The recalibration system is not like d1, the gear system is not like d1, if u have a library full of max stats, that optimizes all gear sets that u pick up with a max core, the problem is with talents on brand set, there r so many talents and stats it is almost impossible to get one stat and one talents u wanted or 2 stats,not to mention if u want to change ur core stat, optimization will not help with this at all. In d1 it worked because u had 4 stats, so u found or bought gear until u got a piece with 2 stats u wanted, u rolled 2 until u got what u wanted, weapons only had a talent u could could change, then u optimization them to max. In d2 would the recalibration of all stats not make it possible to optimize ur gear? If they made stats one time use, would hrs for farming max stats be any different from hrs of farming for division tech? No
Based on the argument that players are fighting against each other, it is indeed possible to set a DZ to a low-environment design.Originally Posted by Merphee Go to original post
They have tried this method in Summit, whether it is dimming the entire environment (limited to enter the night), or turning the dark area into the first underground level to the second underground level. At least in this way, the official believes that it can Allow players to play repeatedly.
Of course the best way is to optimize the game.
However, if you say that you are limited by the host, it is a common business decision error in the game. The official wants to develop PVP live, but has not established a PVP environment. You can't conversely say that player requirements are unreasonable. Just concentrate on designing PVE, and then use DLC to expand PVP. It will give more new content or resources to PVE.
Greed can be profitable, but the M group may be the development team that is the least able to balance the game in the games I have played. It is unrealistic to expect PVP as the player's final game at the level of the balanced game.....
Calibrating all slots would make optimization instantaneous. They won't go for that. You'll have to farm about an hour to raise your piece about 2%-5%.Originally Posted by Finalplay342019 Go to original post
I'm predicting about 20 hours to optimize a build with half stats. I bet I'm close![]()
That’s why I didn’t like direct TD3 when you were investigating before. It is the independent DLC of TD2 to reduce the hardware pressure.Originally Posted by Marriorqq Go to original post
Does UBI push the conversion of archive records on different platforms?
I am not familiar with this industry, but what do I do when making business decisions?
I will use the same system or record (TD1 TD2 TD3) to make the next generation compatible with the previous generation (similar to windos7 compatible win2K win95)
My main system architecture is compatible, and different generations can collect individual special weapons or skins. As an equipment acquisition game, I bought the TD2 mainline and think it’s good, I want to use TD1 equipment (adjustable quality or limited sharing ), because it is compatible, I also purchased TD1 to get some unique items for TD2 to use. So that later TD3 TD4 TD5 can use part of the content of other works.
In this way, the sales can be multiplied. For PVP, a special DLC can be created. Players who don’t like can also PVE for many generations. Want to play RAID to play RAID, want to play survival to play survival...etc.
Of course I may be too ideal, but I think that such a method, whether it is to profit or reduce the cost of restructuring content, as well as development and retaining the freshness of players, and even the hardware limitations you mentioned, these can all be Get processed.
This is whether you have to choose one set of games to sell each time, or sell 10 sets of games at a time, so that the fun content can survive and get paid by the players. The players will not pay for the unfun content, but you may consider special considerations. Good equipment or SKIN to buy and play.
If the equipment obtained by TD2 can go to TD1 PVP, or the things obtained by TD1 can be partly used in TD2. As long as the satisfaction rate reaches more than 60%, I have sold two games at the same time without the cost of rebuilding the core of the new system of TD2. , If Microsoft had to redesign the OS every generation, I would be a shareholder of them and I would probably scold them to death.
There are similar cases in real life "For the standardized generations, different games (PVE or PVP), for PVP, get independent DLC or design integrated games.":
https://www.smashbros.com/
Such a company can be regarded as a world-famous game company, Nintendō.
PS:I refer to the information on the Internet to calculate (may be wrong).
UBI employees are three times as many as Nintendō. But the former's profit is less than one-third of the latter's.
Maybe it can confirm my statement.
Please don't say we. I know for a fact you are not speaking for me. I realise it appears to give your argument validity but it is just fallacy (argumentum ad populum).Originally Posted by newkid2025 Go to original post
You get a new thesaurus for your birthday or something? lolOriginally Posted by Adam_Sanderson Go to original post
Oh, for the record... *realize![]()
The Optimization Station will allow you to maximize each attribute individually – at the cost of a variety of materials for each percent increase.Originally Posted by boer24 Go to original post
For example:
Play a mission on "hard" – find a Providence glove with 4% weapon damage, 5% hazard protection and 1% CHC. With the Recalibration Table you can recalibrate the hazard protection to 12% CHD. Now, with the Optimization Station you can also maximize the weapon damage to 15% and the CHC to 6% in individual steps.
BUSTED!!Originally Posted by mckrackin5324 Go to original post
I bet his punching himself right now![]()
Realise or realize:Originally Posted by mckrackin5324 Go to original post
Realise and realize are two variants of the same word. One spelling is more common in American English, while the other is more common in British English. Since both of these forms are accepted somewhere in the world, neither is technically wrong. Still, any time you are writing, you should consider your intended audience. This principle extends to spelling differences, as well. You will want to use British spellings when writing for a primarily British audience, and American spellings if you are writing for a predominantly American audience.