What Is Wrong With Having Hard Challenging Content In Game These Days?

[mindlessframe]

U don't see casuals crying that they can't make it past wave 100 so why would they cry over any other hard content? 
All I saying is why is it that 99% of games made these days kept watered down for casuals when they can have both content for hardcore players who looking for challenges and casuals they do not have to do super hard content if they don't want to?

This is only reason why games likes these need PvP is because there will never be good challenging content in them as they will always be watered down for casuals.

[Airetam]

There's tons of PvP games out there.

This game does PvE good, DE should keep the focus on that.

As for difficulty, more difficulties will be added.

[revizion]

This was addressed in the last two livestreams. DE said they're looking into creating a difficulty settings option (probably a "Hardcore Mode" or something) Sucks, but we have to be patient for E3 to pass so we can get more towards U9.

[Bakim0n0]

Firstly... trying to trivialize players by reducing them to a label is never going to win you favors and only makes you come off as an elitist.

Secondly, they've already addressed that they've pretty much given up on trying to find a way to please both crowds with a "one size fits all" solution and sounds like they intend on putting in a difficulty slider; hopefully that also influences rewards.

[Maelthorn]

Eh, after the first two responses, I think we're pretty much done here.

[CormacMccarthy]

Killing Floor is only PvE and its old now but still has a huge player base, and is extremely successful. No need for PvP

[KhanCipher]

i would write a long thoughtful post... but this says all i would've said...

 

http://youtu.be/BWFzFsHc75U

[Cpl_Facehugger]

hopefully that also influences rewards.

I kind of hope it doesn't, actually. The guys who talk about how easy the game is shouldn't need to be rewarded more. The challenge should be its own reward, if indeed the problem actually is a lack of challenge.

[Bakim0n0]

There's tons of PvP games out there.

This game does PvE good, DE should keep the focus on that.

As for difficulty, more difficulties will be added.

This is a total non-arguement and people should stop.

This game is a PC game but being expanded to console

This game had no tangible benefit to having clans and we got the clan update

This game had no PvP at all but now has dueling

There are games that are strictly co-op pve but it's not an acceptable argument to tell you to play another game if you want PvE

Like it or lump it there are a *lot* of players who actually WANT PvP and it *does* extend the life of game by breaking up the monotony of farming; in fact a game like this could greatly benefit from PvP so long as they made it a clear and separate thing and were careful never to balance one around the other and there are several ways to go about that from pre-selected loadouts and separated servers and experience (think gw2) to PvP only frames and weapons specifically balanced with pvp in mind.

I do agree PvP shouldn't nessacarily be high priority right now, but I am sick and tired of seeing this horrible nonsensical argument.

[Datareaper]

While I don't necessarily agree with the casual dumbed down line of thought.  I do agree that Warframe isn't really challenging.  It's fun though.

Difficulty is a hard thing to get right, it can't just be giving enemies more hitpoints or making them deal more damage.

Difficulty is a combination of Enviroment, Hazards, Damage, Speed and Health.

I have hopes that DE will nail down a true endgame.

[MrGrae]

This is a total non-arguement and people should stop.

This game is a PC game but being expanded to console

This game had no tangible benefit to having clans and we got the clan update

This game had no PvP at all but now has dueling

There are games that are strictly co-op pve but it's not an acceptable argument to tell you to play another game if you want PvE

Like it or lump it there are a *lot* of players who actually WANT PvP and it *does* extend the life of game by breaking up the monotony of farming; in fact a game like this could greatly benefit from PvP so long as they made it a clear and separate thing and were careful never to balance one around the other and there are several ways to go about that from pre-selected loadouts and separated servers and experience (think gw2) to PvP only frames and weapons specifically balanced with pvp in mind.

I do agree PvP shouldn't nessacarily be high priority right now, but I am sick and tired of seeing this horrible nonsensical argument.

It's perfectly acceptable to point people to another game if the one they are playing doesn't have the content you want. You don't go to a vegetarian resturant and complain there's no steak. 

 

DE have stated that they want warframe to have a PvE focus, if you want PvP there ARE plenty of other games out there that do PvP just fine, why do you need this one to do it too? There's obviously no financial reason since DE seem to be doing fine without it. 

 

As for the ALPHA clan update, yeah, it didn't add anything particularly ground breaking, but then what did you expect from an ALPHA feature?

 

Dueling was only added as a minor concession to PvP outcries.

[GoneM4d]

This game has PVP and it's a fine system as well. If you can't dodge attacks in dojo don't blame the balance, and don't beg for nerf because weapons are too OP because they are meant to be. Wan't a hardcore challenge? Beat a player wielding semi maxed hex using only paris.

[BlueQuail]

Looking for a hard challenge? Solo Vindictus raid bosses.

[mokaiba]

i would write a long thoughtful post... but this says all i would've said...

 

http://youtu.be/BWFzFsHc75U

 

+1

[Bakim0n0]

It's perfectly acceptable to point people to another game if the one they are playing doesn't have the content you want. You don't go to a vegetarian resturant and complain there's no steak.

But when that vegan restaurant puts out a suggestion box and people suggest "you should put some meat on the menu for those of us who do eat meat but have people we care about who don't, to make the restaurant more palatable for us" you can't really, in sound logic, respond to that "if you want to eat meat go somewhere else."

 

 

DE have stated that they want warframe to have a PvE focus, if you want PvP there ARE plenty of other games out there that do PvP just fine, why do you need this one to do it too? There's obviously no financial reason since DE seem to be doing fine without it.

 

DE actually stated it's not a priority, but not necessarily that they aren't going there. But you're absolutely missing that at the end of the day DE's responsibility is to their players and they'll consider any suggestion to improve the game within reason. This fact does not invalidate people commenting on how they would enjoy pvp in this game despite that you may or may not enjoy it.

 

 

As for the ALPHA clan update, yeah, it didn't add anything particularly ground breaking, but then what did you expect from an ALPHA feature?

 

Dueling was only added as a minor concession to PvP outcries.

 

Both of these... point 110% flew over your head. The entire point I was making is that *this game is in a state of change* so it's not valid to refute any proposed change with "if you want that play another game"

This argument is akin to me responding to anyone reporting bugs "if you want a game without that bug go play a different game"

 

[TheChaffeemancer]

This is a total non-arguement and people should stop.

This game is a PC game but being expanded to console

This game had no tangible benefit to having clans and we got the clan update

I do agree PvP shouldn't nessacarily be high priority right now, but I am sick and tired of seeing this horrible nonsensical argument.

 

There are finite resources that they can expend (time, money, etc) to improve aspects of the game. If they expend resources to develop feature (x), then those resources cannot be used to improve feature (y). It's also a perfectly reasonable argument to say "this game is not about PvP, if you want well developed PvP, go to another game, such as (z).

 

If someone goes into Counter Strike and starts complaining about how the game only has guns and they want to use shields and long swords you do not tell them that it is a good idea, you tell them to go play Chivalry or some other game that has the features they want.

 

Both of these... point 110% flew over your head. The entire point I was making is that *this game is in a state of change* so it's not valid to refute any proposed change with "if you want that play another game"

This argument is akin to me responding to anyone reporting bugs "if you want a game without that bug go play a different game"

 

 

Your example is faulty, the bug is not intended, that this game has minimal PvP is intentional (at least at this stage).

Edited June 6, 2013 by TheChaffeemancer

[Relkin]

I kind of hope it doesn't, actually. The guys who talk about how easy the game is shouldn't need to be rewarded more. The challenge should be its own reward, if indeed the problem actually is a lack of challenge.

Because that worked well for defense missions so far and is why they're not going to give us better rewards on higher tiers.....oh wait.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with earning better rewards for your deeds. Don't like it? Don't care. Not entitled. The only reason games get watered down is because people need to be able to complete all the content without working for it or, god forbid, have a skill ceiling higher than the roof. This whole socialist treatment of gamers by developers is crappy. It removes incentives and limits gameplay. It's not like they're trying to tell much of a story or anything so you can't even use core content locking as an excuse.

[Cpl_Facehugger]

Because that worked well for defense missions so far and is why they're not going to give us better rewards on higher tiers.....oh wait.

I said that's what I'd like, not what's going to happen. But you make an interesting point here. So clearly it's about the reward rather than the challenge. Yet you guys whine so much about the lack of challenge. Huh. How odd.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with earning better rewards for your deeds. Don't like it? Don't care. Not entitled.

But you are entitled - or at least, that's the way you come off. You want the game to cater to people like you or I - people who can reliably solo T3 void towers without much issue, without taking into account the casuals. Why should the top 1% of the playerbase be catered to over the majority?

[Bakim0n0]

There are finite resources that they can expend (time, money, etc) to improve aspects of the game. If they expend resources to develop feature (x), then those resources cannot be used to improve feature (y).

 

I do agree PvP shouldn't nessacarily be high priority right now

 

It's also a perfectly reasonable argument to say "this game is not about PvP, if you want well developed PvP, go to another game, such as (z).

 

If someone goes into Counter Strike and starts complaining about how the game only has guns and they want to use shields and long swords you do not tell them that it is a good idea, you tell them to go play Chivalry or some other game that has the features they want.

 

 

Your example is faulty, the bug is not intended, that this game has minimal PvP is intentional (at least at this stage).

 

Going to stop you right there. In the manner with which you're suggesting this topic comes up is in the very limited scope of proposition you are providing, sure... it's not a terribly illogical response. However, lets more carefully look at this situation who I and many other "pro pvp" players feel.

 

This is only reason why games likes these need PvP is because there will never be good challenging content in them

 

The elitism / rudeness removed. This post is very similar to my reflections on the matter. It's not so much about complaining that there isn't pvp in the game; it's a simple opinion that this game is missing something that is vital to being a good game for a certain kind of player, who, by the way, is no small share of the market.

Gamers who enjoy a heavy challenge also typically tend to enjoy pvp. Take DFO for example... the bulk of the game is generally pretty mindless and not terribly challenging so long as you were the right level with the right gear and the skill to back it up... the bulk of the content is PvE but it also had a PvP feature with a fair amount of meat. That idea, altho generally kept separate from gameplay effectively appeals to the hardcore pvp'ers, the hardcore pve'ers and the people inbetween.

In summary... It is not at all logical to tell people to play another game when they feel like this game could greatly benefit from PvP to break up the monotony of the PvE (or if you prefer... balls to the wall farming)

 

[goozilla]

Notice how almost all the PVP criers are f2pers? Chances are, they'll leave this game in a month or two.

[Bakim0n0]

Notice how almost all the PVP criers are f2pers? Chances are, they'll leave this game in a month or two.

Countering pvp elitism with paying customer elitism...

ahh the internets.

[Kahruvel]

U don't see casuals crying that they can't make it past wave 100 so why would they cry over any other hard content? 

All I saying is why is it that 99% of games made these days kept watered down for casuals when they can have both content for hardcore players who looking for challenges and casuals they do not have to do super hard content if they don't want to?

This is only reason why games likes these need PvP is because there will never be good challenging content in them as they will always be watered down for casuals.

 

[TheChaffeemancer]

Going to stop you right there. In the manner with which you're suggesting this topic comes up is in the very limited scope of proposition you are providing, sure... it's not a terribly illogical response. However, lets more carefully look at this situation who I and many other "pro pvp" players feel.

 

Are you saying that adding a PvP won't draw resources away from developing the PvE content or are you attempting to say that the PvE content development can take the loss of resources to develop PvP?

 

 

The elitism / rudeness removed. This post is very similar to my reflections on the matter. It's not so much about complaining that there isn't pvp in the game; it's a simple opinion that this game is missing something that is vital to being a good game for a certain kind of player, who, by the way, is no small share of the market.

Gamers who enjoy a heavy challenge also typically tend to enjoy pvp. Take DFO for example... the bulk of the game is generally pretty mindless and not terribly challenging so long as you were the right level with the right gear and the skill to back it up... the bulk of the content is PvE but it also had a PvP feature with a fair amount of meat. That idea, altho generally kept separate from gameplay effectively appeals to the hardcore pvp'ers, the hardcore pve'ers and the people inbetween.

In summary... It is not at all logical to tell people to play another game when they feel like this game could greatly benefit from PvP to break up the monotony of the PvE (or if you prefer... balls to the wall farming)

 

And for those who don't give a rat's arse about PvP would also rather see something that breaks up the monotony of the current PvE, end game mechanics/missions that add meat to the PvE which is currently lacking (as the current "end game" is just loot checks and grind). The people who are against PvP want to see something else made for the game and so they would suggest that if you want developed PvP, to look else where. It's a matter of where our priorities lie.

Edited June 6, 2013 by TheChaffeemancer

[goozilla]

Countering pvp elitism with paying customer elitism...

ahh the internets.

But its the truth. People who cry for it will likely leave the game much earlier.

[GoneM4d]

 You!... I like you.