Jump to content

Endgame


SheikaVoid

Recommended Posts

There's no such thing as infinitely sustainable PvE, because the developers can only put out so much content within each release date to satisfy the players.

Thus, PvP is required, but not some bogeyman like Conclave.

Why not make people care about the world?  Organizations in EVE and other MMOs draw player investment through well-fleshed-out economy and war systems.

Really, a reworked Solar Rail, or even a more substantial system of Syndicates/Supporting Factions wherein clans and individuals compete against enemies for a real, tangible reward with actual implications might sustain a lively playerbase.

That's all, just an idea, and likely an overwrought one, but I'd like to hear some opinions on the implementation of meaningful and "competitive" PvE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's pretend that you own an imaginary restaurant, hip cafe, or coffee shop. One day a regular asks "so anything new on the menu?". Would you answer:

A. You already tried everything. You're at the endgame. You can just have your usual, that's basically the best that we can do, it won't get any higher than that.

B. Oh there will be something new! We might not have it right now, but best believe that the best is yet to come! We'll always have something new that you might like even more than your last favorite!

 

If you answer "A". Yeah you could use an endgame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, SheikaVoid said:

There's no such thing as infinitely sustainable PvE

Yes there is, you just defined it:

27 minutes ago, SheikaVoid said:

Why not make people care about the world?  Organizations in EVE and other MMOs draw player investment through well-fleshed-out economy and war systems.

Really, a reworked Solar Rail, or even a more substantial system of Syndicates/Supporting Factions wherein clans and individuals compete against enemies for a real, tangible reward with actual implications might sustain a lively playerbase.

There's your sustainable PvE. There are a lot of abandoned systems that could support this kind of stuff with relatively minor tweaks just begging to be revamped. One I bring up all the time is taking the Relay attack events off rails (Fomorian, Razorback) so Relay can actually be destroyed, and then allow the community to rebuild them like we rebuilt Strata during the Pyrus Project.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Soy77 said:

Let's pretend that you own an imaginary restaurant, hip cafe, or coffee shop. One day a regular asks "so anything new on the menu?". Would you answer:

A. You already tried everything. You're at the endgame. You can just have your usual, that's basically the best that we can do, it won't get any higher than that.

B. Oh there will be something new! We might not have it right now, but best believe that the best is yet to come! We'll always have something new that you might like even more than your last favorite!

 

If you answer "A". Yeah you could use an endgame.

Certainly an apt analogy, but implying the existence of PvP-PvE doesn't negate regular releases, seeing as this would be more of a one-time integration, theoretically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, PublikDomain said:

Yes there is, you just defined it:

There's your sustainable PvE. There are a lot of abandoned systems that could support this kind of stuff with relatively minor tweaks just begging to be revamped. One I bring up all the time is taking the Relay attack events off rails (Fomorian, Razorback) so Relay can actually be destroyed, and then allow the community to rebuild them like we rebuilt Strata during the Pyrus Project.

"Really, a reworked Solar Rail, or even a more substantial system of Syndicates/Supporting Factions wherein clans and individuals compete against enemies for a real, tangible reward with actual implications might sustain a lively playerbase. "

Would that, in your view, count as PvP due to clan on clan interference, and would more of a "effect on the world without the need for player conflict" kinda thing be more to your tastes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SheikaVoid said:

"Really, a reworked Solar Rail, or even a more substantial system of Syndicates/Supporting Factions wherein clans and individuals compete against enemies for a real, tangible reward with actual implications might sustain a lively playerbase. "

Would that, in your view, count as PvP due to clan on clan interference, and would more of a "affect on the world without the need for player conflict" kinda thing be more to your tastes?

Are those enemies other clans or just NPCs? Either way IMO it doesn't really matter, since it can and should include both. Not everyone is going to like every activity, so a healthy endgame needs to include many activities to engage many different kinds of players. PvE, PvP, PvEvP, CvC, whatever vs whatever. All of them are viable options that would help give players things to do between updates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's fair to say that the major "issue", if there even is one, is more that Warframe's world feels meaningless, and I propose that some form of persistent and meaningful PvE-PvP would be the ideal solution to such a "problem"

Again, all subjective as always.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, PublikDomain said:

Are those enemies other clans or just NPCs? Either way IMO it doesn't really matter, since it can and should include both. Not everyone is going to like every activity, so a healthy endgame needs to include many activities to engage many different kinds of players. PvE, PvP, PvEvP, CvC, whatever vs whatever. All of them are viable options that would help give players things to do between updates.

Agreed completely, I just think that PvP-PvE is likely the most engaging manner of sustainable, "meaningful", content, but see the above for a more clear statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because, let's say you're an invested player who doesn't want to finish every frame quest, but has beaten all the major story quests and has decent gear, you might want more of a reason to get invested than better loot, but maybe I'm just weird for wanting more than looting out of a looter shooter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, SheikaVoid said:

There's no such thing as infinitely sustainable PvE, because the developers can only put out so much content within each release date to satisfy the players.

Thus, PvP is required, but not some bogeyman like Conclave.

This is false, the amount of content available for PVE in the game far outweighs that of PVP, not to mention any player would quickly get tired of the same PVP maps and start demanding new maps that would only take up time that should be invested in the game's main focus which is the PVE.
PVP was never even suppose to be a thing in the game, the Devs only implemented it for a very minuscule number of players and it takes them a lot of effort to work on anything regarding PVP because of balancing, still players manage to find frames or weapons that are too powerful and make even PVP trivial and repetitive.

Also, Edit button is a thing, stop double/triple posting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, SheikaVoid said:

Because, let's say you're an invested player who doesn't want to finish every frame quest, but has beaten all the major story quests and has decent gear, you might want more of a reason to get invested than better loot, but maybe I'm just weird for wanting more than looting out of a looter shooter.

There's nothin' weird about wanting the game you like to be better. Warframe's got a lot of room for improvement, and the only way for it to improve is for players to talk about it. Ignore the haters (↑) and talk about whatever endgame you want. With how big and varied the community is there'll be people who want the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BiancaRoughfin said:

This is false, the amount of content available for PVE in the game far outweighs that of PVP, not to mention any player would quickly get tired of the same PVP maps and start demanding new maps that would only take up time that should be invested in the game's main focus which is the PVE.
PVP was never even suppose to be a thing in the game, the Devs only implemented it for a very minuscule number of players and it takes them a lot of effort to work on anything regarding PVP because of balancing, still players manage to find frames or weapons that are too powerful and make even PVP trivial and repetitive.

Also, Edit button is a thing, stop double/triple posting.

Yikes, I don't think you're quite giving me the charity of thought I deserve.

I'm speaking strictly about more "meaningful" PvP-PvE, and I pretty explicitly said that Conclave style frame-on-frame combat wasn't the focus of the idea.

I'm well aware that the amount of PvE content outweighs PvP, and I even suggested a more meaningful form of PvE, and even "competitive" PvE. 

So, in addition to explicitly not promoting the Conclave bogeyman, which would be the whole repetitive maps focus, I said that these fixes would, ideally, be a one-time thing, such as changing the conflict systems with the Corpus-Grineer nodes, Fomorians and Razorbacks, and other such PvE content, maybe splashing in a bit of competitive PvE. 

As for posting, I apologize if that makes the thread more difficult to read, but I'm not accustomed to people really caring.

 

Append. - More PvE content does not equal infinitely sustainable content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like how people complain that Warframe is repetitive and has no endgame but will happily start and/or engage with a billion "endgame pls" threads that are all basically the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ebrl said:

I like how people complain that Warframe is repetitive and has no endgame but will happily start and/or engage with a billion "endgame pls" threads that are all basically the same.

Maybe the fact that people complain so vocally implies that folks actually want endgame content.

Aside from the term endgame itself, anything that increases the feeling of the world and the different invasions/offensives/et al would, IMO, boost some of the general longevity and enjoyment greatly, but hey, to each their own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Oberick said:

There's no such thing as infinitely sustainable PvP either which is why pvp games often die so fast.  

Well sure, on a very technical level, that's true regardless, nothing is infinitely sustainable.  I understand that PvP is a buzzword, but I don't see why PvE-PvP can't exist alongside existing mechanics, especially when so much of the game is already obsolete for higher MR players.

Even something as simple as taking Fomorians off rails and adding a little more meaning to the Grineer-Corpus conflicts could, in my view, enhance the game.

Little rant:

[I've heard and understand the argument that nothing should be locked behind PvP because people are "forced" to play something they don't enjoy, but you're criticized for whining when you don't want to complete Nightwave tasks?]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SheikaVoid said:

Well sure, on a very technical level, that's true regardless, nothing is infinitely sustainable.  I understand that PvP is a buzzword, but I don't see why PvE-PvP can't exist alongside existing mechanics, especially when so much of the game is already obsolete for higher MR players.

Even something as simple as taking Fomorians off rails and adding a little more meaning to the Grineer-Corpus conflicts could, in my view, enhance the game.

Little rant:

[I've heard and understand the argument that nothing should be locked behind PvP because people are "forced" to play something they don't enjoy, but you're criticized for whining when you don't want to complete Nightwave tasks?]

PVP requires a ton more balancing and work than PvE does so can take up alot more dev time for half the content.

For example you metion the Grineer-Corpus conflict.  Now if they just made something pvp related to it then they would need to balance all the weapons and almost 50 warframes.  However they could possibly do pvp related content for it where the players controlled prebuilt grineer/corpus "classes/weapons" and there is a much smaller pool but then you have players who want to use their own warframes so they can two shot noobs complaining and in the end if people don't like it you wasted all those resources on a pretty cool idea but it could have went into something else that would have seen more engagement. 

If you really want more pvp content I think you're going to have to convince a ton more people to play the pvp that we currently got. If they suddenly see a 5000% increase in people playing pvp then they might divert more resources into creating pvp content otherwise I don't think you're going to see any major pvp content anytime soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Oberick said:

PVP requires a ton more balancing and work than PvE does so can take up alot more dev time for half the content.

For example you metion the Grineer-Corpus conflict.  Now if they just made something pvp related to it then they would need to balance all the weapons and almost 50 warframes.  However they could possibly do pvp related content for it where the players controlled prebuilt grineer/corpus "classes/weapons" and there is a much smaller pool but then you have players who want to use their own warframes so they can two shot noobs complaining and in the end if people don't like it you wasted all those resources on a pretty cool idea but it could have went into something else that would have seen more engagement. 

If you really want more pvp content I think you're going to have to convince a ton more people to play the pvp that we currently got. If they suddenly see a 5000% increase in people playing pvp then they might divert more resources into creating pvp content otherwise I don't think you're going to see any major pvp content anytime soon.

I agree, when I say PvE-PvP, I really mean a more brute system like some old MMOs, where these conflicts would have meaning, and you would be able to affect the "story" of these conflicts by siding with one group. 

I should clarify, when I say PvE-PvP, I mean competing against other people through the proxy of PvE, like some events from the past, and when I say inter-clan, I mean like the old Solar Rails system.

Actual, frame-against-frame PvP is a favorite of mine, but I, too, don't see it as viable.

 

Append. - Playing as Corpus or Grineer would be badass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At present, PvE is just the grind, it's tedious and gives no satisfaction, hence why everyone gets bored and periodically quits the game because repeated PvE is 99% of the game

When players say there's nothing to do in the game, it's true despite the massive amount of content, because the only thing to do in the game is the same thing just with a different background every time

There is no endgame because DE didn't give us one, and I hope they come up with something within 2-3 years or this game will be one of those that you enjoy but in the end leaves a bitter taste in your mouth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SheikaVoid said:

I agree, when I say PvE-PvP, I really mean a more brute system like some old MMOs, where these conflicts would have meaning, and you would be able to affect the "story" of these conflicts by siding with one group. 

I should clarify, when I say PvE-PvP, I mean competing against other people through the proxy of PvE, like some events from the past, and when I say inter-clan, I mean like the old Solar Rails system.

Actual, frame-against-frame PvP is a favorite of mine, but I, too, don't see it as viable.

 

Append. - Playing as Corpus or Grineer would be badass.

Things like that can work but often times ends up just having everyone join one side to be the winner since nobody wants to be the loser and winners often get better rewards.  Like if in the first week the Corpus have a massive lead then a ton of people are going to jump ship to the Corpus or the people the people who haven't chosen sides yet would do so if you are locked into your faction once you make a choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BiancaRoughfin said:

This is false, the amount of content available for PVE in the game far outweighs that of PVP, not to mention any player would quickly get tired of the same PVP maps and start demanding new maps that would only take up time that should be invested in the game's main focus which is the PVE.
PVP was never even suppose to be a thing in the game, the Devs only implemented it for a very minuscule number of players and it takes them a lot of effort to work on anything regarding PVP because of balancing, still players manage to find frames or weapons that are too powerful and make even PVP trivial and repetitive.

Also, Edit button is a thing, stop double/triple posting.

That's some heavy reality distortion you're doing there.

  • First iteration of PvP was added back in 2013, it's much older than a lot of systems in the game.
     
  • Current Conclave never had a lot of dev investment compared to the main PvE part of the game. They have barely lifted a finger to fix problems in years now. It still has dedicated players, though.
    • Why do you think it takes much time anyway? All assets are taken from PvE.
    • After the initial effort, it's mostly tweaking numbers. And now fixing bugs they introduce via PvE and shoddy separation of modes. But that's bad coding practices and could be avoided.
       
  • Main focus and side modes =/= Only focus and no time spent. But the latter is the pretty much the reality at the moment and has been over a year. Example: the big QoL patch that just happened had one mention: fixing Triple Tap's description. There are buggy weapons in there that should've been fixed a year ago. Triple Tap itself doesn't even work correctly. :facepalm:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Oberick said:

Things like that can work but often times ends up just having everyone join one side to be the winner since nobody wants to be the loser and winners often get better rewards.  Like if in the first week the Corpus have a massive lead then a ton of people are going to jump ship to the Corpus or the people the people who haven't chosen sides yet would do so if you are locked into your faction once you make a choice.

That's fair enough, I had some ideas for fleshing that out more, but, honestly, as long as some meaningful content is brought back, like maybe Solar Rails, Raids, or a better system for Fomorians (even without competition), I feel that the empty feeling would be significantly annulled.

I did have one idea about rewards in Corpus-Grineer conflicts, and the idea of a sort of leveled system where you'd get some rewards for helping regardless of the outcome, even the top-tier stuff, and the actual investment in the conflict would be a story-related thing, like maybe beating back the Grineer delays a Fomorian while beating back the Corpus delays the Razorbacks, I'm sure DE could think of something better than that anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, --EC--Adrenaline said:

At present, PvE is just the grind, it's tedious and gives no satisfaction, hence why everyone gets bored and periodically quits the game because repeated PvE is 99% of the game

When players say there's nothing to do in the game, it's true despite the massive amount of content, because the only thing to do in the game is the same thing just with a different background every time

There is no endgame because DE didn't give us one, and I hope they come up with something within 2-3 years or this game will be one of those that you enjoy but in the end leaves a bitter taste in your mouth

And there will always be players who bemoan any PvP, and are apparently perfectly willing to grind through identical non-competitive content.

I mean, I honestly don't see how PvE content can be "infinitely" rewarding without some competition or story involvement, like old Relays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SheikaVoid said:

Organizations in EVE and other MMOs draw player investment through well-fleshed-out economy and war systems.

we already have economy systems with trading, very simple free market economies, and people have a hard enough time understanding those. remember how a lot of people complain that Warframe doesn't give tutorials on anything and that you need to play with a Wiki tab on standby? adding complex economies like in EVE would just exacerbate that problem: the majority wouldn't understand how to work with it and those that do learn will likely find ways to try and screw other players. we aren't the Corpus lol.

I can get behind some kind of advanced war system though, because that's what I've always wanted Invasions to be: not just a small skirmish we get involved in, but a truly all-encompassing war that takes up the whole system on various levels. Grineer, Corpus and infested would constantly be trying to take each other's territory with or without our help, while the Infestation would keep spreading outwards from dark sectors and taking over nodes until they are wiped out and pushed back. then you'd have the Sentients dropping in when they detect that Tenno are Present, adding even further chaos to the battlefield.

as a faction takes more territory they grow in power, eventually securing their planets with Formorians, Razorbacks and (proper) Juggernauts. any and all territory can be taken and held indefinitely until another faction forces them out: no longer would planets be 100% in the possession of a faction; it's an all out war, and nobody is safe. heck, even the open world could get in on this: if the Corpus take over earth they can start showing up on the plains to steal resources from the Ostrons, or the grineer could take Venus, reach the Vallis and enslave the Solaris for themselves. both factions could try invading Deimos - seems like a losing game due to the nature of Deimos, but who could pass up all the Orokin secrets within the Iso-vaults? Railjack could be a part of this too: aiding one faction's fighters against an enemy fleet, watching Grineer Galleons and Corpus Capital ships firing their big guns at each other while fighters shoot and explode all around! 

unfortunately I think these ideas are too ambitious even for DE, or at the very least would take many years to properly implement, even if they focused ALL their effort onto it, which they won't. but hey, it costs nothing to dream, right?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kontrollo said:

That's some heavy reality distortion you're doing there.

  • First iteration of PvP was added back in 2013, it's much older than a lot of systems in the game.
     
  • Current Conclave never had a lot of dev investment compared to the main PvE part of the game. They have barely lifted a finger to fix problems in years now. It still has dedicated players, though.
    • Why do you think it takes much time anyway? All assets are taken from PvE.
    • After the initial effort, it's mostly tweaking numbers. And now fixing bugs they introduce via PvE and shoddy separation of modes. But that's bad coding practices and could be avoided.
       
  • Main focus and side modes =/= Only focus and no time spent. But the latter is the pretty much the reality at the moment and has been over a year. Example: the big QoL patch that just happened had one mention: fixing Triple Tap's description. There are buggy weapons in there that should've been fixed a year ago. Triple Tap itself doesn't even work correctly. :facepalm:

My dev time! Stay away from my precious dev time!

Angry The Lord Of The Rings GIF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...