DrBorris
-
Posts
5,118 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by DrBorris
-
-
1 minute ago, -AoN-CanoLathra- said:
We always tolerated this even because of the free forma. the same way we tolerated Scarlet Spear because of free arcanes. Both events suffer greatly from the "hurry up and wait" gameplay loops within them. DE should look at the quit farming and realize that the only reason players even do this event at all is for the rewards, not because the event is well-designed.
People will do whatever is the most efficient. People doing the most efficient thing isn't a sign of anything. Warframe players famously hate playing Warframe.
1 minute ago, Crackensan said:It's not so much that, it's that the part 2 defense cannot be accelerated. At all. Zero player input. The drone in P3? Nova, Loki, and a few others have the ability to make it move faster.
P1? Titania.P4? Incarnon Guns.
P2? Literally $&*^ all the player can do to interact and make it more interesting.
IT USED TO; (*note I could be mis-remembering this) but that was changed when the Phylaxis and Catalyst are now no longer required to be on the gear wheel and are just taken automatically from your inventory.SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO it sucks.
Plague Star has always had an unmodifiable 3 minute defense. It is the same event as always with the exception of the drone being easier to speed up.
And I mean... fair enough to criticize the design of the event. But the "how dare you" attitude is just... ugh. The whole "of course they nerfed..." as if it is a sign of DE's incompetence, when this specific decision corrects an obvious oversight, it just isn't a good look. Like... guys/gals, this isn't how you give feedback. You don't advocate for a bad system of quitting out of a Bounty because you have problems with the design of the event. You will not convince someone to listen to you by misrepresenting their actions.
And I'm serious about the part of suggesting things that also take the same amount of time. Every suggestion to "just reduce it" or even "let us reduce it with gameplay" are missing the reality that Plague Star is already insanely rewarding. It doesn't need to be faster, it makes the complaints about the event look like a thinly veiled attempt to get more reward faster when that isn't addressed.
Basically, I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm mostly just pointing out that using quit-farming and its removal as a sign of anything is silly.
-
3
-
-
12 minutes ago, (PSN)FrDiabloFr said:
Argh yes because you can do something everyone else shall suffer blah blah, i can comfortably do a steel path run in 8-10 solo with titania but i’m aware not everyone can hate that attitude.
Isn't the point of multiple difficulty levels to reward people who have better builds or invest more effort?
I am also finding the "how could you do this? DE you are so dumb!" hilarious as Plague Star has always been most efficient when running the full bounty. We get a moment where there is a clear oversight and suddenly DE is doing the "typical" thing and "nerfing fun" or something. Come on guys, this ain't the hill to die on, it is just making you look silly. Of course players prefer to do the more efficient thing, this isn't some grandiose philosophical take about the state of DE.
This is objectively an incredibly rewarding event for your time, it doesn't need to be faster. If you actually cared about gameplay and design you would suggest things to replace that time that take a similar amount of time, not give a "please give more rewards faster".
-
5
-
-
A year or so ago the Path of Exile wiki was moved off of Fandom and Grinding Gear Games took on hosting it. PoE is one of the few games that can beat Warframe in a "how poorly is this explained in game" competition. If they can do it, Warframe's community can.
It can happen, there's a chance.
-
6
-
-
12 minutes ago, Voltage said:
There are quite a few missions more efficient solo (like Bounties). The comment you quoted does have merit. It's why we don't have any co-op Nightwave challenges or why "solo clans" are considered (even though by definition, that's not a real clan. Squads being more efficient is often more of a hypothetical based on the ideal scenario where players are as fast (or faster) as you. When Archon Spy or Disruption comes up, I end up doing a majority of the objectives and waiting at extraction first. That's just how it is.
Warframe matchmaking is a blessing and a curse. On one hand, the fast pick up games are great. However, on the other hand, console spawns and a deceased clan/alliance system makes it really hard to create proper groups unless you're a player doing only new content (like me), or a player in a clan full of players at earlier stages in the game.
The title I went with was a bit of an exaggeration of the meat of the topic, maybe leaned a bit too far in. I wasn't intending to imply that it should only be able to be completed with a group (yes, I used the word require, I'm aware), but that it would actually matter for the context of the mission. A charitable interpretation would be that it requires a group to complete efficiently.
Most of my frustration comes from how bad of a mismatch a key system is with an exterminate mission and that "it was a test" raises more questions than it answers.
-
4 minutes ago, SDGDen said:
if a piece of content requires a premade group and can't practically be solo'd or even is just slower when solo'd, people will complain even harder (even though i'd quite like to see it).
A lot of the core mission types scale better with groups. Interception is almost always faster with a group, as is Disruption and Defection. Spy gets basically a 3x multiplier on speed.
Exterminate isn't the worst mission type they could've picked, Capture wins that award, but it is close.
-
In the last Devstream it was discussed that the new Abyssal Zones were a test for key-esque content, to see what the reaction/engagement would be with missions where matchmaking was turned off. On one hand, I get it. Test something on a simple mission to see how it plays out. On the other hand, it makes absolutely no sense to test the response to a social system on a mission that has no social aspect.
As someone who doesn't have an active group of friends to play with, it is unironically faster for me to solo the mission than it is to go through the time of finding a premade. The results of this experiment are horribly skewed because the content that was used to test is a terrible case for the mechanic being tested. Furthermore, this mechanic has an active detriment to the content itself. The snappy co-op matchmaking of Warframe is one of its underrated strengths; it plays perfectly into the fast paced, short missions we find ourselves playing. Removing that strength from one of those short missions is... yeah, that's not it chief.
My feedback to the experiment is pretty simple then. If a mission is going to require me to get a group of people together, it should feel like a worthwhile cost to do so. The content of the mission itself should improve by a factor greater than what is accomplished with simply three more bodies. It doesn't need to be Raid mechanics, an Interception+ could be grounds for something that begets more co-op gameplay. I am not opposed to having to find a group, but part of why I enjoy Warframe is because I can play it at my own pace. If something is going to take me out of that, it better be for a reason.
I'm also not sure the inherent leeching aspect to key-shares is the most healthy. Even assuming nobody intentionally leeches, sometimes you don't have time or want to run four missions in a row. That leaves you either getting a bad value or leeching off of others. Missions don't need a key to have matchmaking turned off.
I would like to see a proper party finder before we get any significant 'matchmaking off' missions though. Recruiting chat is at best tolerable when looking for popular missions, anything that isn't the new hotness is a slog.
I hope that this is just a temporary experiment and Abyssal Zones are released from a mismatched requirement. Abyssal Zones seem like the Nightmare rework we've needed for over a decade. Open matchmaking, keep the key cost (per player), then replace Nightmare alerts. Bonus points if you add a Nightmare Mod shop to Dagath's Hollow using Vainthorn. The Defixios and Eximus Stronghold could be pretty simply applied to the existing Nightmare mission types.
-
3
-
-
13 hours ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:
And the issue with this, and why I didn't deem to actually 'address' it is simple.
I don't think it is. [DE]Rebecca was in the official Discord and mentioned something along the lines of adding more quests to the new player experience, specifically stuff in-between Vor's Prize and Second Dream (the part of the experience that needs the most work imo). This has the consequence of making that wall to new content even higher.
Basically, if DE continues to make the new experience better by fleshing it out, it is going to have the knock-on effect of lengthening the experience. This means the issue of "quality content wall is a wall nonetheless" will become more important as time goes, finding a solution to this growing issue (as both the main story and NPE gets longer) is absolutely something to address. Criticisms of the new player experience are fair (although your "stop wasting time and just fix it in 5 minutes" comes off a bit ignorant to the reality of game dev) but this issue is separate.
And again, you can just dismiss it... I'm not asking you to admit that it is an issue, I just think that in this discussion about a thing you should at the very least address the thing. Because of Warframe's progression structure I do believe that the experience of playing through is incompatible with the MMO 'skip' norm. Mostly being that the story isn't that long, that it is mechanically quite a bit more simulating than most MMO early games, and that this is an incredibly complex game that needs a lot of time to fully grasp.
Like... I get it. While I'm in favor of a temporary skip, I'm not fully confident that even a watered down version makes sense.
And the Venus thing... if a player gets bored of the game going through Venus, which at that point is 'new' content to them, in what is less than 10 missions... they aren't going to be a Warframe player for long no matter what. Giving a false impression that the game is all narrative all the time hurts everyone, it'll lure in players that don't jive with what Warframe is.
-
3
-
-
16 minutes ago, LuckyCharm said:
It's a weird thing to think anyone would skip the story grind as a new player.
Some people are weird.
But I think the more interesting group is the group that wants to play but feels daunted. The ones that see cool shiny stuff and have friends who are playing shiny stuff, but are too daunted by 10 years of content (quality being irrelevant) to make the investment.
I don't think DE should cater to the people who don't want to play everything leading up to the new content, that type of short-term gratification just ain't gonna work with Warframe's content structure. But I think that group of daunted people could very well become long term players if they were given the ability to jump in with everyone. I think way too much of this thread has focused on the specific idea proposed by Reb and not enough looked at the problem.
Nowhere was it implied that people didn't want to play the content, rather that they don't want to do it first. I think this motivation came through far clearer in the Devstream, the OP got to the point a bit too quick and did the noob mistake of focusing on a specific implementation of a concept rather than emphasizing the concept (something most of us who post here have long learned). Rather than put themselves in DE's headspace, people are creating rationalization based on the proposal.
All this is why I think, given the issues stated here and in the Devstream, a free "skip it for now" option is the way to go. I'll keep it brief as I have a ranty version of this on the first page, but basically utilize the Duviri loaner weapon mechanics to give players a decent arsenal and separate its progression path in a way not all too dissimilar to Duviri. I am actually strongly opposed to any story recap, a person who is jumping to new content isn't doing it because they wanted a TL;DR of the story, it was for the new content. If they want the story, they should play the story. Obviously narratively it won't make sense, but that's a far smaller sacrifice than the potential of deflating 10 years of narrative in an inevitably insufficient lecture. Despite having a strong narrative Warframe is gameplay first, I don't think narrative question marks will ruin the gameplay.
Embrace the skip as an in medias res.
Let the new player come in, be confused by wally, see lots of new shiny and explosions, and once they've had their fill of the new content start working their way through the old, see how we got from an ugly old guy with a gold key to eldritch horrors. Once they play through up to the new content the two "paths" will merge. I think it is imperative that a person who skips looses nothing. There is a massive FOMO wall to "skip this and never get the experience ever again" that will lead to people not skipping that might enjoy the game more if they could have the communal experience. This type of mechanic has the potential to bring the community together for content drops in a way we've never seen. There are many, many, many "lost" players who don't return because the know they have a bunch of stuff to do, I think the game would be better if those players could be brought into new content despite them "skipping" some stuff.
-
23 minutes ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:
Come back to WHAT?! the gameplay that THEY KNOW will and HAS made players quit? AFTER spending money? Money that they can't refund due to how Plat Purchases work.
Don't kid yourselves, if DE gave a S#&$ about the 'wall' between starting players wanting to play the new shiny thing that makes players quit, they'd actually try to fix the wall with proper stairs and railing so that the new players can actually do it comfortably and get to the new Content before they quit.
Instead they're just giving you a lift to see the shiny thing and then shoving those new players back down the wall that makes Players quit. What you're gonna tell me that if a player quits near Venus because of the contents of Venus, seeing the new Whispers of the Wall is going to make them not hate the content wall that is Venus?
The new player experience is not nearly as bad as it is made out to be (in the ways it is being criticized). I've seen a lot of complaints about how the star chart is bloated with way too many nodes and that it takes forever to get through. I'm not sure what star chart yall are looking at, but most every planet is less than 8 nodes from one side to the other. Other than that, we have these apparent obscene grind requirements that are.... what exactly? A Venus content wall? I'm... um... what? What is on Venus that is a wall? Necramechs were absolutely a problem, but as of Dagath that is basically a non-issue. I don't think the new player experience is in a good place, but at this point I think the bloat is mostly fine, if anything it is the holes in tutorialization and world building that are hurting it. It needs more content, not less.
This whole "why would anyone play that" has a very similar vibe to the all too common "I don't actually want to play the game to get the rewards" (then complain about not having anything to play) comment cycle.
And my suggestion is largely tied to this not being a paid option, but I did fail to mention that. In my opinion, having an easily accessible and free "skip to new" option for everybody would indirectly make far more plat than any skip ever would.
Also, you conveniently forgot to address the issue at hand. You're up in arms about the new player experience, that's fair, I'm with you in spirit, but I do find it kinda funny that you ignore the first 3/4 of my post. You could at least hand-wave it away with "that's not a real problem, people wouldn't care to play 20-30 hours of a new player experience if it was good," but nah... we can't have on-topic discussion here.
-
1
-
-
58 minutes ago, (PSN)rexis12 said:
As far as I am concerned this whole debacle is just this
So you haven't payed attention to the whole debacle or tried to understand any other perspectives.
Got it.
I'm getting tired of repeating this, but the issue DE raises ISNT'T FIXED BY A PERFECT NEW PLAYER EXPERIENCE. The issue this is trying to address is that any content wall, no matter the quality, while discourage some players from ever playing. Even if there were no "filler" content between quests that is dozens of hours. When a new update drops people want to play that content with with their friends right away. Dozens of hours could be multiple weeks for some people.
It is also completely dismissing that there isn't a single correct way to enjoy the game. Having an actual progression curve is, for me, an integral part to the game's experience. Being rail-roaded through quest back-to-back would be terrible... for me. Everyone isn't me.
DE have been putting in the work with every major update since New War to smooth out the new player path, to insinuate that DE is doing nothing when a significant part of Abyss of Dagath's patch notes were dedicated to new player experience is downright ignorant. It isn't there yet, there are issues, but what I find interesting is that a way to make the experience better would actually be to lengthen it in some places. A more thorough tutorial, more world-building, that would take even more time.
A pure skip that effectively deletes skipped content is, in my opinion, still a pretty bad idea. But having a way for new or even returning players to engage with new content when it is new is not a bad idea. There are plenty of potential issues, but the "lol, just make NPW better" takes just make yall look not smart.
-
3
-
-
8 minutes ago, Voltage said:
I would love to be proven wrong on my gut feelings, but this just feels like an avenue to cheapen progression to make sure the Warframe Mobile launch has heavy revenue streams on the day it matters most: launch. Regal Aya, "Story Packs", Update Supporter Packs, Heirloom Collections, on top of the normally time-gated content and Prime Access is becoming a bit much.
It is absolutely partially due to Mobile launch. They are going to have a ton of new players see an ad for new content and... content wall. With good intention (I believe) DE are looking at a massive wave of new players and trying to think of a way to get around a problem they perceive to be significant. I know I get a bit white-knight-y about some of DE's recent controversial decisions, in my mind everything makes sense from a good faith perspective, but that doesn't mean I think that this is an all-around good idea.
I think if poorly done this could kill the game for a whole generation of players. Mobile players are more willing to shell out money, but they still are in it to have fun. I think the potentials of the skip creating a bad image or it making for an even worse new player experience are far bigger issues than a slippery slope. Assuming the demographic of these Forums, I don't think anyone here would use a skip. Same goes for DE, game devs aren't likely to be the crowd to skip playing a game. Trying to empathize with the desires and predict the responses of people we fundamentally don't get is hard.
-
4
-
-
12 minutes ago, Jabett said:
"Hey I am going to play this game that is narrative driven, but I am going to pay money to skip the narrative." Aside from this, it is a gateway into more malicious monetisation. DE may not do it on purpose, but they can and have missed the mark on multiple occasions. This is not something to just allow lightly.
As someone very invested in Warframe's narrative, I would never call it a narrative driven game. Come on, we spend maybe 1% of our time doing things that affect the narrative. Furthermore, some players really don't care. It hurts any time I talk to them, I personally don't get it, but there are definitely people here just to make big number and turn Grineer into goo. Warframe is a fantastic game for such people, I don't think we should gate-keep them because we think the story is good.
And I am also wary of slippery slope arguments. A slippery slope isn't actually saying anything is wrong with what is proposed, but rather that it will get worse. I'm not sure how you could listen to Reb's explanation and think "ah yes, this is a slope to bad monetization." There are very real concerns with a skip, things that I think could be destructive to the game. When discussing an issue I think we should be discussing the issue at hand, not the phantom issue in the future.
Edit: I have a bit of extra bias that I think I need to get out. I really, really want DE to expand on the early game story. I want them to go back and do a proper retelling of the events from Sling Stone to the Mutalist Strain. This... this would be a terrible idea right now, adding potentially another 50 hours to the new player path will only exacerbate the issues Reb raised. A temporary skip to new content, then giving players the option to go back and play through the new player experience, is a best of both worlds for me.
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, (XBOX)Architect Prime said:
The twisting of what I said and trying to over analyze it into a drama-posting oblivion that goes on for 30 pages is not my interest. I'm here to give constructive feedback that's on-topic. I will not respond to further to bait. However, I'm happy to talk about the actual subject-matter.
Okay, so rather than talk about how you think the new experience should be better as that is off topic, why do you think of DE's assertion that there are new players that will never play the game no matter how good the experience is? The issue DE is attempting to resolve is the perceived negative results of new players not being able to play the advertised content that their friends are playing. Rather than play a hundred hours of other stuff they choose to not bother. To rectify this they are looking to allow new players to immediately play new content (the method by which this happens is tbd).
Do you think this is not a proper interpretation of new players? Is the proposed "skip" solution full of too many negative repercussions? Maybe another angle on it I'm missing as I am biased (a bit) in favor of a "skip" option?
7 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:I dunno about the rest of you, but I don't want to play old content period. It has nothing to do with new content existing. There is nothing for me on Earth or Mars.
I agree that "just keep squishing" is a terrible idea. That's why I'm wary of a skip. A skip is the ultimate squish: it squishes the experience to zero. Instead, I think a reasonable squish down to a reasonable number of hours, with a more engaging and interesting experience throughout, that can be enjoyed by new players and their veteran friends tagging along to play with them, while also preparing these new players for the content they're rapidly approaching, would be much more effective.
This is why I proposed a split progression approach. Let a new player jump to new content with the Duviri weapon/gear rental system. Then have the "real" progression path stay open as a thing they can and must eventually go back to. Once the two paths meet they merge. I am pretty strongly against deleting 10 years of story, I think this preserves the new player experience while also giving a potential hook into that experience. Whispers of the Wall may be overwhelming for a new player, but it might also be the catalyst to get them invested into seeing how they got there.
-
Just now, PublikDomain said:
-snip-
DE has been and seem to plan on continuing to improve the experience. The reason they want to give an option is, as I've said, to get players to the new content. Reb said in the official WF Discord that they are going so far as to add new quests between Vor's Prize and TSD.
Veteran players don't want to play old content when new content is out. Twisting that into a negative is a bit of a stretch.
I also think the "just keep squishing" is a terrible idea. You can't squish forever, the reason TSD is so good is because you played the game for hours before it. The power progression feels good because of the time frame it takes place over. The story needs breathing room, I was worried that DE would continue to squish everything together until it was an unintelligible mess. The proposal of a skip and adding more content has me far more excited for the new player experience than making it only 10 hours. Lean into the new player experience, make it a good experience, but give an option for those that dgaf.
Also this is my hot take on how to go about this...
28 minutes ago, DrBorris said:I think the concern "it looks bad to offer a new player to skip your story" is a pretty big one. Regardless of intention, it looks bad. I don't know if it is possible but I think avoiding a monetary cost would be best.
As for implementation, I think it would be more interesting to approach it as an "in medias res" as opposed to a skip. Utilize the Duviri 'rental' gear mechanics, let them play with decent gear and grind some of their own new stuff. But then leave the original progression path completely intact. Then allow for that player to swap between their "new content" and "personal progress" paths at will, two separate silos of progression. Have any new content acquired in the 'personal' path feed into the 'new' path, then whenever the 'personal' path meets the 'new' path the silos merge into each other.
So basically make it like Duviri...
I could imagine this actually acting as something that gets some players more interested in the story. Vor's Prize doesn't grab everyone, but imagine starting with Whispers. I could very much imagine someone going "how did we get here? I gotta see how we got here."
Attempting to summarize the story into a digestible time frame will ruin the story. Yall at DE are great, but that is an actually impossible task. Don't try to summarize it, put it off to the side and leave it for later. Those summaries as a reminder would still be awesome though.
3 minutes ago, (XBOX)Architect Prime said:I didn't come to any conclusions. I'm just explaining why I don't like story skip, and how it plays into my wider concerns. I'm giving productive feedback and I even offered a solution to the problem. I think you're jumping to an overdramatic interpretation of things. I honestly have more faith in DE than most studios.
... you started your explanation with "DE has been getting more greedy," then focus on the monetary aspect as if that is the primary motivation. I obviously don't know what you're thinking, but if that isn't the impression you intended to give then you should've probably led with something else.
-
1
-
-
I think the concern "it looks bad to offer a new player to skip your story" is a pretty big one. Regardless of intention, it looks bad. I don't know if it is possible but I think avoiding a monetary cost would be best.
As for implementation, I think it would be more interesting to approach it as an "in medias res" as opposed to a skip. Utilize the Duviri 'rental' gear mechanics, let them play with decent gear and grind some of their own new stuff. But then leave the original progression path completely intact. Then allow for that player to swap between their "new content" and "personal progress" paths at will, two separate silos of progression. Have any new content acquired in the 'personal' path feed into the 'new' path, then whenever the 'personal' path meets the 'new' path the silos merge into each other.
So basically make it like Duviri...
I could imagine this actually acting as something that gets some players more interested in the story. Vor's Prize doesn't grab everyone, but imagine starting with Whispers. I could very much imagine someone going "how did we get here? I gotta see how we got here."
Attempting to summarize the story into a digestible time frame will ruin the story. Yall at DE are great, but that is an actually impossible task. Don't try to summarize it, put it off to the side and leave it for later. Those summaries as a reminder would still be awesome though.
Edit: I see the "this will remove player's attachment for the game" take popping up a lot. If this does turn into a traditional story skip, I'm inclined to agree. But I think the "two progression paths" approach gets around that by not actually skipping anything, instead using new story content as a springboard for the old content.
Edit2: Another advantage of this approach is that it would allow you to expand the new player experience without worry. It would suck to make a new quest knowing some players would never see it. In the context of the current paradigm, adding new quests won't be hurdles to new content, they are just new content. I would love to eventually see a retelling of the events from Sling Stone to Alad's Mutalist strain, that couldn't happen now as it would likely be another 20-50 hours for a new player to get through.
Edit3: (I apparently have a lot of thoughts) Plat is part of this equation, my good-faith interpretation is that it exists as a barrier to dissuade everyone from skipping the story. I think it is a bad idea for quite a few reasons, but if money is the question I think "two progression path" solution is also a bit of an answer. Much like with how I expect yall are expecting a resurgence of players with cross-save, this could do the exact same thing for "lost" players. People who haven't played in years and are daunted by the mountain of content, a free "hey, come play this new stuff" could bring them back where a paid one will likely get an "lol" as a response.
And for new players, I'd go the Duviri(ish) route. Vor's Prize is the tutorial, it's establishment of the world has turned out to be quite important. But once you're done with that have it flash up that old new player screen when Duviri was a start option, the options being "continue," "paradox," and "skip". Embrace this "skip" not as a skip, but a jump-in point for the game. Have anyone at any point be able to take the jump to new content, make any new release be a celebration for everyone and not just those that are caught up.
Edit4: I think this solution would also alleviate the FOMO of a skip as well. While some players don't care about the new player experience or story at all, that isn't everyone. There is likely a group of people who want to play the new stuff now but don't want to "ruin" the game for themselves. Those players will likely not do the skip even though that may be the 'right' choice for them in the moment. The split path takes away the risk from skipping as you don't lose access to the proper new player experience. Again, I think the advantage of having a universally available and free skip would serve to strengthen the community during major content drops. There is potential for this to not just be a solution to a problem, but be an all-around improvement for the game for everyone.
Edit5: (I'm not done yet) I believe that the Duviri loaner weapon mechanic would also be extremely beneficial to a new player who finds themselves in the later stages of the game. Warframe is a very, very complicated game. Even just combat, which is generally tutorialized fairly well, can be overwhelming to new players. I think removing mod customization from the list of worries for a new player would be helpful if they are simultaneously being thrown into the deep end of gameplay. And as a springboard, getting accustomed to the power curve modding provides may end up guiding them to get into build-craft whenever they go back and do the proper new player experience.
-
9
-
-
1 minute ago, PublikDomain said:
It reminds me of the Josh Strife Hayes thing from a while back. If "it gets better after 10 hours" then it doesn't sound like those first 10 hours are any good. Maybe they should just be made good?
That isn't the purpose of a skip, or at the very least it isn't DE's purpose. DE have been and still are working to make that experience better, but they are also aware of the reality of any content being a wall players will bounce off of. Even if the experience up to Whispers is perfect, some people will see "you have to play 100 hours" and leave without any other questions.
That is the point of the skip. Bringing in other points like "just make the experience better" are missing the point.
-
2
-
-
8 minutes ago, Zimzala said:
I get that your opinion is that being able to get current with the story progression through Plat would make teh game worse.
But how, exactly, does it make teh game worse? Many, many people who play games of this nature skip story content as much as they can already, they are only interested in killing pixels. The game would remain for those that want to play it.
As for "real concerns" on how to do it right? Those are DEs to solve, to be blunt.
I didn't say I think it makes the game worse, I'm looking at the potential cons. And I do think it is a very real potential.
Also you don't need to project your "nothing matters these forums are a joke" thing onto everyone. We like talking about things. I know nothing matters but I enjoy engaging with conversation as if they do.
-
11 minutes ago, Zimzala said:
I have yet to see an argument here as to how doing this negatively impacts any current players, beyond making some players with low emotional maturity angry because some other person got a thing in a way they don't like.
I think the (valid) concern is that it makes Warframe a worse game. Without the context of past story content, without having to engage with the new-player progression, the game is worse and people who skip will bounce off.
Being upset that the developers are making the game worse is fair. We all want the game to succeed so the game we like continues. Don't focus on the people using bad arguments, there are some real concerns that need to be considered when trying to make a good skip.
-
6
-
-
15 minutes ago, (XBOX)Architect Prime said:
It's the continued destruction of merit and a slippery slide to $$$-for-everything.
Coming to this conclusion after hearing the very real concerns DE has with it shows me you are entirely unwilling to approach this conversation in good faith.
I feel kinda bad singling you out as most of the people here are doing the same thing. But the opinion "this is obviously wrong" is an actually stupid opinion. It isn't obvious, there are real issues with the way content is added to the game and how new players WILL bounce off if there is ANY wall. Dismissing that as "obviously" irrelevant means you are not willing to actually consider any other opinions.
I know this will also be taken in bad faith, but to try to clarify I'm not saying being against the skip is dumb. I'm not, I can think of may reasons as to why it is bad. I'm still coming to a conclusion myself.
-
6
-
-
It is fascinating how your assumptions about a person/company can affect your perception of their actions.
-
1
-
-
The journey is the destination. If you don't find enjoyment in finding new builds than just stop playing. Warframe is great in that it lets you take a break without punishing you if all you care about is new content.
There are thousands of viable solutions to complete the "endgame" tier of content in SP. The journey of discovery and the mini-progression of creating a new build is the evergame, Also yes... many, many, many builds are viable in SP. Between armor stripping, slash, and status priming, there are countless combinations of items to make unique gameplay in SP. Build choices matter in SP and that is what makes it so good.
Not everyone needs a "reason" to enjoy something. Some people just... do. I am fortunate enough to be one of those people so I am able to play the game for hundreds of hours without a good excuse. Trying to make endless carrots in Warframe could only come at the cost of other systems, I recommend playing Warframe only for what you enjoy out of it instead of asking it to perfectly conform to what you want. If you only enjoy the chase of power and new content, then only play Warframe for those things. As I said before Warframe is a fantastic game for such a desire, it is extremely respectful to your investment and it is always easy to hop back in (unless there are year+ gaps).
-
14 hours ago, owendawgx said:
Currently Grendel feels like nothing but a slightly awkward weapons platform that occassionally interacts with his eating.
Doesn't having a lower cap mean he has to eat more, not less? To make use of Grendel you have to constantly be eating. If you had the option to eat a whole room of enemies, would that not then allow you to ignore the mechanic more?
I feel like I'm not going more than 8 seconds without eating something as Grendel, Nourish's duration isn't that long and the damage/armor strip of Regurgitate is too good to not be using constantly. If I could stack up on enemies it would allow me to increase that time, not shorten it.
-
2
-
-
It is a self fulfilling meme. I think even the biggest Caliban stans can agree he is pretty mid. So when someone comes up and says "lol, this frame is trash," responding with "he's not that bad, he has xyz," all the first person hears is "he's
not thatbad." Then the cycle continues and spreads. This is despite many, many frames not having a 'use' when using the criteria "does another frame do it better".Personally I like him quite a bit. His 4 is simple, but the gameplay loop it creates is actually pretty unique despite being so simple. Having to pick your engagement areas before you get to them is just enough of a variation of the core gameplay to feel unique but is also close enough to the core gameplay that you can let auto-pilot take the reigns a bit. Then between the CC of his 2, the shield regen of his buddies, and the little bit of aggro your buddies pull, he can survive well enough to execute in that combat space.
Caliban is my comfort food Warframe, when I want something simple but don't want to be a basic weapon platform. It is frustrating seeing people hate on Caliban, it is also frustrating to see rework concepts ignore the unique parts of his gameplay and go all in on being a summoner (the anti-gameplay archetype).
Don't get me wrong, I'd love some tweaks or a rework, his 1 especially is fundamentally a terrible idea for an ability, but understanding Caliban takes an ounce of nuance that most won't give to something they consider a meme.
-
This is nice theory and all, but it does not seem to represent the reality of the Forum's direction.
I've been here a few years, seen the tides slowly (and sometimes not slowly) change. There have been ups and downs, but generally I would say that the amount of critical thinking is lower, specifically negative assumptions are more common, people are less likely to process another's ideas, and the general "hive mind" has gotten stronger. At this exact moment, the Forums aren't at their lowest state. A few months back was a bit worse imo, but even threads like this that assume negativity is censored in an era when the Forums are more negative than ever are still running amuck.
This isn't the first time I've posted this example, sorry for being a broken record to who have seen it before, but I present to you...
Yes... that says 2013. Holy fudging butts I've been here for (almost) ten years now. But more importantly, look at that glorious discussion. While the use of writing a "complete" rework like this is questionable in its use to DE (arm-chair Dev'ing isn't good), it shows an extreme degree of effort and intention. Then it gets 49 pages of responses, many of which negative criticisms, that are most often well reasoned and explained. It is glorious, and I (naively) still try to hold my posts up to that standard (along with a few other folks around here).
Speaking of high effort, good-faith negative feedback...
This topic by Voltage a few months ago is basically this thread... but high effort (and a bit less pop psychology). There was some good discussion there, fairly strong points on the different sides, and in generally I think a good conversation all around. And look.... no censorship...
I can't think if a time when I saw properly written, good-faith negative feedback be "censored" just because it was negative. And as an extra hot-take, bad-faith negative feedback belongs only in the dumpster because it is useless (and potentially destructive) to everyone involved. Any time I see someone say "I was censored" the red flag is up. I have seen negative feedback be stifled through thread merging, but that is (in my opinion) a necessary evil and the mods (generally) have a good balance of allowing different threads to last for a few days (to allow proper discussion) before the merging. Oh, and sometimes originally good feedback gets derailed into useless dev basing, that sometimes censors criticism as well, but that's another lesser evil situation. I think there are some people here who have been around for as long as I have, they may have different opinions, but in my experience a little respect for the human beings that are trying their best to make a good game goes a long way when telling them that their design is bad.
This feels a bit off topic from "give me reactions," but some of the assumptions present were not fair in my opinion. So more on point, reactions aren't discussion. More importantly, reactions don't bump threads. A hundred dislikes and no comments means a topic is going to be seen by no one. This is part of why I believe negativity is a bit more common, people are more likely to comment negatively and bump a thread than they are to comment positively as they have an option to hit "like." Shorter, more poorly written threads are more likely to get bombarded with comments.
TL;DR: Only having positive reactions makes the Forums more negative.
-
2
-
DEs problem with everything needing to be *new* and always forgetting the old
in General Discussion
Posted · Edited by DrBorris
I can't imagine how frustrating it is for DE to dedicate the majority of an update to going back and fixing things only for people to continue making posts and comments like this.
Is everything fixed? God no, of course not. Is the thing you personally think is the most important thing fixed? Probably not. But those are ridiculous expectations. The goal-post shuffling that is happening to maintain the "Oh DE, you're so predictable" narrative is either ignorant or disingenuous.
And this isn't to say you can't criticize the things that are still broken, but I believe that you need to acknowledge DE's efforts when giving that criticism. If you don't think their efforts are enough, that's cool too, but you gotta acknowledge the current amount of effort in order to quantity "enough."