(XBOX)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy
-
Posts
303 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by (XBOX)HAPPYHapyJ0YJoy
-
-
Increasing player power in relation to game content isn't "power creep." That's a misnomer. That term has a specific meaning, and players have a nasty habit of misusing it.
It has nothing to do with difficulty and is a design problem. Power creep refers to the increase in power of rewards or content in relation to other like content and how it can lead to the obsolescence of content.
So, for instance, if a new weapon comes out which is more powerful than a older weapons, and older weapons fall out of use because of it, that's power creep. Rivens, despite increasing player power, are actually specially designed to combat this type of power creep (though how well they manage it is up for debate).
Another typical example would be when new content such as a raid or expansion releases and it offers rewards which outstrip that given for previous content that would be power creep, and is seen as dangerous since it has the potential to make all other content irrelevant. Even if the difficulty of the content is *higher* relative to player power, and the game becomes more difficult as a result. Since if you can manage the new content, and it's drops are better, you suddenly have no reason to play older content, as it doesn't have a similar payout. Thus you can potentially be making playing 90% of your game pointless.
That's player creep. What you're talking about are just plain old difficulty issues.
-
5
-
-
Limbo Prime.
Because with no attachments, no sydana, no sigils, no nothing....he still dominates fashion frame. Straight outta the box he's prettier than the other frames ever will be.
-
2 hours ago, (PS4)segulibanez65 said:
You're missing the bigger picture. A dagger should essentially do enormous damage, but to one target. A pole can hit MANY enemies per swing, at a lower damage clip. Figure out the exact number, I don't care. But a well-balanced system should have roughly balanced ttk per enemy...
Per which enemy though?
Most enemies can be killed in one hit. If the rarer, tougher enemies are taking four or five times as many hits from a polearm that only applies to those enemies. The rest of time TTK would be equal and the dagger would be taking four or five times as long to clear a room since they'd have to individually hit every enemy by rubbing up against them, while the polearms will be cutting a swath.
Now, sure, the dagger will come out ahead when attacking a singular tough enemy where the polearm will gain nothing from its range, but how often are we fighting one big enemy vs. the amount of time we're up against a herd, or a boss with a bunch of adds?
In a horde shooter this is going to heavily favor the polearm.
Especially since added range also gives ease of use. You don't have to be or stay as close to your target. You don't have to keep your enemy in such a narrow window. This would also let you more easily run by enemies, hitting them with glancing attacks while keeping your character much safer than a dagger wielder would be, since they'd basically have to stuff their face into the enemy to land blows. Which means that even against more powerful enemies, where daggers would have a DPS advantage, polearms would still have a plus in their column.
Which means that daggers would be behind the curve most of the time, and running somewhere close to even the rest.
-
47 minutes ago, (PS4)segulibanez65 said:
Exactly. A dagger should essentially red crit with 1 hit, with the drawback that you have to kill 1 enemy at a time. Poles should take 4-5 swings, but can hit 5-6 enemies.
So you want polearms to require 4 to 5 swings to kill a grineer lancer? That sounds like a huge nerf.
-
7 minutes ago, fr4gb4ll said:
how about: remove complaining players? that would certainly help too...
But the who would play the game?
7 minutes ago, fr4gb4ll said:i agree that riven mods might have been a concept that wasn't thought through thoroughly (too many damn 'th' here, sorry), and that wouldn't been the first time they did so, but if they would remove it now, all hell would break lose - that i can guarantee you ^^)
Hell is other people. We're always in hell, as evidenced by the people who hate rivens, and the ones who love them, spend thousands of plat, then get fantastically anrgy at every disposition change.
The reality is that rivens are just in a constant state of making people angry and fudging up the game.
They're a nice idea in theory. They combat power creep (actual power creep, not what players define it as), in theory anyway. They let "obsolete" weapons serve a purpose by offering a balancing factor. Buuuuut...
RNG. Regular and Prime sharing dispositions despite being disparate in stats and use. The sheer increase in power they offer, not just to skew lesser items up, but also to top tier items that don't need the boost.
They're a nice idea, but poorly implemented to the point that they fail at everything except making OP items OPer to further trivialize content.
And this, ultimately, is another symptom. Rivens are expensive to slot. Remove them and capacity is cleared up.
I mean, how bad does something have to fail before it's worth removing? Rivens are 100% fail, and even spend an inordinate amount of time pissing off the people who actually like them.
Will people freak out if they're removed? Sure, but they're constantly freaking out over them anyway.
-
I know how DE can solve this problem.
Step 1: Remove rivens from the game.
Annnnd done. Problem solved.
-
3 hours ago, (NSW)ToadBlue said:
"Appeal to popularity" is a logical fallacy. Just because a bad idea has been suggested a hundred times does not mean it isn't a bad idea.
Which would apply if the suggestion was said to be correct because the idea is popular. Which isn't at all the idea. The popularity of the suggestion is important though, regardless of "correctness," quite simply because the support for the idea is held within the player base, in other words the customers. Typically it isn't a financially sound idea to ignore your customers when they ask for quality of life improvements to your service. There's sometimes good reasons for it, like ROI concerns, but ultimately there shouldn't be any of those here.
Really, the popularity of the idea though is not why an auction house is a good idea. The reason it's a good idea is because it's quick and convenient. It also doesn't necessitate the removal of trade chat, which means that those who wish to haggle still have that opportunity. Something gained, nothing lost. Past which, if you take a look at Trials, which failed hard enough they were removed and replaced with nothing (at least so far) you'll see fairly conclusively that forced social interaction doesn't work. Even locking the best rewards behind it only resulted in a tiny portion of player base bothering to take advantage, in a type of game based around rewards. Which definitely points to the idea that that forced social interaction can and will drive some (or more likely very many) players off. There are a lot of people who play online games solo, or specifically only with their friends (as I tend to), and have less than no desire to associate with randoms on any level, potentially even the limited half-assed way that Warframe trade requires. And if you add an auction house? They don't have to. Which potentially means more people trading, and more people buying plat to trade with.
But if you really want to discuss logical fallacies, you are aware that "appeal to authority" is one, right?
Just because DE has endorsed no auction house doesn't mean no auction house is a good idea. Developers, the "authority" in this case, don't always know best. Their suggestion is that they want players to interact, but their system doesn't actually lead to that in any meaningful way for people who aren't actually looking for it (who as such would find it elsewhere anyway), and potentially takes players out of the economy. Those are both bad things. Thus the suggestion is a bad one, regardless of it was from the developer, thousands of players asking for no auction house, or even God himself (or herself if that's your leaning). Bad ideas are bad ideas. And using trade to force interaction is one of those bad ideas.
3 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:"The world is flat" and "vaccines cause autism" are brought up often by the irrational and uneducated. Neither is true or factual, and they are proof that apparent popularity is not a good or even compelling reason to institute sweeping changes.
Nor are they popular opinions. They're beliefs held by a niche so... maybe have a point next time?
3 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:No poop whatsoever, unlike the rather poopy point that I responded to where you suggested that trading doesn't lead to any meaningful interactions.
You mean the one you acknowledge is true? To paraphrase what you said: "get out of it what you put into it". And you full well know and acknowledge that a lot of people want to put nothing into it.
Which means that people who don't want to socialize aren't going to. And people who do? Will do so anyway through hubs, through matchmaking, through finding people in chat and on forums. So you don't gain anything by forcing trade through chat, and you don't lose anything by adding an auction house. An auction house, on it's own, doesn't require the loss of trade chat, which many will still use to try and haggle or quick sell, just like they do in so many other games with auction houses. It also won't stop people from socializing in chat, or in hubs, or queuing for PUGs, or anything else.
Interactions with random people will still be there for those who want them and nothing will ever funnel those who don't into having them. Which makes trying to force them through trade destined to fail. And you know that. You've acknowledged as much.
3 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink" isn't the same as "yeah that water is not potable and will kill you if you drink it". Try to figure out the difference.
Except that the idea here isn't to try and lead the horse to water, it's literally trying to force the horse to drink. There's water f***ing everywhere in this game. You don't need to lead that horse anywhere to find the water. Matchmaking is set to public by default. You actively have to try and not interact here. The horse literally has to try and walk away from the damned water. And yeah, it's a bad f***ing idea to drag the horse back and stuff his face under the water... you're gonna drown the damn horse, or drive him off.
Be better with metaphors.
-
7 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:
Wouldn't happen if what they had to say wasn't the 657,345th rehashing of the same thing that has been dealt with each and every time.
The fact that it's brought up that often is a pretty compelling reason to seriously consider a change. It shows the amount and level of support for the idea. Thus the frequency of the posts undercuts your point.
And also, if it's brought up that much, people should probably accept that it has and will continue to be, and with that acceptance either contribute to threads productively, or ignore them entirely. Adding snippy responses doesn't even take a stance on the issue to show a lack of support, and thus is entirely useless.
15 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:Unless something fundamental has changed in the intervening time, the reasons presented for having the position probably still exist.
The continued support for it in and of itself is something fundamental that likely deserves to be addressed. And making a bad decision for a bad reason doesn't make the reason or decision any less bad the longer you stick to it.
27 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:Yup that's what you get when that's all you put into it. Nobody here needs to kowtow to be your buddy. But I've traded with people who were quite ok with being put on a friendlist for the possibility of future trades. I've bought stuff from people who gave me advice on how to get the item for myself. I've gotten free items tossed in, and upgraded mods just because I was talking to the seller while waiting to load in for the trade.
So, turns out that if you're not a complete introvert who shuns all possibility of human interaction, the odds are pretty good that you are actually able to interact with the people you come across in the game. Quelle surprise.
No poop.
People who want to interact will, and those who don't still won't.
That's the point. You're explicitly pointing out why DE's reason doesn't hold water.
The system doesn't get people to interact. People either will or won't based on who they are and what they're after. And if they want to interact they have, you know, a whole multiplayer game with social hubs and matchmaking that will ensure they'll have that chance.
Which means using the system as a means to get people to interact, by your own admission, is an abject failure, and doomed to be nothing but that. This makes it a bad reason.
-
7 hours ago, WhiteMarker said:
And what you are calling nonsense is something that comes from DE. DE wants people to interact and such. So you should tell DE that what they are doing with trading is bad. But then again we could argue if it's really all that bad. The players actually do what DE wanted them to do. Players interact.
A few things:
First, people should tell DE? This is a feedback thread. That's what this thread and the others like it are doing. It's antithetical to tell someone to communicate the idea to DE while also trying to shut the thread down with, " But DE said!" or "Use search!" Especially when search is pointless, since if someone finds and old thread and tries to add their voice to it people will simply whine about thread necros or the beatings of dead horses.
Secondly, the fact that DE have said something in the past is irrelevant. Only the ignorant and arrogant aren't open to changing their minds, and only people looking to change careers are dead set on ignoring their customers. The more people who speak up about something, the more people who make their opinions known, the more likely someone, and DE themselves, are apt to change their minds. And this is not some unprecedented event; the recent revert on farming changes comes to mind, so does backtracking on the universality of universal medallions.
Lastly, of course people "interact", they have no real choice. That "interaction" however only matters if it's meaningful and adds something to the game. I've made plenty of random trades and none have led to any meaningful interactions...
"WTB [blank]" , [invite], [instance change], [trade window], "[blank] has left the instance"
...when that's how basically all trades with random go, you aren't adding anything to the game by forcing that on people. Any better interactions you've had were obviously from people who were looking to interact and would have as easily happened in a PUG or elsewhere; people not looking to interact aren't going to in all but the shallowest, most meaningless manner. You're sacrificing efficiency and convienece for something that doesn't enrich the game in the slightest.
-
3 hours ago, Steel_Rook said:
Agreed. I still dislike Nightwave on principle for its Battle Pass design...
Huh?
It's just a reputation. "Battle Passes" typically are a monetization system used in F2P with different tier rewards for free players and those who buy the pass who get additional rewards for their efforts.
Unless I'm missing something there's no pass to buy and no resulting tiers of rewards.
-
7 hours ago, Shalath said:
You are vulnerable to knocksdowns and grapples during the invulnerability phase on Iron Skin.
You're also invulnerable. You don't need to be worried about being killed while you're defenseless due to being knocked down or grappled if you're actually the exact opposite of defenseless.
-
18 hours ago, Zoh_Veldae said:
I don't like Shockwave Moa knockdown waves. I don't like Fusion Moa snipe knockdowns from across the room. And I definitely don't like Scorpion grappling hook knockdowns that can't be interrupted by anything short of instant death.
Play Rhino.
Hit 2.
You're welcome.
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, Tatann said:
It's your opinion... Other people prefer Atlas look. And he can also trivialize a lot of content, without being a pain in the ass to other players
Someone pefers Atlas' look? Cool, I have just the place for them...
Really though, Limbo's ability to entirely remove some enemies from the field of play, lockdown locations and enemies, give near perfect cover/shelter to himself and allies, ignore many of the anti-player spy mission mechanics, and lock certain objectives away from enemies make a him amazing in a whole bunch of scenarios, and gives him advantages no one else has.
Atlas is... fairly tanky, though less so than many other tank frames, some of which also have additional bonuses for self and team that Rocky just isn't competing with.
12 hours ago, (NSW)ToadBlue said:I dig Destreza Prime, myself. Vulpine Mask is one of the stances I actually love. It hits fast, it's controllable (unlike some), and it looks and sounds really cool. But I don't like the fist stances, they feel extremely clunky, and combined with the bad range of fist weapons in general, I'm not looking forward to getting Tekko Prime.
I like the look of Desteza, my only issue with it is Vulpine (the only stace I have for it) doesn't have much in the way of wide sweeps. Which when swarmed is kind of a disappointment.
-
17 minutes ago, Duality52 said:
Zephyr Prime came out with the Tiberon Prime and the Kronen Prime, who are going to get vaulted next.
Limbo Prime came out with the Pyrana Prime and Destreza Prime.
You're right. Haven't had my coffee yet. My bad. Pyrana Prime is pretty sweet though...
-
6 hours ago, Tatann said:
You think Trollimbo sold more ?
Sure. People may hate playing with bad Limbos, but he's powerful and can trivialize a lot of content. Also he's a sexy SOB, as opposed to Atlas, the neckless guy who wears bacon.
Also Limbo came with Tiburon Prime, one of the primeiest of rifles.
-
2
-
-
Atlas, Dethcube and Tekko? They should have included a pony too.
I get the feeling this will probably be one of, if not the, lowest selling Prime Access.
-
On 2019-10-05 at 1:32 AM, krc473 said:
Oh, since when can you use both your Exalted and the appropriate weapon together? That’s the difference, these two cannot be used simultaneously. Whereas a frame weapon and sentinel weapon are used simultaneously, they should require independent mods. I am not sure what you are having trouble acquiring, but I never found it particularly difficult to get the required duplicates.
And since when has your character spent several minutes ripping mods out of melee weapons mid-mission when you switch to your exalted? Because if that doesn't happen then it obviously doesn't matter.
-
Warframe 2? Excalibur Prime for everyone!!
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, HugintheCrow said:
Are you legally blind?
Why did you post two pictures of Nathan Drake?
generic scruffy white guy video game protagonists all look alike, and that's about 98% of video game protagonists[/spoiler]
-
On 2019-09-07 at 7:24 AM, (PS4)iheartcampersz said:
More and More stuff is being released, but none of them requiring you to max everything. it makes it dull to see a steady stream of low MR fodder being streamlined out.
So new stuff is only interesting to you if other people can't get it, and if they can it's dull?
That's... questionable.
-
3
-
-
On 2019-09-05 at 5:42 AM, VanFanel1980mx said:
There are people every now and then that just grow tired of a lot of unsolved issues within the game, the grind, the repetitiveness, the lackluster rewards, RNG, etc.
What you described aren't unresolved issues so much as the game. It's like...
"So I've been playing this racing game, but every now and then I get tired of cars and driving and going fast."
It's a farming horde shooter. Repetitive grinding against RNG is kinda the core concept.
-
1 hour ago, Ahniar said:
Prime? No. A Vandal version could be interesting.
Or a grineer variant... Shooting metallic shards can be fun :3
So the Drakgoon?
-
30 minutes ago, OneYenShort said:
Failure to understand what you wrote and history. Go back a few pages as I already posted the history, and you will see that British person that named the element Al, the namer, the one bestowing the name (your phrasing), did NOT get their way. So make up your mind on what you want to argue.
I see you (a) did not read my whole post and (b) are trying to compare proper names to standard nouns, or apples to oranges.
So congratulations on being one of "those people" twice over.
-
2 hours ago, OneYenShort said:
ppfff... No it doesn't. Aluminum's history proves this way before David Jones existed.
That's just a standard noun, not a proper name. Of course you could make the argument this isn't a proper noun, since your standard warframe isn't sapient and it would be more akin to naming a strain of plant than a person. Of course then you run into nouns translating, after all; steel, stehlen, acier, acero. So at this point it wouldn't matter what the Germans say, because the name could be translated to anything, and pronounced however they want.
And of course, even with proper names you end up with some not being the same across languages and cultures. After all, the Germans don't call Germany that. To them, they are the Deutsche who live in Deutschland. And to much of the world it's Allemagne or some variation thereof.
So why nitpick over how Germans would pronounce "Gauss" when no one is even willing to let them decide what they call themselves or their country?
Past that, discoveries aren't typically named by their discoverer. They usually suggest a name, but that rarely works out. Places have generally been decided by map makers. Scientific discoveries by peer review journals. Inventions by the marketing people selling them to the public.
Which really, just goes even further to showing the fluidity of names and naming, and furthers the notion of Gauss being whatever DE wants. They could spell it Buttcrack and pronounce it Juice and it would be just as valid.
Their call.
Stop the powercreep, please.
in General
Posted
Oh it definitely does.
Like you said, almost all online games really. Devs have a habit of wanting new content to be popular for the sake of metrics, for it to draw players in or back, and so most will wedge all the shiny into the newest content, and leave rewards for older content to stagnate.
It's sad. And drives players to one thing, hampers choice, and just... makes games boring.
I don't think there's a dev who doesn't know the issues. It's a Game Design 101 thing. They all seem to jump down that particular well anyway.