Thoughts from a game dev in the industry ...

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

goetzjam wrote:

Actually it is ok to say just use loot filters and wave off the problem, simply reducing the items that drop isn't an acceptable proposition because people that DO use loot filters will find less bases, chrome recipes, just everything.

Should GGG maybe focus on working with the community wiki and creating a starter guide with information needed to play effectively, like loot filter and stuff, yes they should.

So GGG shouldn't just hand-wave off the problem, they should do something about it by making loot filters more accessible to new players. Got it.

Even your idea of smart loot forces people to play a certain way by telling them which drops are the ones they should be using. Trade is the equalizer. You find stuff you can't use but somebody else can. Somebody else finds something they can't use but you can. You trade and everybody gets what they need. Keep the smarts in the players and out of the drop mechanics.

"

MadRabbitPoE wrote:

How so? Rereading my post, I am not debunking anyone's counter points or saying that they aren't valid. Just wondering what the incentive is to post them and ultimately, who are they trying to convince?

last time I've checked, this is a forum. ie, place of discussion. when you post anything, including your feedback, you're opening up a discussion for others to engage in. a discussion isn't a one way street. it isn't a monologue.

if you wanted to tell GGG and only GGG some feedback you dont want to be seen by others, you can do it very well without using forums. if, of course, you actually want to convey feedback and not attract attention and discussion that will come.

"

I'm sure you have some great explanation as to why I am being a hyprocite that makes total sense and thus, paradoxically prevents anyone ever from criticizing bad behavior, but I don't quite see it, outside of reaching really far into a shallow barrel, because my comment stung a little bit.

your comment didnt 'sting', lol; I just found it funny how you went to criticize an opinion for criticizing an opinion and claimed you didn't understand why people do it. the same reason you did it, of course- I hope your question was rhetorical because otherwise it's very ironic.

"

mark1030 wrote:

Even your idea of smart loot forces people to play a certain way by telling them which drops are the ones they should be using. Trade is the equalizer. You find stuff you can't use but somebody else can. Somebody else finds something they can't use but you can. You trade and everybody gets what they need. Keep the smarts in the players and out of the drop mechanics.

Emphasis mine.

Yeah, trade and everyone gets what they need. Including the people running eccentric ES caster Marauders under a smart drop system. The whole trade thing is neutral here, it does not help your argument any more than it helps mine. Your point is invalid.

"

grepman wrote:

last time I've checked, this is a forum. ie, place of discussion. when you post anything, including your feedback, you're opening up a discussion for others to engage in. a discussion isn't a one way street. it isn't a monologue.

if you wanted to tell GGG and only GGG some feedback you dont want to be seen by others, you can do it very well without using forums. if, of course, you actually want to convey feedback and not attract attention and discussion that will come.

It still is a forum and I appreciate your very thoughtful response informing me what a forum is and how it functions. I never denied forums existed for this reason and of course, ultimately, you have the right to post criticism to other criticism, even if that criticism serves not much purpose.

But, of course, having the right and ability to do something doesn't exclude a deeper exploration into the reasons why one would do such a thing and if it was really worth the time.

For example, I have the ability and right to shave my balls and paste the hair across my face to create a fake beard. If I were to choose to do that, I am sure I would be met with questions of "Why are you wasting your time doing this and ruing your face?" from concerned friends. My inherit ability and right to do that, which no one is contending, doesn't invalidate a deeper question of the intentions behind the action.

"

your comment didnt 'sting', lol; I just found it funny how you went to criticize an opinion for criticizing an opinion and claimed you didn't understand why people do it. the same reason you did it, of course- I hope your question was rhetorical because otherwise it's very ironic.

This is quite astonishing. I am apparently leveraging a criticism against a criticism when I ask the question "Is this really the worth and is productive?". The nature of it bring a criticism against a criticism means it's hypocritical and funny, therefore not allowing that question to be asked.

Of course, that would only be true if you completely ignored the differences in type between the criticisms, their substance, their context and the reading comprehension required to actually understand all three, but who needs any of that when ignoring all of it allows your to posture yourself as being an intellectual superior?

"

MadRabbitPoE wrote:

"

your comment didnt 'sting', lol; I just found it funny how you went to criticize an opinion for criticizing an opinion and claimed you didn't understand why people do it. the same reason you did it, of course- I hope your question was rhetorical because otherwise it's very ironic.

This is quite astonishing. I am apparently leveraging a criticism against a criticism when I ask the question "Is this really the worth and is productive?". The nature of it bring a criticism against a criticism means it's hypocritical and funny, therefore not allowing that question to be asked.

Of course, that would only be true if you completely ignored the differences in type between the criticisms, their substance, their context and the reading comprehension required to actually understand all three, but who needs any of that when ignoring all of it allows your to posture yourself as being an intellectual superior?

Criticizingly criticizing criticism or multiple criticisms in parallel, let's discuss. lol

PoE vs D3 again?

bye.

"

Manator wrote:

PoE vs D3 again?

bye.

Gee, it's almost like Blizzard has been setting the bar for ARPGs since the mid 90's or something...

"

MadRabbitPoE wrote:

It still is a forum and I appreciate your very thoughtful response informing me what a forum is and how it functions. I never denied forums existed for this reason and of course, ultimately, you have the right to post criticism to other criticism, even if that criticism serves not much purpose.

But, of course, having the right and ability to do something doesn't exclude a deeper exploration into the reasons why one would do such a thing and if it was really worth the time.

For example, I have the ability and right to shave my balls and paste the hair across my face to create a fake beard. If I were to choose to do that, I am sure I would be met with questions of "Why are you wasting your time doing this and ruing your face?" from concerned friends. My inherit ability and right to do that, which no one is contending, doesn't invalidate a deeper question of the intentions behind the action.

first, you're welcome.
second, let's not project this stuff into real life. youre on internet. the form of criticism varies. you ever wandered off to 4chan ? you should ask /b that question, I would pay to see the responses youd get.

"

This is quite astonishing. I am apparently leveraging a criticism against a criticism when I ask the question "Is this really the worth and is productive?". The nature of it bring a criticism against a criticism means it's hypocritical and funny, therefore not allowing that question to be asked.

Of course, that would only be true if you completely ignored the differences in type between the criticisms, their substance, their context and the reading comprehension required to actually understand all three, but who needs any of that when ignoring all of it allows your to posture yourself as being an intellectual superior?

where did I say the question is not allowed ? you are now making up shit. I just said that question is rhetorical and ironic because by asking that question you are also answering it at the same time.

Im not posturing as intellectual superior, but you kinda are- by implying one valid criticism is superior than other valid criticsm (you said so yourself, youre not arguing its not a valid ciriticsm) and likening it to shaving your balls and pasting hair to your face.

valid criticism = valid criticism last time I checked, but apparently not in your world *shrugs*

Gender "barriers" are in this game due to the fact that the characters are much more written into the story than in other games. Each one has his or her own backstory and there is a fair bit of dialog and interaction with the character. You are not a duelist, you are the Duelist. You are the Scion. You are the Witch. Taking out the character-specific text would diminish the story. Just like there is one and only one Thrall in Warcraft, each of these characters are unique to the story. Harry Potter wasn't female because that's how J.K. Rowling wrote the story. Katniss Everdeen is female because that's how Suzanne Collins wrote the story. I would recommend going back through the story in Path of Exile and doing your research on it before dismissing it since it does actually have depth and intrigue plus commentary on such things as the Catholic church.

If and only if GGG made entirely new animations, voicework, and rewrote the story to include alternate gender versions of the characters could there be alternate gender versions of the characters. Given how small GGG is, the amount of investment needed for such a comparatively small gain is not practical or feasible for them. I am somewhat dubious of the OP's claim they are in the industry given how little thought seemingly went into whether it's even practical or wanted for GGG to do "gender equality."

Also, never start with the assumption that just because a given character or class only has one gender option that it means the game does not have gender equality. True gender equality would acknowledge that sometimes a given character cannot be rewritten as having a different gender. Going back to my first paragraph, rewriting Harry Potter to be Harriet Potter or Katniss Everdeen to be... whatever male version of Katniss there could be, is not feasible given the work that has already been put into those characters.


Chances are the OP meant "SCT" as in "Scrolling Combat Text." For all the talk about making the game more accessible, the OP has done a poor job for not clarifying what "SCT" is since the lack of it in this game would imply people who play this game are less likely to know what it is. Do not make the mistake of thinking that just because you or a large group of people think that something is enjoyable means that another person or a different group of people would like it as well.

Scrolling Combat Text could possibly be implemented and useful to players, but in PoE it could be too clunky to even bother with. It would also exacerbate the graphics problems. If GGG could fix the graphics such that the game is rock steady and reliable then SCT could be explored, but until that happens I wouldn't even put it on the table to consider.

A combat log might be nice though if it weren't for connection problems that many people have. Simply making it an option would help solve that issue. I personally don't see GGG doing that given their stance on how much information should be given to the players (we don't have actual data on what the base damage of some minion skills are for example), but it would be very useful to players so they can figure out what's truly going on in the game.


As already noted by other posters, Path of Exile's map system came before Diablo 3's map system. The thing Blizzard likes to do is copy things from other games and do their own twist or take on it.

I do think maps could be extended to Cruel or even Normal like Diablo 3 and Torchlight do, but I'm not sure whether it would be overall good or overall bad for the game.

What tends to freshen up the game is the new mechanics, skills, and revisions GGG adds every few months. Maps might be something to add onto that but it seems the current system does well enough on its own for keeping a fresh feeling.

The want to get to the end of the map is defeating the boss since they can drop higher level items than the area they're in. There does not have to be fancy fanfare and in fact such fanfare might detract from many players' enjoyment.

Fixed map attempts is in place to make players think about what gear to bring back. The fact that items need to be larger due to how skill gems work means playing into inventory management to some degree can be interesting. GGG doesn't always get the balance right between making a mechanic interesting due to constraints and having it be frustrating because of those constraints, but they do recognize constraints can make a mechanic compelling.


Dominus is not an insane fight once you learn he telegraphs the big hits and it's possible to avoid the other deadly mechanics. Malachai likewise has his telegraphs and has a fair bit of mechanics, although I do agree his fight is perhaps too punishing in terms of space. It is made worse by the game's graphical problems. If or when the graphics are in a better spot then we can do a better assessment of each encounter.

Just like in other ARPGs, bosses have their place. The way GGG has set up the game is rare monsters can definitely outdo unique monsters, but there certainly are uniques that must be approached cautiously or else you will die.


Given how every class can have so many builds and archetypes it is not possible to have a "smart" loot system like Diablo 3 has. Also, even if the game was able to drop stuff based on what the character is currently wearing or what passives they have allocated, that does not mean they'll be using the same gear or passives at end game. Many builds simply do not function before level 70.

GGG has chosen to give more depth end game at the expense of not being so easy on newcomers. It is neither wrong or right to decide to do this. It is simply up to the company's preference on what kind of players they want to attract. In the case of PoE they want to attract players who will invest more into the game and that lines up very well with their micro transaction system.


Just because a single person does not enjoy or "get" the story does not mean it's a failure. I'm curious if the OP even tried to solicit the opinions of others or do research to see if there is something they missed. Sure it does have that Masterpiece Theatre feel to it at times, but for some people that is enjoyable.


The OP seems to have fallen for the trap of arguing semantics over what's an "add-on" compared to an "expansion." If Path of Exile was a pay to play game then Ascendancy and the Perandus league would probably not count as an expansion, but PoE is not pay to play. It is a free game and as such it can have as many content expansions as the developers see fit to release.

If one were to compare it to a pay to play game then it is only fitting to compare it to Diablo 3 and Diablo 3: Reaper of Souls. Within both of those games there have been several patches that added balances and content. Key word: Patches. Gone are the days of patches only being used to "patch things up" and fix bugs. Now they are just as much used to add new content to a game.

GGG's expansions might be better compared to WoW's major raid patches. Owing to me being most familiar with Wrath of the Lich King, I'll use that for examples.

WotLK, which was 3.0, started with a whole new continent and several raids to explore. Then 3.1 added the Ulduar raid and some other new content. 3.2 added the Trial of the Crusader raid and a new 5 man dungeon plus some other goodies. 3.3 added the Ice Crown Citadel raid and three new 5 man dungeons plus the usual other things. There was a 3.3.5 patch or something that added a final raid called Ruby Sanctum that tried to bridge the gap between WotLK and Cataclysm.

If we compare PoE to WoW, then adding a new act is basically adding a new continent to explore which was the start of a new expansion. Everything after that but still on that continent is still basically part of that expansion. The same goes for Act 4 in Path of Exile.

Going with that comparison of course Act 4 isn't as long as it could have been. Nowadays if "expansions" were only released fully content complete then there would be a huge gap between when the players finish one expansion's content and when the next expansion comes out. The content needs to be staggered to keep the game fresh and hold player interest.


The skill point issue noted by the OP is another part of "limitations can make the game interesting" mechanic. True, sometimes when you've got an interesting idea there aren't enough points to do it, but that's to be expected. It is not possible to cater to all possibilities, so the developers need to choose which builds they'd like to support. Obviously they'll get surprised from time to time and then have to decide whether something is good for the game, but that's just part of making the game in the first place and keeping it living.


I totally agree that client and graphics performance needs work. I don't think anyone would dispute that. The catch with this is GGG still needs to come out with new content while taking care of their game's problems. In some cases they don't have all the resources they'd like to fix those issues as fast as would probably be best for the game, so they have to compromise. It sucks, but it's reality.


The game can definitely be brutal and punishing, and the reward for that is knowing you overcame those challenges. What keeps many players coming back is seeing if they can overcome those challenges another way. Whether that will keep the lights on for the company for whatever arbitrary length of time is unknown, but so far it's working pretty well.

Keep in mind many games that are very hard to learn and get into also have quite the strong following. Dark Souls is a great example of this. League of Legends has millions of players because, not despite, it is so difficult to learn and play well.

Having relatively few but very loyal followers is often be much more rewarding than having many half-hearted followers.


For the industry's sake, keep in mind yours is not the only point of view on games. When the OP says "I just wish I wanted to play your game" what comes to mind for me is "So what? Play something else more to your liking and let others enjoy this game as they already do. It is not a sin to dislike a game."

"

Jackinthegreen wrote:

As already noted by other posters, Path of Exile's map system came before Diablo 3's map system. The thing Blizzard likes to do is copy things from other games and do their own twist or take on it.

This game is literally a three-way bastard child of Diablo 2 and Final Fantasy VII and X. Glass houses, man.