This Game is Boring

[Iccotak]

If they are serious about Archwing  then they need to look at ways to make this space combat more unique compared to other games that have space combat. 

like why not  allow us to latch onto services of other space ships or astroids and run along the surface?

Why not create enemies that are latched onto services that you can fight? 

[OniDax]

4 hours ago, Culaio said:

Realism-wise I completly agree with you, it doesnt make much sense for such weaponery to be able to deal damage to bigger object in space(and we see it being able to destroy fomorian shield generators), but this part can be explained by void powers and stuff. 

You may not like it but lore-wise archwing is supposed to be used in space, as we know from lore, and since it seems that DE planed archwings for a while this wont change since it seems that this system was something very important to them, in a way its one of very few things that were planed for a while to be added to game(compared to lunaro that was added because of rocket league popularity...)

Only thing we can do is try to give feedback and hope that they will make it more like space combat sim.

I don't think it being space combat sim works. I think that clashes with the rest of the game, which isn't sim-like. I also think that DE can change the lore, or move it forward, by putting archwings on planets. I mean, if the Grineer and Corpus start bringing out combat fighters, then that could move us (as Tenno) to outfit our landing crafts with weapons. If they start targeting us with their galleons and obelisks, then that would be enough to prompt us to use larger combat ships in space. If they start targeting us on planet tilesets with combat air support (gunships or transport ships fitted with guns), then that'd prompt us to use archwings on planets. Not only that, but the current archwing flight model, as well as the traditional plane-like flight model of space fighters, makes archwings and larger space fighters suited to planet-based air combat and space combat, respectively.

51 minutes ago, Iccotak said:

If they are serious about Archwing  then they need to look at ways to make this space combat more unique compared to other games that have space combat. 

like why not  allow us to latch onto services of other space ships or astroids and run along the surface?

Why not create enemies that are latched onto services that you can fight? 

I think being unique is overrated. I don't think developers should be unique just to be unique. They should be unique if that builds upon their game. I think DE should do what works for space gameplay and what is in keeping with the pace of the rest of the game.

Edited June 26, 2017 by A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n

[Iccotak]

Saw this. Really liked the atmosphere, art, and design of the level.

 

[DrBorris]

1 hour ago, Iccotak said:

If they are serious about Archwing  then they need to look at ways to make this space combat more unique compared to other games that have space combat. 

like why not  allow us to latch onto services of other space ships or astroids and run along the surface?

Why not create enemies that are latched onto services that you can fight? 

For the longest time I have been a proponent of making Archwing feel like on-foot combat, but with the bad@ss level turned up to 11.

 

However, I watched a little bit of Brozime's stream the other day and what he proposed might actually be exactly what Archwing needs... it should be stupidly OP. When in Archwing, you are enhanced beyond how OP Warframes are to begin with to a degree that you are just a tumbling ball of destruction that tears through anything and everything. Big guns that do massive damage in large AoE's, stupidly high speeds, and even throw in some lock-ons so you can actually blow stuff up while flying at those insane speeds.

It is a completely different approach to how Archwing has been looked at before (shooting at pixels with Archwings that are generally less powerful than Warframes), but it might be exactly what it needs. Archwing should be that thing you are excited for if you have to jump into it mid mission because it means that you are going to have your power level cranked up past max. 

Sure, it diminishes any "skilled" play Archwing would have (besides maybe Raid encounters), but should Archwing really be where skill comes into play? On-foot combat is the defining trait of Warframe, which is why I used to say Archwing should emulate that, but the more I have thought about it lately it may be better if Archwing was an escape from on-foot combat where you got to stretch your wings (heh) and show another level of Tenno power. 

 

Things like being able to run alongside the hull of a ship (oh wait, there are no ships yet...) tearing a hole in it while shooting an army of enemies pursuing you should be a normal day in Archwing. For reference, Nier Automata does something similar with their Flight Units. In normal (if Nier even has a normal) combat you are OP as is, but when you get into that flight suit you turn into a true god of destruction and are capable of so much more than you normally would. So, while getting into your Flight Unit may diminish some of your "skill", you look forward to it because it is only desert to the normal gameplay, not a main course. 

 

TL;DR: IMO, Archwing should further empower your Warframe from just being a god of war to being death incarnate and be a release from on-foot combat. 

[Iccotak]

Create destructible environments in Archwing so then you can slice through large ships. 

[Iccotak]

As for this thread. 

The gyst of what we are saying is;

"Spend more time polishing rather than adding content that we don't need or would be broken unless you polish the base game first.

We don't want status Quo of junk constantly being added, We want Progress towards a finished product"

[True_Naeblis]

@Iccotak Pretty much that. As of now this game is a lot like BDO: an ocean's breadth of possibilities with a puddle's depth. There really needs to be more polishing. Now, to be fair there is at least some of that mentality present, as seen in the Earth rework and going back to do things like removing Foundry construction of certain frame missions and fixing the spawn/drop rates. There needs to be more of that and there needs to be more expansion of content. I'd like to see DE continue to flesh out Trials and not take criticisms of the work put into them as insulting, but rather items for considering in the discussion of polishing the content and adding new Trials in the future.

We know there are likely things coming like events for the reconstruction of relays, but I hope that worthwhile intricacy is added to other areas of the game so that it's not only a weekend here or a week there that there's a break from the "norm". There simply needs to be more to do. That's the short of it, there just needs to be more outside of the basics of unlocking the star chart. There would be a possibility of that in something like Kuva farms if the Kuva Fortress actually provided some and gave players a reason to go get lost in there for half an hour at a time, but DE went against that for whatever reason.

I'm not sure what all the capabilities of the engine are, but the fact is that most MMOs that really keep players socially connected have much stronger, more open hubs than what the Relay System offers as well. SWTOR, for instance, is built on about the worst engine of the modern era, but when it's population was good the main planetary and fleet hubs were filled with players just interacting with each other. A lack of social interaction definitely puts stress on the rest of the game to constantly keep players entertained. I'm able to lose 15, 20, 30 or more minutes easily talking with my clan, but not everyone is in an even moderately social clan, and having no real places to interact with others and feel connected hurts the game. Even things like seeing players do some silliness or another while "face to face" with them in groups in more open areas just adds a huge level of depth in comparison to watching Area chat scroll by a 90 miles an hour.

Bottom line: the game just really has to get players more involved, and more involved with each other.

Players want to sink their time into games in ways that most outside of MMO hounds didn't in the past, and DE can definitely provide that experience if they're willing. Lastly, I'll say what I've said before: bringing in just a handful of additional programmers to learn the code structure and spend their time focused on polishing what needs tweaking while the main Devs continue developing new Trials, Sorties, and systems would be grand. I hope it's something that's being considered.

Edited June 26, 2017 by True_Naeblis

[artemisfortune]

It's saddening that there is still no word from DE about any of this.

[OniDax]

24 minutes ago, JSharpie said:

It's saddening that there is still no word from DE about any of this.

Have you directly reached out to Rebecca or Steve? Because I also would really like to see them address this.

[P0Pz]

Was thinking about why a shield is always fix bound to one weapon. The "shield-set". 

Wouldn't it be much better to use any of our 1 handed weapons with any typ of shield?

I mean, it is very limiting to a player, who loves his "Skana" or a "Dagger/Dirk" but is not allowed to use on his "free hand" a shield. Would't it be great to place a shield on your back? So it could reduce incoming fire from your back(+sides) ?

Wouldn't this allow DE to create different shields, including 'Magewalls' the compareable item for caster frames? 

What ya think guys?

[Culaio]

10 hours ago, A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n said:

I don't think it being space combat sim works. I think that clashes with the rest of the game, which isn't sim-like. I also think that DE can change the lore, or move it forward, by putting archwings on planets. I mean, if the Grineer and Corpus start bringing out combat fighters, then that could move us (as Tenno) to outfit our landing crafts with weapons. If they start targeting us with their galleons and obelisks, then that would be enough to prompt us to use larger combat ships in space. If they start targeting us on planet tilesets with combat air support (gunships or transport ships fitted with guns), then that'd prompt us to use archwings on planets. Not only that, but the current archwing flight model, as well as the traditional plane-like flight model of space fighters, makes archwings and larger space fighters suited to planet-based air combat and space combat, respectively.

well maybe I used wrong word to describe it, I call space comat sims games where you fly with small ship in space and fight other space ships both small and large, I dont really take into account realism of flight.

DE can change it true but question is: would they want to ? I mean from what ive read, they DE to be fans of "Zone of the Enders" games, and they based archwing game mode one ZOE, you can clearly see it in archwing melee combat, sadly being based on ZOE is one of main reasons for archwing problems, ZOE is pretty great game which lots of fans but the thing is that gameplay from ZOE was adapted to warframe gamestyle in not so good way, there are some fundamental differences between types of combat in warframe and ZOE,which made archwing inferior version of ZOE.

In ZOE we are mostly focused on fighting smaller number of enemies but who are stronger then enemies in archwing, so melee combat in ZOE is more interactive since it takes few hits to kill enemy also there is one HUGE difference between ZOE and archwing, since ZOE has less enemies it extensivly uses lock on function which lets us to strafe all around enemy very quickly, which makes ZOE melee combat MUCH more interactive.

Archwing being based on ZOE is also reason why long range combat in archwing is so static, ZOE is mostly melee combat focused game, it has long range weapon but its mostly used to distract enemy, it deals MUCH less damage then melee weapon, it would take you a long time to defeat enemy from long range which is why it needs to be used together with melee weapon if you want to defeat enemy quickly.

zone of the enders gameplay:

Archwing fundamentaly always was supposed to have mech-like gameplay, without mechs themselves, also I am sure archwing as support would work since one of complaints about archwing is that enemies are too small, some enemies are bigger thankfully(they are much more fun to fight) but they are pretty much size of jet fighters,(enemies like Ogma or gox) and players playing archwing want enemies of that size to fight, making archwing support would meant we would fight enemies even smaller then current archwing enemies(other then Osprey looking archwing enemies), which could make archwing even less fun, visibility of the enemies is one of major problems of archwing, at least to me, especially when you or other people use archwing powers(if multiple players used powers then you cant see a damn thing).

Personally I dont agree with your opinion that archwing cant be used in dogfights and be fun at it, in one of my previous posts I showed video's from dark void game, and it shows that it can be done to look cool and be fun to play, we literally see there guy in jet pack fighting combat fighters, it even includes ability to grab to figher to damage it.

11 hours ago, Iccotak said:

If they are serious about Archwing  then they need to look at ways to make this space combat more unique compared to other games that have space combat. 

like why not  allow us to latch onto services of other space ships or astroids and run along the surface?

Why not create enemies that are latched onto services that you can fight? 

Well dark void video's I showed before shows guy in jet pack grabing on to combat fighter to damage it, I know its not same thing but thats something

 

here is video for both of you guys, since one video shows stuff I was talking about to both of you guys(jet pack vs combat fighter can be fun, and it shows grabing on to enemy ship):

he grabs onto enemy combat fighter at 2:10

[OniDax]

1 minute ago, Culaio said:

 

he grabs onto enemy combat fighter at 2:10

I don't really care about ZOE, and yeah, I see Archwing is VERY much like that.

As for Dark Void, I really like how smooth that flight is. Archwing should feel like that. That also only reaffirms my view that archwing belongs on planets and should complement ground-based gameplay.

This is what I want for space-based gameplay:

It's space. We should be taking on Grineer and Corpus ships, with our ships.

[ikkabotz]

3 hours ago, JSharpie said:

It's saddening that there is still no word from DE about any of this.

And frustrating. Bothers me a lot how forum topics are cherry picked for Devstream. The last couple of devstreams were an absolute joke considering how much noise is buzzing all over multiple forum threads along the same vein of these issues. When asked about shield gating they just blew it off like nothing. Lately I feel like they're actually quite snide to player questions, sarcastically blowing things off on air and drinking beers. It bothers me a lot for some reason! I'd like to see one devstream they don't drink and answer questions seriously. No wise cracks, real answers. I'm going to try really hard to refuse playing till something changes. Even though I was really excited for Harrow I don't see how supporting the state of the game by logging in really makes for effective change.

Edited June 26, 2017 by komoriblues

[Vanrythzx]

well, if you have everything and done everything in the game, yeah it's getting boring after thousands of hours play, what game doesn't ? 
i agree with adding something new, but this isn't a mmorpg. 

[.Zel]

I realized that too, and that's when i started to play conclave.

[Culaio]

5 hours ago, P0Pz said:

Was thinking about why a shield is always fix bound to one weapon. The "shield-set". 

Wouldn't it be much better to use any of our 1 handed weapons with any typ of shield?

I mean, it is very limiting to a player, who loves his "Skana" or a "Dagger/Dirk" but is not allowed to use on his "free hand" a shield. Would't it be great to place a shield on your back? So it could reduce incoming fire from your back(+sides) ?

Wouldn't this allow DE to create different shields, including 'Magewalls' the compareable item for caster frames? 

What ya think guys?

I had similar idea, kinda inspired by disappointment from silva & aegis prime being mace and shield instead sword and shield, and by new dual wielding that is coming, I will quote my post from another thread:

"DE should make so shield arent part of set with its weapon and instead be equipable part of your arsenal that you could pair with any one handed weapon, for example you could pair Aegis with Dakra Prime, this would make both sides happy and whats more DE could expand with time what weapons could be paired with other one handed weapons including Machete type weapons and even rapiers, not everyone knows it but rapiers were actually used sometimes together with shields(called Rotella), this is how it looks:

You can make this idea even better by making so that you can pair shield with gun so you could feel like captain america:

It should be possible seeing that you can use volt shield together with gun."

Edited June 26, 2017 by Culaio

[Liminal]

I agree it's boring. No new weapon, boss or enemy will change that, what WF needs is proper balance. There's no challenge in the game, and there can never be one when there's only "Players OHK everything" and then "Enemies OHK players". All values are out of whack, our weapon damage, our mods, our powers, enemy durability, enemy damage scaling... and DE shelved damage 3.0, so it's hopeless. WF is basically trivially easy or cheese town, no middle ground, and it's impossible to create truly engaging gameplay when that's the case.

If they decided to rework 80% of the values in the damn game they could probably make cool missions, but right now I don't think it's likely. It's pretty sad because there are many elements in WF that I like, but if it wasn't for the "sunk cost fallacy" I'd have left already.

[OniDax]

1 minute ago, The_Doc said:

I agree it's boring. No new weapon, boss or enemy will change that, what WF needs is proper balance. There's no challenge in the game, and there can never be one when there's only "Players OHK everything" and then "Enemies OHK players". All values are out of whack, our weapon damage, our mods, our powers, enemy durability, enemy damage scaling... and DE shelved damage 3.0, so it's hopeless. WF is basically trivially easy or cheese town, no middle ground, and it's impossible to create truly engaging gameplay when that's the case.

If they decided to rework 80% of the values in the damn game they could probably make cool missions, but right now I don't think it's likely. It's pretty sad because there are many elements in WF that I like, but if it wasn't for the "sunk cost fallacy" I'd have left already.

Balance =/= fun. Balance won't make the game less boring.

[P0Pz]

3 hours ago, Culaio said:

I had similar idea, kinda inspired by disappointment from silva & aegis prime being mace and shield instead sword and shield, and by new dual wielding that is coming, I will quote my post from another thread:

"DE should make so shield arent part of set with its weapon and instead be equipable part of your arsenal that you could pair with any one handed weapon, for example you could pair Aegis with Dakra Prime, this would make both sides happy and whats more DE could expand with time what weapons could be paired with other one handed weapons including Machete type weapons and even rapiers, not everyone knows it but rapiers were actually used sometimes together with shields(called Rotella), this is how it looks:

You can make this idea even better by making so that you can pair shield with gun so you could feel like captain america:

It should be possible seeing that you can use volt shield together with gun."

Same thoughts here buddy. As it seems you and others here got also experiences with a lot different games/mmo's.

Esp in rpg mmo's you got most over shear unlimited combination of different shields/typs and weapons/typs.

As long those weapons are 1h (one handed) you can pair them with any shield, kinda logic.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Some do ofc Damage reducing (DR). While this DR is done differently.

Some have fix DR numbers but an side effect like BlockPer. Like this:

Shield standart stats:

BlockDef: xx% (% to block a hit, reducing damage)

BlockPer: xx% (Block Perfect. % to block any atack 100%, while 50% is the max)

---->

33% block percentage and 50% perfect block will result in approx 1 in 6 perfect blocks.

50% block percentage and 50% perfect block will be 1 in 4 perfect blocks.

100% block percentage and 50% perfect block will be 1 in 2 perfect blocks. (Highest possible)

Exc. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------

 

Magewalls, or Casterwalls go another way.

Instead going against physical damage, they reduce negative effecting abilities of all kinds that do damage on 'hit'.

M.Deff; % chance to block a Ability damaging you (Reduction of damage).

M.Res; (% Ability Resistance/Evasion chance to perfectly block/evade a ability that could damage you)

-------------------------------

Shield can have additional stats on top. Fix given by item/rarity/prime or including random stats + Set bonus!

Set bonus; wearing a weapon + shield + another body-item; with the same Set name, equiped on a frame, gives the frame a 'full' or 'part' set bonus.

Depending on its rarity/tier, a full set bonus 'can' have a 'defending or offensive' side effect or ability.

Exc.:

- 3% chance on attack to cast Sterling's Haste. Increases movement speed by +50 for 10 seconds.

- 3% chance on being attacked to cast Ancient Aegis. Increases physical and magical defense by 500 points for 10~15 seconds. 

 

 

 

Please take a close look at the 2 very right rows set-bonuses.

Bound to: 'Grands bonus on kill if enemy is in your lvl range' !! Could be nice to stop chessing low lvls, but rewarding doing your or higher tier enemies.

Edit2:

Another simple rule could be: "Frames & Gear" only gain exp if they kill enemies at theire lvl/tier -5 lvl and above range.

Anything usefull?

 

Edit:

Almost forgotten to agree to your point: S&A...

It's a set made of 'sword + shield'. It gets upgraded. It needs to be an upgraded sword + shild now, pluse an visual indicator to the style of the set before building up.

A mace is crushing something and/or used to push back/aside.

A sword is to cut something or to pierce something.

Both have by minimal logic still different point of gravity and weight. Which results ofc also in an different atack speed... mace way slower, but hit impact way harder (burst dmg), while a swod got way more atackspeed and therefore DPS. A 2h sword is a hybrid it's a half burst/half dps weapon...i mean by minimal used logic...

Edited June 26, 2017 by P0Pz

[Aedwynn]

10 hours ago, A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n said:

Have you directly reached out to Rebecca or Steve? Because I also would really like to see them address this.

I am waiting for that to happen for two years. All ideas here been talked through and through with no response whatsoever. They just end up in forum archive. That's why I don't have strength to post any feedback anymore - because it's cherry picked. All problems are at least 2 years old, some of them are 4 years old. With those years filled with players suggesting how to balance or fix that. Wake me up two years later - maybe then something will change at last. 

[artemisfortune]

@[DE]Rebecca @[DE]Steve @[DE]Drew

23 pages of actual, constructive feedback. Please, anything. At least so we know you're hearing us.

[Liminal]

4 hours ago, A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n said:

Balance =/= fun. Balance won't make the game less boring.

Not directly, but it's the foundation for engaging content. Without balance there's no fair challenge and no skill based gameplay. You simply cannot design stimulating scenarios with WF's current state.

[OniDax]

15 minutes ago, The_Doc said:

Not directly, but it's the foundation for engaging content. Without balance there's no fair challenge and no skill based gameplay. You simply cannot design stimulating scenarios with WF's current state.

The foundation for engaging content is in how the gameplay is designed - how the characters handle (what they look like, what they can do, and how they move - look and feel, essentially), how the missions are designed (what you can do in the missions and how immersive the experience is), and what gear you can acquire and use (Warframe has this done, but the other two not so well).

Balance on the other hand deals with stats and addresses how "fair" the gameplay feels - is too easy or too hard. It does not directly deal with gameplay.

You can have fun gameplay even with imbalanced stats. You cannot have fun gameplay if the gameplay itself isn't engaging, exciting, and satisfying.

Edited June 27, 2017 by A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n

[DrBorris]

9 minutes ago, A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n said:

The foundation for engaging content is in how the gameplay is designed - how the characters handle (what they look like, what they can do, and how they move - look and feel, essentially), how the missions are designed (what you can do in the missions and how immersive the experience is), and what gear you can acquire and use (Warframe has this done, but the other two not so well).

Balance on the other hand deals with stats and addresses how "fair" the gameplay feels - is too easy or too hard. It does not directly deal with gameplay.

You can have fun gameplay even with imbalanced stats. You cannot have fun gameplay if the gameplay itself isn't engaging, exciting, and satisfying.

I am not sure what the general consensus is here, but for me what keeps me coming back is the gameplay. Movement is slick, gunplay is tight and extremely diverse, and generally mission selection follows suit. 

 

This goes directly back to the first post I made in this thread.

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2017 at 9:04 AM, DrBorris said:

I personally still, after too many hours, have a lot of fun with the game. For me the combat experience is amazing with plenty of diversity, but to that point I generally play Warframes that have funky kits. Something about gliding through the air and getting three enemies skewered on an arrow never gets old for me. 

Where I see the problem is that the balance is so off base that it diminishes many aspects of the core gameplay. The "one-shot or be on-shot" damage scaling just does not mesh with the (IMO amazing) base gameplay. No point in using the amazing tools at your disposal when you push one button and everything dies. 

 

For the most part what keeps me hooked in the game for the past year or so has been, and I hate to admit this, new content. I am the first to say content is a bad way to keep players engaged, but it does work. I get excited to see the new crazy mechanic a Warframe/weapon has and how it works with the spot on (IMO) gameplay Warframe has. If it weren't fun to shoot the guns, then I wouldn't care for the content. DE (somehow) stumbled upon one of the best "feels" for a game I have ever had. Nothing quite touches the freedom you have, other games may be more balanced, have more things to do, or have a better story, but no other game has left me feel so in control of what is happening on the screen as Warframe, and this is a part of the "power fantasy" that a game like Destiny just can't touch. Sure Guardians are also gods of War, but their impact on the battlefield restricted much more than a bullet jump and bow.

Back to that content thing, I see the promise for content to not be the sole driving force of playing, for playing Warframe to have a replay ability innately, but what holds it back is the "one-shot or be one-shot" damage. 

 

Huh, did not expect to dive that deep... whatever. I feel almost out of place in this thread, like that one annoying eternal optimist that just won't shut up when everyone else is trying to be realistic. 

[OniDax]

47 minutes ago, DrBorris said:

I am not sure what the general consensus is here, but for me what keeps me coming back is the gameplay. Movement is slick, gunplay is tight and extremely diverse, and generally mission selection follows suit. 

 

This goes directly back to the first post I made in this thread.

Where I see the problem is that the balance is so off base that it diminishes many aspects of the core gameplay. The "one-shot or be on-shot" damage scaling just does not mesh with the (IMO amazing) base gameplay. No point in using the amazing tools at your disposal when you push one button and everything dies. 

 

For the most part what keeps me hooked in the game for the past year or so has been, and I hate to admit this, new content. I am the first to say content is a bad way to keep players engaged, but it does work. I get excited to see the new crazy mechanic a Warframe/weapon has and how it works with the spot on (IMO) gameplay Warframe has. If it weren't fun to shoot the guns, then I wouldn't care for the content. DE (somehow) stumbled upon one of the best "feels" for a game I have ever had. Nothing quite touches the freedom you have, other games may be more balanced, have more things to do, or have a better story, but no other game has left me feel so in control of what is happening on the screen as Warframe, and this is a part of the "power fantasy" that a game like Destiny just can't touch. Sure Guardians are also gods of War, but their impact on the battlefield restricted much more than a bullet jump and bow.

Back to that content thing, I see the promise for content to not be the sole driving force of playing, for playing Warframe to have a replay ability innately, but what holds it back is the "one-shot or be one-shot" damage. 

 

Huh, did not expect to dive that deep... whatever. I feel almost out of place in this thread, like that one annoying eternal optimist that just won't shut up when everyone else is trying to be realistic. 

I'm not big on balance when it comes to PvE. As long as I can take out some Grineer and Corpus (I hate the Infested) and those Grineer and Corpus are interesting in how they look and what weapons they have and what they do, then I'm fine in terms of balance.

My big issue is gameplay. I think the movement is clunky, the animations robotic. I think the same of the gunplay, and much prefer the gunplay of third person shooters like Ghost Recon Wildlands and Star Wars Battlefront. I think the missions are very simplistic and boring because 1) there are usually only a couple of objectives (I much prefer the mission structure of games like Medal of Honor Airborne) and 2) the environment isn't interactive (there aren't things in the environment that we can interact with) or immersive (the atmosphere is bland - few ships in the sky, no non-combat NPCs, etc). I play this game, and it doesn't have those things, and then I go to games like GRW and Battlefront, and I get those things.

What keeps me coming back to Warframe, despite what those games offer, is that 1) I like the character design, 2) I generally enjoy the melee gameplay, 3) I've poured so much money into this game, and 4) I honestly think Warframe has the potential to rival AAA games, and I think the only thing holding it back is that the gameplay just isn't at the quality of AAA games - I think it's not engaging enough, or immersive enough, so for me, it's ultimately not satisfying enough. That's why I think the game is boring. New content isn't enough to keep me coming back, and that's mostly because most of the new content is lacking the things that I think would make Warframe more fun for me. I'll come back if there's absolutely something I like (usually some cosmetic, occasionally a weapon). But that still doesn't make the game fun for me.

11 hours ago, Culaio said:

snip

I found some higher quality flight gameplay. Reminds me of those Iron Man tie-in games. Archwing flight should definitely be like this imo:

And again, it demonstrates why I want archwing to be a planet-based system. Something like that works well for combat air support.

Edited June 27, 2017 by A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n