Jump to content
Temporary sub-forum for Update 30: Call of the Tempestarii ×

2020 Warframe Usage Stats: Overall Warframe Usage


Recommended Posts

Thanks @(XBOX)EliteGenji70667 for compiling. The usage line with Prime vs Non-Prime is interesting.

 

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics..." 

The best part will be all of the 'definitive conclusions'  about various things these numbers will used to define and defend.

Posters here already deriding other players for playing 'lazy' and 'idiot proof' equipment to let us know their e-peens are bigger - adorable!

And the calls for 'nerfs and buffs' will ring from the mountaintops now, because. "look I have Proof!"

Fun Times.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

Posters here already deriding other players for playing 'lazy' and 'idiot proof' equipment to let us know their e-peens are bigger - adorable!

There's a difference between something being relatively low effort or simple to use and literally taking nothing from the player whilst still being competitive in the damage department. Wuclone and Ignis Wraith are absolutely competitive in the damage department, Ignis for example being able to take on sortie level enemies with a 0 forma six-mod build.

If that's the precedent we're setting - that this game takes no effort - then any chance of content that satisfies the other side of the spectrum is, quite frankly, impossible. Whereas if the game is built around rewarding skill, then both sides can be satisfied. Consider TF2 or Monster Hunter. Most TF2 classes have simple, low-effort strategies that offer enough success to satisfy newer players, even on the more complicated classes like Engineer or Spy, but all the classes have high skill ceilings - even the seemingly less complicated classes like Soldier or Pyro. Monster Hunter, especially in World, does much the same thing, with many easy-to-learn weapons that have hidden layers of depth and skill. What matters is that these strategies are substantially more effective than their lower-effort counterparts, and become necessary to deal with sooner or later. TF2 will have extremely skilled players who know what they're doing dominate you unless you figure out what you're doing. Monster Hunter will have Monsters that laugh in the face of your simplistic strategies.

The issue with stuff like Ignis Wraith is that it takes no effort to use, but it's competive with - or even more effective than - more complex or interesting builds. Which means that the game doesn't reward skill, either mechanical or in buildcraft knowledge. You can work on your build all you want, but why bother if you'll get the same or better results not doing that?

Action games should reward skill. RPG's should reward clever builds. Warframe is both, and it should reward both. Ignis Wraith and Wuclone do neither.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

Action games should reward skill. RPG's should reward clever builds. Warframe is both, and it should reward both. Ignis Wraith and Wuclone do neither.

Your opinion, nothing more. You are the one putting the games and the players in little boxes that you want to conform to your world view, especially with your little buzz-word derogatory names, so cool, so hip!

If you don't like the direction of the game, so what? Who cares?

Play it or don't play it.

If you really don't like it, invest in DE, become the person that calls the shots, and change it.

If you think those other games do it better, go play them.

I think it's hilarious that gamers seem to think games have to be 'work' to be 'worthwhile'. It's a game not a job. It's entertainment, not a life-test.

If you don't like the equipment, don't use it, simple. You get to set your own level of difficulty.

People that think games should be 'work' are the gamers that lost the narrative, IMO. 🖖

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Zimzala said:

Your opinion, nothing more. You are the one putting the games and the players in little boxes that you want to conform to your world view, especially with your little buzz-word derogatory names, so cool, so hip!

I am trying to have a civil discussion with you, using game design wisdom I've picked up from research and experience. 

3 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

If you don't like the direction of the game, so what? Who cares?

Play it or don't play it.

I play it and choose to avoid these playstyles intentionally. Nevertheless, the effects they have on the overall game development still effect me and I know that it doesn't have to be this way. If a way where more people can have a better experience with a game I love, is it not reasonable to give criticism about things that stand in the way of that?

6 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

f you think those other games do it better, go play them.

I do. I also like to play Warframe, because I love the story, the world and indeed, many aspects of the gameplay. Unfortunately, several aspects of the game are unsatisfying to me, and as a consumer, I have a right to voice my opinions about that.

7 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

I think it's hilarious that gamers seem to think games have to be 'work' to be 'worthwhile'. It's a game not a job. It's entertainment, not a life-test.

Don't put words in my mouth.

My entire point is that you can design a game to reward skill, and still accommodate and be welcoming lower skilled players. But if you design a game to not reward skill, higher skill players are likely going to eventually feel alienated, and there's no way to change that. This is compounded by the fact that, the longer a game lives, the more dedicated long-time players will develop higher skill. That's simply a fact of life - the more you practice at something the better you get at it. So, if a game is not appealing to higher-skill players, that causes the game to have an even stricter shelf-life than it already might for those players.

In Warframe's case, it can also be quite hostile to newer players as well. Everyone's got those stories of being in a lobby either as or with a new player, and them being left behind because a turbo-charged player with a nuke build deleted the entire map whilst doing almost nothing. For a new, impressionable player, they don't get to play the game. A skilled player with weaker equipment can keep up with a nuke setup, as bad of a taste it might leave in the mouth, but a newer player simply does not get to have fun in co-op. What most people do as a result of that varies from person to person, and it would probably require a more in-depth analysis to know the exact trends and results, but I'd put good money on it not being a very positive experience overall, or being healthy for the game in the long run.

This ultimately means that Warframe's current design philosophy, highlighted by Ignis Wraith and Wuclone but in no way limited to them, is highly niche. It does not satisfy long-time players looking to make use of their experience and knowledge - I know this because I am one -, and it does not satisfy at least a substantial portion of newer players looking for an interesting new game to play - I know this because I was one. These players can be given a satisfying play experience.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

This ultimately means that Warframe's current design philosophy, highlighted by Ignis Wraith and Wuclone but in no way limited to them, is highly niche. It does not satisfy long-time players looking to make use of their experience and knowledge - I know this because I am one -, and it does not satisfy at least a substantial portion of newer players looking for an interesting new game to play - I know this because I was one. These players can be given a satisfying play experience.

So, because some pieces of equipment make the game easier in your opinion, the whole game design is terrible and moving in the wrong direction, got it.

You are saying the whole design philosophy is now something specific, based on a few stats and your emotional outlook and opinion, from my POV, not trying to put words in your mouth, trying to be specific.

Perhaps WF has satisfied/entertained you, as a long time player, as much as it plans to? How about that?

I just started really playing the last couple of years and this whole 'game too hard for newbies' is BS form my POV.

How about the game simply does not cater to everyone, no game can, so those players come and go as they have since the game began?

In the words of the main person at DE, TMK, 'congrats, you won WF', if it no longer offers you what you want.

I am being blunt, you can call it whatever you prefer, lots of people like to say blunt = equals mean/rude/etc.

Bluntly, you are a long time player from my POV that wants something no game company can do. At some point, you won the game. You know more than the game. You know how to beat it all modes, etc. At some point, the arc of the journey of the game in someone's life, ends. Nothing is forever. This is the part so many players become blind to, IME.

This is not about the 'right' to say things, or about right and wrong, it's about accepting reality, and not trying to bring doom and gloom because a few hardcore players are not getting the things they want, namely a 'reason to come to work', IMO, that no game company can ever, ever satisfy, I have watched these GaaS games for two decades try and try again. They ALL end up having a 'niche'. No game can satisfy everyone and no game should try.

WF has all kinds of things it could do differently, duh. A lot of us like it for what it is and don't feel the need to try and tell a successful game company what to do next, or to tell other players the things they like to play make the game 'lazy and dumb'. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zimzala said:

So, because some pieces of equipment make the game easier in your opinion, the whole game design is terrible and moving in the wrong direction, got it.

 

1 hour ago, Loza03 said:

I also like to play Warframe, because I love the story, the world and indeed, many aspects of the gameplay

 

1 hour ago, Zimzala said:

You are saying the whole design philosophy is now something specific, based on a few stats and your emotional outlook and opinion, from my POV, not trying to put words in your mouth, trying to be specific.

I've held this opinion - or rather, a less informed version of - this opinion for far longer than these stats have been public. I've made threads going back to 2018 about this, and whilst I disagree with a fair bit of the statements or suggestions made in those threads (especially since, at least back then, there was a not insignificant amount of emotional backlash), I've nevertheless been a proponent of a higher skill ceiling for some time.

1 hour ago, Zimzala said:

I just started really playing the last couple of years and this whole 'game too hard for newbies' is BS form my POV.

Likewise - well, to some degree at least. Certainly, it's nowhere near as much of an issue as I think some players have suggested.

Which is why I pointed out that much of its current game design philosophy hurts the new player experience by virtue of them, willingly or otherwise, having to play in the 0-effort playstyles, because they're matched with players who use them. In effect, things that are making the game too low-effort and low-interactiong for longtime players also remove the effort and interaction from new players as well.

1 hour ago, Zimzala said:

How about the game simply does not cater to everyone, no game can, so those players come and go as they have since the game began?

There have been many games which have successfully managed to appeal to both new players and longtime players. In fact, many of the most successful games in the world have been built on such a basis. Pokemon, Tetris, Minecraft - games with vast audiences that are simple to understand and have a low skill floor, but offer vast amounts of depth for those seeking willing to seek it. By contrast, many of the games targeted at lower-skill players at the expense of higher depth tend to die out. There's other factors, of course - marketing is a huge factor - but the trend does suggest that it's not only possible, but desirable.

1 hour ago, Zimzala said:

WF has all kinds of things it could do differently, duh. A lot of us like it for what it is and don't feel the need to try and tell a successful game company what to do next, or to tell other players the things they like to play make the game 'lazy and dumb'. 

Warframe is no longer a successful game.

I hate to break this to you, but it isn't. Leyou has reported losses for (if my memory is accurate) three years running, citing Warframe's flagging performance as the reason. And players have been citing issues regarding a lacking skill ceiling for even longer.

This is not a coincidence.

It seems I was mistaken - although I still stand by the core point for other reasons (discussed in a later post), I was misinformed about the evidence.

Please refer to a future post for more details on this.

Edited by Loza03
Correction.
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

Warframe is no longer a successful game.

I hate to break this to you, but it isn't. Leyou has reported losses for (if my memory is accurate) three years running, citing Warframe's flagging performance as the reason. And players have been citing issues regarding a lacking skill ceiling for even longer.

This is not a coincidence.

I just checked Leyou's finical statements and the only time I could find that they reported a loss on warframe was 2019 which the report put down to the release of competitive games aimed at a similar audience, reduction of spending on console in anticipation of the release of nex gen consoles and reduction of new content released due to the amount of work empyrean took to create. I've linked the financial statements so you have them. Obviously the 2020 interim report has a loss on it but that's been attributed to DE having to close there offices due to covid restrictions in Canada.

http://leyoutech.com.hk/investors-relation/financial-reports

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Troposphere6 said:

I just checked Leyou's finical statements and the only time I could find that they reported a loss on warframe was 2019 which the report put down to the release of competitive games aimed at a similar audience, reduction of spending on console in anticipation of the release of nex gen consoles and reduction of new content released due to the amount of work empyrean took to create. I've linked the financial statements so you have them. Obviously the 2020 interim report has a loss on it but that's been attributed to DE having to close there offices due to covid restrictions in Canada.

http://leyoutech.com.hk/investors-relation/financial-reports

It does seem I was mistaken. I apologise.

However, regarding the losses we have had, it's still hard to suggest that Warframe's failings are not unrelated. In particular for 2020, the impact of the Covid-19 crisis financially would likely be somewhat mitigated by the fact  that 2020 was one of the best financial years in gaming for a long time. Several games which saw no support whatsoever boomed in popularity during this time - including the aforementioned TF2 - so in all brutal honesty, that statement comes off as somewhat hollow. Even in 2019, losing sales to competition does at least infer that your product is inferior to some degree, especially if it was maintained the following year.

I suppose it will come down to whenever we receive the 2020 annual report to see, but the fact does remain that the previous two reports have both shown losses.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Loza03 said:

Warframe is no longer a successful game.

And? Even if true, which seems interesting since they still pay their employees, what I think you mean is that from your POV the profit revenue is not where the company wants it to be. That's for the professionals and bean counters to fix, not some player grousing about minutiae of the equipment in the game.

Not an investor. Not an employee. Don't have my personal well-being wrapped up in the game. I give them money and play the game, that's what I can do as a customer.

I know the numbers of players increased while the overall money train went down a bit. Happens, it's a GaaS game. Again, so? DE pivots and does other things, as game companies do, even if WF fades - DE is a successful game company, to say otherwise is silly. To argue that the company is not successful because one of it's games fades from popularity is silly. To say the game is not successful is silly as well, based on it's lifetime. Is it no longer profitable? Perhaps, but that does not mean it was not a success, nor does it mean we have the whole picture. One of the first things one learns in biz 101 is that just because a company or service closes, does not mean it failed.

IME, players have been saying the same things you are saying about all GaaS games for their entire lifetimes. Seen it happen over and over and over again, the exact same arguments.

Even WoW, the 800 pound gorilla.

The 'Internet noise' around a game is just that - noise. Complainers are loud. Armchair C-level comments are endless.

Again, from my POV, you and many other gamers have simply outgrown the game. If the entire market outgrows the game, it will fade like many others have, some hanging on for many years, others dying.

It is just so entertaining that people think these forums actually have some 'power' to change that.

PS: Not to mention, saying the game and the players are being 'dumbed down by design' is the 'causing the game to die', which IS the narrative being pushed, IMO.

Edited by Zimzala
PS
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

And? Even if true, which seems interesting since they still pay their employees, what I think you mean is that from your POV the profit revenue is not where the company wants it to be. That's for the professionals and bean counters to fix, not some player grousing about minutiae of the equipment in the game.

It's also for the game devs to fix. Because if the bean counters fix it, it will be worse for all of us.

I am giving my feedback on my personal reasons for my reduced playtime and financial backing.

5 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

IME, players have been saying the same things you are saying about all GaaS games for their entire lifetimes. Seen it happen over and over and over again, the exact same arguments.

Most of those games they talk about are still profitable.

For example, TF2 (a classic OH  IT'S DYING game) is still profitable in large part due to the steam marketplace. It has also seen recent player growth. My claim is not backed by emotional wailings - it is backed by the company who runs the game saying that they lost money during one of the most profitable times for their industry in years. 

7 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

It is just so entertaining that people think these forums actually have some 'power' to change that.

... and just because my personal impact is small, miniscule, I should give up trying to make one of my favourite games better? Give up providing feedback as to how they can improve it?

I'm afraid that I'm not interested in defeatism. Despite everything, I still think Warframe has a future, still deserves a future. And that if I want that to happen, I need to offer what little I can.

I am one voice, yes, and my one voice is small. But if I can at least add to a chorus of voices that DE can parse through to figure out what's wrong, why people are not supporting them like they used to? Positive change can be enacted. It has been enacted before, and it can be again.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

I am one voice, yes, and my one voice is small. But if I can at least add to a chorus of voices that DE can parse through to figure out what's wrong, why people are not supporting them like they used to? Positive change can be enacted. It has been enacted before, and it can be again.

By saying the equipment created and players choose to play makes them lazy and dumb?

Really? How does that work, exactly?

Positive changes are awesome, but positive to one person is negative to another in many cases.

How is saying the players of the game are lazy and dumb for using equipment in the game to progress a positive outlook?

That's where this started - implying the players are lazy and dumb because of statistics and implying the game company is dumbing down the game as it's current trajectory...with those statistics, even if some players have decided to 'feel bad' about the game for however long.

How is that promoting positive change?

Also, what makes any poster here think they have actually given DE any bit of data they do not already have? These stats give them all they need, forums are just here for passionate players to express themselves, IME, we are not giving DE any data they do not already possess.

It's not about 'defeatism' it's about reality. DE as a game maker makes what they can make. Like iit or don't. complain or don't.

Thinking that telling players they are lazy and dumb for using equipment in the game the way it's intended to be used and then calling the devs out for catering to the players lazy and dumb is not, IMO, a 'positive' tack on improving the game, it's just elitist players grousing that a game company cannot fulfill their desires.

Edited by Zimzala
clarifying
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Zimzala said:

By saying the equipment created and players choose to play makes them lazy and dumb?

Where, exactly did I say that?

I have been intentionally focusing all of my criticisms on the items themselves precisely for this reason - it is entirely unhelpful to blame the players for what they play. Naturally, players are going to move to the most efficient options. If those most efficient options present a problem, then they should be cut out, not the players.

In this situation, 'most efficient' refers to the extremely low-effort playstyles exemplified by Wuclone and Ignis Wraith. I would again like to stress that these are not the only offenders, merely the focus of this particular discussion given their ranking in the stats. These pose an issue for the reasons I have already cited - in summary:

They remain competitive with higher-skill options, discouraging player experimentation

As a consequence of the above, this discourages and alienates higher-skill players who seek more involvement with the games mechanics as they are not encouraged, or even discouraged from playing the way they want to.

Furthermore, since players of variable equipment are matched together, newer players will also be exposed to these playstyles, which in turn has an effect on their opinions and enjoyment, potentially causing them to stop playing.

6 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

That's where this started - implying the players are lazy and dumb because of statistics and implying the game company is dumbing down the game as it's current trajectory...with those statistics, even if some players have decided to 'feel bad' about the game for however long.

If that came off, I can assure you  it was not my intent. I am attempting to keep my reasoning purely to either objective fact, or wisdom that I have learned from other sources. I have little interest in discussions based on ad hominem or emotional appeals beyond the effects that things may have - of course, emotion cannot be entirely divorced due to the sheer nature of the discussion. I have stated my reasoning clearly, and as I said, have been actively trying to avoid judgements of other players, explicit or implicit, because it's simply not helpful.

10 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

Also, what makes any poster here think they have actually given DE any bit of data they do not already have? These stats give them all they need, forums are just here for passionate players to express themselves, IME, we are not giving DE any data they do not already possess.

DE have extensive quantitative data. What forums and feedback can offer is qualitative data, which is often overlooked.

In other words, DE knows the what. There's nothing of value we can offer them there. I, and the rest of the forums, can offer the why.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

It does seem I was mistaken. I apologise.

However, regarding the losses we have had, it's still hard to suggest that Warframe's failings are not unrelated. In particular for 2020, the impact of the Covid-19 crisis financially would likely be somewhat mitigated by the fact  that 2020 was one of the best financial years in gaming for a long time. Several games which saw no support whatsoever boomed in popularity during this time - including the aforementioned TF2 - so in all brutal honesty, that statement comes off as somewhat hollow. Even in 2019, losing sales to competition does at least infer that your product is inferior to some degree, especially if it was maintained the following year.

I suppose it will come down to whenever we receive the 2020 annual report to see, but the fact does remain that the previous two reports have both shown losses.

Loosing out to competitors in a relatively open market space doesn't bear any inference of inferiority. It just demonstration of supply and demand. Before 2019 warframe was relatively uncontested in it's niche when another game is published in that area some of warframes players are going to be lost to it as a matter of course.

I think the real cause of the losses was the "content drought" warframe makes money by making new content, and they reduced that in 2019 and 2020 for various reasons. Once they get back to a more regular schedule, the profits will go back up. Railjack was always going to cause some loss of profits just because the technical aspects were so complex and they did themselves no favors with how much they marketed it, so it really isn't surprising that they recorded a loss in profits. That doesn't mean they didn't break even it just means they didn't make as much as last year.

The covid crisis also caused issues with there business model which is why they were unable to cash in on the boom in the gaming industry; they didn't have a product to sell when people wanted to buy. Now we could have a conversation about how DE monetizes warframe as a result of the financial reports. DE's finical problems are caused by there monetization tactics and not their game design strategies. That doesn't mean that they don't have game design flaws; it just means that the financials aren't the place to look for them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

Where, exactly did I say that?

In other words, DE knows the what. There's nothing of value we can offer them there. I, and the rest of the forums, can offer the why.

The idea was presented that DE is catering to these players by making equipment for them and that the very act of doing so was validating their 'lazy' playstyles.

I was directly referring to the 'art of doing nothing' and the 'cello tape' comments, I don't care who made them.

I postulate that DE does not, in fact, need you or any other forum goer to tell them the 'why'. Pretty sure they could find that out without these forums existing, based on what I know about feedback loops and software companies.

Do you think DE thinks they made the equipment you dislike to make the game more or less what DE envisions the game to be?

Is what you want more, or less, important than what DE chooses to produce based on projected ROI and market success? You want to talk about the finances and the money, that's what counts.

As I stated, there are plenty of things DE could do differently and that would be 'better' to some portion of the player base.

I think anyone that thinks what they post on these forums is some epiphany for the company is really deep down their own rabbit hole, as it were.

So higher skilled players are randomly matched with low skilled players if you hit Public...so what? Really. This is how this game works. If a player that thinks they know oh-so-much about the game has not realized this and the corollary is that they have to find the kind of teams they prefer outside of Public matches, then they don't really know that much about the game, huh?

There is no issue beyond some players not wanting to play with players that are not 'good enough' to play with them, based on your prose, from my POV.

Why is this DEs problem and not the problem of the 'vet' players that know how to avoid said problem? Don't get me wrong, I might actually team up with other people if I had more refined match-making options, but this game does not have that, so I play solo so I can avoid BOTH the elitist players that think the rest of us are too 'casual' and the players that want someone to explain each thing to them in detail in chat. As players, we have the power to dictate our playtime, our player agency has not been taken from us.

Finally, the meta-chasers and the content locusts are things DE cannot stop, no game company can. There will always be people that just go find 'the meta items' in a game and use them, without any sort of experimenting or original thought, they enjoy picking up someone else's save-game and playing form there, so they can say they finished the game and go on to the next. This is human nature and the state of modern gaming, a game company will not prevent that.

All of this drama, literally, based off of a couple posters seeing a couple items used often and assuming from that, the game is doomed, because players will just not be engaged since there are easier options, because you know, the Internet said so, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

A blattant proof that the playerbase is clueless on average wich is good for DE, it means that there is a constant influx of new players(even in bad wf years like 2020) but very bad for us who played it a lot, because it doesn't incentivise at all releasing polished content, watching at those numbers :). I mean if I was in charge at the balance on WF and seeing those numbers I'd be pretty down.

It won't stop me tagging public, even in RJ because I think that discarding the social aspect is never the right stance.

Edited by Galuf
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Zimzala

Do you have a point about the topic at hand? This conversation about whether or not forums provide value or not is frankly speaking irrelevant, and is just derailing the thread for other people who might have something to say.

I have made my reasoning clear. You seem uninterested in actually discussing them, or any related topics to the actual content of the thread. Instead you are contenting yourself to making ad hominem attacks and assumptions of elitism.

Complaining about other people doesn't help. Complaining about how you don't think feedback is useful doesn't help. And, yes, maybe the feedback I'm providing doesn't help either. But I'm trying.

With respect, I am no longer going to humour you in this pursuit.

 

To the rest of the thread: I apologise.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Troposphere6 said:

Loosing out to competitors in a relatively open market space doesn't bear any inference of inferiority. It just demonstration of supply and demand. Before 2019 warframe was relatively uncontested in it's niche when another game is published in that area some of warframes players are going to be lost to it as a matter of course.

I think the real cause of the losses was the "content drought" warframe makes money by making new content, and they reduced that in 2019 and 2020 for various reasons. Once they get back to a more regular schedule, the profits will go back up. Railjack was always going to cause some loss of profits just because the technical aspects were so complex and they did themselves no favors with how much they marketed it, so it really isn't surprising that they recorded a loss in profits. That doesn't mean they didn't break even it just means they didn't make as much as last year.

The covid crisis also caused issues with there business model which is why they were unable to cash in on the boom in the gaming industry; they didn't have a product to sell when people wanted to buy. Now we could have a conversation about how DE monetizes warframe as a result of the financial reports. DE's finical problems are caused by there monetization tactics and not their game design strategies. That doesn't mean that they don't have game design flaws; it just means that the financials aren't the place to look for them.

If I'm being honest, 2019 felt like a response to the content drought complaints of 2018. In comparison, there was a lot of other 'stuff', and a lot of it was of various themes.

In terms of the big 'title update' updates - big content drops for 2018, you had Beasts of the Sanctuary, the Sacrifice, Mask of the Revenant and some of Fortuna. Two of those were also on the smaller side - the Sacrifice especially was far smaller in terms of secondary content compared to TSD and TWW, and Revenant wasn't even a full quest. 2019, by comparison, got the rest of Fortuna, Nightwave, the Jupiter Remaster (including a new game mode and boss fight), Kuva Liches and Empyrean, all of which were 'bigger' in terms of raw stuff, like new enemy types and new tech - with the main exception being Fortuna of course. DE admitted 2018 had a content drought, but they didn't for 2019.

Whilst it's probably debatable which had more overall, 2019 certainly did provide it at a much steadier pace. All its updates were smaller than Fortuna, but bigger than the other 2018 updates. To keep up the metaphor, 2019 had more steady rather than a dry season followed by a monsoon.

What's less favourable is... well, for lack of a nicer term, the quality of that new content. Simply put, the new stuff added in 2019 just didn't please the community as much, and if anything, actively angered the community. And if I'm being honest... even if 2020 was closer to '18 in terms of stuff, again, games with absolutely no new content saw booms in 2020. That's the big kicker that turned my opinion. If absolutely nothing is getting better results than DE's something? There's something rotten in the state of Warframe.

 

For reference, I'm been relatively optimistic about Warframe's overall healht up until fairly recently - I've had my concerns about its balance for ages, but I've been relatively unconcerned about its future. But recent news is what has caused me to feel troubled about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Loza03 said:

@Zimzala

Do you have a point about the topic at hand?

Yes, it was in all of my posts - the idea that players will take this data and then make conclusions based on the data and use the data to 'prove' things they have already decided.

Was pretty clear from my first post, IMO.

It's obvious this is already the case, as we are discussing that, in addition to if such discussion make an impact on DE in this setting.

These stats are just that - raw data - and players, IMO/IME, will use that raw data like all statistics get used - as a tool to convince others into their line of thinking.

This data means nothing on it's own, as interesting as it is, really, without some pretty extensive meta-data to along with it, IMO, yet we already have a POV presented here that, IMO, pushes the idea that the number and type of players using things like Wukong and Ignis Wraith are somehow devaluing the player experience.

I think using that data to come to these conclusions is less than 'scientific' as it were and it always amuses me when people do it.

For example, all the Wukong stat means is that Wukong got more playtime. No references really to if it was used more solo, or more in specific team instances where someone could somehow use it to be a 'lesser effective and lazy' player on a team, or if it gets used for a specific kind of content that is more popular, etc.

Yet, humans are pattern seeking creatures that cannot abide data that does not, in turn, provide patterns for them to interpret, so our brains make things up...it is fascinating to me to watch people try and infer things out of raw data, so this thread (and the data itself) is awesome!

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

If I'm being honest, 2019 felt like a response to the content drought complaints of 2018. In comparison, there was a lot of other 'stuff', and a lot of it was of various themes.

In terms of the big 'title update' updates - big content drops for 2018, you had Beasts of the Sanctuary, the Sacrifice, Mask of the Revenant and some of Fortuna. Two of those were also on the smaller side - the Sacrifice especially was far smaller in terms of secondary content compared to TSD and TWW, and Revenant wasn't even a full quest. 2019, by comparison, got the rest of Fortuna, Nightwave, the Jupiter Remaster (including a new game mode and boss fight), Kuva Liches and Empyrean, all of which were 'bigger' in terms of raw stuff, like new enemy types and new tech - with the main exception being Fortuna of course. DE admitted 2018 had a content drought, but they didn't for 2019.

Whilst it's probably debatable which had more overall, 2019 certainly did provide it at a much steadier pace. All its updates were smaller than Fortuna, but bigger than the other 2018 updates. To keep up the metaphor, 2019 had more steady rather than a dry season followed by a monsoon.

What's less favourable is... well, for lack of a nicer term, the quality of that new content. Simply put, the new stuff added in 2019 just didn't please the community as much, and if anything, actively angered the community. And if I'm being honest... even if 2020 was closer to '18 in terms of stuff, again, games with absolutely no new content saw booms in 2020. That's the big kicker that turned my opinion. If absolutely nothing is getting better results than DE's something? There's something rotten in the state of Warframe.

 

For reference, I'm been relatively optimistic about Warframe's overall healht up until fairly recently - I've had my concerns about its balance for ages, but I've been relatively unconcerned about its future. But recent news is what has caused me to feel troubled about it.

The 2019 financials were very specific about the causes of the losses in 2019 the amount of time and effort put into empyrean were specifically mentioned as a cause due to the amount of attention it pulled from other fields of expansion. 2020 was always going to be problematic DE wasn't set up in the first half of the year to work from home without studio access. 

The financials do not give cause to say that there is something rotten in the state of warframe. It's just not the case, now if by the end of 2021 things are still not doing well when they aught to have well that's a different conversation. If the call of the tempestarii is a repeat of the old blood I might agree with you but so far all we have is one year that they could have done something about and a crisis they couldn't have prepared for. My point is there's nothing to worry about from what the financials tell us yet. There isn't enough information there to warrant anything other than curiosity. Now if DE fails to deal with it, which I doubt they will money is on the line after all, then I might agree that something is wrong. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Troposphere6 said:

The 2019 financials were very specific about the causes of the losses in 2019 the amount of time and effort put into empyrean were specifically mentioned as a cause due to the amount of attention it pulled from other fields of expansion. 2020 was always going to be problematic DE wasn't set up in the first half of the year to work from home without studio access. 

The financials do not give cause to say that there is something rotten in the state of warframe. It's just not the case, now if by the end of 2021 things are still not doing well when they aught to have well that's a different conversation. If the call of the tempestarii is a repeat of the old blood I might agree with you but so far all we have is one year that they could have done something about and a crisis they couldn't have prepared for. My point is there's nothing to worry about from what the financials tell us yet. There isn't enough information there to warrant anything other than curiosity. Now if DE fails to deal with it, which I doubt they will money is on the line after all, then I might agree that something is wrong. 

I suppose that's fair enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2021-01-29 at 10:08 PM, Ace-Bounty-Hunter said:

It's not surprising that Excal is number one since he's generally a new Tenno's first choice when starting the game. 

I'm just happy to see the Monkey King riding his heels at the second place spot. He truly is the best all round frame in the game.

Yeah, but check out the MR heatmap for Excal. He's used for people's first 3-4 MRs... and then just ditched. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

sorry for making this necro thread come back.

but i'm just sad Grendel is pretty much doomed.

 

even if DE reworked him or tweaked him or whatever, his acquisition is so frustrating.

i got my grendel from a dear friend of mine as a gift, that's why Grendel is one of my favorites <3 

but DE really needs to get rid of his missions or make his mission keys drop not from arbitration rewards. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2021-01-29 at 5:25 PM, Ver1dian said:

Also, how is Nezha so low...

Original is Dojo researched and Prime is fairly new, kind of limits availability. Now if those stats were from the past 2 months only, holy hell he'd be in the top 5, he's everywhere now.

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...