Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Mondays in MMORPGs - 'Have Players Forgotten How to Play in a Group-Based Game?' - Saga of Lucimia -

24

Comments

  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 32,780
    Zeppel80 said:
    This whole argument rests on a false premise, that comparing tabletop gaming to online gaming is a valid comparison; it's not. As someone above has implied, in tabletop gaming rules of etiquette are enforced by the fact that other people are physically present. In online gaming, where other players only have a digital presence, rules of etiquette can be, and are, ignored. So, group play quickly becomes toxic and is generally rejected by most players.

    The other line of reasoning that I find objectionable in this article is contained in this line, "Is is (sic) the dopamine hit we get from being able to play the hero without actually ever doing anything heroic?" The author is implying that group endeavors are heroic, which they're not. Running into a burning school bus and pulling kids out is heroic, completing a raid is not.
    yeah but not everyone throws out "etiquette" or polite behavior.

    I would say that anyone who can't be civil and polite is not someone you want to group with.

    I rarely group but when I do it's usually with really good people. If I sense that the group I'm with is somewhat less than, or has bad members I'll leave.


    Renfail
    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914
    edited July 2018

    Renfail said:





    Renfail said:












    People haven't forgotten how to group or socialize in game, they have instead flat out rejected that playstyle, in many parts due to blatant toxicity of their fellow players. That and being reliant on others to get anything done isn't fun. We all have enough of that in real life and we play these games to be heroes not to be forced to cooperate with someone elses goals as in life.









    You said a lot of what I was going to say. I enjoy group content as much as anyone, but I think too many games now are forcing it upon people, requiring it in order to progress. To me, the very best games allow each player to choose when they want to group, and when they want to go solo. I don't understand the idea that playing an MMO should 'always' mean you are grouping with others; that just doesn't make any sense.





    I think the other issue nowadays is that most gamers' idea of researching builds or skills is asking, "What is meta?" in chat. As a community, it seems as if our attention spans are at an all-time low. Most players can't be bothered to read, or to take others' opinions into account.




    What about tabletop games? Or how about board games? In both cases, you are "forced" to need other players to complete the games. Should you be "allowed to solo" those games as well, despite the fact that they are designed to be social, community-based games? 








    I could be mistaken, but I thought this was about online games, not tabletop games..



    If you read the whole piece, not only the quotes pulled here to MMORPG.com, the entire piece is written about how there is no difference between an online game and a tabletop game or board game, and how MMORPGs are nothing more than tabletop games in an online space. 

    If someone has no issue with being "required" to "group" in order to play a board game like Monopoly or Settlers of Catan, or being "required" to "group" in order to play Dungeons and Dragons or Pathfinder or a tabletop game, why is it that they have an issue being required to group in an online game, when in fact that online game is nothing more than a digital version of a tabletop or board game? 

    After all, they all require you to be social, to play with others just like you were taught in grade school (share the sandbox, play nice with others, etc.), and to dedicate more than a 15 minute segment of time in order to complete the objectives. 

    What's the difference? That's the core of the post if you read it in its entirety. 





    Its a good write up Renfail , and ignore the folks that actually dont read content/threads before commenting, , there like troll hipsters .. It seems to happen frequently here


    Anyhow yea , really enjoyed the read and gonna be checking out D&D shows , i agree with alot of your views here and like the direction SoL is taking relevant to grouping ,

    I think part of the problem with the current offering of MMORPGs is the invasion of the Xbox Soccer / generation which jumped into the MMORPG genre head first and between Monster Drink and Hotpockets with there boisterous whining got us into the mess we are in with games like Gw2 ,Wow and ESO , we need games like SoL and Pantheon and Project Gorgon for ex.. to get the genre back on track .

    Fortunatley it seems the trend is hedging back to devs that are deeveloping play worlds for groups that want to adventure/live and die together ..

    And fortunatley we also have things like Fortnite distracting the Xbox/Soccer generation away from the MMORPG genre ..
    RenfailGdemamiThupliinfomatz
  • WellspringWellspring Member EpicPosts: 1,464
    Scorchien said:

    Renfail said:





    Renfail said:












    People haven't forgotten how to group or socialize in game, they have instead flat out rejected that playstyle, in many parts due to blatant toxicity of their fellow players. That and being reliant on others to get anything done isn't fun. We all have enough of that in real life and we play these games to be heroes not to be forced to cooperate with someone elses goals as in life.









    You said a lot of what I was going to say. I enjoy group content as much as anyone, but I think too many games now are forcing it upon people, requiring it in order to progress. To me, the very best games allow each player to choose when they want to group, and when they want to go solo. I don't understand the idea that playing an MMO should 'always' mean you are grouping with others; that just doesn't make any sense.





    I think the other issue nowadays is that most gamers' idea of researching builds or skills is asking, "What is meta?" in chat. As a community, it seems as if our attention spans are at an all-time low. Most players can't be bothered to read, or to take others' opinions into account.




    What about tabletop games? Or how about board games? In both cases, you are "forced" to need other players to complete the games. Should you be "allowed to solo" those games as well, despite the fact that they are designed to be social, community-based games? 








    I could be mistaken, but I thought this was about online games, not tabletop games..



    If you read the whole piece, not only the quotes pulled here to MMORPG.com, the entire piece is written about how there is no difference between an online game and a tabletop game or board game, and how MMORPGs are nothing more than tabletop games in an online space. 

    If someone has no issue with being "required" to "group" in order to play a board game like Monopoly or Settlers of Catan, or being "required" to "group" in order to play Dungeons and Dragons or Pathfinder or a tabletop game, why is it that they have an issue being required to group in an online game, when in fact that online game is nothing more than a digital version of a tabletop or board game? 

    After all, they all require you to be social, to play with others just like you were taught in grade school (share the sandbox, play nice with others, etc.), and to dedicate more than a 15 minute segment of time in order to complete the objectives. 

    What's the difference? That's the core of the post if you read it in its entirety. 





    Its a good write up Renfail , and ignore the folks that actually dont read content/threads before commenting, , there like troll hipsters .. It seems to happen frequently here


    Anyhow yea , really enjoyed the read and gonna be checking out D&D shows , i agree with alot of your views here and like the direction SoL is taking relevant to grouping ,

    I think part of the problem with the current offering of MMORPGs is the invasion of the Xbox Soccer / generation which jumped into the MMORPG genre head first and between Monster Drink and Hotpockets with there boisterous whining got us into the mess we are in with games like Gw2 ,Wow and ESO , we need games like SoL and Pantheon and Project Gorgon for ex.. to get the genre back on track .

    Fortunatley it seems the trend is hedging back to devs that are deeveloping play worlds for groups that want to adventure/live and die together ..

    And fortunatley we also have things like Fortnite distracting the Xbox/Soccer generation away from the MMORPG genre ..
    Hey now, what's wrong with soccer?!
    ScorchienRenfail
    --------------------------------------------
  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914
    Scorchien said:

    Renfail said:





    Renfail said:












    People haven't forgotten how to group or socialize in game, they have instead flat out rejected that playstyle, in many parts due to blatant toxicity of their fellow players. That and being reliant on others to get anything done isn't fun. We all have enough of that in real life and we play these games to be heroes not to be forced to cooperate with someone elses goals as in life.









    You said a lot of what I was going to say. I enjoy group content as much as anyone, but I think too many games now are forcing it upon people, requiring it in order to progress. To me, the very best games allow each player to choose when they want to group, and when they want to go solo. I don't understand the idea that playing an MMO should 'always' mean you are grouping with others; that just doesn't make any sense.





    I think the other issue nowadays is that most gamers' idea of researching builds or skills is asking, "What is meta?" in chat. As a community, it seems as if our attention spans are at an all-time low. Most players can't be bothered to read, or to take others' opinions into account.




    What about tabletop games? Or how about board games? In both cases, you are "forced" to need other players to complete the games. Should you be "allowed to solo" those games as well, despite the fact that they are designed to be social, community-based games? 








    I could be mistaken, but I thought this was about online games, not tabletop games..



    If you read the whole piece, not only the quotes pulled here to MMORPG.com, the entire piece is written about how there is no difference between an online game and a tabletop game or board game, and how MMORPGs are nothing more than tabletop games in an online space. 

    If someone has no issue with being "required" to "group" in order to play a board game like Monopoly or Settlers of Catan, or being "required" to "group" in order to play Dungeons and Dragons or Pathfinder or a tabletop game, why is it that they have an issue being required to group in an online game, when in fact that online game is nothing more than a digital version of a tabletop or board game? 

    After all, they all require you to be social, to play with others just like you were taught in grade school (share the sandbox, play nice with others, etc.), and to dedicate more than a 15 minute segment of time in order to complete the objectives. 

    What's the difference? That's the core of the post if you read it in its entirety. 





    Its a good write up Renfail , and ignore the folks that actually dont read content/threads before commenting, , there like troll hipsters .. It seems to happen frequently here


    Anyhow yea , really enjoyed the read and gonna be checking out D&D shows , i agree with alot of your views here and like the direction SoL is taking relevant to grouping ,

    I think part of the problem with the current offering of MMORPGs is the invasion of the Xbox Soccer / generation which jumped into the MMORPG genre head first and between Monster Drink and Hotpockets with there boisterous whining got us into the mess we are in with games like Gw2 ,Wow and ESO , we need games like SoL and Pantheon and Project Gorgon for ex.. to get the genre back on track .

    Fortunatley it seems the trend is hedging back to devs that are deeveloping play worlds for groups that want to adventure/live and die together ..

    And fortunatley we also have things like Fortnite distracting the Xbox/Soccer generation away from the MMORPG genre ..
    Hey now, what's wrong with soccer?!
    lol nothing in particular with soccer itself as much as the "participation rewards" associated with it ..

      Which is the point i am making with that reference
  • khelbonkhelbon Member UncommonPosts: 124
    I like doing both and will always support a game which lets players progress by both grouping and soloing.  

    RenfailScorchien
  • RenfailRenfail Member EpicPosts: 1,638
    Kyleran said:
    Renfail said:


    People haven't forgotten how to group or socialize in game, they have instead flat out rejected that playstyle, in many parts due to blatant toxicity of their fellow players. That and being reliant on others to get anything done isn't fun. We all have enough of that in real life and we play these games to be heroes not to be forced to cooperate with someone elses goals as in life.



    You said a lot of what I was going to say. I enjoy group content as much as anyone, but I think too many games now are forcing it upon people, requiring it in order to progress. To me, the very best games allow each player to choose when they want to group, and when they want to go solo. I don't understand the idea that playing an MMO should 'always' mean you are grouping with others; that just doesn't make any sense.

    I think the other issue nowadays is that most gamers' idea of researching builds or skills is asking, "What is meta?" in chat. As a community, it seems as if our attention spans are at an all-time low. Most players can't be bothered to read, or to take others' opinions into account.
    What about tabletop games? Or how about board games? In both cases, you are "forced" to need other players to complete the games. Should you be "allowed to solo" those games as well, despite the fact that they are designed to be social, community-based games? 


    Yeah, about those, I don't play them, likely won't play your game either. 

    It's OK, not like you want my money anyways, you guys are more of a charity after all. 

    ;)
    Yep, we're clearly a charity  B)
    Thupliinfomatz
    Tim "Renfail" Anderson | Wandering Hermits Patreon
  • RenfailRenfail Member EpicPosts: 1,638

    qoona said:

    You are asking wrong question. The real one is "have players forgot how to play a game?"



    ...and this mindset, right there, is the reason why people don't want to reach out. Because of the too-frequent chance that they'll run into someone exasperated by the idea of divergent skill levels. And that's the kindest bad experience one can hope for.
    Nothing wrong with playing with random strangers. Every single one of us started out as a stranger to our friends at one point or another.


    GdemamiThupli
    Tim "Renfail" Anderson | Wandering Hermits Patreon
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited July 2018
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914
    SBFord said:
    Renfail said:

    Indeed; there are zero video games that require groups these days, with the exception of end-game raid content and/or dungeons. And in many games, such as ESO, you can choose to solo many of those dungeons. 

    Meanwhile, you still need a group to play Monopoly or Dungeons & Dragons...but yet we aren't calling those games "hardcore". 

    It's a mind-boggling thing, to me.
    Monopoly is a competitive "battle royale", not a cooperative game, though I'm sure what you're alluding to is that it takes a group to play. Still, if I wanted to play alone, I could. ;) Semantics, but it's true. You're not "cooperatively" working with anyone. You're trying to, in effect, "kill them all", at least financially.

    You've said many times that Saga of Lucimia is a niche game trying to carve its own path in the MMO space. This ostensible "forced grouping" makes that very plain and will, I'm sure, appeal to a certain segment of players. :)
       Lots of people play Team Monopoly .. yes its a thing , and has been since the 70s
    GdemamibcbullyThupli
  • lahnmirlahnmir Member LegendaryPosts: 5,050
    Forced grouping says it all, it isn't fun or happens organically, you are simply forced to do it. Most people tend to avoid that which they are being pushed into doing. All it is right now is dungeons and world bosses, why else would you group? Its a combat and loot thing.

    How about social interaction through crafting, making it a fun and essential role. How about town and city building/communities which pay off through marketplaces, crafting stations etc. How about travelling with caravans or on a boat run by an actual crew? How about exploring parties, roaming musicians, a theatre group, a burglars den? 

    Hoe about making it FUN? How about stop making it about COMBAT and start making it about COMMUNITY?

    Forced grouping means you have failed to make your game fun so players would do it naturally because they want to...

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    pantaroCazrielGdemamiSBFord[Deleted User]bcbullyWellspringPeskyinfomatzimmodiumand 1 other.
    'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'

    Kyleran on yours sincerely 


    'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'

    Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...



    'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless. 

    It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.

    It is just huge resource waste....'

    Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer

  • CazrielCazriel Member RarePosts: 419

    lahnmir said:

    Forced grouping says it all, it isn't fun or happens organically, you are simply forced to do it. Most people tend to avoid that which they are being pushed into doing. All it is right now is dungeons and world bosses, why else would you group? Its a combat and loot thing.

    How about social interaction through crafting, making it a fun and essential role. How about town and city building/communities which pay off through marketplaces, crafting stations etc. How about travelling with caravans or on a boat run by an actual crew? How about exploring parties, roaming musicians, a theatre group, a burglars den? 

    Hoe about making it FUN? How about stop making it about COMBAT and start making it about COMMUNITY?

    Forced grouping means you have failed to make your game fun so players would do it naturally because they want to...

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir



    Exactly. Right now devs think Grouping>Socialization>Fun. But if you really want people to enjoy grouping and not feel forced into it, this has got to be Grouping=Fun. Then the terrible awful word used to describe what happens next, socialization, will occur naturally.

    As soon as grouping is fun, it'll happen.
    SBFordWellspring
  • XiaokiXiaoki Member EpicPosts: 4,036

    Cazriel said:



    Renfail said:





    DMKano said:



    Its not the question of forgetting how to, its more of an issue "dont want to bother grouping or socializing period"

    Some just dont have the patience nor desire to deal with other people.

    But if you build a cooperative instead of competitive game - the group centric players will come.

    The game design drives the community more than anything else









    Yep!






    As Suzie said, tabletop games are not co-operative. Only one person wins. Tabletop games are competitive. Additionally, tabletop games are in-person games, usually with people you know. Unless you're willing to go to the park with your board and ask strangers to play your game, there is really no comparison between playing Monopoly with family and friends and grouping to quest.



    And if I had a buck for every time someone asked for help with a quest or landscape boss and was told by multiple responders, "You can solo that, L2P," I'd be rich.



    I've used LFG in a number of games to accomplish goals that require grouping. There is ZERO social interaction. People don't befriend you, don't even speak to you, and only care that you don't make them fail. There is no discussion of tactics or strategy or even the courtesy of waiting for players who have paused for whatever reason. In other words, simple common courtesy is completely missing from most group experiences in MMOs. YOU do not exist for the other gamers.



    If this is modern MMO socializing content, screw that.



    People dont talk or try to make friends in MMOs anymore because thats not what people use MMOs for anymore.

    15 - 20 years ago people socialized and befriended others on MMOs because that was the way socialized with other people on the internet. No one does that anymore because people dont play MMOs anymore to find people to socialize with or befriend, thats what Twitter and Facebook is for.

    The way in which and how people communicate with each other in MMOs has drastically changed because the internet has drastically changed. This issue is completely separate from modern or old school MMOs.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited July 2018
    Sovrath said:
    Zeppel80 said:
    This whole argument rests on a false premise, that comparing tabletop gaming to online gaming is a valid comparison; it's not. As someone above has implied, in tabletop gaming rules of etiquette are enforced by the fact that other people are physically present. In online gaming, where other players only have a digital presence, rules of etiquette can be, and are, ignored. So, group play quickly becomes toxic and is generally rejected by most players.

    The other line of reasoning that I find objectionable in this article is contained in this line, "Is is (sic) the dopamine hit we get from being able to play the hero without actually ever doing anything heroic?" The author is implying that group endeavors are heroic, which they're not. Running into a burning school bus and pulling kids out is heroic, completing a raid is not.
    yeah but not everyone throws out "etiquette" or polite behavior.

    I would say that anyone who can't be civil and polite is not someone you want to group with.

    I rarely group but when I do it's usually with really good people. If I sense that the group I'm with is somewhat less than, or has bad members I'll leave.


    Now imagine if MMORPGs actually implemented systems whereby the community could help identify members that aren't civil or polite, as well as those who are, so you didn't have to go into a group blind to find out.  Blizzard is doing it in one of the most toxic PvP environments possible: MOBAs (well, technically a hero shooter, but the gameplay loop is generally the same).

    MMORPGs need to foster a sense of persistent identity that is tied to the account level.  They could learn a thing or two from other genres here.
    RenfailGdemami

    image
  • RenfailRenfail Member EpicPosts: 1,638
    Sovrath said:
    Zeppel80 said:
    This whole argument rests on a false premise, that comparing tabletop gaming to online gaming is a valid comparison; it's not. As someone above has implied, in tabletop gaming rules of etiquette are enforced by the fact that other people are physically present. In online gaming, where other players only have a digital presence, rules of etiquette can be, and are, ignored. So, group play quickly becomes toxic and is generally rejected by most players.

    The other line of reasoning that I find objectionable in this article is contained in this line, "Is is (sic) the dopamine hit we get from being able to play the hero without actually ever doing anything heroic?" The author is implying that group endeavors are heroic, which they're not. Running into a burning school bus and pulling kids out is heroic, completing a raid is not.
    yeah but not everyone throws out "etiquette" or polite behavior.

    I would say that anyone who can't be civil and polite is not someone you want to group with.

    I rarely group but when I do it's usually with really good people. If I sense that the group I'm with is somewhat less than, or has bad members I'll leave.


    Now imagine if MMORPGs actually implemented systems whereby the community could help identify members that aren't civil or polite, as well as those who are, so you didn't have to go into a group blind to find out.  Blizzard is doing it in one of the most toxic PvP environments possible: MOBAs (well, technically a hero shooter, but the gameplay loop is generally the same).

    MMORPGs need to foster a sense of persistent identity that is tied to the account level.  They could learn a thing or two from other genres here.
    We're big fans of bringing back player reputation, play nice policies, and eliminating player toxicity. 

    I can get behind the idea of tying reputation to the account and thus the real life identity of the player. How to properly (and fairly) police that is another story entirely, tho. 

    We've briefly touched on both in previous episodes of this Mondays In MMORPGs series; an episode on player toxicity, and another on play nice policies. Implementation will be a fun challenge =P 
    GdemamiMadFrenchiebcbullyThupliinfomatz
    Tim "Renfail" Anderson | Wandering Hermits Patreon
  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914
    Sovrath said:
    Zeppel80 said:
    This whole argument rests on a false premise, that comparing tabletop gaming to online gaming is a valid comparison; it's not. As someone above has implied, in tabletop gaming rules of etiquette are enforced by the fact that other people are physically present. In online gaming, where other players only have a digital presence, rules of etiquette can be, and are, ignored. So, group play quickly becomes toxic and is generally rejected by most players.

    The other line of reasoning that I find objectionable in this article is contained in this line, "Is is (sic) the dopamine hit we get from being able to play the hero without actually ever doing anything heroic?" The author is implying that group endeavors are heroic, which they're not. Running into a burning school bus and pulling kids out is heroic, completing a raid is not.
    yeah but not everyone throws out "etiquette" or polite behavior.

    I would say that anyone who can't be civil and polite is not someone you want to group with.

    I rarely group but when I do it's usually with really good people. If I sense that the group I'm with is somewhat less than, or has bad members I'll leave.


    Now imagine if MMORPGs actually implemented systems whereby the community could help identify members that aren't civil or polite, as well as those who are, so you didn't have to go into a group blind to find out.  Blizzard is doing it in one of the most toxic PvP environments possible: MOBAs (well, technically a hero shooter, but the gameplay loop is generally the same).

    MMORPGs need to foster a sense of persistent identity that is tied to the account level.  They could learn a thing or two from other genres here.
      Well we kinda had that early on in the genre , you could not change name, server faction etc .. Your name went with you and being a dick , Would not get you far ..

      The problem with the other system and i do not speak of Overwatch as i have not played it , but have seen similar other systems abused...
  • JeepEscapeJeepEscape Member UncommonPosts: 64
    edited July 2018
    Star Wars Galaxies offered a bonus to XP for grouping up and going on missions so it was key to leveling up. 

    As for toxicity, these games today are anti-social in general so there's no way to influence people to be good to each other.  In Star Wars Galaxies, the community was the game and if you were a jerk, no one would deal with you.  Kind of like real life.  SWG had a STRONG community of social players, something lacking from almost any game made in the past decade.

    It's the only system that's going to work and can't be abused because the players themselves are the system.  There were still griefers and jerks in SWG, but they were few and far between and made the game more interesting at times, IMO, since the problem wasn't rampant.

    Until these game companies put more of an emphasis on "players as content" (gameplay systems vs static content) then toxicity will continue to be a problem. 
    GdemamiRenfail
  • JemAs666JemAs666 Member UncommonPosts: 252

    What about tabletop games? Or how about board games? In both cases, you are "forced" to need other players to complete the games. Should you be "allowed to solo" those games as well, despite the fact that they are designed to be social, community-based games? 





    Have you seen how many tabletop games released today are solo board games? Even tabletop is moving a lot to solo game play.
    Gdemami
  • NeanderthalNeanderthal Member RarePosts: 1,861

    Ok, I'm someone who wants a grouping game again but I don't think SoL or Pantheon are going to make the type of grouping game I want. 

    So  what do I want (because I can only speak for myself).  Well, I want it to be fun but that doesn't tell anyone much.  Hmm, maybe I should say what I don't want.

    I don't want to have to schedule my life around the game.

    I don't want to have a boss in the game.  It's a game for Gods sake I don't want someone ordering me around.

    I'm really not looking for real life, long term friends.  I actually prefer to be anonymous.  Games are where I go to escape real life.  I'll be your friend in the game but don't ask for my phone number or anything like that.

    I don't want to have to fill out an application to join a guild. 

    I don't want to have to be in a guild at all.  I mean I might join one if I get to know some of the people and like them but I don't want it to be required.  See this is a big one, the people who talk about making these grouping games aren't just making a forced grouping game they are making a forced guilding game too and that sucks.

    I'm actually fine with forced grouping, it's all the other bullshit that gets attached to that type of game that turns me off.  It can't just be about forming a group with some people; having some fun; and then going your separate ways and maybe you'll group again or maybe not.  No, no...all that other tedious crap has to be piled on to it.


    PeskyMendelKyleran
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Scorchien said:
    Sovrath said:
    Zeppel80 said:
    This whole argument rests on a false premise, that comparing tabletop gaming to online gaming is a valid comparison; it's not. As someone above has implied, in tabletop gaming rules of etiquette are enforced by the fact that other people are physically present. In online gaming, where other players only have a digital presence, rules of etiquette can be, and are, ignored. So, group play quickly becomes toxic and is generally rejected by most players.

    The other line of reasoning that I find objectionable in this article is contained in this line, "Is is (sic) the dopamine hit we get from being able to play the hero without actually ever doing anything heroic?" The author is implying that group endeavors are heroic, which they're not. Running into a burning school bus and pulling kids out is heroic, completing a raid is not.
    yeah but not everyone throws out "etiquette" or polite behavior.

    I would say that anyone who can't be civil and polite is not someone you want to group with.

    I rarely group but when I do it's usually with really good people. If I sense that the group I'm with is somewhat less than, or has bad members I'll leave.


    Now imagine if MMORPGs actually implemented systems whereby the community could help identify members that aren't civil or polite, as well as those who are, so you didn't have to go into a group blind to find out.  Blizzard is doing it in one of the most toxic PvP environments possible: MOBAs (well, technically a hero shooter, but the gameplay loop is generally the same).

    MMORPGs need to foster a sense of persistent identity that is tied to the account level.  They could learn a thing or two from other genres here.
      Well we kinda had that early on in the genre , you could not change name, server faction etc .. Your name went with you and being a dick , Would not get you far ..

      The problem with the other system and i do not speak of Overwatch as i have not played it , but have seen similar other systems abused...
    I don't disagree, but the likelihood of finding loopholes in game systems is omnipresent.  I don't feel that should stop devs from implementing them.  It would take the coordination of a large amount of awful people to counteract the effects of a general reputation tracking system that has led to a troll being shown as one.

    image
  • KajidourdenKajidourden Member EpicPosts: 3,030
    JemAs666 said:

    What about tabletop games? Or how about board games? In both cases, you are "forced" to need other players to complete the games. Should you be "allowed to solo" those games as well, despite the fact that they are designed to be social, community-based games? 





    Have you seen how many tabletop games released today are solo board games? Even tabletop is moving a lot to solo game play.


    Yeah methinks he's not actually into the board gaming scene.  Solo variants are becoming the norm and are requested/expected nowadays.
    bcbullyKyleran
  • UtinniUtinni Member EpicPosts: 2,209
    SBFord said:
    Renfail said:

    Indeed; there are zero video games that require groups these days, with the exception of end-game raid content and/or dungeons. And in many games, such as ESO, you can choose to solo many of those dungeons. 

    Meanwhile, you still need a group to play Monopoly or Dungeons & Dragons...but yet we aren't calling those games "hardcore". 

    It's a mind-boggling thing, to me.
    Monopoly is a competitive "battle royale", not a cooperative game, though I'm sure what you're alluding to is that it takes a group to play. Still, if I wanted to play alone, I could. ;) Semantics, but it's true. You're not "cooperatively" working with anyone. You're trying to, in effect, "kill them all", at least financially.

    You've said many times that Saga of Lucimia is a niche game trying to carve its own path in the MMO space. This ostensible "forced grouping" makes that very plain and will, I'm sure, appeal to a certain segment of players. :)
    TFW playing a "Role" in a "ROLEPLAYINGGGAME" is now considered "FORCED WTF"
    RenfailSteelhelm
  • RenfailRenfail Member EpicPosts: 1,638
    Utinni said:
    SBFord said:
    Renfail said:

    Indeed; there are zero video games that require groups these days, with the exception of end-game raid content and/or dungeons. And in many games, such as ESO, you can choose to solo many of those dungeons. 

    Meanwhile, you still need a group to play Monopoly or Dungeons & Dragons...but yet we aren't calling those games "hardcore". 

    It's a mind-boggling thing, to me.
    Monopoly is a competitive "battle royale", not a cooperative game, though I'm sure what you're alluding to is that it takes a group to play. Still, if I wanted to play alone, I could. ;) Semantics, but it's true. You're not "cooperatively" working with anyone. You're trying to, in effect, "kill them all", at least financially.

    You've said many times that Saga of Lucimia is a niche game trying to carve its own path in the MMO space. This ostensible "forced grouping" makes that very plain and will, I'm sure, appeal to a certain segment of players. :)
    TFW playing a "Role" in a "ROLEPLAYINGGGAME" is now considered "FORCED WTF"
    I know, right? :)
    ThupliGdemami
    Tim "Renfail" Anderson | Wandering Hermits Patreon
  • bcbullybcbully Member EpicPosts: 11,843
    edited July 2018
    Renfail said:


    People haven't forgotten how to group or socialize in game, they have instead flat out rejected that playstyle, in many parts due to blatant toxicity of their fellow players. That and being reliant on others to get anything done isn't fun. We all have enough of that in real life and we play these games to be heroes not to be forced to cooperate with someone elses goals as in life.



    You said a lot of what I was going to say. I enjoy group content as much as anyone, but I think too many games now are forcing it upon people, requiring it in order to progress. To me, the very best games allow each player to choose when they want to group, and when they want to go solo. I don't understand the idea that playing an MMO should 'always' mean you are grouping with others; that just doesn't make any sense.

    I think the other issue nowadays is that most gamers' idea of researching builds or skills is asking, "What is meta?" in chat. As a community, it seems as if our attention spans are at an all-time low. Most players can't be bothered to read, or to take others' opinions into account.
    What about tabletop games? Or how about board games? In both cases, you are "forced" to need other players to complete the games. Should you be "allowed to solo" those games as well, despite the fact that they are designed to be social, community-based games? 

    In the vast majority of cases, tabletop guy and mmo/mmorpg guy (or gal) are not the same people.
  • RenfailRenfail Member EpicPosts: 1,638
    edited July 2018
    JemAs666 said:

    What about tabletop games? Or how about board games? In both cases, you are "forced" to need other players to complete the games. Should you be "allowed to solo" those games as well, despite the fact that they are designed to be social, community-based games? 





    Have you seen how many tabletop games released today are solo board games? Even tabletop is moving a lot to solo game play.


    Yeah methinks he's not actually into the board gaming scene.  Solo variants are becoming the norm and are requested/expected nowadays.
    JemAs666 said:

    What about tabletop games? Or how about board games? In both cases, you are "forced" to need other players to complete the games. Should you be "allowed to solo" those games as well, despite the fact that they are designed to be social, community-based games? 





    Have you seen how many tabletop games released today are solo board games? Even tabletop is moving a lot to solo game play.


    Yeah methinks he's not actually into the board gaming scene.  Solo variants are becoming the norm and are requested/expected nowadays.
    Just was up in Austin a couple of weeks back and played One Night Ultimate Werewolf (3-10 players) and Coup (2-6 players). Also love the Battlestar Galactica board game (3-6 players; my favorite board game), the classic Settlers of Catan (3-4 players; who doesn't know this one?), and a bunch of others I've played that don't stick out in my mind. 

    None of those are meant to be played solo. 3-4 players is typically a good "starting point", and if you have more you can get into some real fun. 

    Meanwhile, nobody plays Dungeons & Dragons by themselves. Take a look at the linked shows Geek & Sundry mentioned (in my article back on the site); all of those groups have at least several players coming together for regular sessions. 

    So yes, I'm fairly "into" the board gaming scene. Though not "hardcore" by any sense of the word. 

    Tabletop I'm intimately familiar with, and have been heavily involved with for 20+ years, alongside MMORPGing (which is just tabletop in a virtual space).
    Gdemami
    Tim "Renfail" Anderson | Wandering Hermits Patreon
  • WellspringWellspring Member EpicPosts: 1,464
    bcbully said:
    Renfail said:


    People haven't forgotten how to group or socialize in game, they have instead flat out rejected that playstyle, in many parts due to blatant toxicity of their fellow players. That and being reliant on others to get anything done isn't fun. We all have enough of that in real life and we play these games to be heroes not to be forced to cooperate with someone elses goals as in life.



    You said a lot of what I was going to say. I enjoy group content as much as anyone, but I think too many games now are forcing it upon people, requiring it in order to progress. To me, the very best games allow each player to choose when they want to group, and when they want to go solo. I don't understand the idea that playing an MMO should 'always' mean you are grouping with others; that just doesn't make any sense.

    I think the other issue nowadays is that most gamers' idea of researching builds or skills is asking, "What is meta?" in chat. As a community, it seems as if our attention spans are at an all-time low. Most players can't be bothered to read, or to take others' opinions into account.
    What about tabletop games? Or how about board games? In both cases, you are "forced" to need other players to complete the games. Should you be "allowed to solo" those games as well, despite the fact that they are designed to be social, community-based games? 

    In the vast majority of cases, tabletop guy and mmo/mmorpg guy (or gal) are not the same people.
    I can vouch for this. I've never played a tabletop game in my life.

    Not that I don't think they could be fun, I just wouldn't even know where to start. And I doubt I could talk my wife into playing with me. :wink:
    Kyleran
    --------------------------------------------
Sign In or Register to comment.