Self reviving isn't good

[Mudfam]

The rescue example people keep bringing up is just a very obvious one, it's by no means the one situation in which the game becomes easier.

There are many time sensitive objectives, especially when levels get higher. If someone goes down they are taken out of the fight, when someone tries to revive them they are also taken out of the fight and become extremely vulnerable, not unlikely to die themselves. This can result in chain reactions of people going down as they try to revive eachother, and objectives being destroyed, life support not being replenished, kuva clouds missed, etc. etc.

I immediately noticed a more casually careless approach to the game, something we already have too much of. This is also really noticeable in raids, where there's a clear conflict between reviving someone or completing an objective, a serious problem when one of your key roles is down and others are already otherwise engaged.

Reviving someone was realistically one of the toughest challenges the game had to offer at higher levels, also one of the perks of frames with particular defensive capabilities.

Just like when the daily revive limit was changed, the game immediately became easier, the chance of that now almost forgotten "MISSION FAILED" screen showing up are inexistant.

Sure, most of the game is already too easy, but even then going down was still at least an inconvenience to yourself and your team, something you strived to avoid, and reviving someone was a somewhat worthwhile kind gesture. Now the rare moments when someone actually waits for you to revive them and says thanks seem precious.

Also, people saying it's optional... If you fail something because you didn't opt to revive others will get angry at you lol. In a situation like a raid, if you don't use a quick a revive now you'll get 7 very annoyed people, including, I'm ashamed to admit, myself.

 

I get the whole Oberon thing I guess, though it's never happened to me. That's a separate issue though that could have had its own specific fix, without dumbing down the whole game yet again.

[Jakorak]

On 8/9/2017 at 7:27 AM, Nirrel said:

reckless behavior and demote proper teamplay,

I find it hard to take this seriously.

After playing Warframe for 4 years in public matches and seeing hallway heroes in every single design iteration this game has gone through, using teamplay for an argument about design feels hollow as nothing DE has ever done has gotten its playerbase to act like teammates.

Bonus points: anytime you complain about lack of teamplay in public matches you are laughed at because "public is where you go to have fun and not deal with expectations" as if that's an excuse for willfully or not being capable of at bare minimum staying within 50 meters of a single teammate

[Nirrel]

1 hour ago, Tsukinoki said:

One thing I have yet to see from opponents of the change:
What about solo players in the "old" system?  Why weren't you complaining that solo players didn't have to sit there and bleed out for 15 seconds every time they went down and instead could immediately get back on their feet?

So the multiplayer missions are now being treated the same as solo missions.
in fact solo players still have it easier as they don't have to wait 3 seconds like you do in multiplayer missions if you burn an instant revive.

Why weren't you complaining about how solo players can do all that?
And yet when its brought into group missions now you're all up in arms.

So why is it only a penalty in multiplayer missions and not solo missions?

The bleedout timer isn't simply a penalty but a balaced mechanic in a multiplayer setting so have the possibility to be rivived in time without having to use up a revive at the same time you and your team is penalized by your absence and the necessity to revive you in mid mission wich could lead to failure. In solo you have no team to revive you endlessly so this mechanic becomes of no importance as you are forced to revive anyway loosing a revive every time, the moment you finish them you fail the mission.

Why would multiplayer missions be treated the same as solo missions anyway...it make no sense at all what you are saying. It's a different game mode. Even enemy spawns are tailored for it, or you want spawns for a full squad in solo ecc.

However I don't see how even solo missions comes in to this discussion that from the beginning is talking about team play, how that changed and not for the better.

2 hours ago, Tsukinoki said:

For me the biggest reason this is a boon is that I can no longer essentially be held hostage by an Oberon that gives me a 1+ minute down time and refuses to revive me because "You aren't being targetted by the enemies, just kill them an we'll pick you up when the timer gets low!" and with absolutely nothing I could do.  Now I can at least get out of those situations.

If that is such a problem though it's so easily solvable. Just give possibility to ppl to opt out of it even if I myself never had any problem with it only advantage as I had more time to clear the mobs around ppl before getting them up without the risk being downed. Such a simple solution without destroying a challanging game mechanic.

[Nirrel]

46 minutes ago, Jakorak said:

I find it hard to take this seriously.

After playing Warframe for 4 years in public matches and seeing hallway heroes in every single design iteration this game has gone through, using teamplay for an argument about design feels hollow as nothing DE has ever done has gotten its playerbase to act like teammates.

Bonus points: anytime you complain about lack of teamplay in public matches you are laughed at because "public is where you go to have fun and not deal with expectations" as if that's an excuse for willfully or not being capable of at bare minimum staying within 50 meters of a single teammate

So what is your point? The teamplay sucked even before who cares if it becomes even worst? That's a very helpful attitude...

[MagPrime]

27 minutes ago, Nirrel said:

So what is your point? The teamplay sucked even before who cares if it becomes even worst? That's a very helpful attitude...

 The point is that claiming this kills team play is invalid because there was no team play to kill.

Although, I've been making it a point to do more PUG's lately and seeing how people react when people go down.  While not conclusive, there was 1 instance in the last week where someone was forced to use self revive, and that was due to them being too far away to revive. The rest of the time, everyone rushed to revive. 

So, I really don't see how this change is negative, considering nothing has really changed during the mission.

[Mudfam]

13 hours ago, MagPrime said:

 The point is that claiming this kills team play is invalid because there was no team play to kill.

Although, I've been making it a point to do more PUG's lately and seeing how people react when people go down.  While not conclusive, there was 1 instance in the last week where someone was forced to use self revive, and that was due to them being too far away to revive. The rest of the time, everyone rushed to revive. 

So, I really don't see how this change is negative, considering nothing has really changed during the mission.

I know it's difficult to have a constructive discussion on these forums, but I try anyway.

Yes, there was very little teamplay before, but I wouldn't say none. See my post at the top of this page. Thing is even the people making this argument seem to think the lack of teamplay is a bad thing, and if that's true, shouldn't you be making an argument for better teamplay rather than supporting the last few scraps we had left being gone too? Shouldn't we be telling DE what we want rather than resigning to the laziest and dullest path as the way forward? No matter how small it may seem, I still think this is a step in the wrong direction.

Are you so jaded with the game, lost hope for any improvement, that you welcome anything that will just get the job done quicker, without caring how? It's an honest question, not a criticism.

I've already said everything I have to say on the revive mechanic in earlier posts, I won't reiterate. I'd just like to understand where supporters of the change are coming from, because I don't see any good in it, besides perhaps dealing with the Oberon troll scenario, which could have been done differently.

[Yargami]

On 8/16/2017 at 3:09 PM, Mudfam said:

I immediately noticed a more casually careless approach to the game, something we already have too much of. This is also really noticeable in raids, where there's a clear conflict between reviving someone or completing an objective, a serious problem when one of your key roles is down and others are already otherwise engaged.

   OK, I will admit that I don't do raids. I've only done one and that was before self-revives were a thing. But I'm guessing most players aren't playing raids constantly either, so are you going to start making changes that affect the entire game based on the opinion of a few raiders and ignore the rest of the community? Sounds an awful lot like League of Legends' biggest problem.

On 8/16/2017 at 3:09 PM, Mudfam said:

Just like when the daily revive limit was changed, the game immediately became easier, the chance of that now almost forgotten "MISSION FAILED" screen showing up are inexistant.

   So, wait, you don't just want the self-revives gone, you want the old revive system back too? Do you want to buy it with plat while you're at it? More seriously, though, I don't remember the last time I saw a mission failure screen because of bleeding out, even on the old system. Most of the time in public it's either because some idiot ran up ahead and started the objective without the group or just because we didn't bring a sufficient loadout for the mission type/level and failed to protect the objective (because the objective died, not us and then the objective). I'm not sure I've ever actually failed a mission because I had to sit there bleeding out for 15 seconds, even in rescue prisons after the timer was started. Most of the time I do spy missions solo, but occasionally I'll do them with a friend (rarely on public, but small group does have bleedout, so it counts), and the same thing applies there. I fail spy missions when I do something stupid and set off the alarm and can't get to the vault in time, not from dying.

On 8/16/2017 at 3:09 PM, Mudfam said:

Sure, most of the game is already too easy, but even then going down was still at least an inconvenience to yourself and your team, something you strived to avoid, and reviving someone was a somewhat worthwhile kind gesture. Now the rare moments when someone actually waits for you to revive them and says thanks seem precious.

   Most of the game isn't supposed to be end game. Yes, there need to be more end game, but I don't think trying to turn the current non-end game stuff into end game is the way to do it. And as for the moments when people let you revive them being rare, I think I've had three people self-revive when I could have easily revived them since self-revives were added. So manually reviving people and even seeing a "ty" in the chat afterward isn't actually that rare still.

12 hours ago, Mudfam said:

I know it's difficult to have a constructive discussion on these forums, but I try anyway.

   I don't know about you, but everyone else seems to be staying constructive.

12 hours ago, Mudfam said:

Yes, there was very little teamplay before, but I wouldn't say none. See my post at the top of this page. Thing is even the people making this argument seem to think the lack of teamplay is a bad thing, and if that's true, shouldn't you be making an argument for better teamplay rather than supporting the last few scraps we had left being gone too?

   It is true that there isn't a huge amount of teamplay in pugs, but it is also true that I don't expect there to be a lot of teamplay in pugs. If I wanted teamplay I'd build an actual group instead of matching with random people. I'm not saying that the lack of teamplay is good, but there really isn't a way around it when most of the game is matching with random people who probably brought either brought a loadout sufficient to solo the mission or brought a crap loadout to try to leech affinity with (neither of which is good teamplay). The chances of getting matched with someone who actually built a loadout around teamplay is fairly rare (even EV Trinity loadouts most of the time I've seen them could easily solo the missions).

   Basically, to sum up this and my previous post, if you were arguing that you should not have self-revives in trials and maybe sorties I would say "Sure, I can see the reasoning for that. You are supposed to be prepared going into sorties and especially trials (from my experience in other MMOs, if you haven't memorized the time and location of every raid spawn you're not a true raider)." But you're not arguing for that. You're arguing that they should be gone all the time, and I don't see that they're actually a problem most of the time. I'm not necessarily for them (I'm not against them either though), but I think the extreme back-lash is silly because they don't actually hurt the vast majority of gameplay. And instead of arguing that the current game needs to be converted into end game I would suggest arguing that more end game needs to be added, although I wouldn't expect anything major other than Plains of Eidolon (which sounds like it may be adding end game, so be patient) and Sacrifice any time soon.

Edited August 17, 2017 by Yargami

[Mudfam]

1 hour ago, Yargami said:

<snip>

I see your point, but for me "most of the game" isn't relevant anymore. There is a time when you're running around the starchart with your eyes closed collecting mods, endo and all the equipment. I see a lot of MR 24 players though, that have presumably done all that. Sorties, floods and raids for rivens and arcanes become the only thing left to do.

In these missions with level 100 enemies people actually go down quite easily. Maybe not so much in a regular raid, but you really didn't want them to. An excavator or even mobdef objective can go in the blink of an eye, the team may have to pay attention, the 1-2-3 players being taken out of the fight is a real concern.

Sure, with a proper team setup you can trivialise the game completely, I should know having done 8 hour endurance runs. But I enjoy jumping into a high level pub mission with a squishy frame that doesn't fit the meta for that mission and seeing what kind of shenaningans ensue.

Usually you steamroll it anyway, but sometimes you actually struggle a little and that's when I have some fun. I enjoy the small interaction of reviving a fellow tenno with all hell breaking loose around me. I don't mind carrying underequipped players formaing something, I'm happy to help and welcome the extra challenge (Ok, the guy who showed up for sortie Kela with just Volt and an MK1-Bo was something else - but hilarious).

Some time ago I did a kuva flood excavation, we were 4 random max MR players in public and we just couldn't keep excavators intact for more than a few seconds. We all had an absolute blast laughing at our own incompetence. We eventually completed the mission 30 cryotic at a time, it was fun.

Whether in a raid or whatever high level content, in those rare situations where you actually need to contribute, there was a certain satisfaction in a job well done, rather than letting your team down by bleeding out. Now no one cares, because you can be back up in 3 seconds and everyone can just continue playing and ignore you. Especially when it matters most.

Basically, for what is "most of the game" to me, it does matter. It has noticeably changed the dynamics of the game, removing the small challenges I set for myself, a lot of my enjoyment. I still play Warframe only because I can have some fun playing, not because I'm efficiently grinding for something.

 

And if we do get an actual end-game, what then? Will there be time sensitive objectives in PoE? Will there be any incentive to run as a squad or pairs? Or should we all split up, do our own thing and forget our supposed squad exists? I don't know, but I still feel that some important failure mechanics / conditions become redundant and that's a very bad thing in my eyes.

[Yargami]

3 hours ago, Mudfam said:

I see your point, but for me "most of the game" isn't relevant anymore.

   "Most of the game" is still relevant to most of the players and, more importantly, to the devs. When making a game you can't make changes that affect the entire community just because a small number of people want it. You have to actually balance changes.

3 hours ago, Mudfam said:

But I enjoy jumping into a high level pub mission with a squishy frame that doesn't fit the meta for that mission and seeing what kind of shenaningans ensue.

   I also enjoying throwing out the meta (it's something I do in most games that I play). I've mained Mag since I joined back when she was useless, much of the time playing her out of pure stubbornness. I actually often do builds and make them work because they're not the meta, which I guess means that my personal meta is anything that isn't in the meta.

3 hours ago, Mudfam said:

Whether in a raid or whatever high level content, in those rare situations where you actually need to contribute, there was a certain satisfaction in a job well done, rather than letting your team down by bleeding out. Now no one cares, because you can be back up in 3 seconds and everyone can just continue playing and ignore you. Especially when it matters most.

   The key phrase in this is "in those rare situations." Rare. What I've been trying to get across is that maybe if you said that this change needed to happen in the end game content I would be fine with it. But you're not. You want to make a sweeping change across all game modes, levels, and missions (which you already said weren't even relevant to you anymore) because it helps you enjoy the game in "rare situations." That's not how you build a game and actually keep a community (which, so far, Warframe actually has a pretty good one). Maybe self-revives are a small (very small) step towards making the game easier, but doing what you suggest just because of those rare situations is a much more dangerous step towards listening to one small, elite group of people. That has a much higher chance of killing a game.

3 hours ago, Mudfam said:

And if we do get an actual end-game, what then? Will there be time sensitive objectives in PoE? Will there be any incentive to run as a squad or pairs? Or should we all split up, do our own thing and forget our supposed squad exists?

   I don't know details of what they have planned for the plains, but just because a squad is split up doesn't mean that it's forgotten. I often run a small group with my clanmate who likes to loot the entire level. I am usually a little more objective focused, so we often split up and it isn't rare for us to only see each other at the spawn point and extraction. But we still have a lot of fun doing it.

3 hours ago, Mudfam said:

 I don't know, but I still feel that some important failure mechanics / conditions become redundant and that's a very bad thing in my eyes.

   Yes, there should be some downsides to dying. I'd be fine with some of the missions in PoE ending in failure because you died and the objective died or left. But you can't just make changes across the board to fix a small, rare problem. I am actually against blanket removing self-revive almost more because of the principle behind the change rather than the change itself (I've had fun over the past four years without them, I don't have to have them now). Whether or not you like the self-revives, DE felt that they should be in here. If you have a problem with them in these rare situations, you have to suggest a fix for them. If there were an actual problem with them in most of the game, that would be different. As it is though, there are plenty of different ideas for fixing this problem. Rather than just saying "throw out the whole system," stop and think about work arounds first. Just off the top of my head, self-revives could be disabled in sorties/trials (and maybe Kuva floods), self-revives could cost a lot more affinity in those missions, they could be on a cooldown, or they could revive you with reduced stats or ammo. If you actually think through a problem there are usually lots of potential fixes that are better than just deleting the entire thing. I don't have a problem with all of your arguments, I have a problem with your proposed "solution."

Edited August 17, 2017 by Yargami

[Rakiss]

I think an important takeaway from this is that 4 revives is far too many in most scenarios.
The fact that 15 seconds spent dead is considered by most to be the punishment for dying rather than losing a revive just shows that nobody is ever running out.

[Yargami]

   Yeah, the last time I actually used all of my revives in a mission was when they refreshed daily and I had already used some that day (which I then stupidly refreshed with plat because I was new didn't realize how it worked).

Edited August 17, 2017 by Yargami

[Rakiss]

26 minutes ago, Yargami said:

   Yeah, the last time I actually used all of my revives in a mission was when they refreshed daily and I had already used some that day (which I then stupidly refreshed with plat because I was new didn't realize how it worked).

Outside of a really dicey corpus sortie excavation and a and regularly seeing it happen to other people in Kela De Thaym sorties, I, and I think everyone else, is much the same.

That said, the old revive system was awful and made the solo experience utter misery. 

[Yargami]

14 hours ago, Rakiss said:

Outside of a really dicey corpus sortie excavation and a and regularly seeing it happen to other people in Kela De Thaym sorties, I, and I think everyone else, is much the same.

That said, the old revive system was awful and made the solo experience utter misery. 

   Yeah, in general if the sortie of the day ends in a boss fight I just wait until the next day (unless it's the sniper dude or the Jackal, they're totally fine). I definitely do not want the old system back though.

edit: I forgot about Alad V. His first boss fight (not the mutalist one) is also one I do. Most of them, however, I just find to not be worth the effort. Maybe bosses should increase your rare sortie rewards...

Edited August 18, 2017 by Yargami

[Mudfam]

12 hours ago, Yargami said:

<snip>

I really don't think I represent some elitist minority. There are 300 people in my clan, almost all of these are so called veteran players, and there's nothing special about my clan. When a  new player comes I see them going from rank 5 to 20 in the space of 2 months, by that point they've exhausted everything they actually wanted from the star chart, they're looking to squeeze more out of their builds. All the while complaining that the game no longer presents them with any challenge, and how so many things are pointless because the game is too easy.

You don't have to hear this from me, in my experience this is an extremely common opinion of the game within the community.

I'm not arguing for a change, I'm questioning the wisdom of this recent change in its entirety. And let's not pretend that DE knows best because they're the developers, they rush out broken things all the time, and rarely seem to realise or know where they're going with it. Do they go back and polish core features? No. Everyone knows this.

I dont see any merits to this, to me it's only detrimental. You seem to think this may may only be relevant for certain late game content, I disagee. For a brand new player their first experience won't be "oh * I screwed up and now I'm bleeding out. Oh look, this nice tenno is reviving me", it will just be "time to do as that prompt on my screen says and keep playing as if nothing happened". I could elaborate here, but hopefully you get the point.

With some very niche exceptions, any content a player experiences will be exempt from consequences for failure and team interaction. Newbies will be left in the dust to revive themselves, experienced players will take an even more nonchalant approach to the game, not having to face any effects of failure, whether their own or otherwise.

You can't win if you can't lose. This is something that's being utterly forgotten in games and removing all satisfaction you may get from performing well. The spirit of games is being crushed by lazy players and sore losers that blindly demand convenience without understanding what it costs.

Again, I don't want to argue specifics or how much of a tangible impact this has on the game because of preexisting problems etc. I still think it's a step in the wrong direction, however big or small, a direction that I feel very strongly is bad. It seems we could argue this indefinitely, but never see eye to eye. So be it. :/

[DeathGold]

On 8/8/2017 at 4:12 PM, KIREEK said:

EDIT: Seems one of the reasons was because it allowed oberon players and teammates to make other teammates downed for a really long time, not only that requires many, many factors to happen (planetary alignment is more likely i believe) (requires player being dead, away from team, unsuportive players, an oberon, a specific oberon build, a oberon that doesn't interupt the ability, oberon must be nearby,.....) but it is also easy to solve with a self revive after 15 seconds, so you remain downed for 15 seconds and if you have a 60 second timer then after 15 seconds you can self revive or remain downed. Meaning you choose to take benefit of the extra time or you revive. By making a self revive nearly instant, downed state and reviving is trivialized and taken less seriously than what it should be.

just an Oberon... with rage and it don't have to be in range to get the effect if you get it 1 time you can't remove it ...so get downed with an Oberon and there you go for 1-3 minutes of waiting to die or waiting for "sacrifice" i'm sure they added it for Oberon 'coz he can be annoying some times but i really don't know why people are abusing this .... wait for your team-mates to leave the point and go to revive you ... use the quick revive just to make them feel like they did nothing they should make it unusable when some one is reviving you

[KIREEK]

I believe you can interrupt the ability while downed as an oberon.

[Yargami]

On 8/18/2017 at 6:39 AM, Mudfam said:

I really don't think I represent some elitist minority. There are 300 people in my clan, almost all of these are so called veteran players, and there's nothing special about my clan. When a  new player comes I see them going from rank 5 to 20 in the space of 2 months, by that point they've exhausted everything they actually wanted from the star chart, they're looking to squeeze more out of their builds. All the while complaining that the game no longer presents them with any challenge, and how so many things are pointless because the game is too easy.

You don't have to hear this from me, in my experience this is an extremely common opinion of the game within the community.

I'm not arguing for a change, I'm questioning the wisdom of this recent change in its entirety. And let's not pretend that DE knows best because they're the developers, they rush out broken things all the time, and rarely seem to realise or know where they're going with it. Do they go back and polish core features? No. Everyone knows this.

   OK, maybe the term elite was not the right term. My point was that you can't just drop a game feature because it doesn't work in a few select instances and a few people ask for it. And I never said DE knows best, I said that they wanted the self-revives in here. They are the devs, and if they want something in here they definitely have the right to add it.

On 8/18/2017 at 6:39 AM, Mudfam said:

For a brand new player their first experience won't be "oh * I screwed up and now I'm bleeding out. Oh look, this nice tenno is reviving me", it will just be "time to do as that prompt on my screen says and keep playing as if nothing happened".

   Yeah, there probably should be a little more HUD info about bleeding out and using revives for those players that don't know how the system works. But that's true of almost any change that is still relatively new. I mean, just look at something like damage 2.0. Is there any in-game explanation for how damage, armor, and elementals work? Not that I know of.

On 8/18/2017 at 6:39 AM, Mudfam said:

With some very niche exceptions, any content a player experiences will be exempt from consequences for failure and team interaction. Newbies will be left in the dust to revive themselves, experienced players will take an even more nonchalant approach to the game, not having to face any effects of failure, whether their own or otherwise.

   Again, I've been playing quite a bit since self-revives were added and I don't see this happening at all. And just to be clear, aside from Trials, I have been doing all the stuff we listed as "end game" earlier (mainly sorties and kuva floods). When a player goes down, the vast majority of the time at least one (but usually more) other player(s) goes rushing over to revive them, and the downed player waits and lets them do it, often thanking them. So I don't know who you've been playing with, but the random people I've been playing with haven't been leaving newbies in the dust, or ignoring downed players in general.

On 8/18/2017 at 6:39 AM, Mudfam said:

Again, I don't want to argue specifics or how much of a tangible impact this has on the game because of preexisting problems etc.

   Oh, good, if we all ignore specifics and tangibility, we can turn this into some sort of vague philosophical debate. /sarcasm

On 8/18/2017 at 6:39 AM, Mudfam said:

It seems we could argue this indefinitely, but never see eye to eye. So be it. :/

   This is probably true, so if you are tired of arguing, I'm fine with calling it quits.

Edited August 24, 2017 by Yargami

[Mudfam]

3 hours ago, Yargami said:

   OK, maybe the term elite was not the right term. My point was that you can't just drop a game feature because it doesn't work in a few select instances and a few people ask for it. And I never said DE knows best, I said that they wanted the self-revives in here. They are the devs, and if they want something in here they definitely have the right to add it.

Drop a feature? This isn't a feature, it's replacing a much more important feature and bypassing the game's only failure mechanic. Everywhere, for the entire game, not in a few select instances. Going down is just no longer a thing, everyone now has a completely free Wukong's Defy built in 24/7. GFG.

Sure DE can do what they want, and here we are in the feedback forums to tell them what we think. If they want us to be invicible and unstoppable then it's no longer a game, it's just some interactive graphics with pointless undeserved achievements. RIP.

 

3 hours ago, Yargami said:

Yeah, there probably should be a little more HUD info about bleeding out and using revives for those players that don't know how the system works. But that's true of almost any change that is still relatively new. I mean, just look at something like damage 2.0. Is there any in-game explanation for how damage, armor, and elementals work? Not that I know of.

Good luck with that lol. More likely they'll never even fix G3 being broken. But who cares? Like everything else in the game they've become a complete joke. Only broken scaling and other broken BS mechanics had us cheating our way to victory. Now we need not even bother with lesser cheats, we're unstoppable by default.

 

3 hours ago, Yargami said:

   Again, I've been playing quite a bit since self-revives were added and I don't see this happening at all. And just to be clear, aside from Trials, I have been doing all the stuff we listed as "end game" earlier (mainly sorties and kuva floods). When a player goes down, the vast majority of the time at least one (but usually more) other player(s) goes rushing over to revive them, and the downed player waits and lets them do it, often thanking them. So I don't know who you've been playing with, but the random people I've been playing with haven't been leaving newbies in the dust, or ignoring downed players in general.

Sorry, but that seems naive. Yes, right now people still run to revive others, and sometimes whoever's down will actually let them. It's an old habit, but it will be replaced by the new. Reviving just doesn't make any sense any more, it's simply a waste of time and effort when everyone can instantly revive themselves. Maybe you don't believe this, I'm certain of it. Only time will tell.

 

3 hours ago, Yargami said:

   Oh, good, if we all ignore specifics and tangibility, we can turn this into some sort of vague philosophical debate. /sarcasm

You're just taking that out of context. My point is that no matter how insignificant someone else might believe the change to be, I would even in that light consider it a fundamentally bad and unjustifiable change.

 

3 hours ago, Yargami said:

   This is probably true, so if you ware tired of arguing, I'm fine with calling it quits.

Yeah, we're definitely not going to meet half way. The more I argue this the more I convince myself that this change is absurd. I'm finding it incredibly difficult to see how anyone could endorse this and not see it as murdering the game. On the surface it may still seem like Warframe, for now, but at its core it's more and more hollow, in my mind it's collapsing. There wasn't much keeping me playing already, this may have been the last straw.

I probably no longer represent Warframe's target audience. I like skill based games, I like challenging games even more. I really love games that completely deny me success until I git gud. Warframe's gameplay really appeals to me, but with zero incentive to perform well that appeal is lost. Sadly that's just the way of games now, everyone is always a winner! Without some possbility of failure there is no fun to be had for me.

[Chipputer]

A completely optional QoL feature is bad? Really?

I guess I should start making the, "Vacuum on all Sentinels is bad," topics and see what the reaction to that is.

[Mudfam]

2 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

A completely optional QoL feature is bad? Really?

I guess I should start making the, "Vacuum on all Sentinels is bad," topics and see what the reaction to that is.

Nice page 1 response that's already been laughed at for its complete absurdity. We're on page 3 FYI.

I think I'm done with these forums too.

[Chipputer]

Just now, Mudfam said:

Nice page 1 response that's already been laughed at for its complete absurdity. We're on page 3 FYI.

I think I'm done with these forums too.

I don't see how it's absurd.

One's stupid, the other's stupid. Stupid = stupid.

[Yargami]

33 minutes ago, Mudfam said:

I think I'm done with these forums too.

   Just because people disagree with you doesn't mean you can't post on the forums. If that were the case, no one would ever be able to post on the forums because somewhere out there someone disagrees with them. If you're worried about someone disliking you because of your ideas or opinions, that may happen in the world a lot but, like the disagreeing thing, you shouldn't just stop because of it. Us having different opinions doesn't make me dislike you or think that you shouldn't post. Everyone has their own opinions and I would never try to limit your ability to voice your ideas and opinions (I simply was saying why I disagree with them in this case). Or, to put it another way, if you went down in a match I would still revive you.

[Shockwave-]

On 8/16/2017 at 1:49 PM, Tsukinoki said:

 

So the multiplayer missions are now being treated the same as solo missions.
in fact solo players still have it easier as they don't have to wait 3 seconds like you do in multiplayer missions if you burn an instant revive.

Why weren't you complaining about how solo players can do all that?
And yet when its brought into group missions now you're all up in arms.

Because i rarely play solo. If solo players want a no skill, no failure, walking simulator,that's fine, didn't effect me. If I ever played solo then I would be complaining about solo. I didn't complain because that wasn't the game I ever played.

 

However it is not REALLY like solo. With solo you have no freind to complete the spy vault for you, or rescue the prisoner so they throw you that bone. But now this takes coop play and makes is essentially solo. In discourages one the main essences of coop play.

 

Let's take rescue - in coop play there are 3 hacks and 4 people - so even if 1 or 2 people go down you will make it. ALL 4 have to go down to fail. If even one is up then it is the same as solo play. But now it doesn't matter, the team doesn't need those other people. Two people get to the door first they will just go in, because even if they are both downed they will instant revive and keep going.

 

This is actually taking the 'team' out of team play. Making team play like solo play means you have 4 solo players playing on the same map - not TEAM play. I like team play. If you want it to work like solo play - play solo.

Revives have ones again taken a turn for the candy crush level of difficulty. From 4 per frame to 4 per mission to no down time, to no reason for endless, there is no reason i need a team. There is no reason to have them there except to boost my affinity while I play like I am solo.

 

THe revive mechanic is now gone. Every mission i play someone goes down they insta-revive before anyone can get to them. team play is dead.

[Shockwave-]

On 8/16/2017 at 2:42 PM, Yargami said:

   In my experience, having a 15 second timer on your death hasn't actually changed the gameplay of reckless players. I've been in plenty of matches where someone would charge into heavy crowds with a squishy or low level 'frame, die, revive 15 seconds later, and immediately charge back in and go down again. 15 seconds of sitting there isn't actually a meaningful punishment. On the flipside, there have been plenty of cases where someone has gone down and just had to sit there with nothing to do in a mission type that isn't timer sensitive. The 15 second timer isn't a penalty in most missions types, it's just annoying. So maybe if you were saying that after rescue timers have been set off or vault timers set off, or maybe all the time in sorties you shouldn't have self-revives I could be indifferent about it. But that would mean that the revive system would get very inconsistent and not very intuitive.  

Newsflash - being "annoying" is a penalty. It's the penalty for dying. Look at what you said - that people are still reckless and don't care and go down... but you want to LESSEN their penalty for doing so because its "annoying". There is literally no reason to have this feature in the game. In solo play you get to do this anyway. In team play you get the penalty for going down and have to wait. If people are still reckless then the penalty should be INCREASED - not done away with.

 

All this does is make people MORE willing to go off SOLO in a TEAM setting. They are more willing to run off away from everyone in survival, they are more likely to start rescues before everyone else is present, they are more likely to play solo on team missions. DE should be doing everything they can to make team missions need the team, and play as a team. If you want to go off alone you should be playing solo, not team.

[Yargami]

On 8/26/2017 at 10:01 AM, Shockwave- said:

Newsflash - being "annoying" is a penalty. It's the penalty for dying. Look at what you said - that people are still reckless and don't care and go down... but you want to LESSEN their penalty for doing so because its "annoying".

   Yes, being annoying is a penalty. But what I'm saying is that if the it doesn't change the player's gameplay then obviously it isn't actually working as a penalty. If bleedout is supposed to be a penalty and make players re-think they're style, then when a player runs off solo and goes down, it should cause them to change they're gameplay, right? I have never seen that happen. When a player runs off solo and goes down, even if they have to sit through the entire 15 second timer because they were too far away to revive in time, they just revive and run off solo again. You can't list something as the now removed penalty if it never worked as a penalty in the first place. If you were saying that there needs to be more penalty than that, then I could see the validity (although whether I would agree with it depends on what you were suggesting as a greater penalty). But you're just saying that this ruins an already useless penalty.

On 8/26/2017 at 10:01 AM, Shockwave- said:

In team play you get the penalty for going down and have to wait. If people are still reckless then the penalty should be INCREASED - not done away with.

 

All this does is make people MORE willing to go off SOLO in a TEAM setting. They are more willing to run off away from everyone in survival, they are more likely to start rescues before everyone else is present, they are more likely to play solo on team missions. DE should be doing everything they can to make team missions need the team, and play as a team. If you want to go off alone you should be playing solo, not team.

   No matter how much team play you try to encourage there will always be people that run off solo and start objectives early. I can see where in theory this change would make that worse, but in practice I'm not seeing that in game. What I'm seeing is that those people that already ran off solo before self-revives still run off solo. Most of the people that don't run off still wait for revives from other players. Basically, from what I've seen, there has not been an increase of those players that run off solo. Likewise, I think there have been at most twenty times since self-revives launched almost a month ago that I've gone to revive someone and they've self-revived even though I could have easily revived them. That's an average of less than one a day, and I do on average probably around two-three revives per mission. I don't have stats on how many missions I've done since August 4, but it's a lot.
   Don't get me wrong, I would love to see more team play. What I'm saying is that the self-revive doesn't seem to be making it any worse. It might not be making it better (as I said earlier, I'm kind of indifferent to self-revives), but it isn't making it noticeably worse either.