The core problem with Warframe

[Hypernaut1]

7 hours ago, Lutesque said:

 

If the solution to a problem is to get rid of before it has a chance to become a problem then thats just bad design. 

You cant have something be so dangerous that you you are forced to eliminate it before it can do anything just so you can play. 

This was the biggest issue with Nioh on Way Of The Demon and The Abyss:

In other words... You needed to Cheese to win. 

Yeah I suggest you buy a Copy of Nioh ASAP. Sounds like its your type of game.

 

Say what? This doesnt make sense. Killing dangerous enemies and prioritizing IS game-play. 

People cant cry for "better a.i" but anything that the enemy does thats mildly effective enough to force you to react is considered "cheese".

[(PSN)thowed]

I played classic Destiny and that part in the topic was false.  There were certain weapons that people made sure you had if you wanted to do any end game activity within a timely manner.  Certain classes were also chosen in lfg for their powers.  No one wanted 6 of the same class (not that it couldn't be done but took alot more effort).  If you wanna respond you must have gjallerhorn (sorry couldn't resist).  You could literally roll through the content laughing with the right load outs.

[(NSW)Kirbys-Epic-Yarn]

The core problem is that they got rid of raids which is the end game content 

[Loza03]

56 minutes ago, Hypernaut1 said:

Say what? This doesnt make sense. Killing dangerous enemies and prioritizing IS game-play. 

People cant cry for "better a.i" but anything that the enemy does thats mildly effective enough to force you to react is considered "cheese".

It's both.

If something is so effective at killing you with few chances for you to do anything about it (except focus fire it down the second it spawns or resort to cheese tactics yourself) then it's poor game design.

 

Good game design is, simply put, getting the player to engage in situations which are engaging. Which, in a game like Warframe, I would imagine is bouncing around, ripping and tearing and prioritising targets to break apart a roomful of enemies. Sitting still in a death bubble isn't fun, but neither is getting deleted because the entire floor is a mine field and you screwed up one jump. And the thing is, most of what is currently 'mildly effective' is on the Cheese side. For example, an enemy that aimbots you the frame that you're not in cover would be effective, but it's not fun. Likewise for nullifier spam - filling a room with nullifiers so you can't use your abilities is certainly an effective way of countering us, but it's hardly fun to have half your well-earned arsenal be totally worthless. And right now, that's basically what the game kind of needs to provide.

[Hypernaut1]

1 hour ago, Loza03 said:

It's both.

If something is so effective at killing you with few chances for you to do anything about it (except focus fire it down the second it spawns or resort to cheese tactics yourself) then it's poor game design.

But it was never that though. We've always had many ways to deal with those mines. They could be destroyed, evaded, operator could void dash out of area or you could kill drones beforehand. Exaggerations like this is why enemies are constantly nerfed. Players seem to just want bullet sponges that ACT like they were going to do anything. Whats the point of designing advanced a.i. if its just going to be for show? 

I understand things need to be balanced, but there has rarely ever been an enemy so unbalanced that players couldnt complete missions or ran out of revives. Most nerfs happen mainly because players get upset that an enemy knocked them on their a##.

[BlueGuy13]

Nah, the core problem is bugs

[Lutesque]

2 hours ago, Hypernaut1 said:

Say what? This doesnt make sense. Killing dangerous enemies and prioritizing IS game-play. 

I never said it wasnt.

2 hours ago, Hypernaut1 said:

People cant cry for "better a.i" but anything that the enemy does thats mildly effective enough to force you to react is considered "cheese".

Watch This:

https://youtu.be/DePjQJaZpqg

And if you dont have one hour to spare then you can watch this intead:

https://youtu.be/BRBcjsOt0_g

Theres alot of Enemies in Warframe that just Violate this concept. Enemies that are either so dangerous or so Annoying that they result in Overprioritization (yeah I made that up). 

Take Ancient Disruptors for example... how do counter their Melee Attacks ? 

The answer is you dont... If they touch you then say goodbye to all your Energy. Only solution is to kill them before they get to that point. Preferably through walls.

Oh Heres everybody's Favourite... Arbitration Drones... these enemies Literally make its Allies Immune to everything. Abilities and Damage. How do you Counter that ? Only option is to kill them... and quickly before that Bombard One Shots you.

Same goes for Nullifiers... because they have a tendency to bum rush Players and ruin your day by just turning off your Abilities and resetting any scaling effect it may have, or just resulting in your death because whatever they turned off was essential to your Warframe's survival... Players overprioritize them over everything else... Killing them with Extreme Prejudice regardless of what else is going on.

These are poorly designed enemies. And quite frankly dealing with them isnt challenging. Making them even stronger isnt making your game more challenging. All it does is make it more Frustrating.

52 minutes ago, Hypernaut1 said:

But it was never that though. We've always had many ways to deal with those mines. They could be destroyed, evaded, operator could void dash out of area or you could kill drones beforehand. Exaggerations like this is why enemies are constantly nerfed.

If you destroy it then another Drone drops another one... destroy that another drone drops another one... and so on...

Meanwhile you are suppose busy destroying them that the enemies are beginning to pile up.

Sure you can evade them.... But the Cryopod or Excavator you have to Baby Sit Cant.

Spoiler Mode is never going to be an answer Im going to accept until we get client side Abilities across the board... including Client Side Transference. 

58 minutes ago, Hypernaut1 said:

Players seem to just want bullet sponges that ACT like they were going to do anything. Whats the point of designing advanced a.i. if its just going to be for show? 

Personally I dont want Advanced A.I.... just Advanced Behaviors and diverse enemy types.

59 minutes ago, Hypernaut1 said:

I understand things need to be balanced, but there has rarely ever been an enemy so unbalanced that players couldnt complete missions or ran out of revives.

And If I had low standards this would be fine.... Unfortunately merely surviving or succeeding just by the skin of my teeth isnt very satisfying. Most players want to Thrive and Dominate because thats just more fun.

1 hour ago, Hypernaut1 said:

Most nerfs happen mainly because players get upset that an enemy knocked them on their a##.

Unfortunately thats usually all it takes to kill most Warframes... especially now that Knockdowns last longer than they used to. 

37 minutes ago, BlueGuy13 said:

Nah, the core problem is bugs

This Aswell... !!!

[Aldain]

Honestly it isn't just one problem, it is several.

But if there's one thing that Steel Path has showed me that no amount of changing the enemies health/armor/shield values will ever show any form of actual challenge.

The only way you'd ever see any true change would involve DE angering the mass of players who complain nothing is hard while doing everything in their power to make things unable to be hard by stopping player-based power creep and reigning it in.

[Dauggie]

18 hours ago, (PS4)sister-hawk said:

 

And I understand what you are saying about the Eidolon hunters. I appreciate people who can look at any situation in a game and figure out how to make the impossible possible. But simply doing what they do isn’t skill. When I was still a baby tenno I celebrated being able to break a single Teralyst limb with a radiation modded Lex Prime, which probably took around 20 or 30 minutes. Then I got a Lanka and broke then limb in 5 seconds. I didn’t get better at the game, I didn’t gain any skill. I got better equipment, that’s it.

you gained the "knowledge" to do something, that would give you positive outcome. my previous reply might have went way pass, but i said same thing happens in other game COD/CS/fighting games. you watch and learn from other, develop your knowledge of how thing would work, how enemies/players would react to certain things. That itself is skill. idk what other idea you have for the term skill. 

you compare yourself to old tenno, well you invested your time to understand the game and now you got "skills" to nuke CC whatever. when any new event drops where we got no clue how to do things efficiently, your very first idea would be to use your favorite frame or something, but after you see there is more efficient method, would you not do it? for the grind that warframe is, it would be stupid unless you got all the time in the world to pay at your own pace(for time gated events). 

my issue was just with the skill part, warframe does has some moments that require skills. 

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

20 hours ago, (PS4)sister-hawk said:

I personally believe that the core problem with Warframe, specifically with regard to the concepts of "difficulty" and "challenge," is the staggering disparity between starter level content and what is considered "end-game," and the fact that the players' power level relative to that of enemies is contained entirely within our gear.

Has the community actually agreed on what is considered endgame? Every single time someone gives details of what endgame means to them others flat out disagree. 

Every single time that DE has given us stuff that seems to be a close match to what some people have been saying is endgame, people complain that it's not in line with what they want at all, including some people who were definitely previously saying they it would be the bee's knees. 

I don't see how there is ever going to be anything that resembles endgame, when nobody has ever been able to produce a meaningful consensus on what endgame is. 

[Loza03]

8 hours ago, Hypernaut1 said:

But it was never that though. We've always had many ways to deal with those mines. They could be destroyed, evaded, operator could void dash out of area or you could kill drones beforehand. Exaggerations like this is why enemies are constantly nerfed. Players seem to just want bullet sponges that ACT like they were going to do anything. Whats the point of designing advanced a.i. if its just going to be for show? 

I understand things need to be balanced, but there has rarely ever been an enemy so unbalanced that players couldnt complete missions or ran out of revives. Most nerfs happen mainly because players get upset that an enemy knocked them on their a##.

We also can't forget what kind of game Warframe is - a horde game. The amount of attention that can reasonably be assigned to any individual enemy is small due to the large numbers of enemies encountered, even for 'major' targets. That makes otherwise reasonable enemies feel substantially more annoying - for example, Bombard's aren't really all that much trouble if you can focus on dodging. But... if you meet one, there's a pretty strong chance it's in a crowd with at least ten other goons, most of which are sporting hitscan weapons and suddenly, the homing rocket goes from an interesting challenge to a frustrating annoyance. Likewise for things like the OG  Scrambus's.

What we really need - aside from a global balancing pass to enable further AI work - is better visual design for enemies (so threat identification is reasonable) and group AI/design. Since any individual complex enemy is inevitably going to be a pain in the ass to deal with, reworking the approach so enemies have simple, singular purposes that get attached to groups makes the group as a whole the threat, not the individuals.

[Lutesque]

2 hours ago, Dauggie said:

but after you see there is more efficient method, would you not do it?

I would...

And then I would B*@!# About it Non-Stop.

2 hours ago, Dauggie said:

my issue was just with the skill part, warframe does has some moments that require skills. 

I guess thats a fair point. 

1 hour ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

 

I don't see how there is ever going to be anything that resembles endgame, when nobody has ever been able to produce a meaningful consensus on what endgame is. 

Its Fashion... People are just too intimidated to admit it 😛

 

[Teridax68]

I agree completely with the OP. This may not be a popular opinion, but I don't think it's really possible to reconcile vertical power progression with a game environment that asks the player to return to and replay its lower-level content: in terms of balance, making one's character flat-out stronger is equivalent to making the entire game around them easier, which is why higher-level content needs to be balanced around those power increases. When the player's power increases amount to increases in EHP and DPS, and the game's difficulty raise amounts to increasing the same stats on enemies, that too functionally equates to negating our progression at those higher levels, putting us on a hamster wheel that itself only runs for a limited time. When we go back to lower-level content, however, that difficulty raise is obviously not present, and so gameplay as a result becomes much easier, to the point where it becomes trivial, and thus ultimately less enjoyable to play.

As such, not only do I support equalizing the power gap between higher- and lower-level players, I'd actually like to eliminate vertical power progression as much as possible: progressing should certainly give us more options, namely more warframes, weapons, pets, mods, etc. to choose from, and that choice is power in its own right (which is arguably fine), but those options should simply give us more ways of playing the game, rather than a decrease in difficulty and challenge at a time when many players are clamoring for the exact opposite. Warframe's balance is completely out of control, and so in large part because there is no stable benchmark along which our options are balanced, which is why DE can release "upgrades" to weapons that are inferior to the originals (e.g. the Panthera Prime), or massively power creep the game to degrees they almost certainly did not anticipate (e.g. Adaptation, or corrupted mods). Bringing us all to the same benchmark would make for a much more balanceable game, and likely much more stimulating gameplay for everyone.

[(PSN)DoctorWho_90250]

23 hours ago, Lutesque said:

But they would eventually run into them... i cant imagine they will be happy about it when they do. Especially if:

But they would still have to slog through the Brain Dead Trash Mobs wouldnt they ?

Therefore:

All this does is adjust who gets dissapointed more. Its a tedium Slider.

You can make it so that Both sides are equal... but ultimately anything you do to make one side happy is going to make the other side upset.

Oh... so you see the problem too ? 

So basically each squad would be made up a combination of these groups and they would play their roles to accomplish objectives ?

I dont know why... but something tells me this isnt how its actually going to work out in Practice.

Because difficulty and Balance are 2 totally different concepts.

If you want to balance something. You buff/nerf it.

If you want adjust difficulty... you need to fundementally change how it functions and then balance it accordingly. 

If the solution to a problem is to get rid of before it has a chance to become a problem then thats just bad design. 

You cant have something be so dangerous that you you are forced to eliminate it before it can do anything just so you can play. 

This was the biggest issue with Nioh on Way Of The Demon and The Abyss:

 

if it makes you feel any better... Team Ninja nerfed that S#&$ too... 

 

In other words... You needed to Cheese to win. 

Yeah I suggest you buy a Copy of Nioh ASAP. Sounds like its your type of game.

 

Or Bloodborne.

I love Bloodborne. 

[(PSN)DoctorWho_90250]

20 hours ago, Lutesque said:

Im not concerned with what type of Tactic it is... only with what type of design it is.

only Team PvP game Ive played is Gears. I would imagine nobody is going to play Healer if it paints a target on your back so large that you cant even play because everyone keeps killing you before you can do anything.

Hey I never said ganging up on one dude isnt skillful... But it is pretty terrible for a game to be designed this way.

If it happened to me I would call it Bull S#&$.

 

In team shooters (MAG, Overwatch, Battlefield) I have always gravitated towards the healer role. I like healing and reviving teammates, and part of the fun comes from eluding the opposing team and healing downed teammates, target on my back be damned. In Overwatch (back when I played of course), I'd have a blast playing DPS and other roles (my mains were Junkrat, Tracer, Lucio & Zenyatta), while also loving being the team healer. 

In Warframe, on Eidolon hunts, I tend to exclusively play as Harrow so I can protect the squad from AOE attacks. 

[(PSN)DoctorWho_90250]

On 2020-07-30 at 10:31 AM, o0Despair0o said:

I'd say the probem with warframe is that the developers have no frickin idea what they want to do and end up doing all sorts of crap nobody asked for.

Bingo.

23 hours ago, _Kiro said:

I have no doubts the OP is correct on some things but it won't matter because warframe is a cesspool that can never be balanced at this point.

 

Bingo. I won't go as far as to call it a cesspool. At the same time, it has progressed to a state where balance is no longer possible with how bloated the game is, and continues to get.