Devstream 30: An Unexpectedly Large Blow To My Hopes For The Game

[DiabolusUrsus]

So, I took a few things away from today's Livestream:

1. Screw solo players.

2. We want you guys to have a choice concerning how you play the game, but no, not really.

3. We have read and understood the basic gist of notionphil's AI thread, but don't actually understand how to go about fixing things.

4. No, seriously, screw solo players. 

5. And screw melee-only players, too, even though we introduced that as a new playstyle that did not previously exist. 

 

That's probably an overly-simplistic way of representing things, and there were some promising ideas expressed in the stream. Nanite MOAs and pretty much everything after that abominable poison Osprey looked legitimately interesting. Nevertheless, this has been one of the most disheartening and morale-lowering developer feedback sessions to date.

 

So, where to start? Where else, but RNG RNG RNG? DE, I'm gonna level with you here. You really need to wean yourselves off of RNG as a gameplay crutch. It's in the loot system? Fine. That's how most games work. It's in the spawn system? Fine. That actually does keep things relatively dynamic. However, when you start designing enemy challenges around systems that rely on RNG, you have a huge problem. Allow me to explain. 

 

First, the Prosecutors. You may think these are interesting and challenging enemies, but they really, really aren't. Why? Well... you act as though a player can somehow set out contingency plans for dealing with erratically resistant enemies, which is somewhat true. But... what part of that is fun?

 

Quick Answer: It's not.

 

Simply swapping out mod loadouts so that you have poison on your primary, ice on your secondary, fire on your melee, and electricity on your Sentinel is by no means dynamic or an engaging part of gameplay. It doesn't introduce a challenge. It introduces a chore. Is that chore somewhat more bearable with four people? Absolutely. However, then you're stuck with one person who can deal with the prosecutor, while everyone else just waits for the loot drop. You guys need to realize that "different" is not the same thing as "interesting."  Throwing random resistances onto a single (or even multiple) enemy doesn't do anything to change the fact that the player still responds to that enemy by simply pumping damage into it until it dies. At the end of the day, randomly-generated Prosecutor elemental resistance does nothing aside from smokescreen the fact that what was supposed to be an enemy that let players engage in Melee 2.0 content is nothing more than an over-glorified Flameblade. Combos? Unnecessary. Blocking? Unnecessary. Just more damage.*

*But only the right kind of damage, which you can't actually predict. Just cover all of your bases. 

 

The thing is... that's ultimately how every enemy is going to work. Consequently you should not be focusing on enemies that feature arbitrary roadblocks to the damage process. You should be focusing on enemies that force players to alter their behavior. That was the single most important (in my opinion, anyways) point to notionphil's thread, and you guys missed it completely. The Nanite Moa looks great. The Diseased Ancient does, too. Enemies that simply deal poison damage that bypasses shields don't do anything more than make players hope they are Rhino, have invisibility, or that there is a healer on their team.

 

The Eximi suffer from the same problem. They're the same old trash mobs that are a little bit more difficult to kill, and simply have the most annoying abilities available to them stuck on with duct tape. Venemous Ancients that can proc poison on you from across the room make the game harder, sure, but they don't make it more fun. They make it frustrating and arduous simply by virtue of how decisively simple they are. The only viable solution is to kill them faster. How imaginative. Parasitic Eximus? Wow, I'm out of energy. Still just going to shoot it. Fire Eximus? Wow, damaging knockdown attack with a huge AOE. Still just going to shoot it. Blast Eximus? Wow, a Grineer Heavy that looks like a MOA. Still just going to shoot it. The problem here is that the only viable way to counter the "challenges" the Eximi bring to the table is to kill them faster. You can't dodge them. You can't block them. You can only kill them before they proc, and that is indescribably dull. 

 

Second, your prescribed philosophy when approaching boss encounters is extremely unsettling. You need a specific loadout when going into the boss fight? You can only fight it a certain way? This makes bosses unique and interesting? it keeps the players engaged? 

 

Pardon my French, but... what the flying F***? Are you serious? 

 

General mod loadouts, I can understand. It's probably not the best idea to go up against Sargas Ruk carrying nothing but fire damage. That's something that can be discerned with a basic degree of common sense. However, you guys mentioned that you wanted players to learn how to beat bosses by trial and error. Having specific playstyles and loadouts players are supposed to discover is absolutely the worst possible way to go about doing that. Why?

Well... Having specific loadouts be the only viable loadouts punishes players for going into boss fights uninformed. Hence, the typical response will be consulting the local wiki or asking more experienced players for answers. It's like a multiple choice test where students are penalized for not cheating. You're actively encouraging players to spoil surprises for themselves because they otherwise run the risk of being completely powerless to overcome the challenges you set before them. You should have seen the same issue arise with the Mastery Rank exams. 

 

Furthermore, you're purposefully limiting player choice. The player is no longer playing your game and trying to intuitively or dynamically solve problems. They are jumping through arbitrary hoops that you have thrown out for kicks and giggles. That's not overcoming a challenge, it's going through the right motions. We're not space monkeys, for Christ's sake. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be a generally accepted "best" way to fight a boss. Of course taking out an aerial Vay Hek is going to be easier with a fairly accurate hitscan firearm, preferably an automatic. That's fine. But a player should still be able to succeed at bringing him down with a sword through a greater expenditure of effort and demonstration of skill. Let me give you a couple examples of challenging bosses done right. 

 

Video Spoilers As Requested

 

The Containment Room boss battle from Devil May Cry 4 is a good example of a boss battle that needs to be completed a certain way. The only way to damage the reinforced glass (hah) protecting Agnus is by throwing the the circling Gladius enemies into it. At the same time, the player has to contend with attacks from the enemies themselves, and avoiding the electrical charges that sweep the floor. Observant players will notice that they will be safe from the charges if they stand on the center pedestal, but they will then have to contend with more concentrated attacks from the enemies. Some players won't be as familiar with throwing enemies at separate targets, and will assume that they just need to kill them all (sorta like I did, the first time around.) They'll be stumped, and slightly confused as to what they are supposed to do to get out of a seemingly protracted boss fight. Once they figure things out, though, the boss is fairly trivial to beat, and they enjoy a rather rewarding sense of success. 

 

Bosses can definitely be successfully designed around puzzle-solving gimmicks. The catch, though, is that DMC4 players literally cannot enter that boss fight completely unprepared. The Containment Room boss is very easy for Nero who has his Devil Bringer for throwing enemies, but it would be nigh impossible for the other character Dante, who has no means of doing so. The problem with Warframe is that such a guarantee is virtually impossible. The number of weapons available to players is much larger, they may or may not choose to bring certain weapons, and they might not even have the inventory space to carry the weapon they might need. The same thing goes for mods, which is the biggest problem with using the modding system as a means of obtaining baseline combat effectiveness. How is a player supposed to overcome a challenge that requires a specific loadout, if they have no reliable means of obtaining that loadout, much less knowing what it is? This is the primary example of why your game design is crippled by an over-reliance on RNG. RNG can be contextually appropriate, but as an actual gameplay mechanic it is maliciously unstable and far from the universal bandaid for diversity and intrigue you seem to think it is. If you want puzzle-solving gimmicks and "right" versus "wrong" approaches to boss battles, you need to take RNG out of the player progression system entirely. If you don't want to take RNG out of the drop tables and player equipment, you must not design bosses that can only be defeated a certain way. Period.

 

 

The Dark Souls series does an excellent job of presenting players with boss battles that reward trial and error. The most important thing to keep in mind, though, is that there is no one true way to defeat them. Notice that part of the video title is "Melee Strategy; No Shield." This particular strategy is, in my experience, by far the most difficult... but is still just as possible as bringing a powerful shield or fighting from range. Pretty much every boss in the game is structured in a way that any particular strategy can be made to work, but I chose Manus, Father of the Abyss because he brings such a wide diversity of strategies to the table. The easiest way to beat him is to simply shoot him to death with arrows before even entering the boss arena, but that is an exploitative oversight on the part of the developers and by no means something I would like to see make its way into Warframe. Setting that aside, the sheer intensity and pacing of his melee attacks, and the introduction of dark-magic partway into the fight are what keep the gameplay dynamic and introduce challenge into the fight. They keep things interesting, and ultimately reward players for experimenting with different approaches. Players can opt for the easier way out by staying out of range of Manus' attacks using spells or arrows and dodging his much simpler magic attacks, or they can go for the more challenging up-close method. This allows them to introduce a personalized degree of challenge, which is something that would go a long way towards helping you accommodate both newer and veteran players with your content. It introduces something beyond simply slapping higher values onto health and damage, and it is part of what keeps the boss fights fresh even after three or four NG+ cycles. In games like Warframe where you can go back and fight the boss any time you want, this replayability is even more critically important. 

 

Ultimately, you guys (DE as a whole, not just the Enemy/Boss Design Team,) need to come to a consensus about how players should approach your game. 

Will you accommodate solo players, or will you not? If not, the Solo Play option needs to go. If you will, enemies that require teamwork are okay, but they need behaviors that allow solo players to defeat them as well, even if it requires a greater degree of effort. 

 

Will you accommodate melee-only players, or will you not? If not, the option to remove our firearms needs to be rescinded. If you will, players need a means of using melee to damage all enemies, even if it requires a greater degree of effort. 

 

Will you accommodate a greater freedom of choice, or will you not? If not, you need to make player progression much more linear and remove RNG from the drop tables. Players need to have certain gear by the time the reach certain points on the star chart. If you will, you'll need to design multiple viable approaches to different challenges so that players can tackle them with their available gear at the time, and come back to experiment later when they've found newer and shinier toys. 

 

Either way, this is going to require a great deal of work on your part. To start, players need stronger means of defending themselves. They need more complex blocking, and evasion systems that don't rely entirely on their ability to sprint fast. RNG rolls for resisting knockdowns are a halfway-decent supplement, but by no means a passable excuse for defensive countermeasures. We're not playing Dungeons and Dragons here. RNG rolls for parrying non-telegraphed melee strikes is even less acceptable. 

 

Ultimately, this whole debacle comes back to the core issues of player agency and RNG that have been longstanding topics of discussion here on the forums. If you want to create a game with lasting replay value and player engagement, you need to make the player directly responsible for their own success and survival by equipping them with a means of relying on their reflexes and ability to execute strategies. 

 

If a player has to rely on their equipment for survival and success as they do now, you're going to be stuck in an unending cycle of creating enemies that are weak enough that the player can rely on their equipment for survival, yet strong enough to make the player feel as though said equipment is needed and worthwhile. You are then confronted with the issue of there being absolutely no reliable means of guaranteeing that your players have what they need to survive. Does that sound fun to you? It doesn't sound fun to me. 

 

I love this game, and I want to see it succeed, but the philosophies expressed in Devstream 30 have made it exceedingly clear to me that you may be reading player feedback, and/or listening to it, but you most certainly aren't fully understanding the more important details we are trying to communicate. 

 

Yes, we would like more of a challenge.

 

No, we don't mean higher health values and damage numbers.

 

No, needing to cross our fingers and hope we brought the right tools into a mission is not interesting or fun when we have no means of reliably predicting which tools we will need. 

 

We do not appreciate being presented with gameplay options that are supposed to be viable yet are not actual matters of concern. 

 

RNG is not actual gameplay (with regards to knockdown resists and parries.) 

Seriously. I love you guys, but you scare me sometimes. 

Edited June 10, 2014 by DiabolusUrsus

[-Tzek4-]

>_>

[Catharsis25]

I read the list at the top, and was absolutely sure that this was not worth reading. Then I started reading the wall of text, and I have to admit, you are way too correct. On 80% or more of your points. Especially considering the enemies and the RNG. The trouble is that the way the game works, there isn't a ton you can do to force players to change their behaviors. 

[2T7T]

I read the list at the top, and was absolutely sure that this was not worth reading. Then I started reading the wall of text, and I have to admit, you are way too correct. On 80% or more of your points. Especially considering the enemies and the RNG. The trouble is that the way the game works, there isn't a ton you can do to force players to change their behaviors. 

I'm very astonished at how true both this and the OP are. It really does shock me that I've been this blind about it so far.

All the best DE, but changes are needed.

[dragonboss]

-GiantSnip-

 

+1 to you, Good Sir.

 

You've nailed everything on the head that ever needed nailing.

 

RNG is bad and player agency is bad(for the most part). You have also brought up something I haven't seen much(at all actually..) in the forums.

 

The devs seem to have no goals for what they want the game to be and rather add things they think are cool to the already flawed underlying systems.

 

Look at Ninja Gaiden. While it may not be projectile based, the player is entirely responsible for their survival. Each time you die it's not because your weapons are crap or your health is too small, it's because YOU are not skilled enough. You have all the tools required to go without taking damage whatsoever from beginning to end, provided you are badass and ninja enough to do so.

 

Warframe? Half baked parkour and dodging/parry system(reliant on RNG of all things) that haven't been touched since closed beta, despite the numerous suggestions to improve the system.

 

I thought we were SPACE NINJA not SPARTAN TANKS with powers.

Edited June 6, 2014 by dragonboss

[notionphil]

 

The thing is... that's ultimately how every enemy is going to work. Consequently you should not be focusing on enemies that feature arbitrary roadblocks to the damage process.

 

 

---

 

You should be focusing on enemies that force players to alter their behavior. That was the single most important (in my opinion, anyways) point to notionphil's thread, and you guys missed it completely. The Nanite Moa looks great. The Diseased Ancient does, too. Enemies that simply deal poison damage that bypasses shields don't do anything more than make players hope they are Rhino, have invisibility, or that there is a healer on their team.

 

 

 

Yes, that was the single most important point, and I'd say it was missed about 99%. The point was that our skill or tactics should allow us to overcome a problem.

 

The Riot Moa and the Juggernaut theoretically have shielded fronts, happy about that.

 

Nothing has any press 4 to win resistance.

 

Pretty much everything seemed to have an non telegraphed, AoE shield bypassing attack, which is heart-achingly sad misinterpretation of what makes videogames fun.

Edited June 6, 2014 by notionphil

[notionphil]

And yea. Thread title is perfect. I have never, ever felt that DE doesn't understand the players as much as I do right now. And this is despite the admittedly cool ton of enemies (that nearly all seem to be designed around stunlocks, slows, unavoidable hits and agency removal).

 

 

I think this moment perfectly encapsulated the issue:

 

Rebecca: "So Devs, can you show us some of what these enemies do?"

 

Developer: "Yes, I'd love to show you their behaviors!"

 

*pulls up a screen with enemy shuddering in a cool way, and walking*

 

Playerbase: "wat. You think 'behavior' means how it walks"

 

*facepalm*

Edited June 6, 2014 by notionphil

[Scheifen]

There either needs to be a rework of the game to make it more reliant on player skills, not in-game skills, but rather twitch movement, player reflexes; or DE needs to accept they are making Dynasty Warriors with Space Ninjas, and remove all the annoying things, invincibility times, etc 

[eddy193]

.

Edited June 6, 2014 by eddy193

[(PSN)hardworkgenius]

Reading what OP said I agree for the most part. I think what makes people upset is how its almost obvious what needs to be done, but its their game and its their choice what to do with it. I think people who really love this game (myself included) need to realize is that this game is a Beta in every sense of the word. The reason the game has so many problems is the core of the game is broken or is literally crap. No matter how much shiny stuff or beautiful things you put on it the foundation is not good. AI does not matter when players control how they damage things. What does it matter if an AI can take cover if you have punch through? The game is a hodge podge of ideas and I think this is deliberate. Best thing I can think of as to why this continues is that the game is a mess already why not get more dirty and learn while its in this state. I believe they will take this experience and create a new warframe. You have to stop tricking yourself into believing this game, this beta will be transformed into a well balanced game. Its a testing ground.

[gnat6]

I really want to disagree with you and say that you are worrying about things that are not an issue but sadly I can't because you are totally right on all points and it really seems like DE are just throwing random things into the game for no apparent reason and its not working on any level.

[Hyperius]

As far as I can tell, the issues are so deeply rooted into every aspect of the game, that they won't be able to implement a real lasting fix unless they completely shelve development for an extended period of time.

[Synville]

Yep.

 

After I watched the stream, I just cried in the corner for about an hour or 2.

 

More toxic things... that'll kill us regardless... yay.

 

/wrist.

[Noble_Cactus]

Well put, OP. I appreciate how you addressed this: 

 

 

 

This allows them to introduce a personalized degree of challenge, which is something that would go a long way towards helping you accommodate both newer and veteran players with your content.

 

The opportunity for personalization is what makes video games fun. It's what allows them to become part of the player's identity. It's fulfilling, literally.

 

Funny how this game is touted as a sandbox game, yet all it has are the components that make a sandbox game. They don't come together to form a whole. Yes, it's a beta, but betas usually have a coherent system in place. WF is a bunch of ideas strung together with no direction.

Edited June 6, 2014 by Noble_Cactus

[Noble_Cactus]

As far as I can tell, the issues are so deeply rooted into every aspect of the game, that they won't be able to implement a real lasting fix unless they completely shelve development for an extended period of time.

 

Pretty much. This might be overdramatic, but this game is sick at its core. It needs a fresh rework from the ground up, since it's become a kind of ungainly Infested biomass itself.

 

Maybe that's why I keep playing this game. I can't turn away from the potential beauty in this Orokin vault of a game that is slowly overtaken by Infestation, the walls closing in tighter and tighter because, deep down, its creators simply bit off more than they could chew.

Edited June 6, 2014 by Noble_Cactus

[DiabolusUrsus]

I read the list at the top, and was absolutely sure that this was not worth reading. Then I started reading the wall of text, and I have to admit, you are way too correct. On 80% or more of your points. Especially considering the enemies and the RNG. The trouble is that the way the game works, there isn't a ton you can do to force players to change their behaviors. 

 

Thank you very much for actually taking the time to read what I had to say, even if you were initially skeptic. I suppose I should have made things a little more clear surrounding the list I started off with, seeing in retrospect that I never really made it clear why those ideas upset me.

 

Problems with player connectivity and tileset optimizations have been ongoing issues, and I know more than a few people who are primarily limited to solo play when attempting to run the game. That's definitely partly their own responsibility (internet connections and gaming hardware are the responsibility of the player, after all,) but it seems needlessly cruel to continually introduce content that they can't reasonably expect to enjoy. If it's more or less mandatory to play with a team to tackle new enemies like the Juggernaut, make it clear that you either play with a team or don't play at all. 

 

I'm upset with the handwave concerning melee viability for bosses, because before update 13 it was a non-issue. Players always had a gun on-hand. It was DE that allowed us to remove firearms (or melee weapons, for that matter...) and hyped up "The Sword Alone." They then failed to follow through on making it viable, and expressed a disinterest in ever doing so. I, for one, was really looking forward to that. Don't tell us you're going to implement something, actually start to implement it, and then write it off as something that doesn't need to happen. It's like bait and switch, which nobody appreciates.

 

Lastly, I'm upset at how completely they missed the point of other well-articulated and insightful feedback because I can no longer fully trust their reassurances that they understand issues and are forming effective means of addressing problems. I'm going to have a harder time believing that they "have a plan" for something without actually hearing what that plan is, and being able to point out potential problems with it. That's going to make waiting for the next "Overhaul 2.0" that much more difficult, and it's going to make me want them to just make quick and simple changes with increased frequency even more. How hard can it really be to change the Penta's max ammo count, for starters? 

[notionphil]

As far as I can tell, the issues are so deeply rooted into every aspect of the game, that they won't be able to implement a real lasting fix unless they completely shelve development for an extended period of time.

 

Honestly I disagree, the core combat issues aren't tough to fix. They're just being ignored.

 

1) add a few survivability mechanics to regular enemies like shields, ranged weapon resistance, AoE resistance. ~3 or so per faction.

 

2) make Eximus 5 times as badass, once they hit level 30, and power resistant (and able to protect allies from powers). Make them spawn as announced minibosses on survival/def (like prosecutors are announced)

 

3) remove all bandaid mods (speed holster, handspring, parry etc) and make all those mechanics skill based

 

4) remove any shield bypassing attacks that are not telegraphed. This includes bleed.

 

5) make every single poison nuclear explosion cloud AoE you just showed in the LS telegraphed

 

6) make melee 2.0 have a more effective way of gap closing and hitting flying enemies.

 

7) understand that glowy weakspots on bosses don't work vs melee, and invul phases are typically not fun

 

8) implement some minor balance mechanics where AoE and powers are more harm than good

 

9) give bonus affinity/loot/whatever for killing an enemy in its 'skill based' way as opposed to nuking it

 

10) have an ice cold margarita, you've just made a frigging awesome game.

 

Is that everything? Maybe not, but it's enough to make core combat leagues better IMO.

Edited June 6, 2014 by notionphil

[Iceyspy]

Somehow, I just don`t see Warframe surviving for a very long time if DE keep going the way they do.....Like seriously, I want it to succeed just as much as the next guy, but let`s be real here - 30 Livestreams in and we STILL have S#&$ like RNG controlling pretty much the ENTIRETY of the game, a half-baked melee system that only seems to increase your damage and make you look 'cool', plus a whole bunch of other unresolved issues that DE are ' looking at '.

 

DE really need to concentrate on the flawed and might I add, outdated core mechanics of the game to make Warframe a better experience for Vets and Noobs alike. They just seem so fixated on releasing new and most of the time, unnescessary new content that it feels like they`re going nowhere with most of their projects. Hopefully, they`ll seriously re-evaluate the situation at hand and perhaps we can look forward to some major changes in Warframe or it`s gonna end up just like most of the other F2P games out there - Forgotten and deserted just after a year (maybe a bit longer).

[MageMeat]

I didn't watch the stream, so could somebody explain the following list:

1. Screw solo players.

2. We want you guys to have a choice concerning how you play the game, but no, not really.

3. We have read and understood the basic gist of notionphil's AI thread, but don't actually understand how to go about fixing things.

4. No, seriously, screw solo players. 

5. And screw melee-only players, too, even though we introduced that as a new playstyle that did not previously exist.

I did read the entire thread, and find it quite informative (and dishearteningly truthful), I'm just kind of lacking in context.

Edited June 6, 2014 by MageMeat

[Davoodoo]

Biggest problem ive seen with livestream is "players would need to change weapons to face the challenge".

For me it only shows that these guys havent played the game.

 

On paper these ideas are great i agree, but when you go into game and tear a hole in everything with boltor p or soma its disappointing at best.

Edited June 6, 2014 by Davoodoo

[Archistopheles]

More toxic things... that'll kill us regardless... yay.

 

/wrist.

 

I see my opinion has already been posted in this thread.

 

Good show.

[MageMeat]

Biggest problem ive seen with livestream is "players would need to change weapons to face the challenge".

For me it only shows that these guys havent played the game.

That's ridiculous!

If the game forces players to play in a specific way (or otherwise fail), something must be very, very wrong.

[(PSN)ElZilcho]

I think you're overreacting on the boss issue.

 

Just because they want you to plan accordingly for a boss does not mean there will be a strict, narrow path to defeating it. It doesn't mean that there's only one set of mods, one weapon, or one frame carrying the specific power that's needed to defeat the boss, it means that they want players to think about what they're doing. A common complaint I see on these forums, one that never fails to make me think the issuer is flat out stupid, is that they can't just take whatever equipment, with whatever mods, to whatever mission and do well. If every choice is right, then it invalidates making a choice at all.

 

One of the examples they gave was melee-only on Vay Hek. It's really not a practical thing to try. But you know he's a Grineer boss, so radiation and/or viral will be your first attempt. It will work fine. Scanning him, however, reveals that corrosive will actually do more damage than radiation. A smart player doesn't unequip their guns and take a heat dagger to fight a boss they've never seen before and once they've seen him they would know he flies around and that melee-only was not the way to go for that fight.

 

Regarding melee-only specifically, the game gives you tools and a set of rules. You have to use them, within them. I wouldn't mind more expansion of any mechanic currently in the game, but we are required to play within the set we are given right now. That means bringing guns. You can still use only melee attacks and just have a pistol for backup if you need it. "But they want to play melee-only and DE let them" someone will say. "It sounds like they hate doing that so I don't understand why they still want to" is my response.

 

What I'm seeing in this thread is very disappointing. "I don't want to play Mario Bros. in a specific way, Nintendo. It's not fair! Why doesn't jumping down all these pits make me progress just like jumping over them? This is so, so wrong!" C'mon, guys. Really?

 

 

 

However, I can see where you're coming from on the solo play issue.

 

It seemed like damaging players through their shields was pretty common in the new enemies and, the infested drone and juggernaut in particular, have some pretty harsh area of effect abilities which do that. I think that sounds bad even with a team. It will be worse than the annoying bleed procs for solo players.

 

While I think it's good that there are threatening enemies, this is not really the kind of threat I think is fun to face. Shield-penetrating damage isn't a fun challenge to overcome. It, unlike bosses that must be pepared for like I mentioned above, is not something that forces players to strategize and come out triumphant. Instead, it forces them to compensate. It just makes it a DPS race that's heavily biased in the enemy's favor due to the limited options we have for healing. It's chugging potions to win in an RPG. I've never found that interesting and it doesn't take any brains.

Edited June 6, 2014 by (PS4)ElZilcho

[Noble_Cactus]

Honestly I disagree, the core combat issues aren't tough to fix. They're just being ignored.

 

1) add a few survivability mechanics to regular enemies like shields, ranged weapon resistance, AoE resistance. ~3 or so per faction.

 

2) make Eximus 5 times as badass, once they hit level 30, and power resistant (and able to protect allies from powers). Make them spawn as announced minibosses on survival/def (like prosecutors are announced)

 

3) remove all bandaid mods (speed holster, handspring, parry etc) and make all those mechanics skill based

 

4) remove any shield bypassing attacks that are not telegraphed. This includes bleed.

 

5) make every single poison nuclear explosion cloud AoE you just showed in the LS telegraphed

 

6) make melee 2.0 have a more effective way of gap closing and hitting flying enemies.

 

7) understand that glowy weakspots on bosses don't work vs melee, and invul phases are typically not fun

 

8) implement some minor balance mechanics where AoE and powers are more harm than good

 

9) give bonus affinity/loot/whatever for killing an enemy in its 'skill based' way as opposed to nuking it

 

10) have an ice cold margarita, you've just made a frigging awesome game.

 

Is that everything? Maybe not, but it's enough to make core combat leagues better IMO.

 

I agree to an extent. But WF lacks a certain... spirit required to make all of those changes mesh together. Its heart isn't in the right place. I find it hard to describe what it is other than hollow, if that makes any sense.

 

I don't like to point fingers at any one aspect of development, but I still do think that how they're approaching the F2P model has sucked some of the vitality out of this game. Why refine old assets that don't make money when you could just introduce new ones? And if you don't introduce new ones, hungry fans will realize that beneath them, there's no substance! Just look at all the complaint threads that appear when content arrives late.

 

So DE has locked themselves into a self-perpetuating cycle of releasing ephemeral content to cover up a lack in the core gameplay.

Edited June 6, 2014 by Noble_Cactus

[MageMeat]

I think you're overreacting on the boss issue.

 

Just because they want you to plan accordingly for a boss does not mean there will be a strict, narrow path to defeating it. It doesn't mean that there's only one set of mods, one weapon, or one frame carrying the specific power that's needed to defeat the boss, it means that they want players to think about what they're doing. A common complaint I see on these forums, one that never fails to make me think the issuer is flat out stupid, is that they can't just take whatever equipment, with whatever mods, to whatever mission and do well. If every choice is right, then it invalidates making a choice at all.

 

One of the examples they gave was melee-only on Vay Hek. It's really not a practical thing to try. But you know he's a Grineer boss, so radiation and/or viral will be your first attempt. It will work fine. Scanning him, however, reveals that corrosive will actually do more damage than radiation. A smart player doesn't unequip their guns and take a heat dagger to fight a boss they've never seen before and once they've seen him they would know he flies around and that melee-only was not the way to go for that fight.

 

Regarding melee-only specifically, the game gives you tools and a set of rules. You have to use them, within them. I wouldn't mind more expansion of any mechanic currently in the game, but we are required to play within the set we are given right now. That means bringing guns. You can still use only melee attacks and just have a pistol for backup if you need it. "But they want to play melee-only and DE let them" someone will say. "It sounds like they hate doing that so I don't understand why they still want to" is my response.

 

What I'm seeing in this thread is very disappointing. "I don't want to play Mario Bros. in a specific way, Nintendo. It's not fair! Why doesn't jumping down all these pits make me progress just like jumping over them? This is so, so wrong!" C'mon, guys. Really?

I quote: "But a player should still be able to succeed at bringing him down with a sword through a greater expenditure of effort and demonstration of skill."

It should be much (much, much) harder, but ultimately still feasible.