Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Dungeon Finder Needed Badly


DeuceManX's Avatar


DeuceManX
02.08.2012 , 06:20 PM | #221
Multi-Server Flashpoint Queuing Tool! Please Devs, finding groups for them right now is horrible. Add what everyone wants!
If I don't get a Beta invite within 24 hours, they will kill me!

TwoGod's Avatar


TwoGod
02.08.2012 , 06:25 PM | #222
Quote: Originally Posted by BlueSkittles View Post
Well I sure feel handicapped by accidentally choosing the wrong option. But anyway.



And of course he wants a poll, he knows they can be both manipulated easily and that most of the people who would want a WoW-like LFD tool are actually playing the game or are too "casual" to care what is on a message board. So, no thanks to a poll. I'd rather wait to see if Bioware is smart enough to do the right thing and create a tool that caters to all styles.

Also, just another person to /ignore. It's my own little "community" tool. (Not you Skann, the other person)
You're mistaken in your beliefs, I'm actually for at the very least a LFG system of some sort. So put the poll in game somehow, advertise it on the website, put up billboards, and commercials. Then see what comes out on top. I'm all about giving the community what they want. But I'm also a believer that if you care enough to want something changed, care enough to be involved in the development.

Lerthan's Avatar


Lerthan
02.08.2012 , 07:56 PM | #223
Quote: Originally Posted by Skann View Post
Yes, non-cross-server don't address server population and time window constrains. You penalize people playing on low-pop servers and you penalize people playing off the peak server hours.

Aside from these 2 points, (most) players don't want to engage in social interactions to run Black Talon hard mode for the 30th time. They just want to complete their daily mission with as little effort as possible. While others want to queue non-stop because they want as many Columi tokens as they can possibly get.

For everyone else, you add the 'server only' option to the tool that will group you with people from your server only.

That's the key right there and why so many folks want an LFG system. They want to play and get things in the game without having to put forth any effort to achieve these things. Some folks want to see that effort required, Can you make both parties happy? No you cant. One will always whine if you just try to make the other happy. True diplomacy in this situation would be to make neither party happy yet add in something that both parties can live with.

That aside. There have been numerous posts about an LFG system. Lets be honest, anything right now is better then the system that's in place. Right now it is a pain to put together a group even if most of your server is using the current tool that's available. This is a valid issue and something that needs to be resolved.

However, other points have been brought up that are valid as well. Allowing a random cross server LFG tool that throws people together, fosters an environment of little to no social interaction outside of guild communities. The very fostering of this environment does in essence force players to play in that style as no one talks anymore even when they try and start a conversation. Is this true every time, no its not but it becomes the new normal, while conversations in groups become the exceptions. No matter what you cannot force a player to talk or socialize that doesn't want to socialize. However you can take the socialization away from the players that do by fostering the right environment. There is a solution to this of course that I will get into in a little bit.

Another concern that has been brought up by me and others. The loss of server community. What we mean by this is not the social aspect. Regardless of the LFG tool or lack thereof people will still talk to one another in the server channels or not as the case may be. This is the community at large as far as helping players outside of the LFG. Players being nice to one another, not grabbing chests and mining nodes ect from somebody that is fighting the mobs guarding said node and other D-Bag play in groups as well. The largest penalty that the community at large could impose on such play was never grouping with these players. A random LFG tool takes that penalty away from the players. Also something that can be addressed in a good LFG tool.

The third issue is the lack of choice in who you group with. This for some players is actually the biggest issue. We want to be able to have the choice. Unfortunately what happens with the WoW lfg tool is no one uses the other methods, thereby forcing players to use the tool or not find groups. It also plays into the second issue and concern that gets raised. This is also fixable in a good LFG tool.


Simply put we need an LFG tool better then whats here. However we need to address those issues as well. Ignoring them or saying there not an issue obviously is not working. Nor is it the wise course of action. Can we as a community come up with a LFG system that is acceptable to both sides of the argument. YES WE CAN, but not by arguing about it or flaming one another.

A good LFG tool should consist of two parts. One where your not just randomly tossed in a group with other players. Something like the Original WoW LFG. You picked the instances that you wanted to run or other group content, selected a role and you could then talk in the LFG channel and see who else was looking for a group. Could you make this cross server yes yes you could. It needs to be at least server wide however not the current planet only that we have.

The second part is one that throws you together randomly. However in this needs to be a system to allow you to either A: rate the player privately to where if you liked or cared less then you can continue to get them in your que, if you dint like them you would never get them in your que again. Or B: Allow the players to see who they are going to be grouped with prior to the group being formed and give them a chance to decline the group or vote (majority rules) on the other players.

Both of these systems existing together helps resolve the issues that are brought up. Both systems can work cross server. You get honestly a better LFG tool then the current model that's out there. Could it be refined a bit yes but the core effect is there. The LFG folks that just want to throw a group together have a tool to do so. The players that want to put effort into putting a group together have that option. The community still has its tool to help regulate D-Bag players.

Its not 100% what either side wants but something I hope everybody could accept and live with.

Jay_Stocker's Avatar


Jay_Stocker
02.08.2012 , 08:06 PM | #224
correct me if im wrong, but bioware said that they didnt want it because it breaks down community? orrrr at least multi server LFG does, if not, whats their excuse...?

A multi server one is where i fully agree it shouldnt be in the game, but a server specific one is definitely needed.

either a more details LFG tool where you select from a list of what class/spec you are and where you want to go, or one that pairs you automatically but DOESNT teleport you there would be perfect for me.

Sendrel's Avatar


Sendrel
02.08.2012 , 08:06 PM | #225
Quote: Originally Posted by Drainedsoul View Post
What I don't want is random, automatic grouping, because that creates a set of incentives which conspire to totally destroy any social element to the game and cloister the game into groups of friends and guilds.
So last attempt at this: what does this say for your community? When quid pro quo is the basis for the community, is it really a shock that people will jump at the opportunity to not be held hostage by an archaic grouping system?

Quote: Originally Posted by Drainedsoul View Post
Imagine TOR without the on-line component.

Alternatively, imagine Mass Effect or Dragon Age except in the Star Wars universe.
For yet another alternative, imagine TOR from 1-50.

Quote: Originally Posted by Drainedsoul View Post
Then why not play a co-op game, that's my point. Co-op games exist. Why are you coming to an MMO and trying to make an MMO into a co-op game.

That's the problem. You wanted a co-op game, I wanted an MMO. Now you're trying to make the MMO into a co-op game and deny me the experience I bought the game for the first place.
No, he wants an MMO that offers more flexibility in group forming.

But since we're playing the 'go play another game' game, EQ still has servers up and running. You wanted an MMO with grouping tools that are over a decade old and content that forced grouping in order to foster community. You should definitely go check that out.

Quote: Originally Posted by Drainedsoul View Post
Yeah I just shopped that title in there.

Give this up. You have no idea what I did or did not do when I played in BC. Actually address the points that I raise, don't attack the person raising those points.

That's called an "ad hominem", and it's a well recognized logical fallacy -- it's tantamount to just giving up completely.
Simple solution is to not make dubious claims about being a server all star.

Skann's Avatar


Skann
02.08.2012 , 08:15 PM | #226
Quote: Originally Posted by Lerthan View Post
That's the key right there and why so many folks want an LFG system. They want to play and get things in the game without having to put forth any effort to achieve these things. Some folks want to see that effort required, Can you make both parties happy? No you cant. One will always whine if you just try to make the other happy. True diplomacy in this situation would be to make neither party happy yet add in something that both parties can live with.
I agree with most of what you said. I'm all for giving as many options to the community as possible and letting them use as they see fit.

I just don't agree with the effort part. I raid 10-12h a week already. That's exactly when I socially interact (because I have an out of game communication tool that enables interaction in a meaningful level) with other people (people to whom I also interact on a regular basis) and put real effort into acquiring equipment for my character.

Lerthan's Avatar


Lerthan
02.08.2012 , 08:47 PM | #227
Quote: Originally Posted by Skann View Post
I agree with most of what you said. I'm all for giving as many options to the community as possible and letting them use as they see fit.

I just don't agree with the effort part. I raid 10-12h a week already. That's exactly when I socially interact (because I have an out of game communication tool that enables interaction in a meaningful level) with other people (people to whom I also interact on a regular basis) and put real effort into acquiring equipment for my character.
That's why you have to have both options in there for it to work, to address the issues yet give us something that works. You in your case would still have the random tool to get your group together and your not forced to socialize if you don't want to. However the option is there for the folks that do want to socialize in that manner and put the groups together the old fashioned way.

That's where the community people give a little. Where the random folks give a little is in the rating or vote system that is in place on the random side of things, to preserve that community (aka rep building and non D-Bag play) that players are concerned about.

Touchbass's Avatar


Touchbass
02.08.2012 , 09:17 PM | #228
Quote: Originally Posted by Skann View Post
Yes, non-cross-server don't address server population and time window constrains. You penalize people playing on low-pop servers and you penalize people playing off the peak server hours.

Aside from these 2 points, (most) players don't want to engage in social interactions to run Black Talon hard mode for the 30th time. They just want to complete their daily mission with as little effort as possible. While others want to queue non-stop because they want as many Columi tokens as they can possibly get.

For everyone else, you add the 'server only' option to the tool that will group you with people from your server only.
Well said brother
Our lack of a proper LFD tool will black out the sun!
Then we shall cancel our subs in the shade!

ROneOutcast's Avatar


ROneOutcast
02.08.2012 , 09:17 PM | #229
I just want to sign the petition for a dungeon finder type tool. For those "purists" who think it will ruin the social aspect of the game...what social aspect? There's not a whole lot of chat going on in questing areas. It's mostly on the fleet. And I hate to think that while I'm out questing in Balmora, there's a group shouting for a healer on the fleet.

Please give us some form of dungeon finder. I have no proof but I'm sure the majority wants this.

MalignX's Avatar


MalignX
02.08.2012 , 09:53 PM | #230
Quote: Originally Posted by ROneOutcast View Post
I just want to sign the petition for a dungeon finder type tool. For those "purists" who think it will ruin the social aspect of the game...what social aspect? There's not a whole lot of chat going on in questing areas. It's mostly on the fleet. And I hate to think that while I'm out questing in Balmora, there's a group shouting for a healer on the fleet.

Please give us some form of dungeon finder. I have no proof but I'm sure the majority wants this.
Don't worry, RDF is coming. Hopefully they will reconsider the X-server options.
For those of you still bringing up the "Ruin Community" aspect, I.. I.. I just can't bring myself to argue with you anymore, I find these people to be akin to drivers that drive slow in the left hand lane, just to inconvenience anyone else wanting to exceed the "speed limit".

If a introducing a RDF will "become the way to do it", and it ruins your grouping experience, then to me that just says you're the only one that enjoys the tediousness of looking for a group for 5 hours, and ever single person you're currently grouping with is just as anxious for a RDF as the rest of us here are. Otherwise, when they introduce it, you and your Guild will continue to find groups and run content the exact same way you do now.
Just because I do not care, does not mean I do not understand.