Petition To Warframe's Creative Director - Rebecca Ford - To Host A Longer Devshort or Mini-Devstream This Week

[ECCHOSIERRA]

22 hours ago, JargenBakt said:

Quite a lot actually. If you've been paying attention recently, there's been a serious lack of proper communication. Dante got super nerfed into the ground after they told the community that it was going to be minor changes. Deep Archimedea requires the "optional" modifiers to be enabled to get all the rewards despite being told that wasn't going to be the case and that players could just run it multiple times as needed and that the optional modifiers would just speed up the process.

 

Warframe has always prided itself on its community and communication and this is the worst it has been in a while. I've seen a lot of drama and miscommunication over the years while playing, but everything about what has happened recently has shown something is going on on the development side of things. I'd like to hear their side of things that's more than just a simple brief explanation.

Did they really say that about deep arc?

 

Because if they did, then holy crap thats a comms fail.

[Ace-Bounty-Hunter]

19 hours ago, (PSN)slightconfuzzled said:

but I'll be fine if they just say that they are still taking in feedback and considering stuff too.

We don't want her to read the usual BS from the PR speech handbook. We want an actual conversation like a real human being as to how they botched things up so badly and why they're continuing to ignore the mountains of feedback from their players.

Edited April 9 by Ace-Bounty-Hunter

[kamisama85]

This is next level overreacting.

OP and others should seek help.

[Tiltskillet]

1 hour ago, ECCHOSIERRA said:

Did they really say that about deep arc?

No.  Not that how that aspect would work was well communicated.  To me it doesn't seem like they anticipated that people might think they could stockpile research points up to a cap, so it never occurred to them to say, "No, you can't do that."

I don't blame anybody for misunderstanding how the mode would work before release.  I wasn't sure myself until after I played through twice.  (Although I also hadn't assumed I understood it already.)   And I don't blame people for saying it could have been explained better.  I do find it strange that some people are so angry about it; the implication being DE actually lied about how the game mode would work. 

If you want to listen to what DE said about it, it's in Devstream 177, ~57:40. https://www.youtube.com/live/vy_vtGx8vq8?si=xDv15r5OZoFQBgxM&t=3460

 

[(PSN)slightconfuzzled]

1 hour ago, Ace-Bounty-Hunter said:

We don't want her to read the usual BS from the PR speech handbook. We want an actual conversation like a real human being as to how they botched things up so badly and why they're continuing to ignore the mountains of feedback from their players.

 

No, no no. We want powerbombs, and tombstones. We want run ins and burning hammers. We all agreed that this year, I would get to speak on behalf of everyone, We all agreed and signed the legally binding documents. Therefore when I say we, I mean all of us, and everyone takes me seriously, because we all agreed I personally get to speak on behalf of everyone. 

Now if you mean, generally a decent portion of people, sure, thats fine, except there are also a portion of people who think some people are overreacting and taking things too personally, and plenty of people whose take may overlap but be a bit different. "We" don't all agree, and "we" all frame such things differently as well. 

Like I personally wish people would stop passively accusing other people of things, as if others should just take it for granted as true, or frames a situation that suits their own narrative, but I am just speaking for myself. Plus I get that when people express themselves that will often play loose and fast. Nuance and discretion, crazy right. 

[Corvid]

6 hours ago, L3512 said:

1. This is the company that shipped RJ in an almost completely unplayable state and went on holiday. I'm not even going to hold that against DE as people get pissy about anything, especially (DE)layed content.

Yeah, a thing that often gets left out of the story of Railjack's launch is that in the lead-up to it the community was throwing a fit and demanding that they release it ASAP regardless of whether it was ready to ship.

AFAIR it's the only time in the game's history that the devs publicly went on record warning players to avoid the update's new content if they weren't prepared to deal with bugs.

Edited April 9 by Corvid

[Aruquae]

Oh you’re new?

You get used to the sheer amount of people complaining about certain nerfs

I actually found Dante’s nerf to be better than some… other frame nerfs. Especially the LoS, it’s one of those “good idea on paper, but awful execution,” examples. Sure LoS could work, but they neglected the fact that LoShas always been broken, pretty much butchering the ability as a whole. Overguard nerfs? Nerfed the cap, but buffed the regen. It’s basically old topaz shards but with overguard (ahhh yes, now that was a terrible nerf). 

[Raarsi]

While this definitely isn't the first time something like this has happened (amirite Styanax fans), I doubt this is something that can be covered in the usual weekly 15 minute rundown.  Usually explanations for these sorts of things wind up in the opening housekeeping portions of devstreams. 

I suspect the most likely scenario would be giving what will feel like an all-too-brief rundown on the matter followed by a statement that they'll cover it more in detail for the next devstream.  It's not going to be the best solution, but DE definitely needs to do something in the short-term since this was a circumstance of players feeling like they were swindled--yes, nerfs happen, but when it's something that players are spending money on immediately getting shorted, that's just bad for business.

[CephalonOlphus]

So did you get what you wanted from the devshort?

[(XBOX)CaligulaTwily]

"Sent the community into a deep spiral" too lulzy/didn't read.

Sorry folks, but the nerf things with Dante and uhhh Nezha have been very entertaining actually. People's reactions. It's a bummer about Dante, but Oh Well, I couldn't fashion him pretty nice anyways. I got lotsa other Frames I like. Uhhh Nezha it's all popcorn, I don't play nezha so I'm unaffected so just, very entertaining. 

Edited April 10 by (XBOX)CaligulaTwily

[RichardKam]

Go watch the movie Moneyball. One of the scout made a comment about Brad Pitt. "He only answer to ownership, and God".

Good luck with your endeavors OP. You need it.

 

[JargenBakt]

6 hours ago, CephalonOlphus said:

So did you get what you wanted from the devshort?

Not really. It's not surprising that they aren't saying too much after what just happened. We'll likely see a more detailed explanation (hopefully) during the next devstream or maybe sooner in the upcoming hotfix patch notes. For now, I've already stopped worrying about the current state of things. I've made a few threads detailing some of the more egregious issues that Warframe has had for a long time now in hopes of getting noticed, but I really don't expect anything to come of them. The devteam has always cherrypicked what to fix and a lot of times that comes from total community outcry rather than a necessity to fix some glaring design flaws. It's just the sort of thing you come to expect after having followed the progress of Warframe for years. Although, it's still a much better playable game than it was like five years ago when I started where I had some pretty nasty things to say about it back then. Things do get changed for the better eventually. Just wish the devteam had a stronger focus on fixing some of the more minor things (elemental buffs affecting damage and status distribution, heavy weapons being treated as gear items) that are technically not all that minor.

[Hayrack]

Thread above stating that Dante provided overguard for entire mission, this thread stating that Dante is nerfed to the bits...

Actually, there's myriad of things (bugs, oversights, content abandonment) DE should be bashed for, but adjustments to AFK, 3 billion-of-non-gun damage abilities are not those things.

Edited April 10 by Hayrack

[TeaHawk]

On 2024-04-08 at 6:16 PM, Nekomian said:

All things considered, the changes were rather minor -

Are you kidding? If Saryn gets her 4th LOS instead of AOE you'd call this a minor change?

Tweaking and nerfing stuff is not the problem. Deliberately releasing an unfinished kit after months of testing in order to sell it as "OP" to the players is the problem.

Edited April 10 by TeaHawk

[SneakyErvin]

On 2024-04-09 at 9:00 AM, Tiltskillet said:

No.  Not that how that aspect would work was well communicated.  To me it doesn't seem like they anticipated that people might think they could stockpile research points up to a cap, so it never occurred to them to say, "No, you can't do that."

I don't blame anybody for misunderstanding how the mode would work before release.  I wasn't sure myself until after I played through twice.  (Although I also hadn't assumed I understood it already.)   And I don't blame people for saying it could have been explained better.  I do find it strange that some people are so angry about it; the implication being DE actually lied about how the game mode would work. 

If you want to listen to what DE said about it, it's in Devstream 177, ~57:40. https://www.youtube.com/live/vy_vtGx8vq8?si=xDv15r5OZoFQBgxM&t=3460

Yeah. I'm in the same boat, I get that people were confused since it wasnt really explained, but it is indeed odd that people imply that DE lied about it when nothing was actually said. It would be more logical to assume that the modifiers would need to be active considering what Pablo said regarding still considering "most or all". And in that regard DE have only spoken the truth, since all are required to unlock elite, but to run elite for all the rewards it only requires most i.e all but one active. 

Though I guess that yeah for the sumdawhatever hood ornament you need all in elite once. But that isnt exactly a thing that will go away so can be done a week when you get mostly great picks. I've done it once and will never do it again with all modifiers.

But to be honest I dont see the point of the random loadouts. The moment we get to pick one thing freely the whole RNG setup becomes quite pointless for the most part. I'd much rather see 4 more active mission modifications to counter certain things. Like -90% damage on AoE, Melee attacks per second is cut in half, abilities ignore efficiency modifiers (both good and bad), enemy attacks have x% chance to nullify abilities and/or silence you for 2 seconds and S#&$ like that.

[Nekomian]

4 hours ago, TeaHawk said:

Are you kidding? If Saryn gets her 4th LOS instead of AOE you'd call this a minor change?

Tweaking and nerfing stuff is not the problem. Deliberately releasing an unfinished kit after months of testing in order to sell it as "OP" to the players is the problem.

If saryn had an unrestricted 80m nuke? Yes, but she doesn't since her ability range is smaller and relies on other abilities (spores) proc'd and spread for miasma's multiplier to them to be impactful. I don't wanna rehash this entire argument of "but X frames don't have LoS checks!" so I'll just link a related post for this: 

I don't think they deliberately released an "unfinished" kit, but rather didn't realize how powerful the ability could be when min-maxed. All it takes is one build to spread to a youtuber or something and everyone copies it, so they made adjustments to prevent it from being disruptive in certain circumstances. It's still just as powerful as it was in terms of range and strength multiplier (can still one shot level cap enemies), so I think that's a fine compromise.

Being annoyed or upset for it not releasing in a different state is fine too, but I don't think any indication of power is ever given to frames on release. They don't intentionally sell "OP frame" like a FOMO tactic or anything, these just read to me like regular first week balance changes. This happens with like every frame, just maybe not as quickly (or buggy).

Edited April 10 by Nekomian
typo

[TeaHawk]

45 minutes ago, Nekomian said:

I don't think they deliberately released an "unfinished" kit, but rather didn't realize how powerful the ability could be when min-maxed.

Nonsense. If DE failed to recognize the potency of a slash AOE nuke, it suggests a lack of competence on their part. This implies that this frame may not have been thoroughly tested by individuals who actively play the game. The assumption here is that the developers are unaware of the intricacies of their own game, disregarding community feedback and neglecting to thoroughly test new frames.

 

 

Edited April 10 by TeaHawk

[Jarriaga]

On 2024-04-08 at 10:49 AM, Nero.DMC said:

pushing unfinished changes is just amateur work, something no company of the size of DE should ever allow.

The prevalent model of the entire software industry is MVP (Minimum Viable Product). The discussion on "amateur work" is a ship that sailed a long, long time ago for software developers with a quick-iteration model.

Just because something is incomplete (Lacking polish, missing functions, buggy, undecided final performance and intended behavior) doesn't mean a program isn't ready for public release as long as the bugs don't result in software that can't run at all. You should know that as a software developer.

Edited April 10 by Jarriaga

[Corvid]

5 hours ago, TeaHawk said:

in order to sell it as "OP" to the players

At what point did they do this? Please point to a single piece of official marketing that specifically tries to get you to buy Dante on the basis of him being overpowered at launch.

[Nekomian]

35 minutes ago, TeaHawk said:

This implies that this frame may not have been thoroughly tested by individuals who actively play the game. The assumption here is that the developers are unaware of the intricacies of their own game, disregarding community feedback and neglecting to thoroughly test new frames.

They likely have specific parameters or unit tests for basic stuff (likely why we see so many "fixed script X" in patch notes constantly, I presume they have systemic script checks in place or something automated, as is common to do in large coding projects) - I highly doubt they're running min-maxed builds or testing every single possible permutation of mechanics at play (including mission types), as that would be thousands upon thousands of hours of time to dedicate to that given how many systems this game has. Hell, most players (myself included) don't run min-maxed builds either, it's usually only a few people I see really pushing / optimizing and focusing on this aspect of the game, since most things can handle the majority of content regardless and many players are very casual / might just copy whatever top rated build is on overframe.

This game constantly has balance changes every single patch - things change, and players interact with systems in ways that devs may not anticipate (across all games, not just Warframe). This is nothing new, and will likely continue to happen; the only difference I'm seeing with this Dante release specifically is something wasn't accounted for and was quickly corrected to prevent being disruptive. They've even apologized for it in PSAs, as well as the botched LoS implementation.

If you see this as neglectful that's a valid opinion to have, but at the very least I don't see it as deliberately releasing something "unfinished" or intentionally misleading people about a frame's "power on release" when it was never disclosed or in any marketing / discussed.

[TeaHawk]

29 minutes ago, Corvid said:

At what point did they do this? Please point to a single piece of official marketing that specifically tries to get you to buy Dante on the basis of him being overpowered at launch.

I've never claimed that DE directly advertised this frame as op. Instead, they opportunistically seized upon the situation in the least unfavorable scenarios. However, I firmly believe DE deliberately released an overpowered frame, waiting until it gained traction among content creators and players. After profiting from this, DE then implemented a significant nerf, completely altering the ability's mechanics. Following this, they released a buff, only to later commence deleting entire threads. Such behavior appears either chaotic or malicious.
DE either lacks understanding of their actions or intentionally releases inconsistent kits to capitalize on their popularity, only to nerf them later.

[Nero.DMC]

4 hours ago, Jarriaga said:

The prevalent model of the entire software industry is MVP (Minimum Viable Product). The discussion on "amateur work" is a ship that sailed a long, long time ago for software developers with a quick-iteration model.

Just because something is incomplete (Lacking polish, missing functions, buggy, undecided final performance and intended behavior) doesn't mean a program isn't ready for public release as long as the bugs don't result in software that can't run at all. You should know that as a software developer.

MVP has NOTHING to do with unpolished, MVP or minimum viable product is an iteration of your product that works, Warframe has not been in MPV form for years, changes to balance have nothing to do with MVP and every single company takes care of polishing their updates before releasing, not even indie companies release stuff in the sorry state DE releases stuff sometimes. An "MVP" that does not work is not an MVP since its not a viable product people wont buy bugged software from you.

The game industry have consistently punished games and updates that launch poorly, your comment is both disconected with software development and the game industry. Some game managed to iterate and get better but for every one of those that do manage to get a second chance there are plenty more that die without players

 

4 hours ago, Nekomian said:

If you see this as neglectful that's a valid opinion to have, but at the very least I don't see it as deliberately releasing something "unfinished" or intentionally misleading people about a frame's "power on release" when it was never disclosed or in any marketing / discussed.

i personally spent less than 3 minutes testing Dante after the first hotfix and i knew he was not in an ok state there, DE inmidiatly realized their error and said they were sorry, its not okay to release stuff without testing them, its the bare minimum to give it 10 minutes to see that the changes you just made are just not breaking stuff.

[UnstarPrime]

19 minutes ago, TeaHawk said:

However, I firmly believe DE deliberately released an overpowered frame, waiting until it gained traction among content creators and players.

Except that they very much didn't wait; these nerfs had some of the fastest turn-around in Warframe history, and the speed with which DE released the nerfs is one aspect of what had a portion of the community up in arms.  These players thought the nerfs were too hasty, and that DE should have waited longer to obtain more play data and feedback before making adjustments; in fact, even among players who think the nerfs were warranted, I've commonly seen sentiments that agree that the turn-around on these nerfs was too fast.  If DE wanted to trick players to increase their profits, it would have fit better within their normal release cadence to have waited longer before applying the nerfs, which would both allow even more players to purchase Dante in an "OP" state while also reducing the level of criticism leveled at them.  But instead, they acted with haste in a way that reduced the window in which Dante's could purchase an "OP" Dante, which suggests to me that they wanted to make a swift correction and thus minimize any further players having buyer's remorse.

[Nero.DMC]

21 minutes ago, UnstarPrime said:

Except that they very much didn't wait; these nerfs had some of the fastest turn-around in Warframe history, and the speed with which DE released the nerfs is one aspect of what had a portion of the community up in arms.  These players thought the nerfs were too hasty, and that DE should have waited longer to obtain more play data and feedback before making adjustments; in fact, even among players who think the nerfs were warranted, I've commonly seen sentiments that agree that the turn-around on these nerfs was too fast.  If DE wanted to trick players to increase their profits, it would have fit better within their normal release cadence to have waited longer before applying the nerfs, which would both allow even more players to purchase Dante in an "OP" state while also reducing the level of criticism leveled at them.  But instead, they acted with haste in a way that reduced the window in which Dante's could purchase an "OP" Dante, which suggests to me that they wanted to make a swift correction and thus minimize any further players having buyer's remorse.

I think it might not be motivated by money but it was way to hasty, the problem with the speed at wich they reacted is they did not test the stuff they were releasing, that is simply not acceptable.

Another problem with not waiting is they did not have time to trully gauge how popular dante was going to be, they just got scared because a lot of people was enjoying Dante, he was never that strong, any frame with a weapon well modded weapon could outdps Dante, Dante as a frame was never that powerful wich makes the lost on QoL based on a mostly overreaction all the more annoying to players. 

And we get to the worst offender imo, the way they decided to nerf Dante, instead of making a sensible nerf that most people would have not really cared about they decided to slap a mechanics that is notably annoying, specially considering that tragedy is a detonation ability and does almost nothing without marking enemies first with dark verse.

So how can we decide if the changes where prematurely release? well its super easy, they reverted or changed all of them, that screams of "i did not do it how i should have done it" and they are going to keep tweaking the LoS this means they consider the current iteration is not good enough either, so why make your players suffer that? why not develop with time and release a good balancing solution instead of slaping a bad mechanic in top of a super popular new frame?

[(PSN)GEN-Son_17]

On 2024-04-08 at 1:24 PM, JargenBakt said:

Well, I've said all that I wanted to say. At this point the only choice is to wait to see how the dev team will handle everything going forward. All I'm hoping now is that my thread got noticed and my petition request forwarded. I won't be disappointed if nothing comes of it, but hey... it would be nice.

 

Sometimes you just gotta rant, you know?

You have to be careful with rants. If you failed to read all of the info given to you, but say that little info was provided, then your rant loses all of its steam and you quickly look like the bad guy.

The other issue is not understanding that Warframe has and will always be a game that makes adjustments as feedback (from the feedback section) comes in and fits the full scale of the game. Dante giving way too much overguard was a gift to the SP endurance players...but effectively trivializes the rest of the game. "Right sizing" the overguard amount would make a LOT of sense but would piss of players that love to see sky high values, but never go for endurance runs. The question is, who should DE cater to and can those who receives the benefit negatively, be able to handle the adjustments? That's the challenge.