Jump to content

Effect of altering GoNegative chance


Recommended Posts

First off, this isn't a poll for a good reason. I want to know whereabouts on the scale of 0 -> 0.5 you think is a sensible balance and why. I would also be intrigued to know what Trendy thinks of this (officially or personally)

[table][tr]
[td]GoNeg chance[/td][td]50%[/td][td]40%[/td][td]30%[/td][td]20%[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]No. of positive stats[/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td][td][/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]1[/td][td]0[/td][td]0[/td][td]1[/td][td]0[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]2[/td][td]2[/td][td]0[/td][td]0[/td][td]0[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]3[/td][td]7[/td][td]3[/td][td]4[/td][td]2[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]4[/td][td]6[/td][td]7[/td][td]8[/td][td]3[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]5[/td][td]2[/td][td]7[/td][td]5[/td][td]3[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]6[/td][td]3[/td][td]2[/td][td]3[/td][td]11[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]7[/td][td]0[/td][td]3[/td][td]6[/td][td]11[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]8[/td][td]0[/td][td]1[/td][td]1[/td][td]1[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]Sample size[/td][td]20[/td][td]23[/td][td]28[/td][td]30[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]Average number of positives[/td][td]3.85[/td][td]4.91[/td][td]4.93[/td][td]6.13[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]Expected average[/td][td]3.72[/td][td]4.46[/td][td]5.21[/td][td]5.95[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]

NOTE:
GoNeg chance => If a stat is > 150, this is the chance that it will be sign-flipped
Expected Average = (1 - (0.07 + 0.93 * GoNegChance)) * 8 => the chance for a stat to not be flipped negative multiplied by 8 stat rolls.
It dosen't take into account that the rolls are biased in our favour (shown by 3/4 sample averages being > than the predicted one. 0.3 was just the RNG striking back...)

Test was run with a rather large multiplier on stats to ensure they had a very good chance of exceeding the threshold (and for S's & G's). Any item that didnt have 8 stats or had more than 1 stat below that threshold was ignored

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
would be nicer if it was lower, would certainly fix a lot of grief that people are having with the RNG..

20% seems a little too generous, but a GoNegative chance added in with an RNG on numbers just hurts anyone that's trying to gear up by themselves

would be interesting to see what the numbers would be like if you'd included ones that were ignored, though I realise they're not part of the GoNegative test, it just shows how much more of the gear is not really that useable

I personally don't like the idea of the negatives at all, if it was changed to say halving the stat instead of being negative I'd like the idea more, but if a negative is to be kept then I think 30% (would prefer a flat 25% actually) would be a better value for it, based on your expected results and the way the stats seem to hang around the 5/6/7 positive range (cause face it, gear with any more than 3 negatives is really no fun at all)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally, I wouldn't mind it being the same as it was around the release of this game for those first few months. Though I have no idea what the numbers were at the time, sadly. Use to be finding more than 1-2 negatives on a piece was quite a rare occurrence. Funny thing is, it seems like almost the opposite now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but a GoNegative chance added in with an RNG on numbers

The initial Random number is always positive (0-1). The only way you can get negative stats out of it is to sign flip them at some chance. Initially this chance is 7% less quality factors, but to prevent there being an overabundance of super stat gear Trendy added the second check for high level items. It's the frequency that the high level flip happens that is being altered here

Also, the discarded items were about 5 per test, so maybe 20%
Personally, I wouldn't mind it being the same as it was around the release of this game for those first few months. Though I have no idea what the numbers were at the time, sadly. Use to be finding more than 1-2 negatives on a piece was quite a rare occurrence. Funny thing is, it seems like almost the opposite now.

You will still find those in NM campaign and lower. Any item that dosen't exceed 150 on any stat has <7% chance for any single stat to go negative (or 1-0.93^8 for the chance any of the 8 stats is negative = 44%)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
as dingle mentioned in the other thread, there just needs to be a way to reduce the chance of it happening. his suggestion is actually one i think should be implemented for the game.

now, not to derail, but, the bigger problem i think is the fact that the value is set so low. 150? damn near everything rolls higher than 150 now, so that is basically just a "MAKE IT SUCK!!!" function because it will always trigger. that alone is what makes progression a brick wall after initial endless spires farming.

what do i think is an acceptable "gonegative" chance? 0. progression should be based on what the stats roll in their spawnable range, not on how few negatives an item has. the 7odd% chance to go negative is more than enough.

why?

ITS A ****ING PVE GAME!!! WHO GIVES A **** IF AN OGRE DIES TOO GOD DAMN FAST?! what are they scared people are going to farm too many swords of a thousand truths?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looking at the numbers there, somewhere around 30% looks about right to me. Although, the sample size here is small and the data for that swung a bit under the expected average, so that might even be a bit more generous than it appears. Still, 20% does seem a bit too good... Though maybe I've just been beating into submission by the RNG so much that I've gained a bit of a *********ic streak in that regard... It still seems a bit much at 20%. 30% seems to leave things pretty even, and I think 5-6 positive stats on the average piece of gear is not asking for much.

Edit: Interesting filter is interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[QUOTE]ITS A ****ING PVE GAME!!! WHO GIVES A **** IF AN OGRE DIES TOO GOD DAMN FAST?! what are they scared people are going to farm too many swords of a thousand truths? [/QUOTE]People care because the game becomes too easy. And if it's too easy, the fun wears out just as fast as if it's too hard. If all gear generated always has the best stats, then you may as well just remove the gear, remove the stats, and base everything on fixed values, and make the game completely and totally a traditional tower defense. But since DunDef is trying to be different from those games, that's why we have these things. Yes, if the game as a whole is too easy, people will play it, beat it very quickly, and move on to another game.

If there was no negative chance, they'd have to come up with some other way to keep the loot balanced so you can't just burn through the whole game on every difficulty in a day, because they want the gameplay value to last longer than that. The only other ways I could see them doing it though, would be to have a GoLower chance instead of a GoNegative chance, and make it so you don't get minuses (which are more demoralizing), but instead just either get a relatively low amount, or have a higher chance to not have 8 different stats on the item.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People care because the game becomes too easy. And if it's too easy, the fun wears out just as fast as if it's too hard. If all gear generated always has the best stats, then you may as well just remove the gear, remove the stats, and base everything on fixed values, and make the game completely and totally a traditional tower defense. But since DunDef is trying to be different from those games, that's why we have these things. Yes, if the game as a whole is too easy, people will play it, beat it very quickly, and move on to another game.

If there was no negative chance, they'd have to come up with some other way to keep the loot balanced so you can't just burn through the whole game on every difficulty in a day, because they want the gameplay value to last longer than that. The only other ways I could see them doing it though, would be to have a GoLower chance instead of a GoNegative chance, and make it so you don't get minuses (which are more demoralizing), but instead just either get a relatively low amount, or have a higher chance to not have 8 different stats on the item.

Those don't really fix the basic problem though, that being that gear that makes me care that I just spent time trying to get said gear is far too infrequent. A solid run in this game takes a good chunk of time, I don't think it's crazy to want to expect to be reasonably likely rewarded for that time. Gear that's less bad is still gear that's dropping itself below consideration a lot of the time.

The GoNegative function was introduced at the onset of nightmare, and hasn't changed sicne then. In the meantime, the numbers that determine 'loot quality' have been going up, but the actual average quality of loot is going down, since the higher the numbers roll, the more likely it is to run afoul of GoNegative. That's completely ignoring the fact that while this has all been happening, the relevant difficulty of the game has also gone up quite a bit. So no, I don't think adjusting GoNeg will inherently 'make the game too easy'

Actually, you know what? I'm going to assert that it's inherently fallacious to imply that the reason people have given this game as much time as they have is entirely a function of how much grinding it takes. I think a reason a lot of people have stayed around is because of the relationship the Devs have had with the community, and the constant updates breathing life into the game. With updates tapering off, people are going to lose interest whether or not they have to work this game like a full-time job for decent drops. Maybe this game has reached a point in it's lifecycle where grabbing people by the balls to keep them grinding just isn't going to keep paying off like it has. Maybe it's time to ease up a little and just let decent gear drop more. I know it'd keep me around better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, you know what? I'm going to assert that it's inherently fallacious to imply that the reason people have given this game as much time as they have is entirely a function of how much grinding it takes. I think a reason a lot of people have stayed around is because of the relationship the Devs have had with the community, and the constant updates breathing life into the game. With updates tapering off, people are going to lose interest whether or not they have to work this game like a full-time job for decent drops. Maybe this game has reached a point in it's lifecycle where grabbing people by the balls to keep them grinding just isn't going to keep paying off like it has. Maybe it's time to ease up a little and just let decent gear drop more. I know it'd keep me around better.


I feel like this sums it up perfectly. I'll also add that players writing code to tweak the RNG (while being very careful not to break it in players' favor) are truly doing God's work. I've said it before, I'll say it again: I would return if I felt rewarded for my invested time; and I'm sure I'm not alone in this. People are fixing your game for free. That's how much they (and many others) love it. It's just a little insulting to hear 'nah, grind it out, fixing it is too much work'. I'm hoping the player generated code is implemented so I can finally complain about something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bravo, I agree also with voncrown. Let better gear drop. When you play Diablo 2 on Hell in Act 5 and did Baal runs, you didn't always find the best gear out of it. But they were rarely super crap. Even tho the first time was always the best for items, you would still get decent items.

There is always a thing to try and get better items even if you didn't really need to do it. That is always the fun part of these games, unless you found all ultimate gear with fully maxed and no neg stats, you don't have the best gear and I know lots of people that play RPGs like that a lot, till they truly got the best gear in the game. I have people who play diablo 3 before they buffed teh level 60 gear like mad trying to get better gear, they already put in over 700 hours since it came out! I only have 600 hours in DD cause I've had the game since the beginning!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
by "added in with the RNG" I just meant that it's another thing to add into the process of getting the stats on an item.

As an example of what would be nicer (but a little bit more code) if a number above say, idk 200, had a 25/30% chance to be a percentage lower (between 25-50% on another random number possibly?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[QUOTE]Actually, you know what? I'm going to assert that it's inherently fallacious to imply that the reason people have given this game as much time as they have is entirely a function of how much grinding it takes.[/QUOTE]That's not what I'm trying to imply. Good game and level design are huge factors as well. The grind only helps when people are already having fun.
However, if there was absolutely zero grinding involved, once you beat the game you'd just quit and move on. You might play through it again a couple more times (e.g. like your typical side scroller) but the replay value isn't as high. The concept and design of the game as a whole is the primary source of enjoyment, but the buzz of getting a new shiny is what keeps it lasting longer. This is true of any game that has loot, and especially true of MMOs- people keep playing because the developers keep adding new shinies to get. This is what adds the addiction factor to something that's already fun.

I honestly feel that the high end players would have quit sooner if not for the promise of better loot on harder maps if they kept playing. Of course, better loot became so unobtainable that they gave up anyway.

The problem with the loot system is that it doesn't scale properly to the newer loot. As the loot gets higher "quality", the chance for it to end up actually being terrible is also higher- yet, this loot is made to drop extremely rarely. Since the loot is both more rare and more likely to be bad, good super loot is so rare that players can see they'll never get an upgrade and just give up.

There is a middle ground between having amazing loot always drop and having likely terrible loot that drops rarely. This middle ground is what needs to be aimed for.

This game actually has a lot in common with many MMORPGs- it has loot progression, levels and stats, heroes with various abilities, etc. Ask yourself: Would so many people still be playing games like World of Warcraft if they didn't periodically keep adding new weapons and armor, new characters, etc. ? No, they wouldn't. The shiny buzz would wear out and people would quit. How fast that happens depends on how hard or easy the grind is. Too easy, people get everything too quickly and quit because there's nothing left to get. Too hard, and people give up because they feel like the shinies are made out of unobtainium. The latter being the probelm DunDef is facing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the loot system is that it doesn't scale properly to the newer loot. As the loot gets higher "quality", the chance for it to end up actually being terrible is also higher- yet, this loot is made to drop extremely rarely. Since the loot is both more rare and more likely to be bad, good super loot is so rare that players can see they'll never get an upgrade and just give up.


This game actually has a lot in common with many MMORPGs- it has loot progression, levels and stats, heroes with various abilities, etc. Ask yourself: Would so many people still be playing games like World of Warcraft if they didn't periodically keep adding new weapons and armor, new characters, etc. ? No, they wouldn't. The shiny buzz would wear out and people would quit. How fast that happens depends on how hard or easy the grind is. Too easy, people get everything too quickly and quit because there's nothing left to get. Too hard, and people give up because they feel like the shinies are made out of unobtainium. The latter being the probelm DunDef is facing.

It seems we pretty much agree then- And looking at this data, 30% looks like about the right spot to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think we are all pretty close to in agreement. And why shouldn't we be; we are gamers. I don't think anybody is looking for instant omnipotence. And as someone who definitely doesn't mind grinding (i.e. treasure hunter achievement FFXIII), there is no reason to remove grinding completely. The only time I actually quit a game from a grinding aspect is when a certain hours without reward is reached and I say to myself 'wow, this is pointless'.

Let's aim for a grind that is not quite as pointless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think we are all pretty close to in agreement. And why shouldn't we be; we are gamers. I don't think anybody is looking for instant omnipotence. And as someone who definitely doesn't mind grinding (i.e. treasure hunter achievement FFXIII), there is no reason to remove grinding completely. The only time I actually quit a game from a grinding aspect is when a certain hours without reward is reached and I say to myself 'wow, this is pointless'.

Let's aim for a grind that is not quite as pointless.


I hated that achievement. Took me so long to figure out that I was missing a water ring and had to downgrade something. And those evil turtles 1-shotting you if you take too long....

The grinding annoyed me, but I am the type of person that enjoys story-lines more than grinding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Let's aim for a grind that is not quite as pointless...


Love that SirLatency. Just love it as a quote to use.

Anyway; looking at the percentages and the distributions I would lean towards 30% but maybe slightly higher to give a smoother distribution curve. Maybe 33%.

Also I do like the idea of having the 150 limit get raised based on the wave level. So that at wave 30 it might be 250 (or something). This also could be played with.

With regards to grinding; I like grinding but the grinding has to be something that I can see results however small. I like rare and extremely rare things - but when they turn out to be crap (or even worse negative crap) it is hard to not be frustrated. Make me curious how Alhanalem's comment about a 'go lower' or even 'go zero' would turn out instead of the 'go negative'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Make me curious how Alhanalem's comment about a 'go lower' or even 'go zero' would turn out instead of the 'go negative'.


Pretty much little change overall, we'd just see a lot of unimpressive crap gear all over the place, instead of a lot of spectacularly crap gear all over the place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pretty much little change overall, we'd just see a lot of unimpressive crap gear all over the place, instead of a lot of spectacularly crap gear all over the place.
Gear that doesn't have huge negatives, even if it's not very big positives, is more likely to be useable because it wouldn't take all the 300 upgrades just to get it out of the hole. We can't have every single piece of loot be awesome loot, however, reducing how bad things can get makes a lot of sense. This also means noticably more mana from the auto-sell, and you could still adjust the chance for less than optimal as well.

Right now, with the current odds, on average you get 4 stats negative on "high" gear qualities. I think eliminating the negatives altogether plus somewhat reducing the probability of weaker loot being dropped would be miles in the right direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
people keep playing games because there is something about a particular game that they enjoy. how many "shinies" or whatever they can get is never the sole determining factor. the "grind" is inevitably used in a negative context, because it is either used as something to facilitate a part of a game someone enjoys, but they are doing something they dont particularly enjoy; or it just means that that is all there is to a particular game and thus it becomes exhausting because you are never finished. the latter is true of dungeon defenders.

unless games have an in-depth PvP component, they have an end. and that end is when you get bored with the power struggle or you reach the zenith. everquest has an end, diablo has an end, and dungeon defenders has an end. starting a new character is not continuing the game, it is just hitting the reset button (an doing the equivalent of putting in cheat codes because everyone will undoubtedly use formerly amassed resources to make the second trip less aggravating).

and honestly, the difference between dungeon defenders and a lot of other games is that dungeon defenders, at this point, really has little reason to be changed or worry about trying to be changed. for better or worse, all revenue has been collected for this game. there is no monthly subscription, and the major add-ons are already out, so the bulk of the profit that was going to be made for trendy from this game has already been made, so there is little reason for them to worry if players are upset with the current state of the game. they arent going to lose any cashflow and they arent going to be giving out any refunds any time soon. compare this to say, blizzard, with WoW and diablo 3, WoW has monthly income, so if the playerbase is unhappy, they better make changes otherwise they will lose profit; and diablo, if they dont fix the problems with the game now, 4 months from now when their expansion comes out, people arent going to buy it, so they have an incentive.

DD is done at this point, stick a fork in it. it is completely community driven at this point. this may change, but until it does, see above.



now, as for the whole thing about loot:

first and foremost, alhanalem, every game has a breakpoint where it quickly switches from "difficult" to "too easy" when it deals solely with PvP. the only way to prevent this is to make some enemies have such a high level of power (read: hit points and damage. DONT READ: 400 million hit points and all attacks are one-shot deaths) that players cannot get anywhere near it. dungeon defenders does not have this, which is why there are tons of videos out there of people soloing every boss in the game on NMHC.

what does this game have instead? cheap shots. the kraken can one-shot players, the goblin airship is just wonky as hell to land on and one-shots players, and the old one is a one-shotting nightmare. it doesnt matter how powerful the player gets, all of these bosses can and will randomly and instantly kill a player. why? because trendy does not know how to properly manage player progression. which creates the frustration in why they make the difficulties of maps require such high levels of stats to be able to complete them and then mathematically make it 90% improbable that players will be able to get to that point, and then to even have it be meaningless when they get there.

it is perfectly possible to still have a progression curve even eliminating the ">150 go negative" function, because there will always be the drive to look for the piece of ultimate armor that has 400 to 2 or 3 stats on it. just because the function is removed doesnt mean that the summit or mistymire are going to start dropping only perfect pieces of ultimate armor. it just means that the 6% of armor that does drop that COULD be good actually WOULD be good because it wont have 4 negative stats on it.

honestly, reading the digest this week kinda said to me "stop caring because we dont" with their "the RNG is too ingrained" response. all that basically says is "we are too lazy to change it because we have more important things to work on." which means i have more important things to play. the RNG, it its current state, is a problem, and since this game is all about the loot grind, it means that the game, it is current state, is problematic. little chance to progress means little reason to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[QUOTE]people keep playing games because there is something about a particular game that they enjoy. how many "shinies" or whatever they can get is never the sole determining factor.[/QUOTE]It depends greatly on the type of game. If you have a game with a system of loot and levels to be gained, these are the things that drive the gameplay forward. Yes, games are fun for many other reasons, but in the long term, loot and other forms of progression keep you playing beyond the amount of time you probably would have played otherwise. Loot and levels are lifetime extenders. It's a simple fact. I played a single MMO for 8 years. If pure entertaining gameplay was the only thing the game offered, it would have grown old well before 8 years passed. Better loot gives you something to shoot for, that's why it keeps people in the game.

Then you take a game like Tetris or Super Mario bros. These games have no progression system other than "beat the level and beat the next one". They are simplistic but fun. Their mechanics are not driven by rewards (other than a high score / beating it). This is where what you describe is more accurate. Type of game makes a world of difference in terms of what it is that makes you keep playing.

In the end, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say. Yes, DunDef is basically done, barring some community additions and (apparently) some more DLC. Every game is finished at some point- as long as you got your fair share of enjoyment about it, I don't really see a problem. Whatever problems this game had, I have confidence Trendy will be learning from them with its next titles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What he is trying to say is that some people will play a game longer for more than just loot. Loot grinding is an extension on play-time, although most people grind it out for other reasons.

Community: Many people enjoy the pve aspect of games, not for the grinding but because they do it with friends. Chatting, playing around, partying, etc are often the lifeblood of games. Some people will waste hours doing nothing on a daily basis just for the community. I would say the community mood in DD is a little depressed since practically all my friends on here gave up on this game.

Progession: Progressing through the game to reach harder content does give a certain degree of satisfaction. I don't mean in terms of loot, but actually beating levels, unlocking skills, getting pets/stronger pets, reborn/re-incarnating, collecting rare items (not exactly for loot but basically to show off in an archive), getting achievements, etc. Progression in this game is based on stats and is broken as we all know so I won't say anything here.

PvP: This is a major one. One of the major reasons to ever grind for gear is to pvp. You don't even have to have the best gear or the highest lvl because it is usually easy to find others with equal gear as you do. In many games, pvp is fun because of combos or strategically taking your opponent down (i don't mean with cheap shots like most games seem to follow these days). Although my preference for pvp are usually arcade-style pvp mmorpg's. Pvp in dungeon defenders is not very enjoyable to me but maybe for others so this is up for discussion.

PvE: Due to how much pvp favors those who spend money, much of the player-base tend to focus on the pve aspects. This is technically a mix of community and progression, but this one has it's own special reasons. Some also enjoy playing certain classes, especially if they are properly balanced. In some games, bosses are fun to fight because it takes a little thought in order to win (only if the game is balanced more for the casual player). In dungeon defenders bosses often pull cheap shots like random 1-shots, knockbacks in boss rush, etc. Mobs are a little buggy themselves due to ogre smack range, mobs slipping past very tight walls, random crystal sniping, etc. Classes.....well all builders can be used (even if the game favors auras too much), but it is almost mandatory to use monk dps in order to progress. Yeah, people can use barbs, squire/countess, adept/apprentice, etc but nothing will replace monk boosts.

Overall, the discussion is flawed if you compare dungeon defenders to any other game because no game (at least none that I know of) is similar to dungeon defenders. It is still a fun game at it's core though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hated that achievement. Took me so long to figure out that I was missing a water ring and had to downgrade something. And those evil turtles 1-shotting you if you take too long....


I actually used a spreadsheet to keep track of every item (I'm that OCD when it comes to games). It's one of the worst 30GP (I think it was around that value) achievements out there.

Love that SirLatency. Just love it as a quote to use.


Thanks. I really miss this game, but there's only so many hours I can beat my head against a wall. I hope the code is either accepted or available on open (although I would greatly prefer ranked).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's not what I'm trying to imply. Good game and level design are huge factors as well. The grind only helps when people are already having fun.
However, if there was absolutely zero grinding involved, once you beat the game you'd just quit and move on. You might play through it again a couple more times (e.g. like your typical side scroller) but the replay value isn't as high. The concept and design of the game as a whole is the primary source of enjoyment, but the buzz of getting a new shiny is what keeps it lasting longer. This is true of any game that has loot, and especially true of MMOs- people keep playing because the developers keep adding new shinies to get. This is what adds the addiction factor to something that's already fun.

I honestly feel that the high end players would have quit sooner if not for the promise of better loot on harder maps if they kept playing. Of course, better loot became so unobtainable that they gave up anyway.

The problem with the loot system is that it doesn't scale properly to the newer loot. As the loot gets higher "quality", the chance for it to end up actually being terrible is also higher- yet, this loot is made to drop extremely rarely. Since the loot is both more rare and more likely to be bad, good super loot is so rare that players can see they'll never get an upgrade and just give up.

There is a middle ground between having amazing loot always drop and having likely terrible loot that drops rarely. This middle ground is what needs to be aimed for.

This game actually has a lot in common with many MMORPGs- it has loot progression, levels and stats, heroes with various abilities, etc. Ask yourself: Would so many people still be playing games like World of Warcraft if they didn't periodically keep adding new weapons and armor, new characters, etc. ? No, they wouldn't. The shiny buzz would wear out and people would quit. How fast that happens depends on how hard or easy the grind is. Too easy, people get everything too quickly and quit because there's nothing left to get. Too hard, and people give up because they feel like the shinies are made out of unobtainium. The latter being the probelm DunDef is facing.


Let me put this in MMO terms then. I'm more likely to get double Thunderfury bindings in 1 run, twice in a row on WoW than I am to find an upgrade from the limited amount of content I can do in DD. I've already quit and moved on unless something changes because of this. It's also not very fun when certain reward weapons uttery demolish everything else because of damage per upgrade or other factors. It makes just about every weapon that drops completely and totally worthless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let me put this in MMO terms then. I'm more likely to get double Thunderfury bindings in 1 run, twice in a row on WoW than I am to find an upgrade from the limited amount of content I can do in DD. I've already quit and moved on unless something changes because of this. It's also not very fun when certain reward weapons uttery demolish everything else because of damage per upgrade or other factors. It makes just about every weapon that drops completely and totally worthless.


Sadly, that is probably true >

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...