Outriders
- Thread starter Rollins
- Start date
Not really. Which is hilarious considering the vast amount of feedback given by communities of these games.
Remnant of Ashes uses procedural content. I couldn't get into that game, though, but it could be an exception.
I actually agree. The timed endgame does hinder my excitement for this game. But I’m still going to try it just because everything else looks so interesting.
remnant is a great game but it went largely unnoticed. The main mission areas were procedural and each had about three different bosses that had a chance to appear when you began the level. It was a brilliant idea. It didn’t really have an end game though. You had multiple story endings depending on what level layout you rolled in each area to encourage multiple play throughs.
I think there is a misunderstanding of "timed event".
There are 2 types of timed events. One that rewards you for completion as fast as possible, which limits the playstyle to go fast. That is universally hated except for speed racers.
Then there is time-limited for reward/completion, which is usually generously allowing multiple playstyles, & is used to moderate the capability of your team to clear content reasonably. An example will be diablo 3 great rifts. As long as you do not do damage that merely tickles mobs, you should be able to complete within the limit.
I think Outriders is the latter. It is understandable people are skeptical or not warmed to such requirements, but it's not that bad if you experience similar ones.
There are 2 types of timed events. One that rewards you for completion as fast as possible, which limits the playstyle to go fast. That is universally hated except for speed racers.
Then there is time-limited for reward/completion, which is usually generously allowing multiple playstyles, & is used to moderate the capability of your team to clear content reasonably. An example will be diablo 3 great rifts. As long as you do not do damage that merely tickles mobs, you should be able to complete within the limit.
I think Outriders is the latter. It is understandable people are skeptical or not warmed to such requirements, but it's not that bad if you experience similar ones.
The quality of the reward is tied to how fast you complete it. That is definately not the latter.
These types of mechanics are used to make limited content last longer by repetitive grinding. Which also implies these 15 expeditions that seemingly make up the bulk of the end game are going to be pretty short. The set up also implies the rewarards are fixed, if they were randomly generated the timed aspect would be pointless because the the RnG factor generates a need for repetitive grinding and extends the life of the limited content.
Honestly, if you play these games mainly for the story then get it day 1, 60 hour story is plenty. If you play them for the end game then getting this day 1 seems very silly. The warning signs are there. i hope i'm proven wrong, but so far I have 100% record at calling this in these games.
Free demo coming in Feb 25. So we can try it out & maybe give feedback. They must be pretty confident in their game to allow free demo 1.5 months before release.
It's more than a demo as your progress carries over.
This is huge to me.
This is huge to me.
Not going to help at all as the demo will only be the first few hours of the story. As far as I'm aware there is no endgame stuff in the demo.
I think a demo most certainly would be helpful. The game sports a lengthy campaign and skill progression system so getting a sample of that would be welcome to many gamers. We will get a hands on with the shooting mechanics and abilities, so yeah a demo will be useful. If all you care about is end-game that's fine, you can wait a few months after release to see how it turns out.
of course it will be helpful. You need to have a game to enjoy playing first off. It just won’t give you what you’re looking for.
I'm not talking about gamers in general. I'm only talking releative to my concearns about the game, the end game.
You say it's hilarious, but it's obviously more difficult than you think it is. If there was an example of someone getting it right you might have a stronger criticism.
Always the issue with critics vs creators though. Nothing wrong with criticism, but acting like it's so simple to achieve is a bit ridiculous, I'd say...
It is hilarious. How is it not hilarious that after several years of feedback Bungie just removed everything the community liked and replaced it with nothing? How is it not hilarious that after several years of feedback Massive Entertainment thought a finite activity would fix their end game issue.
Even more hilarious is how Division 1 got so much praise for its DLC and yet didn't encorporate that ethos in the sequal.
Nobody said it was simple or easy. But the answer seems obvious, procedural content. It doesn't have to be used in everything, but imagine that instead of Destiny 2's Beyond Light forcing new exotic armour into lost sector rewards and then makihg them only getable via the hardest difficulty and still hiding them behind RnG, that these very simple mini dungeons were actually procedurally generated, with procedurally generated armour and weapons. Now you have virtually unlimited content with an activity that always rewards you. I just solved 2 of this games biggest issues.
Borderlands has had this system for their loot for a long time. Some game have generated universes with it, one Division 1's highly praised DLCs used it in a very limited fashion. And yet it still remains absent in a genre that seemingly requires it.
But you just wanna invoke the bulls*** critic vs creator argument. This would hold up better if these so called creators could give a reason why this system isn't in their games.
Last edited:
Lol. I pretty sure if they could find a way to keep everyone happy with their decisions, they would. You act like Procedural generation is some solution when balance is a thing. Often times procedural generation comes up with generic garbage. There would be a whole development cycle just tweaking seeds and coming up with interesting variables. You have to build your core gameplay around that.
You take an interestingly know-it-all position for someone who doesn't make these games. The proof is in your face that it's obviously not as achievable as you think it is.
Your apparent derision at their foolishness opens you up to the "I'm sure you could do it better" argument. Which is just as terrible. I know it's hard for you, but a little humility and understanding goes a long way.
No. I didn't say that. I just take issue with your approach/attitude is all. Just irks me sometimes when people act like solutions are easier than they obviously are. I'm sure they'd love to nail that perfect formula.
Their efforts can end up in unintended places, but they are still pouring a lot of time and money into these products. Can it be better? Yes. Are they trying? I believe most of them are. I definitely dont believe it's as easy or obvious as you seem to think.
Even ideas that seem simple can be very hard to achieve. In a way that doesn't make things worse, anyway.
I agree, Procedurally Generated content is not at the point yet where it substitutes a personal touch in gaming. I remember a few years ago it was used quite a bit, mostly for indie titles and most of the complaints were that procedurally generated content was stale and boring and not at all close to being able to replace hand crafted content. I believe that's why the trend faded and we haven't seen it in AAA development outside a few examples. Getting a procedurally generated content algorithm right takes loads of time and data to get right and I don't think we will see it in mainstream game development for quite some time.
Again, nobody said it would be easy or simple. You just assume that is the case. So, you irking yourself.
You also ignored that a DLC for one of these games utilized this method to great effect. So, it certainly seems to be a viable option.
Looks decent and there is a lot to like. Meaty story driven campaign. Tons of optional side quests. A really cool looking customisation & crafting system. World Tier levels are a bit meh though. I also don't really like speed based missions (like the Expeditions endgame stuff). Overall though, most of what I'm hearing sounds good to me. Looking forward to the demo in Feb.
There is a lot to like. Everything but the endgame setup to be exact. To be fair, a 60 to 100 hour campaign is enough to justify a purchase. Plus it comes out in April during a year where there is seemingly nothing much coming out from anybody.
Borderlands 3 has a beefy campaign as well. I literally play 3 out of the 4 to max level (then) & complete every quests (side & main) in the game.
The end game though (then. Now I am not sure) was borefest & hence I stop playing.
I beat then the hardest content (Mayhem 3 killer sharf or something) & there is no more interesting challenges.
I don't think Borderland 3 was designed with the end game in mind though, & it was nothing wrong.
Remnant was half decent, especially coop. I bought & play all the main & DLCs. The problem however is all loots are uniques with fixed stats (some like weapon & armors can be upgraded but has a cap), hence after picking up all the ones for your build & max them out, which did not take that long, there isn't much else to do. If there are different tiers of gears & slightly randomized stats, loots that only drops on higher levels, it could easily double the playtime.
Last edited:
Having loot that only drops from tier 15 would be a s***ty move. Sounds to me like you just get better stats per item to deal with the increased difficulty. Which, I assume, is why expeditions have their own tier system for rewards.
The playtime grind is mods. 350 mods which first must be found on loot you earn, and I imagine a fair chunk will get locked to expedition tiers.