Shy's DE interviews, vol 2 (With Pablo, Triburos, and Jizo)

[Jarriaga]

For those unaware:

Hopefully Shy keeps these up. Ever since that Scott interview, my frustrations with DE have eased a bit thanks to having a better understanding of their train of thought. She hosting different partners with vastly different perceptions is welcome as well.

 

[(PSN)Hikuro-93]

I also like them. Many times people get anxious with lack of clarity, specially about what they love. These more informal conversations help ease that and provide a better look into DE's heart and promotes mutual understanding.

[Jarriaga]

1 hour ago, (PS4)Hikuro-93 said:

I also like them. Many times people get anxious with lack of clarity, specially about what they love. These more informal conversations help ease that and provide a better look into DE's heart and promotes mutual understanding.

Pablo's insight into "Why nerf this instead of buffing the rest" at 18:40 is something most of the community needs to hear and make peace with. Comparing the Rubico to the Catchmoon and what "buffing" the Rubico to Cathmoon levels would entail alongside the ramifications and ripple effects was as clear as it could be.

Edited May 17, 2020 by Jarriaga

[ValinorAtani]

vor 4 Minuten schrieb Jarriaga:

Pablo's insight into "Why nerf this instead of buffing the rest" at 18:40 is something most of the community needs to hear and make peace with. Comparing the Rubico to the Catchmoon and what "buffing" the Rubico to Cathmoon levels would entail alongside the ramifications and ripple effects was a clear as it could by mentioning it was not only the damage, but the range and area of effect.

Is he really comparing a sniper to a secondary weapon? If so DE is more in trouble than I thought...

[Corvid]

1 hour ago, ValinorAtani said:

Is he really comparing a sniper to a secondary weapon? If so DE is more in trouble than I thought...

Care to explain how it's an invalid comparison? Weapon archetypes should be kept in consideration relative to each other if the goal is a balanced sandbox.

Edited May 17, 2020 by Corvid

[Jarriaga]

28 minutes ago, ValinorAtani said:

Is he really comparing a sniper to a secondary weapon? If so DE is more in trouble than I thought...

Check the video at the timestamp I mentioned. It was an example for context. It could have been any other 2 weapons in which X is more powerful than Y, so people ask for Y to be buffed to the level of X instead of X being nerfed to the level of Y. This in turn prompts direct comparisons as to what "The level of X" means to begin with. Is it base damage? Is it range? Is it crit chance? And if both X and Y perform the same (Because Y was buffed), enemies become significantly weaker by proxy, so they in turn need to be buffed again in a cycle.

And mind you, Catchmoon was a secondary so powerful that it overshadowed most other primary weapons in the game. As an outlier, it is a very good example regardless of the other example weapon being a sniper, because people wanted for other secondaries to be buffed to Catchmoon levels instead of nerfing it, so it's an apples to apples comparison.

Edited May 17, 2020 by Jarriaga

[Digressive]

49 minutes ago, (PS4)Hikuro-93 said:

I also like them. Many times people get anxious with lack of clarity, specially about what they love. These more informal conversations help ease that and provide a better look into DE's heart and promotes mutual understanding.

Couldn't agree with this sentiment more 👍

[(XBOX)Shodian]

I'll have to watch this later. I really enjoyed the first one.

[Letter13]

Videos like this are a breath of fresh air.

[Loza03]

5 minutes ago, Corvid said:

Care to explain how it's an invalid consideration? Weapon archetypes should be kept in consideration relative to each other if the goal is a balanced sandbox.

Exactly.

To use TF2 terminology, the Rubico is a 'pick' weapon intended for dealing with beefy or vital targets, whilst Catchmoon's supposed to be a 'power' weapon intended for dealing with groups, but lacking that huge single-target potential. Now of course, TF2 and Warframe are far from 1:1, so the example isn't perfect. Notably, TF2 has the option to allow mobility options to also affect overall role, and is of course, a PvP game, meaning it generally has more intelligent opponents. Generally.

Nevertheless, Warframe could absolutely benefit from taking a page out of that. Enemy design too. We shouldn't be in a situation where some parts of the game exclusively encourage AoE power nuke weapons, and another exclusively encourages single-target pick weapons. i.e. Empyrean's pre-nerf ground enemies vs the rest of the game.

[Ice_Peck]

1 hour ago, Jarriaga said:

For those unaware:

Hopefully Shy keeps these up. Ever since that Scott interview, my frustrations with DE have eased a bit thanks to having a better understanding of their train of thought. She hosting different partners with vastly different perceptions is welcome as well.

 

Scott was literally crying over receiving criticism. Like. All of it.

 

Might be reassuring for you, but that's definitely not a good sign. Especially with his comment on how him and other staff who don't wanna see critique just forward it elsewhere so it's either lost to the void or known infamously toxic staff members are the ones having to respond to it. This is deliberate. That's not good. Not good at all.

[AndrejDelaney]

vor 22 Minuten schrieb Letter13:

Videos like this are a breath of fresh air.

I enjoy them a whole lot, too. Nice insights and the people at DE are just fun to listen to in general. It also helps that the Warframe partners who are participating are asking good questions as well. ☺️

[Jarriaga]

31 minutes ago, Saberfrost said:

Scott was literally crying over receiving criticism. Like. All of it.

 

Might be reassuring for you, but that's definitely not a good sign. Especially with his comment on how him and other staff who don't wanna see critique just forward it elsewhere so it's either lost to the void or known infamously toxic staff members are the ones having to respond to it. This is deliberate. That's not good. Not good at all.

Scott was very honest with Brozime about it. It was not the criticism per se, but the tone of said criticism. The way it was presented. The words chosen. The level of (dis)respect shown. The framing as if DE set out to intentionally screw up. The framing as if DE want for you to dislike their work. Ergo, the line separating constructive criticism from bashing.

Brozime's tone has changed in his recent videos because of it. Jizo's videos as well. So I take it they understood that.

Have you?

Edited May 17, 2020 by Jarriaga

[Firetempest]

27 minutes ago, Saberfrost said:

Scott was literally crying over receiving criticism. Like. All of it.

Might be reassuring for you, but that's definitely not a good sign. Especially with his comment on how him and other staff who don't wanna see critique just forward it elsewhere so it's either lost to the void or known infamously toxic staff members are the ones having to respond to it. This is deliberate. That's not good. Not good at all.

You are not in the public eye. You are not 'popular'. You are not criticized for every detail that might not even have your name on it, monthly, weekly, daily. Have this situation grow over 7+ years and it can start to tear anyone down. Devs (specially the very open and public leads) are not robots just for their job. It's a special lack of empathy and increased ignorance or arrogance in back seat development like yours that can slowly make people grow cold to any criticism of their work, warranted or not, because it's always there. And its extra worse when they know it was rushed and you did what you could. There is always someone over the next person setting deadlines. Splitting up feedback is the most responsible thing they can do so they can get the important bits out of it without all the emotional useless baggage 'you ruined the game and are a failure unless you change X!', 'whoever designed X should be fired!' you typically see around here.

Edited May 17, 2020 by Firetempest

[Genitive]

3 minutes ago, Jarriaga said:

Scott was very honest with Brozime about it. It was not the criticism per se, but the tone of said criticism. The way it was presented. The words chosen. The level of (dis)respect shown. Ergo, the line separating constructive criticism from bashing.

Brozine's tone has changed on his recent videos because of it. Jizo's videos as well. So I take it they understood that.

Have you?

Don't expect people to understand they shouldn't be disrespectful if they can't understand what Scott was complaining about in the first place.

[vanaukas]

44 minutes ago, Saberfrost said:

Scott was literally crying over receiving criticism. Like. All of it.

 

Might be reassuring for you, but that's definitely not a good sign. Especially with his comment on how him and other staff who don't wanna see critique just forward it elsewhere so it's either lost to the void or known infamously toxic staff members are the ones having to respond to it. This is deliberate. That's not good. Not good at all.

Your comprehension to the situation it's the only thing that isn't good at all. I can't believe how something that obvious could go over you and made you miss the whole point.

[ranks21]

lol crying over spilled milk, boo effin hoo.  the gaming  community takes no prisoners when critiquing any and everything in the gaming world. they as developers should know that, they've been around long enough and have witnessed what has happened to  studios that fails or upsets the masses. it's a harsh reality check and they cant handle it, but (the irony) they (devs) wants you the players to accept the nerfs, good/bad changes etc as is and adapt or leave.

 the biggest disrespect of all is when a representative of the studio calls its player base "losers" yet feels butthurt when the table is turned. really now.the customer is always right>> the devs and their proxxies wants the customers $$, even with the criticisms like us they too have to adapt.

[Corvid]

8 minutes ago, ranks21 said:

the customer is always right

Not always, especially when two customers may hold diametrically opposed opinions.

[3rdpig]

IMO DE has a real problem with their code, it's called CACE. "Changing Anything Changes Everything.

Otherwise known as "spaghetti code".

That's over simplifying it to a large degree, but I believe it's one of their core issues. It happens to almost any code base once it's grown too big and has too many different people modifying it, many who may no longer be with the company.

[(XBOX)The Neko Otaku]

24 minutes ago, ranks21 said:

the biggest disrespect of all is when a representative of the studio calls its player base "losers" yet feels 

literally just slip of the tounge nothing else making a mountain out of grain of sand.

25 minutes ago, ranks21 said:

the customer is always right

no it's not Karen. Only extremely entitled people use that saying.

[ranks21]

theres no slip of tongue, you think then talk <> it was on her/his mind or even conversed and got out live.

the customer is always right<< they are the spenders, without the customers buying their product the game wouldn't survive. there is no entitlement to it just the facts.

[AbstractLemons]

27 minutes ago, ranks21 said:

lol crying over spilled milk, boo effin hoo.  the gaming  community takes no prisoners when critiquing any and everything in the gaming world. they as developers should know that, they've been around long enough and have witnessed what has happened to  studios that fails or upsets the masses. it's a harsh reality check and they cant handle it, but (the irony) they (devs) wants you the players to accept the nerfs, good/bad changes etc as is and adapt or leave.

 the biggest disrespect of all is when a representative of the studio calls its player base "losers" yet feels butthurt when the table is turned. really now.the customer is always right>> the devs and their proxxies wants the customers $$, even with the criticisms like us they too have to adapt.

You are evil this what you are saying, "I'm insecure that needs to insult people on the internet to make myself look smarter than I actually because I have a PHOBIA of looking inferior. The developers are saying I'm an awful person cause of it but I'm too insecure to acknowledge it so instead I am going to DOUBLE THE #*!% DOWN and make myself look like a SADIST because i'd rather look like a derange than face the possibility of looking stupid."

This is what's wrong with you people. You are evil and yeah the developers are trying to IGNORE YOU PEOPLE SPECIFICALLY because you lie about issues that aren't issues or pair your criticism with unnecessary attacks so you can get away with attacking them because you are so insecure you'd rather portray yourself as a deranged psycopath than a average person you NEED TO WIN THE FORUMS.

 

ACTUAL criminals do the same crap you do. "I think this person thinks their better so I'm show that I"M BETTER by beating them up...why are the police after me?" "I'm going to insult the developers...why am I being ignored?" You people are this freaking stupid.

[(XBOX)The Neko Otaku]

Just now, ranks21 said:

theres no slip of tongue, you think then talk <> it was on her/his mind or even conversed and got out live.

Okay Karen this may be hard for you understand, sometimes people feel nervous and sometimes completely different than what they are saying nitebthat slip up was at live event being viewed by thousand of people and DE don't really do big events like that, so rebecca is going to be nervous and fib something 

 

5 minutes ago, ranks21 said:

the customer is always righ

 Only the most entitled stuck up people use that phrase and they usually use that when they are in the wrong and don't want to admit it.

[nslay]

I mean... even if I play it back at 2x, it's 53 minutes to watch this. Can't they just edit out stuff like, for example, that bit about anime? Do we really care about that? I mean, 1.78 hours... that's not casual watching. That's like watching a Netflix movie... only less good!

EDIT: My gosh... this is Volume 2? Are you kidding me?

Edited May 17, 2020 by nslay

[Corvid]

50 minutes ago, ranks21 said:

theres no slip of tongue, you think then talk <> it was on her/his mind or even conversed and got out live.

I can tell you what likely went through Rebecca's mind at the time: "26 million registered loyal users", and she got scrambled in the moment and contracted the last two, which is something that I've seen happen on multiple occasions, usually caused by the brain sending two different sentences out at the same time.

If you watched "Half Life VR but the AI is Self-Aware" (which I highly recommend if you haven't, as it's excellent improv comedy), Doctor Coomer at one point says "I did have a wife, but they took her in the divorce". This was revealed in a BTS commentary to be a flub much like Rebecca's on the part of Coomer's actress, who unintentionally combined two "character-establishing" lines into an amusingly nonsensical statement. 

If you watch the clip, you even see Rebecca stumble over her words in the moment (In fact, what she says is actually "26 million registered luh- users." The community just ran away with it because it was funny). There was no subconscious insult, just an innocent mistake. To claim otherwise is, in my eyes, character assassination.

Edited May 17, 2020 by Corvid