60 réponses à ce sujet

[stysiaq]

The RNG store was the most common thing to b***h about in ME3 and rightfully so. Unfortunately, when I doubted that you can design a worse store, there it is - DAMPster! 

 

Why DAMP store is worse than ME3 one? That's why:

 

• Unique items vary from single-digit levels to level 23, and low level uniques are often abysmal even when compared to high level commons/rares
• There's apparently no limit on items on any given type, thus you aren't guaranteed that you'll get an item you really want because you got the others
• Every weapon is salvageable, which means you can salvage a good item of yours by accident (I heard stories like that)
• Weapons are strictly tied to classes which means that if you even get a good weapon it won't necessarily be a weapon for a class you fancy, but for 2 other characters or 4 if it's a staff.
• From the looks of it there's a clear hierarchy of weapons with 1 or 2 'Holy Grails' in each category, which means that you can't be satisfied with your current gear unless you'll finally hunt down that white whale.
• Half of each chest are potions which can be bought separately and nobody uses them anyway.

Absolutelydisgusting.png

 

Now, the improvements that I have in mind would be:

 

• Keep the 15+ level uniques as uniques, make rares out of other items so players don't get their hopes up
• Add chests that would guarantee a unique item for an increased price - it still would be fair because you can have a superb rune as your uniqe, and after finding a bunch of them you don't need more, really.
• Add chests that would have just items in them - for example a 7-items-chest for 1200
• Add more weapons in DLCs, weapons that compare to the top-tier ones, don't increase the garbage pile.
• Add possibility to craft a good, upgradeable weapon that would have properties based off the used materials - I bet that most of the players have piles of unused materials right now
• Have the unique items lock the possibility to get another one of the same type unless it's a rune or this item is salvaged.

Thoughts?

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I don't know anything about chests, yet, since I've played about 6 games, so far, but given how annoying RNG was in ME 3, I'm probably going to be strongly agreeing with you before long.

[holdenagincourt]

There likely won't be sweeping, fundamental changes to items and the store (e.g. reclassifying most uniques out of the category), but I'm willing to guess that bigger and better packs will be added in the coming months, if ME3 is anything to go by. I would even say it's a given tbh.

 

Probably something like 2000 gold, 5 pots, 7 items, two guaranteed rare with an increased chance for a unique compared to normal packs.

 

Oh and there will definitely be more content ("weapons in DLCS...that compare to the top-tier ones"), because otherwise there's almost no way of generating or maintaining interest in the game.

[uzivatel]

There was never guaranteed N7 class item in ME3MP store packs.

[stysiaq]

There was never guaranteed N7 class item in ME3MP store packs.

 

except that you can't really compare N7s and purple items when a purple item can be so terrible or just be a rune or an accessory you don't need.

[uzivatel]

except that you can't really compare N7s and purple items when a purple item can be so terrible or just be a rune or an accessory you don't need.

 

Meanwhile N7 could be N7 Eagle ... or a Volus.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

There was never guaranteed N7 class item in ME3MP store packs.

 

No, but there were from Weekend Challenges, which meant most people maxed one or more N7 items long before they maxed an Ultra Rare (barring spending a lot of money.)

[uzivatel]

By N7 I meant Ultra Rares.

I did all the operations that could get us the original four N7 weapons, maxed some Ultra Rares, but never unlocked others. M-7, Punisher and Spitfire kept avoiding me until my final days of ME3MP.

[Sidney]

Even "useless" guns still were, in theory, useful because they took the Avenger from Avenger IV to Avenger V. Here, it get useless weapons and all they are good for is a scant amount of crafting materials which means each drop is largely useless.

[Cirvante]

 

• Have the unique items lock the possibility to get another one of the same type unless it's a rune or this item is salvaged.

Thoughts?

 

This please.

 

[knownastherat]

I have said it before and I will probably say it again in future as few seem to listen and understand:

 

RNG needs to be abandoned! The "solution" proposed is half assed. 

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I have said it before and I will probably say it again in future as few seem to listen and understand:

 

RNG needs to be abandoned! The "solution" proposed is half assed. 

 

It's better than doing nothing, and far more likely to be implemented than your recommendation of doing away with RNG entirely (due to the income related to the ability to sell players packs that do not actually provide them with anything - as unethical as that is.)

[knownastherat]

It's better than doing nothing ..

 

 

I do not propose doing nothing. 

 

 

and far more likely to be implemented than your recommendation of doing away with RNG entirely

 

In your opinion.

 

 

(due to the income related to the ability to sell players packs that do not actually provide them with anything - as unethical as that is.)

 

So assuming this is close to reality. You guys are alright with it? Like .. yeah its unethical, its scam, but whatever. Scam me less, please. This is my solution?

 

This is not how I operate. It is unacceptable.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I do not propose doing nothing. 

 

 

In your opinion.

 

 

So assuming this is close to reality. You guys are alright with it? Like .. yeah its unethical, its scam, but whatever. Scam me less, please. This is my solution?

 

This is not how I operate. It is unacceptable.

 

1 - I didn't say you did. In fact, in my next sentence (which you failed to quote until after removing it from context) I acknowledge your proposal.

 

2 - You can call it my opinion if you want, but if you knew anything about the industry, you'd be more likely to call it reality, as well.

 

3 - How did you get the impression that something I refer to as "unethical," and support improving, is something that I'm alright with?

 

If it is unacceptable to you, then don't buy the packs with real money. Announcing that they have to change their Store system because it is unacceptable is far less likely to produce results than actually refusing to spend money on that system.

 

In the meantime, people who are suggesting compromises are making a legitimate effort to improve the existing system. Criticizing their ideas won't get you any closer to your goal.

[lpconfig]

This please.

 

  If you could give me one of those, I would be much obliged.

[knownastherat]

Is it still holidays or can I be blunt? ;)

 

I think I will try to do better than that. Not to buy their next game if they will have RNG store. For the time being, I am left with pointing out flaws and proposing changes. The change suggested is half assed -  it does not solve "RNG problem" just makes it less idiotic and unethical -  which in my opinion is not good enough. 

 

Whether you do know anything about the industry or not is irrelevant until you will support you claims with evidence. 

 

 is far more likely to be implemented than

 

 

is a claim. Can you support it or all you have is your expertise in the industry I am to believe in?

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

Is it still holidays or can I be blunt?

 

I don't think winkey smiley means what you think it means.

 

 

Whether you do know anything about the industry or not is irrelevant until you will support you claims with evidence. 

 

 

is a claim. Can you support it or all you have is your expertise in the industry I am to believe in?

 

I'm not sure I understand why I have to support anything I said with evidence, when you don't.

 

But I'll offer this: The Store was one of the most complained about aspects of ME 3 MP, and they repeated the RNG model when they made their next MP, for DA:I.

 

Since they did so in spite of people complaining, my conclusion is that complaining had little to no impact on the decision, and will continue to have little impact.

 

By contrast, if no one had spent money on packs, I doubt they would have repeated the model. This is based on simple economic theory - companies don't repeat a business model if it fails to produce profits.

[Stinja]

 

• Have the unique items lock the possibility to get another one of the same type unless it's a rune or this item is salvaged.

Thoughts?

 

If nothing else, this.

 

I mean the main definition of "unique" means singular, so really they should not appear twice, if you already have one.

 

 

http://dictionary.re...m/browse/unique

 

unique

[yoo-neek] Spell Syllables

 

1.

existing as the only one or as the sole example;single; solitary in type or characteristics:

a unique copy of an ancient manuscript.

 

 

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/unique

• (not comparable) Being the only one of its kind; unequaled, unparalleled or unmatched.  [quotations ▼]

 

 

http://www.merriam-w...ctionary/unique

 

:  being the only one :  sole <his unique concern was his own comfort> <I can't walk away with a unique copy. Suppose I lost it? — Kingsley Amis> <the unique factorization of a number into prime factors>

 

 

http://www.oxforddic.../english/unique

unique Line breaks: unique

Pronunciation: /juːˈniːk 

  

Definition of unique in English: ADJECTIVE

1Being the only one of its kind; unlike anything else:the situation was unique in British politicsoriginal and unique designs

[Miclotov]

I agree with OP for the most parts. The ME 3 store was mostly ok in my book, but here we have one layer of rng too many. Crafting for multiplayer sure is a nice idea, but for that I would prefer to buy chests with crafting materials only.

[lpconfig]

I don't think winkey smiley means what you think it means.

 

Inconceivable!

[Saboteur-6]

Folks the RNG store is here to stay, might as well get used to. The reason loot distribution feels so wonky right now is that they pretty much just dumped the SP loot pool into the MP and called it a day. Problems obviously arise with progression since things like character levels and level requirements were balanced to function in the SP system, not the MP. So that solid lvl 12 Unique Greatxe that'd you use in SP looks less shiny next to a lvl 23 common.

Hopefully the MP loot table is expanded on significantly but it can't be chests with guaranteed Uniques.

Weekend "Ultra Rares" will come but be in the form of Schematics that you'll have to craft.

[knownastherat]

I don't think winkey smiley means what you think it means.

 

 

 

I'm not sure I understand why I have to support anything I said with evidence, when you don't.

 

But I'll offer this: The Store was one of the most complained about aspects of ME 3 MP, and they repeated the RNG model when they made their next MP, for DA:I.

 

Since they did so in spite of people complaining, my prediction is that complaining had little to no impact on the decision, and will continue to have little impact.

 

By contrast, if no one had spent money on packs, I doubt they would have repeated the model. This is based on simple economic theory - companies don't repeat a business model if it fails to produce profits.

 

Do I guess correctly you are willing to educate me on what the smiley means? ;)

 

It is simple. You made claim so you ought to support it. I will not quote the claim in question again to which my initial response was: In your opinion, to which you replied: If you knew anything about.. Well, educate me about the industry then. Show me the studies suggesting what kind of micro-transaction model are developers more likely to implement. Or better yet, point me to interview with Bioware/EA official saying something like that. I do not deny I could be ignorant. Feel free to help me.

 

The only claim I made was regarding "half assed suggestion" simply referring to the fact that the root of the problem, RNG store you called unethical, remains.

[SpaceV3gan]

There should be a pack that gives you at the very least guaranteed Rares, with a chance of Unique. Just like the Premium Spectre Pack for example, which may not give you Ultra Rares (not often), but will always give you two Rares that basically translates into Characters and Weapons unlock, so that you have guaranteed progression whenever you buy a pack.

[knownastherat]

lol no there should be what players need  want.

 

And if you and others insist, for reasons beyond my comprehension, on having "random factor" (which is not random at all) when it comes to gear then at least have the decency to define what "Rare", "Unique" and "Chance" is. Scam is dishonest scheme, whether intentional or not.  What people understand under the words mentioned differs greatly so do their expectations from the product offered. Hence so many negative remarks regarding the system. People are not getting what they need, what they expected and paid for. This needs to, in my opinion, stop. No compromise because there is no reason for one. System without RNG would allow for progression and fun just as good as RNG without the RNG frustration and dishonesty. 

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

Do I guess correctly you are willing to educate me on what the smiley means?

 

It is simple. You made claim so you ought to support it. I will not quote the claim in question again to which my initial response was: In your opinion, to which you replied: If you knew anything about.. Well, educate me about the industry then. Show me the studies suggesting what kind of micro-transaction model are developers more likely to implement. Or better yet, point me to interview with Bioware/EA official saying something like that. I do not deny I could be ignorant. Feel free to help me.

 

The only claim I made was regarding "half assed suggestion" simply referring to the fact that the root of the problem, RNG store you called unethical, remains.

 

You made a prediction, as well, but you feel no need to support it with evidence. You again claim the points that I make are irrelevant without ever bothering to offer a reason why.

 

I offered an explanation for my prediction, which you ignored/rejected out of hand, repeatedly, and insist on bringing back the same out of context quote.

 

I made a prediction based on the history of the industry. It was not a claim, it was a prediction. I used the phrase "more likely." There was no implication of anything guaranteed about it.

 

If you were at all interested in visiting the issue for real, you would have offered something more to the conversation by now.

 

You can have the last word to your heart's content.