Quote Originally Posted by sebastianosmith View Post
I and my static group do all of these every time we step into a quest. We play as a team, each fulfilling a critical role which makes the whole stronger than the sum of its parts. That is the way we choose to play. The game neither encourages nor dissuades us from doing so. We simply decided to do it on our own.

The reason so many players choose to solo or zerg like mad is not a function of game mechanics. The game allows for such behavior just as it allows for what I and my group prefer. It doesn't favor any particular style over another. The players do that based on desire and expectation. Attempting to enforce a behavior through enticement, game mechanics or some other means will produce unpredictable results because many such measures fail to take player goals into account.
I disagree. To talk specifics, let's go back to my wizking example. Exactly how is the quest completed in a better way by the attitude"We play as a team, each fulfilling a critical role which makes the whole stronger than the sum of its parts". You play in a static group and cooperate regardless of whether there are meager returns to it or not.

A lot of people, notably rookies, play in pugs where the only reason that a priori they have to cooperate and formulate strategies is the in game reward. I argue that currently there is little to non.

It is game design 101 that desired behaviors should be incentivized. Then people decide if they like the game for what it rewards or not. Giving self sufficiency and little cross - player cooperation benefits directly points in the direction of no group play. With clickies, self buffs, self healing, evasion / trapping people barely need anything from anyone while in a group. I seldom ever see any of the 4 points I mentioned happen in game.

Exactly what cross player cooperation is the game encouraging right now? The whole state of it is summarized by: "every man on his own pushing to get this done as fast as possible". As I said, in a lot of quests the difference I see is simply speed, not more interesting synergies.

Saying that people can do as they please while the game mechanics are moving in the direction of no cooperation (in the sense I described) is just cheap talk.

PS - I get it, a veteran does NOT want to have to rely on someone who may not know how to play that well for crucial aspects of the gameplay. However, the alternative is even less fun for me.