Devstream 30: An Unexpectedly Large Blow To My Hopes For The Game

[Dwagon]

Furthermore, you're purposefully limiting player choice. The player is no longer playing your game and trying to intuitively or dynamically solve problems. They are jumping through arbitrary hoops that you have thrown out for kicks and giggles. That's not overcoming a challenge, it's going through the right motions.

Well, I know I'm being overly pedantic, but...that can also describe all video games in theory since all "game logic" is arbitrary.

 

That and "fun" varies from person to person, let alone population to population.

Without delving into the heavy stuff, it's simpler to say that gaming, like any creative medium, is more of a test of design philosophy than hard rule.

 

With the proper execution, well..Arguably the most recognized game series in the world is a surreal adventure about a plumber who rams his head into bricks to snag magic mushrooms and flowers, while stomping, kicking, or vaulting over everything else in his path.

 

(for the record, I share most of your opinion on the matter; DE is taking the low road in a lot of instances, like with the RNG business)

[LukeAura]

First of all, I'd like to personally apologize for not voicing my opinion in this thread sooner.
I also feel like I should do some devstream catch up because apparently I've missed a whole lot of nothing.

I completely agree with the concerns voiced in the Op, I've been here for about a year now and time and again it seems like DE makes the same fatal misunderstandings each time.

 

However, an issue stands where there is a possibility that DE may be overwhelmed, and our representatives in the discussion may not be ideal. There may have to be a selection of who gets in. I'd nominate (at the very least) notionphil, DiabolusUrsus, Xylia. 

I'll second these nominations if this actually becomes a thing and people are willing to do it.  


I regularly play solo in games(I solo'd my way through the entirety of Dark Souls 2 even, god those Belfry Gargoyles...*shudders*), Warframe being no exception and yes in Warframe because of how enemies spawn you do feel overwhelmed pretty often. But that's because the game requires a certain level of enemy numbers to even be considered exciting. Solo play in order to be 'balanced' would need to have less than a quarter of the enemy count(You can't cover as many angles, and knockdowns/energy drains are significantly more threatening when there is no one to protect or revive you). 
The player to enemy count ratio is worse for solo players because it's required to keep them playing at all. Which means relying on ults more and more to deal with problems in all four directions a team can cover with just guns.

[unsiezer]

I'm not sure how many people played Resistance 2(for PS3) online in there coop mode, and I'm sure most who have probably don't remember it to well, but I think that game had an ideal means by which solo players could play, and have it be difficult but possible, and having 4 players and have it be equally challenging due to heavy reliance on each other player and there role in the party. I think in order for DE to do this they would have to put at least 8-12 months of solid work to obtain the level of player quantity scaling quality they had in R2. but firstly they would need to stop with the completely generalized roles of different Warframe's. every Warframe needs to be set in a very specific role of either Protector, Healer, Damage, and support and they need to be try and true tested to insure that they can play that role, and have there key role ability's scale with difficulty. this should also mean that your Warframe also decides what equipment you can use, and what mods you can put in your weapons, Warframe, and sentinels, for example haveing punch through on weapons only available to damage role Warframes, so if an enemy bubbles, only a damage Warframe can deal with it with out getting close. then they would need to have player quantity actually effect What enemy's spawn, as well as quantity, frequency of spawns, and strength of enemy's. they would also need player number to effect drop tables of mission specific items in the case of say survival missions you need Life Support drops. once you have that in place you need to make the spawned enemy types dynamic. by dynamic i mean if you are playing a healer Warframe, then allow toxic aura enemy's to spawn because your character can handle that, but don't spawn say heavy defense enemy's, and like wise if your playing a damage warframe, spawn heavy defense enemy's but not toxic aura enemy's because you can handle that enemy. Next make when multiple players slowly join that the player quantity can also increase the enemy types that spawn. and lastly you need enemy's  to fit in to the same 4 roles that players have and have them work off one another to varying degrees depending on level difficulty, player quantity, and the present role of each player. the last thing i think they would need to change is enemy scaling appropriate to said enemy's role. so as difficulty increases, and player quantity increases enemy's need to scale appropriately a damage role enemy will gain small amounts of health,shield and armor, while having a larger jump in damage, or a protector having longer and stronger shields and bubbles and minimal increase in damage, this could also mean enemy's picking up ability's as difficulty goes up. a great example, have your basic Grineer Protecter just have high armor, and health, then the second stage increase health and armor, but give them a basic shield, then the third stage increase health, and armor more and give them a larger wall ability(like volts electric shield), then the 4th stage have them gain more health, and armor and give them a non moving bubble(like frost), then 5th stage have even more health and armor and a large moving wall, and at the 6th stage more health and armor and a moving bubble. then from there on have the bubble ,and large wall be mix and match spawned but increase there duration, and health maybe even  size to a degree.

[weirdee]

I got me a miscellaneous beef:

 

Bonus exp for tough foes or stealth kills is largely useless because it's only reasonably possible to do so with weapons and/or frames that most likely do not need more exp.

 

The exp system in general is bad because weapons start out gimped to compensate for their maximum mod potential and is like pulling teeth when you're not using cheap methods to feed them, such as unequipping gear to focus exp on the item you want and then just spamming powers to bypass using the weapon, or fighting infested because you can just kill them by landing on em hard enough and they can't reasonably fight back unless you get sloppy. This is both a symptom of how weapon development works, and how exp is rewarded. The current exp system is based on a traditional progression game where exp is valuable all the time, and the weapon development system is designed for weapons that are actually competent at all levels (which many are not) and compensating for mods that are really strong, which then fights against the exp system by making exp useless the moment it is actually enjoyable to obtain.

 

A side effect of this system is that since people have varying needs for exp, there's almost no way to get strangers to actually coordinate on how to act in any given random group unless an area has specifically been designated as a "farming" ground for such a resource, which in of itself is somewhat insulting that these things only come up by accident of design elements falling together, rather than deliberate design. The dark sectors are kind of a step forward, but they made it more complicated with all these other mechanics that don't quite fit into one cohesive product, and we're back to square one. Also, it's not quite the thing people actually wanted, for everybody, and is another bandaid to resolve an issue they themselves created by damaging the design to begin with.

 

This needs to be looked at also.

Edited June 18, 2014 by weirdee

[DiabolusUrsus]

First of all, I'd like to personally apologize for not voicing my opinion in this thread sooner.

I also feel like I should do some devstream catch up because apparently I've missed a whole lot of nothing.

I completely agree with the concerns voiced in the Op, I've been here for about a year now and time and again it seems like DE makes the same fatal misunderstandings each time.

 

I'll second these nominations if this actually becomes a thing and people are willing to do it.  

I regularly play solo in games(I solo'd my way through the entirety of Dark Souls 2 even, god those Belfry Gargoyles...*shudders*), Warframe being no exception and yes in Warframe because of how enemies spawn you do feel overwhelmed pretty often. But that's because the game requires a certain level of enemy numbers to even be considered exciting. Solo play in order to be 'balanced' would need to have less than a quarter of the enemy count(You can't cover as many angles, and knockdowns/energy drains are significantly more threatening when there is no one to protect or revive you). 

The player to enemy count ratio is worse for solo players because it's required to keep them playing at all. Which means relying on ults more and more to deal with problems in all four directions a team can cover with just guns.

 

The devstreams are interesting enough, but #30 was unsettling because it was a complete rollercoaster of feels. Interest in new content followed by dismay at how badly they were missing some of the more recurring issues, followed by slight degrees of hope, followed by further disappointment. Stuff like claiming that boss designs that required certain mod loadouts or couldn't necessarily be defeated in more than one way (e.g. shooting them) were unique and interesting. They're introducing a bunch of new Infested enemies sometime in the future (looks like they'll finally be getting some ranged firepower, discounting the Juggernaut) which is nice enough, but many of the enemies had toxic attacks. The early WIP version of the Juggernaut almost instantly killed the Dev who was playing as Rhino. Sure, they gave the disclaimer that the enemies hadn't been "balanced" yet, but what that told me was that they didn't have a solid idea of what numbers might be balanced. Sure, maybe the damage values and health bars weren't spot-on perfectly adjusted yet, but it shouldn't take much to think "Hmmm, maybe 650 toxin damage is a little high for a wide AOE attack." 

 

My one recurring thought was "My God, they really just don't get it." 

 

That said, hopefully they start working a little more closely with notionphil to introduce enemies that are actually fun to fight, which will in turn allow for more balanced single-player play when filling the screen with bodies is no longer necessary to keep things interesting. In the mean time improved spawn logic might help a bit. 

 

PS: I totally feel your Belfry Gargoyle pain. They were one of the hardest bosses for me in the first game (took me nine tries) and this time around they were even nastier. Topped off by the fact that reaching them without getting invaded was a nightmare. Freakin' Bell Keepers. 

[LukeAura]

PS: I totally feel your Belfry Gargoyle pain. They were one of the hardest bosses for me in the first game (took me nine tries) and this time around they were even nastier. Topped off by the fact that reaching them without getting invaded was a nightmare. Freakin' Bell Keepers. 

((Second time around was much easier, but then again, Halberd triple spin is ridiculously good at finishing off weakened gargoyles as long as you have the stamina to roll afterwards.)) 

 

 

The devstreams are interesting enough, but #30 was unsettling because it was a complete rollercoaster of feels. Interest in new content followed by dismay at how badly they were missing some of the more recurring issues, followed by slight degrees of hope, followed by further disappointment. Stuff like claiming that boss designs that required certain mod loadouts or couldn't necessarily be defeated in more than one way (e.g. shooting them) were unique and interesting. They're introducing a bunch of new Infested enemies sometime in the future (looks like they'll finally be getting some ranged firepower, discounting the Juggernaut) which is nice enough, but many of the enemies had toxic attacks. The early WIP version of the Juggernaut almost instantly killed the Dev who was playing as Rhino. Sure, they gave the disclaimer that the enemies hadn't been "balanced" yet, but what that told me was that they didn't have a solid idea of what numbers might be balanced. Sure, maybe the damage values and health bars weren't spot-on perfectly adjusted yet, but it shouldn't take much to think "Hmmm, maybe 650 toxin damage is a little high for a wide AOE attack." 

 

My one recurring thought was "My God, they really just don't get it." 

 

That said, hopefully they start working a little more closely with notionphil to introduce enemies that are actually fun to fight, which will in turn allow for more balanced single-player play when filling the screen with bodies is no longer necessary to keep things interesting. In the mean time improved spawn logic might help a bit. 

Specific mod loadouts, just, gah, that's literally a problem I just talked about in another thread. We have too many situations in which 'mod differently' is the only solution, as if modding to continue going along as we already do is going to make the game any better. I'm not playing a strategy game, I'm playing an action game! Where's the action oriented solutions to enemy designs? 

That seems to be a recurring recurring thought among the community actually. They fix a problem, then make the same blunder over and over again. It feels like at times the person making the initial design decision is removed from the feedback process, when something needs fixed it goes straight to the builders. 

[Mi-Marido]

My thanks to the OP for taking the time to write all that out and really nail them down on major issues that have plagued this potentially great game for so long. I've played about 1500 hours and as much as I want to continue to love the game, I'm struggling with that. There needs to be fundamental change to so many aspects of the game, as you so eloquently listed. Nothing feels rewarding anymore. I nearly burned out thanks to void RNG. I had to run 30 t1 survivals at 40 minutes each just for a loki prime chassis. That's all i got for my efforts besides other junk parts i can't sell and hundreds of junk mods i don't need. The missions were mind-numbing and repetitive and without any challenge, but since there isn't any other new gear for me to acquire, i had to grind it out. I have a deep and abiding hate for the void now. If i were a new player, then every mod drop, every void reward potentially gives me a new toy to play with or makes me stronger.

I ask this: what happens when you have all the toys and nothing can make you stronger? You get bored and stop playing, unless the gameplay is dynamic and exciting. Right now, I, like so many other veteran players, keep waiting for each update, hoping desperately that THIS update will be the one. THIS one will be the game changer that makes EVERY mission thoroughly enjoyable. I almost wish they did away with mission types altogether. You don't just go to the starmap and pick a survival or extermination mission....you just pick a location and the mission will be dynamic...always different. Changing objectives, multiple simultaneous objectives, surprise boss ambushes, etc. I'd love to see truly fundamental changes to game. Player ships are a cool idea, but ultimately it's just a big starmap UI overhaul with a few missions to make it interactive. It's visually new but not game-changing. Anyway, my rant is done for now. Now waiting for the next update with hope that there's something truly different this time.

[DiabolusUrsus]

((Second time around was much easier, but then again, Halberd triple spin is ridiculously good at finishing off weakened gargoyles as long as you have the stamina to roll afterwards.)) 

 

 

Specific mod loadouts, just, gah, that's literally a problem I just talked about in another thread. We have too many situations in which 'mod differently' is the only solution, as if modding to continue going along as we already do is going to make the game any better. I'm not playing a strategy game, I'm playing an action game! Where's the action oriented solutions to enemy designs? 

That seems to be a recurring recurring thought among the community actually. They fix a problem, then make the same blunder over and over again. It feels like at times the person making the initial design decision is removed from the feedback process, when something needs fixed it goes straight to the builders. 

 

I was switching between a scimitar and a falchion (depending on which moveset I was toying with... never been much of a dual-wielding fan.) You can imagine the range on those things. My only saving grace was having tricked out endurance and adaptability. 

 

You actually kinda hit the nail on the head with "the person making the initial design decision is removed from the feedback process." According to the livestream, the people in charge of the enemy design actually have pretty much nothing to do with balancing the enemies/attacks they create. It also sounds like there are separate teams for weapons/Warframes. Basically, DE sounds hyper-compartmentalized, with each division doing a decent job on their own, but with practically zero communication in between. As a result we get stuck with mechanics, numbers, and intentions that don't quite match up the way they're supposed to. I actually kinda have to give them props for concealing that for so long. It explains a lot, though. 

[LukeAura]

I was switching between a scimitar and a falchion (depending on which moveset I was toying with... never been much of a dual-wielding fan.) You can imagine the range on those things. My only saving grace was having tricked out endurance and adaptability. 

I don't want to derail your thread any further about Dark Souls, fun a topic this is, but I'd probably recommend the Falchion just because more damage is better than less, along with all the other little benefits it brings. 

 

 

It explains a lot, though. 

It really would...Wow, It would kind of explain everything. 

Edited June 19, 2014 by LukeAura

[5Billion]

OH so there's actually someone who agrees with me on how the last Devstream was practically terrible..

 

DE went from the awesome that was #29 with the player ship, updated UI, new foundries, and possible lore, to rehashing boring enemies, not even choosing more than 3 enemies to introduce with Update 14 from the contest, and barely even hinting at how bosses will become BOSSES and not just giving them higher health and more damage...

 

And all the DE fanboys just fell for it 'cus they put up pretty pictures of concepts that they won't even bear fruit to...

 

In other news, let's see how DE can fix the RNG and dilution problems that came with T4 Void before the release of Update 14 before people continue leaving the game...

 

My suggestion for the Void dilution problem and RNG in general (a bit unrelated but I feel like posting it here) is to:

1) not make any prime part or BP appear more than once throughout the void;

2) implement a system that increases the likelihood of getting drops and parts (warframe parts, prime parts, resources, rewards, whatever) as you collect more of those items, for example if I already have a Trinity chassis and systems BP, then make it likelier that I'll receive a helmet BP..;

3) make it so that we cannot obtain any prime part multiple times per mission, this gets really annoying when we get multiple Burston stocks in one T1 survival instead of just giving us the Loki Prime chassis..

So there.

[Skynin]

-snip-

I would like a back-and-forth discussion between a bunch of DE members on the couch/office webcams/plain text real-time chat, and team of the most reliable moderators, contributing users, and the community staff of Drew, Megan, and Rebecca. We can't take everyone, and we can't take every topic. We really need to be thorough, yet concise.

 

I'm dreaming about this. You can see something like this here:

http://youtu.be/91j3EHEybV0?t=27m23s

http://youtu.be/91j3EHEybV0?t=27m23s

But with Warframe staff and community it wouldn't be this boring

I hope to see this one day.

[cyril1204]

1) not make any prime part or BP appear more than once throughout the void;

2) implement a system that increases the likelihood of getting drops and parts (warframe parts, prime parts, resources, rewards, whatever) as you collect more of those items, for example if I already have a Trinity chassis and systems BP, then make it likelier that I'll receive a helmet BP..;

3) make it so that we cannot obtain any prime part multiple times per mission, this gets really annoying when we get multiple Burston stocks in one T1 survival instead of just giving us the Loki Prime chassis..

 

1 and 3 suggestions sound good, but I can't agree with your no.2 suggestion because that will break the core of every MMO game out there. If you think about it. Let's say you have Trin Chassis and Systems, then the droprate for the helmet magically increase by 5 10 20%, No. That's not "luck" anymore but rather DE holding your hand and show you the way to the game. That's just an easy way you want to go about the grindwall. And beside, the game we play often than not operated in a team-based mechanics. With that in mind, the part you need might not be what the others in the team need; implementing that mechanics will be hard as hell and more just a waste of time since there are many conflicts between players.

 

You know what, the current T4S r5 reward appears multiple times during 1 mission is awesome; when I see it appear and not the part I'm looking for, I'm not even mad, it is great for upgrading your mods, that is a conflict over your no.2 suggestion: more likely the part that you want appear, less likely it will be for r5 farmers like us to get what we want.

[CosyPigeon]

SO can we get some official word from DE that they've seen this thread and that they're actually taking it to heart? The dev stream and the latest update where they completely ignored the community as well as the perspectives of their own LEAD DESIGNERS with yet another tier of void keys has been pretty damn disconcerting. 

[azmyth1]

-snip-

Dude, whitespace.  Do it.

[cyril1204]

Dude, whitespace.  Do it.

Thanks, I skipped the whole wall of text

[AveryJ]

I understood what you were asking for, but I don't think you got what I was saying. It will restrict what the devs can do with bosses if extremly handicapped players must be able to defeat them.

We'll use the new Derf Anyo as an example.

His totally sweet hoverboard? If players must be able to defeat him with melee only, his flight and speed must be restricted. He cannot fly higher than players can reach (there's another threat complaining about not being able to kill drones melee only where the OP steadfastly refuses to bring a gun and would rather fail) and Derf cannot fly faster than players can run (there is another thread complaining about not being able to melee-only capture targets with gauntlets and a slow stance). Now Derf and his styling new helmet are barely better than any other slow, ground-based boss.

There isn't more variety, there's the illusion of more variety. You feel like you have more options, but all your options are really the same. You attack the slow moving boss like you would any other. It's just a bag of hitpoints. It can't have anything other than a big pool of health because some Thrak Rhino with gauntlet weapons and no guns needs to be able to beat him too.

I believe their goal is to make bosses which can't simply be flavor-of-the-month spray cannoned down in five seconds. Do to this, they need strategies and gimmicks, and those mean not every approach can be viable for every boss.

no...you really aren't understanding what he's saying. as long as derf anyo can be damaged and defended against in the slightest way with melee players then its all good. the OP is saying as long as he isn't literally completely invincible to melee damage and can be hurt then he's a fine addition to the game. the devs don't need to "slow him down to accommodate melee only players" or anything like that. they just need to make sure that he doesnt have super tiny weak spots that can only be damaged with firearms as the only way to kill him. (the best way to kill him? yes, absolutely, but not the only way.   a simple fix would be to replace boss invincibility phases with heightened armor phases insead. as long as there is some progression against the enemies health bar (no matter how small) players will always have that sense of "chipping away" at them instead of the "wow,all my bullets/attacks are wasted" feeling.

[grillv20]

I'm not sure how many people played Resistance 2(for PS3) online in there coop mode, and I'm sure most who have probably don't remember it to well, but I think that game had an ideal means by which solo players could play, and have it be difficult but possible, and having 4 players and have it be equally challenging due to heavy reliance on each other player and there role in the party. I think in order for DE to do this they would have to put at least 8-12 months of solid work to obtain the level of player quantity scaling quality they had in R2. but firstly they would need to stop with the completely generalized roles of different Warframe's. every Warframe needs to be set in a very specific role of either Protector, Healer, Damage, and support and they need to be try and true tested to insure that they can play that role, and have there key role ability's scale with difficulty. this should also mean that your Warframe also decides what equipment you can use, and what mods you can put in your weapons, Warframe, and sentinels, for example haveing punch through on weapons only available to damage role Warframes, so if an enemy bubbles, only a damage Warframe can deal with it with out getting close. then they would need to have player quantity actually effect What enemy's spawn, as well as quantity, frequency of spawns, and strength of enemy's. they would also need player number to effect drop tables of mission specific items in the case of say survival missions you need Life Support drops. once you have that in place you need to make the spawned enemy types dynamic. by dynamic i mean if you are playing a healer Warframe, then allow toxic aura enemy's to spawn because your character can handle that, but don't spawn say heavy defense enemy's, and like wise if your playing a damage warframe, spawn heavy defense enemy's but not toxic aura enemy's because you can handle that enemy. Next make when multiple players slowly join that the player quantity can also increase the enemy types that spawn. and lastly you need enemy's  to fit in to the same 4 roles that players have and have them work off one another to varying degrees depending on level difficulty, player quantity, and the present role of each player. the last thing i think they would need to change is enemy scaling appropriate to said enemy's role. so as difficulty increases, and player quantity increases enemy's need to scale appropriately a damage role enemy will gain small amounts of health,shield and armor, while having a larger jump in damage, or a protector having longer and stronger shields and bubbles and minimal increase in damage, this could also mean enemy's picking up ability's as difficulty goes up. a great example, have your basic Grineer Protecter just have high armor, and health, then the second stage increase health and armor, but give them a basic shield, then the third stage increase health, and armor more and give them a larger wall ability(like volts electric shield), then the 4th stage have them gain more health, and armor and give them a non moving bubble(like frost), then 5th stage have even more health and armor and a large moving wall, and at the 6th stage more health and armor and a moving bubble. then from there on have the bubble ,and large wall be mix and match spawned but increase there duration, and health maybe even  size to a degree.

 

paragraphs man

[ScorchedIce]

I wish i could add something to the topic, you summed up pretty much everything people have been asking for for months, and put it in a nice thread, solutions, ideas, examples, everything

I would tip my hat if i used one, ill just humbly upvote and bump.

[Casardis]

You probably know my opinion here already, especially since I linked your topic in another one concerning community hot topics.

Anyway thanks for your effort. I hope all of this feedback is actually understood (UNDERSTOOD) by DE, instead of having them take only what they like about it. It's especially alarming when I seem to notice more and more topics of this kind.

Edited June 21, 2014 by Casardis

[CBAROG]

"They may be referred to as 'bandaid' mods, but they're in there for a reason. We've added mods after the fact, like handspring, if you really don't like knockdown." What reason NOT to make Handspring a mechanic?

[MechaKnight]

"They may be referred to as 'bandaid' mods, but they're in there for a reason. We've added mods after the fact, like handspring, if you really don't like knockdown." What reason NOT to make Handspring a mechanic?

I really disliked the response too. The main opposition to the mechanic is "people don't like quick-time events." In general, people prefer when successful QTEs grant benefits (melee 2.0), rather than failure brings punishment (think of those games where the QTE kills you if you fail).

 

Still, in the sense that we never use the Handspring mod, the addition of this mechanic is better than none, so the QTE will be seen as purely advantageous compared to what we have now. Handspring can be incorporated into the system to allow the QTE to complete itself quicker (fewer button presses), or to allow the player to start pressing buttons early.

 

In short, the mechanic could be added and Handspring could be changed to suit the mechanic. It's nothing but a bonus to players, nothing like making it so feral kubrows jump onto us and try to rip our throats while we press buttons to save ourselves... although it'd be cool to see that livestream scene again in color.

[LukeAura]

I really disliked the response too. The main opposition to the mechanic is "people don't like quick-time events." In general, people prefer when successful QTEs grant benefits (melee 2.0), rather than failure brings punishment (think of those games where the QTE kills you if you fail).

QTEs killed reactionary button press mechanics. 

Being able to time a button press when knocked down, isn't a QTE.

A QTE is an 'event' it is separated from real gameplay and requires arbitrary button presses to achieve success in a fancy chain of moves that aren't feasible under standard gameplay. A simple thing like springing up from a knockdown would be 100% integrated in to combat, and therefore, not a QTE. That would be like calling Dodge Rolling in Dark Souls a QTE. 

And it doesn't even have to be a reactionary button press, we could just be able to tap shift while getting up to roll back to our feet. 

[DiabolusUrsus]

QTEs killed reactionary button press mechanics. 

Being able to time a button press when knocked down, isn't a QTE.

A QTE is an 'event' it is separated from real gameplay and requires arbitrary button presses to achieve success in a fancy chain of moves that aren't feasible under standard gameplay. A simple thing like springing up from a knockdown would be 100% integrated in to combat, and therefore, not a QTE. That would be like calling Dodge Rolling in Dark Souls a QTE. 

And it doesn't even have to be a reactionary button press, we could just be able to tap shift while getting up to roll back to our feet. 

 

This. Or an ukemi in Soul Calibur. Combo "Just Inputs." Stuff like that. QTEs are typically detrimental to action games, but standard action game controls are not QTEs. 

[CaptainPeanut]

Your topic is amazing and I couldn't agree with it more, OP. I only wish DE would have listened to this sort of suggestion long ago. Maybe then my friend would still be playing.

[MechaKnight]

This. Or an ukemi in Soul Calibur. Combo "Just Inputs." Stuff like that. QTEs are typically detrimental to action games, but standard action game controls are not QTEs. 

Okay, so I mislabeled the mechanic as a QTE, but all the same. Yes, the ukemi in Soul Calibur and other games is what I speak of for button responses. So it's actually not a QTE. In a sense, I'm not sure we'd have a QTE in this game unless a melee weapon or ability stops gameplay to press a series of buttons. The closest thing would be if Ash's Bladestorm did that. Currently it doesn't, so it's fine.