Give me a legitimate reason to NOT have a LFD tool.

[EvilTrollGuy]

A favorite phrase out of EQ comes to mind. "You ruined your lands. You will not ruin ours."

 

I don't have to come up with theories. I watched what happened with dungeon queues in Rift. People stayed in the main city and simply waited. Group quality in pickups went directly to hell because the mindset was all about getting the gear and screw the content. I saw this happen. I left.

 

I don't want to see such behavior encouraged here any more than it may already be. Some things should involve effort - even if it is just the minimal effort of watching your text screen and then getting to the instance. Makes it more real for me.

 

I guess "real" is subjective these days, sigh.

 

 

That's exactly what's going on now anyway. People are waiting around in the fleet to get a group. People group up just to get new equipment. That's all there is. You don't play the same FP 5+ times just because it's fun, you do it because you need a specific piece of equipment.

 

WHY should anybody care about the content/environment after the initial run in a FP when all they need is gear to progress?

[ferroz]

Keeping it on one server gives you the protection against leechers x-servers gives you none instead it promotes it.

No, I ran into the same number of each in both cases in wow. Single server really doesn't give you any protection against them that you don't have xserver.

[Kaelshi]

A favorite phrase out of EQ comes to mind. "You ruined your lands. You will not ruin ours."

 

I don't have to come up with theories. I watched what happened with dungeon queues in Rift. People stayed in the main city and simply waited. Group quality in pickups went directly to hell because the mindset was all about getting the gear and screw the content. I saw this happen. I left.

 

I don't want to see such behavior encouraged here any more than it may already be. Some things should involve effort - even if it is just the minimal effort of watching your text screen and then getting to the instance. Makes it more real for me.

 

I guess "real" is subjective these days, sigh.

 

 

So what about the majority of people who were not able to tackle the content before the LFG was introduced? Rift and WoW end-game groups were only accessed regularly by very few people(admitted to by the devs of both games) and after the introduction of the LFG tools millions of people who had never done high level dungeons were able to do them.

 

YOU can still do pick up groups with people you know or same-server people. No one is forcing you to use the tool. Just like no one forces you to PvP for example or use the guild-finder tools.

 

so to the millions of people who may not be able to do the higher level content and who don't have the time to play the amount you do - what would you say to them? Go find another game? Sorry this game is not for you?

[JustAnotherClone]

Why are you offering that as if it were an argument against lfg? People were already doing that before Trion added an lfg tool to that game.

 

By using "as if" you are attempting to misdirect my argument. This suggests you don't have a conclusive rebuttal. Try and find one, please. (grin).

 

I observed the introduction of queues in Rift. I observed a decided decrease in pickup group quality. I indeed draw a cause-effect correlation between the two. I feel this is a legitimate point.

[ferroz]

Basicly the server is if a person feel mistreated he can say it to his guild his friends or and to the server x-server all those options are gone

 

Yes you did but then you always got the choice blacklisting them because of that X-server that is also is gone

No, you can do the same thing xserver. you can blacklist them xserver.

 

So what do you mean my objective reasoning is not objective thanks to that you cant even answer how to protect a single player aswell as the group in a X -server LFD.So you use the see no evil hear no evil stunt which is just lame

So, maybe your primary language isn't english. Because I can't make out what you're trying to say.

 

were yuo going to offer an objective reason against it... or were you going to continue to argue some bizarre off topic tangent?

[ferroz]

By using "as if" you are attempting to misdirect my argument. This suggests you don't have a conclusive rebuttal. Try and find one, please. (grin).

No, I'm using it to point out that it's not an actual argument against, since the behavior that you're attributing to the lfg tool actually predated the existence of said tool. So my rebuttal is that you've not made a valid argument. Sorry if that wasn't clear

 

I observed the introduction of queues in Rift.

Likewise.

 

I observed a decided decrease in pickup group quality. I indeed draw a cause-effect correlation between the two. I feel this is a legitimate point.

You're mistaking correlation with causation. The data that you observed only supports correlation, and you're asserting a causal relationship. It's a common logical fallacy. Edited February 13, 2012 by ferroz

[JustAnotherClone]

So what about the majority of people who were not able to tackle the content before the LFG was introduced? Rift and WoW end-game groups were only accessed regularly by very few people(admitted to by the devs of both games) and after the introduction of the LFG tools millions of people who had never done high level dungeons were able to do them.

 

YOU can still do pick up groups with people you know or same-server people. No one is forcing you to use the tool. Just like no one forces you to PvP for example or use the guild-finder tools.

 

so to the millions of people who may not be able to do the higher level content and who don't have the time to play the amount you do - what would you say to them? Go find another game? Sorry this game is not for you?

 

If I thought the end result of queues would not affect game play in general then I would have no objection. However, it did. Fewer folks bothered to call out lfg, and so I resorted to the queue and found myself encountering a significant increase in poor groups. Don't want a repeat of that - although arguably your argument is sound. Arguably, we could just as easily introduce "free to play" here as well (hey, you don't have to) and trust me, you would also see a difference in game play - not necessarily a good one from my perspective.

 

I am uncomfortable with suggesting restrictions on how other's play their game, but remember that this axe swings both ways. A queue will affect my game as well, based on my past experience. In the end, I hope Bio-ware doesn't appeal to the lowest common denominator and make this identical to WoW in all aspects save for better stories.

 

Just my opinion, of course. I'm not "right" for anyone but myself (grin)

[EvilTrollGuy]

If I thought the end result of queues would not affect game play in general then I would have no objection. However, it did. Fewer folks bothered to call out lfg, and so I resorted to the queue and found myself encountering a significant increase in poor groups. Don't want a repeat of that - although arguably your argument is sound. Arguably, we could just as easily introduce "free to play" here as well (hey, you don't have to) and trust me, you would also see a difference in game play - not necessarily a good one from my perspective.

 

I am uncomfortable with suggesting restrictions on how other's play their game, but remember that this axe swings both ways. A queue will affect my game as well, based on my past experience. In the end, I hope Bio-ware doesn't appeal to the lowest common denominator and make this identical to WoW in all aspects save for better stories.

 

Just my opinion, of course. I'm not "right" for anyone but myself (grin)

 

I've had a good experience with the LFD and groups in WoW. Sure, there were *******, but those were a feature the game launched with. Not saying my experience is the same as everyone else.

[Kaelshi]

If I thought the end result of queues would not affect game play in general then I would have no objection. However, it did. Fewer folks bothered to call out lfg, and so I resorted to the queue and found myself encountering a significant increase in poor groups. Don't want a repeat of that - although arguably your argument is sound. Arguably, we could just as easily introduce "free to play" here as well (hey, you don't have to) and trust me, you would also see a difference in game play - not necessarily a good one from my perspective.

 

I am uncomfortable with suggesting restrictions on how other's play their game, but remember that this axe swings both ways. A queue will affect my game as well, based on my past experience. In the end, I hope Bio-ware doesn't appeal to the lowest common denominator and make this identical to WoW in all aspects save for better stories.

 

Just my opinion, of course. I'm not "right" for anyone but myself (grin)

 

 

I think you are absolutely right. Your personal experience reflects how you feel about it.

 

What tips the scales for me is access to content.

 

Believe me - I wanted to do high end content, but due to other obligations I did not really have much of a choice in the matter. I could not commit to times or lengths of times of when I'd be around.

 

the LFG changed that for me - yes I was one of those people who occasionally had to leave a group mid-run, but how much better for the group was it that they could just re-queue for a person than if they were in a server-only group? I never joined server-only groups for this reason - I'm not an outright ahole.

 

I understand an appreciate people have had bad experiences but I think concerns like this should, and for developers probably do, boil down to Content access.

 

Do more players have access to content with or without LFG.

 

I think there is no question an LFG increases access to content.

[Varghjerta]

No, you can do the same thing xserver. you can blacklist them xserver.

Let me use this to make it abit simplier you have a guild consisting of 30 persons .

You join a group and you get mistreated so you say damn that <players >is an idiot and a ninja 20 people of 30 puts him on ignore .

But now take those twenty having the same experience the same day in a X-Server LFD so you mean the whole guild should blacklist him while knowing he will just be able doing the same tomorrow withoutr a problem ?

So, maybe your primary language isn't english. Because I can't make out what you're trying to say.

 

were yuo going to offer an objective reason against it... or were you going to continue to argue some bizarre off topic tangent?

Swedish btw

 

But as LFD is built up and protecting you cant get both groups and single persons protected againg abuse

Edited February 13, 2012 by Varghjerta

[Kaelshi]

Let me use this to make it abit simplier you have a guild consisting of 30 persons .

You join a group and you get mistreated so you say damn that <players >is an idiot and a ninja 20 people of 30 puts him on ignore .

But now take those twenty having the same experience the same day in a X-Server LFD so you mean the whole guild should blacklist him while knowing he will just be able doing the same tomorrow withoutr a problem ?

 

Swedish btw

 

 

 

wait wait! What if you are a casual player and you dont have a guild of 30 people.

 

So now your options are to not experience the content at all.

 

I'd rather risk running into jerks with an LFG tool than to not be able to run content at all.

[JustAnotherClone]

No, I'm using it to point out that it's not an actual argument against, since the behavior that you're attributing to the lfg tool actually predated the existence of said tool. So my rebuttal is that you've not made a valid argument. Sorry if that wasn't clear

 

Likewise.

 

You're mistaking correlation with causation. The data that you observed only supports correlation, and you're asserting a causal relationship. It's a common logical fallacy.

 

I was not referring to any lfg tool. Perhaps we're tangling over terms, but I was mentioning the dungeon queue. Dungeon queue. I had no objection with the lfg tool - I don't think it was used that much in Rift, certainly not in EQ, and my impression is the current lfg tool in this game is suffering the same fate. I can't make a valid argument against something I'm not addressing, eh?

 

I am not a student of logic but it does seem that if "B" doesn't happen until "A" is introduced, there is a strong correlation. All of this is subjective, of course, hence the debate. From your perspective it is perfectly understandable if you saw none of this. I am addressing my point of view here and nothing more.

[Uruare]

A favorite phrase out of EQ comes to mind. "You ruined your lands. You will not ruin ours."

 

An emotionally charged sentiment. The emotional appeal is fairly worthless on this topic however.

 

I don't have to come up with theories. I watched what happened with dungeon queues in Rift. People stayed in the main city and simply waited. Group quality in pickups went directly to hell because the mindset was all about getting the gear and screw the content. I saw this happen. I left.

 

Would you be open to contemplating that the game designers may well set the stage for this mindset themselves with the heavy emphasis on gear acquisition as your primary method of advancement within the level-based structure?

 

Is it, in that framing of contrast, really all that unreasonable that people would be primarily concerned with getting gear when getting gear is, in many of these games, the most singularly important component of character advancement in tandem with character levels themselves?

 

 

 

I don't want to see such behavior encouraged here any more than it may already be. Some things should involve effort - even if it is just the minimal effort of watching your text screen and then getting to the instance. Makes it more real for me.

 

The game developers designed the scope and nature of the activity/reward metrics.

 

That manner of behaviour is exactly what this model rewards. It is often said that people are fundamentally lazy, and ironically, the truth of this is that people can be very industrious in facilitating themselves to efficiency so that they can, thereafter, be lazy in a manner of speaking.

 

In the current model of activity versus reward, standing around watching your text screen with no assurance of finding the people you'll need to do the content that will put you in the running for the gear you need to advance does not jive well with the reward model itself.

 

It is insufficient and, frankly, wrong to say that 'everyone wants everything handed to them on a silver platter' for example. We are intelligent creatures that do not appreciate feeling like our time is being arbitrarily wasted by artificial prolongments of waiting for the sake of waiting, randomness in the outcomes of our rewards just for the sake of more artificial dilation in the timeframing of their acquisition, and so on.

 

 

We are, in fact, no more fundamentally lazy by any indication than anyone that, when tasked to wash clothes, would prefer to use a washing machine; technology that commonly exists in the world; than to drag them to a river and wash them on a rock.

 

We are no more fundamentally impatient than anyone that would prefer to drive 60 miles to get to where they want to be in a nice, reliable vehicle than to walk.

 

It is, I posit, a dyed-in-wool failure of games such as these that they very literally reward speed and efficiency while simultaneously punishing them.

 

You're supposed to endlessly chase the carrot of the best pieces of gear you can stick in your character slots if you want to be the most effective and capable, mechanically speaking, as you possibly can be.

 

This system does not reward 'the journey'. Frankly, in these systems, 'the journey' is the hardship you must endure to get there; that it must be endured and is so very easily compared to an -endurance test- is disappointing in the extreme.

 

Bioware has done a fine job of offsetting that in the 1-49 game with their immersive storytelling model; they really did do a fine job there of making the journey itself for quite possibly a good many a capable reward itself in the terms of experiencing it.

 

But then we're back to the gear grind we've seen so many times before in so many other games before at 50.

 

Naturally, since we're once again being told we have to go 60 miles through repetitious and endurance-testing scenery to get to the only place where there is any reward at all, being the end; the gear; we'd prefer to do so with the vehicles that exist in so many other games for, yes, expediting some of the most annoying and deterministically unrewarding aspects of the process.

 

In short: Gear is all that matters at 50. You do not do more damage, take less damage or increase your stats by one single point by making friends. In fact, making friends is counter-intuitive to many of the short-term requirements of the absolutely undisputable metrics of the process.

 

You don't need -friends-. You need at least marginally competent bodies that can drive their characters and complete repetitious tasks along with you. The reward for this minimal requirement is some of the gear that is absolutely all that matters in any way, shape or form to your character's advancement.

 

Sure, in the long term, friends can be nice to have to do such things with; I would argue that playing games like these with friends can add a whole new level of its value as a recreational activity.

 

Most of us, I'd wager, probably aren't here to find bosom-buddies and chums. I'd run the assumptive risk of wagering that most of us aren't here running these gear treadmills because what we actually wanted, were trying to get or wanted to feel forced into looking for in this game are people to trust.

 

At least, not any further than is required to kill the bosses and not do stupid things and get everybody killed.

 

 

 

If Bio-ware wants to heed anything, it is to shy away from making this just another WoW clone anymore than it already is. You want WoW - then play WoW (or Rift). Don't bring that mindset here.

 

 

Too late. SWTOR already has the exact same formula of gear treadmilling as so many other games, and with that, every single problem that's ever existed because of that particular model.

 

May as well acknowledge that. It's pretty blatantly true.

Edited February 13, 2012 by Uruare

[JustAnotherClone]

I think you are absolutely right. Your personal experience reflects how you feel about it.

 

What tips the scales for me is access to content.

 

.

 

When you say "restricted", does this mean restricted because of a chain-quest pre-req or simply that you couldn't find/fight your way to the entrance of the instance?

 

I can understand the latter frustration (and sometimes would love a shuttle to run me over to the instance).

[Calsidian]

Hi. Cross server LFG Tool is a terrible idea. I do endorse having one within your own server, however.

[JustAnotherClone]

An emotionally charged sentiment. The emotional appeal is fairly worthless on this topic however.

 

Worthless to you, perhaps. My response wasn't meant to conform to any but my own sentiment. I think it's good for opposing views to be aired so folks know they are out there.

 

I do not grind for gear myself, and park my toons at 50 until the next expansion ups the level. So, my viewpoint is not going to be the same as yours. I am all about the journey. That is where I speak from - not end game.

 

For me, nothing said by any contributor is without value. Nothing. We're all playing "our" game here, and I think it best to always keep that in mind. You raise legitimate concerns for end-gamers. Yes, it would, I suppose, be all about the gear to you. What else is left?

 

Me? I roll another alt (grin). By the time all of my toons hit 50, one would hope we'll see the inevitable cap raise. Then, my journey continues, and your race to end game.

[Jswizzle]

A cross server pug group on a hardmode flashpoint sounds like a nightmare.

 

I'll pass and just run with my guild. Don't mind if other people use it, but I most likely wont

[Varghjerta]

wait wait! What if you are a casual player and you dont have a guild of 30 people.

 

So now your options are to not experience the content at all.

 

I'd rather risk running into jerks with an LFG tool than to not be able to run content at all.

 

So basicly you cant read aswell .

 

With no x-server the person in youre guild that gets mistreated tells the (just for you ) 3 million others in the guild what he done and 2 million say screw him-

 

With X-server

That just that 3 million goes we had that 5 minutes ago but what to do he is on another server.

[Odincore]

My 2 cents about LFFP.

 

I am not taking a side on if we should have or not have LFFP. But if we do have LFFP these are the things that need to be taken care of in my book.

 

1. Need a way to filter out the people who go in to grief\steal\all around hate. (rating system)

 

2. Need a way to filter out guildie groups who constantly kick people who don't follow their uptight rules. (crack down on repeated kicking with same members remaining in group)

 

3. Need a way to "link" cross server people who you like so that you can consistently get grouped with them. (this would have to be a mutual type of "link")

 

4. Need a way to make LFFP cross server or internal server. (simple check box)

 

I'm sure I have more but those are the top off my list.

[EvilTrollGuy]

A cross server pug group on a hardmode flashpoint sounds like a nightmare.

 

I'll pass and just run with my guild. Don't mind if other people use it, but I most likely wont

 

It works in WOW, why shouldn't it also work here?

[Varghjerta]

A cross server pug group on a hardmode flashpoint sounds like a nightmare.

 

I'll pass and just run with my guild. Don't mind if other people use it, but I most likely wont

 

Problem is that it will be adapted towards that.

 

Basicly in Swtor how can you fail get gear "RNG aint a contributor" just how many bags/drops at a time.

 

Time have replaced action even in PVE

Edited February 13, 2012 by Varghjerta

[ferroz]

I am not a student of logic but it does seem that if "B" doesn't happen until "A" is introduced, there is a strong correlation.

Well, you were talking about 2 situations

1. People sitting around cities.

2. quality of groups declining after the lfg queue.

 

The first I objected to because it was already prevalant long before the lfg queue was added to rift.

 

I think that ones is cause primarily by 2 things: (1)a lack of stuff that's interesting for level capped people to do, and (2) people gravitate toward centers of trade. In EQ, people congregated in the EC tunnel, or in Gfay (depending on the server) because they were trade centers, and because they weren't leveling any more and were kind of out of stuff to do, so they were a good place to shoot the **** with other level capped people. Later on the congregation points moved to the bazaar (especially people using the pvp area there) and then to pok.

 

 

The second I objected to because I think you're assuming a causal relationship and I don't think the evidence supports that.

 

The big thing to keep in mind is that correlation is not the same thing as causation.

 

it's really common for someone to see that X an d Y happened at the same to make the leap that X caused Y...that's the basis for a lot of superstition, for example.

 

The name of that logical fallacy is post hoc ergo propter hoc (after this, therefore because of this); it's specifically about making that leap without proper evidence of causality.

 

In this particular case (group quality declining), I think there are a lot of factors that go into it; I'm kind of convinced that the issue was one of accessibility (new level 50s started getting into hard modes mixed in with the hard core players) rather than being actually inherently caused by the lfg queue itself.

[Amiracle]

You must of missed it then:

 

X-server LFD isn't a panacea for the community issue. Never said it was. It is a tool for one thing. Getting quick groups and for that it does it's job well.

 

Community is created by people, not functionality. The reason I mention the lack of community is in response to the common phrase 'LFD ruins communities". In my case, even though LFD doesn't ruin communities in my experience, there is nothing to ruin.

 

As far as guild drama....see the little winky eye......

 

To translate....it does not do anything for community, pro or con.

 

 

I see you still haven't answered.

[oursacrifice]

how do you ignore people when your list is has 50 names in it? there are 100s of worthy people that need an ignore and wow only limits you to a list of 50.

 

i mean they are even asking for limit caps to be raised on the wow forums:

 

http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/3120002276

 

its apparently not working as well as you say?

 

After five years of playing WoW, I had a whopping 18 people on my ignore list (around 5-6 of them were trade-chat trolls that NEVER shut-up).

 

Perhaps it's the fact that I don't whine and cry when someone doesn't follow the unwritten rules exactly. Perhaps it's the fact that I have a spine and live in the real world where dealing with a jerk is part of life. Or perhaps it's the fact that since I'm a tank, I control the flow of the dungeon and when you chain pull people in the group tend to be extremely happy that:

 

a) They have a tank that understands game mechanics and doesn't wait 2 minutes between every pull

b) They have a tank that's moving so quick that there isn't enough time to even bother crying over the fact that someone needed a crafting mat

 

Also, I don't speak while in a random group, because I simply don't give a damn about how these 4 strangers' days have been, nor do I care what their favorite color is or how fresh their level 85 was. I take the exact same approach in SWTOR, except I DPS now instead of tank. I don't talk to people except for at the very end of the run I say "ty 4 grp" and instantly leave. I get invited back to groups, so clearly the fact that I have zero interest in socializing with random people in the game world doesn't negatively impact their personal enjoyment of the game.

 

Honestly, the only thing I do that would probably annoy people is I don't spacebar dialog sequences unless it's the type that you just read.

 

So yeah, your link example there, that covers an exceptionally small group of people wanting an increase in ignore list clearly shows that it's a global problem that everyone deals with... It obviously doesn't have ANYTHING to do with the fact that those people are probably pulling an /ignore over every little insignificant thing that annoys them.

 

People like that, should just stick with forming their own groups before queuing - it would save them the headache of dealing with normal people, and it would save everyone they'd get grouped with from their continual crying and moaning over trivial things like a maelstrom crystal.

Edited February 13, 2012 by oursacrifice

[ferroz]

Worthless to you, perhaps.

No, the topic is about having real, valid reasons, not making emotional appeals. So they're always worthless to that particualr topic.