Why The Love Of Weaknesses?

[(PSN)Guerrilian]

Why do things need additional drawbacks and constricting limitations? Why do people want cons tacked onto something with all pros? A challenge?

 

You know what's challenging? An opponent that's just above you.In a foot race with a slightly slower opponent, do you give them a head start or do you put rocks in your shoes.

 

Masochists, keep your mouths shut and your fingers off the keyboard.

 

Everyone else, of course you don't put gravel in your sneakers. Even if you won, it would be a hollow victory. You just sucked all the fun out of a good old fashion sprint by trading endorphins and a well earned sense of superiority for blood soaked socks.

 

People think Rhino should be slower and decry Rhino Prime. If Rhino has no downsides, so what? He'll still be killed on higher levels by not playing smart. Just make the movement speed for everyone else faster. Make the other warframes sturdier. Let their abilities seriously mess enemies up.

 

Then, they will feel like the War gods they are meant to be. After that, raise the level cap on enemies or just have 'high security' modes unlocked with mastery rank.

 

There, now warframes are a choice of style over advantages. There's your balance. You can gain harder levels (and faster). There's your challenge.

[VKhaun]

It's an action RPG.

 

RPG is supposed to provide depth.

Action is supposed to provide fun and replay value.

 

 

If RPG is > Action, then the whole game becomes boring because action is meaningless. You don't need to avoid fire if slash procs don't hurt. You don't need to dodge boss moves if you have tons and tons of HP and he doesn't scale.  You don't need to care about your position if snowglobe lasts minutes and is invincible the whole time. You don't need to worry about target selection if you vaporize everything very quickly.

 

The problems with RPG aren't in RPG. They're in overruling the need for action.

 

Power creep is BAD, and we are at such a level of power creep relative to currently available content that pretty much everything needs absurd drawbacks added to make any sense.

[Orbister]

yea man you show them! all those dumb tactical players! who wants to play tactical if you can just stomp your way through faster than than all those "masochists", it's like being The Hulk AND The Flash at the same time! you show them mah brah! pfts i even dare say who the hell needs shields and health! let's all get a shiny iron skin that allows NO DAMAGE AT ALL, but EVERYONE! because NOBODY likes drawbacks! Rhino the hell out of all those sissy frames DE! RHINO THEM WELL!

Edited March 15, 2014 by Orbister

[(PSN)Guerrilian]

It's an action RPG.

 

RPG is supposed to provide depth.

Action is supposed to provide fun and replay value.

 

 

If RPG is > Action, then the whole game becomes boring because action is meaningless. You don't need to avoid fire if slash procs don't hurt. You don't need to dodge boss moves if you have tons and tons of HP and he doesn't scale.  You don't need to care about your position if snowglobe lasts minutes and is invincible the whole time. You don't need to worry about target selection if you vaporize everything very quickly.

 

The problems with RPG aren't in RPG. They're in overruling the need for action.

 

Power creep is BAD, and we are at such a level of power creep relative to currently available content that pretty much everything needs absurd drawbacks added to make any sense.

I never suggested the bosses don't scale. I never suggested snowglobe be invincible. And I'm sorry if I implied otherwise, but by "seriously mess up" I had loki in mind, who has no directly damaging abilities, and was talking about tactical crowd control.

 

You are talking about Power Creep, but I am talking about retaining challenge.

[ThePresident777]

It's an action RPG.

 

RPG is supposed to provide depth.

Action is supposed to provide fun and replay value.

 

 

If RPG is > Action, then the whole game becomes boring because action is meaningless. You don't need to avoid fire if slash procs don't hurt. You don't need to dodge boss moves if you have tons and tons of HP and he doesn't scale.  You don't need to care about your position if snowglobe lasts minutes and is invincible the whole time. You don't need to worry about target selection if you vaporize everything very quickly.

 

The problems with RPG aren't in RPG. They're in overruling the need for action.

 

Power creep is BAD, and we are at such a level of power creep relative to currently available content that pretty much everything needs absurd drawbacks added to make any sense.

 

Games are meaningless.  Some people enjoy the action, sights, sounds.

[Orbister]

Games are meaningless.  Some people enjoy the action, sights, sounds.

may i suggest a Michael Bay movie instead?

[Un1337ninj4]

Thing is, if there is no weakness there is no balance, if there is no balance there is no challange and many Master Race issues.... Creating Toxic players, hard-set-in-stone metas, boring gameplay, and (most importantly) no reward. 

 

Even if every frame was god mode, what fun would it be? What's the risk? To play Sci-Fi Duck Hunt? 

 

Weaknesses are a key concept in submersion. I for one love knowing all to well when I play Ember Prime that I really need to focus on wall running and damage evasion. Or as Rhino (used to be) having to actually worry about keeping up with your team and being able to topple the enemy mountain if they falter under it's weight.

 

Thus it also comes down to PLAYSTYLE, while having every frame set to the same standard sounds well and good. How do you intend on that? Make Ember sturdier.... Now what do I have to lose when playing her?

Edited March 15, 2014 by un1337ninj4

[arisaka]

I think the OP should be more specific. This thread is incredibly broad which leads to a vague debate.

[DalaiLlama]

Masochists, keep your mouths shut and your fingers off the keyboard.

 

Trying to weed out criticism before discussion even starts.  Niiice.

 

Regardless of nerfs or buffs, what you seem to want is balance.  Instead of nerfing things, you want other things to be stronger.  To that I ask, why should they?  Loki is crazy fast already even without rush.  Valkyr has a base armor just under five times the "tank" frames.  Nova's skills have been the bane of survival/defense enemies dissolving into clouds of PhysX particles.  Rather, it just seems that you're one of the butthurt people who recently suffered a nerf to a previous favorite (to which I say get in the damned line...) who would much rather your gear/frames stay the same.

 

The very point of weaknesses is to create strengths in other places, this gives variance and a different feel to different pieces of equipment as well as creating a much-needed niche for each; if every darned thing in the game made everything in the game instantly disappear into blood showers, what point is there in buying different weapons if all have high strengths and no weaknesses?  At that point owning different weapons simply becomes a cosmetic feature, which is as shallow as the human first impression.

 

Not only that, but humans are humans, and so are the Devs.  Newly implemented ideas are bound to have chinks and nicks within them that need to be ironed out; there have been as many buffs as nerfs in the history of Warframe's developmental process to date.  It's natural and needed; imagine if all the chinks in this game were never ironed out.

 

There, now warframes are a choice of style over advantages.

What will happen is the exact opposite.  When every piece of equipment has no drawbacks and no special purpose, all gameplay styles meld into "kill everything in similar ways."

 

Then, they will feel like the War gods they are meant to be.

Tenno are not war gods.  They were never, and never will be.  I assume you drew that from the overly-fanciful lore section from Excalibro.

Edited March 15, 2014 by DalaiLlama

[ValhaHazred]

Even if the Tenno where "War Gods" that doesn't mean the enemy isn't equal to them. Demons of war if you will.

[Axterix13]

People think Rhino should be slower and decry Rhino Prime. If Rhino has no downsides, so what? He'll still be killed on higher levels by not playing smart. Just make the movement speed for everyone else faster. Make the other warframes sturdier. Let their abilities seriously mess enemies up.

 

Then, they will feel like the War gods they are meant to be. After that, raise the level cap on enemies or just have 'high security' modes unlocked with mastery rank.

 

There, now warframes are a choice of style over advantages. There's your balance. You can gain harder levels (and faster). There's your challenge.

The bit about "just make everyone else faster" is why your idea is flawed.  If one thing is the problem, then you fix that problem.  You don't change everything else.  That's just idiotic.  Not only is it more work, it is also a greater risk of something else getting screwed up.  And then what?  Is everything supposed to be buffed to the level of the new screw-up?

 

Furthermore, the game isn't designed for higher level mobs as things stand.  Shields and HP rapidly lose their value, because enemy damage scales up.  And that in turn leads to people relying on borked powers to survive.  Any frame that doesn't have a borked power?  Bottom tier.  Doesn't matter that the frame is overall fine when facing appropriate level stuff.  Doesn't matter that the top tier frame has multiple powers that are bad.  All that matters is that one god-like power that can trivialize things.

 

When something is overpowered, you nerf it.  Just like when something is underpowered, you buff it.  You don't change everything else to match that level of power.  Sadly, devs tend to be pretty good at doing the former, and not so good at the latter.

 

And as to loving the weakness... it isn't about the weakness.  It is about the strengths.  A strength of the fast frames is their speed.  To have that speed, they give up other things.  When you have a frame that doesn't give up anything suddenly being given their speed, they no longer have a strength.  They only have weaknesses.  To have balance and variety, frames have to have weak and strong points.

Edited March 15, 2014 by Axterix13

[(PSN)Guerrilian]

yea man you show them! all those dumb tactical players! who wants to play tactical if you can just stomp your way through faster than than all those "masochists", it's like being The Hulk AND The Flash at the same time! you show them mah brah! pfts i even dare say who the hell needs shields and health! let's all get a shiny iron skin that allows NO DAMAGE AT ALL, but EVERYONE! because NOBODY likes drawbacks! Rhino the hell out of all those sissy frames DE! RHINO THEM WELL!

 

Masochism was limited to the analogy. I'm sorry if you didn't get the joke.

I was playing in the void to earn cash with vanguard rhino, do you know what thrilled me? That the strength of the enemy forces made me used tactical advantages like traps, cover (including human shields), and the physics of reverse water falls. I'm not asking players to throw away tactics. Perish the thought.

Regarding stomping past tactical players: You can't really do that at higher levels, anyway.

The Hulk and the Flash: Are you implying the hulk is pretty fast, even among super beings? Did you know the flash has the infinite mass punch that can destroy planets? Do you know those two combined is basically Superman, who is forced to think tactically anyway for the sake of engaging readers?

Making everyone Rhino: Do I want that? God no. You know what saves me more than Iron skin? Volt's electric shield, Nyx's Chaos, and Mag's Pull.

Don't count me in with Rhino-ing everyone. Chain lightning for the win. Let those tasered puppets dance by strings of jagged fire!

[neKroMancer]

Ever play ARPG with class that able to carry heavy shield, don biggest armor available, swinging extremely large two-handed axe while carrying shield, and able to cast meteor shower every five second? Is there any game that actually let you play something like that? 

 

They don't exist because it will break the game's diversity and replayability. You got glass cannon mage, two-handed axe wielding barbarian, sword&board paladin - each with innate strength and weakness.  

 

The idea of fixing the game by buffing everything to higher standard is flaw by itself and it's indeed an idea that many players think it should be applied in the game. Actually, it will create more work and in the end achieve similar result to lower one thing that is out of norm.

- If you buff all the things then players will be able to stomp the AI, which leads buffing the AI to normalize the game. End result? Larger number and balance gameplay.

- If you set a standard and buff/nerf everything according to it, then you can leave most of the content from reworking and get a balance gameplay.

 

Rhino prime speed is going to get lowered or all the prime will be buffed to set a new prime standard to differentiate them from stock models. 

[(PSN)Guerrilian]

I think the OP should be more specific. This thread is incredibly broad which leads to a vague debate.

 

Yeah, I should have been more specific.

 

People, the "masochism" thing is a joke. I've been watching this show called Archer, where there is a character named Cheryl who...I'm not sure I should be describing in this forum, come to think of it. Lets just say she blissfully fantasizes about being slowly murdered and leave it at that. I meant literal masochists, not people that use the word figuratively.

 

By "weakness", I meant debuffs put where something is not even close to an instant win button or already has places where it is not as strong. For instance, when posters suggest something new, they often tack on a penalty as if the inherent specialization of the ability doesn't already leave holes in its utility. Lets say someone wants an ability that greatly enhances melee damage, but you take more damage. I say, you are already taking more damage by getting shot in the face point blank by five shotgunners. Its not clearing a room while granting invincibility, so why tack on increased incoming damage when already putting yourself in more harms way than usual.

[DalaiLlama]

Yeah, I should have been more specific.

 

People, the "masochism" thing is a joke. I've been watching this show called Archer, where there is a character named Cheryl who...I'm not sure I should be describing in this forum, come to think of it. Lets just say she blissfully fantasizes about being slowly murdered and leave it at that. I meant literal masochists, not people that use the word figuratively.

 

By "weakness", I meant debuffs put where something is not even close to an instant win button or already has places where it is not as strong. For instance, when posters suggest something new, they often tack on a penalty as if the inherent specialization of the ability doesn't already leave holes in its utility. Lets say someone wants an ability that greatly enhances melee damage, but you take more damage. I say, you are already taking more damage by getting shot in the face point blank by five shotgunners. Its not clearing a room while granting invincibility, so why tack on increased incoming damage when already putting yourself in more harms way than usual.

 

Long story short:

1. Increased power without costs leads to too much power.  There should always be a limit on free power, especially in a game with a horizontal leveling system.

2. If what you wanted was more "style" and more varied gameplay, these weaknesses only support it.  Given the ability to deal more damage comes at the cost of having to play even more evasively, in your example.  It is a higher reward for a higher risk, and this is natural.  If not, people would simply keep charging headlong and increased-damage slashing until things stopped moving, given that they have no greater motivation to dodge incoming lead by not taking increased damage.

 

It's a real problem nowadays regarding people becoming too "OP", people are just trying to create, as you wanted, "balance."  Higher ability comes at higher risk.  Higher power comes at higher cost.  This is the sort of balancing that must occur if we should attain any sort of variance at all.  If we instead wish to attain balance by keeping ability and risk constant for everything... well that just leads us back to square one.

 

If what you mean is a weapon though, I'll need an example of sorts...

Edited March 15, 2014 by DalaiLlama