Silligoose

It might on console or mobile - I am not sure (alright I'm reaching... I really don't know). I am using more exaggerated examples, because people do not seem to understand the more nuanced implications in a suggestion such as this, seeing as they continuously ignore the points I make and simply go back to "muh accessibility" and damned be those who are negatively impacted. "Accessibility" tends to be an extremely poor excuse to make changes in a game and more often than not leads to a game losing its feel, its diversity, its very essence, as it erodes the richness once held. In Warframe we've seen it time and time again, from changing mechanics to make a game easier, to inserting arbitrary damage modifiers, to altering movement mechanics such as void dash, to changing melee so it went from a varied, rhythmetic experience in which different weapons really felt different when playing, to the vast majority of melee now playing the same - just hold button. This yet another idea that dumbs down and erodes the game and it is on par with requests to make this game even easier, because "accessibility". Few players feel satisfaction from a game when an "I win" button is sitting in the menu, which is why those buttons are almost never seen. Aside from bringing a host of balance issues with it, auto-melee removed the distinct feel of the use of different weapons, which is, at least in part, why melee is boring. Another player in an identical thread suggested an implementation of auto-fire leading to decreased performance as well, so the original method of fire remains the choice with the higher potential and while I agreed it may help and your suggestion may help, but I still believe this request will lead to the feel of weapons being lost and the game effectively losing diversity, since all semi--auto/burst weapons will most likely, for the most part, effectively become just another auto weapon.

PvE games also require balance and a game being PvE doesn't excuse poor gameplay decisions. The TF2 idea sounds like an implementation that would decrease my concern with regards to the player experience, the feel of a weapon, being decreased. I can't comment on the degree to which it would affect my experience or the feel, I've not experienced a change like that. Despite me not agreeing with this thread's suggestion, this suggestion would be preferable to simply adding a "hold to fire" option. I'm still against it though, especially given the reason for "greater accessibility" - it is a poor reason to ask for mechanical changes that disregards various gameplay element in a game and usually a selfish one that boils down to "I can't do the thing - make it easier so I can do it to and damn whatever negative impact it has on the experience of others".

Forget about the mods - the option would open up more mods being more viable than currently generally considered for builds, granting more realistic diversity. It would increase accessibility. I can simply enter the same reasons used in defence for this thread's suggestion. I'm not against the suggestion for those reasons. I'm against it due to how it affects the experience. How would the infinite health/energy/damage menu toggle affect the user's experience? How would it affect the feel? Would the option mentioned detract from the game's gameplay and overall enjoyment? Would players still feel the same amount of satisfaction when destroying a level due to their build, when they could simply have toggled the option?

Would having the menu option of infinite health/energy/damage, an option that would increase accessibility, add to, or detract from the game?

I've already stated the downside, but you don't want to accept that is part of the request when asking for this option. The role of a game is to present a problem, present tools with which one can solve said problem and parameters within which to work. The role of the player is to use the tools within the parameters presented to overcome the problem. When done right, the player gains satisfaction from completing this task. Players only tend to have the scope of decision you speak of when they elect to install mods that allow them to alter the tools and parameters presented.

The game is negatively impacted as mentioned, regardless of whether it is a PvP game or not. The option does impact the game, because now you are changing the parameters for optimal use from having good timing, to holding down a button. Your requested option fundamentally changes what would constitute good use of the weapon and the mechanics involved and the associated balance is thrown off (though balance in WF isn't great in any case). Like I said, you may as well ask for semi-auto and burst weapons to be removed from the game and have everything be auto, because that is the effective outcome of this request.

The positive impact pales in comparison, which is why the examples I gave ring true. Might as well ask for a weapon that oneshots everything in the game, seeing as the use of it is just an option, or better yet, as for a "oneshot everything" option in the menu and cite "accessibility" as the reason for it, because then it is just an option as well.

Good fighting games don't have "push 1 button, execute 30-hit combo" options in their menus as it takes away from the game. Good driving games don't have "we will regulate the proper driving speed" throttle settings in their menus as it takes away from the game. Good games overall don't have "infinite health/mana" settings in their menus as it takes away from the game. Trying to hide the negative effects of the request behind the word "option" doesn't change the negative impact it has.

While you say it feels bad when one's shots "stutter" because of mistiming, you seem to forget the satisfaction that comes with proper timing, which you are now asking to be diminished. Melee weapons lost their feel when DE removed timing windows and lost even more when one could just hold the melee button. You are asking for diversity in weapons, feel, even satisfaction of weapons, to be decreased in the name of accessibility. Yeah, it is unfortunate that some people have health issues that prevent them from using certain weapons properly (that includes me). It is unfortunate that some people have issues that prevent them from overcoming some obstacles in the game. It is unfortunate that some people have issues that prevent them from taking advantage of certain mechanics that lead to far greater performance, but continuously sacrificing the game's diversity, integrity, it's very essence in the name of "accessibility" is foolish and will continue to make this game a shell of its former self. If people can't use certain weapons due to the mechanics involved for whatever reason, they should make peace with the fact that the weapon isn't for them and be happy others may enjoy such mechanics instead of being selfish and wanting the essence of the weapon changed to accommodate their inadequacies. You might as well simply request DE deletes "semi-auto" and "burst" weapons from the game and make everything auto, because that is what it comes down to. I can't use all weapons due to health issues, but I'm happy those diverse options are there for others who enjoy the diversity in mechanics I may not be able to use and would not want to see that taken away for the sake of a minority's "accessibility".

While you say it feels bad when one's shots "stutter" because of mistiming, you seem to forget the satisfaction that comes with proper timing, which you are now asking to be diminished. Melee weapons lost their feel when DE removed timing windows and lost even more when one could just hold the melee button. You are asking for diversity in weapons, feel, even satisfaction of weapons, to be decreased in the name of accessibility. Yeah, it is unfortunate that some people have health issues that prevent them from using certain weapons properly (that includes me). It is unfortunate that some people have issues that prevent them from overcoming some obstacles in the game. It is unfortunate that some people have issues that prevent them from taking advantage of certain mechanics that lead to far greater performance, but continuously sacrificing the game's diversity, integrity, it's very essence in the name of "accessibility" is foolish and will continue to make this game a shell of its former self. If people can't use certain weapons due to the mechanics involved for whatever reason, they should make peace with the fact that the weapon isn't for them and be happy others may enjoy such mechanics instead of being selfish and wanting the essence of the weapon changed to accommodate their inadequacies. You might as well simply request DE deletes "semi-auto" and "burst" weapons from the game and make everything auto, because that is what it comes down to. I can't use all weapons due to health issues, but I'm happy those diverse options are there for others who enjoy the diversity in mechanics I may not be able to use and would not want to see that taken away for the sake of a minority's "accessibility".

Overguard is a terrible band-aid solution implemented in lieu of properly balancing certain cc mechanics. Devs discussed the how wildly imbalanced it can be with regards to frame viability, but basically shrugged it off with an "oh well". Based on their discussions on the matter, they do not appear willing or able to address the power of cc properly and as such lazy band-aids likely remain par for the course. Sometimes it sucks to see what happens to hand-me-downs, but such is life.

I 100% agree that more interesting enemies could do wonders for the replayability and enjoyment of this game. I sometimes wonder why DE doesn't make use of the diversity in enemy roster already created - there are enemies (I can't recall the name at time of writing) that actually move a lot like Warframes! They'll bullet jump, they'll wall jump, they'll keep the pressure on the player and chase them down, but when is the last time you actually had something like that come for you? I myself can't even remember. Bringing everything up to OP levels is often times foolish as it exacerbates powercreep and sometimes it isn't an option, because the mechanic in question is inherently overpowered. That results in too many mechanics being nullified, which leads to monotonous gameplay despite diversity in enemy and player rosters. DE doesn't let that fly. We've seen it over and over and over, except, instead of addressing the problem by directly nerfing the OP mechanics, they use band-aids to address it indirectly. The problem keeping overpowered abilities in play and relying on indirect nerfs to bring about diversity, is the exact situation in which Warframe finds itself: In order to present more challenging content, DE proceeds to invalidate a massive amount of mechanics. Look at Archons. Look at TFO. Look at Eximus-only missions/rounds. Most abilities simply do not work on them. We're talking endgame content in a progression-style game where the progression of the player is nullified because the developers couldn't be bothered to balance mechanics properly. The anti-nerf crowd don't seem to understand that overpowered options are always going to get nerfed. There is no "no nerf" option. The only question is whether it will be nerfed directly, or indirectly, and looking at the state of "challenging content" in Warframe, the erosion of gameplay associated with band-aids like Overguard or the mechanic-invulnerability seen with Archons or TFO, or other enemies, I would much rather see direct nerfs that allow me to still use different abilities against "challenging content", even if they are less powerful, than arbitrarily being told the majority of abilities won't affect said "challenging content", effectively reducing the diversity in play as a result.

The talk about powercreep is real because it turns Warframe into a baby-game. Overguard is a detriment to this game on enemies and little more than a new shiny on players, contributing to powecreep and turning "high level content" into even more of a joke. I enjoy Frost, but his abilities have a lot of effect overlap leading to redundancy - that is why he could benefit from a rework/revision. Overguard doesn't change that. I played Styanax far beyond encouraged content levels prior to him getting Overguard. Cc, defence strip, player resource replenishment on various fronts... he was more than fine and didn't need Overguard added in the slightest.

Most sense made in this thread. Frost wasn't irrelevant. Styanax was fine. Overguard is just a reused asset from enemies that aids in powercreep by making frames immune to some forms of cc. The "diversity" it brings, erodes gameplay mechanics to a greater extent by nullifying various threats. DE likes reusing assets and it seems players are easily mesmerized by a "new" shiny, so low cost for greater income. As with much released in this game, I doubt DE has a long term plan for overguard beyond what has been shown already.

I've noticed more and more, especially with the newer "difficult/endgame" bosses, the people in charge at DE simply do not seem interested in, or capable of, making the game a challenge for veterans without sabotaging their players and the game they inherited from the OG devs. Whereas other games encourage, or even necessitate, the synergistic use of the diverse tools and mechanics given to them to take on a challenge, DE instead opts to take away from those tools, to take away from the diversity in the game. The "difficult" options seem the antithesis of what endgame play for a progression-style game tends to be, as it nullifies some advantages made from progression completely by arbitrary means, whilst not encouraging and rewarding the increase of skill through gameplay challenges. I've lost a lot of interest in Warframe as a result and this thread is what informed me of the upcoming new mode. The answer to "challenge" will likely be something along the lines of "defence strip ability + lategame mods on random weapon", which again sounds like a loss of diversity. The random aspect is most likely a means of encouraging players to spend money on weapons/frames they would not otherwise have. It is a disappointment, but I do not see it changing anytime soon.