109 replies to this topic

[Frakov]

I'm starting this thread because I like the discussion going on in another thread, but I also want that thread's actual topic to get the attention it deserves.

To sum up the discussion so far, Guild Wars 2 is supposed to be a community building game. Some people have said that by taking away barriers such as kill stealing, need for grouping in events, and other elements that may cause player-to-player conflict, GW2 is allowing natural social flow. Others have been saying that by removing the need for people to group and talk to each other, GW2 is actually discouraging people who would otherwise not talk to each other to develop any substantial relationships with other players.

That summary has been how I interpreted the discussion to be going, but I hope the actual people who expressed their opinions there will continue to do so here so that both threads can continue with minimal topic confusion.

Edited by Frakov, 07 July 2012 - 03:25 AM.

[Shriketalon]

It has a good heart with minor hiccups.

GW2 has done a lot to make other players feel like a welcome part of your experience, and it's leaps and bounds ahead of the industry in that regard.  We've seen games like Journey prove the power of cooperation when people don't have to worry about negative experiences, and removing the player-based frustrations pushes the game closer to true camaraderie.

The only problems right now relate more to interface and social systems than the actual cooperation itself.  If it becomes a little easier to seamlessly enter parties with random people, things will go a lot smoother.  It might also help for some grouping to be semi-automated, like an event list that can naturally display everyone grouping together to take on a given challenge.

[anzenketh]

What systems would you recommend they implement to allow you to seamlessly enter with random people?
Furthermore what is the purpose of a actual group that is formed into a party?

Edited by anzenketh, 07 July 2012 - 03:37 AM.

[UssjTrunks]

Even if PvE content can generally be completed solo, you still need to socialize inside dungeons.

Socialization is also highly encouraged in WvW and PvP.

Edited by UssjTrunks, 07 July 2012 - 03:48 AM.

[Flashman]

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 03:05 AM, said:

Others have been saying that by removing the need for people to group and talk to each other, GW2 is actually discouraging people who would otherwise not talk to each other to develop any substantial relationships with other players.

It's comparing apples to oranges, clearly.

Playing together socially and creating substantial relationships are two radically different things.

No wonder there are two sides opposing each other over this; they are arguing different things.

[Rhydian]

I don't think removing forced grouping discourages social aspects at all. Frankly in those events, most of the interactions that go on are negative. Prison is also a forced grouping, sure they interact, but its not something they enjoy.

By removing the forced aspect of grouping players can group, when they want to ,and not group when,... they don't want to.
If you are forced into a linear chain of events with people you may not want to associate with, its more of a form of punishment. That doesnt mean those players will not socialize, it means they will not socialize with you. People who want to run dungeons should do so if they want, but not be allowed to force other players to assist them.

Dynamic events are an unforced group event, dynamically apposed to forced grouping. Having played the game the questing system alone is far more cooperative than anything WOW ever did. Believe me there is nothing social about that first dungeon run in the early levels, its a speed run to get some pvp and or leveling gear.

Also for the sake of logical argument try to keep this about what GW2 actually does and not mutate it into another "needs raids" topic?

[DarkWasp]

For me BWE1 lacked social interaction almost entirely, but BWE2 was way better than most MMOs I've played.

1. We had to coordinate to do that little mini dungeon in Diessa. That was pretty social.
2. We had a pretty big /sleep-over in Maguuma non-overflow when the end event didn't kick off.
3. I made two friends helping people out from map chat.

Really its a matter of who's quiet and who's not. Quiet people are going to be quiet whether you're forced to group with them or not. So why force it?

Also since people were so much more adjusted in BWE2, think about how BWE3 and launch are going to be.

[nekura]

At first I didn't think so, but that's because I'm a bitter MMO player. My girlfriend made friends with some 19 year old kid, and they leveled together almost the entire BWE2. She's a first time MMO player, so she figured out how to chat, group and everything by herself. She's a total social butterfly, so I think the no kill tagging, and coop play is working.

[UVShockwave]

anzenketh, on 07 July 2012 - 03:37 AM, said:

Furthermore what is the purpose of a actual group that is formed into a party?

I don't quite understand, are you asking why is it beneficial to group up as a party?

- parties are account wide, so you can keep track of players who switch to other toons.
- you can keep track of where your group is around the map
- you can chat to your whole group no matter where you guys are around the map

[Flashman]

People will continue to debate this I know but, truly, I think I gave "the real" answer to the question a few posts back.

ie: there are two totally different situations at hand, so it's no wonder people are arguing over them...

Edited by Flashman, 07 July 2012 - 04:10 AM.

[4arsie4]

One thing scientists who are studying how chemicals affect our brains are starting to find out that chemicals (beta-endorphins for example) that produce a greater sense of social cohesion in animals, also produce a greater sense of distance from the other. Social cohesion appears to be a wholly positive thing, but because of our inability to extend our social consideration infinitely outwards, it also becomes a negative thing.

It makes perfect sense of course, the more you are proud of the group you belong to (your guild, for instance), the more you are likely to feel less friendly towards people who are not in your guild. You see it in nationalism/patriotism as well.

So the more Anet empowers the guild or alliance with chat tools, etc, the less people in guilds and alliances will play with people who are unguilded or in other guilds. This is especially since the group barrier of entry is just 5. So even small guilds might not need to open their groups to PuGs.

This is one very clear example of how Anet cannot please anybody, and I suspect, they are going to lean on the side of guildless players. But there are third party tools like Steam or Ventrilo that bypasses this lack of a feature to a certain extent.

Edited by 4arsie4, 07 July 2012 - 04:15 AM.

[asbasb]

What it does is not force you into an artificial sense of socialbility if you don't want to. People that want to party can and will party because they like each other, not because they are getting a 2% higher magic find. Except for dungeons and tournament sPvP, that is. It's one of the major selling points for me.

Edited by asbasb, 07 July 2012 - 04:32 AM.

[Genesis]

There is a lot community-building incorporated into GW2. WvW is an obvious example. Social cooperation and gameplay will be rewarded. Servers with more organize WvW and dedicated guilds will likely win over less social servers.

Many of the game mechanics, especially the "little things," encourages social gameplay. The nature of the downed state and revives, for example, actively encourage players to revive and help other players. Why? Because there's a Golden Rule mentality at play. It's something you would hope other players would do for you. In dynamic events, you want players back into the fight because that will also make it easier for you.

[Izardoz]

i've never really experienced any loot-stealing or boss-tagging, so GW2's mechanics seem natural to me

someone was asking a question on local (before they changed it) chat, and no one answered...i am one of those people that feels bad when someone needs help, so i answered

we got to chatting a bit, then partied up and played together as long as we were both online

not sure if any of this is relevant, but that was my experience in one of the BWEs, and i had fun..i hope he did, as well  

[Frakov]

anzenketh, on 07 July 2012 - 03:37 AM, said:

What systems would you recommend they implement to allow you to seamlessly enter with random people?
Furthermore what is the purpose of a actual group that is formed into a party?

I can think of two which may benefit different players:

1) A mentor/master and apprentice system. Players at a certain level can volunteer to team up with new players of the same class to teach them the game or just help them out in the beginning. GW2 does a fair job of guiding new players, but all the different mechanics can still be confusing for people transitioning from other games or people who are new to MMOs altogether. Basically the mentor/master gets paid by their race's respective government at a regular rate for however long they team up with the new player. To prevent people from exploiting this, the master/apprentice system would end upon the apprentice reaching level 20 or after the apprentice's /age goes past a certain amount of hours in-game. The apprentice could terminate at any time if (s)he doesn't find the mentor/master helpful or friendly which encourages volunteers to do their best in taking the system seriously. Two accounts would not be able to have a master/apprentice agreement more than once to prevent further exploitation.

2) Escort/Tour guide system. Similar to the above idea, two players could enter an agreement whereby the escort, or tour guide, will be rewarded karma for exploring and discovering new points of interest in a zone. The incentive to "hire" an escort/tour guide instead of a random person in General chat is the player knows that the other player is getting rewarded for his/her time and is therefore more likely to do the task efficiently. To prevent escorts/tour guides from wasting time just to accumulate more karma, they would be rewarded per square unit explored so the team would always be looking for new stuff to explore. Of course this arrangement would end at any time should either party becomes dissatisfied. The arrangement would eventually end up worthless to the escort after the other player has already explored most of the zones (since the escort is rewarded only as new areas are uncovered, not by time committed). This would encourage social interaction because it would be a long and lonely tour without any chatting (unless both players prefer it that way in which it would still be mutually beneficial).

Flashman, on 07 July 2012 - 03:55 AM, said:

It's comparing apples to oranges, clearly.

Playing together socially and creating substantial relationships are two radically different things.

No wonder there are two sides opposing each other over this; they are arguing different things.

Perhaps the heart of the conflict was lost in my attempt to summarize, but it's difficult to be comprehensive when the discussion went on for several pages. I can only tell you that when the discussion started it was about the same issue and then went on different tangents from there.

Edited by Frakov, 07 July 2012 - 04:33 AM.

[StormDragonZ]

As long as it doesn't get to the point where you must rely on other people 95% of the time...

[Izardoz]

how would the escort/guide know if the area was undiscovered...i am assuming he/she would have been there before, so they could 'guide' the new person

lol...that one is just confusing to me..i guess that just have to ask the other person, have you been here before?

[Rhydian]

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 04:30 AM, said:

I can think of two which may benefit different players:

1) A mentor/master and apprentice system. Players at a certain level can volunteer to team up with new players of the same class to teach them the game or just help them out in the beginning. GW2 does a fair job of guiding new players, but all the different mechanics can still be confusing for people transitioning from other games or people who are new to MMOs altogether. Basically the mentor/master gets paid by their race's respective government at a regular rate for however long they team up with the new player. To prevent people from exploiting this, the master/apprentice system would end upon the apprentice reaching level 20 or after the apprentice's /age goes past a certain amount of hours in-game. The apprentice could terminate at any time if (s)he doesn't find the mentor/master helpful or friendly which encourages volunteers to do their best in taking the system seriously. Two accounts would not be able to have a master/apprentice agreement more than once to prevent further exploitation.

2) Escort/Tour guide system. Similar to the above idea, two players could enter an agreement whereby the escort, or tour guide, will be rewarded karma for exploring and discovering new points of interest in a zone. The incentive to "hire" an escort/tour guide instead of a random person in General chat is the player knows that the other player is getting rewarded for his/her time and is therefore more likely to do the task efficiently. To prevent escorts/tour guides from wasting time just to accumulate more karma, they would be rewarded per square unit explored so the team would always be looking for new stuff to explore. Of course this arrangement would end at any time should either party becomes dissatisfied. The arrangement would eventually end up worthless to the escort after the other player has already explored most of the zones (since the escort is rewarded only as new areas are uncovered, not by time committed). This would encourage social interaction because it would be a long and lonely tour without any chatting (unless both players prefer it that way in which it would still be mutually beneficial).

For point one I think they do this passively anyway with downscaling of high level players, being someone myself who is notorious for running new players through difficult content, I dont think this will be a problem unless you have an anti social person... who wont accept help or join groups anyway.

Tour guide systems have been done however its unreliable when you make it dependent on other players, which is why as far back in the 80s and 90s on text based MUDs the tour guides were always npcs.

[Archduke]

The server I played on during the Beta weekends seemed pretty vocal. Almost too vocal. Maybe I somehow accidentally joined the gossipy server, but I haven't noticed a whole lot of silence. Hoelbrak was probably the most silent zone I encountered.

Although, the talk was hardly about "useful" things. So I guess you bring up a very good point. All the talk was focused on how GW2 was totally going to murder WoW, what everyone was eating and drinking to stay awake during the nights and how sexy their characters were and which classes and races were the best.  But I think there was also a good amount of talk on how to do certain events and where to buy things in which did respond with helpful answers. But once everyone figures things out and wont need to ask anymore is when it may get quiet. Easier for people to RP though as the NPC's talking makes it lively enough.

[Frakov]

Rhydian, on 07 July 2012 - 04:34 AM, said:

For point one I think they do this passively anyway with downscaling of high level players, being someone myself who is notorious for running new players through difficult content, I dont think this will be a problem unless you have an anti social person... who wont accept help or join groups anyway.

Tour guide systems have been done however its unreliable when you make it dependent on other players, which is why as far back in the 80s and 90s on text based MUDs the tour guides were always npcs.

Players would still have the option of doing both things by themselves or with friends they already have in-game, but these systems would accommodate people who have specific needs, want to meet new players, and at the same time know that the other players are being rewarded. At the end of the day, the two players may end up becoming regular in-game friends or guildmates. Even if they decide never to play together again, at least both got something out of the deal.

[Ruefully]

When I played the first BWE I felt soooo lonely. I advertised on the GW2RP forum that I felt such and ended up being invited into a guild for it. My experience with BWE1 felt so much better after that.

I don't think the fact that you don't need to group or can't kill steal robs social interaction. I think that ArenaNet hasn't supplied GW2 with an optimal chat window though.

The lack of /say and /local being limited in range really hurt BWE1. BWE2 felt a lot more sociable. I could hear people talking. Saw people using the /say. I think it would be in ArenaNet's best interest to add more channels to the game, both public and private. Private channels are necessary for groups of people that aren't guilds to communicate. Public channel unites people who don't know each other by giving them a topic to converse.

In other games it has been trade or a lookingforgroup, among other things. I think if they also included player to player trade it would help.



So, in short, the problem doesn't lie in the design of the game but in the design of the chat system.

[PariahX]

Ruefully, on 07 July 2012 - 04:41 AM, said:

So, in short, the problem doesn't lie in the design of the game but in the design of the chat system.

definitely agree with this, that and chat while in combat is much more challenging (for me at least) than in other games but then I also had the same problem in GW1 probably because I am a bit click heavy in my habits which makes for really difficult typing with their UI set up.   I think this is only a problem for a certain percentage of the gaming population so I am not sure how much it will impact GW2 as a whole but I found myself a lot less chatty in GW2 BWE's so far than usual.  And of course not knowing the range and functionality of the chat channels in the BWE's kept me more on quiet side sending tells to answer individual questions instead using public channels.  I think it will get better with time becoming less of a problem with familiarity and community involvement whereas if the game style encouraged player-to-player conflict there would be very little we could do as a collective to improve that situation.

[Hep]

I agree with the notion that requiring grouping / people talking to one another and the goal of social gameplay should be seen on different scales. One is a parameter of the goal, and the other is the goal itself. The requirement of that social behavior shouldn't exist, in my opinion. I'm ok with finding methods of encouraging social gameplay without that requirement, but if we can't have one without the other, I'd give doing away with that requirement first priority.

[LOCOMOFO]

GW2 encourages social gameplay by making it easy and beneficial to help other players around you.  Features such as no kill/loot/node stealing, level scaling, XP for rezzing, etc. promote teamwork whether in a party or not.  I found this brings people together to achieve common goals.  Whether you choose to further interact/communicate is then up to the player.

What GW2 doesn't do is force you to group or socialise if you prefer not too.

If I was big on socialising, making friends, participating in events, playing in a more organised setting etc. I would look into joining a guild for all that stuff.  The choice is there, but it's not forced on you and this appeals to a lot of people, including myself.

[RedStar]

Well it encourages you to help other players by resurrecting them, or assisting them when they have troubles killing monsters, finishing hearts or doing a DE. Which is nice.

But since you don't need to talk to anyone, and no one needs to talk to you, the chat can be really empty except for the few "ty" and "np" you get when you resurrect/are resurrected by someone. Which doesn't bother me at all, and if you are bothered by it, nothing is preventing you from talking to someone, like someone did and ended up assisting me doing some hearts.

Edited by RedStar, 07 July 2012 - 05:24 AM.

[Frakov]

LOCOMOFO, on 07 July 2012 - 05:16 AM, said:

GW2 encourages social gameplay by making it easy and beneficial to help other players around you.  Features such as no kill/loot/node stealing, level scaling, XP for rezzing, etc. promote teamwork whether in a party or not.  I found this brings people together to achieve common goals.  Whether you choose to further interact/communicate is then up to the player.

What GW2 doesn't do is force you to group or socialise if you prefer not too.

If I was big on socialising, making friends, participating in events, playing in a more organised setting etc. I would look into joining a guild for all that stuff.  The choice is there, but it's not forced on you and this appeals to a lot of people, including myself.

The downside to only playing with people you decide to join is that you may never meet people outside of those who you think you'll enjoy playing with. An example I used in the other thread are the people I work with. If I was never forced to get to know them at work, they probably wouldn't be the type of people I'd approach when I'm out shopping or running errands. However, I was "forced" to get to know them (the alternative being extreme awkwardness at work) and ended up really liking them. We now get together regularly.

[Rhydian]

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 05:23 AM, said:

The downside to only playing with people you decide to join is that you may never meet people outside of those who you think you'll enjoy playing with. An example I used in the other thread are the people I work with. If I was never forced to get to know them at work, they probably wouldn't be the type of people I'd approach when I'm out shopping or running errands. However, I was "forced" to get to know them (the alternative being extreme awkwardness at work) and ended up really liking them. We now get together regularly.

Maybe but that is not discouraging social gameplay it is allowing you to socialize with those you want to socialize with. Just like in life if I meet someone I want to socialize with, nothing is stopping me from doing so, so GW2 promotes a more natural approach as apposed to someone who is a ranking guild member in a guild you really really need to join to get gear, who is a complete ahole who you not only do not want to assosiate with, but regret ever meeting. GW2 makes it totally possible to never need to engage in this encounter, and .. thank god for that.

[Ghostwing]

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 05:23 AM, said:

...you may never meet people outside of those who you think you'll enjoy playing with.

That's going to be the case even if the game required you to group with other people.

I really think Rhydian's prison analogy is the best for the scenario of forced social interaction.

Right now you can still group with people, you can still meet people if you wanted to, there's nothing stopping you, and the game does encourage it by giving guild boosts etc. Your work analogy is more akin to "encouragement" rather than "force." Unless you are a slave. If that is the case I am very, very sorry.

Edited by Ghostwing, 07 July 2012 - 05:35 AM.

[LOCOMOFO]

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 05:23 AM, said:

The downside to only playing with people you decide to join is that you may never meet people outside of those who you think you'll enjoy playing with. An example I used in the other thread are the people I work with. If I was never forced to get to know them at work, they probably wouldn't be the type of people I'd approach when I'm out shopping or running errands. However, I was "forced" to get to know them (the alternative being extreme awkwardness at work) and ended up really liking them. We now get together regularly.

Wouldn't joining a like minded guild satisfy that social aspect for you?  You're more inclined to get to know everyone within the guild, just like you do in a work environment.

[Salidin]

Frakov, on 07 July 2012 - 05:23 AM, said:

The downside to only playing with people you decide to join is that you may never meet people outside of those who you think you'll enjoy playing with. An example I used in the other thread are the people I work with. If I was never forced to get to know them at work, they probably wouldn't be the type of people I'd approach when I'm out shopping or running errands. However, I was "forced" to get to know them (the alternative being extreme awkwardness at work) and ended up really liking them. We now get together regularly.

I don't really see that issue, yes it could apply to some it applies more so in games like WoW and has much more reasoning behind because of various mechanics that are found within the game the mindset won't go away completely.

In Guild Wars 2 you don't need to group in the old fashion method true but instead you just wonder over and cross paths with others. Of course in Zerg everything is a blur chances of getting a "buddy" from that is slim but more down to the personal level like 1-6 people where a small group can be formed it still very much possible to get some kind of relation by helping out a random person. Especially if you do well or the other person does well at what they are doing specifically in difficult areas of the game like taking out a veteran that is considerably higher level then one or all of you.

I speak form mainly personal experience because this did happen to me, I was playing my human warrior I was by the rotten veteran oakheart another fellow walked up next to me sent me a IM and we decided too attempt to take out the oakheart just us two about 3-5 minutes later we successfully did and after that we went on to other things together and I will playing with him on launch still in communication with even today.

But again will that scenario happen to everyone no it won't especially if there is a zerg but it is viable and possibly more so then in games like WoW or Swotor or Lotro where helping pugs is viewed as bad for various reasons.