DE really needs to add a tutorial to kuva siphons

[(PSN)jaggerwanderer]

1 hour ago, Hypernaut1 said:

I think most players prefer just going on YouTube and getting a quick summary of how to do things efficiently anyway. 

It would be a waste of time to create tutorials for everything. 

Or you know people can't figure it out for themselves and need someone else to tell them what to do. Kinda funny how that works. "I don't need someone to tell me what to do. I'm the boss! Okay I don't know what to do someone tell me NOW!"

[(PSN)Madurai-Prime]

9 minutes ago, FlerpDish said:

You also can't claim to know that 50k+ individual humans are perfectly fine with failing over and over again. Nice try though.

But we do know people have skill sets based on a below average, average, and above average scale. By it's nature, there are always gonna be more people that figure it out just fine, than there are people that can't figure it out, because the amount of average people outweighs the below average. 

We also know that online forums are only a very small fraction of the entire player base, which makes this complaint even more below average.

For the 4 people that can't figure it out (and probably other things in game if this simple task was too hard for them, they will run into more obstacles due to their incompetence) there are 20 more that figured it out just fine.

Hence why this specific argument has only popped up once or twice in a couple years.

[FlerpDish]

3 minutes ago, (PSN)Madurai-Prime said:

But we do know people have skill sets based on a below average, average, and above average scale. By it's nature, there are always gonna be more people that figure it out just fine, than there are people that can't figure it out, because the amount of average people outweighs the below average. 

We also know that online forums are only a very small fraction of the entire player base, which makes this complaint even more below average.

For the 4 people that can't figure it out (and probably other things in game if this simple task was too hard for them, they will run into more obstacles due to their incompetence) there are 20 more that figured it out just fine.

Hence why this specific argument has only popped up once or twice in a couple years.

There you go again, making more assumptions. I can't make the assumption that people play Warframe to have fun, but you can make the assumption that most people will figure everything out just fine with crappy explanations and the lack of tutorials. And the assumption that those players who didn't know what to do are "incompetent".

Let me put this in simple terms, just for you: Failing is not fun. Warframe is not a rage game. Better explanations won't hurt anyone.

Wouldn't it be much more beneficial to the game if 3 of those 4 people who would have failed didn't because the game put in better explanations? This is a PvE game, not a ranked PvP game. I really don't understand why you people are so against simple tutorials or explanations in game that help the newer players.

[(PSN)Madurai-Prime]

1 minute ago, FlerpDish said:

There you go again, making more assumptions. I can't make the assumption that people play Warframe to have fun, but you can make the assumption that most people will figure everything out just fine with crappy explanations and the lack of tutorials. And the assumption that those players who didn't know what to do are "incompetent".

Let me put this in simple terms, just for you: Failing is not fun. Warframe is not a rage game. Better explanations won't hurt anyone.

Wouldn't it be much more beneficial to the game if 3 of those 4 people who would have failed didn't because the game put in better explanations? This is a PvE game, not a ranked PvP game. I really don't understand why you people are so against simple tutorials or explanations in game that help the newer players.

It'll come in time, but it won't change that some humans at their core will skip that stuff until they have to go back and retry the second time, but we're also saying there are many reasons why this won't happen, or will at least take a very long time....because it's not a priority because most people on average are worried about more important things. 

It's a mission for a 5 plat mod. You can skip the tutorial and buy 2 in a shorter time than it takes to do a flood.

I'm just saying be realistic, DE currently has us waiting on 2 major plot driven missions and new frames coming out etc. 

It took them years to rework zephyr chroma and ash and they did one tutorial revamp for vors prize. 

 

[FlerpDish]

18 minutes ago, (PSN)Madurai-Prime said:

It'll come in time, but it won't change that some humans at their core will skip that stuff until they have to go back and retry the second time, but we're also saying there are many reasons why this won't happen, or will at least take a very long time....because it's not a priority because most people on average are worried about more important things. 

It's a mission for a 5 plat mod. You can skip the tutorial and buy 2 in a shorter time than it takes to do a flood.

I'm just saying be realistic, DE currently has us waiting on 2 major plot driven missions and new frames coming out etc. 

It took them years to rework zephyr chroma and ash and they did one tutorial revamp for vors prize. 

 

Might not be #1 priority, but new player experience should be something Warframe focuses on, even if they don't dedicate much to it.

Also I highly doubt rewording some tutorials would take that much manpower, or coding for that matter.

Obviously, the kuva siphon thing isn't the end all be all of the game. It's a niche mission that most people wont do many of, if at all. Was just pointing out how bad the in game explanation for the mission is, and how easily they could rework it and make it much clearer. I'd personally love to see more in-game tutorials and/or better explanations (I'm looking at you, Sargas Ruk), but I know DE will be slow to roll them out, if at all :/

[(PSN)thowed]

It's no different than watching people just melee away at Mr. Hammer time.  You'd think after minutes of not hurting the guy you'd try something else lol.

[Megalomaniakaal]

Considering how unrewarding the mission type is I'm inclined to argue for (either removing them which I don't expect to happen or) reworking them altogether along with their reward pool, if not in what it rewards then perhaps and much rather the amounts rewarded. Not worth playing as it stands, IMO. While at it the transmissions and cloud visibility/recognition can be improved too.

 

22 hours ago, Butterfly85 said:

She does. Tells you to use Spoiler mode and shoot the clouds. Only way she could help more is physically appear in the mission and do it herself.

As someone else already pointed out on the first page: yes, she does - but only AFTER you have already accidentally stumbled on it yourself. Which is bad.

13 hours ago, (XBOX)The Neko Otaku said:

Lotus literally says target the cloulds, vouces lines were added a year ago to help people with siphon are people deaf and unable to read?

See above.

 

15 hours ago, Kaotyke said:

The moment you get close you get a big "Press 5 to use Transference", it's already a big hint that your Warframe and weapons will not cut it.

And looking at the Siphon as it raises the braid at a direction and you see a red/black cloud coming from that direction... Looter shooter reasoning says "Shoot/Hit/Stab/Blast/Kick/Tackle/Tickle/Penetrate it!" as far as I know.

The Braid stands erect and succs cloud? Hitting erect dangle bit doesn't flaccid it... Maybe hitting the cloud? Erect dangly bit explodes... Climax.

All it needed was a child's touch.

Lewd. Also, bad touch. Something-something 'stop, don't touch me there, this is my no-no square.' _{I'm too lazy to go looking for the proper memes to link here, sue me.}

[Hypernaut1]

7 minutes ago, (PSN)thowed said:

It's no different than watching people just melee away at Mr. Hammer time.  You'd think after minutes of not hurting the guy you'd try something else lol.

I know what to do, and I'll still attack him. Just because.

[LillyRaccune]

3 hours ago, FlerpDish said:

...or they might not want to live in the wiki in case it spoils something for them?

To be fair, the writers of the wiki are pretty diligent to mark any articles that give away story elements as spoilers so you don't acidentally lose the joy of quitting the game early and not seeing the story element of surprise.

[(PSN)thowed]

9 hours ago, Hypernaut1 said:

I know what to do, and I'll still attack him. Just because.

Ok

[lowgrav]

23 hours ago, DealerOfAbsolutes said:

I'm not talking about the radar. 

I'm talking about things like Sargus Ruk weak points. Usually half the squad deals no damage to him and one guy is clean up.

they are not on the radar they are on the enimy as if somone pointed at the enimy and marked them the markers show up on certain enimys and vanish if you get closer than 7m from them and reappear when you get further ahan 7m away from the enimy (as the red marker also has the distance to the target too) so you can see where the enimy is even behind walls it dont show up on all enimys just some

[DreisterDino]

vor 12 Stunden schrieb FlerpDish:

Let me put this in simple terms, just for you: Failing is not fun.

At least say "not fun for me". This is your opinion and not an universal truth.

Like i pointed out on page 2 already, failing and learning by yourself is a key-element of gaming and part of the fun for many players.

 

I like it when i actually have to think about what to do.

I like it when i have to observe the environment to figure things out.

In this particular case: I like it that i have to watch the braid to see where the cloud will come from, i like it that i have to listen to the sound of the cloud to get a better indicator of where it actually is, and i like it that i have to pay attention. This makes this mission just slightly less braindead and forces a bit of active gameplay from me.

 

This mission could be made "fail-proof":

• The Harvester could get a waypoint at the beginning of the mission. That way we dont have to find it.
• the clouds could get a red waypoint aswell. That way everybody knows what to shoot at and where it is.
• the game could place a huge text on the screen that says "press 5, then press E or Ctrl+Space to hit the red waypoint"

 

Everything would be clear, everyone would always know what to do, and there is no way you could fail the mission. And we would be faster, so more efficient.

But i would hate this. I dont want a game in which i only follow one waypoint, to then click on another waypoint to finally shot a waypoint and follow a waypoint at the end again. Again: I like it when a game doesnt tell me everything.

 

Am 13.10.2021 um 01:06 schrieb FlerpDish:

Any thoughts? Similar experiences? Or were you able to figure out kuva siphons the first time you ever encountered one?

You asked for opinions in general discussion.

As you have noticed, opinions differ.

Why are you fighting so hard against everyone who has a different opinion?

 

I posted ideas in this forum of which i thought everyone should like them and that there is no way that anyone could have a reason to not want that.

And then it turned out that not everyone thought the same as me. It might be hard, but we have to accept that others think different.

[DreisterDino]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Lutesque:

in Warframe since Failing is accompanied by some rather Annoying Consequences....

What consequences (plural)? I can only see 1 consequence, and that is that you dont get loot for one mission if you fail.

And in the case of Kuva Syphons, this is limited to not getting the kuva, you still get all the other rewards from the normal part of the mission, so time is not completly wasted.

 

vor einer Stunde schrieb Lutesque:

That's only true for the games that actually put effort into a good Failure System

good Failure systems? What is that supposed to be?

I dont know Transistor - but i am aware that there are games that put an emphasis on giving you progress if you fail, but those are games which are a lot harder and are build around the player failing over and over again. If the game is that hard and designed in a way that a player will fail many times, a "failure system" which still rewards the player somehow makes sense.

And even though Warframe isnt like this and in over 90% of the missions we dont fail, i'd say there are "failure systems" that prevent harsh punishment.

• The Kuva-Syphon mission: You can fail the syphon and still get the rewards from the rest of the mission + affinity and so on
• there are other examples: When you get to 0% life Support in a Survival Mission this is basically a mission failed. But as long as we have been there for over 5 minutes (and its basically impossible to run out of life support in 5 minutes even if you play in the most casual way) we can still run to extraction and get all the rewards.

 

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Lutesque:

For the most part Failing Sucks in every game.... You fail... You restart from the beginning... There's nothing fancy or interesting in that cycle....

Like i said, failing and learning is part of every computer game, and its also part of every game in Real Life.

If failing isnt an option, most things will get boring really fast and the good feeling for actually succeeding wont be as strong.

I fail to understand how one could argue against this.

But i do understand that some people are more resistant to frustation than others, but thats a different story.

 

But let me give some examples:

First of all, failing and improving is part of every PvP-game naturally, thats what draws people into it.

Obviously, Warframe isnt PvP but PvE, but even in PvE games across all genres failing and learning from mistakes is part of the experience.

There are games which explain nothing, and there are games which give you tips and hints about what to do, but the player still has to figure out what he has to do to be succesful.

 

Side-Scrollers:

Lets just use the most known and succesful game of all times as the example, Super Mario.

The game tells you the controls and thats it. You start the level and learn while playing. You will fail and restart again and again. You have to learn yourself that  you can jump on turtles, you have to figure out that you can jump into the pipes and so on and on, the game doesnt tell you anything. Does Super Mario and all other games that are like this suck?

 

Building strategy games:

Doesnt matter if we talk about Anno, City Skylines, Rollercoaster Tycoon, Sim City or any other Tycoon, they are all the same regarding failing and learning.

To pick one mechanic as an example: Those games will tell you that you citizens or guests have to be happy in order to be succesful. They might even give you more hints about what to build to achieve this, but its still up to the player to learn the best ways, and you can still fail. And players will, and usually the target audience has fun in figuring out what they can do better (if there is some logic you can learn, if the game is a complete mess they will hate it obviously). Do those games all suck because you can fail?

 

Racing Games:

Same as above, doesnt really matter which one you pick, players will fail and have to restart races in order to learn the tracks, best lines etc. Some games will give you more assistance in finding the optimal route, its basically up to taste and all tastes are covered by different games. But players will fail in every of those games.

 

RPG Games:

Usually games with lots of dialouges, which compares well to the point of the Topic, meaning that the commands from Lotus are too vague.

Following dialogues closely and understanding what the NPC's want from you has always been a big part of those games. In the early days in games like Gothic, you really had to listen, and often you had to read between the lines to be succesful. Nowadays in many games it has become more easy and this part has been replaced with "talk to someone - get a waypoint", but there are still games which leave it up to the player to figure it out. Again, its up to taste and there is something for everyone i guess, but failing and learning is always an option in most of those games, especially if we talk about what weapons/abilities/characters you use.

 

Shooters:

Super easy shooters exist in which you cannot miss the path you are supposed to follow and enemies wont even kill you at any point. Failing will be very rare. But failing in Shooters still exists and many (succesful) games throw (mini-)bosses at you without telling you about weakpoints and stuff like that in a direct way. The player has to figure it out and will fail. What do you think why basically every shooter has auto-save checkpoints during a level you will get set back to when you die? because failing is part of the experience!

 

I could go on about every genre and about how failing is part of games and how it doesnt make the game worse, but i will stop here.

 

TLDR: Failing is part of every game and when i read stuff like "when a player fails its bad game design" or "failing always sucks" i have to strongly disagree with that, and i tried to give examples in my unnecessary long text above 😁 Without failing, games would be more boring. There are games in which you fail a lot and games in which you fail less, and Warframe is at "basically never fail" level. Regarding Kuva-Syphons: In my opinion its fine as it is because

1. we have visual indicators about what to do (moving braids)
2. audio indicators about what to do (sounds of the cloud + messages from the lotus)
3. we have 8 attempts in one mission and nobody should fail this mission more than once if you just look at what is happining. And in public matchmaking there will be always one player who knows what to do. Would it be that hard for OP to just type one line with "go into operator and look for a cloud and blast it with operator" if he see players are clueless?
4. finally, thats already all you need to know...Step 1: go into Operator Step 2: blast the cloud .... do we really need a Tutorial for that?

[Spoldozer]

On 2021-10-12 at 4:11 PM, (PSN)DoctorWho_90250 said:

DE should add tutorials overall. But they won't. Also, forewarning, this thread will likely lead to arguments between the pro-tutorial and anti-tutorial camps.

Brace yourself.

Technically, they do in the Codex. It's not like an interactive tutorial like a mission, but it gives you the gist on the main missions. Things like Void Fissures, Kuva Siphons, and Sorties should get some as well though.

[Lutesque]

31 minutes ago, DreisterDino said:

What consequences (plural)? I can only see 1 consequence, and that is that you dont get loot for one mission if you fail.

That's the one....

32 minutes ago, DreisterDino said:

good Failure systems? What is that supposed to be?

I dont know Transistor

It's SuperGiant's 2nd Game.... In Transistor... When you die.... You don't restart... Instead you get all your Health back but You lose access to one of your Functions (Basically they are Attacks)... Not only that.... That function will stay Deactivated for the next 2 or 3 Save Locations... Thus you have to disassemble your build and try the other Functions that have been sitting around your inventory gatherring Dust.... After all... Players have a tendency to get complacent and settle into a predictable pattern... If that pattern gets you killed... This system gets you to try something else... Admittedly it does so using force but this is the only time being Forced to try something new hadn't Irritated me.

38 minutes ago, DreisterDino said:

but i am aware that there are games that put an emphasis on giving you progress if you fail, but those are games which are a lot harder and are build around the player failing over and over again. If the game is that hard and designed in a way that a player will fail many times, a "failure system" which still rewards the player somehow makes sense.

This works fine for Competitive PvP games since failure is an unavoidable part of the experience....

But for PvE games even I don't like how this works....  But I'm not sure why yet.... Il have to mediate on this one....

40 minutes ago, DreisterDino said:

The Kuva-Syphon mission: You can fail the syphon and still get the rewards from the rest of the mission + affinity and so on

Because those matter ? 🤔

Considering players just rage quit when even a single Cloud reaches the Siphon I think it's safe to say they don't care about those rewards.... It's Kuva or Nothing...

42 minutes ago, DreisterDino said:

there are other examples: When you get to 0% life Support in a Survival Mission this is basically a mission failed. But as long as we have been there for over 5 minutes (and its basically impossible to run out of life support in 5 minutes even if you play in the most casual way) we can still run to extraction and get all the rewards.

Endless Missions are a different story all together....

43 minutes ago, DreisterDino said:

Like i said, failing and learning is part of every computer game, and its also part of every game in Real Life.

I get that you think "Real Life" is an argument but really it isn't... If real life was so awesome then more games would mimic that.... They don't... Because Real Life sucks... It makes for terrible Game Design when implemented as is...

And I don't know about you but I learned how to do the Railjack Volatile Mission without Failing at it despite never having even heard of it before.... I can assure you my experience would have been worse if I failed that mission just like I did with Orphix 10 Minutes Later....

Failing might be a part of many games... But it doesn't have to be....atleast that's what Don Norman would say...

48 minutes ago, DreisterDino said:

 

I fail to understand how one could argue against this.

That might have something to do with your personality...

If Don Norman had accepted that way of thinking he would still be struggling with Switches and Faucets 😱... Even if you don't think it's possible to argue against it.... Try anyway.... You might discover something 😮...

52 minutes ago, DreisterDino said:

 

Lets just use the most known and succesful game of all times as the example, Super Mario

I feel like I'm the only person in the world who hadn't actually played any of those games 😱 !!!

53 minutes ago, DreisterDino said:

The game tells you the controls and thats it

No it doesn't....

 

Atleast the first one doesn't...

58 minutes ago, DreisterDino said:

You will fail and restart again and again. You have to learn yourself that  you can jump on turtles, you have to figure out that you can jump into the pipes and so on and on, the game doesnt tell you anything. 

Games aren't designed like this anymore... Atleast the good ones aren't.... 

Developers have come up with a Formula for teaching players without having them fail or kill them off...

And one these things is "The Demonstration"... basically instead of dropping you infront of a Goomba and having you learn it's lethal by having it murder you... They will Instead have the Goomba murder something else while you watch... Technically either approach works fine  so long as forcing someone to failure is effectively devoid of any consequences and punishment like a loss of time or progress.... But if you want a failure free method of Learning... The Demonstration method is eggcelent.... Now you might think that this is alil too on the nose but these Demonstration are Cleverly disguised as Narrative moments with in the game.... The very first Time you see a Big Daddy in the Original Bioshock is a perfect example.... Obviously someone like you won't be fooled so easily but I think that's the correct way to teach players stuff.

1 hour ago, DreisterDino said:

Building strategy games:

Completely uncharted Territory for me... I've always wanted to get into the genre but never found a simple game to get myself used to the concept.... Also alot of these don't have Controller support so _@&$ them 😝 !!!

1 hour ago, DreisterDino said:

Racing Games:

Same as above, doesnt really matter which one you pick, players will fail and have to restart races in order to learn the tracks, best lines etc. Some games will give you more assistance in finding the optimal route, its basically up to taste and all tastes are covered by different games. But players will fail in every of those games.

This is why we have Leagues and Seasons for these types of games and for Racing in Real Life... Michael Schumacher wasn't considered great because he won one race or every single race he ever took part in... He was considered great because he won enough Races to put him on top of the League Standings....

Atleast I'm assuming that's what happened... I don't actually know a damn thing about Formula One 😁.... 

Either way that's the issue with Racing Video Games specifically.... Too much emphasis is placed on Being first in EVERY SINGLE RACE instead of being at the Top of the League when the season ends... Also Racing AI Cheats 😤 !!!

1 hour ago, DreisterDino said:

RPG Games:

Oh boy... Here we go... 😱

1 hour ago, DreisterDino said:

Usually games with lots of dialouges, which compares well to the point of the Topic, meaning that the commands from Lotus are too vague.

Following dialogues closely and understanding what the NPC's want from you has always been a big part of those games. In the early days in games like Gothic, you really had to listen, and often you had to read between the lines to be succesful. Nowadays in many games it has become more easy and this part has been replaced with "talk to someone - get a waypoint", but there are still games which leave it up to the player to figure it out. Again, its up to taste and there is something for everyone i guess, but failing and learning is always an option in most of those games, especially if we talk about what weapons/abilities/characters you use

I think we have different definitions of what RPGs are.... If it's all the same with you... I'm going to skip over this one until the genre gets its #&##_ together....

1 hour ago, DreisterDino said:

Shooters

Despite its popularity... This is a genre I know very little about....

The biggest problem with shooters is that even though it's obvious that you have failed... It's difficult to pin point what you failed at exactly and how you can improve... In many Shooters getting shot at is actually unavoidable... LoL... I mean just look at Warframe.... So obviously you need to think of Failure in terms of a Budget since everytime you take damage you are effectively failing but since it's unavoidable in order to Actually play you have micro manage the Failure until you succeed some how.... It's so counter intuive to other game genres where you can successfully avoid things that would cause failure... In theory.... 

1 hour ago, DreisterDino said:

 

I could go on about every genre and about how failing is part of games and how it doesnt make the game worse, but i will stop here.

But it does.... And it can be fixed.... Unfortunately doing that is more trouble than it's worth so it only happens once in a blue moon when all the stars align 😱 !!!

1 hour ago, DreisterDino said:

Failing is part of every game and when i read stuff like "when a player fails its bad game design" or "failing always sucks" i have to strongly disagree with that, and i tried to give examples in my unnecessary long text above 😁 Without failing, games would be more boring. There are games in which you fail a lot and games in which you fail less, and Warframe is at "basically never fail" level

Yep... Don Norman definitely isn't on Board with this... I mean at first I thought he was selling Snake Oil  but he has showed that user Failure Actually is Bad Design. 🤔

Observe:

 

[FlerpDish]

8 hours ago, DreisterDino said:

At least say "not fun for me". This is your opinion and not an universal truth.

Like i pointed out on page 2 already, failing and learning by yourself is a key-element of gaming and part of the fun for many players.

 

I like it when i actually have to think about what to do.

I like it when i have to observe the environment to figure things out.

In this particular case: I like it that i have to watch the braid to see where the cloud will come from, i like it that i have to listen to the sound of the cloud to get a better indicator of where it actually is, and i like it that i have to pay attention. This makes this mission just slightly less braindead and forces a bit of active gameplay from me.

 

This mission could be made "fail-proof":

• The Harvester could get a waypoint at the beginning of the mission. That way we dont have to find it.
• the clouds could get a red waypoint aswell. That way everybody knows what to shoot at and where it is.
• the game could place a huge text on the screen that says "press 5, then press E or Ctrl+Space to hit the red waypoint"

 

Everything would be clear, everyone would always know what to do, and there is no way you could fail the mission. And we would be faster, so more efficient.

But i would hate this. I dont want a game in which i only follow one waypoint, to then click on another waypoint to finally shot a waypoint and follow a waypoint at the end again. Again: I like it when a game doesnt tell me everything.

Cool. You do you, I do me. And I've never said to make the mission "fail proof". You're just putting words in my mouth now. All I'm advocating for, as I have stated MULTIPLE times at this point, is to make the instructions more clear. If I just told you "destroy this thing" and not give any further details until you've already figured out what to destroy is just bad design.

8 hours ago, DreisterDino said:

You asked for opinions in general discussion.

As you have noticed, opinions differ.

Why are you fighting so hard against everyone who has a different opinion?

 

I posted ideas in this forum of which i thought everyone should like them and that there is no way that anyone could have a reason to not want that.

And then it turned out that not everyone thought the same as me. It might be hard, but we have to accept that others think different.

Ah yes, the good ol' classic "I can express my opinions but you can express yours". Same could be said to you. Why are you fighting so hard against everyone who has a different opinion? Could be said to anyone who's debated anyone else ever.

[(PSN)jaggerwanderer]

23 hours ago, (PSN)thowed said:

It's no different than watching people just melee away at Mr. Hammer time.  You'd think after minutes of not hurting the guy you'd try something else lol.

I ran into a Sortie with said Mr. Hammer boss in a sortie. Had a Banshee, me Mag, a Hildryn, and a Xaku. Banshee had her "Silence" the entire time. I just ran into the top most bunker of the boss room and waited to see if someone notice how the boss isn't doing anything at all but swing the hammer. After 20 minutes of trying, words where exchnaged about bugs and glitches. Banshee abandon, Hildryn abandon. Me and Xaku ended the mission three minutes after those two left.