Gameplay problems with group centered games and attempts at solving them

Help and Feedback Game Design Support
, , ,
#1

Hello devforum.

Introduction

This is actually a topic rarely spoken about - The issues with Group and Group Rank games.

They dont have to be entirely centered about it. But it seems that alot of issues appear once a group community is engaged.

Personally, I deem strong group communities as a double edged sword - They are great for game stability, support and communication, keeping the traffic, aswell as keeping the players EXTRA long in the game, making them bring friends.

Group communities in roblox have always been special to me. I think that having a strong fanbase is one of the most amazing things in this industry, especially when working alone or in a small team.

And the most importantly - group communities bring a great stability and longevity to the game. My game (Which is the reason behind this topic.) has survived through really rough times, and for almost 3 years at this point all thanks to the loving community around it. It also led to alot of players supporting the game even when risky and straight up dumb decisions were made with the gameplay.

The game

Okay, let’s get to the point.

“My game” which i’ve talked about is called “Iron Curtain” [Papers Please] Iron Curtain - Roblox
(Game was created on the July 23rd of 2019 - Thats because we switched groups in July. The original game was made in July 23rd of 2017)

It’s a kid of the 2016 border games and a hybrid with today’s roleplay games. It’s really strange to define but I’m doing my best.

I have been told countless times to drop this game and move to something “more profitable”, but over the last 3 years I have developed a very strong bond with the game and the community. The game is very flexible when it comes to developing it - thats why it was very fun over the years testing different ideas and concepts. And I have now took the job of making it the best version of the game that it possibly can be. I was doing it for almost a year now, and this is why I now ask here.

Main Point

What struck me recently was this message that I’ve received (I receive alot of messages, but this one was pretty big for a stranger.)

image
image951Ă—365 63.6 KB

"But it being tied to “group” ranking is a failure of every possible front. You both rob the game of possible potential, and destroy any attempt at utilizing the game for any kind of role playing experience at the same time. Allowing the game to be a more free and clear experience would surely lead to the game being far more successful then its…"

This made me think alot, but I want to ask whether this guy really has a point. And if he has, how could I start thinking of ideas on how to solve this issue.

So far one of the biggest issues I’ve noticed is that:

  • When a game is based on community (and in this case, to be the “police” you need to be in group and rank up through it) theres a lack of group members in the police teams.

But this is not so easy to solve, If I made the “police team” open to all players, wouldnt the community be neglected and slowly loose its meaning? What would be the point of getting into the community then?

Conclusion

So, I ask for a discussion in the comments about solving issues with this topic.

Is it possible to have the best of both worlds?

Did that guy have a point?

4 Likes
#2

The point he’s attempting to get across (as far as I understand): group ranks in your game slightly represent superiority (cosmetic titles, benefits as I would assume, etc.) and that degrades the game to those who do not actively play the game, as they comparatively lack benefits.

I slightly disagree with him in one aspect - your game is still open and free regardless of group ranks, as long as everyone is permitted to engage in it and have fun. Other than that, I unanimously agree with him. Nearly all games incorporate a system in which activity is rewarding; the more active a player is, the more benefits they receive. However, being required to join and contribute into a group to join a very basic, fundamental, in-game team (police in this case) is irrational and unintuitive.

Consequently, I would assume that the new user rate statistic isn’t high as, from my investigation, your game is unwelcoming to new players unwilling to contribute to the group. Although having a group-linked game does develop a concrete fan base, it harms many crucial statistics (ie new user rate) and decreases positive publicity associated with your game.

I’m going to be completely honest, and attempt to be constructive whilst doing so: your game sounds slightly authoritarian in the sense that individuals with high group ranks control those below them. Personally, I suggest either limiting the power of individuals with high group ranks, or improving the experience for new players without group ranks. This situation is difficult, but hopefully things resolve over time.

3 Likes
#3

Thanks for your opinion! :grin:

Do you have any suggestions for ingame mechanics that could balance “non-group players vs group players” issue?

1 Like
#4

This is the primary point I’m emphasizing: group players should gain no physical benefit compared to non-group players. Provide group players with cosmetics; but ultimately, they are (or should be) no superior than non-group members. With that being said, a custom mechanic for this particular issue is unnecessary, as both group and non-group users will be equal in physical benefits.

Physical benefits refers to more than simply items (ie improved weapons or attachments). By default, group members will generally be more proficient than non-group members in your game - as they are dedicated and devoted enough to join your group. What I mean by physical benefits is that group players have no explicit, direct advantage because they are in the group, but they probably have more physical benefits (items) coincidentally, as they are more motivated.

If this is applied, randomization should function well. I wholeheartedly wish you and your team the best of luck in developing an adequate solution.

1 Like