0.9.10 Information and News

FFA Is how this genre is supposed to be. These types of games have a basis in roguelikes and roguelikes are supposed to be brutal. If you see a rare drop and the hulking barbarian gets to it first, oh the hell well. You should have been faster. Sick of people whining for more casual BS.

"

Mikekan13 wrote:

FFA Is how this genre is supposed to be. These types of games have a basis in roguelikes and roguelikes are supposed to be brutal. If you see a rare drop and the hulking barbarian gets to it first, oh the hell well. You should have been faster. Sick of people whining for more casual BS.

Well people who say such BS are usually the hulking barbarian you describing and quite aware of the fact that they need victims so they dont want them playing in a mode that prevents them from taking all the good loot.

any fresh news on upcoming patch >?

Full patch notes will probably be up before the weekend, but that's not promised.

"

brgillespie wrote:

GGG could always use Torchlight 2's system of dividing up loot between players:

It doesn't!

Basically, every player gets loot proportionate to if they were playing single-player. However, the player is only able to see the loot that belongs to him/her. To everyone else, it's invisible.

No squabbling, no "I want that unique!"

You can also easily share items between your party members through a quick trade window.

Actually ...... this is a good idea.

"Hey, I got a rare sword! Anybody need?" is MUCH better than seeing it and fighting over it, *or* seeing it but having to wait for a timer, or whatever else.

If there is to be a standard, I'd vote in favor of making this option that standard.


I'd still prefer to see the option for true FFA, however this solution here should (?) satisfy all parties that want instanced loot but without going too far?

"

CharanJaydemyr wrote:

I think this 'timed allocation' thing is worth testing, and clearly so do GGG. Whether it's the best or worst of both worlds remains to be seen.

True, it's worth testing. But I think we've already seen that many players do not like the idea, and I suspect that GGG did not expect this kind of heated reaction.

The idea he presented was really good IMO, as it seems a good middle ground. I'm on the FFA side too (and true that D2 was fine with its FFA), but some people here are seriously against it.

Those on both sides, however, seem to be very apprehensive toward the timer thing.

i am also for FFA loots !If you dont want to lose your drop farm alone xD or be fast :D

"

VideoGeemer wrote:

But this last message you make, well, it doesn't sound like you're trying to be an ass, just that you're trying to express that it truly is *that* important to you.

I don't see how it could possibly really be that important, and your mention of not caring if everything else is LIGHT YEARS more advanced definitely gave the impression that you were being really weird about the point ..... but if to *you* it really is that important, then maybe it is. *shrug*


I have no idea why it would. I mean, the game can be a million times better than any other game, and have perfect *alternative solutions* to the looting problem, but you won't play it unless it has your specific feature? It really won't matter if their solution is a revolutionary, better way of handling the problem? I mean, *every* game has some flaw or another, and sometimes they break ground by implementing brand new ideas. None of this matters at all? Seriously?

I mean, can you at least see where that would come across as childish, trolling behavior? If that's not how you meant it to sound, then perhaps I came off too strongly as well. But really, that's how it sounded.

Ah, I think we have finally come to an understanding. Yes, instanced loot really is *that* important to my friends and me.

Others have suggested that FFA looting can't be that big a problem, since D2 had it. Well, D2 is exactly the game where this issue came up for my friends and me, and we stopped playing because of it. My girlfriend couldn't grab the loot as fast as her son and I, and she said that even though we were generous about sharing items, she felt left out. When we refrained from picking up so much loot, she felt that we were deliberately letting her have it--like letting someone win at chess or cards or Scrabble because you feel sorry for them--and that was no better. She was right; FFA looting is inherently competitive, and we simply don't want to be pitted against each other, ever. So yes, we actually quit playing D2 over this issue, and we won't play any game that has the same limitation, no matter how good it otherwise is.

I see now that a lot of needless tearing of hair and gnashing of teeth might have been avoided had I explained this background from the beginning. I apologize for not doing so. At least this debate has brought out more discussion of the looting issue.

As others have pointed out, PoE is a very loot-oriented game. Its loot system is therefore of great importance, and worth whatever effort GGG must invest to make it perfect. People have expressed strong preference for both approaches, so it seems to me that the ideal solution is to let players choose their preference, and give them the option to filter their looking-for-group results based on that preference. That would give PoE the best of both D2 and D3.

Any chance you can squeeze in some UI customization?

The least a slider to decrease the size of the chat window!

Being able to scale down the overal UI size would be even more awesome!

I basically stopped playing, because of the UI taking up most of my screen on my 27inch with resolution 2560x1440.

Yes it really is THAT annoying.

Thanks!

Six box a full group and the loot is all yours :P