Catering to the minority

[-]

MrBones-Necromancer@reddit

What pisses me off even more is when it's a PvE game. Like Bordelands, what do you mean you nerfed your best gun? Who the fuck cared if it was doing "too much damage" to the goddamn pixels!? Let people have fun!

[-]

JBlazzy@reddit

Yeah, fuck game balance ans build diversity, let everyone just run the same 4 guns on every character on every build!

a-bottle-of-vokda@reddit

I despise the sentiment that game balance isn't important for PvE games. Having a balanced arsenal of reasonably powerful tools creates interesting and varied gameplay, and when one of those tools is too strong it both reduces gameplay variety and makes the game less challenging/engaging.

[-]

Boudac123@reddit

Agreed however borderlands is kinda in the category where the devs really shouldn’t care

[-]

IIlIIlIIIIlllIlIlII@reddit

I don’t know how to say this without sounding like a meme but I think seeking a balanced engaging challenge is just slightly on the more intellectual side that doesn’t apply to most people if you know what I mean

[-]

UnNecessary_XP@reddit

While I agree with this sentiment, nerfing a build or weapon in a PvE game feels really shitty, I’d rather them buff other builds or weapons playstyles to keep up with the stronger build in question, then have a difficulty modifier to allow you to still have a challenge. Much like the Mayhem modifiers in Borderlands 3 or the Tiered (forget what it’s called) dungeons in Diablo 3.

Only agree with nerfing if the weapon or build in question is not working as intended. If it’s just a clever use of game mechanics leave it in the game.

[-]

dat_GEM_lyf@reddit

Right so if the devs nerf something that is, and I quote, “not working as intended”… you’re fine with it.

So what’s your complaint lol

Devs want you to play a certain way and you abusing something that they didn’t intend… then it’s a warranted nerf, per your own words

[-]

UnNecessary_XP@reddit

As in it the build or gun is broken with glitch. Hence, the reason I put a follow up sentence. “If it’s just a clever use of game mechanics, leave it in.

[-]

dat_GEM_lyf@reddit

Unintended game mechanics would be not working as intended…

You’re arguing against yourself lol

[-]

UnNecessary_XP@reddit

I’m really not lol. 🤦

“Is it a glitch? Fix it.”

“Is it a clever use of game mechanics? Leave it alone.”

Example:

Glitch: This gun hits hard but only shoots a single projectile, if I save the game and load back in as I’m switching to a gun that shoots multiple projectiles. My hard hitting gun will now shoot multiple projectiles. Fix this as this is a glitch.

Clever use of game mechanics: This one gun in the game shoots knives that are classified as melee damage so it takes advantage of melee damage increasing skills while still having the advantage of a gun. And if you get this in a certain element it deals even more melee damage to affected enemies. Don’t nerf this as it’s just a clever use of game mechanics.

[-]

dat_GEM_lyf@reddit

You’d defend the BFG “slowdown” tech lol

Unintended behavior can be things outside of “glitches”. Literally no glitch occurs but the devs just didn’t think about the interaction that much or it didn’t get discovered in play testing. When a game releases, you get more hours of “testing” in the first hour of day 1 players than you get the entire development time.

BF3 USAS with frag rounds is a great example of this

[-]

UnNecessary_XP@reddit

https://i.redd.it/4ujjvkxrx1cf1.gif

😂👍

[-]

dat_GEM_lyf@reddit

No you

gif

demon-storm@reddit

Noob detected

[-]

MeBustYourKneecaps@reddit

This I can understand. Honestly I even agree with it.

"Balancing single player games doesn't make sense" Unbalanced single player games are still less fun, you have to intentionally disadvantage yourself to use the full set of options you have in the game means you are less likely to use the full kit, which makes it less enjoyable.

[-]

FrazzleFlib@reddit

this is of course a niche example. not all balance issues stem from abusing bugged behaviour, and sometimes if theyre out of reach and enough and fun enough they should absolutely be kept in, like hoiking in terraria

but im talking people itt shit themselves when devs literally just slightly nerf the most overtuned shit in a dlc or something, in a way that retains its fun entirely, like with brimstone in isaac repentance. its damage was nerfed like 15%, people went apeshit lmfao

[-]

SaintCambria@reddit

Game balance matters yes, but buffs are preferable to nerfs; if an item is overtuned, bring the others up to its level, and if needed, buff the enemies too. The net result is the same, but it feels so much better for end users.

[-]

FrazzleFlib@reddit

this is only warrented in major systematic issues, like launch helldivers 2, this is insane to expect all the time as its obviously 100x more work and usually utterly unnecessary

[-]

SaintCambria@reddit

So then leave shit alone and let people have fun.

[-]

dat_GEM_lyf@reddit

Obviously you’ve never run 2016 with a mastered SSG from level 4 through the entire game without touching another weapon…

Do you think gaming is a job? If you've played it so many times that you're bored of it, play something else dawg.

Regardless, if you want to optimize your free time, why is it the job of the game companies to stop you from doing that? How does that make any sense? In your metaphor, this is saying "well, they blocked off the 10 minute shortcut, so now I gotta take the hour long route everyday. Thank god they did, they sure know better than me what I should be doing. That old shorter route was gettimg boring anyway"

[-]

SurprisedCabbage@reddit

Tl:Dr you won't agree with anything I say anyway so just don't bother reading.

Do you think gaming is a job?

No, my analogy was an example. You can substitute whatever you like. The point is that when people have a goal they'll aim to achieve it as quickly as possible, regardless of how tedious the process is. If you make one gun the strongest in the game by far and you get a person who wants to level every character in the game to max then they will use that same gun for every character and burn themselves out due to tedious gameplay.

Using my analogy you are incorrect about blocking off the shorter path, that would be akin to removing the gun entirely. What they should be doing is ensuring all routes to your destination are similar in length but varied. One might pass by a gas station, one might pass by a park, one might be a country road, but if they're all similar in length then you get to pick and choose which one you like best instead of only driving one road for the rest of your life.

Analogies asside, no I don't see games as work, but I do know people will do tedious or painful tasks if it means achieving what they want. People don't always play for fun. Some people play really difficult games because they like overcoming a challenge, dark souls. Some people play toxic hostile games just because they enjoy feeling superior to others, League of legends. And some people will play games that extort actual money from you just to so you can get fast passes to achieve your goals, mobile games. Yes it is stupid that people will play games that don't enjoy but it is generally a good idea for developers to do their best at ensuring players will walk away from their game with a positive outlook rather then a negative one.

[-]

alexmp00@reddit

For PvE they should balance powering the weakest weapons, not nerfing the favorite ones. (When the power balance broke because the game became easier just buff the enemies or add new ones more op)

[-]

fateofmorality@reddit

Helldivers 2 had this problem as well, balancing guns to make them more 'realistic' in a future setting than making the guns fun.

Jozsefirst@reddit

I cant really get behind this having witnessed the downfall of Helldivers 2. The game was supposed to be difficult and you were meant to work together with your team in order tp cover all tactical requirements, dedicated machinegunners, rocketeers, flamers, so on, all useful in specific circumstances, all vulnerable in others. The fun of the game was the cohesion of different tactics each player would bring to the squad dynamic. Then people started whining because you couldnt one man army the entire process and the devs caved. Everything has been buffed to where you are no longer dependent on your team at all. Might as well be a single player experience because everybody consistently just runs off on their own anyway.

[-]

GruntBlender@reddit

Fucking Warframe

[-]

I hear what you're saying, but I have never, not even once, found that to be the case. It's always "this one is too strong" but it's not like other strong options don't exist. You, the player, are choosing if you want to use the super powerful thing. You always had the option to use less powerful weapons, and that doesn't make this one "the only viable option".

If players want to go on a power trip, let them. If it trivializes your end game, who cares? That's a choice that they can make.

[-]

kdhd4_@reddit

Because it feels like shit to know that your favorite playstyle is trash and you could be doing better using something else.

Why should one thing be really good for a small number of players that like that, instead of making things all around decent so everyone can have fun with that? Even people that like trivializing the game might find the one option that enables it unfun because they're stuck with that one option.

who cares? That's a choice that they can make.

This makes no sense. The devs care, they have a vision on how the game should be played. Maybe it's a choice they don't think you should be able to have.

[-]

Mister_Bossmen@reddit

The answer should then be to buff the rest.

Buffs feel good. Nerfs feel bad.

If the game has no player opponents anyways, edge on the side of giving the player the powertrip. Give them a challenge, but also give them MULTIPLE fun toys to tackle it with. Don't give them the challenge and then take away the already few toys that could deal with it easier

[-]

Peepus_Christ@reddit

Buffing is not a straight forward answer, because then what was once a bad item, becomes the new absolute best, from unforeseen consequences of willy nilly buffing, now everything needs to be buffed to match that, and the cycle repeats until everything is all over the board

[-]

Mister_Bossmen@reddit

Let me rephrase, slightly.

Balance the game with a tendency to buff existing weapons over nerf.

I'm not saying "stronger is better. Buff everything" I'm saying, if things aren't balanced, avoid balancing them at a less fun playing field. Bring it all UP to a balance, instead of depressing it all DOWN to a balance.

If a weapon is overused, you need to analyze why its used so much, and buff/nerf accordingly. Just nerfing things will always make next thing buffed by default.

Strenght is A B C, you nerf A, now B is too strong. What im proposing is ask why is C not used as much and buff it accordingly. Just nerfing things would leave the game unfun to play. You need things to feel strong, and unless you start by making everything broken, nerfs wont get you there.

[-]

NotVainest@reddit

I don't disagree with this. This thread started as people saying that "only buffs" is a viable balancing strategy and I'm arguing that it's not. Just nerfing things is arguably worse than just buffing things. You need a balance of both, like you're saying.

[-]

You know that they could nerf the item in a way that the low level player can enjoy it, while the high level player dont right?

Buff other things instead? Nooo thats too much effort get fucked

[-]

Fun1k@reddit

Balancing is important even for a PvE game.

[-]

Adventurous_Turnip89@reddit

Can't let the Speedruns be too speedy...

[-]

gbuub@reddit

Gonzales

[-]

DamnGoodCheeze@reddit

gif

[-]

Sinfere@reddit

gif

[-]

Zermist@reddit

Idk I got up to top 3% solo queuing and one tricking black widow and she’s the worst hero in the game by far. Probably a skill issue

[-]

dat_GEM_lyf@reddit

Game4kids.png

[-]

mischievous_shota@reddit

Why even give hero bans? If you're so damn good, you're going to be playing with the absolute cream of the crop and for them, this sort of thing would be a challenge. If someone is so good they can't be opposed, they've earned it frankly.

[-]

Dasnap@reddit

Remember when they changed it so you had to play with one less friend? The vast majority of players found it confusing, and only the top players went 'yeah' for 5 minutes before finding something else to complain about.

[-]

FeelAndCoffee@reddit

This. OW was for FPS what Smash Bros was for fighting games or Mario Kart for racing games, just fun, stupid and wacky gameplay.

But then, they started to optimized everything for the try hards, and if you play the game only a few times per week or month with your friends, even just having an idea of what is the current patch feels like a chore homework.

This eventually lead to people playing less, including your friends, so you play even less, and each time that you come back the game, it feels so different that it's not worth it just to get used to the new season meta.

It's a death spiral.

[-]

CthulhuMadness@reddit

It did. I will never forget the day they demanded "competitive". Then next thing you know you were only allowed on of each character. After that... you couldn't spam voice emotes because it was "toxic".

Dude I remember having so much fun in a 6 DVa comp in season 1 of competitive lmao

A shame the game really went headfirst into the competitive e-sports scene

[-]

Heathcliff511@reddit

You can still play no limits bro. Nobody forced you to play comp.

[-]

ZenPyx@reddit

You can play the gamemode with far fewer players, and no ranking system?

[-]

Femboy_hater@reddit

Higher end? It is objectively casualized version of ow1 with specifically bigger hitboxes and less variety. New heroes are do-alls instead of smth focused. Ow lost its style and lore to boot.

Don’t confuse QOL changes with actual improvement

[-]

MrInfinity-42@reddit

As an OW player, no it didn't. What led to OW becoming hated was the dev team pouring all their resourses into PvE, which lead to pvp going without any content updates and barely even any balance patches for nearly 3 years

And then before that several heroes throughout OW1 were broken to the point where if you didn't pick them at any level of play, you were throwing. Pro play too saw the same meta repeated over and over

So OW fell not because the devs were listening to one particular group, but because they weren't listening to anyone at all

[-]

MrEuphonium@reddit

Idk, brig wasn’t as bad as people think, and Orisa never deserved the hate she got.

Why not balance the game differently in each league?

NCAA and NFL have different rules for that reason

[-]

Finkenn@reddit

It‘s so disgusting how much effort it takes to counter these low-skill cheese picks — when you play solo trynna “coordinate” with randoms

[-]

-Danksouls-@reddit

Overwatch is super balanced though. The heck?

DominateMePiper@reddit

incomprehensible

[-]

Quakezy@reddit

goated pfp

[-]

DominateMePiper@reddit

ty <3

[-]

CalmOptimal@reddit

This is a good thing for us, I think.

[-]

The_King_7067@reddit

I don't understand it either

It's probably the difference between me being slightly overweight and me being hella obese

[-]

FreljordsWrath@reddit

"adc in 2018 lmao"

adc is attack damage carry, or the dps in other games.

that was an era where all the other roles were insanely inflated in terms of damage and tankiness to the point where adc players needed insane babysitting in order to be able to pull their own late game. and even then, a full build fighter/assassin/mage could melt the adc in 2 seconds.

i mean, that's still kinda true, but at least adcs deal some damage now.

[-]

Kohtupora609@reddit

It was absolutely hilarious to play a normal full tank build on someone like Sejuani and having enough damage with your full combo to 100 to 0 an adc in 3-5 seconds while they're literally permastunned the whole duration, very balanced gameplay yes.

[-]

The_Meemeli@reddit

Thanks for the explanation. The other person capitalized the "i" in "in", for some reason, so I thought it said "ADC LN 2018 LMAO"

[-]

GoatRocketeer@reddit

League has the best pvp balancing of any game and its not particularly close.

Excluding iron and challenger, there's like a \~10% winrate gap between the worst champ and the best champ at every rank. That's pretty narrow. And then you compare that to every other pvp game out there.

[-]

sendnukes_@reddit

People love to shit on League, but it's pretty good on most ends, otherwise it wouldn't be one of the most popular games in the world for years like it has.

[-]

I swear people make an effort to have a bad time in league

DISABLE THE FUCKING CHAT.

And if people spam ping u just mute them.

You gotta realise this game is filled with 14yo idiots. Stop steping down to their level, be a fucking adult and ignore the crying baby, you're not gonna make them play better

[-]

sick_frag@reddit

Yeah league is fucking awesome. People act like it’s addictive but it’s because they have been lied to by easier games and can’t accept the reality of a true ranked ladder.

I can’t imagine getting “addicted” to casual league. Like there are people in this thread talking about raging at their friends for not tryharding? Like bro you need to win in Normal games that bad?? Do you play Mario kart and rage at your friends for throwing blue shells, or do you have a good laugh and play again?

Only reason I ever redownloaded it was because my ex-girlfriend (now fiancée) wanted to play together. :D

[-]

cocofan4life@reddit

I mean Im mainly referring to people that say 'any nerfs bad and just give buffs' ppl on this thread etc

[-]

SocSmallfry@reddit

Literally describing the economy.

[-]

CoronelPanic@reddit

Ah yes Warhammer 40,000

[-]

noah9942@reddit

Anytime games balance around the competitive scene, it gets worse.

[-]

Jozef_Baca@reddit

Tbf, I'd say fighting games are the only exception to this.

Games not balancing around competitive scene is how you get shit like Injustice 1.

[-]

AtomicNewt7976@reddit

The culture around lower level players is completely different in FGs as well, when a low elo player can’t beat a certain tactic, we don’t say “wow spamming rekka on elphelt is OP!” we say “don’t let her do that next time you have to 6P her”.

[-]

noah9942@reddit

You know what fair, I don't play any fighting games but those generally seem much more in line with the comp scene.

[-]

Jozef_Baca@reddit

Injustixe 1 batman when trash can is within his vicinity

[-]

MalekithofAngmar@reddit

Commit egregious design error abused by good players

FIXING THIS WOULD MAKE THE GAME WORSE

[-]

MeBustYourKneecaps@reddit

Devs balance the game around the top 5% of players

Be Starcraft

Everyone complains

Devs balance the game equally around the entire playerbase

Be League of Legends

Everyone complains

Devs balance the game based on variety of player feedback

Be TF2

Everyone complains

Devs balance the game based on the complaints of everyone

Be Marvel Rivals

Everyone complains

Devs balance the game based on their own intuition

Be Helldivers 2

Everyone complains

Devs neglect to balance game and allow for the playerbase to naturally ebb and flow based on the perception of the state of the game

Be Call of Duty BO 3

Everyone complains

I think y'all are just assholes, ngl. Genuinely bad balance can be annoying sure, but I've so so many fucking picky playerbases who are the equivalent of the head butler hovering over the gentleman in training as he wonders what utensil to reach for. Inevitably reaching for the "wrong" one and getting shot in the palm for doing so.

It's impossible to please absolutely everyone when it comes to a competitive game... that you must know. Yes balancing the game around your top players is not a good practice, but where does it end? Do they choose to balance the game around the ranks just below that and possibly alienate/punish the ones in the top ranks just because they found a niche that got them ahead? Taking away their fun? Do they balance the game around the middle ranks and cause the game to have a repetitive, samey meta? Do they balance the game around the lower ranks and cause absolutely everything to become OP? Like genuinely think about it for a second, it ain't easy to do.

I'm not saying you should just take your slop and like it, like a good little bitch. I'm just saying... all this excessive hatred needs to be...

Balanced

[-]

Tom_Browning@reddit

Trickle down economics doesn’t work in real life, so why do game devs believe it will work in-game?

[-]

Brutal_Illusion@reddit

I'll never forgive the R6 seige Devs for absolutely ruining a really fun tactical shooter. Such a shame

[-]

beardyMcfatfuck@reddit

Tarkov

[-]

Pola2020@reddit

Single player game

Devs nerf player's weapons/abilities

[-]

CailHancer@reddit

Is it really fun combat if you're 1 shotting everything? I'm playing a CRPG currently, there exists a build which with an early game pair of boots and an early game chainsaw has more movement than god and deals up to 10 million dmg (the strongest enemy of the game caps at 20k). The only real solution if you want to have an interesting and engaging combat experience is to not play that build.

[-]

Jozef_Baca@reddit

Is it really fun combat if you're 1 shotting everything?

Yes

Next question

[-]

MangaIsekaiWeeb@reddit

Then play on easy difficulty.

Hard difficulty should remain hard.

[-]

MoffDracen@reddit

Since you can't grasp the concept of it, the fun is getting as OP as possible to make even hard mode be turned easy.

[-]

But I never said nerfs are bad, motherfucker. Nerfs are good to constantly shake the meta and is a good way to make the game fresh every season. Destiny 2 is a good example of this. However, that is not the point Anon is trying to make.

Balancing the game around the top players is not a fun way to balance anything. Making everything balanced just makes everything weak. Compare Overwatch at launch and Overwatch now. TTK is at an all time low because they wanted to focus on eSports championships, like the cucks that they are.

[-]

MangaIsekaiWeeb@reddit

But I never said nerfs are bad

Whoops, my bad. I thought you were another person. So many people replied to me and I don't keep track of the messages.

Balancing the game around the top players is not a fun way to balance anything.

Compare Overwatch at launch and Overwatch now.

Seeing, my original message is about playing easy mode to feel powerful and the top message is about Single player games. The top 5%, Overwatch, and Anon is irrelevant. I don't really care about those games anyways. I care about singleplayer/PvE games.

If you still insist on arguing with single player and PvE games in mind, feel free to continue to argue. Otherwise, there is no point in you arguing, but I will argue believing you are talking about PvE games in general.

Since you can't grasp the concept of it, the fun is to learn the game and then getting as OP as possible to make even hard mode be turned easy.

Making everything balanced just makes everything weak.

On Hard mode? Yes, all your tools should feel weak so that achievements means something. If you want easy mode, play easy mode.

[-]

If you argue that nothing should be nerfed you should also believe underpowered things shouldnt be buffed which I know you dont even though the end goal of these 2 actions is the same - equalizing power level across the game

[-]

Jozef_Baca@reddit

How do you even come to that conclusion?

Buffs are good, they make more things viable and usable

Nerfs make less things viable and usable

[-]

CailHancer@reddit

Endless buffs with no nerfs is how we get powercreep and how a game's difficulty gets ruined.

[-]

Jozef_Baca@reddit

Nah, power creep is usually caused by not enough buffs to the old content while new stronger content gets released.

[-]

MangaIsekaiWeeb@reddit

Indeed, I could just not use that strat. But the existence of that strat destroys the prestige of beating a game at hard difficulty without it.

Getting an achievement for beating a game at the hardest difficulty needs to mean something.

[-]

Pola2020@reddit

Difficulties shouldn't exist for most games and most of the time harder difficulty is just "ok now enemies have 10x more health and deal 10x damage"

[-]

Because in a perfectly balanced game you should be able to build for any playstyle you want and not feel like you're missing out because there's a build that invalidates everything in the game. I'm not even against one shot builds if they're hard to assemble so you feel like some effort you put in was rewarded but if its easy as it is in this example it just feels cheap.

[-]

FrazzleFlib@reddit

why should devs not be allowed to make balance updates in their game? really annoys me when games get perfectly reasonable updates that even slightly affect difficulty and then endlessly whine about it, as if it being a singleplayer experience magically invalidates any and all care of balance and difficulty design, see the flood of "un-nerfing" mods for the binding of isaac after repentance came out

[-]

Parksrox@reddit

As a game dev, it's not usually smart or well received to you let people do a thing and then tell them they can't do that thing anymore. People usually care not just about the difficulty, but that either their playstyle is no longer viable because of a small change or a specific thing they liked just isn't possible anymore. Helldivers 2 is my favorite example without outing what I've worked on, so I'll go with that even though they've totally fixed it and made the game incredible again by now. They nerfed guns like the Railgun and HMG into the ground, removed emoting midair to prevent fall damage (which players loved, saving yourself by saluting goes with the game very well), nerfed all the explosives to the point of them not even hurting the enemies you brought them for, and many more unneeded nerfs that noticably made it worse. If you can't do a thing you like anymore, that sucks for you as a player. A good game developer makes changes for the player, not just their artistic vision. 15% less mag capacity on a big gun means you can't kill that thing you brought it specifically to kill. 10% slower movement speed as a fast character means you can't use what you picked them for like you could. 20% damage on that shotgun you loved because it obliterates everything in front of you no longer obliterates everything in front of you.

That's not the reason Blackbeard got nerfed lol. He would just hang out on windows where you COULDNT shoot his chest/body.

He was dumb and deserved a nerf.

[-]

Yep, and it wasn't just top down balancing but was "balancing" the game so it was fun to watch for pro league

[-]

bosnanic@reddit

it was jarring going from operators based on real life special forces units to gooner slop k-pop idol who can deploy kuwai holograms.

[-]

Dtron81@reddit

gooner slop

Brother, were you there for even the first year of Siege??? This was always a thing. The worst case of this is Ela, a year 2 op, and even then, most of the gooner brained people complain operators are too ugly these days lmao.

[-]

cocofan4life@reddit

Wahhh wahhhhh wahhh women in my vidya games for men!!!!!

[-]

Povstnk@reddit

I think they are talking about elite skins that look extremely out of place

Default Ela at least looks tacticool

[-]

Dtron81@reddit

Some of them do, yeah, but if he's referring to the Iana elite thats like one of the few cross-over skins that isn't poorly done imo. And I'm fucking gay saying that lmao.

[-]

Immortal_Merlin@reddit

Nah, Alibi is cool since r6 is implied to work with tech that is slightly advanced and we already had few holograms on music concerts.

The problem is a lot of non-competitive games tried to pivot into esports, so they started doing it as well.

[-]

Jedimaster996@reddit

I knew it would go the route, but the early days of Hearthstone before it went full meta builds for competitive were a blast. 'Storymode' was rad, gave decent rewards, and didn't feel like any goofy deck was too punishing.

Honestly devs shouldn't have to cater to any player group

balances around top 5%, new players stop coming

balances around noobs, long time players get bored and quit because even if the surface level mechanics are equal-ish, any semblance of skill annihilates the game balance completely

balances around the average joe, top players call it catering to no skill, noobs call it catering to skill

but honestly the most evil way to balance is Gaijin: balance to polarize your community and make them get mad at each other instead of you because you're literally applying the divide and conquer principle on your playerbase

[-]

o0THESHADE0o@reddit

I'll eat down votes but the second an exploit is found by a pro in any of the games mentioned in these comments, everyone and their mom is abusing that shit in casual queues. I see it happen all the time to this day in games like MTG where everyone net decks what the pros play, and exploits in MOBAs and whatnot are quickly used in casual to pub stomp.

This is a bad take for those reasons imo.

[-]

MalekithofAngmar@reddit

Design game for hardcore audience

decide to take this post's advice

top 10% of the ladder completely and utterly miserable/unplayable

hardcore players (big spenders) all quit, no point in mastering game

mediumcore players all quit because there's no point

casual players were mostly tourists and the one's who weren't see there's no point in upping their engagement

Antoni-_-oTon1@reddit

Touche.

[-]

ConCadMH@reddit

Devs balance to cater to an ever expanding "wider modern audience"

Depth and skill expression are eroded

game slowly gets worse

DonPepe181@reddit

IMO WOW lost its appeal when they started making everything accessible to every player (kinda the opposite of what this topic is complaining about). It was around WotLK. By the time the pandas came out it was more like playing a mobile game and just grinding pointless matchmaking trainwrecks than a real a MMO where you know the people you are playing with.

[-]

TechiesOp@reddit

This is 100% true. To the point where today you are timegated so heavily on how much you can progress your character every week, so that wagies can still play the game and not feel behind.

[-]

Tetragig@reddit

Dungeon queue kinda made the rest of the game irrelevant.

[-]

SPZ_Ireland@reddit

Any competitive fighter

I don't care about your frame rate bs. I just wanna have fun.

[-]

TopMountainGoat@reddit

Tekken 8 is balancing around it’s more casual audience and look at how it’s fairing, so to me at least fighting games are the worst example for this

[-]

SPZ_Ireland@reddit

Tekken 8 is great to play because of that.

It's the exception to the rule

I think for PvP games, this is totally fine, because buffs/nerfs generally don't impact low elo very much, as they have gameplay issues that impact whether they win or lose more than any buff or nerf ever could (unless the buff/nerf is something insanely egregious, which is rare); it doesn't matter that your character is "weak" or theirs are "strong," because both parties are playing so ineffectively that those buffs/nerfs are basically irrelevant.

When PvE games start buffing/nerfing things? That's where it gets stupid, in my opinion. Not that things need to just be broken OP, because that's also boring, but a lot of the time they do nerf things for no real reason at all, and then fun weapons are no longer fun, and the unfun weapons are STILL unfun.

[-]

TerminalDoggie@reddit

Dead by daylight my beloved

[-]

pizzabox53@reddit

war thunder

[-]

fibericon@reddit

That's what pissed me off when I played WoW. Let's nerf this ability that hurts too much in arena. Nevermind that we just fucked everyone else, most of whom have literally never even been to the arena.

[-]

AsherTheDasher@reddit

the finals

[-]

Slip_Snake@reddit

Watching the game I like get worse, knowing there's nothing I can do about it.

Apex legends was the opposite for me. Balanced around the bottom 30%.

But in a competitive game, you will always have someone who loses more often than he's winning. Even with MMR, you have someone in the bottom tier who is bad even for that bottom tier. Those people will leave the game.

When they leave the game, you have someone else who is losing more often than he's winning. Those people will also leave the game.

Years and years of this, and the only regular players you have is the top few percent. Those are either so competitive they don't mind losing, or they like dunking on the new palyers who occasionally come and go.

The Finals is pretty reasonably balanced but the heavy's lack of mobility is a real question mark. In Cashgrab and TDM, nobody seems to play it because the lights can simply plink and dodge while the heavy just stands there, and the mediums have a broad array of tools for getting around shields and barriers.

yariimi@reddit

The devs of ow1 were incompetent they never listened to pros and the average community,why do you think goats was in the game for 2 years?they never listened to anyway,the devs themselves and Jeff kaplan was the downfall of overwatch

[-]

Inner_Impress8741@reddit

Well, right now the only complaint I have is how the new hero does too much damage. Counter-picking still exists but is much harder now because of hero bans. Anyway, that's pretty much it balance wise. I don't really have much of an issue with the balancing or think that they're especially catering to the top pros.

[-]