399 réponses à ce sujet

[Malanek]

_only1biggs_ wrote...

Bryan Johnson wrote...

_only1biggs_ wrote...

my point had nothing to do with balance. forget that. my concern is that bryan johnsons statement of "there is no unfair advantage, it's a co-op game", completely dumps on the idea of their being balance in the game.
i don't care either way about balance as i will play whatever character/weapon i feel like. just because alot of people chose to play THEIR game how THEY wanted, everyone says "nerf this" and "nerf that".

Your point stems from the singular argument that the only reason to do balance changes is in result to being fair/unfair. Just like I can use the same argument to say that we should half all weapon and power damage, since it is fair.

You also made the statement it is the person's game to do with as they please, while I am not going to get into this huge debate, but that is also not true.

wow, firstly, i didn't make a point about balance changes. i called into question your, "it's a co-op game, there's no unfair advantage" remark. if that's the case, then why bother with "nerfing" powerful weapons? i'm not saying anything about fair/unfair, you're putting words in mouth.

Nerfing powerful weapons IS a balance change. It's not done, or not only done, because Bob has it and can get more points than Jim. It is done, or also done, because the whole game becomes too easy for Bob and Jim because the enemies die too quickly.

[jlee375]

_only1biggs_ wrote...

Bryan Johnson wrote...

_only1biggs_ wrote...

my point had nothing to do with balance. forget that. my concern is that bryan johnsons statement of "there is no unfair advantage, it's a co-op game", completely dumps on the idea of their being balance in the game.
i don't care either way about balance as i will play whatever character/weapon i feel like. just because alot of people chose to play THEIR game how THEY wanted, everyone says "nerf this" and "nerf that".

Your point stems from the singular argument that the only reason to do balance changes is in result to being fair/unfair. Just like I can use the same argument to say that we should half all weapon and power damage, since it is fair.

You also made the statement it is the person's game to do with as they please, while I am not going to get into this huge debate, but that is also not true.

wow, firstly, i didn't make a point about balance changes. i called into question your, "it's a co-op game, there's no unfair advantage" remark. if that's the case, then why bother with "nerfing" powerful weapons? i'm not saying anything about fair/unfair, you're putting words in mouth.

moreover, it is the persons game to do with as they please. if someone wants to ONLY use a Geth Infiltrator, that is their choice to do so; "they paid for the game, they can play it how they wish".

nice attempt at trying to twist my words, but you've just made yourself look incredibly stupid, at least to the enlightened

You did make a point about balance, all you have been talking about is balance. Nerfing/Buffing falls under the category of balance. 

And actually, the game is the property of Bioware and EA to some extent. Though we have some latitude in how we use it, some aspects of it are not subject to debate. 

Also, why is it so difficult to be civil? Has Bryan said anything antagonistic to you? He was merely participating in our discussion. Have some manners. 

Modifié par jlee375, 14 février 2013 - 09:10 .

[Shampoohorn]

_only1biggs_ wrote...
you've just made yourself look incredibly stupid, at least to the enlightened

@ biggs: No class.  None at all.

[DragonRacer]

Shampoohorn wrote...

_only1biggs_ wrote...
you've just made yourself look incredibly stupid, at least to the enlightened

@ biggs: No class.  None at all.

Exactly. As soon as one starts throwing insults, the discussion is over. And I'd hardly call his argument "enlightened".

[HELLHOUND_ROCKO]

so, BroJo still finds it "not unfair" that a pre-orderer like me gets for ever cap-penalized for having played the single player mode first and twice before starting with the multiplayer mode - in the good will thinking that the EA logo on the game stands for decent game companys work where redicolous bullsh** like this either never happens or at least gets fixed afterwards
- not knowing by then that i do not deal with a decent game company here - but instead with Bioware and their first little multiplayer experiment!

i initially woke up on valentines day to "see how much bioware loves us" with officiall DLC-announcement and such, so i can go further happy gaming ME3-MP - but instead of DLC-announcement i found this present-box with my name on it after "from Bioware", with nothing but this piece of stinking sh** in it - i am so frustrated about this treatment,
i am outta here for now, going to play stupid "shoot each other" with generation violence porn kids that do not know what they are doing either way in BF3 instead of letting me anger further by getting serious treated like this from BW today.

[N172]

Malanek999 wrote...

You can't remove them form those who have them because they have either earned or even paid for them.

Wrong, they did not earn or pay for them, they spent earned credits or money on veteran and spectre packs, back then those where the two packages that contained those upgrades.

Those packs contained slots, the following could contain a consumable upgrade:
- 1 new uncommon/rare unlock or an already maxed uncommon/rare kit (veteran pack)
- 1 new rare/ultra-rare unlock or an already maxed rare kit (spectre pack)

They did nothing to "earn" more cobras/ops/medigel/ammo than anyone else, they were just lucky.
Removing this advantage and grand them a free SP for each removed cobra/ops/medigel/ammo capacity upgrade whould be generous towards them.

[Computron2000]

HELLHOUND_ROCKO wrote...
i am outta here for now, going to play stupid "shoot each other" with generation violence porn kids that do not know what they are doing either way in BF3 instead of letting me anger further by getting serious treated like this from BW today.

Bye!

[ryoldschool]

DragonRacer wrote...

Shampoohorn wrote...

_only1biggs_ wrote...
you've just made yourself look incredibly stupid, at least to the enlightened

@ biggs: No class.  None at all.

Exactly. As soon as one starts throwing insults, the discussion is over. And I'd hardly call his argument "enlightened".

[jm2207]

Cyonan wrote...

jm2207 wrote...

I have no idea how often I run into players with 10. They might only use 5, but the fact that they have 5 in reserve almost certainly affects their gameplay. 

It is not theoretically unfair because it exists and IS unfair.

What do I want them to do? Either one. Or admit it's unfair.

It's theoretical because you don't even know if you've played with a player who had 10 missiles. You're complaining on the off chance that you might play with one, and that would be unfair to you.

They aren't going to trivialize the game by giving us 13 missiles each, and it's just as unfair to take away those missles from the people who got them. Admitting it's unfair wouldn't actually do anything unless they took some kind of action around it.

It is not theoretical. The fact is people with 10 missiles, et al, exist and that is unfair and not theoretical. Whether I play with them or not has nothing to do with that categorization.

If the game would be trivialized by giving us 10+3 then it already is for the people who have it. By not taking them away they are allowing it to remain so. It's not unfair to balance, and taking them away would be doing just that. 

[stromguard555]

Balancing weapons and balancing players are two different things. "Nerfing" weapons from their shipped state is necessary because play-testing can only reveal a portion of the uses for the weapon/ability/kit. Game design is a scientific process and includes vast amounts of trial and error.

Think of each weapon as a hypothesis. They release their hypothesis to be tested (by the MP community), and gather the results. They then adjust their hypothesis based on their findings to accommodate unexpected results. This process continues until the hypothesis expresses exactly what they wanted. That is the "balanced" weapon and that is what we get to use.

And BroJo was exactly right to say that the game we play is a service offered by Bioware. 1) we played for the SP and got the MP as a bonus. 2) MP requires an online pass - a permit, to use the product. That permit can be revoked for what ever reason Bioware chooses, be it a just reason or not. That online pass is like your drivers license. You can drive however you want but your ability to drive can be revoked at any time for any reason. It is the same principle as MP.

[Computron2000]

N172 wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

You can't remove them form those who have them because they have either earned or even paid for them.

Wrong, they did not earn or pay for them, they spent earned credits or money on veteran and spectre packs, back then those where the two packages that contained those upgrades.

Those packs contained slots, the following could contain a consumable upgrade:
- 1 new uncommon/rare unlock or an already maxed uncommon/rare kit (veteran pack)
- 1 new rare/ultra-rare unlock or an already maxed rare kit (spectre pack)

They did nothing to "earn" more cobras/ops/medigel/ammo than anyone else, they were just lucky.
Removing this advantage and grand them a free SP for each removed cobra/ops/medigel/ammo capacity upgrade whould be generous towards them.

wait, so if you bought a TV that came with a free video cam for the first 100 people who drew a winning ticket in a luck draw and a hambuger for everyone else, then your video cam was taken back and you were given a hambuger, that would be generous to those who drew the winning ticket?

[BridgeBurner]

Computron2000 wrote...

N172 wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

You can't remove them form those who have them because they have either earned or even paid for them.

Wrong, they did not earn or pay for them, they spent earned credits or money on veteran and spectre packs, back then those where the two packages that contained those upgrades.

Those packs contained slots, the following could contain a consumable upgrade:
- 1 new uncommon/rare unlock or an already maxed uncommon/rare kit (veteran pack)
- 1 new rare/ultra-rare unlock or an already maxed rare kit (spectre pack)

They did nothing to "earn" more cobras/ops/medigel/ammo than anyone else, they were just lucky.
Removing this advantage and grand them a free SP for each removed cobra/ops/medigel/ammo capacity upgrade whould be generous towards them.

wait, so if you bought a TV that came with a free video cam for the first 100 people who drew a winning ticket in a luck draw and a hambuger for everyone else, then your video cam was taken back and you were given a hambuger, that would be generous to those who drew the winning ticket?

I like hamburgers...

[Computron2000]

_only1biggs_ wrote...

i didn't insult anyone. but well done everyone for jumping in there, enjoy your brown noses.

again, EVERYONE has missed the point. johnson made a silly mistake and now i'm the one getting buried because i shined a light on it.

i'm out

No youi're getting buried because a lot of people aren't morons. They do know how to read "shipped state" and understand you're referring to balance changes. Those that don't will likely think what you mean by nerf and yes that means balance changes.

Your entire self congratulations on being enlightened only made it look more stupid

[tungstenKestrel]

If I use more than 4 of any equipment, I was doing terrible and another 5 wouldn't save me.

[Malanek]

N172 wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

You can't remove them form those who have them because they have either earned or even paid for them.

Wrong, they did not earn or pay for them, they spent earned credits or money on veteran and spectre packs, back then those where the two packages that contained those upgrades.

Those packs contained slots, the following could contain a consumable upgrade:
- 1 new uncommon/rare unlock or an already maxed uncommon/rare kit (veteran pack)
- 1 new rare/ultra-rare unlock or an already maxed rare kit (spectre pack)

They did nothing to "earn" more cobras/ops/medigel/ammo than anyone else, they were just lucky.
Removing this advantage and grand them a free SP for each removed cobra/ops/medigel/ammo capacity upgrade whould be generous towards them.

They "earned" them by playing a lot. Just as you "earn" stuff by playing now. Yes, they were lucky, but they still "earned" it the same as everyone else has done since then. Taking away players inventory is a recipe for disaster and would possibly even be against the law in some countries.

Modifié par Malanek999, 14 février 2013 - 09:23 .

[FeralJester616]

@ those with a bad case of "Butthurt"

Get off BroJo's back, it's hardly his fault.
End of the day; You snooze, you loose. Period.
Deal with it.

I for one do not have the 10 cap on anything and I don't want it. Nor do I really want anyone with it in my games.
Having it would make the game boring, as it stands the game is a challenge and that is how it should stay.
Yes, it is more challenging than I remember at the beginning and that's fine. Things change, they evolve. So grow the hell up and get on with it or get off the forums and the hell out of the game.

[Malanek]

tungstenKestrel wrote...

If I use more than 4 of any equipment, I was doing terrible and another 5 wouldn't save me.

People are complaining because it can shave minutes off a speedrun.

[Parallax Demon]

Does it really matter for the coop games? Not really; using more rockets only improves the chance of an extraction, so everyone wins (unless those who care about the scoreboard).

Making videos about a speedrun in which you use more than eight rockets; please don't post them anymore! Don't care about your kit and the weapons you used, as you made it yourself easier by nuking a couple of spawns more than 99% of the playerbase can do.

[jlee375]

Malanek999 wrote...

They "earned" them by playing a lot. Just as you "earn" stuff by playing now. Yes, they were lucky, but they still "earned" it the same as everyone else has done since then.

Exactly, it was a limited promotion/lottery for those who started playing early. It is not unfair, it is not unbalanced, and is incredibly meaningless in the long run. 

[tMc Tallgeese]

Did this get all of the fuss started?


Ryncol Light Presents

Real Beings of Genius

Today we salute you Mr. Scoreboard Guy.

[MR. SCOREBOARD GUY]

While most people are just playing a game, you are playing for greatness.

[GOTTA BE NUMBER ONE!]

Uh oh, looks like that Level 12 noob just got past you. Being number two just won't do.

[WAM BAM THANK YOU MA'AM]

Couple of missiles and suicide runs makes it all better. So what if you had to spend all your equipment to get back to one, you're the top gun on this board.

So crack open a keg of Ryncol Light you top tier point scrambler because what's the point of sharing points, if you're not the one sharing the most.

[THIS ONE'S ON ME FELLAS]

[jm2207]

tungstenKestrel wrote...

If I use more than 4 of any equipment, I was doing terrible and another 5 wouldn't save me.

So you've never been out of consumable and could have used another one? Wow. Impressive.

[Cyonan]

jm2207 wrote...

It is not theoretical. The fact is people with 10 missiles, et al, exist and that is unfair and not theoretical. Whether I play with them or not has nothing to do with that categorization.

If the game would be trivialized by giving us 10+3 then it already is for the people who have it. By not taking them away they are allowing it to remain so. It's not unfair to balance, and taking them away would be doing just that. 

It's theoretical that you're ever playing with them, which is my point. There are so few of them that this all comes off as complaining for the sake of complaining.

It would be trivialized by everybody having 13 missiles which results in 20 extra missiles per game. 1 player results in 5. Yes you could theoretically get 4 people together but that happens so incredibly little(if it even has happened at all) that actually coding a system to prevent this is just one massive waste of resources.

[TtlDstruction]

I can't remember the last time I used 5 rockets in one game. In fact I can say I know for certain I've never wiped in any game and thought to myself "Gee, if I just had 5 more rockets!" If you gave me 10-13 well, it would just be that many more that went unused.

[DragonRacer]

HELLHOUND_ROCKO wrote...

so, BroJo still finds it "not unfair" that a pre-orderer like me gets for ever cap-penalized for having played the single player mode first and twice before starting with the multiplayer mode - in the good will thinking that the EA logo on the game stands for decent game companys work where redicolous bullsh** like this either never happens or at least gets fixed afterwards
- not knowing by then that i do not deal with a decent game company here - but instead with Bioware and their first little multiplayer experiment!

i initially woke up on valentines day to "see how much bioware loves us" with officiall DLC-announcement and such, so i can go further happy gaming ME3-MP - but instead of DLC-announcement i found this present-box with my name on it after "from Bioware", with nothing but this piece of stinking sh** in it - i am so frustrated about this treatment,
i am outta here for now, going to play stupid "shoot each other" with generation violence porn kids that do not know what they are doing either way in BF3 instead of letting me anger further by getting serious treated like this from BW today.

Hey, Hellhound -

Consider this, fellow PS3 player.

For the first three operations, PS3 players could not participate because of something or other between BioWare and Sony. So, guess what? That was two commendation packs (the third operation gave no commendation packs) that we initially didn't get. We got to sit here and watch the XBox and PC players have all the fun.

Guess what happened? This, as you call it, "indecent" game company, once they finally were able to allow us to participate, then GAVE EVERY SINGLE PS3 PLAYER THE TWO COMMENDATION PACKS FROM THOSE MISSED OPERATIONS.

They didn't have to do that. In fact, a bunch of XBox and PC players gave BioWare a bunch of grief because they felt we didn't earn those commendation packs.

So, don't you even DARE come in here with that sort of argument, sir. I suggest you curb your attitude.

Modifié par DragonRacer, 14 février 2013 - 09:26 .