Jump to content

Why we cant have endgame content


Recommended Posts

Just now, Aseraan said:

What you described here is not interesting  its just literally "overwhelm the player whit a bunch of high priority mob that cant be instagibed and have higher stats than the same level counterpart  anywhere else".

The high priority targets don't spawn often enough to be overwhelming, in my opinion.

And they sure can be instagibbed, they just take a little more attention to do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DE main problem: DE sells toys (Warframes, Weapons, Accessories) every three months with some features. The features (PoE, Arch Wing, Fortuna) are great for the toys but such features ends being unattended or dropped. Game environment revolves around the 'sales' or 'releases of Warframes' when the game health depends on the expansion of levels, improvement of enemies and augmentation of the parkour control tool kit utilities. 

1. Enemies needs tiers of better weapons and more menacing A.I.

2. Worlds must expand even further and restriction of the bounding boxes most be removed for exploration. Being constrained doesn't sound fun. 

3. Redesign on 3d enemy models, better weapons for enemy models and enemy types. 

4. Populate more the barren levels in Rail Jack (Arch Wing content)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2020-05-02 at 8:25 PM, Vespilan said:

We cant have endgame content because a handfull of players keep crying about how hard any new gamemode is because they haven't adapted to it yet, DE gives in and creates another grindzone.

Oh hey, another one of these. Let's perhaps start with some basic facts:

  • Railjack did not get turned into a grind zone, Railjack already was a grind zone, and in fact the grind was a lot worse before the most recent update.
  • Players adapted to the mode within days, uncovering the Sentient Anomaly within the first week, when DE expected it would take us months. Void Hole + Particle Ram very quickly emerged as the dominant meta, and the complaints about the grind in Railjack came largely from veterans who burned out on the mode, and players who were turned off by the insanely high grinding requirements before they could even get started.
  • Railjack was never a difficult game mode. It certainly gear-checked the players hard, and missions once took an incredibly long time to complete, but all of that merely made the mode tedious, not challenging. If the players had the right build, avionics, etc., there was no real risk of losing missions. The most recent update certainly did not make the mode any more difficult, but did make it less drawn-out.

So really, Railjack was never able to work as proper endgame, because like every previous attempt at endgame, it was always a grindy, unchallenging content island from the very start. As per usual, many players pointed this out, which DE eventually acted on to make the mode more tolerable, and as per usual, a much smaller contingent of wannabe hardcore players have chosen to whine about how we shouldn't be making content less unpleasant, because that's apparently what defines endgame. And so the wheel turns, and nobody learns their lesson.

Edited by Teridax68
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Aseraan said:

but what is endgame content in warframe where  high end players either cheese to the max or just flat out  nukes everything from orbit?

Stop assuming everyone plays public matches with randoms. Which high end players are you referring to....? All of them? 70%? 30%? 99%? I'm confused how you conveniently know how everyone plays the game. How about you provide some empirical evidence for your claim that apparently "everyone just nukes everything".

Organized groups of people that know how to play.....can complete content with whatever they like....and you're not going to see them....because they'll be making their own group....

Edited by (PS4)CrazyBeaTzu
Grammar.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The gamemode was grindy before and not a lot harder, just over complicated and grindy.

Now it's enjoyable. Endgame feels like a unicorn. You chase after challenge but refuse to self-nerf. As others have said if there's a meta to make a mission easier the community will find and exploit it till it gets nerfed.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

A teleport straight into an attack would be pretty cheap, that's why. We can't see behind us as well as in front of us. That's why the flameblades have the distinct purple smoke and take a second.

Yes, the argument exists of 'just don't stop moving', but we probably should be encouraging movement that's intelligent, not jumping around like a rabbit controlled by a headless chicken.

Conveyance is as important as anything else - enemies aren't designed to kill us, they're designed to entertain us by presenting interesting challenges (and then kill us if we don't adapt to that challenge). Now, if the Hyenas had some kind of 'pack' AI where they knew where the other enemies were going and circled round for flanking purposes, that'd be more interesting.

Melee's a big part of their gimmick as the 'zombie horde', so I'd hold back on ranged units overall. I'd probably give them more movement abilities so it's easier for them to get into melee range. Let the lighter units wall crawl. This A: lets more of them into a single corridor since there's now wall space as well as floor space, B: makes it harder to just jump up on top of something and snipe the melee units from out of range and   C: adds to the whole 'swarm' thing if they're flooding in over every surface they can.

Maybe also expand their spawning behaviour so they can appear from pods anywhere that infested biomass appears in tilesets - be it the big clumps or just the smaller meat-moss. Something similar to a lite version of the 'brood swarm' disruption effect. The pods give this 'flanking spawn' a wind up to limit their ability to just gank people from behind but it prevents people from just complacently focused on what's directly ahead of them or the obvious door spawn areas that other units come in from. It requires attentiveness at all times and from all angles.

An overall speed buff would also not go amiss, or maybe less wind-up on their various lunge attacks.

They could have some indicator by sound or something. The teleport would just be there to help them get close to do what they do. With a sound queue or something similar, like flashing screen indicators in their direction would be a good thing, that means you'd have time to get away or kill them. It shouldnt be some "fatal teleport" kinda thing where you are SoL the moment they get close.

And yeah infested has the melee gimmick, they are just too slow with everything to ever be a threat. Most of them need to have their speed cranked up, I also wouldnt mind if they actually have a good counter to our melee, so it isnt so easy to just mow through them. It would give them a far bigger swarm feeling if we could just wipe out most of them with a single melee strike. I cant recall the last time I actually felt any threat at all from infested. The main issue is DE tried to fix them the wrong way by increasing their damage output in scenarios where they hit you, the big problem is that they actually rarely hit you. I think the most damage I take in infested missions is from the yellow puddles left behind by the Moa's (or are those supposed to be infested ambulas?). I mean it isnt uncommon when I play Rev in infested survivals, arbies and normal, when I end after 30 minutes and have lost only 2 charges or so. Those situations really makes you notice how slow the infested are and how little of a threat they can be. And that is when playing carelessly since it is Rev and you know your skin will save you no matter what.

1 hour ago, Aseraan said:

What you described here is not interesting  its just literally "overwhelm the player whit a bunch of high priority mob that cant be instagibed and have higher stats than the same level counterpart  anywhere else".

If they get to the point where they overwhelm you they are doing their job since they interfear with the normal mindless gameplay approach of WF. Hence why they are high priority targets, you kill them when they spawn so they dont overwhelm you. That is why we need those types elsewhere, so people actually stop for a moment to kill them, which leads to more involving gameplay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You all thinking in that thread box is fun and all, but you've long gone far away from the original post.
OP issue was: difficulty made easier as we get more updates and mechanics.

This issue can already be solved in various ways just from the player perspective.
Now back to the funny part of this mess.

@Felsagger What's your conclusion to have fun with a live service game once you experienced all the main content ?
Emphasis on having fun.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Teridax68 said:

Oh hey, another one of these. Let's perhaps start with some basic facts:

  • Railjack did not get turned into a grind zone, Railjack already was a grind zone, and in fact the grind was a lot worse before the most recent update.
  • Players adapted to the mode within days, uncovering the Sentient Anomaly within the first week, when DE expected it would take us months. Void Hole + Particle Ram very quickly emerged as the dominant meta, and the complaints about the grind in Railjack came largely from either veterans who burned out on the mode, and players who were turned off by the insanely high grinding requirements before they could even get started.
  • Railjack was never a difficult game mode. It certainly gear-checked the players hard, and missions once took an incredibly long time to complete, but all of that merely made the mode tedious, not challenging. If the players had the right build, avionics, etc., there was no real risk of losing missions. The most recent update certainly did not make the mode any more difficult, but did make it less drawn-out.

So really, Railjack was never able to work as proper endgame, because like every previous attempt at endgame, it was always a grindy, unchallenging content island from the very start. As per usual, many players pointed this out, which DE eventually acted on to make the mode more tolerable, and as per usual, a much smaller contingent of wannabe hardcore players have chosen to whine about how we shouldn't be making content less unpleasant, because that's apparently what defines endgame. And so the wheel turns, and nobody learns their lesson.

Is there any intention to learn such lesson? What happens if we learn the lesson, does that change or improve the game? 

Cocaine, C17H21NOis not the only drug that creates addiction. Video games creates addiction hampering the capacity of thinking due to the state of placebo and bliss. The conception of the addiction is well conceived by many companies. War Frame is no the exception to this rule. Addicts can't reason what push them into the cycle. They can't escape their cycle and reason why they are in it. Many brain activities are compromised and even hijacked inhibiting other mental faculties such as discern and reasoning. 

The problem can give the bad impression that such community doesn't know how to project, write, develop or describe the impact of the game in their sensory system. Is not the lack of communication, the real problem is the indecision that causes these iterative loops making the player swim in circles. We have players that argues about the high difficulty of the game. These players projects their concern without comprehending the game mechanics. The other set of players misinterpret the intended purpose of the designer or game developer attributing qualities that such game mode doesn't have. The player deforms and distort reality in their written descriptions because he/she can't read the game structure, intentions and purposes. DE will never reveal their structural thinking of their patterns. That is their main business. The vision of the community is polarized making the development team draw middle point lines on their design. Such decisions are then object of critique dividing even more the community. 

Game design is a science and this science breathes on a classical market known game as a service. This is a strict GAAS game. The loop is not comprehended well and so the mechanics of it. DE is not the one to blame here. We are. We empowered DE and gave them enough power over the power creep players, the players who likes easy gains and the players who spend money because the time gates of the game doesn't match with their productive life. We yield DE this authority over us telling them how we can get marketed. They did their homework to perfection making their market sustainable. The indecision we have feeds DE because this is what they capitalize. If the game structure is well defined, with clear objectives and mechanics that are precise and exact the game will be settled to a finite life. If this happens DE will have sales once forcing them start a whole new project. However they are not big enough for the production five years roll up titles. They have only War Frame. 

The question is this: the player comprehends the content of this lesson? Let us start there. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, STUVash said:



@Felsagger What's your conclusion to have fun with a live service game once you experienced all the main content ?
Emphasis on having fun.

1. If the GAAS or live service game gets better, invest. This is the + vote. 

2. If the GAAS or live service game gets worse, invest in another game until the developer makes it better. This is the − vote. 

 

Our wallet controls the outcome. Our words on a forum worth nothing. Suggestions could guide the developer if DE listens to a community that has decisions instead of indecision and a clear consensus on what they want out of the game. 

 

Edited by Felsagger
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

They could have some indicator by sound or something. The teleport would just be there to help them get close to do what they do. With a sound queue or something similar, like flashing screen indicators in their direction would be a good thing, that means you'd have time to get away or kill them. It shouldnt be some "fatal teleport" kinda thing where you are SoL the moment they get close.

I still feel like the flanking's better, since it matches the whole 'Hyena' thing more. Pack mentality and all that. 

40 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

And yeah infested has the melee gimmick, they are just too slow with everything to ever be a threat. Most of them need to have their speed cranked up, I also wouldnt mind if they actually have a good counter to our melee, so it isnt so easy to just mow through them. It would give them a far bigger swarm feeling if we could just wipe out most of them with a single melee strike. I cant recall the last time I actually felt any threat at all from infested. The main issue is DE tried to fix them the wrong way by increasing their damage output in scenarios where they hit you, the big problem is that they actually rarely hit you. I think the most damage I take in infested missions is from the yellow puddles left behind by the Moa's (or are those supposed to be infested ambulas?). I mean it isnt uncommon when I play Rev in infested survivals, arbies and normal, when I end after 30 minutes and have lost only 2 charges or so. Those situations really makes you notice how slow the infested are and how little of a threat they can be. And that is when playing carelessly since it is Rev and you know your skin will save you no matter what.

Increasing their damage wasn't a bad thing, but I agree that getting them faster so they can use it more often is a must.

A highly lethal, but very vulnerable horde's a pretty good setup to differentiate from the other factions. Right now they're not fast enough to use it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Il y a 1 heure, Felsagger a dit :

1. If the GAAS or live service game gets better, invest. This is the + vote. 

2. If the GAAS or live service game gets worse, invest in another game until the developer makes it better. This is the − vote. 

 

Our wallet controls the outcome. Our words on a forum worth nothing. Suggestions could guide the developer if DE listens to a community that has decisions instead of indecision and a clear consensus on what they want out of the game. 

 

Wait what ? My question was how would you have fun once you explored most of the main content. It's a personal question from me to you. The rest doesn't matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm actually getting used to the Railjack fighter changes.

It's still very easy, but I'm starting to see that this might open for a less annoying time with external objectives. Currently the objectives aren't great either, but with more interesting ones, the current degree of fighter durability might work itself out. After all, Railjack energy expenditure is much more significant than for Warframes due to the requirement to get up and rebuild it, and deal with forges, so you can't spam void hole + vortex forever. Currently,  you can, because by the time you do run out the missions over, but this might change with more in-depth mission types.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, STUVash said:

Wait what ? My question was how would you have fun once you explored most of the main content. It's a personal question from me to you. The rest doesn't matter.

Well, I go for the Kurias, scan some items. Get some scenarios for 'captura' and play with the enemies. When I'm in the mood, I farm for intrinsic in my Railjack playing solo. Lately I'm turning off War Frame for some matches in Titan Fall 2 and other single player games. I'm waiting for Cyber Punk 77. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Felsagger said:

Cocaine, C17H21NOis not the only drug that creates addiction. Video games creates addiction hampering the capacity of thinking due to the state of placebo and bliss...

This entire post is quite possibly the most digressive and pedantic manner one could have employed to express the simple notion that players of a video game sometimes lack self-awareness. At the end of the day, it is DE who design this game, and who put in its addiction mechanisms in its first place, so that much is their problem, but whether that addiction extends to how people conceptualize challenge is debatable. The point being made here is not that players are somehow so addled by game addiction that they are incapable of learning anything at all, but that there is a clear track record for DE trying and failing to create "endgame" through an extremely specific content model, i.e. a content island with excessive grind and gear-checking. Despite this, both the developers and some players fail to acknowledge these past updates, and so repeat the same mistakes each time, which predictably leads to the same results. This isn't a matter of addiction, so much as a continual refusal to exercise any amount of analysis or critical thinking.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Loza03 said:

I still feel like the flanking's better, since it matches the whole 'Hyena' thing more. Pack mentality and all that. 

Increasing their damage wasn't a bad thing, but I agree that getting them faster so they can use it more often is a must.

A highly lethal, but very vulnerable horde's a pretty good setup to differentiate from the other factions. Right now they're not fast enough to use it.

I wouldnt mind the pack mentality, if it actually gets them into lethal range. Currently they just do the wonkiest stuff to the point where you can more or less ignore them. I'd say give them flanking behavior and then when they have a clear flanking path, have them launch themselves at us.

Increasing the damage for the infested was a good thing, but it wasnt the solution to start making themselves lethal. If they never hit the enemy, doubling the damage still results in zero damage being made. I'd like to see wall/ceiling crawling, high speed and pouncing as big infested mechanics. Too bad we have so many ways of getting immune to things like knockdowns and staggers, otherwise they could have made some fun synergy between different infested. You could have those that knock down or stagger us, then the guys that wait for that moment to launch their attacks through leaps, pounces and other things when we are most vulnerable.

But no matter what they give the mobs to make them more lethal, it will be pointless aslong as we can just press a button and wipe everything out within 50m through walls, floors and everything else, especially when facing melee focused factions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
il y a 50 minutes, Felsagger a dit :

Well, I go for the Kurias, scan some items. Get some scenarios for 'captura' and play with the enemies. When I'm in the mood, I farm for intrinsic in my Railjack playing solo. Lately I'm turning off War Frame for some matches in Titan Fall 2 and other single player games. I'm waiting for Cyber Punk 77. 

That's cool

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Redthirst said:

What if my endgame is "content that has you actually working and relying together with other people"? Can we have some actual co-op content this (ostensibly) co-op game?

Grab friends/clan mates get in a preset group and everyone handicap yourself to make the game harder and run stuff you enjoy.

There you go difficult "end game" content requiring teamplay.

Lets be real random pugs means no communication or cordination with folks trying to spam through at lightspeed. Pugging isn't what you are after clearly.

Now they could say allow players to choose a difficulty setting when starting a mission.  Thus letting you get a challenge as an option.  But if most folks don't choose to pug that difficulty you will probably be alone most of the time.

Edited by (PS4)Kakurine2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Teridax68 said:

This entire post is quite possibly the most digressive and pedantic manner one could have employed to express the simple notion that players of a video game sometimes lack self-awareness.

The truth hurts deeply. Enjoy. 

Quote

At the end of the day, it is DE who design this game, and who put in its addiction mechanisms in its first place, so that much is their problem, but whether that addiction extends to how people conceptualize challenge is debatable.

We should stop blaming DE. We are the ones who are guilty not them. Our lack of control, reasoning, measurement brought us here. We gave DE licence to practice their business. The problem is that we got addicted to low standards. DE found a way and we on our own decision gave them our money. I don't blame DE at all. We still have our choices but we downgraded our standards. Is War Frame a fair good game. Yes it is. We have to stop pointing fingers and begin with ourselves. 

We have to meditate what we do, what we give away and how we lie to ourselves. DE will continue their game. We have to take full responsibility of our actions. Why? We lack a consensus. We are not sending the right message and our intentions is to simply appease our needs. Egoism brought us here, nothing else. The game eventually will walk the mile and get better. If not we simply march towards other games or hobbies. 

End game? This game can't have one. Never had one to begin with. We are the ones trying to find on this product a creeping limit. This game was not designed with such intentions. This is a service game that depends on updates for sales and slow progression. If the game reaches a top, it stops. 

Quote

The point being made here is not that players are somehow so addled by game addiction that they are incapable of learning anything at all, but that there is a clear track record for DE trying and failing to create "endgame" through an extremely specific content model, i.e. a content island with excessive grind and gear-checking.

But here we are again, after how many threads? We are repeating the same Sisyphus cycle. You are incorrectly using the term 'end game'. Second there is no end when the purpose of this game is to sell. It is a GAAS game. What you see as grinding and gear checking IS NOT 'end game' at all. There is a confusion between progression and endgame. Grind and gear checking are associated with progression. 

Let us review this definition again. 

Endgame: The last stage in a game of chess when only a few of the pieces are left on the board.  

This is the original common use of the phrase applied to games. 

Quote

Despite this, both the developers and some players fail to acknowledge these past updates, and so repeat the same mistakes each time, which predictably leads to the same results. This isn't a matter of addiction, so much as a continual refusal to exercise any amount of analysis or critical thinking.

But it is. Why? Downgrading (Nerf) and upgrades (buffs) cycles are goalpost moving. This is the stick and carrot of the War Frame game system. If people where able to see it, I'm sure that such game will be completely different. But let us wind back the clock a little bit. How many years this game continues doing this? Answer, 7 years. These problems where present all the time. In other words, these are not 'problems'. That is the strategy. 

Edited by Felsagger
Link to post
Share on other sites
Le 03/05/2020 à 04:06, Hypernaut1 a dit :

There is, but most people will call anything challenging cheap. 

If enemies hit hard - cheap

Enemies have high health - cheap

Enemies have CC- cheap

Enemies counter - cheap/

 

so what exactly do some of you mean by challenging? 

Mind I'm one of the people who actually wants endgame, but there is a big problem with enemy and ability design in warframe. 

IE simply making the enemy a bullet sponge isn't gonna solve anything. It is a short term solution in that, for example, having easier access to Lv 200+ enemies would at least give geared players something to actually fight and not just curbstomp. 

 

But DE simply isn't capable, or at least willing, to make properly designed enemy abilities. See all the scripted nonsense with grappling hooks hitting you despite you being at their back when they fire, or the near unavoidable Lich grapple. 

They don't properly telegraph and neither they properly give you a counter. 

On top of that, they have this weird scaling system in which mooks and heavies scale at the same rate which is the most BS thing ever. Now for instance if you had swarms of mooks dealing kinda negligible dmg with a few command, support and heavy units sprinkled in that actually have meaningful abilities and need to be engaged with, the game would already work much better. 

 

Warframe is a reskinned Musou game, but it took out the minibosses of Musou games. That's retarded tbh. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, (PS4)Kakurine2 said:

Grab friends/clan mates get in a preset group and everyone handicap yourself to make the game harder and run stuff you enjoy.

There you go difficult "end game" content requiring teamplay.

Lets be real random pugs means no communication or cordination with folks trying to spam through at lightspeed. Pugging isn't what you are after clearly.

Now they could say allow players to choose a difficulty setting when starting a mission.  Thus letting you get a challenge as an option.  But if most folks don't choose to pug that difficulty you will probably be alone most of the time.

But then what is the point of grinding for anything in this game and trying to make builds if the only way to get challenge is handicapping yourself. And I'm not sure how it works now with the armor changes, but in the past it was pretty hard to handicap yourself without everything just becoming a massive bullet sponge. I remember me and my clan doing Law of Retribution with MK-1 Bratons for a change, and all it really did was just make every enemy into a massive bullet sponge that takes a lot of effort to kill. It didn't really change anything beyond that, it's just "guess we'll have to shoot Vay Hek for 20 minutes to kill him". Maybe it's better now, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Autongnosis said:

But DE simply isn't capable, or at least willing, to make properly designed enemy abilities. See all the scripted nonsense with grappling hooks hitting you despite you being at their back when they fire, or the near unavoidable Lich grapple. 

They don't properly telegraph and neither they properly give you a counter. 

On top of that, they have this weird scaling system in which mooks and heavies scale at the same rate which is the most BS thing ever. Now for instance if you had swarms of mooks dealing kinda negligible dmg with a few command, support and heavy units sprinkled in that actually have meaningful abilities and need to be engaged with, the game would already work much better. 

Warframe is a reskinned Musou game, but it took out the minibosses of Musou games. That's retarded tbh. 

A precise critique. It goes hard on the developer but is correct tho. 

Enemy designed abilities, perks and load outs for enemy weapons. Treat the enemy with special properties adding them stronger weapons.  

Different tiers for support and heavy units. Bring heavier tiers. An example happened in Titan fall 2 game type frontier. 

And the last observation is on spot too. This is a pseudo Musou game without the intermediate bosses on the hordes. The game needs diverse intervention of large enemies combos. 

Edited by Felsagger
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Redthirst said:

But then what is the point of grinding for anything in this game and trying to make builds if the only way to get challenge is handicapping yourself. And I'm not sure how it works now with the armor changes, but in the past it was pretty hard to handicap yourself without everything just becoming a massive bullet sponge. I remember me and my clan doing Law of Retribution with MK-1 Bratons for a change, and all it really did was just make every enemy into a massive bullet sponge that takes a lot of effort to kill. It didn't really change anything beyond that, it's just "guess we'll have to shoot Vay Hek for 20 minutes to kill him". Maybe it's better now, though.

And there enlies an issue power creep, bullet sponges, etc.

What exactly makes something a challenge per person.  And do they even want it?

No matter how much the npcs are scaled we the players can min/max to cheese it or it just becomes a bullet sponge.

Its a looter hack and slash shooter. Not a mmo with raid tiers.  Its not really an animal designed to have the "end game" stuff i believe you are actually after.

They had raids and pvp relays but they all failed so there where scraped.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Felsagger said:

The truth hurts deeply. Enjoy. 

Not in any way what I was criticizing, but sure.

2 hours ago, Felsagger said:

We should stop blaming DE. We are the ones who are guilty not them. Our lack of control, reasoning, measurement brought us here.

Interesting, I was unaware that we were the developers of this videogame.

2 hours ago, Felsagger said:

We gave DE licence to practice their business. The problem is that we got addicted to low standards. 

... set by whom? This is where the whole "we shouldn't blame DE but ourselves" line falls apart, because it takes two to tango in this sort of scenario, and the playerbase themselves didn't lower their own standards. In fact, the opposite would be more true, given that only now players as a community are putting their foot down and generally demanding higher-quality content, at a time where DE seems stuck in an unhealthy development pattern.

2 hours ago, Felsagger said:

We have to take full responsibility of our actions. Why? We lack a consensus. We are not sending the right message and our intentions is to simply appease our needs. 

I can partially agree that sometimes the community doesn't really advocate for changes that would truly benefit it in the long term, but "lack of consensus" is complete bunk, given that a significant player consensus is precisely what spurred DE to deliver those changes to Railjack in record time.

2 hours ago, Felsagger said:

End game? This game can't have one. Never had one to begin with. We are the ones trying to find on this product a creeping limit. This game was not designed with such intentions. This is a service game that depends on updates for sales and slow progression. If the game reaches a top, it stops. 

Then perhaps we should stop thinking of endgame as some sort of content island that nothing else can surpass. I agree with you that calling some bit of limited content "endgame" and hoping it sticks forever is not going to work for a game in constant ongoing development, but that's precisely why live service games typically don't do that. Destiny, World of Warcraft, even Fallout 76 have their own versions of endgame content that are repeatable over a long period of time -- when the endgame is a set of raids or the like, for sure it doesn't stay endgame forever, but those games acknowledge that and either release more content, or allow players to retain a challenge when going through old content through certain scaling systems. Warframe, by contrast, has none of that, particularly as whichever content islands it pushes as endgame tend to be completed in a matter of weeks, if not days. This isn't simply because Warframe cannot deliver a challenge at the moment, but because its "endgame" has pretty much always taken the form of content islands that players can easily burn through.

2 hours ago, Felsagger said:

But here we are again, after how many threads? We are repeating the same Sisyphus cycle. 

Yes, that is in fact my point. I'm not saying the entirety of the playerbase is like this, so much as a small, yet vocal portion of the forums, as the community at large seems to have appreciated the Railjack update. It's just that these sorts of updates are usually accompanied by a small contingent of congenital contrarians with a desperate need to assume some sort of position of personal superiority over the rest, who thus see said updates as an excuse to look down on other players by conflating tedium with challenge.

2 hours ago, Felsagger said:

You are incorrectly using the term 'end game'. Second there is no end when the purpose of this game is to sell. It is a GAAS game. What you see as grinding and gear checking IS NOT 'end game' at all. There is a confusion between progression and endgame. Grind and gear checking are associated with progression. 

Given the personal definition of endgame you've given, it is more likely you who are misunderstanding it, since games as a service have existed for far longer than Warframe, and many among them have managed to successfully provide and endgame for their players. Furthermore, you seem to have missed the entirety of my point, as my whole argument is precisely that grinding and gear-checking are not successful means of delivering endgame content. I am advocating for a different means of giving long-term players enduringly engaging content, ideally one that doesn't feel like a slog to burn through then abandon shortly after.

2 hours ago, Felsagger said:

Let us review this definition again. 

Endgame: The last stage in a game of chess when only a few of the pieces are left on the board.  

This is the original common use of the phrase applied to games. 

This I think further reinforces the fact that your definition of endgame is based on a misconception, particularly as you seemed to have missed the more relevant definition from the site where you picked it:

(video games) The gameplay available in a massively multiplayer online role-playing game for players who have completed all of the preset challenges.

It is not surprising then that you believe endgame to be impossible to add to Warframe when the definition you are using inherently presumes a finite game. Given the above, more accurate definition, not only is yours inappropriate for an ongoing game like Warframe, but the presence of endgame in similar ongoing games is a common enough occurrence for it to warrant its own specific mention. Also worth noting is that the above definition, while perhaps a bit broad, is also something Warframe is capable of achieving -- it's just not something it's achieved successfully yet.

2 hours ago, Felsagger said:

But it is. Why? Downgrading (Nerf) and upgrades (buffs) cycles are goalpost moving. This is the stick and carrot of the War Frame game system. If people where able to see it, I'm sure that such game will be completely different.

I'm sorry, buffing and nerfing are part of addiction now? They're moving the goalposts... to what, exactly? Nothing you are saying here makes any sense.

2 hours ago, Felsagger said:

But let us wind back the clock a little bit. How many years this game continues doing this? Answer, 7 years. These problems where present all the time. In other words, these are not 'problems'. That is the strategy. 

By that same inane reasoning, long-standing bugs and acknowledged design flaws are also "the strategy", simply by dint of being around for a while. Newsflash, that's not how video game development works, especially not for live service games that often have a lot of design and tech debt to work through over the years. Given that DE have repeatedly announced an intention to implement endgame, attempted to do so numerous times, and subsequently acknowledged that they failed, imputing Warframe's lack of endgame as intentional is plain bizarre.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Autongnosis said:

But DE simply isn't capable, or at least willing, to make properly designed enemy abilities. See all the scripted nonsense with grappling hooks hitting you despite you being at their back when they fire, or the near unavoidable Lich grapple. 

They don't properly telegraph and neither they properly give you a counter. 

Would YOU be willing to make properly designed enemies, under the circumstances? I mean, consider the Wolf. Bullet sponge aside, he DID have legitimate telegraphing. Also consider the Eidolons. Or even Lephantis.

Most enemies that DE is confident that we can't instantly delete have honest-to-god telegraphing. Even some that don't, like the osprey charges with both a visual and auditory cue before they go. In other words, it's most likely the latter case - we are so overpowered in terms of what we can do to cheese enemies, that to have even the faintest chance of threat, DE seems to think they must respond in kind. 

 

Sure, you've got grappling hooks (which, strangely, never give me much trouble, but I'm willing to waive that to playstyle), but those were a very early addition, which is probably in a similar case as pre-revised armour was.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Teridax68 said:

Not in any way what I was criticizing, but sure.

Fine, lets get into a detailed discussion. 

Quote

Interesting, I was unaware that we were the developers of this videogame.

... set by whom? This is where the whole "we shouldn't blame DE but ourselves" line falls apart, because it takes two to tango in this sort of scenario, and the playerbase themselves didn't lower their own standards. In fact, the opposite would be more true, given that only now players as a community are putting their foot down and generally demanding higher-quality content, at a time where DE seems stuck in an unhealthy development pattern.

Let us start with the first lesson. We have a forum where everybody writes down and even document what DE does. Many people got frustrated to the point of showing apathy. We can't force DE work our way. We tried before and we got three strikes in a row. I decided not critique anymore. If they fumble, I walk away without spending energy typing more critiques. You are still here being hopeful that they will rectify. The initiative of quality should start within themselves without us pushing them. If they get more professional with their job we stick our wallets in and continue the journey. If they lay back I'm not going to force them to work either. This is a developer choice. 

Quote

I can partially agree that sometimes the community doesn't really advocate for changes that would truly benefit it in the long term, but "lack of consensus" is complete bunk

In here people have different ideas and opinions on the definition of the term 'end game'. 

Quote

 given that a significant player consensus is precisely what spurred DE to deliver those changes to Railjack in record time.

Because they knew how low they went in terms of quality. Even the last patch required another quick patch. The quick patch rendered the game useless for two hours. They had to work with the third patch. 

Quote

Then perhaps we should stop thinking of endgame as some sort of content island that nothing else can surpass. I agree with you that calling some bit of limited content "endgame" and hoping it sticks forever is not going to work for a game in constant ongoing development, but that's precisely why live service games typically don't do that. Destiny, World of Warcraft, even Fallout 76 have their own versions of endgame content that are repeatable over a long period of time -- when the endgame is a set of raids or the like, for sure it doesn't stay endgame forever, but those games acknowledge that and either release more content, or allow players to retain a challenge when going through old content through certain scaling systems. Warframe, by contrast, has none of that, particularly as whichever content islands it pushes as endgame tend to be completed in a matter of weeks, if not days. This isn't simply because Warframe cannot deliver a challenge at the moment, but because its "endgame" has pretty much always taken the form of content islands that players can easily burn through.

In this same paragraph you confirm that different developers don't coincide with the concept 'end game'. Deadstiny and 76 are jokes for games. I don't even mention them in a formal discussion. Rail jack is a bridge more of an 'access gate' between battle scales and conditions. Railjack joints battles on 'land' and Arch Wing battles. Never was intended as 'end game' content. 

Quote

Yes, that is in fact my point. I'm not saying the entirety of the playerbase is like this, so much as a small, yet vocal portion of the forums, as the community at large seems to have appreciated the Railjack update. It's just that these sorts of updates are usually accompanied by a small contingent of congenital contrarians with a desperate need to assume some sort of position of personal superiority over the rest, who thus see said updates as an excuse to look down on other players by conflating tedium with challenge.

The sense of bragging rights was thrown out of this game by DE. DE threw out the Leader Boards. DE threw out the solar Rails. Having a maxed out Rail Jack or all the Tenno schools or even having everything in the game doesn't grant a sense of superiority or position. That is completionism. Let the contrarians enjoy their status. That will not change the size of the fridge on my house, the number of books and much less the structure of the game. If this contrarians sees people over the shoulders, that is their problem not yours or mine. If they want to be competitive then they should pick up a PVP game and test their talents there. War Frame focuses on other aspects.  

Quote

Given the personal definition of endgame you've given, it is more likely you who are misunderstanding it

I simply quoted the consensus that Merriam's Websters says over such phrase. 

Quote

since games as a service have existed for far longer than Warframe, and many among them have managed to successfully provide and endgame for their players. Furthermore, you seem to have missed the entirety of my point, as my whole argument is precisely that grinding and gear-checking are not successful means of delivering endgame content.

We passed through that concept pages ago. We all agree that gear checking and grinding are not 'end game'. 

Quote

I am advocating for a different means of giving long-term players enduringly engaging content, ideally one that doesn't feel like a slog to burn through then abandon shortly after.

And what about short term players? Sorry but is not all about Veterans. Veterans already outgrew the game. In other words what you are advocating is simply wishful thinking or just a wish list. Yes, you know how this goes typing wish lists for the long term player enjoys the game. 

Quote

This I think further reinforces the fact that your definition of endgame is based on a misconception, particularly as you seemed to have missed the more relevant definition from the site where you picked it:

(video games) The gameplay available in a massively multiplayer online role-playing game for players who have completed all of the preset challenges.

More relevant definition according to you and your perspective. I picked the classical definition. Let me put it this way. When you get all the items in an update that is it. There is no more items to get or things to do. You consumed the full package of that update. Sorry but DE can't entertain you forever. I wish they could but that will never happen. 

Quote

It is not surprising then that you believe endgame to be impossible to add to Warframe when the definition you are using inherently presumes a finite game. Given the above, more accurate definition, not only is yours inappropriate for an ongoing game like Warframe, but the presence of endgame in similar ongoing games is a common enough occurrence for it to warrant its own specific mention.

End game of Spider Man is the strongest suit and set of perks. 

End game of Horizon Zero Dawn is the top damage weapons, best shields and equipment for Alloy. 

End game for Doom Eternal is the most powerful gun in the game, the top difficulty settings for the missions and the rewards in them. 

End game for Batman Arkham Knight is the top tier equipment in his arsenal an the best build of weapons in the game. 

End game for Fez is the collection of all the golden pieces for the longer ending.

End game for Titan Fall 2 is the last level of the campaign in it. 

The term applies to finite games hence there is an end. Simple logic. You are confusing progression with the concept 'end game'. However you are referring to exclusivity of activities in a game that only long seasonal players will be the only ones to enjoy. Those missions are intended at a small portion of players in comparison to the number of players the game has. 

Quote

Also worth noting is that the above definition, while perhaps a bit broad, is also something Warframe is capable of achieving -- it's just not something it's achieved successfully yet.

Warframe is a GAAS game. It can't has it. The structure of the game doesn't allow any form of endgame. 

Quote

I'm sorry, buffing and nerfing are part of addiction now? They're moving the goalposts... to what, exactly? Nothing you are saying here makes any sense.

Yes, the classical line of 'you are wrong, I am right'.  

If there are no meta, then there is no endgame. If there is no top, then there can't be any final goal. Pretty simple. 

Quote

By that same inane reasoning,

 

This is the type of guy who brings a knife for a discussion and a sword for diplomacy. I'm afraid he will bring a mallet next. 

 :3

Quote

long-standing bugs and acknowledged design flaws are also "the strategy", simply by dint of being around for a while. Newsflash, that's not how video game development works, especially not for live service games that often have a lot of design and tech debt to work through over the years. Given that DE have repeatedly announced an intention to implement endgame, attempted to do so numerous times, and subsequently acknowledged that they failed, imputing Warframe's lack of endgame as intentional is plain bizarre.

Is plain bizarre that a GAAS gets 'end game'. What you are asking is something different. The materialization of that idea is the increase of engagement. Let me help you write down such idea. For example, different tier of enemies with better capable weapons could be something worthy for seasonal players. This is how you dynamically do a gear checking performance. These enemies have different load outs, sets of abilities and an increase in damage level keeping the same level of shields and armor. The factor that scales up are their weapons, their tactics and the tier composition and the A. I.. In levels there should not be endless horde except on horde modes. For example if you take out all the enemies in a certain level then the enemy can call reinforcements that are stronger on believable insertion points or spawn points. 

Entertainment happens when the game gets more interesting asking the player skill, precision, priority, preservation, better positioning and preference of enemies to be taken down first due to the level of risk they possess. Every encounter is dynamic. It doesn't repeats constantly the same volley of turtle shell enemies. This doesn't exclude the seasoned player or the new player. Everybody may explore their luck in the game. Hardened player may run the risks to stay for a bit longer and some missions will have these parameters to more aggressive tiers. Another example are the introduction of three or four Liches attacking at the same time or bosses in the middle of a fight without any previous alert. This is not the only solution but it tries adding a better engaging combat. 

 

Edited by Felsagger
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...