Jump to content

dmvanmeveren

Junior Defender
  • Content Count

    81
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by dmvanmeveren

  1. Dear Best friends, This has gotten out of hand. My complaint was simply the order of release. I understand that Trendy needs and deserves money to develop DD2- and to earn a healthy paycheck. In fact, I bought pre-alpha to support them! I am simply eager to test out actual gameplay rather than the costume and accessory system, and I wish Trendy would have provided more Dungeon Defenders-esque content before they implemented Sims-esque content. I understand the importance of the costume system, and I will love the heck out it when it's complete; I just wish the focus had been on new towers/skill spheres/classes/item progression etc first.
  2. This is a sincere and honest complaint: I am upset that the Trendy team implemented the costume/lock-box/appearance system before they added more gameplay content. Maybe I'm being a bit too critical, but I'm just honestly upset that they launced their moneygrab system so early before we had a real satisfying gameplay experience. I mean, I paid for the pre-alpha so that I could assist in the development of a tower defense/action RPG game, not Sims 4 Dungeon Defenders expansion pack.
  3. The hearts are a reference to the first game where the Squire wore heart print boxers. Instead of boxers, he's now wearing the tank top. It's actually a more badass design than the old one since now he actually looks like a man and not a kid in oversized armor. The contrast between Betsy's look and her name is part of the humor. It's not to make her cute, it's to create a ludicrous contrast between this threatening monster and her completely non-threatening name. The style of the game has always kind of relied on these contradictory elements. That's part of the fun and humor of the series. Not everything has to be dark and gritty to be appealing to adults and games don't have to always adopt a serious tone to be considered "mature". There's nothing wrong with light fun. Yep. The heart print boxers made even less sense. DD2 could be so much more. I'm just disappointed with some of the dev's aesthetic choices.
  4. The daily quest gives a rare weapon: super heavy flow lavender mango-scented tampon!
  5. No, I do understand the context- I'm saying the aesthetic content does not match the context. People are dead or at risk of dying; but I am going to defend them by wearing my shirt with hearts all over it? Maybe we could use plastic t-ball bats or cotton-padded teddy bears to kill the Dark Ones?And I also agree that Betsy looks badass, but the name Betsy is just too cheesy for my taste.
  6. I enjoy the cartoony graphics as well, but there is very little content at the moment which elevates DD2 away from simply being a nick jr. cartoon. It feels more like a Little Einstein's adventure than an aesthetically satisfying game. I feel like I need to get my parent's permission to log on. Fable had the same saturated graphical style, but was badass.
  7. Dear Trendy, Please remember your demographic and the violent nature of the storyline of Dungeon Defenders II. Most of us here happen to be adults. Please don't make me feel like I'm playing the game version of a Nick Jr. cartoon. Some of the NPC's and all of the pets look like they belong in Dora the Explora, not defending a suffering kingdom from an oncoming horde of murderous evil and a dragon which burns and kills the innocent. The dragon- the central boss of the game as it stands- is the mother of all wyverns, is the looming threat to the safety of the kingdom, is swift and certain death- is named "Betsy?" that's cute. I guess. My pet- which is to aid me and my defenses in my battle against murderous and senseless orcs and ogres- is a dragon that spews out bubbles or is a cat with a propeller? that's cute. I guess. Please, please, please, please include some badass content, do excuse my French, because I can't handle this over-saturated 1:00 PM on a Tuesday Nick Jr. Cartoon content anymore.
  8. Hey guys. I used to be pretty active on this forum and took a break for a while. I decided to come back and check the Pets and Dragons update, so I thought I'd hop back on the forums and shoot out some of my sincere hopes for the future development of the game. First, it goes without saying that the game is still in its early stages, so all of my ideas aren't really critiques, they are recommendations and hopes. Here is my short lift of subjects, the ones I believe are of highest priority are mentioned first: PetsSo at the moment we have 3 kinds of eggs and each egg can potentially hatch one of three pets- and I haven't earned enough Wyvern coins to guess what Betsy's egg is yet- which means there are 9 pets. I sincerely hope that there will be far more basic pets, not just evolutions, and far more egg types and degrees of rarity. Since we the dev's have announced the pet evolution system, they may as well fully develop the pet aspect of the game. I would like to see 60+ unique types of pets, each with their own evolution path, and each having their stats and abilities slowly conform to the play style of a particular champion. This conformity could grow according to the affection system that is currently in place. For example, if I am a apprentice builder, the stats of my pet- which start off at a baseline, pre-determined amount- would slowly adapt to increase defense power/speed and its passive and active abilities could enhance towers. I would also love pet fusions- think of the Monster Rancher games- where a pet can be sacrificed and its stats be imbued into another pet. I would also love for the fusions to have an effect on appearance, but that might be asking a bit too much at this point. It would also make sense for the pets to level up in battle rather than just by feeding them. I would sincerely love to theory-craft my pet choice and be excited about discovering new pets. Weapon LevelingI've mentioned before that the current gear upgrade system is uninspiring and clunky. Not to mention, its terribly difficult for a casual player to max out an item because it becomes so expensive, and maxed-out gear is required to complete difficult maps. So, as a means to ameliorate these difficulties, I propose a weapon leveling/enhancement/socket system- similar to the current skill sphere system- in which a piece of gear has a number of slots or sockets which can be equipped with various enhancement orbs. The weapon gains experience as you use it and- when it reaches a new level- the weapon absorbs the enhancement orbs so that new enhancement orbs can be fitted. As a reference to this kind of system, think of the Dark Cloud games or Diablo 2. An enhancement orb might give +5 Defense Power or +31 fire damage or +66 Hero Magic Resist. Of course, there could be rare orbs that would give even better effects, and there could be legendary enhancement orbs that cause a unique effect, like temporarily summon a phoenix or shoot flaming boulders out of a weapon. If this system was implemented, many of the problems of the current system would be solved. Players could reasonably progress their gear at a comfortable pace, wouldn't necessarily have to endlessly farm for a single piece of gear, and there would be more potential for customization. Musical ScoreAs it stands, the musical score is only okay. Be honest: can you whistle to me a single tune of any of the stages? I would really appreciate a little development in the musical composition. In fact, I kind of need it. Music is one of the most important aspects of a game, for me. I also kind of hate the cheesy looping sound effects on some maps, like the constant annoying crying in The Throne Room. Skill SphereThere has been a lot said about this so far, and I agree with the majority of opinions concerning the skill sphere system. Include skill spheres that tangibly alter a skill, not simply enhance its effectiveness Or maybe even consider a sphere grid kind of system like Final Fantasy X? There are certain abilities that you can eventually get by traveling and progressing through the sphere grid. For example, if you go down the Builder's Sphere Grid Path, you could pick up simple spheres like +25 Defense Power and +40 Defense Attack Rate, but you could also include substantial and exciting spheres- like a sphere which unlocks a new kind of tower or ability. That's about all I've got to say at the moment. I think we should all encourage the devs to continue producing good content. I am so excited to see where DD2 goes in the coming months.
  9. I mean, its alright, but could you whistle me the tune from any particular stage? Nothing is truly memorable.
  10. One of the coolest things I can remember when I first started playing DD1 was that each new weapon, or so it seemed, had a different projectile style e.g., shoots out two bolts, three bolts, four bolts, slow moving rocket-type, rapid machine-gun type, spiders, birds. I sincerely hope that variation in projectiles are in the Dev's near future.
  11. As it stands, the music score for the game is OKAY. I mean, the composers have basically transposed the melodic theme from DD1 and added a tiny bit of variation. For me, I would appreciate the atmosphere of the game so much more if there were intense battle music or surreal forest music in the Wyvern's Den. I hate to resurrect an old example out of fear that not may people know what I'm saying, but one of the reasons why Zelda Ocarina of Time is so fantastic is because of its musical score. The theme for Zora's Domain. Ohhhh, the feels. I know it's early stages (goes without saying, really), but as the game progresses, I would enjoy some real musical composition improvements.
  12. Ermm... My Druid is more like a WoW Druid rather than a "pet themed" Druid. I'm sorry if this ruins the idea for making the two classes into one. Nope. I totally agree.
  13. Pets could also have temperaments (think of breeding in Pokemon Pearl or Diamond) such as cheerful, grumpy, stubborn, enthusiastic, joyful, etc. that identify how its stats will likely progress with levels.
  14. Because pets could die in Monster Rancher, that means that you were on a certain time limit to accomplish as much as possible before the pet died, and encouraged you to treat the pet in ways that allow it to live longer. With the possibility of extremely difficult end-game content, the possibility of pet death would add a new degree of encouragement to get as far as possible.
  15. I'd rather ditch the beast tamer idea in favor of the druid.
  16. Best frens: Has anyone played the Monster Rancher games? Let's implement a pet system like that. Pets progress in level and power as you use them in battle, or you could raise multiple pets in a corral and let them graze to slowly increase their level. Pets die after their life span's are through Pets can be combined in a kind of fusion laboratory in order to create unique, more powerful pets that can live longer and have a higher level cap.Pets could be sold or traded to other players up to a point (maybe when they are babies, for example), but would be soul-bound after a point (when they actually become useful). Implementing this system would: Introduce pet theory-crafting in fusions Discovery of new breeds of pets in an immense pet encyclopediaDiscourage boring farming for a certain pet (After all, this is a RPG tower defense game, this is not Harvest Moon!) Encourage pet leveling for a smoother, more enjoyable progression in attempting more difficult challengesI don't know about pet evolutions, because that's a bit too pokemon-ish. Instead, pets could go through their entire life cycle and change appearance according to their age and function. For example, when you first breed a new pet, it would be a baby. As it grows older, it slowly changes appearance and looks more and more BA. There could be an entirely new class: Beast Tamer, who is purely offensive and can control three pets at once. Yes? No?
  17. So, you are a Pokemon master who throws Dittos everywhere? I think the idea is pretty cool. What if the goo attacks a mini-boss or ogre?
  18. I remember back in the day (DD1), I wanted to be that guy who was able to build for everyone. That's almost what kind of drove me to continue playing, to get the best gear available, so that I could carry other players through a difficult map. Of course, after 500 hours of sitting back and being carried, I still wasn't that guy who could carry, so I quit.
  19. However dungeon defenders isn't a normal RPG, and also have you ever played a game called Dragon Age? Not all RPGs are like that. Instead of controlling a single character you can control a whole team. Well that doesn't really matter 'cause in the current game you can actually stick with just one character and play the whole game. I've done it, other people have done it, it's no big deal, if you really want to do it you can do it. Sure, but it is dynamic to control an entire team. At the moment, it is horrifyingly static to play a single class on DD2. I just need variability within each class through turret/ability customization to fit my play style. That is all.
  20. Wellll, if you want to get technical, many RPGs give you a party of classes that work together to achieve victory. (Wizard, fighter, cleric, rogue, ect...) If you're talking about MMOs, then I'll give you that. There are usually solo options in an MMO for your dude to go get experience and level up without needing others. I will agree with you that there should be more towers available to each class. In fact, I really like the idea of a skill system where investing in a certain skill tree will let you unlock new and improved towers. But hey, the game is pre-alpha, they may implement more towers later. Point taken. But even though you had a party to achieve victory, even still it was a single player game. Give each class the ability to assume the role of wizard, fighter, cleric, rogue through turret/ability customization. Then I'll be happy.
  21. I'd say the towers need re-imagining completely. They are just too static and are prone to cookie-cutter builds. I want self-sufficiency, not necessary dependence on other classes' cooperation. You can be self sufficient as much as you want, it was pointed out quite often, there's even a guide on how to solo in the guide section i believe. You can do it solo with a single character the whole game, which imo shouldn't be possible, but it is, i know this not just by ear, but i've done it myself with monk, squire and apprentice. I believe if a person doesn't want to play multiplayer he should need to have multi characters, if you want to play solo team play with yourself, however this isn't the reality we face in DD2, so dunno what people are complaining really.. Soloing right now is REALLY hard. Once you start getting into levels with 3 or 4+ enemy spawns it becomes really painful. In the old game, a basic understanding of your structures would let you solo most of the original game content with some farming and creative tower placements. (Though some of the later added DLC levels did require multiple classes using towers.) This game expects you to use cooperative tactics right from the get-go, and I think that's putting off some of the older player using tactics from the first game and expecting them to work. I liked the cooperative requirement once I figured it out, however I think some players come into this game with the expectation that they'll be able to just play by themselves and succeed. (Something that's really hard to accomplish with just one class.) And when you start to fail over and over, it can be frustrating which can drive them away from the game. The thing is, the norm of tower defense games is to reward creative tower placement. This creates a bit of an expectation when players come in to play a tower defense game. The way you've changed the game is fun, but goes against the tower defense expectation that players have. It's unavoidable that you'll get some pushback from players who want that tower defense experience. True dat.
  22. I'd say the current state of the towers themselves is too static to allow for more than one cookie-cutter build. You build your character to win, but you have very little choice on how you want to win. Sure, you could go either offensive or defensive, but there is almost zero variability within each of those categories. When I play tower defense games, I like to set up a pack of long-range towers to peg off enemies from a distance and a separate pack of rapid-fire towers to pound away at the front lines. At the moment, I can't do that. I also would rather employ stacking DoTs rather than burst, but I can't do that either. :( ^---I agree with that, there isn't enough flexibility with tower stats, or anything really to make multiple builds be great... maybe more combos are needed , or more specs for the char stats...on the livestream they mentioned gambits that could lower one thing but make something else stronger so till they put in everything there cant really be more diversity Yeah, I'd argue that the gambit system is just stupid. Instead of leaving things to chance, they should just add more customization content to allow for unique game play styles. I hate to mention WoW, but it's handy and a lot of people know what it is. There are a ton of classes, and within each class is variability through talent trees, and even though the end goal is to kill an enemy, there are hundreds of ways of going about that in equally successful ways. At the moment, DD2 has severely limited options of killing enemies in a variety of equally successful ways.
  23. Honestly, if you level multiple characters and just switch between them, you can build some pretty OP defenses. While certain metas are way better, you could even use short-range towers as OP defenses if you know what to put in front of them. This game makes you think a little bit more than DD1 did. In DD1, you just had to raise some of the statistics to make a single classes towers OP. In this game, you have to use multiple towers from multiple classes correctly to achieve the same thing. Honestly, it's pretty easy to figure out the combos, you just have to play a few of the classes then switch between them as you are defending. So basically, you can still be OP with stats, you just have to use multiple tower types creatively to achieve it. Or just let other people build and you stick your defenses behind theirs in protected locations. Bleh, that's just not what I want. In any other RPG ever made, you pick a class and stick with it, and each class worked equally well to be successful. We just need some sort of turret talent tree that opens up the possibility of each class being satisfying and capable of playing on its own. That is all.
  24. Honestly, if you level multiple characters and just switch between them, you can build some pretty OP defenses. While certain metas are way better, you could even use short-range towers as OP defenses if you know what to put in front of them. This game makes you think a little bit more than DD1 did. In DD1, you just had to raise some of the statistics to make a single classes towers OP. In this game, you have to use multiple towers from multiple classes correctly to achieve the same thing. Honestly, it's pretty easy to figure out the combos, you just have to play a few of the classes then switch between them as you are defending. So basically, you can still be OP with stats, you just have to use multiple tower types creatively to achieve it. Or just let other people build and you stick your defenses behind theirs in protected locations. yea, I do that now since I play solo, but the OP comes from balancing issues. the combos are really strong and playing without combos is really weak...since this is pre-alpha I expect a lot of rebalancing to happen. Well, it's not really about balance it's about lack of content. I want each class to have enough towers/abilities that it can be self-sufficient by itself. Having 4 towers just simply doesn't cut it for an adequate choice of game play style, and it really limits the capabilities of end-game enjoyment.
×
×
  • Create New...