Monsters and Memories (Project_N) - Old School Indie MMO

Kirun

Buzzfeed Editor
21,677
18,959
you're never going to have thrilling highs without without bad feelings, you need a juxtaposition. details are irrelevent to that concept
Wow. Thought provoking stuff.. truly.

"You're never going to have thrilling highs without bad feelings."

Thanks, Plato. The problem is that you've immediately jumped from "negative experiences can enhance positive experiences" to "therefore any negative experience is valuable!" Those are not remotely the same thing. By this logic, we should make loot randomly disappear from inventories. We should force players to re-enter their password every ten minutes. We should randomly disconnect people during boss fights. After all, the frustration would make the good moments feel even better, right?! Obviously not.

Because the details are entirely relevant. The entire discipline of game design is figuring out which negative experiences create meaningful tension and which ones are simply annoying. A difficult boss creates tension. A risky pull creates tension. The possibility of losing a rare drop creates tension. Having to suddenly leave because your kid got hurt and then getting punished by the game for it creates nothing. That's not an emotional low that enhances a future high. That's just real life colliding with a video game. And that's where this argument always falls apart.

People start speaking in these sweeping abstractions about "highs and lows" because the moment you start examining the actual mechanics individually, actually start using your fucking brain, start thinking critically and not just living in a memory, the defense gets much harder.

Was corpse recovery in EQ memorable? Sometimes. Was it also frequently annoying, time-consuming, and the reason people logged off for the night? Also yes. Were contested camps memorable? Sometimes. Did they also create monopolization, toxicity, and soft PvP behavior? Absolutely. Were long travel times immersive? Sometimes. Were they also often just dead time spent staring at a screen? Of course.

The details are literally the entire discussion. Because if details are irrelevant, then every bad mechanic can be justified by claiming it contributes to some larger emotional contrast. It's not "design", you're just rationalizing.

The reality is that successful game design isn't about maximizing bad feelings. It's about creating the right kinds of tension - this is precisely why the Souls games were so successful they literally invented a genre of video game. Because games can be difficult, challenging, ball-busting, frustrating, filled with tension, and yet still be great fucking games - because you design for the right kinds of friction for the player. Not "tension" from administrative inconvenience, real-life scheduling conflicts, systems that consume time without creating interesting decisions, etc.

The funniest thing about this argument that you're too fucking dense to realize is that it accidentally proves the opposite of what you're trying to prove. If the details truly "don't matter" and all that matters is creating lows to support highs, then every negative mechanic is equally valid. But nobody actually believes that. Which means the details matter enormously. In fact, they're the only thing that matters.
 
  • 5Like
Reactions: 4 users

Kithani

Vyemm Raider
2,359
3,367
Wow. Thought provoking stuff.. truly.

"You're never going to have thrilling highs without bad feelings."

Thanks, Plato. The problem is that you've immediately jumped from "negative experiences can enhance positive experiences" to "therefore any negative experience is valuable!" Those are not remotely the same thing. By this logic, we should make loot randomly disappear from inventories. We should force players to re-enter their password every ten minutes. We should randomly disconnect people during boss fights. After all, the frustration would make the good moments feel even better, right?! Obviously not.

Because the details are entirely relevant. The entire discipline of game design is figuring out which negative experiences create meaningful tension and which ones are simply annoying. A difficult boss creates tension. A risky pull creates tension. The possibility of losing a rare drop creates tension. Having to suddenly leave because your kid got hurt and then getting punished by the game for it creates nothing. That's not an emotional low that enhances a future high. That's just real life colliding with a video game. And that's where this argument always falls apart.

People start speaking in these sweeping abstractions about "highs and lows" because the moment you start examining the actual mechanics individually, actually start using your fucking brain, start thinking critically and not just living in a memory, the defense gets much harder.

Was corpse recovery in EQ memorable? Sometimes. Was it also frequently annoying, time-consuming, and the reason people logged off for the night? Also yes. Were contested camps memorable? Sometimes. Did they also create monopolization, toxicity, and soft PvP behavior? Absolutely. Were long travel times immersive? Sometimes. Were they also often just dead time spent staring at a screen? Of course.

The details are literally the entire discussion. Because if details are irrelevant, then every bad mechanic can be justified by claiming it contributes to some larger emotional contrast. It's not "design", you're just rationalizing.

The reality is that successful game design isn't about maximizing bad feelings. It's about creating the right kinds of tension - this is precisely why the Souls games were so successful they literally invented a genre of video game. Because games can be difficult, challenging, ball-busting, frustrating, filled with tension, and yet still be great fucking games - because you design for the right kinds of friction for the player. Not "tension" from administrative inconvenience, real-life scheduling conflicts, systems that consume time without creating interesting decisions, etc.

The funniest thing about this argument that you're too fucking dense to realize is that it accidentally proves the opposite of what you're trying to prove. If the details truly "don't matter" and all that matters is creating lows to support highs, then every negative mechanic is equally valid. But nobody actually believes that. Which means the details matter enormously. In fact, they're the only thing that matters.
Bro have you ever considered running your responses through ChatGPT and saying “cut this down to 1/4 length”
 

Muligan

Trakanon Raider
3,332
995
I think its an easy solution if they really want to maintain the authenticity, lore, economy, whatever of their classes. Casters should have a personal gate and port spells throughout the lower levels and have more specialized ports in the higher level/endgame that would be more valuable and convenient. There should be a quest for a "Home" ability that anyone can learn/maintain with a decent cooldown. For groups there should be banner system for folks to come to and from dungeons/raids (again, some type of quest, tradeskill, or skill to promote class or tradeskill value). There should also be potions that melee classes can buy that also come from alchemists with limited charges for gate spells and maybe even certain locations.

I think there are plenty of creative ways to provide everyone the ability to travel all while supporting the economy and maintain the integrity of class roles and lore. It doesn't have to be complicated.
 

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
58,485
143,950
Wow. Thought provoking stuff.. truly.

"You're never going to have thrilling highs without bad feelings."

Thanks, Plato. The problem is that you've immediately jumped from "negative experiences can enhance positive experiences" to "therefore any negative experience is valuable!" Those are not remotely the same thing. By this logic, we should make loot randomly disappear from inventories. We should force players to re-enter their password every ten minutes. We should randomly disconnect people during boss fights. After all, the frustration would make the good moments feel even better, right?! Obviously not.

Because the details are entirely relevant. The entire discipline of game design is figuring out which negative experiences create meaningful tension and which ones are simply annoying. A difficult boss creates tension. A risky pull creates tension. The possibility of losing a rare drop creates tension. Having to suddenly leave because your kid got hurt and then getting punished by the game for it creates nothing. That's not an emotional low that enhances a future high. That's just real life colliding with a video game. And that's where this argument always falls apart.

People start speaking in these sweeping abstractions about "highs and lows" because the moment you start examining the actual mechanics individually, actually start using your fucking brain, start thinking critically and not just living in a memory, the defense gets much harder.

Was corpse recovery in EQ memorable? Sometimes. Was it also frequently annoying, time-consuming, and the reason people logged off for the night? Also yes. Were contested camps memorable? Sometimes. Did they also create monopolization, toxicity, and soft PvP behavior? Absolutely. Were long travel times immersive? Sometimes. Were they also often just dead time spent staring at a screen? Of course.

The details are literally the entire discussion. Because if details are irrelevant, then every bad mechanic can be justified by claiming it contributes to some larger emotional contrast. It's not "design", you're just rationalizing.

The reality is that successful game design isn't about maximizing bad feelings. It's about creating the right kinds of tension - this is precisely why the Souls games were so successful they literally invented a genre of video game. Because games can be difficult, challenging, ball-busting, frustrating, filled with tension, and yet still be great fucking games - because you design for the right kinds of friction for the player. Not "tension" from administrative inconvenience, real-life scheduling conflicts, systems that consume time without creating interesting decisions, etc.

The funniest thing about this argument that you're too fucking dense to realize is that it accidentally proves the opposite of what you're trying to prove. If the details truly "don't matter" and all that matters is creating lows to support highs, then every negative mechanic is equally valid. But nobody actually believes that. Which means the details matter enormously. In fact, they're the only thing that matters.

yeah i'm not reading this garbage lol, condense this. if you can't express your thought in a couple of sentances you're rambling.
 

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
58,485
143,950
Again I just want to reiterate this is a completely academic discussion that bears no resemblance to actual reality because there's literally no place in this game so dangeous atm you can't logout and figure it out later without dying. All of the dungeons have tons of safe spots or are very small. 85%+ of the places you'll go will be outdoors. Most of the time the biggest hastle is running a second zone away instead of 1 and there's no outdoor zone you can't run through to get to a camp.
 
Last edited:

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
58,485
143,950
don’t hastle me bro

they kind of already addressed your complaint by having "outdoor' dungeon designs. A lot of the game is "dungeons" that are actually just zones that are widespread and outdoors.
 

Quaid

Trump's Staff
12,620
7,242
they kind of already addressed your complaint by having "outdoor' dungeon designs. A lot of the game is "dungeons" that are actually just zones that are widespread and outdoors.

That sounds fucking dogshit

Where’s that screenshot of your playtime at lvl 40?
 

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
58,485
143,950
Where’s that screenshot of your playtime at lvl 40?

im grouped now on my 19.8

1780372431164.png


so that's how long it took to get there, i solo'd a lot and wandered around mining a bunch for hours too, would have been a lot faster grouping.

I'm doing the beta so I know what to do during EA and be efficient, like i was selling stuff to shady vendor until level 4 at first lol
 
Last edited:

Quaid

Trump's Staff
12,620
7,242
im grouped now on my 19.8

View attachment 630163

so that's how long it took to get there, i solo'd a lot too, would have been a lot faster grouping.

I'm doing the beta so I know what to do during EA and be efficient, like i was selling stuff to shady vendor until level 4 at first lol

So 3 days to level 20? So less than 5 days to 40 was a flat out lie?

Thought so.

Their median time to get to level 60 just so you’re aware, is 674 hours. Level 20-25 median playtime is 115 hours. Straight from Shawn.

IMG_7194.png

IMG_7195.png
 

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
58,485
143,950
So 3 days to level 20? So less than 5 days to 40 was a flat out lie?

Thought so.

If i had grouped instead of slowly soloing and fucking around a ton that would be <2 and leveling doesn't really slow down because you constanly change spots every few levels and it's not nearly as punishing as EQ about groups doing yellow and red cons which happens A LOT.

when they did the public ea before they reopened beta i got a warrior to 12 in like 1 day

but again it's not the 500 hours panic mode you were spreading which was outright propaganda bullshit
 

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
58,485
143,950
So 3 days to level 20? So less than 5 days to 40 was a flat out lie?

Thought so.

Their median time to get to level 60 just so you’re aware, is 674 hours. Level 20-25 median playtime is 115 hours. Straight from Shawn.

View attachment 630164
View attachment 630165

I just asked a 60 on my server his /played is 21 days and maybe 2 days of that are level capped. those numbers just aren't accurate.

300 actual focused hours of leveling would get you to 60.
 
  • 1Pathetic
Reactions: 1 user

Quaid

Trump's Staff
12,620
7,242
If i had grouped instead of slowly soloing and fucking around a ton that would be <2 and leveling doesn't really slow down because you constanly change spots every few levels and it's not nearly as punishing as EQ about groups doing yellow and red cons which happens A LOT.

when they did the public ea before they reopened beta i got a warrior to 12 in like 1 day

but again it's not the 500 hours panic mode you were spreading which was outright propaganda bullshit

Correction: Panic mode propaganda bullshit that the lead dev is pulling from internal data. And its 674 hours to 60, not 500.
 

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
58,485
143,950
I like how people who've never played are insisting that i'm wrong when I actually went through it and consulting people who actually did it.