Do we need invintory slots, ammo, and rep caps? Do we really?

[(XBOX)Architect Prime]

It seems like everything would be better if all three mechanics were simply not in the game. 

[-Moctezuma-]

Yes we do

F2P game

[Skoomaseller]

we don't but DE wants to have a time gate so players have a reason to come back. thus, standing caps.

inventory slots are just another way for them to make money.

[SiriSnugglebottoms]

I think they're all fine.

It's an f2p game and inventory slots is not a very malicious way to monetize given their plat cost is so low.

Rep caps is multi-purpose. Having it limited is bad for players in the way that you can't just grind everything out whenever you want, but it's also good for the player in the sense that it makes it easier to put worthwhile rewards behind them. It maintains the price of the tradable items you can get from rep somewhat, so you can make decent profit from selling things even if you don't play for a thousand hours a day. The increased cap is also a very nice little incentive to get to higher MRs.

Ammo is the one I am the most on the fence about. In theory it's a good balancing lever to pull for a weapon but in practice it's mostly irrelevant despite claims brought about by the recent patch. Some weapons did suffer a lot for it, mostly bad weapons that didn't need nerfs to begin with but some of the more meta weapons were hit significantly harder than other meta weapons, which is weird. As a balancing lever I don't think they're good at using it and for that reason I could go either way on it. It doesn't really add anything to the game other than punish people who shoot five missiles at a singular target (which I'm fine with people being punished for), but I also don't think it takes away anything either so it might as well stick around in case they can get ammo balance tuned nicely rather than being dictated by a blindfolded monkey throwing darts.

[MqToasty]

DE needs to put these in because the game's success is measured (at least in part) by the number of daily players, and DE understands the best way to pump the number up is to make it habit forming.  Allowing players to grind as much as they want and burn out in the first week is typically not very good for player retention (churn reduction).

This is a F2P game, so at least a few dark patterns are bound to be present.  Overall, I find that DE is not too egregious when it comes to employing these design patterns, so I stick with the game as long as it is still enjoyable.

[Achlevius]

44 minutes ago, (XBOX)Architect Prime said:

It seems like everything would be better if all three mechanics were simply not in the game. 

Why?

What problem are they causing?

What would removing them add to the game?

[trst]

Inventory slots, yes. It's a F2P and slots are the only "guaranteed" purchase the game has. But they're obtainable for "free" anyways via trade.

Ammo, yes. You can already build to make ammo effectively infinite (yes, even for post ""nerf"" AOE) and there's no reason to change that nor to make it free for those who don't know how to build.

And Reputation caps, also yes. They serve to prevent players from finishing entire faction grinds in a day as well as providing an incentive to raising mastery.

 

But really if you think the game would be "better" without these then you might want to attempt providing an argument for how you think it'd be better. And how it would make up for/replace the reasons they exist.

[elmetnuter]

No, the real reason they exist before platinum gating is for calculation capabilities linked to the server that can only allocate so much to one player.

Basically, game engine single player memory allocation.

If players unlock slots with plat, they can allocate more memory to you as a player. Fully allocating all the slots for all players will brake or slow down significantly the engine.

They have some wiggle room, but it is not infinit.

Steve explained that one or two years ago in a Dev stream.

[(XBOX)Architect Prime]

15 hours ago, Achlevius said:

What would removing them add to the game?

More fun. 

[Tyreaus]

In order:

1. Yes, monetization.

2. Not really (see battery / recharge weapons), but taking it out would mean balance adjustments elsewhere, so it creates quite a bit of work for questionable gain.

3. Yes: long-term retention, content pacing, and player health. A non-gated grind lengthened for retention and pacing might have someone grinding for several days straight. Not super healthy, that.

EDIT: Also the standing gate has a benefit of promoting versatility. You're not just running the same missions day in and day out trying to max out standing in a syndicate; you're encouraged to go do other things, including real-life things.

[Achlevius]

2 hours ago, (XBOX)Architect Prime said:

More fun. 

How?

[Tsukinoki]

4 hours ago, (XBOX)Architect Prime said:

More fun. 

How would it be more fun?

 

I mean DE at one point tried a grind without any gates: Focus 1.0.
No limit on grinding (albeit no shared affinity contributing to what you gained).

People ground out millions of focus in only a few days, completely finished the system, burned themselves out.....and then turn around and blamed it on DE quite loudly.

De limited the grind, added a few caps that you couldn't get around.....and the complaints stopped.
By adding limits DE actually prevented complaints.

 

This playerbase has proven time and time and time again that without limits we grind things until we are sick of it....then blame DE.
And by removing the reputation caps on other grinds that is the only thing that would be accomplished by this.

 

 

 

As to your inventory slots:
Those don't really add fun to the game if you remove them...and would just remove monetization from this game.
And companies need to make money or they kinda shut down....

[(PSN)robotwars7]

yes, as should be apparent by not only people's reactions, but the facct that these thigns have never even been considered "unnecessary" even once in this games nearly 10 years of existence. you think maybe there's a reason for that?

regarding inventory slots, you can theoretically go without buying any slots, it would just mean using a weapon/frame and then deleting it once you decide you want to try something else, but since the meta changes every so often and some elements/weapon types become more viable than others, not to mention the sheer amount of different weapons and frames there are, it's only resulting in you handicapping yourself. slots are monetized because they will always be a reliable source of income: when more stuff gets released, people want it, so charge them for the space. if I'd paid £60+ for warframe I'd be unhappy about it, but the game itself is free, so they have to use tactics like any otehr F2P game (and I'd still argue that Warfram's monetization isn't nearly as bad as many of it's rivals.)

regarding ammo, I have found that I do run out of ammo more often with some weapons, but this just encourages me to switch up my playstyle more, and put additional focus on the use of abilities and melee weapons: it's fairly easy to inadvertently do 99% of missions without casting once if you just have one decent-ish weapon, but at that point, why have powes at all when you're basically playing like it's an ordinary TPS? if we had to rely on guns then it would be bad, but we really don't have to. 

regarding Rep caps, they're a necessary evil: nobody likes being told they can't progress until after a reset, but we know full well -or at least you should- that most players have little to no sense of self-control when it comes to warframe and they will grind until they are forced to stop, likely through external IRL factors like "oh no, I need to cook dinner" or whatever. it's not like it matters how quiclly you rank up a syndicate, only that you do so eventually if you want to reap the benefits.

TL;DR, you're complaining about things that aren't going to change, and arguably need to stay in place anyway. 

[(PSN)slightconfuzzled]

Do we really need anything? Thats a bit of tongue in cheek there. Just, when we frame actual things around the idea of "need"... what is the person asking expecting? Usually there are reasons, the reasons may not be good, and can be argued, often those arguments already exist and are ongoing in small ways... Usually even if the systems/mechanics have undesirable aspects, there are positive aspects to them existing. Warframe being FTP means there are going to be a lot of odd patterns to be found, but usually they exist to be self sustaining/profitable up to certain points. 

Like there is a lot of Warframe, I wish were different and quite questionable, but there is a lot about modern living, and other systems, some that govern Warframe, that I wish were different and find more questionable. So it gets a bit tricky. 

[EdinaMonsoon]

honestly if there were no caps in the game... i'd have even less of a life than i do now

it's DE telling you softly to go touch grass