BETAOPTICS
-
Posts
4,318 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by BETAOPTICS
-
-
15 hours ago, PublikDomain said:
Yeah, that kind of sums it up. You can solo it, but it's going to be a lot harder than with teammates.
Assumed those teammates actually end up sticking out and have gear necessary for the challenge. At this time you can have relatively new-ish players & players who disconnect or quit. Today went in with randoms and 2 of 4 left. Next time I'll go in solo because randoms are simply not dependable enough. I know I can solo it though, but I think that the fact that this dynamic exists in the first place does say something about the current implementations problems.
-
Hello there!
I like deep archimedia and it's elite version conceptually. However I think the implementation has certain design flaws. One major design flaws in the current implementation is when a player or multiple player disconnects/quits, it kind of screws over everyone in the team. The game mode does issue a warning of this when you initialize the challenge but some players simply don't care. They might be at a point in their warframe progression where shards are either not needed yet and they just want to test the mode out. That would be fine if the costs wouldn't be so high for the rest of the team. It's not fun to lose the elite deep archimedia challenge simply because the game scales the missions for 4 players and then half the team quits.
Don't get me wrong here: When it is a disconnect from the player, I will not blame them because it wasn't their choice. And of course nobody but the person themselves knows exactly whether or not it was a disconnect or they quit. But seeing how frequently that happens within random games, it is probable that at least some of them were players quitting because they realized they simply became unprepared for the challenge requirements. It's not that getting some MR 13 player into the hardest content in the game (excluding endless runs) is the issue, because it's a gear check first and foremost and I don't tie this to MR directly. Rather it's that some players don't simply respect how high of an investment it is for everyone involved and they just want to try the mode out. Or so I think.
Now you could simply say that it's a skill issue and good for you if are good enough to carry an endgame game mode scaled up to 4 players. You are probably right there, and yet I would argue that most players are not like that. I am not suggesting making the game mode easier, I don't mind losing when it's fair and due to my the teams own mistakes. What I am saying is that in my personal opinion the game mode needs some safe guards against situations where the cause is out of players control. The game modes implementation is too high of a cost and risk to currently go and play with random players to play with and I can not see myself playing the game mode in the forseeable future. It fails to respect my time enough for the risks tied to it to be worth it.
What would the solution look like? Well that's the hard part and I probably don't have good solutions either. Bummer I know. One possibility would be to either give the staying players a vote where they could either decide to continue on the mode or leave (similar to defense). Another solution could be to allow new players to join in on ongoing modes with recursively getting all the rewards they would get as if they played the full round (probably not possible and certainly not perfect solution either). Third option that comes to my mind is to simply check the team size and make it not cost weekly tokens if the team size is reduced to x% from it's original size and the team fails. After all the game already tracks fail counts and tracking player counts should not be hard data to extract.
I can't believe those words are coming from my keyboard right now as I tend to be very forgiving and supportive of the community but as of currently in the current implementation of elite deep archimedia I am probably not going to play the game mode because random players are simply not depdendable enough. I genuinely hate to say that, and wish that developers would consider safe guards of some kind.
Agree or disagree? Please leave feedback to me as well. I am not pretending to be an arbiter of truth.-
3
-
-
-
I think simple toggle and reworking values will suffice.
-
Praise updates!
-
Cool! Merry Christmas Digital Extremee employees! Merry Christmas fellow Tenno!
-
2
-
-
Awesome! QoL!
-
1
-
-
On 2023-09-28 at 6:37 PM, [DE]Juice said:
We look forward to seeing a wave of Hydroids drowning their enemies across the Origin System with the Abyss of Dagath Update on October 18th!
Don’t forget to check out the other Dev Workshops for the Abyss of Dagath Update!
Looking good. Please add the information about the last abilities augment and also add a note for those who missed it that Tentacle Swarm does Corrosive damage now instead of Magnetic like it used to.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Circle_of_Psi said:
Oh please
is that all you care about?
Like I've said to several others: My posts are not personal evaluations on how things should be but rather evaluations on how things are currently. I don't like the trade laws either hence why my initial post went with I understand that wish but they are still laws that companies are obliged to follow irrespective of my personal viewpoints. Impersonal vs. personal viewpoints.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, ShardPerson said:
lowering prices =/= offering new bundle options
Lowering prices = altering the trade deal and that is illegal my friend.
For example if you go take a look at the prime access bundles, there is a reason why DE only made new bundles available when a new prime access came and not when a pack deal was already going.-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, ShardPerson said:
Bundling the stuff people want with stuff that's not wanted but is technically expensive so they can mark up prices significantly is actually illegal in some places and could absolutely get them in trouble already. Releasing the skins separately and undoing the timed exclusivity, and refunding anyone who bought in because of the predatory tactic of making skins only available in a super expensive bundle is the right move in all circumstances.
It'd be ethically right. But again my comments are not ethical evaluations of how things ought to be, they are evaluations of why DE would take this course of action as it has so many times before this as well (this is not the first time DE has done something like this and they've never decreased monetary prices. Instead they give addtional digital goodies).
It is frankly amazing how few on the internet seem to be able to tell the difference between personal and impersonal takes. Oh well I guess it comes with the times we live in.-
3
-
-
1 minute ago, (PSN)TEAINSHENNON said:
Making excuses 😴
No? Why are you being dishonest and disingenious? It is mandated by law that you can not alter the deal once it has been sealed monetarily. For instance there was a legal lawsuit few years ago where Elon Musk had to pay up fees for trying to back away from a trade deal on buying Twitter as he had already signed the transaction. Trade law is clumsy, you can't just do whatever you wish however you wish. And again: My comments are not evaluations on how things ought to be but rather they are about how the laws actaully are. It's not my personal opinion on the packs. I would not have said I understand that wish people have made.
Now I would suggest you stop being disingenious and stop trolling. It's not productive.-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, CosoMalvadoNG said:
No, the truth would simply be easier to create a different package apart from the ones that are already there
Yeah if you were to risk legal investigation. Like you do realize trade laws exist, right? It's the same reason DE can not re-release the founders program either, as trade laws legally bind them. This is not an evaluation of how things should be but the simple truth of how things are. They suck, yes, and that is all the more reason further consideration should have been had and that's on DE. But I can be pretty confident saying DE nor any other company would be willing to break laws just because they made a bad judgement.
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, (XBOX)MASK SMGX said:
We asked for cheaper bundles
I understand this but the only problem I think it would have is those who already bought the bundle. Not sure how refunds would work there. Maybe? But I think this is the main reason the price was kept as was.
-
2 minutes ago, SokeNagato said:
The standalone client launcher is broken since month, the only way to play bugframe is via the steam client but steam hangs in a "searching for updates, trying later loop".
Nice job DE!
2 minutes ago, -KyloRen- said:
is this related?2 minutes ago, Greendyes said:nice update, would also be nice if the launcher would actually download it.
1 minute ago, Aarrggghhhh said:Finally, it's updating.
Scratch that, it started and then failed. Great!
Patience. The update is still deploying due to a technical difficulty. Go make some hot choco while they are hunting the issue and sorting it out.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, crimsonspartan1 said:
Warframe launcher keeps on failing update immediately upon opening it and each time i wait for it to restart, it immediately fails again
Just now, GPrime96 said:Same here
Still deploying, A technical issue. Hand tight.
-
1
-
-
-
3 hours ago, Raijinmeister said:
No is not. Those weapons by themselves, even unmodded are very powerful
You win anybody else who didn't shortcut to buy them. There's always a competition aspect in any game, even a pure pve one like WF.
This semantics of "what is pay2win" is old and disingenuous. This game is super pay 2 win and now with adapters being sold, they killed the circuit. Why bother doing that if I can just get from the NPC the item?
DE created the problem of placing these adapters behind the weekly rotations and the more items they made the worse it will be to farm for specific ones. But hey, you can buy them now, isn't awesome? You create a problem to sell the solution.Sounds like a you problem. I've never cared for "competitiveness of PvE" games. Especially considering that you believe the weapons are already powerful as they are without the incarnons, and in this current systems in any given week some people will have incarnon's on weapons you won't, and you become what, envious of that? I fail to see the problem. But maybe I'm lucky I am not that envious and petty then, maybe that's my fortunate bias to never haven understood this superficial problem.
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, (PSN)BdotRASS said:
The incarnon pay-to-win is super sucky.
Pay-to-win how? It's not more different than buying gear from the market for things you can obtain in hours regardless. Whom do you win over even?
-
3
-
-
18 hours ago, IDystopiaI said:
The impact changes make Impact worse, making the detrimental part of the status more pronounced while trying to make mercy kills more common. Now enemies are going to be flailing around more making headshots harder to land, and will still die before someone gets a chance go up to the enemy to use a mercy kill. This also ignores the fact that you're expecting players to jump into Eximus units, most of which will stagger you and hit significantly harder than the rest of the enemies just to do a mercy kill on a single enemy. There's also the problem that by the time Overguard is destroyed, there's enough DOTs and other status procs present to kill the enemy most of the time, and that mercy kills are only usable on some enemies. Impact makes your weapon worse in all other cases.
Hopefully a better test showing how Impact Procs get progressively worse as more procs are added:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKFEAjdiWDo
- At 5 procs, the enemy starts raising its arms in front of its head and the torso starts swaying and some randomized lateral movement is added.
- At 10 procs, it looks like a backpedal animation is added, replacing the animation of the enemy taking a slight step back to steady itself.
Previous videos which don't do a good job showing progressive stages:
Differences between Impact Proc animations below and at cap:
Below 10 Impact Procs - some flailing but not too extreme, more of a minor annoyance.
Shooting enemy that has hit Impact Proc Cap - fairly extreme flailing and will be more common if the cap is reduced to 5.
*
Removing the Heavy Stagger when at the Impact Proc CapI thought the Wiki had specific wording for a 'Heavy Stagger/Flinch' at 10 procs but that does not seem to be the case. Reducing the intensity of staggers would help with mitigating this, or replacing the stagger with something else entirely. As it is I don't think anyone actually uses impact intentionally for the brief stun it provides, and changing the effect to something desirable would go a long way to having players consider adopting weapons like this. (Please no more band-aid mods like Hemorrhage/Internal Bleeding, make the actual status effect useful instead hiding the "fix" behind mods).Adding an offset for weapon damage numbers would be helpful in cleaning up clutter around the reticle.
There is only ever a single use case where I'll intentionally build for impact. It only works on Vulkar (Wraith) and Grinlock (Prisma), and that is when I use Internal Bleeding mods (35% chance to apply a bleed proc, 2x the chance if fire rate is below 2.5). This is because the impact will affect the chances to proc slash and the damage tic it will make. But again even for these weapons the impact status effect does nothing, it's the slash that is being built for.
Impact has a fundamental issue with the proc effect and what it does. It's effect makes the guns worse in most cases and mercy kills are just not realistically usable in 99,99% of use cases within the game. It should be changed to something else and I feel like mercy in general is a system that doesn't bring value other than in spy missions, and only just even then. -
Awesome! This is a perfect summer gift. I just graduated as a software engineer a few weeks ago and now Kullervo is a homeage to our Finnish folklore Kalevala.
Fun fact for non Finnish speakers: Kullervo's signature shotgun Rauta means Iron.-
4
-
-
14 hours ago, --N-- said:
I imagine it's mainly meant to allow you to use the adaptor on the base variant if you don't have the prime/vandal etc. (or if there is no better version yet), and then upgrade to the prime without having to farm another adaptor.
Why did you pick the same weapons as last week?
There have been similar UI bugs in the past and I was not at full attention capacity to be fair. I just graduated last week so it was the first time I did not have time to get all the materials for the incarnons so and as my attention was divided elsewhere, in my confusion I figured it was just some odd confirmation screen from the last week. The lateral part is on me, but regardless of that, it is clearly a system that needs proper data validation. I became a Software Engineer, so to me this is professionally clear that it needs validation checks. A system this rigid needs to work. To be fair to DE developers, it's tough trying to think all the possible outcomes that can come up with down the line. But it should have been tested appropriately and clearly it wasn't. Well we'll see if DE returns to this topic or not.
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, Packetdancer said:
In all honesty, you're not the only person I know of who did this. Some folks were like "Oh, did it bug out and I need to pick what I did last week so that it awards them to me?" or whatever, and while I feel like there's some degree of "I might've checked the forums or Discord first" to that... I mean, it's also not an entirely unexpected outcome.
I do wish that they let you change out your selections if you have not yet hit Tier 1 of your chosen reward path; it would fix scenarios like yours, or where someone mixed up the Burston and Braton and thought they had a Prime for the one when they actually had the other and only realized after clicking "Begin", etc.
Yeah totally. While there is a degree of player agency there, Warframe also has history with bugs like this so it isn't an unreasonable mistake. And to be fair, I wasn't really in my full brain capacity and attention either so that's one me. But like you say, I am not alone and this solution is insufficient I think. I think going into the future there should be some kind of check that would check if the player already hasn't done the incarnon genesis and if the gun has available variants left. If both results are false, then grey those options out or at least give a warning about it.
It should have been properly tested to be fair. It is such a rigid system, a player either gets to continue relatively normally or gets absolutely nothing so it is crticial to get it right.
-
On 2023-06-05 at 9:09 PM, Tsukinoki said:
And what exactly were the alternatives that are "fairer"?
What about people who already have rank 5 (or 10) and therefore already have the incarnon adapters for this week? What would be a "fair" solution to them, that is also "fair" to people who held off on doing anything with the mode until they got word on what DE was going to do?They could rotate everyone else...in which case the people who got to rank 10 doesn't get a chance at the week 1 rotation and miss out.
They could rotate everyone....in which case the people who got to rank 10 would get to go to rank 10 again and get a total of 4 incarnon adapters for the week and everyone else gets nothing.
OR they could just leave it as is and let things roll over so that people either don't miss out or get double rewards....which seems a lot fairer.Those are good points. For me I had taken Sibear and Zylok last week, and in my confusion clicked them again. Now I have two incarnon gensis for two weapons that do not even have an alternate version (Wraith, Kuva, Vandal, Tenet etc.) so it is a wasted week. I am unable to see a solution that would account for different variations but this is really bad. I'd lie if I told you I am happy with how DE has handled this.
Players quitting elite deep archimedia.
in Deep Archimedea Feedback
Posted
Yeah it still does not respect my time with the current implementation.
I have. Maybe it was simply bad timing and there weren't just many players around at that time but I tried for a time and then I had to go do other things. This is a lesser issue though, that's more of my own making.