Stringing on the Kickstarter customer, or Why this game needs to die
" I have over 5800 posts. I've been posting ~daily since late Sep 2011 (on this account since Dec 2011). I have been a forum moderator and alpha member for much of that time. I have made probably over a hundred map-worthy characters across my playtime. What more do I do? Send them physical mail? Call them and have a heart-to-heart? Posting is the "official" way to talk about these things. It's up to GGG to listen to who and how they want to. " The golden line is what they promise and what they do. I won't care or defend any changes that don't break their promises. They can remove the death penalty if they keep the game challenging in other ways. The death penalty is just a means to an end of challenging gameplay. Personally I would prefer that they keep the death penalty, but unlike losing loot tension (which I railed against for months) or adding chase uniques (which I also posted against) or adding respecs (which I also posted against)... it's not an absolute renege on any promise they've made. --- " That's how non-competitive games work. Games like this have an objective stick with which to measure things. I would love a version of this game that just let you pick your skills and gear from a drop-down list and was a more creative work, but that's not this game. This game has RNG and trading and short-term, ladder-based leagues instead. Good builds are rewarded, and most importantly, they allow you to make whatever builds you want in a fixed amount of time. " Their percentage is low because they are rare. The interesting numbers which they're not posting is what is their usage rate factoring out their rarity. Or, what would be their usage rate be assuming that everyone had one. In the spirit of "nerf the strong stuff, buff the weak stuff, and don't let enemies get power creeped out of existence", how about adding a version of "chaos goes to low life" on a really weak chest and introduce more risk (and for the fuck of it, let's call it Solaris Lorica). ... Oh shit, they've done that and people are using the Lorica and it's still too strong? Well, I don't know what to do next, but at the very least, I know Shav's is far too strong and is only being "balanced by its rarity". " Better and worse are subjective things. Holding up to their statements are objective things. " A rare has 6 possible affixes. If there are only 7 desirable affixes, then 7 choose 6 = 6 possible mirror rares. If there are only 8 desirable affixes, then 8 choose 6 = 28 possible mirror rares. If there are only 9 desirable affixes, then 9 choose 6 = 84 possible mirror rares. ... It does not take a whole lot of affixes to completely change the way that "mirror rares" work. For my go-to example, imagine if they added a suffix to weapons that had {+ipd%, -aspd%}. How many new "mirror worthy" rares would that generate? There's no reason for itemization to suddenly "go the way of D3" while still staying true to their original motives. " Boem parsed my words correctly. I intended to say "the fact that it is possible ... is a change", by implying that if anyone can do it, it's possible. Last edited by pneuma#0134 on Mar 2, 2015, 8:57:42 PM
|
|
"More like... 8 affixes - 4 desireable prefixes, 4 desireable suffixes = (4 choose 3)^2 = 16 10 affixes - 5 desireable prefixes, 5 desireable suffixes = (5 choose 3)^2 = 100 Not quite as efficient but still totally with it. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
|
|
" True, true. Thanks for the math catch. |
|
" They have upheld their statements since day 1 of OB, with the exception of loot allocation where they clearly and publicly changed their mind (for the better IMO). And even given the change of mind, it is still 100% possible for you and your like-minded buddies to play short allocation or free for all. They didn't remove loot tension, they made it optional. How is that bad? All I've seen them do is increase the amount of possible player choice. More builds are viable than ever. More MTX are available than ever. More loot allocation options are available than ever. Don't like PA parties? Don't play them. Don't like seraph wings MTX? Don't party with people using it. Think Shavs is broken? Don't use it. Etc...etc...etc... I have sunk a minimum of 50 hours into every major ARPG (and even some not-so-major ones) since Diablo 1 and Path of Exile offers more freedom than ANY of them in terms of what goals you can set out to achieve and how you can go about achieving them. This game is as close to 100% customizable with respect to gameplay and progression as I've seen from the genre. The only thing that you can't opt out of are passive tree resets and the associated meta balance changes with each new expansion. And this is why I post in these threads critiquing the criticism, because the game I hear some of you guys arguing for *is* *still* *there*. Maybe it's a competitive issue and some old timers don't like how they have to play if they want to compete in races/leagues etc, but as far as just actually playing the game - you really can play it how you want. You don't have to chase super powerful uniques and flashy MTX skins while everyone plays in PA parties and has a nice time sharing all their loot without any competition. And the existence of such an option shouldn't bother you. " That's basically diablo 3, possibly minus the word "creative". " For some builds it has no competition. That's what you miss and why it sounds to me like QQ. If someone were to think that it should not be possible for a unique to be BiS for any build, then I'll just agree to disagree; I think that's bad stratification of items. And if the issue becomes the NUMBER of builds for which Shavs is BiS, then again, you are actually talking about a whole host of issues coming together (pain attunement / auras / blood rage / etc), and placing the blame on Shavs is overly simplistic. The 352nd character to hit Level 100 in Standard The 82nd character to hit Delve 1000 in Standard Last edited by tackle70#1293 on Mar 2, 2015, 9:33:11 PM
|
|
" Why is that a problem? If GGG were to somehow discourage min-maxing, the min-maxers would just go play something else. I don't see how their inclusion in the PoE playerbase really affects all that much for regular players. And ARPGs in general tend to be encouraging to min-max playstyles The 352nd character to hit Level 100 in Standard
The 82nd character to hit Delve 1000 in Standard |
|
" Doryani's catalyst can be best in slot depending on how you map your passives because you're unlikely to get a high ele dmg and high phys dmg mace with crit; for belt headhunter by a long shot; for amulets many of those corrupts are on uniques (chayula etc), particularly but not purely in PvP; boots lioneyes with +1 gems for some setups but otherwise yes a rare... Agree windripper, pretty wow... and I'm not sure it's as out of favour as all that (unless TS takes a hit) - perhaps for those who can afford 450+ dps harbingers. Atziri's disfavour is currently cyclone king along with facebreakers... There's quite a few. Things like, for example, the +2 support gems on disfavour are not repeatable on a rare and it reduces itemisation. It just wouldn't hurt to be looking at some of these things and trying to find a way to bridge the gaps. With chests most of all though. |
|
|
I should add that BiS is in some ways self-driven by the way rares work. Imagine having to buy 50 rares with nearly max life, resists and say, accuracy to corrupt just to get one with +1 gems. Wonder why uniques invariably end up being the go-to items for corruptions?
|
|
" I'm confused as to what any of this means. I have about 5k posts, I almost exclusively post in feedback and trade, at this point mostly trade. I also took probably a year off of posting, between the time I was away from the game and I didn't really post outside of trade during all of rampage when I did come back heavily. Also we both know alpha has been pretty inactive since OB started. Being a mod means there's a chance many of your posts are towards mod related things rather than feedback. Also I'm not sure why you mention how many characters you've made as it literally has no relevance to what we're talking here. I'm not trying to start a dick measuring contest. My point is I spend most of my time defending tooth and nail things I want to stay how I want them to stay in this game. I will take the time and write long feedback posts, answer virtually every reply, I will fight the same arguments by different nameless people and many of the old timers in this thread I never see doing the same here. You are one of them. I'll see you pop up every now and then but if you really want to make claims that you don't like where the game is heading. Where were you when people were bitching about how hard it was to progress in maps? Where were you when everyone was fighting for uniques to be easier to get? Where were you when all of these topics that you're so against right now were hot topics on the forums? I get so upset in those threads because I know more people agree with me but no one gives a fuck to jump in the thread and say so. We praise GGG for listening to the community, well everyone in this thread, they have been listening to the community and they've made changes that reflect what the community has been saying. Don't be upset because your silence didn't lead towards them sticking to ideals they had years ago. Things change, there were no promises made. Finished 17th in Rampage - Peaked at 11th
Finished 18th in Torment/Bloodline 1mo Race - peaked at 9th Null's Inclination Build 2.1.0 - https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1559063 Summon Skeleton 1.3 - https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1219856 |
|
" We're literally playing different games. This topic is not going to be any easier to discuss if we can't even agree on what game GGG is making. In the game that I play, GGG is in complete control of the difficulty, not just for myself, but for everyone that I am playing and trading with. They lay the constraints, and players work within those constraints and solve that puzzle. The solving of the puzzle is the playing of the game, and an easier puzzle makes a shittier game. In the game you play, you're alone on a desert island, playing solo, immune to balance concerns entirely. Any content they add is strictly positive; even if it's easier; even if it removes large chunks of the game complexity. You make up your own challenges as you go along. It's like going on an SSF2T forum and saying, "Akuma is fine! If you don't like it, don't play him!" It is GGG's decision to make a competitive game or a non-competitive one. A non-competitive one is ostensibly Torchlight 2, offline client available, mostly solo, and player-driven modding. A competitive one has online-only play, ladders, challenges, races, pvp, and prizes given out to contestants. Which of these more acutely resembles Path of Exile? |
|
|
There is a significant distance to bridge between 'has competitions' and 'is competitive'. I don't think PoE has bridged that distance, nor will it ever. Neither did any Diablo game, by the by.
I get that Chris is trying to model the game off, presumably, the experiences he had playing Diablo 2 in a 6-man LAN, but some of those experiences were confected by his circumstances, not integral to the game itself. |
|
