Jump to content

StellarPhenoma

PC Member
  • Posts

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

79

Recent Profile Visitors

202 profile views
  1. The way that I see this issue/debate comes less from a hard numbers point of view, and more from the point of view of generalized game design philosophy. A recurring theme with this essay and discussion is the lack of need to vary our builds based on the game mode, gameplay, and enemy type we are facing in the game. For instance, I have a generalized approach to builds in the game for weapons based on their status and/or critical damage capabilities, and I end up applying a set of rules for each build that make the weapon more than capable for endgame content, regardless of changing damage types per encounter. Really, there is not much variation in each weapon build I have, and everything has begun to blend together in my mind from a gameplay perspective. — Is this a self-inflicted issue? Yes. — Is it still a problem from a game design perspective that I can do this at all? Absolutely. — Is it solvable? 100%. The simple fact of the matter is that we do not have very many good reasons to modify our builds and utilize different elements, damage types, or gameplay approaches. If we can build weapons and frames, so they essentially work as a one-size-fits-all kind of tool, then we have homogenization of the gameplay flow, which is never a good thing and leads to stale gameplay, and even staler “progression”, as the fundamental way we progress and grow in a game is hindered by simplification. This is what I think the crux of the issue comes down to entirely: homogenization and simplification. Warframe's Damage 2.0 was designed to be a solution to this issue as a whole, and over time, DE has fallen into the same traps that brought about the necessity for a Damage 2.0. Armor was stripped from certain units and factions for gameplay design purposes, now it has been brought back as a universal factor. Shields as well, in a way, can be seen through this lens as well. Faction based weaknesses and approaches went from being unique and per-encounter based, to generalized. We now have to factor in everything as a potential threat vector, from armor, to shields, to health, to variations in health design at an almost arbitrary level with some units. Do they have the special health that was supposed to be for one specific faction, or are they simply using the base health states? Is there additional armor on these units, or are they relying on shields. The answer to these either, or question is yes. Which is the problem. We have to mod for everything at all times. If I want to vary up my gameplay, it is through no actual need, and moreso from a desire to experience something differently than usual. There is no reason to take advantage of different approaches, no motivation to do so. Again, this is what the crux of the issue is. There is no reason to vary builds or designs anymore, because everything has become a mess of the same “everything” approach to game design. Warframe is a systems driven game at its core. It is a game driven by intrinsic progression and variation of gameplay based on those systems, with a side-helping of story and lore. When those systems have lost their ability to vary the way we need to approach the game, it becomes a problem.
×
×
  • Create New...