Jump to content
The Lotus Eaters: Share Bug Reports and Feedback Here! ×

Let's clear up some misunderstanding about the reworks

Doxorn

By Doxorn,
in General Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Doxorn

Doxorn

Posted
Posted

Greetings,

since I saw a lot of complainments and compliments about the reworks. I want to clear up some clouds in both side's mind.

Reworking doesn't make something bad. However just reworking doesn't make something good either. It can make it worse or better. ...Like that Nekros rework, do you use his 1st ability regularly?

When someone tell that a specific warframe needs rework, some people outright jump on them and defend it like their life depends on it with comments like that warframe is good as it is and does not need any rework and learn to play with it, etc... (looking at Oberon, Limbo, Valkyr, Banshee, Zephyr, Mag, Chroma, Hydroid, Trinity, Nova, Titania, Vauban, Mesa, Wukong, Nekros, Ash rework topics). Not saying they are bad, but instead that they could be better.

If I'd had to tell some warframes who are in good position, those would be: Frost, Saryn, Excalibur, Equinox, Loki, Rhino, Inaros, Ivara, Nyx, Volt.

 

I can foresee by now comments like:

 "-X warframe got already reworked Y times..." and "X warframe is perfect and does not need any rework!!!!!!!!! :@ Learn to play!"

Reworking something doesn't make it outright good. It has to be reworked and tweaked over and over and over again until it is perfect. 

 

"-But I don't want them to change my favorite warframe!"

If you don't want change then why do you play a game that is in BETA stage? It's all about change.

 

"-X warframe is better than it was! It doesn't need any rework."

Who said it is worse now? It is better yes, but better=/=good. Keep this in mind.

 

"-If you wan't to cheese the game then just go Mirage + Simulor, don't try to make other warframes cheesy"

I don't want them to be cheesy. I want them to be competitive and balanced. BTW Mirage is not guilty in the Mirage+Simulor case, the guilty one is Simulor.

 

Some warframes was completely fine, but when a new system is introduced it can make some abilites negligible. That happened with some warframes.

With some warframes the abilities themselves doesn't even have to be changed just have to play around with the numbers.

 

If something is good is it a reason not to make it better? Definitely no.

If something can be better, why not make it better?

Better means more engaging, more creative, more interesting, more useful, immersive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DxAdder

DxAdder

Posted
Posted
On 11/27/2016 at 4:33 AM, Doxorn said:

Greetings,

since I saw a lot of complainments and compliments about the reworks. I want to clear up some clouds in both side's mind.

Reworking doesn't make something bad. However just reworking doesn't make something good either. It can make it worse or better. ...Like that Nekros rework, do you use his 1st ability regularly?

When someone tell that a specific warframe needs rework, some people outright jump on them and defend it like their life depends on it with comments like that warframe is good as it is and does not need any rework and learn to play with it, etc... (looking at Oberon, Limbo, Valkyr, Banshee, Zephyr, Mag, Chroma, Hydroid, Trinity, Nova, Titania, Vauban, Mesa, Wukong, Nekros, Ash rework topics). Not saying they are bad, but instead that they could be better.

If I'd had to tell some warframes who are in good position, those would be: Frost, Saryn, Excalibur, Equinox, Loki, Rhino, Inaros, Ivara, Nyx, Volt.

 

I can foresee by now comments like:

 "-X warframe got already reworked Y times..." and "X warframe is perfect and does not need any rework!!!!!!!!! :@ Learn to play!"

Reworking something doesn't make it outright good. It has to be reworked and tweaked over and over and over again until it is perfect. 

 

"-But I don't want them to change my favorite warframe!"

If you don't want change then why do you play a game that is in BETA stage? It's all about change.

 

"-X warframe is better than it was! It doesn't need any rework."

Who said it is worse now? It is better yes, but better=/=good. Keep this in mind.

 

"-If you wan't to cheese the game then just go Mirage + Simulor, don't try to make other warframes cheesy"

I don't want them to be cheesy. I want them to be competitive and balanced. BTW Mirage is not guilty in the Mirage+Simulor case, the guilty one is Simulor.

 

Some warframes was completely fine, but when a new system is introduced it can make some abilites negligible. That happened with some warframes.

With some warframes the abilities themselves doesn't even have to be changed just have to play around with the numbers.

 

If something is good is it a reason not to make it better? Definitely no.

If something can be better, why not make it better?

Better means more engaging, more creative, more interesting, more useful, immersive.

Are you referring to lets say Ash & Bladestorm ? 100% Nerf ! ZERO thought put into that "Re-work"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PsiWarp

PsiWarp

Posted
Posted

Yes, it's silly how the term "Rework" has become taboo on the forums. I guess some people assume that whenever someone mentions a rework of XYZ frames, they look at the past reworks done by DE on other frames, think of the worse changes/decisions in their opinion that happened, and zealously try to shut down any notion of trying to change his/her/its favorite frame lest they suffer the same fate.

Well guess what, each Warframe is unique. Buff and nerfs, additions, changes, they are all part of the balancing process. Telling someone "don't like it, don't use it" or "stop matchmaking, just solo" is them being ignorant of the problems that others are trying to point out and get DE to resolve, in hopes of the frame becoming more fun to use.

Of course, there are bad ideas that completely lose sight of the frame's identity. Those can be added to the ever-growing archive of fan concepts, so maybe with luck those can inspire the devs some day for new frames.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thebel

Thebel

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, (XB1)ax1L3 said:

the only good thing nekros "the new master of death" has for him self is desecrate.... isn't death meant to be a destroyer not a scarecrow

 

Don't remind me, he went from my most used to not used at all. They basically swapped it from people pressing 3 to 4 instead. Appeased all those loot bots but decided to screw over that didn't play that way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xaanos

xaanos

Posted
Posted
On 2016-11-27 at 10:33 AM, Doxorn said:

 

If you don't want change then why do you play a game that is in BETA stage? It's all about change.

 

Warframe is not in beta, don't be silly. They may call it that, but when they start taking money, it stop being a beta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
(PSN)DesecratedFlame

(PSN)DesecratedFlame

Posted
Posted

Here's the thing. All the recent reworks have made things worse, and "rework" has been code for "massive nerf." So yeah, people start getting defensive when you talk about "reworking" the frames they like playing.

On 11/27/2016 at 4:33 AM, Doxorn said:

If you don't want change then why do you play a game that is in BETA stage? It's all about change.

The game is not a beta. It stopped being a beta when DE started offering a cash shop. The Beta term is just used by fanboys (maybe not you, but in general) like a poor shield to deflect valid criticisms. It's like when someone points out that change just for the sake of change is bad, goes into a long list of reasons and explanations to back it up, then a fanboy shows up and shouts, "it's a BETA!," as if it supposedly negates or erases all those listed reasons and explanations.

On 11/27/2016 at 4:33 AM, Doxorn said:

but better=/=good.

Prove it. Where is the evidence? Just because you say it, doesn't make it true.

On 11/27/2016 at 4:33 AM, Doxorn said:

Better means more engaging, more creative, more interesting, more useful, immersive.

Better means more useful, period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doxorn

Doxorn

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said:

The game is not a beta. It stopped being a beta when DE started offering a cash shop. The Beta term is just used by fanboys (maybe not you, but in general) like a poor shield to deflect valid criticisms. It's like when someone points out that change just for the sake of change is bad, goes into a long list of reasons and explanations to back it up, then a fanboy shows up and shouts, "it's a BETA!," as if it supposedly negates or erases all those listed reasons and explanations.

Could you consider something beta where can maximum level/rank cannot be reached because of missing content? Half polished content where objects are spawning inside walls and under the floor, where you fall out of the map by doing certain actions (press 5 repeatedly), where there are missing tutorials. This is my view. Also if the game wouldn't be in BETA stage then DE could not make drastical changes like the Parkour 2.0 or Starchart 2.0 and 3.0.

No one is forced to buy anything from the market (except Warframe and weapon slots, but you can get that by trading). Every significant item are accessable by just playing the game. People only think they MUST BUY cosmetics or built stuff from Market because of their ego. Yes, I also do it but I don't complain about it.

 

Quote

Prove it. Where is the evidence? Just because you say it, doesn't make it true.

Let's say DE would rework that Limbo's 1st and 2nd ability becomes 1st ability and could be switched like Ivara's 1st ability. His 2nd ability would be a new ability. This would make him better, but still may not became good. I don't need evidence to prove better is not straight good. Adding flowers on a pile of poo (not a Limbo ref.) makes it look better, but it's stil s**t (I know, not the best example) :D

 

Quote

Better means more useful, period.

Yes I wanted to add that, I just forgot and didn't remembered :D

 

Edited by Doxorn
changed the color, it was too bright ^^
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aekhon

Aekhon

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Doxorn said:

Also if the game wouldn't be in BETA stage then DE could not make drastical changes like the Parkour 2.0 or Starchart 2.0 and 3.0.

False.  UO was fully released and made drastic changes, at one point even remaking the game in 3D.  SWG was fully released and made so many drastic changes that they killed themselves.  DE could easily do it without the beta tag, they just don't want to.  It's a dirty tactic used by developers/publishers to avoid responsibility.  No, I agree with the others.  Once you start asking for money from players IN ANY FORM, it's no longer a beta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doxorn

Doxorn

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Aekhon said:

False.  UO was fully released and made drastic changes, at one point even remaking the game in 3D.  SWG was fully released and made so many drastic changes that they killed themselves.  DE could easily do it without the beta tag, they just don't want to.  It's a dirty tactic used by developers/publishers to avoid responsibility.  No, I agree with the others.  Once you start asking for money from players IN ANY FORM, it's no longer a beta.

I half agree with you. Yes, it is also a way to avoid responsibility. However beta begins when the game is feature complete but likely to contain a number of known or unknown bugs. A Game in beta phase generally have speed/performance issues and may still cause crashes, low performance. Which are still happening.

But the other way, they don't ask players for money. They give you the option.

Developing a game takes money, they aren't a AAA+ company to have that much budget. From where will they make that money to pay their employees? Ever heard of kickstarter funds? Instead of they just straight beg you for funding, they at least give you some cosmetics for your money.

Asking money doesn't make it out of beta (well maybe for you). Why it is still beta is stated above.

 

PS: What is UO and SWG? Never heard these abbreviations. Make it understandable to others too

Edited by Doxorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
(PSN)DesecratedFlame

(PSN)DesecratedFlame

Posted
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, Doxorn said:

This is my view.

My view could be the sky is made out of string cheese, but that doesn't make it true.

28 minutes ago, Aekhon said:

False.  UO was fully released and made drastic changes, at one point even remaking the game in 3D.  SWG was fully released and made so many drastic changes that they killed themselves.  DE could easily do it without the beta tag, they just don't want to.  It's a dirty tactic used by developers/publishers to avoid responsibility.  No, I agree with the others.  Once you start asking for money from players IN ANY FORM, it's no longer a beta.

+1

Edited by (PS4)DesecratedFlame
Link to comment
Share on other sites
(PSN)DesecratedFlame

(PSN)DesecratedFlame

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Doxorn said:

I half agree with you. Yes, it is also a way to avoid responsibility. However beta begins when the game is feature complete but likely to contain a number of known or unknown bugs. A Game in beta phase generally have speed/performance issues and may still cause crashes, low performance. Which are still happening.

But the other way, they don't ask players for money. They give you the option.

Developing a game takes money, they aren't a AAA+ company to have that much budget. From where will they make that money to pay their employees? Ever heard of kickstarter funds? Instead of they just straight beg you for funding, they at least give you some cosmetics for your money.

Asking money doesn't make it out of beta (well maybe for you). Why it is still beta is stated above.

Asking for kickstarter funds is one thing, opening a legit cash shop is an entirely other thing. The founders packs were the "kickstarter" for warframe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doxorn

Doxorn

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said:

My view could be the sky is made out of string cheese, but that doesn't make it true.

Thats where you are wrong at. The truth is what everyone acknowledge as a truth, but thats another story... :)

Edited by Doxorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doxorn

Doxorn

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 minutes ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said:

Asking for kickstarter funds is one thing, opening a legit cash shop is an entirely other thing. The founders packs were the "kickstarter" for warframe.

So would you consider warframe to be beta if there would be no platinum?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doxorn

Doxorn

Posted
  • Author
Posted
13 minutes ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said:

I'll believe when there is a unified theory that can be tested.

You are being just plain ignorant. If something is not pushed into your face it doesn't exist. I don't like ignorant people.

This is also getting very off-topic. I am done with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...