Monsters and Memories (Project_N) - Old School Indie MMO

Kriptini

Vyemm Raider
3,731
3,635
What do you mean T&L didn't have effective ways to group? Leveling 1-50 was done 100% through soloing. (There were group dungeons below level cap but they were 100% a waste of time because soloing was so much more efficient and you were required to do the story quests to unlock things.) Both party board and matchmaking queue were in the game at launch (although matchmaking queue was bugged and didn't actually work for a significant period of the early access period).
 

Quaid

Trump's Staff
11,998
8,365
What do you mean T&L didn't have effective ways to group? Leveling 1-50 was done 100% through soloing. (There were group dungeons below level cap but they were 100% a waste of time because soloing was so much more efficient and you were required to do the story quests to unlock things.) Both party board and matchmaking queue were in the game at launch (although matchmaking queue was bugged and didn't actually work for a significant period of the early access period).

The game is enormously focused on large scale group pvp and pve content, and you identified yourself the issues with the tools.

Solo content was thin, and solo progression was not rewarding.

In contrast to other populated MMOs (WoW, GW2) group content in T&L is far more emphasized in relation to solo content.
 

Kriptini

Vyemm Raider
3,731
3,635
The game is enormously focused on large scale group pvp and pve content, and you identified yourself the issues with the tools.

Solo content was thin, and solo progression was not rewarding.

In contrast to other populated MMOs (WoW, GW2) group content in T&L is far more emphasized in relation to solo content.

Yes, group content is emphasized in T&L, but that's not why the game failed. It failed because of bugs! If the matchmaking was working, I would've just said "you're wrong" in response to you saying there was no effective way to group. If it weren't for the gorillian bugs, the game's population would not have crashed. Yes, we would've lost the solo players, but frankly, the game didn't need them - even two months into the game when several guilds had quit due to frustration with the game's stability, the population was still extremely active and there was never a dull moment in any of the open world content.

Also, "the game is enormously focused on large scale PvE content" is not true in the sense that you had to "group" for it. All of the "large scale PvE" was possible to participate in as a solo player by just running up to a boss with the rest of the zerg and smacking it for your loot. The game didn't introduce large scale PvE content where grouping and coordination really mattered until about two months ago, when the first 12-man PvE raid was released. But guess what went wrong with that? BUGS! On launch day, the raid automatically kicked out anyone who tried to enter it. There was a hotfix the next night, but the first boss had a bug where he couldn't be killed unless you used an exploit. It took A WEEK for the devs to fix it, and then in that same patch, they gave out 3-7 day temp bans for anyone who exploited the unkillable boss. I'm sorry Quaid, but when it comes to T&L, claiming that anything other than bugs killed that game is an ignorant position. I should know.

1754071359310.png


As for New World, I don't have any experience with it so I'll just have to take your word for it.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Kirun

Buzzfeed Editor
20,452
17,107
Can confirm with Kriptini Kriptini that bugs/stability issues killed T&L for me. I was in the same alliance he was at one point. Our guild got blown up because of our retarded leader, which certainly didn't help, but when that situation was contrasted with all the stability issues? It made it easy to just quit entirely.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Sloan

Silver Knight of the Realm
142
122
In terms of M&M, what is the argument being put forth about single vs group experience exactly? I almost exclusively solo in M&M. And I dont mean I box, I just solo not a huge fan of boxing. I would say most the people I play with group the majority of the time, however there are a big chunk like me that just like soloing or duoing.

I think its important that not every class can solo. Right now for the most part the classes that arent very good at soloing bring more to groups as well. Fighters for example are monsters, easily doing double the dps as my necro and not having to worry about mana - not very good at soloing though.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Kirun

Buzzfeed Editor
20,452
17,107
In terms of M&M, what is the argument being put forth about single vs group experience exactly? I almost exclusively solo in M&M. And I dont mean I box, I just solo not a huge fan of boxing. I would say most the people I play with group the majority of the time, however there are a big chunk like me that just like soloing or duoing.

I think its important that not every class can solo. Right now for the most part the classes that arent very good at soloing bring more to groups as well. Fighters for example are monsters, easily doing double the dps as my necro and not having to worry about mana - not very good at soloing though.
I think the distinction you’re making that "not every class should be able to solo" is often used as a stand-in for difficulty, but it's worth asking what kind of difficulty that actually represents.

If certain classes simply can't solo, not because the content is tough or situational, but because they lack the tools to survive or progress at all - that's not difficulty in the meaningful sense. That's just exclusion. It doesn't test player skill, decision-making, or adaptability. It just narrows viable playstyles based on class selection, and often ends up funneling players into suboptimal experiences unless they have the luxury of always being in a group.

And sure, in theory, the classes that can't solo well are supposed to bring more to groups. That sounds fair on paper. But in practice, it often creates dead spots in a player's experience: times when they want to log on, engage, progress, and there’s nothing they can do unless someone else is online. That doesn’t encourage grouping, it just discourages logging in. Not to mention how horrible most devs are at class balancing, where a class that's supposed to bring more to a group actually doesn't, but also can't solo either.

This is why I keep coming back to intentional incentive design as a better solution. You don't need to prevent soloing to encourage grouping. You need to make grouping feel better. More rewarding. More efficient. More fun. If someone solos, that should be viable - just slower, maybe riskier. Not broken by default. Not a punishment for rolling the "wrong" class.

MMORPGs work best when players can express autonomy and feel pulled toward interdependence. That doesn't happen when some classes are effectively turned off outside of a group. It happens when the game gives everyone a reason to cooperate - not because they have to, but because it's the better path forward.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

Kriptini

Vyemm Raider
3,731
3,635
I think it's fine if all classes gain access to abilities that give them a better time soloing. Rogue, for example, can use their short-cooldown stun and incap to set up backstabs and ambushes when soloing. The time to kill mobs is actually fairly decent, but the killer is HP regen between fights. (Maybe there needs to be a consumable pot that increases HP regen when out of combat?) It's also much less efficient for XP than grouping, but if people want to play that way, I don't mind the playstyle being supported through niche abilities for all classes.