battlewraith

Is it any good? Do the people that have played it feel that it’s worth supporting?

The whole point of Homecoming is to bring back the game AND continue development. Which is why we have a suggestions forum and engage in these conversations. The shivans and nukes are a funny example. In a sense they are free, because they were content set within the context of an open PvP zone. The intent was to bring players into the zone, where they would fight each other in order to achieve the objectives and get the desired reward. If people can routinely go there and get the rewards without interacting with anyone from the opposite side, then the primary challenge in earning the reward has been skipped. And yet the sky did not fall. The game did not go shrieking down the slippery slope of ruin.

I do skip them, generally speaking. And when I don’t, the “real effort” amounts to moving a character to locations that are memorized or marked on a map in order to get “exploration” badges. Or clicking on history plaques, the contents of which were first introduced in what, 2004? Moreover, the “don’t like it, don’t do it” argument can be applied to anything. Don’t like that a melee set underperforms? Don’t play it. Don’t like that certain ATs are less favored in hard content? Don’t play them. Don’t like that certain areas of the game are underpopulated (eg. redside)? Just don’t play there. It’s a recipe for stagnation that favors risk-averse players that are satisfied with what they have and don’t want change.

They are a trivial matter. It’s just a repetitive, tedious activity that people have been doing for years. There’s nothing particularly difficult about it. As for the power creep argument—the game is easy, whether they make a change like this or not. People that have a problem with this can play harder content or skip the accolades if they think it’s a big deal.

Tweaking the requirements of the accolades to make them less tedious is, imo, an incremental adjustment. It does nothing to change the strength of the accolades or their influence on gameplay.

The game is not some unchanging platonic ideal. It’s gone through various phases of development and continues to be altered. The gist of development is to make it fun and appealing presumably to a wide variety of players. The notion that certain legacy things have some sort of perfect balance and therefore should not be adjusted is silly. It’s a dogmatism that could actually cost the game players in the wider view of things.

It’s just crazy to me. The last three games I played all have vastly better graphics than this and didn’t recommend that much. Google came up with some minimum specs for this game that are lower, but they aren’t listed on the company’s info page. I think I’d probably have to buy a new computer to run those recommended specs.

Everyone is rightly focused on price, but damn that’s a lot of RAM for a game that looks like that. Seems very risky to drop enough money for a AAA game on something that appears very poorly optimized.

Regardless of what the next suggestion is, the general response will be the same. Too many oldsters enchanted with the repetitive tedium that was designed to keep them paying$15 a month. Changing that would be like rearranging the furniture at the retirement home. If people are only running Numina to get the accolade, isn’t the real problem that Numina isn’t appealing on it’s own? Is linking rewards that people want to content they don’t like good game design? I think the accolades were introduced at a time when people were new to the game and hungry for content. Killing various enemies would just normally happen in the course of playing. Clicking a couple extra boxes to get an accolade was not a big deal. It’s 20 years later. There’s nothing novel or challenging about doing this for the hundredth time. People have pointed out that the accolades and their constituent parts are optional. If that’s the case, then there’s no harm in making it less of a blatant time sink. The net result would probably be more people doing it, or pursuing it on more alts.

Looks like Borderlands 4 is going to have some stiff competition.

I made a couple comments disagreeing with Troo. If it bothers you so much, put me on ignore. You seem to want attention, then you complain when I give it to you. Make up your mind Boo 😃

Here we go again, I’ll try to break it down for you. The subject of this thread is the acquisition of accolades. Troo said that the introduction of “fake-accolades” for pvp didn’t pan out, and that we could “surmise” the same thing happening in pve if they started giving such awards away. There is no case to be made that pvpers stopped playing the game because of the introduction of these accolades. None. The pvp community had long wanted a change like this and it was a rare instance where they got something they wanted. The fact that there may be less pvpers now, after that change, is a correlation. One QOL change is not going to make or break a game mode. The thought that this change, if it was a good one, would flood the arena and zones with new players is also a stupid. Then in his response to my post, Troo does more of the same—there seems to be fewer pvpers after this change, etc. And then he does his over generalized logic flow. Now TRY to follow along here. He says this: Accolades can be necessary in order to be competitive. (True in pvp) Removing the hassle of doing a bunch of objectives to get those accolades seemed like a good move. (Past tense, as this was only done for PvP) Now fewer players. (Meaning fewer pvpers, as this was a PvP only change). Troo did not state the PvP community would drop off—he is implying that it did drop off. And he’s offering that up as an example of what could happen if a similar change happened in pve. Which is a very weak argument that relies on a shallow perception of PvP in this game. Capiche? That’s all for this episode of BW’s Reading Rainbow, where I explain to dumbfounded posters the gist of conversations I’ve had with other people.

My favorite Redford film was Three Days of the Condor. Apparently the Russo brothers cast him in Winter Soldier as a kind of homage to that film.

Well, first off this is factually wrong. If you're doing competitive pvp you need them. Otherwise you will be a soft target by default and farmed. Secondly, there are 2 contradictory objections to this proposal floating around this discussion: 1. Nobody needs these accolades, thus you shouldn't be able to purchase them. 2. If you could purchase them, wealth disparity would be negatively impacting poor players, who would still have to grind out the accolades. These can't both be true.

In the part I quoted. Maybe read it?

For the life of me, I can't see how being able to skip the rigamarole of doing accolades for pvp characters would've lead to the death of the pvp community. It's a pretty bizarre speculation.

What? Accolades in pvp were necessary in order to be competitive. Removing the hassle of doing a bunch of pve objectives was a good move. Saying it didn't "pan out" doesn't make any sense.

Which had been greenlit, with the the same director and featuring Sam and Quorra. Then Tomorrowland flopped and Disney cancelled it. I'm still pissed about that. This looks like it's going to a disaster. The first trailer made it seem like humans were pulling programs out of the grid to use as weapons. That longer trailer with all the footage of previous Tron movies seems desperate to remind people what the Tron franchise is about. The recent spots make it look like the programs on the grid have just decided to go to war with humans. Jered Leto is coming off some serious flops. There's only so much that Trent Reznor can do to generate hype for this movie.

That is my assumption. When they released the thing into the sheep, it was watching Kirsh. Boy genius came in and drew it's attention saying basically "look at me, I'm the important one." I took that as a foreshadowing. I was a bit disappointed in the flashback episode where the eyeball had taken over the engineer. I was hoping that when the eyeball takes over an entity, it access the victim's brain and can draw on memories, thoughts, etc. The guy barked like a seal, but didn't seem to display much in the way of human thought.

There are 8 for this season.

Episode 6. The most enigmatic character on the show to me is the synth Kirsh. After watching this episode, it's difficult to view him as anything other than a stealth antagonist. Possibly an anti-human agent in the mold of David from Prometheus.

I thought you were against it. Didn't you just spend the last couple pages insisting that people move on? WHO ARE YOU???

A lot of folks are fixated on vertical thinking rather than lateral thinking, and expect everyone else to follow suit. That's the more salient issue imo. Lol because they are problem solving seminars. This is like saying "people who jump into a pool overwhelmingly get wet." Ideation is not problem solving. So is there no exceptional thinking? Who decides what exceptional thing is? You? Rudra? Lol like Darwin. Galileo. Socrates? Or pretty much anyone that routinely argues on the forums including you?

It sounds insulting because it is. It's writing off people that don't agree with you by assuming they lack good reasoning skills. Meanwhile, Ghost is writing people off for being psychologically deficient. These responses are very expected at this point and emblematic of what is being pushed back against. There are two batshit crazy notions being fronted here. The first is that ideation is this tiny thing that you briefly do before getting to the real meat of the issue, which is problem solving. Nonsense. Ideation is the most important part. If you don't have a good idea, and people that are passionate about that idea, everything that follow is a waste of time. The fallout from this emphasis on problem solving is a forum populated with mundane, seemingly doable tweaks. As Oklahoman rightly pointed out, something bold like the Labyrinth of Fog would never have passed muster here. The second thing is that people should just "move on". People are being faulted for pushing back against naysayers--probably because their weak, untrained minds can't handle "the critique". Actually, in reality nothing happens without follow through. Innovation and good ideas go nowhere unless you fight for them. And the fact that people may say they don't like an idea--means absolutely nothing unless you expect the entire audience for your game to be roughly the same sort of person.

The same can be said for the for the other side. The people that you described, that don't want change, absolutely want affirmation. They want to play armchair dev. They want to wow people with their arguments and their knowledge of the game and the lore and everything else. They want their friends to give them emojis for their good points and strike down the bad people with the bad emojis (lol). They will go on for pages and pages arguing shit. But you expect the people that are hyped about some idea to just drop it and then walk away. What? First of all, why would any normal person bother to do that? Secondly, you really can't see the blatant double standard you've got going on there? Some people are like that, but I don't think that's the gist of the complaint. 1. Very few things are implemented. 2. Things that are implemented are done slowly. 3. There is a group camping in suggestions that think it's their dharma to pick apart ideas and evaluate those ideas by criteria that these people think are relevant. The complaint is not "wah, you hurt my feelings." The complaint, I believe, is more that, given point 1 and 2, the insistences of the people in group 3 are unnecessary and a buzzkill. And yes, that's how life and the internet works. Wanna drive away engagement--fill a place with people hellbent on critiquing the shit out of everything. That's why you have people sneaking over to general discussions to make covert suggestions over there. They are trying to avoid the mentality frequently seen here.