Jump to content

(PSN)wintersandman

PSN Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    206

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by (PSN)wintersandman

    Solar Assassins

    in Recruitment

    Posted · Edited by (PS4)wintersandman

    Why dont we just put Alad in charge of our tenno lab, so we can replicate the stalker-frame.

     

    Beasides i was panning to strike a deal with him over all my leftover blueprints

    I would rather have him replicate The Lotus... So I can watch her die over and over again.

    Gives a whole new reason to Ogris myself.

    Why Do People Not Want Frames To Be Balanced?

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    I want there to be more realistic choices, not just possible choices, because I don't think it's healthy for the game to have one 'absolute best' that does what other frames already do and better... That's all. Of course, there are some Frames that still perform okay, but are still overshadowed... and then there's frames like Ash and Nekros.

    If anything is possible isn't it realistic? Someone will always be overshadowed in a given situation. When we had Cicero I brought Trinity thinking it was going to be tough. But an Oberon came and made me feel inadequate because healing wasn't needed but damage was. I think I only cast Blessing once and that was because I ventured off to far and Link wasn't cutting it. The Oberon was a better choice and I could have been something more useful because invincibility wasn't required.

    Why Do People Not Want Frames To Be Balanced?

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    You could play with a team like Trinity/Nova/Rhino/Vauban.

    What about Loki, Banshee, Nova, and Saryn for Grineer?

    Or Mag Prime, Loki, Volt, and Valkyr for Corpus?

    Or you could do Loki, Oberon, Vauban, and Nova?

    Or you could do Ember, Nova, Vauban, and Saryn for infested? Because damage of time abilties suck in comparison to explosions. Oh wait... accelerant plus molecular prime... plus ticking flames around slowed enemies is a bad idea.

    To me it sounds like there are a lot of varieties. Hey we should nerf Loki since I mentioned him in 3 different group makeups. 

    To summarize 'we feel' that 'we need' certain classes to get things done when in reality we are just choosing the easy way out or not thinking outside the box.

    Why Do People Not Want Frames To Be Balanced?

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    However when you turn around and look at Warframes in the same "intended" class, Ember vs Nova, there is clear winner there.

    Then lets look at Nekros vs Trinity.

    Frost vs Vauban.

    Valkyr vs Rhino.

    Ash vs Loki.

    There are some Warframes that are vastly better at their intended roles then other Warframes going for about the same role.

    I don't see the relation on a lot of these frames that you compared. Except Ash vs. Loki. Frost is supposed to be a tanking class where as Vauban is a Controller. Have to think outside defense missions. 

     

    Trinity is definitely built for support, and Nova is definitely built for damage, but let's say you have a 4-player party. One Trinity is all the support you need, because you're permanently healed and invincible. Playing Oberon is pointless, because his damage doesn't compare to someone like a Nova, and his heals are worthless, because everyone is invincible anyway. Does that clear it up a little?

     

    Trinity is a healing support class and so is Oberon. Of course it wouldn't be needed to have both. Where as you can have another support class like Banshee which increases everyones damage and helps provide minor crowd control. 

    Classes are more than just damage, support, or tanking classes. 

    You have controllers, healers, tanks, damage dealers, debilitators, etc.

    Plus molecular prime loses it's luster after a time and only soon becomes amazing for not the explosions but the slow and increased damage. Other frames have more scaling when it comes to specific factions. Volt on infested? no so much. For example. 

    I play a class based on the faction I am fighting. Saryn is amazing on high level Grineer survival.

    There is more to it than just the first five minutes or five waves.

    Console Superiority

    in Off Topic

    Posted

    Console gamer reporting in... 

    Actually I am a flexigamer (if that is even a word). 

    PC has the ability to outperform consoles any and every day of the week. The problem is cost to benefit. I bought a console so I didn't have to worry about the latest and greatest motherboard, video card, etc plus the benefit of playing from my couch on a larger tv with a controller. 

    Yes I know I can hook up a controller to my pc but I have other tech woes to worry about. 

    So I become selective. I buy a PC that is as badass as possible without having to build something (again tech woes) and play the games that I am playing for the graphics etc. Some are just to damn cumbersome with a mouse and keyboard. 

    So what it really boils down to is cost and comfort.  Console is cheaper, less hassle, more comfortable seating (couch, recliner, bean bag, etc.) and no concerns about operating system compatibility. 

    The PC users view it as Lazy. 

     

    Put aside the childish behavior and look at it in a more bang for your buck way.
    P.c are waaaay more flexible,universal, backwards compatible, efficient. I can build a rig for under 400 that can blow any console away. Now the common complaints people always say are "it costs too much, "its too hard to build" Poppy @#&$ i say, hell most rigs these days are just plug in the parts and play. People just look for the easy -cough consoles- then actually putting effort or research.

    I would love to see your build and have your free time to build, retune, etc.

    De Fails Hard~

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    I mean this cant be what people want....is it?

     

    Developers just pumping out a skeleton game, charging you for it, then over the next couple years it might be fantastic or might completely change, or it might suck and just fail?

     

    All the great games start with a clear cut vision, and they stick to it.  If developers listen to the community to make a game it always turns to crap, and it divides the community.  Major difference between feedback and letting the community more or less decide on concepts and systems btw.

     

    Anyway, fail faster mentality is why there are so many crappy games out there, which are in broken unfinished states, with the developers rattling the proverbial change cup to the hordes of players walking by.

     

    Yeah every now and then a major hit game could come from this process, someone mentioned minecraft (I cant quote on these forums) and I think that game would have been a big hit regardless of the approach they took to developing it.

     

    This video and this mentality can be better named "throw a bunch of S#&$ at the wall and see if any corn kernals stick" rather than fail faster.

     

    People will stop supporting these upstarts if the norm becomes failing at it faster.  Right now we are in the golden age of crowdfunding, mostly because just about every game that has gone through this isn't even finished yet, at least the major ones.

     

    I think soon enough this mentality will collapse in on itself, as gamers get sick of paying for unfinished games.  Hell im already there, wont touch early access on steam, wont bother with a beta, could care less about beta gifts. 

     

    Mark my words, this mentality will collapse in on itself.  Then we can perhaps go back to the old days of buying a fully developed game that was made with a clear vision, vs the unfinished games with no vision more or less conceptually developed by whoever was the most vocal on the forums.

    I think it will prove out for some and not so much for others. It all depends on how responsive the developer is. 

    The problem is the community around a game. Developers try to build hype around an expected release date for specific games so they have a good launch. The community following starts to grow and builds more hype which forces developers to rush the game so the hype doesn't evaporate. The game then launches half-baked and infuriates the community. 

    Some games like this completely fail. But others have turned it around and redefined the game. FFXIV is one that comes to mind that did this exact same thing. They couldn't push the game out without pissing off the community but they also released an unfinished product. It's the catch-22 that people fail to remember. We are a 'now' society. We report an issue and want it fixed same day but sometimes it may take 2-3 days or longer to find the fix or appropriate fix.

    It all depends on how things are managed.

    De Fails Hard~

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    This is a good post and as someone new to Warframe, I believe our forum community is bi-polar. One second we have people raging about a change and other are happy about it. There are very few posts with constructive criticism and when they happen. They turn into the rage post. 

    It's like this game has become people's lives. But in reality in is every person at DE's life that is part of this game. They live and breathe this daily

    Do they screw up... yes...
    Do they do good... yes...
    Do they pay attention... yes...
    Are they responsive to their community... yes... 
    Do they have room for improvement... yes...

    But all of these things they are working on. You can tell by the way they respond to 'constructive' criticism. But they will stop listening to polarizing comments that are demoralizing and unappreciative. 

    Archistopheles, I think this is a discussion that is worthwhile for the level headed forum community but the bi-polar majority may disagree. 

    Why I call the bi-polar part the majority is because they are the most vocal on the forums. PC and PS4 alike.

    Solar Assassins

    in Recruitment

    Posted · Edited by (PS4)wintersandman

    An invite you will get.  I think we are mostly night owls given how late we play and the sheer amount of bloodlust we have.

    Your Bloodlust is strong. Be one with the Tenno.

    Your Most Hated Weapons

    in Weapons

    Posted

    Let's see.

     

    The Embolist and Ignis: They just don't feel satisfying to use. The mechanics are okay I guess, damage is fine, but I don't don't have fun using them.

     

    The Ogris and Miter: The charge mechanic just doesn't sit well with me on these weapons. I love it on the Lanka, though.

     

    The Gorgon and Supra: I've never been a fan of them because of the wind up time and spread. I tend to stick to accuracy focused weapons so the boasted rate of fire with the sacrifice of accuracy and recoil just ruins it. The fact the Soma is so accurate is the reason I can stomach it and that's the only reason it's not in there as well.

    Supra wind up is not even noticeable with shred and speed trigger. 

    Your Most Hated Weapons

    in Weapons

    Posted · Edited by (PS4)wintersandman

    Cernos... Tries to do what the dread and paris prime for Corpus but come up severely lacking. Unless a Cernos prime comes out... it is a sad day for the bow kingdom.

    Braton series... Is it a Burstron is it a Soma... no it is a Braton. Need speed mods to really make this gun worthwhile at all.

    Embolist... if they are that close I am doing something wrong... Carrier snap to it.

×
×
  • Create New...