Dungeon Finder Needed Badly

[Racheakt]

You're probably right. Just something inside of me cringes when I see people using irrational arguments. I don't know, it seems like its a violation of nature or something.

 

I don't see it that way, he just has an opinion that he is entitled to, as are we.

 

We all have irrational arguments, like I think Sages and Sorcs should get pants cause with all that lightning and rock throwing it has to get drafty.

[Moricthian]

I don't see it that way, he just has an opinion that he is entitled to, as are we.

 

We all have irrational arguments, like I think Sages and Sorcs should get pants cause with all that lightning and rock throwing it has to get drafty.

 

Having opinions is one thing but when you make claims like "LFG will lead to the complete trivialization of content" you need to be able to back them up with evidence. I have no problem with people having or voicing an opinion but if your saying something factually untrue with no evidence to back up your statement that might influence important facets of the game, people need to be corrected.

 

Someone is allowed to believe 2+2 = 5 but that doesn't mean its true.

Edited February 7, 2012 by Moricthian

[Canmore]

Actually why dont we drop this subject matter forawile , its been flogged over and over , i pretty much think bioware is aware of the pro and cons now that community has argued back and thro , and if the community cant drop it foreawile i urge the forum moderaters to ban this subject matter forawile till things are abit further down the road , if we have had no clear response in two months to this from bioware i would understand frustration , but in all honesty we need to stop beating this donkey every day .

[AceOfHertz]

I wish the devs would repost Touchbass arguments for a LFG tool rather than the original post. Touchbass delivers much more succinct and reasonable arguments for our cause and they should be what people first see.

 

Funny, I just read through Touchbass' post and didn't see a single source or evidence backing up the claims.

 

Do you just request evidence when someone takes a position opposite of yours? I know you think it destroys a person's argument to just demand a citation, but it doesn't.

 

I've made my feelings about LFD/LFG tools in a previous thread. I'm fine with them, but each person who participates in one should be required to submit a player review for each person in the dungeon/group upon disbanding. People who are below a minimum threshold rating should be grouped with similar people of low ratings.

 

The /ignore is fine as a hindsight action. It isn't going to protect me from the next person crossing servers who wants to be a jerk because it doesn't affect them on their own server.

 

But getting back to my original thought. Don't ask for supporting evidence from an argument you don't agree with when you're going to advocate for an argument lacking specific evidence that you agree with.

[Meldwyn]

Actually why dont we drop this subject matter forawile , its been flogged over and over , i pretty much think bioware is aware of the pro and cons now that community has argued back and thro , and if the community cant drop it foreawile i urge the forum moderaters to ban this subject matter forawile till things are abit further down the road , if we have had no clear response in two months to this from bioware i would understand frustration , but in all honesty we need to stop beating this donkey every day .

 

You are not forced to read nor respond to this subject matter. Its like any other conversation between individuals/groups, they pick a subject and talk about it until no one is interested any more. If there is interest, it will be discussed. When the interest goes away, so will the threads!

[Canmore]

You are not forced to read nor respond to this subject matter. Its like any other conversation between individuals/groups, they pick a subject and talk about it until no one is interested any more. If there is interest, it will be discussed. When the interest goes away, so will the threads!

 

understand your point but its like some people are on a crusade to ram it down our throats im really interested in seeing some new stuff appearing apart from the same rhetoric getting thrashed about

[Racheakt]

Actually why dont we drop this subject matter forawile , its been flogged over and over , i pretty much think bioware is aware of the pro and cons now that community has argued back and thro , and if the community cant drop it foreawile i urge the forum moderaters to ban this subject matter forawile till things are abit further down the road , if we have had no clear response in two months to this from bioware i would understand frustration , but in all honesty we need to stop beating this donkey every day .

 

I don't see that happening either.

[Yuuj]

I am having trouble seeing this proof. Please tell me again how implementing a automated LFG tool will "completely trivialize content" and lead to "free gear".

 

Also, just because they nerf something doesn't mean its because of the LFG tool. They nerf every raid eventually so that everyone can see the content. Also, I'm not advocating for a LFR tool. I'm advocating for a LFG tool. All raid related arguments should be saved for a thread dealing with that subject.

 

On the topic of regular/heroic dungeons having their content nerfed, this is a legitimate concern. There were quite a few adjustments made to abilities and the overall difficulty of encounters in regular and heroic dungeons post the introduction of the LFG/Cross Realm LFG dungeon finder.

 

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/game/patch-notes/3-3-2

 

Encounters were shortened and made easier so that the dungeons became more streamlined. While it wouldn't completely trivialize content, and lead to free gear, considering how it was implemented in WoW, it is fair to say for it to be a success, they'd have to make content easier to get through.

 

They have to adjust for the lowest common denominator or average players would get frustrated using the system.

[Lerthan]

He has is opinion and it is rather fixed, odds are he will always think an X-server LFG tool causes cancer, you are not going to change his mind.

 

My opinion is this: in a sandbox Rep matters as the world is free range you need others to depend on to make to the highest end of the game, see UO, EvE, AC. In a theme park Rep is silly, when loot is another 30 min instance away, all the events are rides like roller-coasters does it realy matter if the guy in the car behind you kicks puppies as a hobby? Do you run around Six Flags finding the most reputable people to ride the coaster with you? Do you hit the food court begging folks to ride it with you? No; you get in the queue and ride it when it is your turn. Or you get a fast pass, in the game context that is for a group with guildies or friends.

 

Rep actually did matter in WoW prior to the LFG tool. If you had a good rep as a good player you had no issues finding a group with the old system. If you had a bad rep built after many times of being a D-Bag no one grouped with you any more. There where of course server differences but still your rep that you built directly affected your ability to find groups quickly.

 

Secondly yes the LFG group directly impacted the social interaction between players in groups. Prior to LFG a lot of times the players where friendly joked where a lot more patient about mistakes and willing to help a player learn there spec/class/rotation or what ever. There where of course players that never talked but they where few and far between. Now, I have and can run dungeons for 5 hours without a single word being spoken by the group other then me trying to start a conversation.

 

But the biggest issue with it is the lack of choice in who you get to group with. You are just tossed together. If the player is a bad player and causes wipes the only thing that you can do is vote kick them and hope you get a better player. On top of it they don't learn anything from the experience because they can just Que up for another group that might be able to carry them thru.

 

I am not against being able to form a group quickly and effectively. I just want to be able to choose who I group with based on prior experiences with those players and for players to actually build a rep as a good player or a bad player and have that affect how they experience the game.

 

As it stands in WoW right now, I can be a total D-Bag and have no ill affects. The features that where added to the loot rolling in WoW after the LFG tool was added where a direct result of the sudden surge of players being D-Bags in groups. Sorry but it did impact server community and it did affect how players treated other players in a direct manner.

 

I am not saying that adding LFG tool is bad, I am saying before adding it make sure that you take the time to limit the cons and the negative effects that it causes prior to adding it. Rather then telling the folks that are bringing up these concerns to shut up and arguing with them trying to prove them wrong. Look at it from there point of view and try to come up with something that alleviates those concerns and be willing to compromise a little to where we can actually get a tool that provides what is needed and wanted by both parties.

[HarassMe]

i have spent MANY hours trying to fill various groups in MMO's and i will say one thing i have noticed. The easier you make everything, the lazier people get.

 

One thing that really irritated me about the cross-server LFG tool from WoW, was the fact that it was essentially anonymous. What were the odds you would get someone from your realm? Normally, it wouldn't be an issue... but with this veritable anonymity, people really tend to show what complete ******s they can be.

 

I wouldn't mind a better LFG system but i am not completely onboard with something that is going to automatically put your group together... there is something to be said for a player who is good at getting effective groups together. Typically, these players will have lists of various players to fill the essential roles.

 

as it stands now, there have been heroics i have not been able to find groups for, but those have been few and far between. All it takes is watching chat periodically and advertising your services.

[Moricthian]

On the topic of regular/heroic dungeons having their content nerfed, this is a legitimate concern. There were quite a few adjustments made to abilities and the overall difficulty of encounters in regular and heroic dungeons post the introduction of the LFG/Cross Realm LFG dungeon finder.

 

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/game/patch-notes/3-3-2

 

Encounters were shortened and made easier so that the dungeons became more streamlined. While it wouldn't completely trivialize content, and lead to free gear, considering how it was implemented in WoW, it is fair to say for it to be a success, they'd have to make content easier to get through.

 

They have to adjust for the lowest common denominator or average players would get frustrated using the system.

 

You're comparing apples and oranges though. Every instance is differnet ane every situation is different. Some instances in WOW were too hard and some were too easy. You have to make these decisions based on each case as it comes. I think we sometimes overestimate the kind of impact forumn qq has. Whether something should be nerfed is determined by metrics. Is a group wipping on this boss X number of times? What particular mechanic needs to be adjusted? You can't just make blatent statements that LFG leads to nerfs becasue there are so many other factors in play.

 

The concern is based on the fallacy of Post hoc Ergo Prompter Hoc or correlation does not prove causation. This means that just because a dungeon finder was in place and content was effentually nerfed does not mean the former directly casued the latter. There are so many factors involved thain decicing on nerfing content, to blame it on LFG alone is irrational. On top of that, to conclude that the same thing will happen in SWTOR (a completely different game with different instances, class mechanics and fights) is again just ignoring all of the other factors aside from the LFG tool. LFG tool might have had a part to play but it by no means the sole contributer in why WOW nerfed what it did and we can't conclude that LFG will lead to nerfs in SWTOR either.

[Ichikitsune]

The same way I am social now with the new player and i am leveling my 8th toon, I am polite, i joke, and i tell him how to fight and what to expect in the instance.

 

really every grouping of random players either via general chat or a matchmaker --it is your responsibility to make it a social event.

 

That's cool, wish I could've said I was able to say the same. I found I was more helpful and more tolerant of those from my own server. Speaks more of me then anything else.

 

My only concern is the cross faction LFD coming to soon into the game, I personally wouldn't mind it if it stayed in server only at least for the first couple of expacs. I think cross server will be benefitial but only on low level FP and not at this time. What I do not want to see is a *** for tat copying of WoW and should be unique to this game.

[BlueSkittles]

You're comparing apples and oranges though. Every instance is differnet ane every situation is different. Some instances in WOW were too hard and some were too easy. You have to make these decisions based on each case as it comes. I think we sometimes overestimate the kind of impact forumn qq has. Whether something should be nerfed is determined by metrics. Is a group wipping on this boss X number of times? What particular mechanic needs to be adjusted? You can't just make blatent statements that LFG leads to nerfs becasue there are so many other factors in play.

 

The concern is based on the fallacy of Post hoc Ergo Prompter Hoc or correlation does not prove causation. This means that just because a dungeon finder was in place and content was effentually nerfed does not mean the former directly casued the latter. There are so many factors involved thain decicing on nerfing content, to blame it on LFG alone is irrational. On top of that, to conclude that the same thing will happen in SWTOR (a completely different game with different instances, class mechanics and fights) is again just ignoring all of the other factors aside from the LFG tool. LFG tool might have had a part to play but it by no means the sole contributer in why WOW nerfed what it did and we can't conclude that LFG will lead to nerfs in SWTOR either.

 

Love your arguments, Morichthian.

[Ethern]

 

And if you think how groups are formed has no effect on how social they are, well, I completely disagree. I think a system that slams a bunch of people together and drops them into an instance in front of their first fight has a huge effect on how social groups are. I've seen it first-hand, as have many others.

No there is no effect. It's just that people who use the LFD are more there for finishing the dungeon, rather then going into a nice chat session.

Again, if you transfer your social approach to the LFD tool, then you're the one to blame if that social aspect is deteriorating. Don't wait for a LFD to meet new people.

[Ethern]

That's cool, wish I could've said I was able to say the same. I found I was more helpful and more tolerant of those from my own server. Speaks more of me then anything else.

If you have befriended the whole server and have no problems for grouping, then the cross server LFD has zero interests for you.

[Yuuj]

You're comparing apples and oranges though. Every instance is differnet ane every situation is different. Some instances in WOW were too hard and some were too easy. You have to make these decisions based on each case as it comes. I think we sometimes overestimate the kind of impact forumn qq has. Whether something should be nerfed is determined by metrics. Is a group wipping on this boss X number of times? What particular mechanic needs to be adjusted? You can't just make blatent statements that LFG leads to nerfs becasue there are so many other factors in play.

 

The concern is based on the fallacy of Post hoc Ergo Prompter Hoc or correlation does not prove causation. This means that just because a dungeon finder was in place and content was effentually nerfed does not mean the former directly casued the latter. There are so many factors involved thain decicing on nerfing content, to blame it on LFG alone is irrational. On top of that, to conclude that the same thing will happen in SWTOR (a completely different game with different instances, class mechanics and fights) is again just ignoring all of the other factors aside from the LFG tool. LFG tool might have had a part to play but it by no means the sole contributer in why WOW nerfed what it did and we can't conclude that LFG will lead to nerfs in SWTOR either.

 

It appears your foundation for arguing points is to find a logical fallacy that might apply to the argument you disagree with and quote it as if it is applicable.

 

What I find most amusing is how you a misrepresenting my position. I never said that the dungeon finder was solely responsible for the content nerf. Your use of post hoc is incorrect.

 

With that said, you cannot ignore evidence that shortly after the release of a feature that automated the grouping process, a great deal of instances were shortened. The dungeon tool allowed for more players to experience dungeons, which in turn increased the number of players which were participating in instances, which allowed for a greater pool of metrics, which had an impact on Blizzard's decision to change the instances in the link I provided.

 

Did Blizzard make this decision based solely off of the implementation of the dungeon finder tool or QQ on the forums? Of course not and I never stated such. Did the dungeon tool provide them with more numbers (Total deaths/length of instances/etc) so that they could tune instances better? Of course. To argue otherwise would just be silly and irrational.

Edited February 7, 2012 by Yuuj

[Touchbass]

Damn the thing capped again with me asleep

[BlueSkittles]

Damn the thing capped again with me asleep

 

For however long you have left in the game, Touch, you must never go to sleep. At least I got in there again and put your great info up. And will continue to do so until the tool is fixed.

 

And still want a LFG tool on par with the Warzone tool, even if in the short term it has to be same-server due to the length of the development time for cross-server tech. Patch 1.2 improved LFG tool, please!

Edited February 7, 2012 by BlueSkittles

[Ichikitsune]

If you have befriended the whole server and have no problems for grouping, then the cross server LFD has zero interests for you.

 

That's not what I said. Nor did I imply that, I stated my opinion but go ahead slam me dude.

[Moricthian]

Did Blizzard make this decision based solely off of the implementation of the dungeon finder tool or QQ on the forums? Of course not and I never stated such. Did the dungeon tool provide them with more numbers (Total deaths/length of instances/etc) so that they could tune instances better? Of course. To argue otherwise would just be silly and irrational.

 

This is a good thing. I will conceede that the LFG tool provided a larger pool of metrics. However the argument that Blizzard then decided to nerf the content in order to accomdate the worst of players(this is the typical argument anti-lfg people will use) making up that metric falls under the post hoc fallacy.

 

All LFG did was provide more metrics. We don't know what Blizzard did with those metrics nor do we know the real reasoning behind any of their nerfs. I can agree with you that the LFG affects the process (sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse) but to make a kind of generalized statement that LFG will lead to nerfs is a jump in logic that is not appropriate.

 

I would argue that LFG is a good thing. The more people that experience the content, the better blizzard gets a tuning the fights, as you've said. This seems to be more evidence that LFG will be good for the game.

Edited February 7, 2012 by Moricthian

[Ichikitsune]

There is a LFG already in game. I think improving that should come first before any "instant let me FP" button, so to speak.

[Yuuj]

This is a good thing. I will conceede that the LFG tool provided a larger pool of metrics. However the argument that Blizzard then decided to nerf the content in order to accomdate the worst of players(this is the typical argument anti-lfg people will use) making up that metric falls under the post hoc fallacy.

 

That's actually fair. One cannot assume what 'type' of player Blizzard or Bioware tailors their content for. It is obvious it is not for the 'worst player' because people still fail at instances to date. We should acknowledge however that when a company decides to tune (I hate the word 'nerf' because it has negative connotation so from now on I'll just use the word tune.) their content, they have a specific type of player in mind which they are catering to.

 

All LFG did was provide more metrics. We don't know what Blizzard did with those metrics nor do we know the real reasoning behind any of their nerfs. I can agree with you that the LFG affects the process (sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse) but to make a kind of generalized statement that LFG will lead to nerfs is a jump in logic that is not appropriate.

 

Well, some of us know what Blizzard did with those metrics but that is because we were privied to that information during the games life cycle. For the rest of us that don't know, we can only assume. Again, it is safe to assume that Blizzard did not simply sit on their hands considering the amount of changes that were made for tuning purposes post the release of the dungeon finder. When you use the word tune in place of nerf, I think it is completely fair to say tuning will occur post release of a dungeon finder tool, for better or worse.

 

I would argue that LFG is a good thing. The more people that experience the content, the better blizzard gets a tuning the fights, as you've said. This seems to be more evidence that LFG will be good for the game.

 

Of course it is a good thing! The LFG tool gave Blizzard the opportunity to see how well people did in the different instances they designed, which instances were popular, and which ones they avoided, which 'optional' encounters were attempted and which were skipped, and so on.

 

I said it in another post on this topic and I'll say it again, I'm a very liberal thinking. I don't believe that a feature should be excluded simply because people don't like it. Based solely on observations, there is very little evidence to support that the LFG tool in World of Warcraft actually had a detrimental effect on the server community. I don't believe it made people mean spirited or elitist either.

 

I will say this though. There is no 'filter out elitist' or 'filter out meanie heads' or 'filter out people who aren't interested in story' option, and because the system is automated, there is a larger pool of people to pull from, and you lose the ability to screen/remove people from the group, you are more likely to be stuck in a group with people you don't like. Nothing stopping you from leaving though, and I certainly don't see this as a reason to punish the rest of the community that would use it.

Edited February 7, 2012 by Yuuj

[crica]

There is a LFG already in game. I think improving that should come first before any "instant let me FP" button, so to speak.

 

There is a LFG already in the game that I would not use unless it auto-grouped me for the group content I am interested in.

 

Why would I only use an auto-group LFG tool?

 

Because I enjoy the game matching me up with others who share my gaming interests so I can use my time actually playing the game instead of trying to find a match.

[HoopzMV]

Sadface.

 

I ran out of popcorn.

[salaryman]

That being said, our design team doesn't philosophically believe that cross-server Flashpoints are good for the game at this stage in the game's lifespan. There is huge social pressure to not be a jerk that goes away when the odds that you will never see these people again is high. I'm not saying never - there may come a time in the future where we reevaluate this - but at least in the short term, we believe this will cause more damage to the community than good.

 

If Bioware refuses to do cross-server flashpoints for "philosophical" reasons, then they should allow free server transfers or start merging the dozens of low-population servers.

 

Having a LFG tool isn't going to fix anything when there are only 3 people on a planet and 10 on the Fleet.