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

[Innocent_Flower]

I think it's more like we need

 

Stealth 1.0

Movement 2.0

melee 3.0

Enemies 1.0

balance 1.0

RNG 1.5

defense 2.0 

Edited June 8, 2014 by Innocent_Flower

[grillv20]

bumping this thread

[Trainsaw]

Thanks :)

 

Yeah that's also a big problem making a big hype and then when update show up what we got is another dissapointed.

 

I mean DE shouldn't build hype when they are not sure if something will be in game (i remember that i saw chart about what DE promised).

 

In warframe we have like hundreds of weapons good amount of warframes yet almost all of them feels like reskined versions of already existing items. I have more fun with guns in ME3MP, same with character. What i'm trying to say is that we don't need million weapons/warframes/mods, what we need is a complete "customization" overhaul, because i feel that i have more customization options in ME3MP that now in Warframe...

This is so true, I never thought I'd say this but, DE, we (well I at least) don't actually want more content right now, it's crazy and insane to say but seriously, with the model they have now all of this new content is bad for the game, the content we have is flawed enough as it is, giving us more flawed content doesn't soften the blow, it cuts deeper. Am I the only one here who could do without regular updates if it meant the devs spent a large chunk of time making whats already there actually work first?

[Innocent_Flower]

This is so true, I never thought I'd say this but, DE, we (well I at least) don't actually want more content right now, it's crazy and insane to say but seriously, with the model they have now all of this new content is bad for the game, the content we have is flawed enough as it is, giving us more flawed content doesn't soften the blow, it cuts deeper. Am I the only one here who could do without regular updates if it meant the devs spent a large chunk of time making whats already there actually work first?

Well if you look through my huge history of threads,there might be some evidence that I may agree with you. 

[Mak_Gohae]

This game has a strong RPG element which most people dont seem to understand because guns.

This is why..... RNG, this is why... equipment, aka, mods.

 

This is also a Co-op game which means solo players will have a harder time going through stuff.

All of this are the norm on online RPG games. If you never experience something like this you have to explore a bit because Warframe is not doing some tremendously strange things when it comes to the type of games it's trying to fit in.

[Innocent_Flower]

This game has a strong RPG element which most people dont seem to understand because guns.

This is why..... RNG, this is why... equipment, aka, mods.

 

This is also a Co-op game which means solo players will have a harder time going through stuff.

All of this are the norm on online RPG games. If you never experience something like this you have to explore a bit because Warframe is not doing some tremendously strange things when it comes to the type of games it's trying to fit in.

Not relevant . Just because others are S#&$, doesn't mean warframe needs to be S#&$. 

 

 

 

The game's a shooter anyway. There is no roll playing.  The game isn't co-op, it's singleplayer with allies at best. 

Edited June 8, 2014 by Innocent_Flower

[Mak_Gohae]

Not relevant . Just because others are S#&$, doesn't mean warframe needs to be S#&$. 

 

 

All relevant points.

A lot of these complains are based on ideas of what the game should be like when it's clearly nowhere in that direction.

[gnat6]

This game has a strong RPG element which most people dont seem to understand because guns.

This is why..... RNG, this is why... equipment, aka, mods.

 

This is also a Co-op game which means solo players will have a harder time going through stuff.

All of this are the norm on online RPG games. If you never experience something like this you have to explore a bit because Warframe is not doing some tremendously strange things when it comes to the type of games it's trying to fit in.

Minor wall of text below

Warframe is a third person shooter with gear progresion it is not a RPG game the only thing that even resembles an RPG game is the fact that you farm for resources to build new and stronger weapons but most games have that and even if warframe was a RPG it would still have the exact same problems the only difference would be the solutions.

As an example the weapon balance in warframe is nonexistant the tps* solution to the problem is to rebalance the guns so that while some are clear upgrades all of them can be made viable through skill and creative modding.

The downside to this approach is that it feels less rewarding to obtain new weapons and many people will find a gun they like and not bother trying out new weapons.

 

the rpg solution would be to rebalance the guns into a rough progress tree so that there is a clear sense of progression and rework the resource requirement so that you can build new guns when you need them instead of not being able to build any guns before finishing earth and being able to build all of them after finishing earth.

The downside to this method is that you are designing weapons that are created to be thrown out as soon as people are done with them and even if someone likes some of the lower ranking weapons they cannot use them because DE designed them to be crap not to mention its a big waste of artwork.

One of the big problems with weapon balance right now is DE is using both methods and while they are both perfectly good systems they don't work together.

 

As for co-op vs solo DE has stated that they intend for both to be viable so until that statment is retracted we are fully within our rights to complain about the lack of balance between the two.

 

*Third Person Shooter incase anyone was confused.

[grillv20]

This game has a strong RPG element which most people dont seem to understand because guns.

This is why..... RNG, this is why... equipment, aka, mods.

 

This is also a Co-op game which means solo players will have a harder time going through stuff.

All of this are the norm on online RPG games. If you never experience something like this you have to explore a bit because Warframe is not doing some tremendously strange things when it comes to the type of games it's trying to fit in.

 

its not strictly a co-op game

[Innocent_Flower]

All relevant points.

A lot of these complains are based on ideas of what the game should be like when it's clearly nowhere in that direction.

you're like... The popes of the dark ages. 

 

Progress is bad! Don't change or criticise anything!! 

 

I don't see any reason to take that stance. No, Your points weren't relevant. No, that point you made just now isn't relevant. The communities Ideas (as a collective, we all have inner disagreements) of what the game should be like is exactly what the game should be like

Edited June 8, 2014 by Innocent_Flower

[Mak_Gohae]

Minor wall of text below

Warframe is a third person shooter with gear progresion it is not a RPG game the only thing that even resembles an RPG game is the fact that you farm for resources to build new and stronger weapons but most games have that and even if warframe was a RPG it would still have the exact same problems the only difference would be the solutions.

As an example the weapon balance in warframe is nonexistant the tps* solution to the problem is to rebalance the guns so that while some are clear upgrades all of them can be made viable through skill and creative modding.

The downside to this approach is that it feels less rewarding to obtain new weapons and many people will find a gun they like and not bother trying out new weapons.

 

the rpg solution would be to rebalance the guns into a rough progress tree so that there is a clear sense of progression and rework the resource requirement so that you can build new guns when you need them instead of not being able to build any guns before finishing earth and being able to build all of them after finishing earth.

The downside to this method is that you are designing weapons that are created to be thrown out as soon as people are done with them and even if someone likes some of the lower ranking weapons they cannot use them because DE designed them to be crap not to mention its a big waste of artwork.

One of the big problems with weapon balance right now is DE is using both methods and while they are both perfectly good systems they don't work together.

 

As for co-op vs solo DE has stated that they intend for both to be viable so until that statment is retracted we are fully within our rights to complain about the lack of balance between the two.

 

*Third Person Shooter incase anyone was confused.

 

Warframe is an action RPG, just like Zelda, with guns.

People keep getting confused because... guns.

People need to get off this notion that because guns this means this game should be built in a certain way.

This game has way more in common with Zelda than it does with Gears of War.

 

 

its not strictly a co-op game

 

I never said it was strictly a co-op game.

But the structure of it is co-op. 

This game is not a solo game that has a co-op feature, this is a co-op game that let's you solo.

 

you're like... The popes of the dark ages. 

 

Progress is bad! Don't change or criticise anything!! 

 

I don't see any reason to take that stance. No, Your points weren't relevant. No, that point you made just now isn't relevant. The communities Ideas (as a collective, we all have inner disagreements) of what the game should be like is exactly what the game should be like

 

Never said anything about progress.

I am saying to pay attention to the type of game this is when giving feedback because some folks are thinking of the wrong type of game when giving feedback.

Edited June 8, 2014 by Mak_Gohae

[grillv20]

considering that 90% of the levels in the game are solo-able I would beg to differ.

[Innocent_Flower]

Game is a third person shooter with some progression, economic and customisation elements. 

It's a loose co-op game. Meaning solo players can play solo and the game caters for them. 

The pace is currently 'fast'. 

 

 

I don't realy see how anyone's got any ideas that go horribly against this or criticisms that ignore this. 

Edited June 8, 2014 by Innocent_Flower

[Beladric]

Zelda is not a action RPG. Genji is a action RPG. Kingdom Hearts is a action RPG. Dark Souls is a action RPG. Mainstream Zelda is, has and always will be an adventure game, with the exception of Zelda 2. Zelda has RPG elements. That does not make it an RPG. It's considered good game design these days to at least include some RPG elements in your game (this is where most games get their customization factor). Please understand your genres. Zelda is one of the worst comparisons to make with Warframe that at least can still actually be made with Warframe. The games, from the very outset, were made on completely different principles.

 

Game is a third person shooter with some progression, economic and customisation elements. 

It's a loose co-op game. Meaning solo players can play solo and the game caters for them. 

The pace is currently 'fast'. 

 

 

I don't realy see how anyone's got any ideas that go horribly against this or criticisms that ignore this. 

 

In theory, Warframe is supposed to be this. In practice, I think it's not there yet. One of the major problems Warframe faces is that the numbers are simply so over the place that certain weapons and abilities completely destroy any semblance of game balance on their own, and that's without going into the excessive amount of firepower damage mods bring to the table. DE either needs to commit to tiering its gear or it needs to start a very arduous task of balancing them. While I disagree with the mere idea of retiring equipment at a fundamental, OCD level of desire to collect things, we have reached the point where if DE isn't going to commit one way or another, then we need some weapons to go. There are just too many functionally useless weapons.

 

Warframe has many problems. Being more like a RPG, ironically, isn't one of them. It's really right where it needs to be on that scale. Any closer and the game would, quite possibly, become less interesting.

[DiabolusUrsus]

This is so true, I never thought I'd say this but, DE, we (well I at least) don't actually want more content right now, it's crazy and insane to say but seriously, with the model they have now all of this new content is bad for the game, the content we have is flawed enough as it is, giving us more flawed content doesn't soften the blow, it cuts deeper. Am I the only one here who could do without regular updates if it meant the devs spent a large chunk of time making whats already there actually work first?

 

Yes, and no. 

 

First, I definitely could do without constant content updates if it meant the stuff that needed fixing got fixed faster. I realize that this has come up before, and been dismissed with the formerly reasonable response: "We can continue releasing on content because different people work on new content than the people responsible for fixing problem x or y." I say formerly because up until now, that made sense. The recent devstream has led me to believe that the people responsible for releasing new content having nothing to do with the people responsible for fixing problems with content is more than a small part of the ongoing problem.

 

Second, "I could do without content updates" does not mean "I could do without any updates at all." Allow me to explain. Yes, I would like DE to dedicate a significant portion of their efforts to fixing the major problems outlined elsewhere in this thread by a number of individuals. No, I do not want them to sort of just keep quiet and work diligently as they do so. I want the community to know how they plan on fixing problems, and have the opportunity to point out potential flaws with the proposed solutions, or problems that might arise as a consequence. This would, of course, require a group of community representatives to focus the cacaphonous voices of the many into the coherent voice of the whole. 

 

Get us involved in the process. And I don't mean Design Council style immediately accessible voting. I think one of the biggest problems with the Design Council as it is comes from the fact that when the Council is given something to vote on, they are essentially handed a ballot and given the opportunity to discuss the merits of the various candidates afterwards. There needs to be a chance for discussion prior to voting so that people can voice their concerns and make arguments in favor of or against particular decisions. One of the most dangerous creatures in the world is the uninformed voter. 

[DiabolusUrsus]

This game has a strong RPG element which most people dont seem to understand because guns.

This is why..... RNG, this is why... equipment, aka, mods.

 

This is also a Co-op game which means solo players will have a harder time going through stuff.

All of this are the norm on online RPG games. If you never experience something like this you have to explore a bit because Warframe is not doing some tremendously strange things when it comes to the type of games it's trying to fit in.

 

As was mentioned by others before me, RPG elements do not make an RPG. That's actually completely beside the point, though, because if you had understood my original post you'd know that I'm not arguing in favor of removing the RPG elements from the game. I don't think it's necessary to actually touch the loot system, and the changes I'm in favor of making to the mod system would actually bring Warframe closer to an RPG-styled game.

 

The only place RNG becomes an irreparable problem is when it is when it is inseparably integrated into gameplay in such a way that it limits a player's ability to succeed. Old-school games like Dungeons and Dragons, Dragon Warrior, Final Fantasy, and other games featuring RNG-based combat systems functioned on an entirely different level. RNG rolls for resistance and misses were necessary because that was the only way the game could simulate the nearly infinite possibilities attached to swinging a sword or aiming a spell in real time. Once the action element makes its way into gameplay as it has in Warframe, RNG is not only unnecessary in combat it is unacceptable. Hits and misses, blocks and dodges are now under direct control of the player, and the player is responsible for their own success. Warframe is similar to an RPG, yes, and so RNG has its places in the game. It does not belong in the player's ability to prevent knockdowns or inflict/avoid status procs or critical hits. 

 

All I'm saying is that if RNG is going to stay in the loot system and directly affect a player's access to mods, it is a bad idea to design bosses that are in any way limited by or dependent upon a player's access to specific mods. That sort of design philosophy was directly expressed in the last livestream, and that is part of the reason I am so worried right now. 

 

The norm does not constitute anything more than... the norm. I think most of us here want to see Warframe surpass the norm (which also includes dying out in a year or two) and ascend into the extraordinary. I could be wrong, though. 

[Mak_Gohae]

Zelda is not a action RPG. Genji is a action RPG. Kingdom Hearts is a action RPG. Dark Souls is a action RPG. Mainstream Zelda is, has and always will be an adventure game, with the exception of Zelda 2. Zelda has RPG elements. That does not make it an RPG. It's considered good game design these days to at least include some RPG elements in your game (this is where most games get their customization factor). Please understand your genres. Zelda is one of the worst comparisons to make with Warframe that at least can still actually be made with Warframe. The games, from the very outset, were made on completely different principles.

 

 

What's the difference between Zelda and Dark Souls? You run around killing stuff and getting better equipment.

[DiabolusUrsus]

What's the difference between Zelda and Dark Souls? You run around killing stuff and getting better equipment.

 

In Dark Souls your ability to run around and kill stuff is directly dependent upon the points you put into various stats. In Dark Souls, you can create an archer, or a swordsman, or a greatsword-wielding pyromancer, or a spear-and-shield knight. In Zelda, you can create a Link. In Zelda, you gain health. There's no choice involved. You go from point A to point B to point C in a specific order, or you will not succeed.

You also don't actually need better equipment. The game is still beatable using the default gear using the right stat upgrades, and the only items tied directly to progression are miscellaneous objects like keys. You don't need a hook shot to cross a chasm, or a feather to jump over a pit. 

[Mak_Gohae]

In Dark Souls your ability to run around and kill stuff is directly dependent upon the points you put into various stats. In Dark Souls, you can create an archer, or a swordsman, or a greatsword-wielding pyromancer, or a spear-and-shield knight. In Zelda, you can create a Link. In Zelda, you gain health. There's no choice involved. You go from point A to point B to point C in a specific order, or you will not succeed.

You also don't actually need better equipment. The game is still beatable using the default gear using the right stat upgrades, and the only items tied directly to progression are miscellaneous objects like keys. You don't need a hook shot to cross a chasm, or a feather to jump over a pit. 

 

If anything that has an RPG element has to have character creation and stat adjustments then there are some RPG gamest that are not even RPGs.

There are different types of RPGs and we are going to get into a discussion over the what makes an RPG type game into an RPG based on the rules of one game because we are not going to get anywhere because these rules vary.

[DiabolusUrsus]

If anything that has an RPG element has to have character creation and stat adjustments then there are some RPG gamest that are not even RPGs.

There are different types of RPGs and we are going to get into a discussion over the what makes an RPG type game into an RPG based on the rules of one game because we are not going to get anywhere because these rules vary.

 

Okay, then, so if the rules of what defines an RPG as an RPG are so vague and poorly defined... and are completely variable depending on the rules specific to the game, where do you get off the hook saying that Warframe will no longer be an RPG if we change the rules a little bit?

[Mak_Gohae]

Okay, then, so if the rules of what defines an RPG as an RPG are so vague and poorly defined... and are completely variable depending on the rules specific to the game,

 

There are defined. There are some basic elements that in the genre that make a game fall into that type of game. But saying if it doesnt imitate this game then this is not, we have a problem. Not all games that are RPG or have RPGs elements have character creation. At best some games just let you change the name.... which Zelda does. 

 

where do you get off the hook saying that Warframe will no longer be an RPG if we change the rules a little bit?

 

I never said this. I called Warframe an action RPG and then a bunch of you came down saying that it wasnt.

[Beladric]

There are defined. There are some basic elements that in the genre that make a game fall into that type of game. But saying if it doesnt imitate this game then this is not, we have a problem. Not all games that are RPG or have RPGs elements have character creation. At best some games just let you change the name.... which Zelda does. 

 

I never said this. I called Warframe an action RPG and then a bunch of you came down saying that it wasnt.

 

RPG, at its core, when it comes to video games, refers to the idea of leveling up and abilities being derived from statistics originally presented within the Dungeons and Dragons tabletop game. The genre has long since evolved from there, to the ability to customize your character as you wish ala Dark Souls or Knights of the Old Republic (which is a Western RPG in its truest, most base and derivative of Dungeons and Dragons form). Only Eastern RPG's such as Final Fantasy continue to stick to the linear old model, and even they have abandoned it in recent memory.

 

No, there are NOT varying rules when it comes to RPG's. The idea of attributes and random variance being used to decide things is in fact at the genres very core. Action RPG's recognize that the player action factor removes the need for randomness, and allows for player agency within combat. The ONLY Zelda game that has ever been a RPG is Zelda 2, which pioneered the Action RPG genre well before its time.

 

Warframe IS NOT a action RPG. It is a Third Person Shooter with RPG elements. If RPG elements made a game a RPG, then video games would not be called video games, but RPG's, because these elements now permeate the entire damn industry.

 

Zelda is an adventure game. You have been given a set destination and have to acquire the means to progress there as you go. The act of exploring and problem solving is in and of itself a means of progression within Zelda. It can also be called an action game, due to its focus on combat to the detriment of a lot of other things. It is NOT a RPG. Link does not have multiple statistics that affect the game in various ways. Link is static. He never grows in any reasonable way. He gains more powerful equipment, yes, but this should not be considered a substitute for RPG style growth. There are no options. You merely go from point a to point b, and if you don't have weapon x at point b, the boss kills you and you try again.

 

I reiterate. Zelda is NOTHING like Warframe. It is NOTHING like the list of Action RPG's I listed in my last post. It is a completely different beast. The only point of comparison it has with the other games is the emphasis on combat.

[DiabolusUrsus]

There are defined. There are some basic elements that in the genre that make a game fall into that type of game. But saying if it doesnt imitate this game then this is not, we have a problem. Not all games that are RPG or have RPGs elements have character creation. At best some games just let you change the name.... which Zelda does. 

 

 

 

 

I never said this. I called Warframe an action RPG and then a bunch of you came down saying that it wasnt.

 

You asked what was different; I listed what was different. Okay, so if a game doesn't have character creation that doesn't mean it isn't an RPG. Fine. Under a logical progression of thought that would mean that a game that doesn't have RNG can still be an RPG. That would also mean that a game that doesn't have equipment progression can still be an RPG. So... what's your point? 

 

You're right, you never said that. What you did say was that people were forgetting that Warframe was an action RPG, and in saying that you suggested that some of the proposed changes - like reducing the presence of RNG - would change Warframe so that it was no longer an action RPG. If the rules of qualifying as an RPG are game-specific, do you see how that doesn't quite add up? 

 

So far the only concrete definition of an RPG we have seems to be "contains some RPG elements." Following that stipulation, removing RNG from the Prosecutors and introducing non-RNG-dependent combat functions like dodge rolling and parrying would not change Warframe's ability to qualify as an action RPG. 

 

What you're really saying is that you don't like the idea of reducing the presence of RNG or equipment progression, because you see Warframe as an action-RPG, and those kinds of changes would make it less of an RPG in your opinion. That's perfectly fine and I'm not going to say you can't feel that way, but don't try to hide behind the false authority of conventional genre definitions when they don't necessarily support you. Just voice your opinion. You are welcome to do that here.*

*I understand that you may be shot down rather viciously for having an opinion pretty much anywhere else on the forums, but within my threads I will staunchly defend peoples' right to have an opinion. I may disagree with your opinion and attempt to convince you to change your opinion, but I will never condemn you for having it, provided you do in fact recognize it as an opinion. 

 

Edit: To make my position perfectly clear, I agree with Beladric's definition of an RPG completely, and I do not think that Warframe qualifies as an RPG. I tried addressing your statements working under the assumption that your assertions concerning RPGs were true, because even when you are correct about Warframe being an RPG your position still isn't defensible as anything other than an opinion, and the topics of particular concern here would in no way affect the game's ability to qualify as an RPG. At least, according to your definitions of RPGs. 

Edited June 9, 2014 by DiabolusUrsus

[dragonboss]

 - often randomness can be bad, depends on situation, it can also be amazing.

 

- wat. player agency is never bad, that's a crucial part of Video Games. i hope you either mean there's little Player Agency in Warframe or you're just being cynical. 

I meant player agency in the sense that control is taken away from you when;

 

1. you get pimp slapped and stun locked by ancients

2. a commander you can visually see switch teleports you and you stand there getting shot while looking around like you don't know what happened

3. a scorpion hooks you from behind through the corner of a door

 

And there are no SKILL BASED ways of recovering or evading them with 100% success rate. Parrying and blocking occasionally works and rolling or flipping usually does not work.

Edited June 9, 2014 by dragonboss

[grillv20]

I just wanna be a ninja and not be a sonic the hedgehog with guns.