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

"

hyper_ch wrote:

I didn't think there were so many players.... I thought maybe 100-200k.

I think that number was referring to concurrent players ( logged in at the same time).

"

Turtledove wrote:

1. A free to play game is not going to have nearly as many dissatisfied customers that complain as a product with paying customers.

That may have been true before the internet.
People now have no problem bitching about something that they haven't given a dime for anymore, that's how it works now.
People behave like a bunch of kids that feels entitled to everything and think that they are hidden from everyone else, that's what the internet is.
And an obvious example of that is that huge pathetic other thread that has already more than 600 pages.
QQ, QQ, QQ and QQ.

2. No, the list is just something that you are trying to use to "pressure" GGG (or to try justifying your delusions ?), and it's pointless.
If GGG wants figures, they have much more that they can interpret, than this joke of a list.

3. lol, lol, lol and lol.
I had seen you being delusional, but not that much! honestly ...
But I understand, you wasted a lot of time doing this, so you are trying to convince yourself that it was not all for nothing.
It likely was.

4. GGG didn't change anything that the crybabies of this and the other thread were asking for (most of them, aka removal of traps, removal of the lab, or just removing the points from the lab), they merely streamlined the lab with the new 10 acts, and like every content in the game, they simplified it after some time (and to some, including me, a bit too much I guess, but let's see in 3.0.0).
Only, not like other pieces of content, they have not simplified its final iteration.

"

Turtledove wrote:

...

4. Your stated purpose here was to make sure that GGG didn't cave in to the cry babies complaining about labyrinth. GGG caved.

I'm not certain I'd use the word "cave" to describe GGG's periodic, ongoing efforts to make lab less unpalatable to many who play the game. That's just listening to feedback and being somewhat sensible.

But, oh, the irony nonetheless. A small but highly determined band of similarly-minded posters didn't just fail to achieve their goal of preventing the ongoing series of changes to lab; their efforts have probably boomeranged big-time and were actually key for giving efforts to get lab changed a higher profile.

Going forward, we'll probably get exactly the same stuff from the same small band of would-be GGG protectors and those efforts will probably have exactly the same effect as in the past. But, they'll probably be earnestly typing away anyways, day after day and month after month.

"

EnjoyTheJourney wrote:

But, oh, the irony nonetheless. A small but highly determined band of similarly-minded posters didn't just fail to achieve their goal of preventing the ongoing series of changes to lab; their efforts have probably boomeranged big-time and were actually key for giving efforts to get lab changed a higher profile.

You don't understand at all, do you ?
People are "fighting" so that the lab stays with the ascendancy points, and still remains a challenge.
The streamlining changes nothing to that, uber hasn't changed, merc is barely changed, and the two other (maybe a bit overdoing, not sure) just fit more into the game now.
Those are not bad changes.
However, I guess salty QQers will keep trying to find excuses no matter what.

In fact, I suggested one or two months ago that Izaro could loose couple of its mods for the normal lab (to have the lab's difficulty increase from normal to merciless ) .... guess what ?
right.

People like the changes because you have to be in the lab for less time, that is a good thing for a lot of people. At a game play perspective... how do these labs prepare you for things like merc or uber? Barely any traps, a watered down izaro who can't even use all his abilities. The trials offer nothing as well, why go through them if they barely/don't even make an appearance when you go into the lab itself.

People have been vocal about the lab everywhere, not just in these 2 forums threads that have a ton of views/replies. You have people coming in saying how great the lab, when it clearly has problems.. even GGG seem to be addressing. While I don't personally like the watered down versions, there probably won't be a change that makes me enjoy the lab because the whole lab itself isn't fun for me. I'd prefer more Izaro like gameplay with trap and monsters combined, but that would require a ton of work.

Everyone talking about statistics when nobody has them. You could however open your eyes. When the lab came out, this was very big on the forums/reddit for people voicing their dislike of it. Majority.. minority... who cares.. I remember opening up the forums to seeing threads everywhere on this. I still see them crop up time to time. And I see still people going back on forth on these 2 large forum threads. Albeit the main topic has gone off the beaten path now.

"

EnjoyTheJourney wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

...

4. Your stated purpose here was to make sure that GGG didn't cave in to the cry babies complaining about labyrinth. GGG caved.

I'm not certain I'd use the word "cave" to describe GGG's periodic, ongoing efforts to make lab less unpalatable to many who play the game. That's just listening to feedback and being somewhat sensible.

But, oh, the irony nonetheless. A small but highly determined band of similarly-minded posters didn't just fail to achieve their goal of preventing the ongoing series of changes to lab; their efforts have probably boomeranged big-time and were actually key for giving efforts to get lab changed a higher profile.

Going forward, we'll probably get exactly the same stuff from the same small band of would-be GGG protectors and those efforts will probably have exactly the same effect as in the past. But, they'll probably be earnestly typing away anyways, day after day and month after month.

I was using Fruz's term for it. I agree that GGG was just listening to feedback and made the best of the situation with the resources and time available to them at that point.

The current change to the first 2 labyrinths is very similar to Regulator's "Lab Rework Ideas" 2 and 7, that's in the big thread. I am looking forward to eventually trying PoE out again after 3.0 comes out. I agree that Fruz and the like minded "vocal minority" are ironically helping the cause more than hurting it by keeping the Labyrinth threads active and visible. Although, I suspect things will drop off significantly heading forward. There is much less of the bad content to dislike now after all.

"

Fruz wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

1. A free to play game is not going to have nearly as many dissatisfied customers that complain as a product with paying customers.

That may have been true before the internet.
People now have no problem bitching about something that they haven't given a dime for anymore, that's how it works now.
People behave like a bunch of kids that feels entitled to everything and think that they are hidden from everyone else, that's what the internet is.
And an obvious example of that is that huge pathetic other thread that has already more than 600 pages.
QQ, QQ, QQ and QQ.

That is total nonsense.

If something is "free", then it still has to meet the expectations of people, else it´s not good for them and they skip it. If I go to the gym, I can take various streets and will pick the one I feel most comfortable with.

Gaming works the same, if something is not good, then people will raise their dissatisfaction with the product. To believe that only people who paid for something, are allowed to have an opinion is stupid and I hope you know that.

The truth is, you are the entitled person here, you are the one who believes to be something better than everyone else and this is a terrible attitude, but sadly very common among our elitist society.

"

Turtledove wrote:

[Some blather by that ETJ guy, whomever the heck he is]

I was using Fruz's term for it. I agree that GGG was just listening to feedback and made the best of the situation with the resources and time available to them at that point.

The current change to the first 2 labyrinths is very similar to Regulator's "Lab Rework Ideas" 2 and 7, that's in the big thread. I am looking forward to eventually trying PoE out again after 3.0 comes out. I agree that Fruz and the like minded "vocal minority" are ironically helping the cause more than hurting it by keeping the Labyrinth threads active and visible. Although, I suspect things will drop off significantly heading forward. There is much less of the bad content to dislike now after all.

You may be right. The irritation level will go down as lab becomes less a part of people's experience of the game. There are a few "X" factors, though.

The oddness and monotony of re-running the same content multiple times per character in a game that will pride itself on not doing that for everything else will stand out, as of 3.0. The lore can't help but stand out because it's that bad, especially as it was created for the earlier game. Plus, players are generally OK with not easily finding items. But, when players don't finish up uber lab then they aren't fully developing their character; we'll see how well players accept that, going forward.

Finally, what GGG is doing with lab is just plain odd. Nobody is rushing to copy what they're doing with lab, which is not a strong endorsement. Also, "we have the biggest maze and associated platform mini-game in an ARPG and we gate character progression behind it" isn't exactly likely to draw in many players. Overall, lab has the look and feel of something pushed internally by a limited number of people. The internal politics in GGG of lab are probably divisive, despite the consistent image being presented externally.

"

EnjoyTheJourney wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

[Some blather by that ETJ guy, whomever the heck he is]

I was using Fruz's term for it. I agree that GGG was just listening to feedback and made the best of the situation with the resources and time available to them at that point.

The current change to the first 2 labyrinths is very similar to Regulator's "Lab Rework Ideas" 2 and 7, that's in the big thread. I am looking forward to eventually trying PoE out again after 3.0 comes out. I agree that Fruz and the like minded "vocal minority" are ironically helping the cause more than hurting it by keeping the Labyrinth threads active and visible. Although, I suspect things will drop off significantly heading forward. There is much less of the bad content to dislike now after all.

You may be right. The irritation level will go down as lab becomes less a part of people's experience of the game. There are a few "X" factors, though.

The oddness and monotony of re-running the same content multiple times per character in a game that will pride itself on not doing that for everything else will stand out, as of 3.0. The lore can't help but stand out because it's that bad, especially as it was created for the earlier game. Plus, players are generally OK with not easily finding items. But, when players don't finish up uber lab then they aren't fully developing their character; we'll see how well players accept that, going forward.

Finally, what GGG is doing with lab is just plain odd. Nobody is rushing to copy what they're doing with lab, which is not a strong endorsement. Also, "we have the biggest maze and associated platform mini-game in an ARPG and we gate character progression behind it" isn't exactly likely to draw in many players. Overall, lab has the look and feel of something pushed internally by a limited number of people. The internal politics in GGG of lab are probably divisive, despite the consistent image being presented externally.

Agreed that the lab lore and repeating it 3 or 4 times per character sticks out like a sore thumb. Those considerations along with GGG finally acknowledging that something needed to be done about the lab would seem to indicate to me that improving labyrinth will remain on GGG's radar. Can't know their priority for it though?

A sore point with the labyrinth for the less vocal minority is the lack of checkpoints/way-points. I mean that's less problematic for me as well as many other of the active anti-lab crowd (I'll guess) but, it seems to be a more widely shared "irritation" regarding lab in general. Meaning a fair percentage of first time complaints seem to include or focus on that aspect, those first time posts seem to indicate that. That will continue to generate new threads also, I think. It is likely something that could easily be changed, from a development resource perspective.

"

mezmery wrote:

0.01% significant indeed

Had you known anything about statistics, you would know that distribution in a sample is much more important than the size of the sample.