Jump to content
Jade Shadows: Share Bug Reports and Feedback Here! ×

'winning', And Why Thinking You Can Is Bad For Warframe


TheJagji
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have been planing to write something about this on here for a while. I find it disappointing that people have such an abuser attuned towards balance and the like.

Anyway, I was over on the Star Citizen forums, and found this:

 

Quote from Stanley Crube from Star Citizen forums

 

Since the start the normal balance concerns have been frequently posted on. Balance is a real issue--you don't want only one ship and loadout being effective, only one career worth working at, etc.

But the repeated posts of "unfair" regarding players who play longer have more stuff and player who buy stuff will have more stuff is off the point. In real life there are battleships and there are shrimp boats. You go on one for one reason and on the other for a different one.

If you fly a Freelancer for example, it is irrelevant that other players are more powerful than you--of course they are. Some will have simply chosen a more powerful ship to fly, some will have outfitted their ship better and some will be part of a group or team to multiply their effectiveness. One person might have traded like mad to buy a destroyer and another might be in a clan-funded carrier financed by a group owned factory.

You are NEVER going to always be as strong as every other player and if you start the game letting "more powerful" people ruin your fun, you've missed the point of the game. It isn't balance to want to eliminate other player's efforts and acquisitions--it's a petition for a personal handicap. Essentially, "Nerf their play so I don't have to deal with them on their level". That's unfair and it's also what a LOT of forum posts here are always angling for--some way to remove risk, remove threat, remove loss, remove competition and remove challenge.

Imagine playing a game of chess where the rules required that the white and black player could only move on their respective sides of the board or a rule that a piece could only be captured if the other player consented. You're no longer playing a game at that point and the challenge is minimal at best.

This game is a simulation of real life in space--taking the "real" out doesn't make it more fun.

 

END QUOTE

Source: https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/59354/why-you-can-t-win-this-game-and-if-you-think-you-can-you-re-playing-it-wrong

 

So, basically this, but apply it to Warframe ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree to an extent.

 

Competition, and being better then others is a ambitious desire that most players have, to set goals and to build upon.

Without a better player, then the worse players wont know what to work towards.

 

The game is not exactly balanced, and their is a meta right now, Which gives players direction.

 

And if you take that away, and remove the concept of winning. Then the only thing we have left is the gameplay.

Because if grinding is the core element of warframe, then without winning, It makes grinding obsolete. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree to an extent.

 

Competition, and being better then others is a ambitious desire that most players have, to set goals and to build upon.

Without a better player, then the worse players wont know what to work towards.

 

The game is not exactly balanced, and their is a meta right now, Which gives players direction.

 

And if you take that away, and remove the concept of winning. Then the only thing we have left is the gameplay.

Because if grinding is the core element of warframe, then without winning, It makes grinding obsolete. 

More like an ambitious desire all humans have whether they acknowledge it or not...

 

My goal of winning would be to build everything, and make my dojo look nice... all the while helping my younger brother get better at the game, and grow my clan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

worse players instead of trying to get better, accusing better player of being a cheater and crying a fkn river on off forums.

 

also i have no idea how winning have anything to do with wf. there is nothing to win or lose.

Edited by Althix
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how is this translated into Warframe? Are you basically telling people that there is no such thing as a legit balance concern?

 

If the "true" endgame can be achieved by one set of player with a couple of weapons, and the "other" endgame is for someone at Phobos you think that's an acceptable state to be in?

 

Unless I'm missing the point I think that a game like this vs. a game like Star Citizen is that this game is much smaller in scope, and each weapon or warframe should be able to come to the same result in a different fashion. I had a guy legitimately arguing with me nonstop in Region about how T3 Defense wasn't doable without a Frost RIGHT AFTER I got done doing two without one. I had to mute the guy to get him to finally shut up.

 

The real problem is that people would rather lean on crutches than coordinate and be smart about how they play. There ARE obvious balance concerns, and I'm sure you'll get torn apart if you tell Volt or Ember players that their warframes are fine, so I hope you're not saying everything is perfect.

 

I really don't think anything can be compared between Warframe and Star Citizen, really. Especially balance arguments, since that game is going to have SO MANY ways to acquire things, and real, intelligent effort is going to be required to get what you want. In Warframe you look at the wiki, find out what top performing weapons are, farm for them or buy them with plat, then get them to 30, forma a couple times (usually farming between Survival & Defense) then head into whatever Voids you need, clearing them in the fastest times possible to make getting BPs easier. Most "hard earned" stuff is earned in warframe through some monotonous, braindead activity.

 

I'm sure I'm gonna get crap for that comment, but that's how I see it.

Edited by DavidSPD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what the OP think the statement from star citizen can be applied to Warframe. I still don't see a true 'win' condition in Warframe in term of PvE but balance is needed in order to create varieties in build, loadout, and frame powers. Basically, DE can't sell subpar Warframe and weapon because they are gimmicky and unable to reach high level play. Releasing new weapons only to be ignored because it doesn't match the existing standard is pointless and a waste of resource.

 

Basically, PvE has no true winning condition. All you can do is climb the stair and reach somewhere higher. Warframe needs more stairs, lots of it. How stairs are created? Balance, baby. Balance all the thing.  

 

In PvP, we're already governed by conclave point and I see no big concern in this area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it is the same principal for real life

 

wanting will move you, but wanting everything or being the best will come at the cost of things and others (whether it be money or something that you like/enjoy)

 

you cannot rise without something else being behind or below you

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 There are situations in which the point he made in that post DO happen to cover what you see discussed here on the forums.

 

 The most popular topic on these forums that his posts would pertain to are the threads talking about DE and limited edition weaponry.

 

 It is true - ranting and raving for a nerf on an item like that is pretty much just asking to handicap another player for someone without to add up. There is an extent to which that can be unreasonable.

 

 Of course - that is a touchy subject because, on the other hand, If something like the Braton Vandal was suddenly horribly overpowered in every way then of course it'd need to be toned down.

 

 Aside from that there is a lot of subjects his post does not properly cover, in my opinion. Warframes needs as a game are very different from the needs of Star Citizen. In fact, the difference is incredibly vast. The difference in complexity and scale are enormous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except Warframe is a PvE game. There is no true "win" condition other than just completing a mission, and that doesn't exactly require the most powerful god-tier weapons like Soma. Warframe does require balance to a certain degree, because that is the best way to give players variety and keep them interested.

Without balance, DE can only pump out increasingly powerful weapons for anyone to be interested in them, as anything less powerful than something that exists in-game will be ignored. For example, with Soma around, EVERY OTHER RIFLE is now obselete, if DE releases any new rifles, they MUST either be even MORE powerful than the Soma or have a very unique gimmick in order to raise interest in it, and thus get sales. And under this system, the game will suffer from a severe case of powercreep. The game will become increasingly easy as players faceroll through everything, and they will get bored and demand more "challenge". DE will thus have to raise enemy stats to balance out this powercreep, thus rendering all lesser gear NON-VIABLE instead of just obselete. The increasingly steep difficulty curve to balance powercreep will also soon become too much for new players to handle, and new players will leave because of it.

Sure, it's fine to have tiered weapons, reward player effort and give them things to work for, but this tiering must be as flat as possible, the curve must be made as low as possible to provide players with variety and choice. There are two ways of doing this. Balance, and gimmick weapons, a.k.a. "differences in kind". When it comes to balance, a powerful weapon must be equally difficult to obtain. Everything within the same tier, which require approximately equal effort to obtain, must as such have near equal power. For example, if Soma is to remain as Mastery 3, it must have power equivalent to other Mastery 3 weapons, which means a heavy nerfing. If its power level does not change, its Mastery requirement, its tiering, must be raised significantly, such as to Rank 8 (it's stronger than SUPRA, so that makes sense).

As for differences in kind, this is done by producing weapons with unique mechanics that seperate them from other weapons in terms of purpose or playstyle. For example, both Glaive and Kestrel are thrown melee, yet they have entirely different purposes. Glaive is more powerful in terms of damage, but Kestrel can ragdoll enemies as a support weapon. Neither is truly better than the other objectively, as they have different playstyles. There's also gimmick weapons, such as the Miter, or the Flux Rifle, or Torid. These have unique mechanics, making them fun to use despite not having the best stats.

There's also the fact that Warframe has the whole Forma and Supercharging thing. DE wants to sell these things, but people will only use Forma/Potatoes if they decide they'll be using a weapon for the long term. This isn't going to happen with powercreep present, where your current favourite gear can become redundant and pointless within a week when DE throws out something that plays the same but has twice the damage. Powercreep is bad for DE's income, it is an especially poor business decision due to the Forma and Supercharge system.

As such, not all weapons need to be balanced, there CAN be power tiers (Frames should ALWAYS be balanced though, it's like classes, none must be objectively better than the other), but it must be done right and kept as less steep as possible. This is a must for Warframe's success in the long run, both for player enjoyment and DE's profit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Balance as I define it for this game is as follows:

 

Having is a valid numerical and mechanical reason to use every item in the game

This can be appended so that it applies to each tier of gear.

 

Basically weapons of similar function and tier should be roughly equal, with the overall tier of weapons all having similar usability. 

 

I could go on about how to set tiers for gear in terms of power and accessibility, as well as those of early, mid and end game, but i'll save that for another thread.

 

 

My $0.02

 

 

Balance is an extremely finicky thing and is really quite difficult to achieve over all. Everything is sort of ok now, but I'd wait for armour 2.0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Aside from that there is a lot of subjects his post does not properly cover, in my opinion. Warframes needs as a game are very different from the needs of Star Citizen. In fact, the difference is incredibly vast. The difference in complexity and scale are enormous.

 

Not really. In the end, they are both games. Yes, there are MASSIVE differences, and I was not really meaning to take the post litrealy, but more the feeling that is given. That is, there is to much complain about why your x is better than my y, so yours needs a nerf or mine needs a buff kind of crap.

I also dislike the analyzing nature of some people on this forum, and I think some people would be better of playing the game, rather than doing a scientific study, witch some people seem to be doing. Now, there is plenty of room to make suggestion, and so on, but it dose get a bit ridicules some times. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also dislike the analyzing nature of some people on this forum, and I think some people would be better of playing the game, rather than doing a scientific study, witch some people seem to be doing. Now, there is plenty of room to make suggestion, and so on, but it dose get a bit ridicules some times. 

 

 It is very easy to talk down at someone who chooses to dig down into the little details of a game - but the community and the game does need people like that. There are some problems that simple opinions or skimming the details wont shed proper light on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. In the end, they are both games. Yes, there are MASSIVE differences, and I was not really meaning to take the post litrealy, but more the feeling that is given. That is, there is to much complain about why your x is better than my y, so yours needs a nerf or mine needs a buff kind of crap.

I also dislike the analyzing nature of some people on this forum, and I think some people would be better of playing the game, rather than doing a scientific study, witch some people seem to be doing. Now, there is plenty of room to make suggestion, and so on, but it dose get a bit ridicules some times. 

 

There are always complaints about X is better than Y in virtually every game. How reasonable the complaint is the problem. Asking for balance (buff and nerf) is reasonable when there is enough proof and number to back it up. Therefore, proper analyzing, calculation, and understanding of game progression and mechanic are required to create solid balance argument. It's partially scientific work at that point.

 

The archtype "OMG, his gun kill everything therefore nerf" is pointless since it's no reason to back it up and best left in the depth of the forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 It is very easy to talk down at someone who chooses to dig down into the little details of a game - but the community and the game does need people like that. There are some problems that simple opinions or skimming the details wont shed proper light on.

 

Oh, I understand that. Its a good thing, but people who do it need to take a break from doing it, and just play the game every now and then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I first played I liked the idea of progressing towards something, new planets harder enemies... then after 4 weeks of playing you are all ready strong enough to do anything, and have all planets and missions unlocked... thus the only progressing ends up being a collection game,  collecting all frames,weapons, and mods.

And there is no real reason to collect other then for the sake of collecting.  And for thoes who played a lot, and have a lot of maxed stuff, have no real way of challenging them selves in this game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But is it ultimately that what we are talking about, or would it be a hunt for the perfect loadout for ourselves? There are multiple ways to have goals and enforce ambition. It doesn't necessary have to go trough power creep to do so. Of course, there is no such thing as perfect balance and there will always be stronger builds whether you like it or not but I don't think that in a game of this scale, we should make content useless. Why limit more when the game is very limited to begin with. I don't want a game that has only one loadout to be played with and one map and mode to play and one purpose to play. I'd rather have many maps, many modes, many loadouts, many ways to play and hardest of them all, many purposes to play the game.

Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...