Leave the game untouched ffs,thats the way it was intended, I actually think this kills some SOUL
Why do people support the balancing patches of games?
Christopher Brooks
Other urls found in this thread:
Tyler Hill
balance is only wrong when it's in favor of the player
Blake Perry
Stupid zoomers and their MUUUUH NEERFFF TOO STRONK!! or MUUUUH BUFF TTOOO WEEAK
Nathan Moore
because it's easier to say that the game is unbalanced than to admit that you just suck at the game
Jackson Gomez
It depends on the situation
For multiplayer games a lot of these things are cases where it never occurred to the QA team to test out EVERY single option or combination, and as such only find out once live if there is a balance issue--whether it should be balanced I guess comes down to the case of if the exploit is fun or obnoxious to work around
For singleplayer, these are almost ways issues that were straight up missed, and definitely not intentionally (Curse stacking in DS1 and elemental Rifle Spears in BB)
For games like DS2 that are singleplayer with heavier multiplayer focus though, the balances just need to account for enemies and bosses, which almost none of the patches did, balancing the MP while making SP more of a slog because intented kill methods were nerfed
Cameron Bell
You try to be serious in a shipost thread? Godspeed user.
Joseph Adams
it's easier than having good game design
if you create options that have good counters for everything, even if something is overpowered you can expect it and counter
however it's much easier to just have the game poorly designed and nerf what is currently strongest
Isaac Diaz
Oliver Bell
>having lots of options but only having a handful of it be usable is a good thing
no
Blake Price
because they are retarded but thats just as devs want it because that way they dont have to do shit other than tweak couple of modifiers with each "patch" and create a shitty perpetual metagame which has never new content other than tweaking modifiers
Jaxon Williams
...
Camden Lopez
>League of Legends took an aggressive rebalancing approach 2 years ago
>Loses significant popularity and twitch viewership because pro players who used to stream and promote their game have to scrim against each other 14 hours a day to understand all of the radically changed bullshit that will probably go out of style next patch
Asher Martinez
Old people are just as retarded as young people so the zoomer argument sucks
I think it's pritty subjective, i think games would be better off patched max once a month but that's just me
Jace Bailey
>patched max once a month
No, if somethings broken it should be fixed immediately, I don't want to wait a month for the devs to fix bugs and several months for them to fix the new broken character because they limit bug fixes to monthly patches and balance changes to seasonal patches.
Easton Gray
True, i need to think more about the subject it seems
Brandon Rodriguez
I guess there is no good way to patch a game ina good way other then patching it good, if you patch a game good the game will be better, if you patch it shit and everything goes to shit, it gets worse, but what is good? balanced? fun? both? gotta be both, how hard is that tho? is it realistic you expect devs to patch a game to be both balanced and fun? isn't that to much to ask for?
Cameron Baker
I guess a balanced game is a fun game tho, because it would be best for competetive, wich is the reson i would asume so many poeple like league of legends overwatch and etc, they would would only need to focus on balance, and yet it seems no devs can do that
Eli Mitchell
Jose Long
I seem to not understand what you are trying to convey user, would you mind explaining in more detail
Jeremiah King
PUNCH NAZIS
Camden Thompson
This type of attitude is why Anarchy Reigns fucking died.
No.