Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
They realised that because they are terrible at balancing games and need to rely on a badly designed scaling mechanic that shouldn't exist they needed to address the fact that everyone was running around in max tier armour with the best dodge roll.
So instead of making their game better, they decided to just nerf everyone who was using this strat.
You obviously didnt play much of the first game. They will keep fine tuning things until almost everything is viable rather then having to rely on one or two meta builds to have real success.
Sadly in the meantime that does mean that sometimes your favorite things will get nerfed a bit.
I know nerfs in singleplayer/co-op game is silly policy and often makes the game unfunny and hurts enjoyment, shrink playerbase, but the Bright Steel Ring single handily used to make the whole Encumbrance system obsolete. They shouldn't have include this ring in the game first place, what were they thinking?
They were thinking it was worth trying, and balanced it later once they had enough evidence that it was a terrible decision?
Just a note:
It is completely irrelevant whether a game is single player a co-op game or a pumpkin.
If it is not how the creators of the game wanted it, it will get buffed / nerfed / deleted or reworked. Simple as that. People need to abandon this flawed mindset of "why nerf things in a single player game".
Explain why provider's freedom regarding services of product is related with argument of "nerf things in a single player game is not good for the product" being invalid. Two are entirely different subject. Or are you insisting some kind of Mandate of Heaven logic, in a free market, at 21st century?
Freedom has consequences. Choice has responsibility. Last time I checked the whole Dark Age Mandate of Heaven style 'Ruler has every rights to do anything in their lands thus any criticism is invalid' thing only brought us pain and remorse in history. While you speaking nonsense in the forum, insisting a logic that is outdated, proven to be wrong; the game might losing it's profits and customers in real life, real time.
Remnant 2 isn't some kind of artist's painting in the room; it's a product. I've seen too many cases in video games history that developers busy making every popular tactics weak instead of making contents or make the game enjoyable, and it eventually took away all the fun and bleed playerbase. Although in this case the nerf is justified; it's totally, 100% valid and legit argument that developers should take seriously.
If criticism is considered as flawed mindset, there would be no progress, advancement or evolution.
1 slight nerf, literally everything else is a buff. And honestly, nerfing the Bright Steel Ring IS making the game better overall.
Sorry you don't feel the same, but at least you got to use it while it was still busted.