Devstream :135 Overview [Late]

[Loza03]

Just now, SordidDreams said:

I'm aware of it but I also don't believe in it. Especially when it's used in defense of a free-to-play, pay-to-skip game built around grind that is deliberately designed to be unfun in order to squeeze microtransaction money out of players. In other words, the real reason why Amesha is getting nerfed is because the devs wanted to sell more plat to people wanting to buy repar drones in order to upgrade their ships, and being able to clear the railjack star chart in archwing with an unupgraded ship is undermining that. Don't let yourself be fooled for one second that the goal is to make the game more fun. It's to make it more tedious and sell more tedium-skipping microtransactions.

https://www.designer-notes.com/?p=369

Saying 'I don't believe the people who's job it is to think about this stuff' is pretty much one foot in the same conspiracy theory boat as Anti-Vaxxers.

Regardless, money is likely a part of it, but even then, a part of that is that the Devs make money from people sticking around with a game, and fun is among the myriad reasons people stay with a game. Not the only one, but it helps.

[SordidDreams]

Just now, Loza03 said:

https://www.designer-notes.com/?p=369

Saying 'I don't believe the people who's job it is to think about this stuff' is pretty much one foot in the same conspiracy theory boat as Anti-Vaxxers.

Regardless, money is likely a part of it, but even then, a part of that is that the Devs make money from people sticking around with a game, and fun is among the myriad reasons people stay with a game. Not the only one, but it helps.

I'd be able to take that point a lot more seriously if it didn't come from someone who claimed in their previous post that fun is all subjective. You'll need to pick a position and stick to it.

That's the paradox, though, isn't it. The devs don't make money from people sticking with the game, they make money from people getting done with the game quicker. That's what rushing is. Every time you spend plat on buying items from the market or rushing their construction, the devs are making money from you shortening the time you'll spend with the game. And yet if you do get done with it, they won't make any more from you. It's almost as if the f2p, pay-to-skip business model is fundamentally flawed and exerting a detrimental influence on the design of the games that use it.

[TARINunit9]

1 hour ago, (XB1)GearsMatrix301 said:

She’s not a vampire.

Revenant and Garuda were two versions of the idea "vampire frame". Revenant takes Dracula's hypnotic magic and fog-based shapeshifting, Garuda takes Vlad III's famous imaplement-based warfare and Dracula's aversion to mirrors

[Paradoxity]

Just now, TARINunit9 said:

Revenant and Garuda were two versions of the idea "vampire frame". Revenant takes Dracula's hypnotic magic and fog-based shapeshifting, Garuda takes Vlad III's famous imaplement-based warfare and Dracula's aversion to mirrors

I always got more of a specter/ghost feel from Revenant, TBH. 

[Loza03]

2 minutes ago, SordidDreams said:

I'd be able to take that point a lot more seriously if it didn't come from someone who claimed in their previous post that fun is all subjective. You'll need to pick a position and stick to it.

That's the paradox, though, isn't it. The devs don't make money from people sticking with the game, they make money from people getting done with the game quicker. That's what rushing is. Every time you spend plat on buying items from the market or rushing their construction, the devs are making money from you shortening the time you'll spend with the game. And yet if you do get done with it, they won't make any more from you. It's almost as if the f2p, pay-to-skip business model is fundamentally flawed and exerting a detrimental influence on the design of the games that use it.

Give me a monetisation model that won't cause a detrimental influence on the game. Even full retail provides a one-and-done payment that was set decades ago and hasn't accounted for inflation, let alone rising production costs. 

[TARINunit9]

Just now, Paradoxity said:

I always got more of a specter/ghost feel from Revenant, TBH. 

You're not wrong. In addition to Dracula (he was nicknamed "Vlad" before release), Revenant is a mashup of old European folklore:

"Revenants" were zombies, but lucid, and hell-bent on revenge

He's also a ghoul. Ghouls were ravenous corpses, but you could stop them from ever rising in the first place by driving a stake into their heart with a grave digger's spade. This would later become a standard vampire weakness

He's also based on Will o Wisps, haunting light spirits that lure you into the swamp.

His signature weapon the Phantasma is short for "Phantasmagoria", a genre of theater where the bad guy is usually evil spirits from European folklore

His ultimate is based off Danse Macabre, a popular genre of paintings in 1400's Europe. Once again, about spirits, but this time usually just the recently deceased ready to ascend to heaven

[SordidDreams]

3 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

Give me a monetisation model that won't cause a detrimental influence on the game. Even full retail provides a one-and-done payment that was set decades ago and hasn't accounted for inflation, let alone rising production costs. 

Yeah, that one. Inflation and rising production costs seem to be balanced out nicely by increased sales, and companies that stick to that model don't seem to be doing badly. It has everything you want; you're paying to play, so the incentive is to make the game fun to entice you to pay; but you only pay once, so there is no incentive to drag things out unneccessarily to keep you paying (as the subscription-based model tends to).

Another good option is f2p monetized through cosmetics only. Path of Exile is almost a pure example of that. I wish WF went that way.

[Paradoxity]

1 minute ago, TARINunit9 said:

You're not wrong. In addition to Dracula (he was nicknamed "Vlad" before release), Revenant is a mashup of old European folklore:

"Revenants" were zombies, but lucid, and hell-bent on revenge

He's also a ghoul. Ghouls were ravenous corpses, but you could stop them from ever rising in the first place by driving a stake into their heart with a grave digger's spade. This would later become a standard vampire weakness

He's also based on Will o Wisps, haunting light spirits that lure you into the swamp.

His signature weapon the Phantasma is short for "Phantasmagoria", a genre of theater where the bad guy is usually evil spirits from European folklore

His ultimate is based off Danse Macabre, a popular genre of paintings in 1400's Europe. Once again, about spirits, but this time usually just the recently deceased ready to ascend to heaven

Honestly, it's Danse Macabre that got me thinking that way about him. It's a phrasing I've usually only otherwise encountered in supernatural works dealing with ghosts and spirits. 

[Aldain]

That Ash Deluxe skin is going full Ash-sassin's Creed (no I am NOT sorry for that forced pun).

[(XBOX)GearsMatrix301]

42 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

Do most Blood Mages consume blood to grow stronger/heal? Pro tip, if they do, then they're probably considered a Vampire.

 That’s true, except Garuda doesn’t consume blood. Does she technically absorb blood/life energy with her 2? Yes, but then technically so does every frame getting the benefit from her 2. And she doesn’t directly drink the blood.

[Paradoxity]

4 minutes ago, Aldain said:

That Ash Deluxe skin is going full Ash-sassin's Creed (no I am NOT sorry for that forced pun).

You're fired. Turn in your badge and your gun. 

[Loza03]

Just now, SordidDreams said:

Yeah, that one. Inflation and rising production costs seem to be balanced out nicely by increased sales, and companies that stick to that model don't seem to be doing badly. It has everything you want; you're paying to play, so the incentive is to make the game fun to entice you to pay; but you only pay once, so there is no incentive to drag things out unneccessarily to keep you paying (as the subscription-based model tends to).

Another good option is f2p monetized through cosmetics only. Path of Exile is almost a pure example of that. I wish WF went that way.

Yeah, sorry, but the companies that stick to that model are also pumping their games full of microtransactions (usually not just cosmetic ones either) or are compromising their game design to match. Or both. See also, Fallout 76. Even if it doesn't look like it on the outside, I guarantee you 100% that there's a ton of content on the cutting room floor they didn't have the budget to make. Even some of the 'greatest' games of all time - Super Mario Galaxy 2 is basically an entire game made out of stuff they didn't have the budget/deadline to put in the first game. And that's with ten years less inflation, and from Nintendo in the Wii era.

As for Path of Exile, I'm afraid that game is also almost certainly cheaper to develop for, because a lot of its items are non-visual, and its camera angle gives it far more liberties with it's graphical design, which is easily one of the  most expensive parts of game design. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if a large part of it's budget was spent on those very cosmetics, which will absolutely have a knock-on effect to the rest of the game. Of course, I don't have the exact financial information, but from what I've heard over time from this side of the industry, that would make sense to me.

[White_Matter]

Ash deluxe looks like an egytian zombie.

I love it, but why is still in Dev ? It's been like a year or something.

[IceColdHawk]

3 hours ago, (XB1)EternalDrk Mako said:

(sorry for the late post, year end work issues) 

 

What you apologizing for? Official overview isn't even up yet but yours is. Cheers 👊

[SordidDreams]

6 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

Yeah, sorry, but the companies that stick to that model are also pumping their games full of microtransactions (usually not just cosmetic ones either) or are compromising their game design to match. Or both. See also, Fallout 76. Even if it doesn't look like it on the outside, I guarantee you 100% that there's a ton of content on the cutting room floor they didn't have the budget to make. Even some of the 'greatest' games of all time - Super Mario Galaxy 2 is basically an entire game made out of stuff they didn't have the budget/deadline to put in the first game. And that's with ten years less inflation, and from Nintendo in the Wii era.

As for Path of Exile, I'm afraid that game is also almost certainly cheaper to develop for, because a lot of its items are non-visual, and its camera angle gives it far more liberties with it's graphical design, which is easily one of the  most expensive parts of game design. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if a large part of it's budget was spent on those very cosmetics, which will absolutely have a knock-on effect to the rest of the game. Of course, I don't have the exact financial information, but from what I've heard over time from this side of the industry, that would make sense to me.

No, only the greedy ones. Look at CD Projekt Red and their games, proving that it's 100% possible to make great games without doing any of that stuff. As for tons of stuff being left on the cutting room floor, yeah, of course it is. That's true of any creative project in any art form, commercial or not, and not relevant to anything discussed here.

All I can say in response to that is: Lol, no.

[Aldain]

13 minutes ago, Paradoxity said:

You're fired. Turn in your badge and your gun. 

Turn them into what?

[Loza03]

1 minute ago, SordidDreams said:

No, only the greedy ones. Look at CD Projekt Red and their games, proving that it's 100% possible to make great games without doing any of that stuff. As for tons of stuff being left on the cutting room floor, yeah, of course it is. That's true of any creative project in any art form, commercial or not, and not relevant to anything discussed here.

All I can say in response to that is: Lol, no.

I'd like to point out that the Witcher 3 used one of the profitable cash-cow tropes of the time of its release, an open world like Skyrim. If you think that was 100% because CD Projekt Red felt it was the right thing to do and not because some financial manager said 'Hey, this is profitable, make it like this'... well, sorry, but probably not.

And, yes, it is relevant, because the cutting room floor isn't just for artistic reasons either. A lot of it is cut assets. Ratchet and Clank 3 is a great example. A game many people consider one of the best in its series, and yet it has entire mechanics half-implemented before being cut because of deadlines. Deadlines being caused by the fact that full-retail games almost always require a publisher.

[Paradoxity]

24 minutes ago, Aldain said:

Turn them into what?

Endo. 

[(PSN)CrazyBeaTzu]

2 hours ago, Toppien said:

meh whatever, i already have jelly-bride prime but im just saying that many people dont like that ivara deluxe

And many people do, so I guess it doesn't matter.

[(PSN)The1stAzrael]

1 hour ago, Loza03 said:

She seems to have the Akarius, so they might be reusing assets to make the animations before building the Frame's model.

Could be the case. Although, what's the point of showing off the animation set, without even some concept art, to give you a better feel of the character?

That animation set would look good on Mirage, though.

[(PSN)Silverback73]

2 hours ago, alukard18 said:

i love to see garuda deluxe skin something like this

As soon as Operators get weapons you’ll be able to copy this look.  You can get pretty close NOW with an Amp.

Edited December 21, 2019 by (PS4)Silverback73

[SordidDreams]

29 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

I'd like to point out that the Witcher 3 used one of the profitable cash-cow tropes of the time of its release, an open world like Skyrim. If you think that was 100% because CD Projekt Red felt it was the right thing to do and not because some financial manager said 'Hey, this is profitable, make it like this'... well, sorry, but probably not.

And, yes, it is relevant, because the cutting room floor isn't just for artistic reasons either. A lot of it is cut assets. Ratchet and Clank 3 is a great example. A game many people consider one of the best in its series, and yet it has entire mechanics half-implemented before being cut because of deadlines. Deadlines being caused by the fact that full-retail games almost always require a publisher.

Do you realize that open-world games have been popular for like a decade before Skyrim? And do you realize that the Witches series shows a clear tendency toward openness, increasing with each installment? To think that W3 was open-world to cash in on a fad would be incredibly naive and ignorant.

No, it's not relevant for the reasons I've already explained and will now re-iterate. All creative projects, even non-commercial ones, cut stuff. For all kinds of reasons. Some creative, some financial. It has nothing to do with business models and their effects on game design.

[(PSN)Lei-Lei_23]

Hilarious that Amesha is planned for a nerf on a broken game mode. Buffing the other AWs is the right move, but nerfing the one that actually has some functionality in Railjack? And they’re using usage statistics?

Fix what’s broken. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it please.

[Loza03]

2 minutes ago, SordidDreams said:

Do you realize that open-world games have been popular for like a decade before Skyrim? And do you realize that the Witches series shows a clear tendency toward openness, increasing with each installment? To think that W3 was open-world to cash in on a fad would be incredibly naive and ignorant.

No, it's not relevant for the reasons I've already explained and will now re-iterate. All creative projects, even non-commercial ones, cut stuff. For all kinds of reasons. Some creative, some financial. It has nothing to do with business models and their effects on game design.

If it's for a financial reason, you can bet it's compromising on design. That's just reality.

And yeah, I'm well aware. Doesn't change the fact that around the time of the Witcher 3's release, open worlds were the big cash cow. Best case scenario, it was fortuitous for the dev team that they didn't have to deviate too much from their vision. Also, don't forget that the Witcher 3 also had paid DLC's, which also are usually monetisation driven.

At the end of the day, the Witcher is only one game, made by one of the biggest companies around. There are exceptions to every rule - the vast majority of retail-price games are either made purely for the publisher or have significant cuts for the sake of profit margins. If it was a perfect system, then the other systems wouldn't have developed in the first place.

Simply put, the idea that Warframe's monetisation scheme is somehow unique in how it compromises the game design is just wrong. Warframe has to make compromises for it's monetisation scheme. Almost every game does.

[(PSN)CommanderC2121]

2 hours ago, Paradoxity said:

Oh? do tell, then, what's her archetype? Cos when DE says "Hey here's a frame with an overwhelming focus on blood and the life-energy of her targets" I'm fairly certain they're all about the vampire angle. Hell, even the name- Garuda- is from South east asian mythology of a birdman that eats men. 

Shes a Hemo-mancer. Like Vladimir from League of Legends