Raids were very toxic, and should not be brought back even if the idea of them is popular

[The_Red_Death]

В 04.03.2022 в 18:25, Numerikuu сказал:

And people didn't play it because of what OP talked about. This is why they ended up being pulled with Arcanes moved to Eidolons, because literally barely 1% of the entire community utilised them. Not good, especially when that 1% became extremely wealthy in regards to platinum, with some of them using it for RMT.

I get the feeling most people asking for raids aren't actually asking for raids at all, and are more so just wanting more challenging/difficult content as a whole. Such a thing doesn't have to come in the form of raids.

Mirroring Ervin, I've played enough MMO's in my life with 'raids' to know just how well they turn out to be. Spoilers: they were all just as--if not more--toxic than PvP... let's not go down that route please. The day Warframe's community turns into a toxic cesspit akin to most MMO's will probably be the final nail for me.

Personally, i had two groups of 8 players and we played together every day with pleasure and without, and raids were only thing that made us play this game every day because of such valuable rewards, it was nice to run together where everyone said something hilarious, but now many of them have stopped playing since most of tasks in game can be performed solo, unlike raids

[Loza03]

3 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

But now you are bringing pen and paper terms into the game, from one specific game within a genre that is extremely wide, while making it sound like D&D is the definition of it all, while it isnt. To add to that, PnP rpgs do not have raids either, they arent interactive, you dont have boss mechanics etc. Everything is decided by the GM, from the starting size of the campaign group to everything else.

You should in reality look at this from what type of game we are playing, which isnt a PnP rpg, or a solo player PC rpg or anything else like that. This is a co-op looter with strong ties to MMOs in the content concept. So Dungeon and Raid do have very distinct and different meanings, since the words describe two very different parts of a game the moment you hear them if you've ever played an MMORPG. Just as there is a very distict difference in what you connect to in your brain when you hear dungeon/raid or heroic dungeon/raid.

Please dont start watering down the terms that can actually be used to express what type of endgame people want, since "endgame" is already broken, r***d, butchered and left for dead behind the local inn. Soon everything will be so vague that no one will know what the heck the other party is talking about. And that doesnt help anyone.

Also, you seem to have very little experience with it all, since now all of a sudden you assume that we are talking about tab-target games as being required to create raids. But that isnt at all what is being said, what is being said is that trinity is nearly a must for wortwhile and engaging raids to exstis. Trinity =/= tab-target, since Trinity exsists in action based games aswell. And yes, everything can be a raid, but that doesnt mean it is good or worthwhile. Trials were effectively raids, since they included group+ size and had specific mechanics that required group+ size (or well atleast a minimum of players), but that doesnt make it worth having or good, or what people actually look for in a raid. It needs to go beyond the arbitrary mechanics that are simply there to push up the number of players needed.

There is just zero point to add something just to add something so you can call it something if you dont bring the things that makes that something something the special thing it is ment to be in the first place.

FI'm not entirely sure if you're reading my points through or just skimming. After all, I make it pretty clear that my bringing DnD into it is to illustrate that the terms are flexible - I even point out just how arbitrary the definition is in terms of video games. This is also why I also refer to Skyrim and Zelda. In other words, the definitions you are working from may well be dramatically different to what everyone else is working from. I see no reason that what I understand as a raid (and from what I've seen elsewhere in this thread and others) would absolutely need a trinity system. Whilst that system is indeed useful for easy identification, it's also been subverted in many games, several of which have what many people would consider 'raid content'. Which was my original point in the first place. The co-operation and role-based aspects of what I would understand as raid content don't require any kind of trinity. So, like I said before - the floor is yours.

Define what you mean as a Raid so that people can have a meaningful discussion with you. Because unless everyone else knows why raids are the 'special thing they are meant to be' you are working from, then there's no way we can actually discuss how to translate that to Warframe, or if doing so would even fit the game.

[DreisterDino]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Loza03:

In other words, the definitions you are working from may well be dramatically different to what everyone else is working from. I see no reason that what I understand as a raid (and from what I've seen elsewhere in this thread and others) would absolutely need a trinity system. Whilst that system is indeed useful for easy identification, it's also been subverted in many games, several of which have what many people would consider 'raid content'. Which was my original point in the first place. The co-operation and role-based aspects of what I would understand as raid content don't require any kind of trinity. So, like I said before - the floor is yours.

Define what you mean as a Raid so that people can have a meaningful discussion with you.

I am also curious regarding his definition of Raids.

 

While the definition for the term Raid can be flexible, pretty much all definitions have certain things in common. And when you actually do some research and look for definitions in encyclopedia's, dictionaries or articles in general you will find these similarities. While i was doing this i noticed that these are the things all definitions have in common:

• missions for a group of players
• mostly connected to endgame, so the target audience are players that have done mostly everything else
• higher difficulty (hence why you need multiple players)
• best and most desireable rewards

Thats what everything i have found had in common. On a Sidenote: This "Trinity" concept hasnt been mentioned in one single article or definition.

 

But i guess this discussion is doomed to fail no matter what, because i noticed in a few discussions in this forum that people have their own definition for a certain term, their whole argumentation is based on their very own definition and the definition is used to make a point, and even when there is a commonly and widely accepted definition of a certain term which disproves their argumentation, this gets simply ignored and they say "no, thats not my definition", because the whole argumentation would fall apart.

  

Am 8.3.2022 um 17:06 schrieb SneakyErvin:

Yes MH and Destiny have bosses, but they do not have what can be considered neither raid bosses nor raids. I mean, we are talking small group content in those cases, even in D2 "raids" that are made up of an original "mmo group" + 1 extra member. So at that point we should really talk about if WF can make "dungeons" or not to begin with, because that is in essence what those games provide. And in that case, yes WF can make "dungeons" since we already have Eidolons and Profit Taker that would clock in as acceptable bosses, and we see it in Kela and some other normal boss fights aswell [...]

I mean...the Developers of Destiny call it Raids, the Playerbase calls it Raids, Content Creators call it Raids just aswell as the gaming press calls it Raids. Everyone calls it Raids. How do you want to have a discussion with someone who just comes around and says "nope, its not Raids". Even if there would be the ultimate definition everyone would agree on, some people would still go with "no, thats not my definition" if it doesnt suit their argumentation. @SneakyErvindont take this personal or anything, this little digression isnt solely directed at you this just happens way too often in this forum, and if you actually can provide a definition and back it up with just any source, i am willing to accept it.

[----Legacy----]

7 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

I dont see how that makes toxic content less toxic. It just means there are toxic players for other reasons aswell. And the more people that avoid the toxic content, the more it proves that the content is toxic, if the players leave due to the toxicity of others.

To be fair, content can't be toxic by itself since it doesn't have a mind and can't think nor speak, nor anything.

Toxicity comes from people, either because they refuse to let something others may enjoy to be added, maintained, improved, etc (as proven by this thread) or preceived to come from people who wants to ensure a successful run and decides to recruit players according to their game plan (basically the same first group projecting their own toxicity on the latter, also proven by this same thread).

7 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

There are other reasons why I wouldnt want to see that content and it has nothing to do with Jimmy being toxic little bugger or not.

Nevermind the reasons, whatever these are, trying to prevent other players from having content they may enjoy just because of your reasons that nobody cares about is just selfishess mixed with toxicity, anything beyond like talks about experience and the whole moving goalposts with ancient book definitions that aren't used nowadays is just trying to sugarcoat that toxicity.

[ShogunGunshow]

Honestly toxicity isn't really in the top reasons not to do raids.

Warframe is horrifically balanced, and any raid that would be made would either have extreme damage attenuation, mass invulnerability phases that require a gimmick to get past, or likely both.

In the New War DE got to design encounters because they knew what kind of power you would have going into the missions. DE can't do that in general play without DA or invul phases, because you can't design a good encounter when one group can do, like, 50x the damage of another based off of just damage amps.

Y'all are goofy. If raids come back they're going to be a disappointment. 

[SpentCasings]

"I don't like a completely optional and now arguably obsolete piece of content. Plz remove"

 

Bruh. Get outtta heeeeeeere with that noise. 

[Kaotyke]

5 hours ago, ShogunGunshow said:

Y'all are goofy. If raids come back they're going to be a disappointment. 

Considering that no matter what is put into this game someone will consider it a disappointment anyways, this is not a very big reason to not implement them.

But I agree on the rest, player power has to be brought down for Trials to actually work.

There's also another point... 8 players in 1 mission... I remember my toaster burning back in those days. I now have a potato, but the game has become more demanding in terms of hardware too, so it will likely bake.

[SneakyErvin]

On 2022-03-10 at 7:01 PM, Loza03 said:

Define what you mean as a Raid so that people can have a meaningful discussion with you. Because unless everyone else knows why raids are the 'special thing they are meant to be' you are working from, then there's no way we can actually discuss how to translate that to Warframe, or if doing so would even fit the game.

I have gone over that. I even gave examples of what could be done, examples that would avoid an actual trinity. As I said, just look at GW2, that is a perfect example of what can be done in a non-trinity game in order to achieve actual raids i.e content that follow the real concept that made raids what they are to begin with and what seperates them from normal dungeons. By your and others definition of "raid", the dungeons (heroic and normal) of WoW are also "raids" even though the game has a very distinct difference between the two. Since in reality D2 "raids" have the depth of regular dungeons in actual MMO's, both when it comes to mechanics and group size.

That D2 considers part of their content raids is laughable at best. And shows how far a dev can go just to attract people through a simple name that "sells" within the PvE crowd.

On 2022-03-10 at 9:37 PM, DreisterDino said:

I am also curious regarding his definition of Raids.

You can pretty much find it on wikipedia if you wonder, since it mostly shares the view and experience I've had with what works in and makes raids actual raids. And you can go on and look at other sources too that also specifically point out what I do, such as raids being content for groups of a far larger size than what a normal group would be for other content. Content that also actually give a meaning to a large increase in needed players to complete it etc.

It is also odd you found those definitions and highlight points but missed the first and most major one that would make raids impossible for WF, a point I havent even brought up since I think it can be possible given the right circumstances. And that point is that it is "content for MMORPGs", something that WF isnt and never will be.

On 2022-03-10 at 10:50 PM, ----Legacy---- said:

To be fair, content can't be toxic by itself since it doesn't have a mind and can't think nor speak, nor anything.

Toxicity comes from people, either because they refuse to let something others may enjoy to be added, maintained, improved, etc (as proven by this thread) or preceived to come from people who wants to ensure a successful run and decides to recruit players according to their game plan (basically the same first group projecting their own toxicity on the latter, also proven by this same thread).

Nevermind the reasons, whatever these are, trying to prevent other players from having content they may enjoy just because of your reasons that nobody cares about is just selfishess mixed with toxicity, anything beyond like talks about experience and the whole moving goalposts with ancient book definitions that aren't used nowadays is just trying to sugarcoat that toxicity.

I'm saying that if it brings out toxicity the content is toxic, since it is the source of it, the fuel. And raids aswell as pvp bring out toxicity in people to a greater extent than most other types of gameplay. But that doesnt matter and isnt a reason for not adding content.

I also dont see how expressing a view on content that has already been tried and failed is toxic. I doubt anyone would want DE to make the same mistake again. So opening up and speaking from raid experience where it has worked would be the opposite of toxic, since it actually helps to get an idea across as to what actually works and what has worked in the past. And those "ancient" definitions are still very much in use in actual MMORPGs. Actual raids is not what people are looking for in WF. They want some content to call a raid for some very odd reason I cannot understand. I get the same feeling over these people as I got with a friend I had, a person that always budged in when PvP was discussed and brought up DS, just to feel like he belonged when the rest of us were talking about mass scale BG's, open world ganking or keep sieges across different games. Is that what people want, to be able to say that they raid among their gamer friends? Or do people want actual raids, so they can get their other games friends over to WF, since it has actual successful raid content. I know which one I'd want.

 

[Loza03]

22 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

I have gone over that. I even gave examples of what could be done, examples that would avoid an actual trinity. As I said, just look at GW2, that is a perfect example of what can be done in a non-trinity game in order to achieve actual raids i.e content that follow the real concept that made raids what they are to begin with and what seperates them from normal dungeons. By your and others definition of "raid", the dungeons (heroic and normal) of WoW are also "raids" even though the game has a very distinct difference between the two. Since in reality D2 "raids" have the depth of regular dungeons in actual MMO's, both when it comes to mechanics and group size.

That D2 considers part of their content raids is laughable at best. And shows how far a dev can go just to attract people through a simple name that "sells" within the PvE crowd.

You haven't 'gone over that', though, at least not within this conversation..You keep talking about 'Actual' raids and not to 'water them down', but as far as I can tell thus far, the only thing that seems to make that difference is A: The game differentiates them and B: you, personally, think of them as a Raid. Which isn't really productive.

27 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

You can pretty much find it on wikipedia if you wonder, since it mostly shares the view and experience I've had with what works in and makes raids actual raids. And you can go on and look at other sources too that also specifically point out what I do, such as raids being content for groups of a far larger size than what a normal group would be for other content. Content that also actually give a meaning to a large increase in needed players to complete it etc.

From: Raid (video games) - Wikipedia

"In video games, a raid is a type of mission in massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs) where a number of people attempt to defeat either: (a) another number of people at player-vs-player (PVP), (b) a series of computer-controlled enemies (non-player characters; NPCs) in a player-vs-environment (PVE) battlefield, or (c) a very powerful boss (superboss). This type of objective usually occurs within an instance dungeon, a separate server instance from the other players in the game."

Destiny's raids, as well as Warframe's Trials definitely seem to fall into this definition pretty well to me? 

There is also this, the section on 'Raid tactics':

"The combat encounters comprising a raid usually require players to coordinate with one another while performing specific roles as members of a team. The roles of Tank, Healer, and Damage Dealer are known as the "Holy Trinity" of MMORPG group composition.^[4] Other common roles include Buffing, Crowd control, and Pulling (selectively choosing targets with which to initiate combat).^[5] A raid leader is often needed to direct the group efficiently, due to the complexities of keeping many players working well together."

But, even here it just say 'Usually'. Nothing in this Wikipedia page supports anything you've said about Warframe 'needing' the Trinity, or anything else you've been talking about.

 

This conversation feels like it's going nowhere.

[Stafelund]

I don't really believe this. Asked my friends who were able to do raids and toxicity isn't one of the things mentioned. 

Chaotic? Yes. Especially if you only went with random players. No coordination, sometimes the whole session becomes something like this:

 

[----Legacy----]

1 hour ago, SneakyErvin said:

I'm saying that if it brings out toxicity the content is toxic, since it is the source of it, the fuel. And raids aswell as pvp bring out toxicity in people to a greater extent than most other types of gameplay. But that doesnt matter and isnt a reason for not adding content.

I beg to differ. Toxicity comes always from people's frustration, most of the times for not being mature enough to turn a defeat into a learning experience. Granted, content that requires cooperation and/or competition are far more likely to make people fail in their missions than most other things, but i think it's worth keeping in mind that warframe has beem so dumbed down that missions rarely if ever fail.

2 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

I also dont see how expressing a view on content that has already been tried and failed is toxic. I doubt anyone would want DE to make the same mistake again.

I'm sure nobody wants DE to make the same mistakes again, and i agree that expressing opinions on the matter isn't toxic. However, i think it's worth pointing that trying to prevent content from either being added, improved or maintained is a toxic attittude, while the whole talk about how DE is about to fail for not following  your "Holy Raid Guidelines" written after only god knows how many millenia of experience playing raids on different games is just sugarcoating the toxic attittude that's trying to prevent DE from adding content others might enjoy.

2 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

And those "ancient" definitions are still very much in use in actual MMORPGs. Actual raids is not what people are looking for in WF.

Oh hey! This is pretty much the reason why any debate with you fails to go anywhere. The constant moving goalposts by adding an adjective before the noun to prevent your speech to fall when you're cornered, which is proven by how many times the definition of trials has been discussed in this thread before and how now you talk about "actual raids".

I wonder how long would it take the goalpost to reach the point of "real legit actual proper trials done right" and what would come later.

[DarkSkysz]

On 2022-03-04 at 10:24 AM, TheArmchairThinker said:

rewards moved elsewhere

I am 100% in favor of accessibility... locking stuff behind one wall is always...boring.

[BansheeAndZephyrMarried]

10 minutes ago, DarkSkysz said:

locking stuff behind one wall is always...boring.

Prime parts are "locked behind" Relics. Plenty of gears are "locked behind" Railjack. Warframe and weapon augment mods are "locked behind" their respective Syndicates. You simply won't have access to 100% of the augment mods unless you're one of those gigachads with all six syndicates maxed. 

Yet people deal with trading those "locked" rewards fine. You either play that specific content or play some other part of Warframe and make plat and trade for what you want. Why should raid rewards be any different? 

The rewards just need to be tradable. That's it. 

addendum: Please don't use "accessibility" to mean "let me bypass content." It doesn't help anybody. 

[TheArmchairThinker]

8 hours ago, BansheeAndZephyrMarried said:

Prime parts are "locked behind" Relics. Plenty of gears are "locked behind" Railjack. Warframe and weapon augment mods are "locked behind" their respective Syndicates. You simply won't have access to 100% of the augment mods unless you're one of those gigachads with all six syndicates maxed. 

Yet people deal with trading those "locked" rewards fine. You either play that specific content or play some other part of Warframe and make plat and trade for what you want. Why should raid rewards be any different? 

The rewards just need to be tradable. That's it. 

addendum: Please don't use "accessibility" to mean "let me bypass content." It doesn't help anybody. 

Look at the content itself, relics, railjack and syndicate don't require you to do things perfectly or you do things from scratch if not team wipe and can be done solo. Something that require tight coordination will be prone to be toxic over a slight mistake unless the setback isn't significant which would make it dismissed because "not challenging/difficult enough".

Rewards being tradeable doesn't help it either when only a few who can finish it in reasonable time frame with a dedicated team decided to set the price very high because its "rare/endgame rewards".

[Krankbert]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb TheArmchairThinker:

Rewards being tradeable doesn't help it either when only a few who can finish it in reasonable time frame with a dedicated team decided to set the price very high because its "rare/endgame rewards".

That's not how prices work. The items will either be expensive because they will actually be rare or they won't be because they won't be rare, but there is no scenario in a game as big as this one where prices will be high because someone says an item is rare when it's not.

Also I'd appreciate it if everyone would stop pretending that a game where currently everyone is generally just solo faceroll everything would for some reason get raids that are a ludicrously hard Dark Souls final boss style affair. I can't even begin to fathom why you'd possibly think that.

[BansheeAndZephyrMarried]

2 hours ago, TheArmchairThinker said:

Look at the content itself, relics, railjack and syndicate don't require you to do things perfectly or you do things from scratch if not team wipe and can be done solo. Something that require tight coordination will be prone to be toxic over a slight mistake unless the setback isn't significant which would make it dismissed because "not challenging/difficult enough".

Rewards being tradeable doesn't help it either when only a few who can finish it in reasonable time frame with a dedicated team decided to set the price very high because its "rare/endgame rewards".

It's pretty clear you never ran Trials. To me it looks like you're just pre-emptively cowering at the mere thought of missing out on an unknown Warframe reward when you don't even know what form the content will be. That this one content type would require any kind of co-op automatically puts it out of reach for you in this co-op shooter and somehow that's supposed to be everybody else's problem. 

No. Get over yourself. It's perfectly OK for Warframe to have content that doesn't roll over at your whim. You will survive. 

[DarkSkysz]

12 hours ago, BansheeAndZephyrMarried said:

Prime parts are "locked behind" Relics.

True but also false. You can choose what you want to play to get those parts, exterm, capture... you are not forced to wait in an endless queue like conclave.

 

  

12 hours ago, BansheeAndZephyrMarried said:

addendum: Please don't use "accessibility" to mean "let me bypass content." It doesn't help anybody. 

Also you are just proving raids or even the people that want them back are toxic :)

You look like that kind of person who blame everybody if the grinner train touch one of the mines and loose some hp...

[BansheeAndZephyrMarried]

1 hour ago, DarkSkysz said:

True but also false. You can choose what you want to play to get those parts, exterm, capture... you are not forced to wait in an endless queue like conclave.

 

  

Also you are just proving raids or even the people that want them back are toxic :)

You look like that kind of person who blame everybody if the grinner train touch one of the mines and loose some hp...

TIL pointing out how Warframe has incentivized player trading for years, and the route it will predictably take with most future content-exclusive rewards, is toxic. 

TIL asking someone politely to not use "accessibility" in order to sugarcoat their self-centered ideas is toxic.  

I guess basic decency and observations are toxic when you're too desperate to feel victimized by a piece of content that doesn't even exist yet :)

[DarkSkysz]

1 hour ago, BansheeAndZephyrMarried said:

too desperate to feel victimized by a piece of content that doesn't even exist yet :)

I am not even sure if you are talking about yourself or not anymore... you are beyond common sense by now.

Maybe you are just sleepy and cant use your brain atm... so I will try to help you.

You can't trade for account bound stuff.

Content that doesnt exist... you mean raids? Which we had access for a long time ago?

And about accessibility... do you really think its bad? So if someone can't play railjack because they have some sort of medical issue, like the flashing lights in void storm causing migraine or something worst, they should be locked out of the rewards there?

And you dare to call me toxic... shame on you. You are really a bad person... I will just ignore you from now on. Not worth the time.

Kinda hate your selfish behavior.

[----Legacy----]

3 minutes ago, DarkSkysz said:

Maybe you are just sleepy and cant use your brain atm... so I will try to help you.

Is this ad-hominem really needed?

43 minutes ago, DarkSkysz said:

You can't trade for account bound stuff.

So? Why are people so self-entitled to get absolutely everything in the game? It's ok to have some stuff being available through trading while other things, like account bound stuff, can only be obtained by completing some specific pieces of content.

Account bound things are normally just prestige rewards, something to show-off that doesn't affect player power nor mastery so you wouldn't be missing out on anything if this isn't enabled for trades anyways.

47 minutes ago, DarkSkysz said:

And about accessibility... do you really think its bad? So if someone can't play railjack because they have some sort of medical issue, like the flashing lights in void storm causing migraine or something worst, they should be locked out of the rewards there?

Accessibility should be addressed through accessibility settings, like the ability to reduce light flickers or make people able to hold a button instead of mashing it and still get the same effect (like DE did on TNW for struggles). There's no point on holding back content just because of accessibility when -as just pointed- there are far better ways to address it.

56 minutes ago, DarkSkysz said:

And you dare to call me toxic... shame on you.

The original post you made about "accessibility" was clearly talking about having the rewards available through some other ways, but when called out for it you instantly switch to talk about accessibility for people with health issues that could prevent them from playing certain content and then use that to call out toxicity from @BansheeAndZephyrMarried despite your dishonest approach to discussion.

And then you have the face to call others toxic when all you're doing is a clear example of projecting your own toxicity on anyone else.

[Digressive]

Locking thread as it has become non-constructive and abusive.

Thanks