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

[locojuan]

YES! dont get me wrong!

 

I understand this, and I agree with it, but I want to say that what you think I am asking for is in no way what I am asking for. Yes, the player should feel like a god among men, so to speak, but that doesn't mean that they should be nigh-invulnerable. There's no real merit to feeling like a god if you can't be brought back down to earth. I'm not saying "make everything difficult," or even "nerf the damage of powerful weapon x." For example, the Penta doesn't need a damage nerf. It needs an ammo efficiency nerf. The problem is that people don't understand that "nerf" does not mean that their godhood is being rescinded. The most recent example that springs to mind is the set of changes made to Trinity. You may recall that it was followed by a veritable S#&$-storm of "OMG TRINITY IS USELESS NOW YOU KILLED HER BYE." 

The only actual "nerf" she was hit with was no longer being able to provide immunity to one-hit kill attacks, which really shouldn't be part of the game to begin with. 

 

On the flip-side, her Energy Vampire was buffed into awesomeness in that killing an enemy hit with the ability gives you a near-instant energy recharge, and Blessing's actual intended function was improved by a reduction to its cast time. It is now easier to save teammates from the brink of death with a full restore. Energy Vampire means that she can use Link almost constantly, and Blessing should never be far out of reach. 

People didn't really notice that she was shifted into a better-defined healer/support role by the changes because they were pre-occupied with the "nerf" to Blessing's invulnerability. 

 

Having used her both pre- and post- nerf, Trinity is still a veritable god. She's just not completely invulnerable, which necessitates the player staying attentive and engaged in the game. I can't see that as anything but a beneficial change. 

YES! we do agree on all the points you just made. i was merely remarking that nerf and buffs are the courrent topic and the major cause of discussion, while by simply adding mobs as the ones our dear phil proposed, would inmediately result in a change that might turn on some lights in what is otherwise dark areas of the game, without the need of touching the things already in the game. THEN, once this mechanics are proven to work (no doubt they would), we polish the powers and weapons that avoid the new mechanics to an extend.

[DiabolusUrsus]

YES! dont get me wrong!

 

YES! we do agree on all the points you just made. i was merely remarking that nerf and buffs are the courrent topic and the major cause of discussion, while by simply adding mobs as the ones our dear phil proposed, would inmediately result in a change that might turn on some lights in what is otherwise dark areas of the game, without the need of touching the things already in the game. THEN, once this mechanics are proven to work (no doubt they would), we polish the powers and weapons that avoid the new mechanics to an extend.

 

Awesome. I have a better idea of what you were saying, now. Thanks for the feedback, and that actually sounds great. 

[gnat6]

Good god simulator tries to show player that its because of player that character is nigh invulnerable, in contrary, warframe shows us that only thing that makes us god is our gear which we get by praying everyday to higher deity the "rngesus".

 

Thats ofc before de introduces us with endless scaling and doubling enemy power every 10 lvls to the point where we become ants in gods sandbox if we dont use our protection talisman, namely snow globe, iron skin or blessing.

You have a good point there I feel much more powerful playing star wars battlefront because I am using the same equippment as all the other units but can massacre them or lose miserably because of my skill or lack of it as opposed to warframe where all I have to do is point my gun at the enemy and they fall over dead or in the case of most of the warframe skills I can skip the aiming part and just have everything die.

[Hexagoros]

I read the list at the top, and was absolutely sure that this was not worth reading. Then I started reading the wall of text, and I have to admit, you are way too correct. On 80% or more of your points. Especially considering the enemies and the RNG. The trouble is that the way the game works, there isn't a ton you can do to force players to change their behaviors. 

 

This.

[Hyperius]

What's funny to me, is that the main attribute that makes players godlike isn't exclusive to the tenno. If the Grineer managed to cobble together mods held by their own troops and put it into their most common weapons...the tenno would be toast. The tenno are just better at the mod card game and hoarding. The very idea makes me sad.

 

The tenno are godlike card collectors, not godlike warriors.

Edited June 7, 2014 by Hyperius

[Davoodoo]

I think we are looking at it wrong way.

 

I remember time when game had old mod system wasnt about loot, bosses while lacking any specfic mechanics were biggest challenge in the game and game had any challenge.

 

Then de started to introduce weapons, when ppl got annoyed by powercreep de responds "its a loot game"

 

When ppl get annoyed by lack of challenge de responds "we want players to feel like a gods"

 

It all seems like an attempt to advertise their new addition instead of actualy describing their vision of game.

 

Also before dark sectors which were supposed to be endgame we heard "endless missions arent endgame"

Edited June 7, 2014 by Davoodoo

[Noble_Cactus]

 

I think it'd be interesting if DE could release a very limited "Creation" kit of sorts working with a plugin system for an offline version of Warframe so that interested members of the community could take their time to create "mods" (mods as in Skyrim-styled mods, not mod cards) illustrating some of their proposed balancing changes. I'd be very interested in trying out a Volt_Cruelerz or notionphil-styled overhaul, and I think being able to experience the end result of some of the ideas being tossed around might help lay some of the community-at-large's fears to rest concerning weapon nerfs. It's a really rough idea, but I remembered a thread I read a while ago titled "If you could be a Warframe Dev for a day" or something like that. Thinking about it realistically that idea wouldn't really work or be practical, but DE's relative silence in combination with some of their responses after making seemingly random changes make me think "Here, let me show you what I'm talking about." 

 

 

I'd be down for this. Or at least something like a test server. Anything to establish a closer dialogue between players and devs... though I have a feeling the devs wouldn't like this. I have my reasons.

 

Anyway, what I like about the idea of a creation kit is that it potentially "idiot proofs" itself. Because using it wouldn't be some hand holding Fisher Price deal, your random schmuck might not be understand how it works and would give up, while dedicated players who really want to put their ideas into effect would sit down with the tool and work out their thoughts. At the same time, there's also the possibility that it would be too difficult or complex for a person who isn't attuned with authoring tools but has "good" ideas. 

 

But that's up to how the kit itself works. As for the general concept of a toolbox, I support it.

[Noble_Cactus]

I think we are looking at it wrong way.

 

I remember time when game had old mod system wasnt about loot, bosses while lacking any specfic mechanics were biggest challenge in the game and game had any challenge.

 

Then de started to introduce weapons, when ppl got annoyed by powercreep de responds "its a loot game"

 

When ppl get annoyed by lack of challenge de responds "we want players to feel like a gods"

 

It all seems like an attempt to advertise their new addition instead of actualy describing their vision of game.

 

Also before dark sectors which were supposed to be endgame we heard "endless missions arent endgame"

 

I like how Dark Sectors were originally advertised as endgame. Yet when they rolled around (a shocking month or two later, which is very quick for an "endgame idea that we've been discussing on the design council forums"), that was quickly hushed up and never brought up again.

[Hexagoros]

I like how Dark Sectors were originally advertised as endgame. Yet when they rolled around (a shocking month or two later, which is very quick for an "endgame idea that we've been discussing on the design council forums"), that was quickly hushed up and never brought up again.

 

Does anyone above rank 5 even play Dark Sectors?

[DiabolusUrsus]

Does anyone above rank 5 even play Dark Sectors?

 

They're useful for ranking weapons quickly. So yeah, I play them, but only when I have things to level. 

[-CM-Trives]

Does anyone above rank 5 even play Dark Sectors?

 

 

Uhm, I'm 15 and I only play Dark Sectors.

[WhisperByte]

A part of the reason why so many players are against nerfs is the way DEvs handle them. They spend months pretty much ignoring the issue and make it seem as if it was designed like that and then suddenly come out saying something along the lines "enough people screamed at us so we are making changes". And then they bug the nerfed/buffed gear the frag out.

 

Lately they seem to be doing it better (Nova's nerf only impacted the M Prime application speed in a Fleeting build)  but I guess a lot of tenno still remember the burns such as Acrid nerf, continuous weapon nerf, lato nerf and the good old turning Rhino into a bug-ridden steaming pile of drek that took them a month to fix

[Chaosdreamer]

I did'nt read much but :

 

Solo player "screw up" I mean is more "real" that one VS all is more difficult or nearly impossible compared to 4 vs all

 

Melee only screwed up? good thing seriously what the point of going in battle with your knife against all firing ennemies?

[DiabolusUrsus]

A part of the reason why so many players are against nerfs is the way DEvs handle them. They spend months pretty much ignoring the issue and make it seem as if it was designed like that and then suddenly come out saying something along the lines "enough people screamed at us so we are making changes". And then they bug the nerfed/buffed gear the frag out.

 

Lately they seem to be doing it better (Nova's nerf only impacted the M Prime application speed in a Fleeting build)  but I guess a lot of tenno still remember the burns such as Acrid nerf, continuous weapon nerf, lato nerf and the good old turning Rhino into a bug-ridden steaming pile of drek that took them a month to fix

 

Which is precisely why I've spent some time advocating a "Balance Changes" section of the patch notes every week. Small tweaks to reach a hard-to-guess sweet spot in terms of power, with the community having enough time to test things out in between patches. I agree that part of the problem is that people get to used to the status quo and take it as the word of god rather than something that might need to change. 

[WhisperByte]

Melee only screwed up? good thing seriously what the point of going in battle with your knife against all firing ennemies?

I don't know. You should ask Raiden

[DiabolusUrsus]

I did'nt read much but :

 

Solo player "screw up" I mean is more "real" that one VS all is more difficult or nearly impossible compared to 4 vs all

 

Melee only screwed up? good thing seriously what the point of going in battle with your knife against all firing ennemies?

 

Why, then, is solo play an option?

 

Why, then, is melee-only play an option?

If something isn't supposed to be a viable option, don't give players the option. They're either included or not, and the devs should make it clear which of those two it is. Saying "no, really, guys, we want to include you," for the sole purpose of convincing people to stick around is conniving and dishonest if you have no intention of actually including people. 

 

You may find solo play to be stupid and prefer working in teams. So much for the people who can't handle incoming data from three separate people or suffer from Strict NAT. So much for people who prefer to keep to themselves. So much for the people who get cut out of public lobbies because of player-set ping limits. 

You may find melee play stupid and illogical. I find that simply pointing and clicking with a gun gets kinda dull after a while and I want something to mix things up and keep the game fresh. So much for that, I guess. My mistake for thinking that all the hype around "The Sword Alone" should be taken at anything more than face value. 

 

Because realism.

Edited June 7, 2014 by DiabolusUrsus

[Stormquake]

I, too, felt disheartened at their ideas on their "boss design philosophy"

 

Lots of great points in this post

 

I give it a 7 out of Slam Drank

[calabi]

There's a stat somewhere that says that 60 percent of people whom play mmo's play them single player.  I bet its quite high with this game.  This is like the perfect single player, multiplayer mmo.  Its extremely playable on your own, its fun to play on your own(its not a tab targetting monstrosity), but you can occasionally interact with other people if you wish.  If they ran with that then who knows...

Edited June 7, 2014 by calabi

[(PSN)ElZilcho]

snip

 

That thread about gauntlets and rhino vs capture targets? The guy who made that also didn't want to use slide attacks, if I recall that correctly. He got a stance and wanted to use the combos. And it's not just the ability to unequip your guns. It's the ability to unequip any two weapons. They also didn't describe it as a good idea, but as the ultimate challenge. I don't believe DE needs to change the game to accomodate self-imposed handicaps. DE didn't tell you do go without guns, they merely made it an option. You can also go without melee. If you didn't equip Serration on your primary and complained about enemies being too tough to kill, you'd be laughed at. There is clearly a solution to your problem that you are refusing to use. DE let you go melee only, but they also let you fuse Slash Dash with a Legendary core, transmute four Crimson Dervishes, or sell your Boltor Prime parts for a few thousand credits. Those are all bad ideas, like feeding your Titanite Slab to Frampt. It's your responsibility to not make them. It's not DE's to stop you from making them.

 

If a player doesn't know what to expect from a boss, then it would be stupid for them to unequip their guns. I said as much before. If they bring a self-imposed handicap to an unknown situation and fail, then they know not to do so again. While admitting defeat is not something people always want to do, it's only a game. It's not some deep shame they'll have to carry for the rest of their life. It's sort of sucks, but they did it to themselves. In my book, refusing to equip and refusing to make use of are the same thing.

 

I am a free-to-play player. I have fourteen frames and I don't know how many weapons. Trading has made it a different game. If the warframe they need (needing specific frames was not an idea I put forward) drops somewhere after the boss they're trying to defeat, then that's bad design. It's not about needing specific weapons, in a "you can only use the Boltor to damage Jackal" way or even a specific mod (I don't think prosecutors are particularly great either) but about having a gun or a melee weapon and maybe being able to compensate for lacking one by using the powers of some frames.

 

If you're a solo player, you don't unequip your guns. It's just that simple. Any player is perfectly capable of playing in a melee-only style with a pistol on their hip. Having that pistol does not harm them. If you go into a Corpus exterminate, a place you know is likely to have small, flying enemies that are very difficult to hit with a melee weapon, with no guns, then you have engineered your own failure. It's not about "the way you want to play" because you can still play that way with a gun stuck to your leg, it's about not ruining your own experience through stubborn entitlement and thinking the devs need to shield you from failure. I would prefer they let me fail missions all over the place so I can design my own safety net.

 

I don't believe anyone is entitled to success. People going melee only are going into the graveyard instead of up the stairs to the right, you dig? The solution is not to make the skeletons easier, it's for players to learn from their struggles.

Edited June 7, 2014 by (PS4)ElZilcho

[notionphil]

I'd be down for this. Or at least something like a test server. Anything to establish a closer dialogue between players and devs... though I have a feeling the devs wouldn't like this. I have my reasons.

 

It's time to stop talking about player reps and closer dialogs and make it happen. That last dev stream perfectly illustrated just how disconnected parts of DE are from both eachother and the playerbase at large.

There's simply no way core mechanics will markedly improve by following the status quo of making mega posts with 100s of supporters and having them ignored, misunderstood or outright negated by lack of actual gameplay experience.

I'm done talking. We need a plan.

[Hyperius]

I'm done talking. We need a plan.

 

I'm all ears for a plan, but sadly I don't think we have the leverage to impose our semi-congealed will onto a privately owned business. Our voice is possibly *just* coherent enough to get the point across that a portion of the community WANTS change, but any enlightened points made may not be the direction that they head toward.

 

And that's considering they even do decide to make any changes at all.

Edited June 7, 2014 by Hyperius

[Keltik0ne]

It's time to stop talking about player reps and closer dialogs and make it happen. That last dev stream perfectly illustrated just how disconnected parts of DE are from both eachother and the playerbase at large.

There's simply no way core mechanics will markedly improve by following the status quo of making mega posts with 100s of supporters and having them ignored, misunderstood or outright negated by lack of actual gameplay experience.

I'm done talking. We need a plan.

The diconnect can be even more obvious when the "main" devs are on: it's painfull when Reb asks a good community question and Steve bulldozers her by answering something else entirely.

 

She needs to do the streams with a cricket bat in hand.

[DiabolusUrsus]

That thread about gauntlets and rhino vs capture targets? The guy who made that also didn't want to use slide attacks, if I recall that correctly. He got a stance and wanted to use the combos. And it's not just the ability to unequip your guns. It's the ability to unequip any two weapons. They also didn't describe it as a good idea, but as the ultimate challenge. I don't believe DE needs to change the game to accomodate self-imposed handicaps. DE didn't tell you do go without guns, they merely made it an option. You can also go without melee. If you didn't equip Serration on your primary and complained about enemies being too tough to kill, you'd be laughed at. There is clearly a solution to your problem that you are refusing to use. DE let you go melee only, but they also let you fuse Slash Dash with a Legendary core, transmute four Crimson Dervishes, or sell your Boltor Prime parts for a few thousand credits. Those are all bad ideas, like feeding your Titanite Slab to Frampt. It's your responsibility to not make them. It's not DE's to stop you from making them.

 

If a player doesn't know what to expect from a boss, then it would be stupid for them to unequip their guns. I said as much before. If they bring a self-imposed handicap to an unknown situation and fail, then they know not to do so again. While admitting defeat is not something people always want to do, it's only a game. It's not some deep shame they'll have to carry for the rest of their life. It's sort of sucks, but they did it to themselves. In my book, refusing to equip and refusing to make use of are the same thing.

 

I am a free-to-play player. I have fourteen frames and I don't know how many weapons.

 

If the warframe they need (needing specific frames was not an idea I put forward) drops somewhere after the boss they're trying to defeat, then that's bad design. It's not about needing specific weapons, in a "you can only use the Boltor to damage Jackal" way or even a specific mod (I don't think prosecutors are particularly great either) but about having a gun or a melee weapon and maybe being able to compensate for lacking one by using the powers of some frames. I want the new Tyl Regor to be a melee boss.

 

If you're a solo player, you don't unequip your guns. It's just that simple. Any player is perfectly capable of playing in a melee-only style with a pistol on their hip. Having that pistol does not harm them. If you go into a Corpus exterminate, a place you know is likely to have small, flying enemies that are very difficult to hit with a melee weapon, with no guns, then you have engineered your own failure. It's not about "the way you want to play" because you can still play that way with a gun stuck to your leg, it's about not ruining your own experience through stubborn entitlement and thinking the devs need to shield you from failure. I would prefer they let me fail missions all over the place so I can design my own safety net.

 

You will not find me supporting someone who outright refuses to use a core mechanic that is persistently available to them, when that core mechanic is what makes their playstyle possible. If melee-only is supposed to be the ultimate challenge, why is that challenge ever potentially impossible? Even purposefully punishing games like I Wanna Be the Guy never reached the point of absolute impossibility. They get asymptotically close, but they never reach it. Fusing Slash Dash with a legendary core is not necessarily a bad idea if you have every other mod in the game maxed. Transmuting Four Crimson Dervishes is not necessarily stupid if you have sixty copies of the mod. What's the problem with selling your Boltor Prime parts for credits if you've already built the weapon? What's wrong with feeding a Titanite Slab to Frampt if you've upgraded every normal weapon in the game? Sure, the circumstances under which these choices would be anything other than ill-adivsable are ridiculously specific and highly unlikely, but that doesn't mean a player would never want to make that choice for one reason or another. 

 

Okay, players should go into boss fights prepared. I agree. Let's say, for a moment, that a player goes on a Sargas Ruk or Lech Kril run, and does pretty much everything you're specifying right. They come prepared. They bring both a primary and secondary weapon, and they keep a melee weapon. Disregarding how unlikely this outcome actually is, what if they find themselves out of ammunition? Too bad, so sad, abort mission? Yeah, you're right, it's just a game, and there's no real lasting damage, but how is that fun? How is that more beneficial to the gameplay experience than simply making it possible to kill the boss with a melee weapon? Are you trying to say that simply being invulnerable to a specific type of damage should be one of the traits that distinguishes a boss as unique? Are you serious? That's limiting creativity with half-assed excuses, not expanding it.

 

Congratulations to you. And for the people who don't have dojos and/or clans with trading posts? The people who are unwilling to participate in the trading market? The people who don't have spare copies of mods or other items that will actually sell for platinum? The point here is that there are people who are limited in ways you might not be, but that doesn't excuse you from taking them into consideration.

 

Yes, having a Warframe drop at some point after a boss that could only be defeated with that Warframe would be bad design. Designing bosses that rely on equipment that is not necessarily available to a player is also bad design. In this instance it is mods, not weapons, but that doesn't change the fact that mods are randomly distributed, and that the availability of critically important mods has been an ongoing issue for new players for as long as I can remember.  Integrating gameplay elements that are in any way dependent on random chance or the availability of equipment that can't be guaranteed is bad design. It's that simple. 

You want Tyl Regor to be a melee boss? That's great; so do I. Do you mean to tell me that the player shouldn't be able to use guns on him? That sounds pretty stupid. There is no defensible reason as to why enemies or bosses which are completely immune to any type of damage should be introduced. Ospreys in Corpus missions are poor analogies because it is possible to destroy them with melee weapons. Do you see me asking for some sort of disabling mechanic added to them to make doing so easier? No. And you won't see me ask for that either. Is it needlessly difficult to take them out with a sword compared to shooting them down with a gun? Yes, but that's not a problem, because it's not impossible. 

 

You want a better analogy? Orokin Shield Drones. They literally have no functioning melee hitbox, and they read as invalid targets for target-specific abilities. Do you seriously think that makes them interesting, fun, or unique? Would it somehow damage their gameplay value if players were able to cut them down or Soul Punch them out of the air? I don't know what you think, but they strike me as a Shield Osprey clone that is more irritating to destroy for no reason at all. It's perfectly fine to have enemies that are more resistant to melee, or more resistant to firearms. It's perfectly fine to have enemies that are resistant to Warframe powers (we actually need more of those...). It is not fine to have those enemies be completely immune in some way that cannot be circumvented. Lech Kril's backpack being invulnerable to melee does not make him unique. General Sargas Ruk being invulnerable to melee does not make him unique. Those fights are not made more interesting because they require firearms. The complete exclusion of melee combat is bad game design, in the same way that the complete exclusion of any other aspect of gameplay would be bad game design. 

Edited June 7, 2014 by DiabolusUrsus

[Moderius]

Okay so, just something I noticed, is that all the examples of "good" boss battles are single-player games. Devil May Cry, Dark Souls.

 

Find an example that applies. Single-player boss battles and multiplayer boss battles are entirely different creatures.

[Beladric]

Dark Souls bosses are designed for both single player and multiplayer. With the phantom system, its even possible to have nearly as many players as in Warframe (3 a team vs 4 a team).