instancing, and wish devs would use that lump 3 feet above their butts and design good OPEN WORLD content that allows for solo, grouping and raiding to co-exist on the same maps.. I know I could if given the opportunity.. It really isn't that hard..
And personally i love instances. If i want to solo or in a group, i don't want other people to impact my game. It is not hard ... but undesirable for me.
Instances also have better scripting and control of the experiences (for me, of course).
I've seen plenty of social interaction in my time with Smite. It's a lobby game. I don't like it for the lack of interaction. I like it for its skill-based combat, its unique take on God vs. God, and its replayability due to the many Gods available (with more coming out every month or so). That has nothing to do with preferences for social interaction.
It does. You just made an implicit choice that even a lack of social interaction is not as important as the skill based combat (and setting), and hence you play it.
If you truly value social interactions above all those, you would not have even played SMITE.
You can argue whatever reasoning you may have in your head and no one knows if that is true. But your choice pretty much tells about your true preference.
All my choice says is that I like more than one type of game. Liking or disliking one game does not make a universally rigid statement about my preferences in all games.
For instance, I like the Battlefield franchise. I love the Team Fortress franchise. I do not like Call of Duty, I do not like HL2: Deathmatch. I do not like the Halo series. I love Natural Selection. I did enjoy my time in Destiny (though I think it needs a lot more content added before launch if they aren't just holding back). All of these are shooters. Just because I don't like Call of Duty, it doesn't mean I don't like shooters. It doesn't mean I don't like multiplayer shooters, as I enjoy other multiplayer shooters. The fact that I do not like Halo and HL2: Deathmatch doesn't mean I don't like sci-fi shooters. You're oversimplifying things to suit your argument, yet again.
Just because I play games where socialization isn't paramount to the fun (for me), it doesn't mean I don't like socialization. It just means I can have more than one taste in games, none less important by definition (only by personal preference) than another. Thus, making a general statement about what playing Smite says about my universal tastes in gaming is generally incorrect.
Folks aren't that simple.
@Cephus, again you mistake encouragement for coercion. The fact that many MMOs homogenize classes and promote solo play is encouragement, not coercion. I hold no grudges against that (though I prefer more defined roles). Why do you seem to think automating and creating even easier avenues to find groups is a coercion to group? Folks never have to use the LFD/LFG if they do not wish. It will not affect your solo gameplay whatsoever.
The friends list thing is a perfect example of automation that can make life easier. All you do is login, queue up, and poof! Everyone you are friends with in-game who has flagged themselves as wanting to group are paired. You say, "Hey! Let's do this!" and there is minimal time wasted chatting. That should be a boon to most who declare they like to play massively multiplayer games without ever talking to anyone. This way, they can endeavor in all content (even group, if they so choose) without ever having to type a thing. Where's the downside?
@Cephus, again you mistake encouragement for coercion. The fact that many MMOs homogenize classes and promote solo play is encouragement, not coercion. I hold no grudges against that (though I prefer more defined roles). Why do you seem to think automating and creating even easier avenues to find groups is a coercion to group? Folks never have to use the LFD/LFG if they do not wish. It will not affect your solo gameplay whatsoever.
The friends list thing is a perfect example of automation that can make life easier. All you do is login, queue up, and poof! Everyone you are friends with in-game who has flagged themselves as wanting to group are paired. You say, "Hey! Let's do this!" and there is minimal time wasted chatting. That should be a boon to most who declare they like to play massively multiplayer games without ever talking to anyone. This way, they can endeavor in all content (even group, if they so choose) without ever having to type a thing. Where's the downside?
I didn't say there was a downside, although I don't think it's necessarily as easy as you seem to think. You assume that everyone on a friend list is someone that you want to group with. Just because they are friends and people worth talking to, that doesn't mean they are people you want to jump into group content with. Playstyles clash. Most people that I've been friends with in MMOs have been people I have no interest in doing group content with because their playstyle and mine are incompatible. They want to rush to endgame, they want to get through the content as fast as possible, killing with gleeful abandon and running to the next mob, whereas I want to take it slow, explore all of the areas, pick up all of the drops, etc. That's why I don't do much group content at all, between conflicting playstyles and the generally low-class players you have to deal with, I'd rather solo and I think I'm part of the growing majority who see things that way.
But you are wrong that people will never have to use LFG because, at least with my friend lists, there are almost never enough people on at the same time to form a group just from friends. You're assuming a lot. You're assuming that everyone wants to group all the time and are not busy with other things. You're assuming that everyone is online at the same time. In the absence of enough people to form a group, you're going to have to go to the LFG system to pad out the party, which invalidates the ease of your system in the first place. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, I'm just saying it's not a panacea.
MMOs went solo to cater to expand sales, so now the majority of the player base are players who mainly play solo games. That's changed somewhat in recent years, but players who will play Battlefield etc, don't conect 'grouping' there to other games. Remove the need to group, and no one groups.
Originally posted by Scot MMOs went solo to cater to expand sales, so now the majority of the player base are players who mainly play solo games. That's changed somewhat in recent years, but players who will play Battlefield etc, don't conect 'grouping' there to other games. Remove the need to group, and no one groups.
Because they don't want to group. If nobody wants to group, then why isn't it the choice of those playing what they should and should not do? It's the groupers who want to force people to group, it's never the soloers who want to force people not to group. One side wants freedom, the other wants force. Imagine that.
Originally posted by Scot MMOs went solo to cater to expand sales, so now the majority of the player base are players who mainly play solo games. That's changed somewhat in recent years, but players who will play Battlefield etc, don't conect 'grouping' there to other games. Remove the need to group, and no one groups.
Yes i am one of those players. With a regular job, wife and active social circle.. gone are the days of alarm clock raids and grouping which suck up 4 to 5 hours a day.
In answer to both of the above, 'forced' grouping has been replaced by 'forced' soloing. Neither were forced, its just which was easier, easier always wins. Also if no one wants to group why is everyone happy to group in L4D, BF and all the others? Tell me, if you play any games like that, do you complain you have to group or partake of some group related activates there?
I don't think they were aiming at you Bigdaddy, unless you were a console kid last decade. The change has suited you, but you were not in their mind. In fact had you left gaming they would not have cared, because the market size they were aiming for was far larger than the one MMOs originated with.
Comments
This is why it's important for developers to simply make interacting with guildies (such as grouping) easier than ever before. The idea is to minimize the time to find the group, and maximize the potential for progression and fun for participating.
LFG/LFD can work, but honestly, when it pulls from megaservers with no priority given to guildmates or alliance-mates, it falls flat on its face. You play for 45 minutes without ever doing anything but spamming 2-3 abilities in the same scenery over and over. That's about as boring as it gets, personally.
That is an issue of making combat fun, and has nothing to do with groups. Just make fun combat like in SP co-op games.
True story, but it gets exacerbated during group content where the trinity is so rigidly applied that one player spams taunt, another spams heal, and the rest spam nukes.
I believe in a player character not being able to fulfill all roles at once.. But when fulfilling a certain role becomes so boring, I can definitely understand why some players dislike the idea.
Yet you have lots of people who don't want grouping to be easy, they don't want LFG, they don't want people to be able to cross-server group, they want it to be as difficult as possible, such that people only group with those that they know and there are no pick-up groups at all so that grouping requires that you become connected to the same people over time.
Hardly anyone wants to do that these days. Grouping is just a means to an end, not a method to socialize. Combat in these games is often spamming the same keystroke shortcuts over and over and over. That's a problem with the combat, not with the grouping mechanism.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
What about the players that view the genre as a hobby instead of throw away entertainment? The ones that actually enjoy figuring stuff out and getting lost in long complex dungeons with other like minded players.
I'm getting pretty sick of the "i don't have the time to invest in something that requires it" nonsense that i keep hearing. That's what other genres are for.
Honestly, if cross-server grouping is needed, then your MMO is either failing miserably, or a server merge is in order. Cross-server grouping in LFD actively prevents players from finding players that they can count on to be available to play with consistently if they wish.
I don't know anyone who's said or implied that there should be no pick-up groups. In fact, aside from the flawed method of cross-server group queues that I mentioned above, I say developers should be searching for ways to make pickup grouping faster and easier. A way that encourages players to "bookmark" those players they enjoyed playing with for future play sessions. That doesn't mean a lack of pickup groups. That means a way to passively connect characters to one another because they simply share the same playtimes, are open to grouping, and enjoyed their past sessions grouping with one another.
If you're going to do LFD, give priority to guild and alliance-mates in the matchmaking system (no need to even spam guild chat asking for buddies to group with). Allow players to easily bookmark players they specifically enjoyed playing with (as I mentioned), and give extra priority to those players when available. Pretty soon, players that play consistently at the same time begin seeing one another over and over. They recognize one another, and it makes it that much easier for a conversation to start that could end with one player getting invited to another's guild. Then, that player has an entire guild (and, ideally, an entire alliance as well) worth of other folks that are awarded priority when he LFDs. These players are already connected to him in a certain way that naturally invites cooperation and interaction. It also provides a higher level of accountability, should any player in that alliance act like a jerk. Then, add in another player that consistently plays at the same time, but isn't a part of the alliance.
Now, the first player has joined a new guild and recognizes this new player from multiple groups. This new player has a guild of his own, but no alliance. Networking does its thing, naturally, and a new guild is welcomed into an alliance (ideally). Hell, you could even have a method by which guilds and alliances "bookmark" entire alliances and guilds. A simple, easy-to-use system of networking that provides a behind-the-scenes way for players to target other players or groups of players they enjoy playing with for LFD. These bookmarks can be used as a sort of "trial" run for new guilds being considered for invite by the alliance, without the commitment of placing the alliance name on potential addition's crest.
Automate networking, while allowing players to give the system input on which instances/players they particularly enjoyed for future reference. THAT'S a LFD/LFG system I can get behind. Not one that actively works against such interaction.
That is a problem with the trinity. GW2, or D3 combat can still be enjoyed in groups, but no trinity, so it can be done.
Group content in wow is working perfectly for the player base you can do a dungeon in 15-20 mins how can you ask for shorter than that? If you can't devote time to raiding that is no big deal there are thousands of solo quests that you can do on your own time and dungeon/scenarios are fun.
Don't feel bad because you don't have the top of the line raiding equipment, since you only need raiding equipment for raiding.... It's an endless cycle there.
Your gear doesn't even matter if you just start doing normal groups and if you don't want to spend the time getting gear for heroic dungeons (which isn't hard whatsoever) you could always just continue on happily playing alts and soloing for years.
Raiding does still work fine for many of us who keep doing it. We happen to be 20-50 yrs old, and we still schedule it in and love it!
In fact, WoW made raiding so rediculously easy after Everquest 1, how can you even complain? The raid zones are split into parts, so they are shorter and easy to schedule in, and a 2-3 hr raid was unheard of for Everquest 1, raids used to take 4-8 hrs plus back in the old days...
I mean losing your corpse and needing a ressurection? Actually losing experience and having to get it back ? Having to grind alternate ability points? Unheard of!!! WoW is as easy as you can possibly get, and if you're to busy for WoW, there is no shame in that, there are plenty of thousands of great single player / multi player co-op online games that you can play, it just means you are not a true mmo gamer.
MMO Gamers expect things to take several hours, we know that the game is meant to be a time drain, otherwise we'd be playing MOBAs and other shorter single player affairs.
The causal market destroyed mmos, by thinking everything has to be quicker, no it doesn't. We want social interaction and communitys back, we want loyal members who hang out and have fun, instead of constant hotbar rotationals, and people to busy with actiony combat to communicate... Or to obsessed with the parser, to just chill out and have fun...
In fact , the longer raids and groups on Everquest 1 had more communication and communitys than we have had on most mmos other than Lord of the Rings Online these days... simply because they had more downtime and long camping sessions!
No, if your game needs cross-server grouping, that just means that the majority of people playing the game have no use for grouping at all. It doesn't actively prevent anything because nobody is required to use the LFD/LFG system in any MMO at all. If you want to put together a group of friends that you regularly group with, knock yourself out. You act like this is a conspiracy to keep people from doing that. Anyone who wishes to, can. The fact that most people don't only shows that this gameplay preference isn't popular and you can't blame the game for that.
You need to look around here some more because there are plenty of people, especially when WoW implemented LFG, that complained long and hard that any and all PUGs were an affront to their preferred gameplay. All groups should be picked from people you already know, random groups, put together by the game are always a bad thing, it gets in the way of being social. Don't ask me, I think it's a stupid argument too.
If you're going to do that, why have LFD in the first place? Just get on guild chat and find a group on your own. The reason LFD/LFG exists is because people don't want to do that, in fact, more and more people are foregoing giulds at all. You're trying to force people to do things that they clearly don't want to do. Most people, if they're going to group at all, just want to get into a quick group, go consume some content, and ultimately just use the other people in the group for their own purposes because that's really what grouping is. It's using other people to do things that you can't do yourself. If they end up making friends along the way, they can and many do. It shouldn't be required.
That assumes anyone wants to be in a guild in the first place. Many don't, myself included.
There are none that actively work against interpersonal interaction, anyone *CAN* do it if they want, it's not rocket science. You want a system that ENCOURAGES it, not ALLOWS it. That's where we part company. I want people to be able to do what they want without coercion.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Who are "we"? I certainly don't want social interaction and communities.
Does the mass market want that? If so, why are lobby games so popular?
Everyone here makes it sound like those "good old days" of WoW was this great, community-driven experience where we all helped each other out. It wasn't. In fact, even in games which were designed around interdependence and community, the most significant players in our community (the most successful, largest guilds) wanted none of it.
When we had opportunities for interdependence, what we did was buffbot and alt it, like in SWG. When we had opportunities for 40 man raids, what we did was get picky with who we wanted. And when we had these massive subscriber numbers of players come in to games like WoW, what we did was ignore the vast majority of folks in favor of our guilds.
No...the time when everyone says was so "social" was only social in the sense of the old "society culture" that was great for some, but not for all. If you were an achiever who played these games to be the best, this society was for you. If you were someone who liked to think of these games as a kind of "team sport", this society was for you. And if you were someone who was committed to doing whatever it took to master the content and make a name for yourself as a player (not as a character, mind you), this society was for you.
But if you were a roleplayer, this society wasn't for you. That's because everybody worth knowing was logged onto TS and Vent, and you didn't want to do that. If you were a housewife, this society wasn't for you. Because it was a society based around content consumption and min/maxing, and you just didn't have any place. If you were a crafter or support character, this society wasn't for you. Because those roles were botted, and your only real worth was whether you could get it done in the loot department. If you liked to meet new people in pick up groups, this society wasn't for you. Because everybody was so interested in success and efficiency, people had more reason not to group with people than to group with people.
We can go on and on, lamenting the loss of that old "guildarchy" that existed over the last ten years, talking about how the content and the culture forced people to work together, talking about the funny stuff said on TeamSpeak, and talking about things like the market. But if it was such a utopia, why did we have the applications, the "must have TeamSpeak," the "Dragon Kill Points," the PUG-bashing, and the standard, boiler plate advice of "The most important thing to do is to find a good guild?" How many people has this genre scared off, because nobody wanted to play with them? I think a lot more than we'd like to accept.
Methinks it has a lot to do with the idea that we weren't as social as we think we were towards each other in the "old days," and that we had to take measures to artificially make the games more social. And those who didn't fit in got drummed out...for no other reason than they didn't have the "right stuff."
I don't see today's MMO as an anti-social MMO. I see it as a way to repair the antisocial atmosphere we (yes we, not the devs) created over the last ten years.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
It actively discourages it because when players are pulled from a pool across the entire gaming population, not only are they dismally unlikely to ever see that person again but, even if they did, they could not interact outside of that instanced content. My entire point about the LFG/LFD system I described was about providing easy ways for players to mark and play together with players they enjoyed playing with. Pulling from across servers for instanced dungeons (ala WoW) actively prevents any lasting connections because the players do not zone back out to the same server. And what's your beef with LFG? You consistently rail against it like implementing easier ways for folks to find other players with similar interests will somehow render your preferred playstyle obsolete. As I've said time and time again, solo play should be viable. I merely described a method by which I think developers could help players interact more easily and consistently with players they enjoy playing with. A way to improve the LFG/LFD system to help promote social connections within the game. Not sure why that strikes a nerve with you.
If you'd like to take the time, please point me in the direction of those posts railing against PUGs and claiming them to be "an affront" to anyone's gameplay. If the thread is active, I'll gladly chime in with why I think they're wrong and agree with you here.
You have it because it's even easier to group with guildies if you can hit one button and have the game automatically add you together? It's all about making things easy, because even (especially) in large guilds, the majority of folks are uneasy (at least at first) with the idea of spamming their guild channel looking for help. This isn't limited to MMOs; this sort of hesitance to speak out in front of large groups of people occurs throughout every facet of society. It's a natural part of the transition between a group of strangers and a group of friends/acquaintances. The system I propose enables the player to take a step towards friends/acquaintances in a much smaller (initially) and more comfortable manner. They can simply flag themselves and the system can do the rest of the work for them. That's what LFG/LFD was originally built for; I'm simply prioritizing the list so they are less likely to get thrown in with random folks they don't enjoy playing with. After being paired with guild/alliance-mates, the discussion becomes small-group, where folks are much more likely to open up and begin conversation. Sue me for that if you like.
It's fine if you do not want to become a part of a guild. The system I described still allows you to easily flag players you enjoyed playing with and prioritizes those players. Heck, you could even prioritize an entire guild without being a part of said guild (if you liked). Use the system enough, and pretty soon you should be seeing familiar faces pretty often (if you wish). And again, the system promotes accountability here. Dicks that hatemonger or have an elitist attitude will end up grouping with themselves, while the rest of the folks on the server who aren't pricks will enjoy a much wider availability.
As I described above, LFD across servers actively prevents anything but the shortest of interactions between players. Nothing lasting comes out of it by the very nature of its pool of players. The system I describe has no such limitations. It encourages social connections that can be used repeatedly throughout the game to both avoid undesirable players and provide the easiest means for connecting with desirable ones.. It doesn't coerce anyone into anything. As you like to point out about grouping: it's simply an option. You don't have to use it if you don't want to, and if you don't, it won't affect you in any way. Not sure how you made the jump from encourage to coercion.
Why are FPSs? Why are mobile games? Why are singleplayer RPGs?
They are for a myriad of reasons, not just the ones that suit your argument.
I've seen plenty of social interaction in my time with Smite. It's a lobby game. I don't like it for the lack of interaction. I like it for its skill-based combat, its unique take on God vs. God, and its replayability due to the many Gods available (with more coming out every month or so). That has nothing to do with preferences for social interaction.
People play certain genres for different reasons. Not just your reasons.
No, people put themselves into the cross-server LFG system because it's fast and pretty much guaranteed to produce a group in very little time so people can just play the game and not sit around waiting. That's all most people care about. They don't care who is in their group, only that they get playing, get XP, get drops and get finished. What you are describing is something most players couldn't care less about. They don't care about finding people to group with again and again. You might care about it. Most players do not. You're trying to impose your own desires on others and it doesn't work that way. Again, I have no horse in this race, I only play solo, I virtually never group so I couldn't care less about PUGs, cross-server matching or anything of the sort. It doesn't affect me one bit. I'm just pointing out that things work the way they work because they are preferred by the majority of players. In fact, I'd say you are trying to protect your preferred playstyle more than anything else, by pushing others to play like you do and care about the things you do. You want more social connections in the game but that is not what most people want, that's why these games have consistently moved away from more social connections.
It's been a couple of years but you're welcome to go looking if you want.
It can only add you together if you're all on at the same time but as many people, perhaps most people, don't have a regular gaming time set aside where they are on at the same time every day or even on the same day of the week, such a system would be effectively pointless and you'd have to go to the LFG system to fill in the holes in the group anyhow virtually every time. It's been my experience in the past, even with very large guilds, that people are not at all uneasy about spamming guild chat, in fact we've had to tell some people to shut up because they were being too obnoxious asking for help at every single possible turn. In fact, you have people who join guilds just to ask others to give them things, which is annoying in and of itself. And, of course, you're still assuming that most people have any interest in making friends in a game. Lots do not.
And how could you not do the same thing in a LFG system? Have it prioritize people online in your friend list and if they are not available, it matches you with others who are online? You can easily do both, but you can do the same thing by just looking at who is online from your friend list and inviting them to a group on your own. Why does the game have to do it for you if you're too lazy to do it yourself?
No, you're just thinking that people are too stupid and lazy to do things on their own and if they are, screw 'em. You're trying to construct a system that actively encourages your preferred means of play. You want people to do things your way. I want things to do things however they want to do it. You are most certainly trying to coerce people. Let's not pretend otherwise.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
I agree with the "bite size content" statement, which is exactly what instancing is for most.. Too many don't have the time to do 6 hour raids anymore.. I did the raiding in EQ1 that took all night and then some, and WoW wasn't all that much better.. Raiding felt more like a job, then a game.. Personally I hate instancing, and wish devs would use that lump 3 feet above their butts and design good OPEN WORLD content that allows for solo, grouping and raiding to co-exist on the same maps.. I know I could if given the opportunity.. It really isn't that hard..
It does. You just made an implicit choice that even a lack of social interaction is not as important as the skill based combat (and setting), and hence you play it.
If you truly value social interactions above all those, you would not have even played SMITE.
You can argue whatever reasoning you may have in your head and no one knows if that is true. But your choice pretty much tells about your true preference.
And personally i love instances. If i want to solo or in a group, i don't want other people to impact my game. It is not hard ... but undesirable for me.
Instances also have better scripting and control of the experiences (for me, of course).
All my choice says is that I like more than one type of game. Liking or disliking one game does not make a universally rigid statement about my preferences in all games.
For instance, I like the Battlefield franchise. I love the Team Fortress franchise. I do not like Call of Duty, I do not like HL2: Deathmatch. I do not like the Halo series. I love Natural Selection. I did enjoy my time in Destiny (though I think it needs a lot more content added before launch if they aren't just holding back). All of these are shooters. Just because I don't like Call of Duty, it doesn't mean I don't like shooters. It doesn't mean I don't like multiplayer shooters, as I enjoy other multiplayer shooters. The fact that I do not like Halo and HL2: Deathmatch doesn't mean I don't like sci-fi shooters. You're oversimplifying things to suit your argument, yet again.
Just because I play games where socialization isn't paramount to the fun (for me), it doesn't mean I don't like socialization. It just means I can have more than one taste in games, none less important by definition (only by personal preference) than another. Thus, making a general statement about what playing Smite says about my universal tastes in gaming is generally incorrect.
Folks aren't that simple.
@Cephus, again you mistake encouragement for coercion. The fact that many MMOs homogenize classes and promote solo play is encouragement, not coercion. I hold no grudges against that (though I prefer more defined roles). Why do you seem to think automating and creating even easier avenues to find groups is a coercion to group? Folks never have to use the LFD/LFG if they do not wish. It will not affect your solo gameplay whatsoever.
The friends list thing is a perfect example of automation that can make life easier. All you do is login, queue up, and poof! Everyone you are friends with in-game who has flagged themselves as wanting to group are paired. You say, "Hey! Let's do this!" and there is minimal time wasted chatting. That should be a boon to most who declare they like to play massively multiplayer games without ever talking to anyone. This way, they can endeavor in all content (even group, if they so choose) without ever having to type a thing. Where's the downside?
I didn't say there was a downside, although I don't think it's necessarily as easy as you seem to think. You assume that everyone on a friend list is someone that you want to group with. Just because they are friends and people worth talking to, that doesn't mean they are people you want to jump into group content with. Playstyles clash. Most people that I've been friends with in MMOs have been people I have no interest in doing group content with because their playstyle and mine are incompatible. They want to rush to endgame, they want to get through the content as fast as possible, killing with gleeful abandon and running to the next mob, whereas I want to take it slow, explore all of the areas, pick up all of the drops, etc. That's why I don't do much group content at all, between conflicting playstyles and the generally low-class players you have to deal with, I'd rather solo and I think I'm part of the growing majority who see things that way.
But you are wrong that people will never have to use LFG because, at least with my friend lists, there are almost never enough people on at the same time to form a group just from friends. You're assuming a lot. You're assuming that everyone wants to group all the time and are not busy with other things. You're assuming that everyone is online at the same time. In the absence of enough people to form a group, you're going to have to go to the LFG system to pad out the party, which invalidates the ease of your system in the first place. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, I'm just saying it's not a panacea.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Because they don't want to group. If nobody wants to group, then why isn't it the choice of those playing what they should and should not do? It's the groupers who want to force people to group, it's never the soloers who want to force people not to group. One side wants freedom, the other wants force. Imagine that.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Yes i am one of those players. With a regular job, wife and active social circle.. gone are the days of alarm clock raids and grouping which suck up 4 to 5 hours a day.
I still love to game but priorities have changed.
In answer to both of the above, 'forced' grouping has been replaced by 'forced' soloing. Neither were forced, its just which was easier, easier always wins. Also if no one wants to group why is everyone happy to group in L4D, BF and all the others? Tell me, if you play any games like that, do you complain you have to group or partake of some group related activates there?
I don't think they were aiming at you Bigdaddy, unless you were a console kid last decade. The change has suited you, but you were not in their mind. In fact had you left gaming they would not have cared, because the market size they were aiming for was far larger than the one MMOs originated with.