What is the Origin of the Term, "Nerf"?
By
Abigail Frost,
Posted on: 2006-07-13 08:39 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I hate the word, and try never to use it when talking about the game to players. It carries a very negative stigma that I like to avoid whenever possible.
[/ QUOTE ]
This may be true. But using a different term comes across as PR-Speak or just plain old snake oil. Which is worse. Far better to be honest and call it like it is.
So you won't mind if we carry on calling a nerf a nerf and up-keep Rent.
This is a song about a super hero named Tony. Its called Tony's theme.
Jagged Reged: 23/01/04
[ QUOTE ]
If I thought that the developers were continually nerfing the game in order to lessen my enjoyment, I would quit immediately. It surprises me that you seem to think that is what's happening, and yet you still play.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's the problem with monopolies, they leave you with very little choice.
If another superhero game that offers basically decent gameplay, a whole slew of character options at your fingertips, and powers that haven't been homogenized until they seem a good deal less than superheroic pops up mayhap more people will jump ship. Were it offline and thus placed out of reach of grasping developers whose only goal in life sometimes seems to be to destroy characters and render time spent playing meaningless then so much the better. Such a game would doubtless gather an online community that would create more content than MMORPG devs have a tendency to and without the tendency to "rebalance" things into inanity ta' boot...
That's the dream, but in the meantime there's a monopoly. In the meantime we can but shake our fists and give voice (such as it is) to our many complaints, fruitless endeavor though it may be. Unless and until something better comes along, we're stuck here and they're stuck with us.
Goodbye may seem forever
Farewell is like the end
But in my heart's the memory
And there you'll always be
-- The Fox and the Hound
[ QUOTE ]
This may be true. But using a different term comes across as PR-Speak or just plain old snake oil. Which is worse. Far better to be honest and call it like it is.
So you won't mind if we carry on calling a nerf a nerf and up-keep Rent.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nerf and buff are nebulous and ill-defined words. Patch notes are supposed to be clear and concise. Publicity concerns aside, it makes sense to be as specific as possible with your patch notes, so you know what was changed.
[ QUOTE ]
Question: if, prior to the devs making HOs 50/50, they announced a "buff to all power sets was coming" would that have been the truth, a lie, or just misleading.
It seems to me that if increasing the maximum possible slotting capability is not a universal buff to all sets, but reducing the maximum possible slotting capability is a universal nerf to all sets, then we're talking much more about psychology than objective reality.
Keep in mind, I'm the one who made the "mentioning it in the hallway" comment so I'm on record as thinking this was bad form right from the start. Just saying, I wonder if this is less about the devs being consistent and not misleading, and more about the devs not seeming to realize just how fragile credibility actually is.
I.e. "technically right" is usually not the goal when you're attempting to gain the trust of the people you're communicating with.
[/ QUOTE ]
The correct analogy would have been if the devs had made all enhancements 50% (30% for Sch B, etc.). If they said they were buffing all powersets and then just buffed every enhancement I would say that's perfectly true and consistent.
It's not psychology so much as net effect. Statesman was technically right in Issue 2 when he said a "small tweak" was coming to Regen. But players (all customers really) don't care about how much work it is for you. They care about the net effect on their playstyle.
In any event, ED was just Statesman not having the courage after I5 of saying, "This is what we think the game needs. If it's not enough there might be more major changes later." That would have been the truth. Of course, it would have pushed some people away. But for me, having credibility with the customers would have been more important.
The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.
Nerf/Buff is not only a term used to describe adjustments to certain changes in an MMO it is also a strategy. The constant nerf/buff has been used by every MMO to keep players playing and paying for years. And it works.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's a fun thing to try... any time you see the word 'nerf' substitute the word 'balance'. It works!
"Man! They really balanced that power this time!"
"Oh No! They balanced me!"
"I sure hope they don't try and balance <insert power here>."
"My fire tank was uber until the devs balanced him."
"They've balanced us one too many times! I'm quitting!"
...
[/ QUOTE ]
But then, in a demonstrably large number of circumstances, you'd be disseminating falsehoods.
[/ QUOTE ]
In addition, the word "balance" would be stricken from the developer vocabulary for fear of its newly aquired stigma, still failing to fool, placate or even impress the players who have issues with the action it describes.
It's not the use of the word "nerf" that anyone gives a rat's [censored] about, it's the actual changes that swirl the playerbase into a frenzy. Just take a look at Enhancement diversification. The word "nerf" appears nowhere in its description, and yet explosions still ensued.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Here's a fun thing to try... any time you see the word 'nerf' substitute the word 'balance'. It works!
"Man! They really balanced that power this time!"
"Oh No! They balanced me!"
"I sure hope they don't try and balance <insert power here>."
"My fire tank was uber until the devs balanced him."
"They've balanced us one too many times! I'm quitting!"
...
[/ QUOTE ]
But then, in a demonstrably large number of circumstances, you'd be disseminating falsehoods.
[/ QUOTE ]
In addition, the word "balance" would be stricken from the developer vocabulary for fear of its newly aquired stigma, still failing to fool, placate or even impress the players who have issues with the action it describes.
It's not the use of the word "nerf" that anyone gives a rat's [censored] about, it's the actual changes that swirl the playerbase into a frenzy. Just take a look at Enhancement diversification. The word "nerf" appears nowhere in its description, and yet explosions still ensued.
[/ QUOTE ]
Honestly they would have had less complaints if they had just called it "Enhancement Nerfing". There were quite a few posts ticked at the inanity of calling something "diversification" that lessened the number of viable alternatives.
The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I hate the word, and try never to use it when talking about the game to players. It carries a very negative stigma that I like to avoid whenever possible.
[/ QUOTE ]
That "negative stigma" might have something to do with the fact that when a power gets nerfed it gets negatively effected. Power,secondary, etc are reduced in effectiveness as compared to before they were "nerfed".
[ QUOTE ]
It's not the use of the word "nerf" that anyone gives a rat's [censored] about, it's the actual changes that swirl the playerbase into a frenzy.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think it's more accurate to say:
"...it's any actual changes that swirl the playerbase into a frenzy. "
My memory's not as sharp as it used to be.
Also, my memory's not as sharp as it used to be.
"The tip of a shoelace is called an aglet, its true purpose is sinister." The Question
[ QUOTE ]
"GizmoDuck's Battlearmor".
[/ QUOTE ]
O M G. Gizmo Duck was the best one-wheeled superhero EVER!
Troller-50(Earth/Rad) Fender-50(Rad/Rad) Scrap-50(Dark/Dark) Tank-40(Stone/Stone) Blaster-25(NRG/NRG) WS-32
Corruptor-40(AR/Rad) Stalker-40(MA/Regen) Brute-32(DM/EA) MM-30(Ninja/DM) Dom-26(Ice/Fire)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I thought that the developers were continually nerfing the game in order to lessen my enjoyment, I would quit immediately. It surprises me that you seem to think that is what's happening, and yet you still play.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's the problem with monopolies, they leave you with very little choice.
If another superhero game that offers basically decent gameplay, a whole slew of character options at your fingertips, and powers that haven't been homogenized until they seem a good deal less than superheroic pops up mayhap more people will jump ship. Were it offline and thus placed out of reach of grasping developers whose only goal in life sometimes seems to be to destroy characters and render time spent playing meaningless then so much the better. Such a game would doubtless gather an online community that would create more content than MMORPG devs have a tendency to and without the tendency to "rebalance" things into inanity ta' boot...
That's the dream, but in the meantime there's a monopoly. In the meantime we can but shake our fists and give voice (such as it is) to our many complaints, fruitless endeavor though it may be. Unless and until something better comes along, we're stuck here and they're stuck with us.
[/ QUOTE ]
QFT
I myself CAN'T WAIT for Marvel and DC to release their games. It's not that I will auto-jump ship from CoX, but I will be trying those games the day they hit the shelves. Though I do enjoy most of the time I spend in CoX, I also think there's alot that's wrong with this game and, call me negative if you want to, but I don't see any of those things getting fixed. Most of my problems with CoX stem from all the nerfing, and just plain old design/implementation flaws. If those same things are better in Marvel/DC's games then I don't envision me having any difficulty moving my $30 a month over.
Until then, barring anymore major nerfs, I'll be here.
[ QUOTE ]
If I thought that the developers were continually nerfing the game in order to lessen my enjoyment, I would quit immediately. It surprises me that you seem to think that is what's happening, and yet you still play.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nobody believe that the Devs are nerfing things IN ORDER to lessen the enjoyment, just thats a side effect of the somewhat ham fisted way changes are implemented.
This is a song about a super hero named Tony. Its called Tony's theme.
Jagged Reged: 23/01/04
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I hate the word, and try never to use it when talking about the game to players. It carries a very negative stigma that I like to avoid whenever possible.
[/ QUOTE ]
Strangely enought the exact same thing can now be said of the word "BALANCE"
This is a song about a super hero named Tony. Its called Tony's theme.
Jagged Reged: 23/01/04
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I hate the word, and try never to use it when talking about the game to players. It carries a very negative stigma that I like to avoid whenever possible.
[/ QUOTE ]
Strangely enought the exact same thing can now be said of the word "BALANCE"
[/ QUOTE ]
QFT. Whatever word you use is going to get the negative stigma because people generally don't like nerfs.
The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody believe that the Devs are nerfing things IN ORDER to lessen the enjoyment ...
[/ QUOTE ]
I do. It helps keep my blood pressure down. 
They've consistently lowered the overall amount of fun in the gameplay for more than a year now.
I really can't believe people who are intelligent enough to make the game could do this accidently. So I have to assume they're doing it intentionally. If I thought they were doing it accidently I'd have to spend too much energy in a futile campaign to make them see what they're really doing and I'd just end up with a heart attack or stroke or something.
They probably have some research that somehow is interpretted as saying people play more consistently if you tease them with only occasional fun than if you just give them lots of it. Or maybe it says that people get more committed when you anger them than when you please them.
Try the official Nerf site!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The only thing that can make the reaction worse is when you say something like "a little nerf" and then you make a major reduction.
[/ QUOTE ]
Or like when you say there's gonna be no more nerfs to powers ...
Then cut all enhancement effectiveness by half ???
[/ QUOTE ]
Key words highlighted. They were technically right.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, because of all those non-power uses for enhancements. I mean, it's not as if affecting how enhancements work has any bearing on powers...
Anyone who can argue with a straight face that ED was not a sweeping nerf to all powersets is not someone I'd ever choose to believe on any matter.
[/ QUOTE ]
Question: if, prior to the devs making HOs 50/50, they announced a "buff to all power sets was coming" would that have been the truth, a lie, or just misleading.
It seems to me that if increasing the maximum possible slotting capability is not a universal buff to all sets, but reducing the maximum possible slotting capability is a universal nerf to all sets, then we're talking much more about psychology than objective reality.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't know. If they said they were boosting all SOs to 50/33 from 33/20, that would certainly be a boost to all powersets. HOs, though, is a somewhat rarefied example. At best you could say you're boosting the level 50s. While there are a lot of 50s, I'd hesitate to place them in the majority.
[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind, I'm the one who made the "mentioning it in the hallway" comment so I'm on record as thinking this was bad form right from the start. Just saying, I wonder if this is less about the devs being consistent and not misleading, and more about the devs not seeming to realize just how fragile credibility actually is.
I.e. "technically right" is usually not the goal when you're attempting to gain the trust of the people you're communicating with.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with this. "Technically right" does not matter when you have these results - that the maximum possible boost to every power's features has been halved, at least from enhancements. If you had the right powers to make up for the lack otherwise, you could slot attacks to do triple base damage - actually a bit higher. Now you can just barely double them. IMO, this qualifies as a sweeping powerset nerf, and being technically correct - as you point out - that it doesn't directly affect the powers is completely meaningless.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
[ QUOTE ]
In any event, ED was just Statesman not having the courage after I5 of saying, "This is what we think the game needs. If it's not enough there might be more major changes later." That would have been the truth. Of course, it would have pushed some people away. But for me, having credibility with the customers would have been more important.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, that would've cut down a huge chunk of my own frustration with how ED was handled. I'd still be annoyed that issue 5 and 6 were back to back massive nerfage, but without the assurance that it wasn't going to happen, I wouldn't be to the point where I only believe what two devs say anymore.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's not the use of the word "nerf" that anyone gives a rat's [censored] about, it's the actual changes that swirl the playerbase into a frenzy.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think it's more accurate to say:
"...it's any actual changes that swirl the playerbase into a frenzy. "
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, after a few radiation defender-playing people got all swirled into a tizzy over tar patch having a -res debuff, you might be right...
Then again, there weren't many frenzies after armor stacking was added, after Dark Miasma got its needed boost, and so on.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
... Burn just sticks out 'cause it was so freakingly, amazingly over-powered for about a year. And, yes, my only 50 is a fire / fire tanker. I know *precisely* how over the top burn was...
[/ QUOTE ]
How far "over the top" were the changes to "fix" this power? I feel the changes to the power itself were a bit much - considering mob AI was conveniently and simultaneously recoded to further "nerf" Burn's effectiveness. Add ED and then watch the power's effectiveness slip below Bob Dole virility.
[/ QUOTE ]
3-slotting for damage versus 6 is largely offset by making burn buffable by FE, BU, and any other +dam buff I can think off. If you team, it's not that hard to find someone who can keep mobs in burn.
To me, it's like like having SB on my kin or insulation shield on my bubbler; duh, they're useless while solo, but are quite nice in teams. And burn ... is not useless while solo, you just have to pick out a decent time 'n' place to use it, instead of putting it on auto while the invuln tanker herds mobs onto you.
And FA still has pretty good damage output, regardless of burn, because of FE and blazing aura. FA's primary problem, as I've said before, is surving alpha strikes from big spawns while teamed.
Competition is good. Once Marvel and DC release their own mmo's, the competition will be fierce, unless one or more of the contenders is severely botched.
i though the word nerf originated from star wars galaxies. i thought the term was used because a nerf was a highly unplesent animal in the star wars universe. (dont ask how i know that)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is Castle's sig quoting everyone's favourite robotic assassin from KOTOR?
[/ QUOTE ]
From KOTOR2, and I think it was one of the other HK models, but yeah.
[/ QUOTE ]
I just finished playing it again. I love the game.
[ QUOTE ]
i though the word nerf originated from star wars galaxies. i thought the term was used because a nerf was a highly unplesent animal. (dont ask how i know that)
[/ QUOTE ]
A nerf is a highly unpleasant animal referenced in The Empire Strikes Back, which I suspect predates SWG by a few years.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The only thing that can make the reaction worse is when you say something like "a little nerf" and then you make a major reduction.
[/ QUOTE ]
Or like when you say there's gonna be no more nerfs to powers ...
Then cut all enhancement effectiveness by half ???
[/ QUOTE ]
Key words highlighted. They were technically right.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, because of all those non-power uses for enhancements. I mean, it's not as if affecting how enhancements work has any bearing on powers...
Anyone who can argue with a straight face that ED was not a sweeping nerf to all powersets is not someone I'd ever choose to believe on any matter.
[/ QUOTE ]
Question: if, prior to the devs making HOs 50/50, they announced a "buff to all power sets was coming" would that have been the truth, a lie, or just misleading.
It seems to me that if increasing the maximum possible slotting capability is not a universal buff to all sets, but reducing the maximum possible slotting capability is a universal nerf to all sets, then we're talking much more about psychology than objective reality.
Keep in mind, I'm the one who made the "mentioning it in the hallway" comment so I'm on record as thinking this was bad form right from the start. Just saying, I wonder if this is less about the devs being consistent and not misleading, and more about the devs not seeming to realize just how fragile credibility actually is.
I.e. "technically right" is usually not the goal when you're attempting to gain the trust of the people you're communicating with.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)