Over 430 threads discussing labyrinth problems with over 1040 posters in support DONE!!!!!

"

KiKurASiruSaSH wrote:

face it, console players would spend way more on a game than pc players, i'm surprised the game wasn't ported for both ps4 and xbone when they released

edit:
https://stari.co/articles/pc-vs-console-10-good-reasons-to-choose-a-pc
look at point #3 & #4, pc players are cheapskates :P

There isn't really anything to prove that when you consider the model that GGG is using. The free to play game that comes to mind that was "relatively" recently released on consoles is star trek online and I don't know if they share information about finances or not.

In terms of getting ported to ps4, I think you are wrong. GGG would not be making this statement now about xbox 1 if they were also anywhere close to doing PS4 too, unless they are waiting for some key reason. The difference is xbox 1 is made with dx11 in mind, it is from the information I can find far easier to port to xbox 1 then it is to ps4, furthermore its far better to expand to the market with one option and see how well that works, before going full eggs in a basket sort of situation.


PC players like to save money, but they aren't opposed to spending it either, I know I've supported $1900+ on this game, you cant tell because ive disabled my supporter tags (prior to this announcement) because the version of poe we have now is not at all what I really want to play. Its far too give everyone everything, if everyone is special no one is.

"

Xavathos wrote:

Why would anyone even consider stopping support for the game? This does and will not negatively impact the game at all. You'll see. Growth is good for all of us, especially when it's managed by a fair and transparent company like GGG.

The bolded part is wrong, that is a missconception that many have, growth is not always good.

In this case, PoE is going to be ( and has been already I guess ) suffering from Xbox gameplay limitation ( because of what you can do with the controler of course, that limites you compared to a mouse and a keyboard ).

Xbox only has 4 actions ( without flasks ), that is one element where ideally, GGG is going to want to reduce the number of action to 4, instead of what we have now, like seriously, automation ( reactive skills for examples ) has definitely been a step forward in that direction.
At some point we might even have a golem support gem to auto-resummon it so people do not need to assign a command for it lol ! ( for those who want a higher level golem out of the CwdT setup.

"

Shovelcut wrote:

"

Clownkrieger wrote:

still no answers to my other questions.

Yeah, it's probably best to give up trying to engage that one. You'll just end up going in circles and make absolutely no progress in any kind of discussion.

My recollection is that Shovelcut said something like, "You are just pretending that labyrinth isn't a popular farming area." He then went on in a subsequent post to list a bunch of ways that GGG might have calculated the aspirant trails to further support that thought but that required that GGG's top ten list item for "Aspirant Trail" to be mislabeled.

I then made the post about people shouldn't pretend the labyrinth numbers weren't inflated. I think that other people also made posts along the lines of Shovelcut and perhaps even in support of Shovelcut's post.

Sorry Clown, I'm just not interested enough to look up the exact posts. You can do that if you want too. Your other questions were even less interesting or more confusing. (That is meant to be an inclusive "or" rather than an exclusive "or".)

"

Turtledove wrote:

Sorry Clown, I'm just not interested enough to look up the exact posts. You can do that if you want too. Your other questions were even less interesting or more confusing. (That is meant to be an inclusive "or" rather than an exclusive "or".)

this has nothing to do with interest. you would simply not be able to find proof for you claim, because it was made up in a lame attempt to blame and denounce the ones that werent agreeing with you. made up like your claim ggg manipulated statistics to promote lab (you even said yourself there is no proof for either the manipulation or the intention it would have been made in). but thats your approach of dealing with other opinions and things that doesnt fit into your agenda throughout this thread.

and i can understand that my other questions are "confusing" to you. beeing confronted with the illogicality of ones own words and claims can be confusing. your "lack of interest" is again a lame excuse, because if you would answer my questions, you would have to admit that the motivation of this thread is kinda senseless, if you take your own words into account.

this thread is nothing but a populistic sharade to pretend there is a majority for something, and to demand change based on that. and dont get me wrong: maybe there IS a majority that dislikes lab. but there is no way to prove it. and like you said: even IF there would be a majority, it wouldnt change the fact that this is not a democracy and ggg doesnt tally votes to make decisions.

so just leave it be and switch back to making suggestions on how to IMPROVE lab if you dislike it that much. that would be at least a sort of constructive and useful feedback. which this thread is definetly not.

Clown

"

In this case, PoE is going to be ( and has been already I guess ) suffering from Xbox gameplay limitation ( because of what you can do with the controler of course, that limites you compared to a mouse and a keyboard ).

I don't really see that, because if they gave up on namelock skills there are plenty of reasons to do so without the Xbox. Just think about a few builds and how you would play them on a controller.

1. Cyclone? Pretty fun
2. Reave? Propably nice
3. Spectral Throw? Seems good
4. Essence Drain... ehm... yeah the Drain works, but Contagion
5. Shield Charge? How do you decide how far you charge... I guess you will just charge.
6. Any Totem build just imagine an ele reflect map with Flameblast Totems, you have to replace them permanently, doing that with a controller looks odd.

They have to change a lot, so I view the console version as a different game. Yes boss encounters might be designed with that in mind, skills though are definitly not, because a lot of them have to change anyway. Any Ground targeted skill is terrible if you have to move your character at the same time, you either have to do odd targeting shenanigans with multiple sticks while pressing a button. A good example is a CwC Scorching Ray build you have to rotate and select the distance and press the button for scorching ray, which is pretty annoying to do.

So I assume they can keep the graphics engine and all the assets and just have to make gameplay changes, animation is a shitton of work and not having to redo this saves a lot of work, so doing these gameplay changes is a reasonable approach.

"

Clownkrieger wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

Sorry Clown, I'm just not interested enough to look up the exact posts. You can do that if you want too. Your other questions were even less interesting or more confusing. (That is meant to be an inclusive "or" rather than an exclusive "or".)

this has nothing to do with interest. you would simply not be able to find proof for you claim, because it was made up in a lame attempt to blame and denounce the ones that werent agreeing with you. made up like your claim ggg manipulated statistics to promote lab (you even said yourself there is no proof for either the manipulation or the intention it would have been made in). but thats your approach of dealing with other opinions and things that doesnt fit into your agenda throughout this thread.

and i can understand that my other questions are "confusing" to you. beeing confronted with the illogicality of ones own words and claims can be confusing. your "lack of interest" is again a lame excuse, because if you would answer my questions, you would have to admit that the motivation of this thread is kinda senseless, if you take your own words into account.

this thread is nothing but a populistic sharade to pretend there is a majority for something, and to demand change based on that. and dont get me wrong: maybe there IS a majority that dislikes lab. but there is no way to prove it. and like you said: even IF there would be a majority, it wouldnt change the fact that this is not a democracy and ggg doesnt tally votes to make decisions.

so just leave it be and switch back to making suggestions on how to IMPROVE lab if you dislike it that much. that would be at least a sort of constructive and useful feedback. which this thread is definetly not.

Clown

The question I answered was silly with an obvious answer that needed nothing more than some mediocre reading skills to have answered it yourself. You now seem totally uninterested in the answer because apparently you now realize what a meaningless question it was. So Clown, I answered your most interesting question. Now you make the ridiculous claim that I "would have to admit that the motivation of this thread is kinda senseless". You are being even more irrational than I thought. Look at the OP, Clown. The OP fully answers your silly question already. Although it might require some mediocre reading skills which seems to be the big challenge for you.

I didn't say that namelock skills were good, don't misunderstand me.

But there are things like LW / Totems / Tornado shot / Flameblast that will just .......... I have no idea how much they could implement this on a controler with it being smooth and not having a fixed distance in a straigth line in front of the character.
I am speaking about those limitations.

Same for self cast curses ( yes, it is still possible in this game to self cast curses ! ).

Those are not small things at all.

"

Turtledove wrote:

The question I answered was silly with an obvious answer that needed nothing more than some mediocre reading skills to have answered it yourself. You now seem totally uninterested in the answer because apparently you now realize what a meaningless question it was. So Clown, I answered your most interesting question. Now you make the ridiculous claim that I "would have to admit that the motivation of this thread is kinda senseless". You are being even more irrational than I thought. Look at the OP, Clown. The OP fully answers your silly question already. Although it might require some mediocre reading skills which seems to be the big challenge for you.

- you have answered no questions/delivered proof for your claim, which again you (simply) claim to be obvious (asking for prove for something is silly and meaningless, yeah... and this wasnt the most interesting question btw.)

- you (again) crop citations, leaving out the important parts.

"

Clownkrieger wrote:

... because if you would answer my questions, you would have to admit that the motivation of this thread is kinda senseless, if you take your own words into account.

- i have related to your op. the important parts that where in question: "...providing anecdotal evidence as to how a significant percentage of the player base dislikes the labyrinth..." "The purpose of this list is ... primarily to demonstrate that many people ... have posted in support of changes." (ive just cropped out where you rage against the "false assertions" of "the others", sry for that, but i need to break things down to fit my mediocre reading skills :) )

confront that with:

"

Turtledove wrote:

GGG is a company. GGG will decide to do something based on what they think, not some electoral process where people vote and GGG tallys votes to see if there's at least 50% voting for something. [...] Your majority assumption is made up nonsense. A figure you have pulled out of thin air, meaningless blather, worthless numbers, irrational thinking. Sorry, but that's plain and simple.

- we have a proverb where i come from: "there are no silly questions, just silly answers". q.e.d.


keep calling me silly, irrational, and dumb. i would "assert" that there is a "majority" of people that see this otherwise. :D

"

Clownkrieger wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

The question I answered was silly with an obvious answer that needed nothing more than some mediocre reading skills to have answered it yourself. You now seem totally uninterested in the answer because apparently you now realize what a meaningless question it was. So Clown, I answered your most interesting question. Now you make the ridiculous claim that I "would have to admit that the motivation of this thread is kinda senseless". You are being even more irrational than I thought. Look at the OP, Clown. The OP fully answers your silly question already. Although it might require some mediocre reading skills which seems to be the big challenge for you.

- you have answered no questions/delivered proof for your claim, which again you (simply) claim to be obvious (asking for prove for something is silly and meaningless, yeah... and this wasnt the most interesting question btw.)

- you (again) crop citations, leaving out the important parts.

"

Clownkrieger wrote:

... because if you would answer my questions, you would have to admit that the motivation of this thread is kinda senseless, if you take your own words into account.

- i have related to your op. the important parts that where in question: "...providing anecdotal evidence as to how a significant percentage of the player base dislikes the labyrinth..." "The purpose of this list is ... primarily to demonstrate that many people ... have posted in support of changes." (ive just cropped out where you rage against the "false assertions" of "the others", sry for that, but i need to break things down to fit my mediocre reading skills :) )

confront that with:

"

Turtledove wrote:

GGG is a company. GGG will decide to do something based on what they think, not some electoral process where people vote and GGG tallys votes to see if there's at least 50% voting for something. [...] Your majority assumption is made up nonsense. A figure you have pulled out of thin air, meaningless blather, worthless numbers, irrational thinking. Sorry, but that's plain and simple.

- we have a proverb where i come from: "there are no silly questions, just silly answers". q.e.d.


keep calling me silly, irrational, and dumb. i would "assert" that there is a "majority" of people that see this otherwise. :D

First, I admit that I didn't even read all of your post. You are just wasting time it appears to me. I don't intend to address anything you said directly in any case.

You seem to have a style of communication that can work well in a face-to-face situation. The question/answer style of communication does not work well in an Internet forum form of communication. The problem with that question/answer style of communication in this forum is that:
First, there is past information already available. The specific example in this case is that the opening post (OP) of this thread already contains the purpose of the thread. It appears to me that you haven't even read this information that seems to be directly pertinent to your stated goal.
Second, when a question is answered it can generate sub-conversations within the thread. This has a tendency to dilute or distract from the chain of thought that the question/answer style of communication requires.
Third, it is more difficult for the questioner to anticipate what the answer is going to be and to form relevant questions that lead to successful communication.
Fourth, the long pauses between question and answer and the next question with other unrelated posts sprinkled in between makes it difficult to keep the train of thought together.

Therefore, if you want to discuss a post I've responded to then read the posts that I'm responding to before forming your post. Put it in the form of an assertion rather than a question. You asked me to go back multiple pages and look up posts that I responded to. That is your job to read the posts that I responded to before you ask why I responded in the way that I did. If you want to talk about the purpose of this thread then you need to do your due diligence and read the OP first. Then come back and use that knowledge to form an assertion rather than asking me to do your due diligence for you. In other words stop-beating-around-the-bush and perhaps I'll find your posts more engaging and respond to them.