Looting -- The official thread for discussing the loot system. Updated 18th March, 2013.
" No, you can't. And that's all there really is to it. |
|
" I am quoting YOU! Do you even know what you are typing? Are you so high that you just hit the keyboard & hope for the best? |
|
" You dont get the point. PA doesnt offer you another option, it forces the remaining people who prefer SA into accepting it. Removing any competition is what most people like, therefore the common loot system will be PA. Try to create a short allocation groups in HC or Onslaught right now, people will just whine. Something like that never happened before the option was added and theres no way in hell you can put that genie back into the bottle without a shit ton of people complaining. The devs ideals were set in stone since closed beta but they decided to suddenly take a different route, which maybe was the only possibility for the game to stay healthy, I dont know. The thing neither you, nor most others see, is that PA isnt really an option, it catters to the instincts of most humans. Minimizing your own risk is what most people prefer over maximizing their payout. On a different. It would be cool if youd stop to bring up the CoD series, the definition of rehash and dumbed down shooters. The fact that this software sold more than a couple thousand times is sad, the fact its the most sold videogame already pathetic. Sure it sold a lot of time, but that doesnt mean that its good, let alone that its what the devs wanted to publish. You can release a successful game by standing by your ideals and not giving in so easy. Sure you will end up with less profit, but thats something GGG has to make up their mind about. Do they want to stand by their ideas or increase their paychecks? The direction looks pretty clear right now. (As I said earlier already I have no clue whether or not that maybe is the only way to keep the game alive since I dont have access to their financials in which case their move would be reasonable.) Last edited by nynyny#3398 on Jun 16, 2013, 12:18:30 PM
|
|
"Pretty much. Here's a repost from me for the people who missed it:
How 'Loot Options' are Anti-Choice
"From a thread that shouldn't exist, because this is the only authorized loot allocation discussion thread (edit: was? I swear that sticky was up earlier today): "What the "loot options" proponents fail to understand is that they are the enemies of choice, not the friends of it. Yes, if you have friends who drink or use drugs, you don't have to hang out with them. Precisely our point. Instead, "loot options" compel them to hang out with you (what other options do they have with everyone choosing "permanent"?), while their activity is continuously sanctioned, as if alcohol and drugs were eradicated from the face of the earth. The idea behind the old system was to give the player real dilemmas, real choices. The decision to ninja loot for a quick gain, or not ninja loot in order to maintain honor in the eyes of the group, was a choice; now choice is gone. The decision to allow a player into your party, based on whether you trust or distrust them, is now irrelevant, thus no longer a choice; there is no trust to betray. Okay, so maybe the old system had trouble making those choices relevant... who cares? The point is that it was trying to implement true choice. It just needed some help. Instead, it got destruction. A choice on whether or not to destroy choices -- with a clear bias towards destroying them -- is not an invitation to choose. It's an invitation to prevent choice, an invitation to determinism. Frankly, it's kind of sad that both the players and GGG aren't able to see through the bandying around of the word "options" and realize what those options really mean. The defect in the old system was not the lack of choice, but the need to frequently make blind choices. RandomPlayer wants to join the party; should we allow him or not? Admittedly, under the old system this was a major problem, and I agree that it needed to be addressed somehow... which is why I believe the correct choice at this point is to remove "loot options" while simultaneously implementing a Reddit-style "karma" voting system for accounts. (Obviously bot protection would be implemented: for example, no votes until one character on the account is level 25, and banned accounts have all of their votes revoked.) This karma system might not be as good as actual experience with the player, but it would give party leaders something to go off of, and give possible ninjas something to fear in terms of reprisal. RandomPlayer has negative karma? The party leader might allow it, might not; it depends on how forgiving that player is feeling. Choice. The chance to grab someone else's unique? I could ninja it, but then I'd get downvotes and it might be hard for me to find a good party. Choice. That is a choice mechanic. What we have now is a no-choice mechanic. However, instead of salvaging a strong mechanic that actually made you feel like an exiled criminal on an island full of exiled criminals... at the urging of the players, GGG completely scrapped it, refusing to treat its problems and killing it off instead. Thus yuwy is correct about one thing: GGG had a moral failure here. They failed to stick to their guns; they caved. Yes, the loot system had issues; yes, those issues demanded resolution. But there is a fundamental difference between repairing a broken part and replacing it, between standing up for what you believe enough to fix it properly and selling it out for an entirely different vision. If anything, that's when sticking to your guns is more important than ever. 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. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Jun 16, 2013, 1:23:55 PM
|
|
|
Loot choices have nothing to do with game difficulty, fail argument.
Choices won't effect the loot tension junkies enough to have any lasting effect on the game, only offer it to a wider audience, fail argument. Trying to attention seek from the difficulty of an online game, fail at life. |
|
|
I love the new options. I usually play ranged class and i like to kill alle the mobs around, before i go crazy on loot. Don't get me wrong, I'm super ninja, half of my uniqs were ninjaed.
I have a suggestion for all of u pa haters, make a thread for u, where u all can meet up and group. |
|
" Quoting what exactly? Im not sure what and where you are going with what you quoted. What do you expect really? And yes, I may have smoked one to many bong loads but the fact remains. D2 is a Legendary ARPG. Maybe I should pass you the bong. You seem like you need it. :D |
|
" You know absoutely nothing about logic, evidence and empirical data. Let me just point out a few thing: "D2 is the greatest ARPG of all time" is and OPINION, and if you base your argument on that being a fact then I can dismiss it immediately. "D2 is the most played ARP of all time" is a baseless claim. If you want to make any point that is based on "D2 is the most played ARP of all time" then you have to first prove that statement. But I see no empirical data, or any evidence at all, so I can dismiss it because of that aswell. Even if "D2 is the greatest and most played ARPG of all time" is true, it does NOT mean that FFA is good, or that everyone liked FFA, or anything like that. So you can't prove or disprove anything about FFA loot by just bringing up D2. The only thing that make it take any effort to prove you wrong is that you are not making a coherent argument or statement in the first place. If you truly are not just a troll and really do believe everything you are saying then you have absolutely nothing to lose by presenting your side in a more logical and consistent way. Stop confusing opinions and facts. Stop telling people that you have disproved them by stating that you don't agree. Even if you just are a troll you should still do this, because people are clearly losing interest in you, I don't want this thread to die, do you? Last edited by Sickness#1007 on Jun 17, 2013, 12:45:31 AM
|
|
" Boogerballs, I like this idea a lot. It would bring back the old cutthroat feel but your choices also have consequences in the long term. 1. Give players a 'party play score' 2. Give players the option to vote up / down other players score once 3. Give players the option to accept or decline someone who wants to join your party, decided by the leader, where their party play score is displayed for the party to examine before deciding. P̯̹̙̥̉̏ͦͯA̠̝̰̣̯͕͚̲̭͈̥̠͑̓̿ͦ̾ͯ̍ͅͅȚ̜̦͕̞̞̠̮͎͔͙͔̺̺͉̟̿̿̏ͬ͛͋̍ͮ̌̚H̹͕͚̟͍̘̤̱̻̬͓̬̮̫̦͖̳̹ͮͨ̒̉ͮ̿̈ͪ̇̿͆ͭ̃ͭ̃ͭ̚ ̲̫̞̤͓̳͑ͬ̾͌ͯ͐͂̿͗ͨ͋͑̍͐͗̾̄O͕̮̻͔̳̠͉͖̳͖͈̻͇͈̣̙̪͈ͨ͐̒̽ͣ̋ͅF̣͎̞̞̯̝ͦ͌̆ͥ̈͐̾ͣ̔ͮ̐̀̏ͪ̚ ̟̩͙̙̩̮̻̼ͬ͑ͥͦ͗̿E̼̭̩̜͕̱̤̭̞͖̳͍̝̤̼͓̗ͩͫ̌ͬ̊̋̄͑͗̽X͕̰̪̱̲̩̙̦͓͓̯̠̤̝̝̯̣̥̀̋̌̍̚Ȉ̖̟͔̩̝̊̿ͪͅL̺͓̻̰̀͋̅ͮͧE͔̼͚͕̮̻̟̩̪̖̫̪̦͙̎̑͆̏ͨͅ
|
|
" Exactly what I was trying to say but I quit because its pointless arguing with someone who is either 1) Too dull or bias to really think critically about anything, 2) Just succeeding at trolling for attention. Its really only somewhat fun to continue discussing this with people who actually really want to discuss it. Our side of the issue won so its pointless to waste time with someone like that. We can just relax and enjoy the game. :) Cheers Standard Forever Last edited by iamstryker#5952 on Jun 17, 2013, 1:42:39 AM
|
|
