34 replies to this topic

[Ghogiel]

Warfarm is a RNG wonderland.


It is actually better than MWO in many ways, but how can you not get bored of those mission types against bot AI after the umpteenth time grinding it in a row. Last I heard they were doing something about that to vary the gameplay, so you aren't stuck doing AW intercept for 9hrs to get an elytron wing BP or whatever. Anyway I kinda like WF, but it's a no life loser grind type game that is mildy interesting at times.

Edited by Ghogiel, 27 November 2015 - 06:08 AM.

[El Bandito]

Spr1ggan, on 26 November 2015 - 03:56 PM, said:

Tried Warframe once, one of the most boring games i have ever played.

Then again i find all co-op games to be pointless and boring.

The point is to have fun. I remember the tons of fun I had playing L4D2.

[QuulDrah]

Hehehe, funny. I just came the other way...
Played Warframe for nearly a thousand hours before finding MWO... haven't looked back since.

You can probably guess, that I have few bad things to say about a game I played for so long(*), but yeah, I like MWO better.

--
(*): actually, I have lots of bad stuff to say, but mostly minor nitpickings about the GUI, not the gameplay.

[DjPush]

I won't play it because.... It ain't giant stompy robots with freakin laser beams!

Edited by DjPush, 27 November 2015 - 08:16 AM.

[AssaultPig]

I tried warframe, didn't have a good time with it

every low level map I joined seemed to have at least one high level/gear/whatever player who was just there to blast through (farming something or other I assume.) I'd frequently not even see mobs. Even when this didn't happen, combat seemed to be pretty rote.

'horde mode' shooters can be fun (payday, killing floor, ME3 multiplayer), but warframe I thought kinda missed the mark

[Jon Gotham]

KHETTI, on 26 November 2015 - 03:56 PM, said:

AW is a rather nice looking game, but jesus its boring.

It' actually the same as this, but with tanks instead of robots-although with actual functioning role warfare. Shock and horror!
Though the lure for me is getting to play actual British vehicles that perform somewhere enar at their actual level, unlike WoT.....a lot of anti Brit BS out there....

[Revis Volek]

WarFrame was so bad in the beginning that they gave it away to PS4 owners for free....


Its still not that great of a game IMO, its fun but nothing to write home about.

[KHETTI]

kamiko kross, on 27 November 2015 - 10:09 AM, said:

It' actually the same as this, but with tanks instead of robots-although with actual functioning role warfare. Shock and horror!
Though the lure for me is getting to play actual British vehicles that perform somewhere enar at their actual level, unlike WoT.....a lot of anti Brit BS out there....

LOL AW is nothing like MWO, not even close, and by role warfare you mean, high tier MBTs being the only viable option.
Yeah i play AW for the Brit vehicles too .

[Palor]

I had a lot of fun with Warframe, I think i have logged over 1,000 hours on that game over the years.

[Naelbis]

PGI tried to model MWO after WoT and failed miserably. More specifically, they failed to make in game purchases for anything other than mech packs compelling enough that most players would pay it. I was willing to pay for in-game camo in WoT because it gave a small in-game advantage, MWO camo is just aesthetics. XP conversion was the same, worth paying for in WoT for the little bit of an edge that higher lvl crew gave but no real drive to do it in MWO due to the meager benefit. Premium tanks were the big purchases for the increased crew EXP gain and credit bonus, both of which were huge time savers thanks to the exponential crew exp curve and repair/rearm mechanic. Running anything over Teir 8 without a prem tank to grind credits with would drain your coffers quick unless you were good enough to consistently score super high. The point being that WoT found a way to encourage players to spend gold in game, while PGI basically has mech packs. If they could flesh out some other mechanics to make MC worth spending I would probably spend way more money on this game than I do.

[FupDup]

Naelbis, on 27 November 2015 - 12:00 PM, said:

PGI tried to model MWO after WoT and failed miserably. More specifically, they failed to make in game purchases for anything other than mech packs compelling enough that most players would pay it. I was willing to pay for in-game camo in WoT because it gave a small in-game advantage, MWO camo is just aesthetics. XP conversion was the same, worth paying for in WoT for the little bit of an edge that higher lvl crew gave but no real drive to do it in MWO due to the meager benefit. Premium tanks were the big purchases for the increased crew EXP gain and credit bonus, both of which were huge time savers thanks to the exponential crew exp curve and repair/rearm mechanic. Running anything over Teir 8 without a prem tank to grind credits with would drain your coffers quick unless you were good enough to consistently score super high. The point being that WoT found a way to encourage players to spend gold in game, while PGI basically has mech packs. If they could flesh out some other mechanics to make MC worth spending I would probably spend way more money on this game than I do.

That doesn't sound like a failure on MWO's part, that sounds like a success.

Paying money to become directly more powerful than other players is a toxic, garbage mechanic that is destroying the gaming industry.

WoT should not be used as the baseline for video game financial models; if anything it might even make a good example of how to NOT monetize a game.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

FupDup, on 27 November 2015 - 12:20 PM, said:

That doesn't sound like a failure on MWO's part, that sounds like a success.

Paying money to become directly more powerful than other players is a toxic, garbage mechanic that is destroying the gaming industry.

WoT should not be used as the baseline for video game financial models; if anything it might even make a good example of how to NOT monetize a game.

I concur, I remember when WoT had favorable matching for their premium tanks and players running premium time. You'd be a Tier 3 and all the Tier 5's would be premium tanks there to club seals with gold ammo and premium time. Hell, I remember when I still played and finally bought a premium tank, it was a Tier 6 german (the Schmalturm) and I was consistently fighting Tier 4 and 5 tanks and the occasional Tier 6 premium.

Needless to say, the outcry was substantial and they finally pulled it overtly (players have gathered over thousand of games that Russian tanks and certain nations premiums still have favored matchmaker, but it's not explicitly stated by the company which neither confirms nor denies the claims). Now, my Schmalturm is, around 75% of the time, the lowly Tier 6 seal to be clubbed by all the Russian Tier 8s.

[Naelbis]

FupDup, on 27 November 2015 - 12:20 PM, said:

That doesn't sound like a failure on MWO's part, that sounds like a success.

Paying money to become directly more powerful than other players is a toxic, garbage mechanic that is destroying the gaming industry.

WoT should not be used as the baseline for video game financial models; if anything it might even make a good example of how to NOT monetize a game.

F2P is a BS model anyway and makes people feel entitled to other people's work for nothing. It shouldn't even be a thing. That being said, if you have played WoT you would know that everything I was paying for could be had for credits (prem tanks/XP conversion excepted). Camo is credit purchasable, it just isn't permanent like gold camo is. XP conversion is a time saver, nothing more. Everything you pay real money for is a convenience, people pay it because it is worth the time savings. Which is how a F2P SHOULD be monetized, because people are more likely to spend money to avoid a time sink than they are on superficial cosmetics.

[Revis Volek]

Naelbis, on 27 November 2015 - 12:56 PM, said:

F2P is a BS model anyway and makes people feel entitled to other people's work for nothing. It shouldn't even be a thing. That being said, if you have played WoT you would know that everything I was paying for could be had for credits (prem tanks/XP conversion excepted). Camo is credit purchasable, it just isn't permanent like gold camo is. XP conversion is a time saver, nothing more. Everything you pay real money for is a convenience, people pay it because it is worth the time savings. Which is how a F2P SHOULD be monetized, because people are more likely to spend money to avoid a time sink than they are on superficial cosmetics.

Yea...because no one ever took someone else's work and ran with to make things better...(religion anyone)

F2p is not BS its the Micro Transaction stuff and whales that make it seem like BS and that only matter if your game is p2w. If its just content, skins, different vehicles with no OP factor or p2w factor involved then its a good business model and a money making one at that.

So where does PGI fit into this BS equation you created? Because you know they offer things to cut down the grind...like EVERY MECH PACK and we have XP conversion here as well.

Edited by DarthRevis, 27 November 2015 - 01:23 PM.

[Alex Morgaine]

Naelbis, on 27 November 2015 - 12:00 PM, said:

PGI tried to model MWO after WoT and failed miserably. More specifically, they failed to make in game purchases for anything other than mech packs compelling enough that most players would pay it. I was willing to pay for in-game camo in WoT because it gave a small in-game advantage, MWO camo is just aesthetics. XP conversion was the same, worth paying for in WoT for the little bit of an edge that higher lvl crew gave but no real drive to do it in MWO due to the meager benefit. Premium tanks were the big purchases for the increased crew EXP gain and credit bonus, both of which were huge time savers thanks to the exponential crew exp curve and repair/rearm mechanic. Running anything over Teir 8 without a prem tank to grind credits with would drain your coffers quick unless you were good enough to consistently score super high. The point being that WoT found a way to encourage players to spend gold in game, while PGI basically has mech packs. If they could flesh out some other mechanics to make MC worth spending I would probably spend way more money on this game than I do.

Got a thunderbolt 9s way back and put a one shot on it. I now own 2 more chassis... with no camo and just colors I got on sale or with the resistance pack. The camo options just don't feel worth it any more.
The fact they tend to look blobby(1k res and in some cases lower yay...) isnt helping. I'd rather no armor damage effects aside from blown off parts, at least camo would be worth it for dieing in style instead of looking like Misery after running by a machine gun barrage for .1 damage all over.

Edited by Frosty Brand, 28 November 2015 - 06:02 PM.