Labs should not be mandatory.
" Sure, but why would they? If they did, the lab would be pretty much dead. Why even go there, if you are not running a dedicated lab runner? Which means, you are asking GGG to not only "delete" (yes thats an exaggeration) content they worked on for a long time, had to pay for the development time and is supposed to be a major expansion of the game, but also asking them to spend even more time/money on another mechanic to allow the lab haters getting the power they want but refusing to work for. I know you will reply "Im fine with working for it, as long as it just not the lab". Read the line with spending extra time/money again. I cant see it happening ^^ Especially after they dumbed it down recently. Again: Im not a fan of the lab and never will be. But at this point I have to say: If you still think the lab so bad that you cant ever be bothered to run it - thats on you and you will have to accept the fact you wont ever ascend. |
|
" Fair enough in the way that, that is a valid strategy for growing your customer base. However, just like with any other product, you're not the only customer, meaning (put bluntly) that your voice is quite the minority. I've had to deal with entitled customers for a year working customer service, and it was always the same ramble that they would speak ill of the product to their acquaintances, hence why I had to magically change the product the vast majority of people 1. didn't care about, or 2. liked. You do understand that the entire point of this kind of game is risk vs reward right? Of course you can run white t1 maps, but you will gain a load less of experience and lose a great deal of potential loot compared to a yellow, corrupted, 45% pack size, sextanded t15 map. That same logic applies to lab, you absolutely don't need to run it, you want the rewards, you're not willing to take the risk, or even without talking about risk, you're not willing to play that part of the game. Which is fine, but as with maps, you won't be getting that sweet, sweet reward. just remember that this is a game, you're a "user", voluntarily, don't like it? quit. |
|
" The exact same argument could be made about nerfing Kitava and giving people the option to buy a kitava kill. "Why nerf Kitava when GGG worked so hard on it? If you let people buy Kitava kills than most people will just essentially skip him. Kitava would pretty much be dead except for dedicated Kitava killers. It wouldn't even be that hard to allow Ascendance to be unlocked by a different mechanism. Just have the points be gained upon hitting a certain level, or attach the point game to the death of a certain boss. That's not difficult to code at all and it would bring in revenue. I know I personally stopped playing the game because of the labs. I know people stop played the game because of Kitava. And that means less advocacy for the game, less new players, less loyal players, less money. If coding is the issue I'll code that shit myself. Level 20: Gain 2 ascendancy points. Level 50: gain 2 ascendancy points. Level 70: Gain 2 ascendancy points. The problem isn't that something like this would be hard to code. The problem is GGG simply doesn't want to do it in the same way it took them so long to nerf Kitava. The coding wasn't hard, it's just GGG didn't want to do it. |
|
" The traps, as annoying as they are, are what makes this particular piece of content "difficult" (not really tho) and you can trivialize them by using the "trick" I mentioned, just use anti-bleed flasks with duration or more charges, 5 of them, bring a movement skill and you can just basically ignore them. " This argument is, in my humble opinion, definitely applicable to kitava. I died quite a lot to him, but to be fair, he's the story's end boss, they're supposed to be hard, and a pain in the ass. " Again, I would say the same about kitava if that discussion was the subject of this thread. Lab being mandatory, is definitely NOT hurting PoE and GGG as a whole, some people don't like them, so what? Others don't mind them. Others even understand why it's the way it is. and others even like it. Last edited by OArchAngelO#6919 on Nov 16, 2017, 12:21:19 PM
|
|
" Made me laugh a lot :D Thanks for that Nerfing Kitava equals changing some numbers in a database. Thats hardly worth mentioning in terms of effort. Same goes for your proposal to simply gift everyone Ascendancy points for free. Would be easy to do I agree. But thats not what GGG does. They want you to work your ass off. Thats the whole point of a grinding game. Otherwise they could also start dropping gg gear on certain levels - so you dont have to farm for it. You know, some people dont like farming... You have to come up with a better proposal thats involving work, time and risk worth the reward. And that will cost GGG time and money, which is why they most likely wont do it. |
|
|
"The traps, as annoying as they are, are what makes this particular piece of content "difficult" (not really tho) and you can trivialize them by using the "trick" I mentioned, just use anti-bleed flasks with duration or more charges, 5 of them, bring a movement skill and you can just basically ignore them."
So argument for buffing Kitava and removing the ability for friends to kill him for you. "It's easy if you know what you are doing, Just do this this and this. Stop complaining. IF you do "this" you can basically ignore Kitava's damage. "This argument is, in my humble opinion, definitely applicable to kitava. I died quite a lot to him, but to be fair, he's the story's end boss, they're supposed to be hard, and a pain in the ass." Yet we are given the ability to bypass him and move on to maps safely by allowing another player to kill him for us. That allows us to experiment more with different builds and not be bogged down with grinding to 90 before trying to safely kill this boss. Without Kitava kills the game would grind to a halt for many players. IF you agree that with the idea that buying a Kitava kill doesn't take away from the game, you should agree with giving labs and the traps, the option to be bypassed. "Lab being mandatory, is definitely NOT hurting PoE and GGG as a whole, some people don't like them, so what? Others don't mind them. Others even understand why it's the way it is. and others even like it." This is just a statement of business ignorance. This is like saying "some people having poor customer service experiences doesn't hurt a business. Some people feel good about customer service, some people don't lie it, others don't mind. So lets not try to improve upon our customer service because some people having bad experiences have no effect on our business." Tell that to United Airlines. Tell that to For Honor. The player's experience of a game definitely effects the game. If GGG didn't nerf Kitava they would have lost business. If they didn't nerf maps they would have, ( and defintely did) lose business. If GGG cares about their game and want to thrive as much as possible there is no downside to making Labs optional. Tell me how making labs optional would effect your personal experience of the game in a negative way? |
|
"You're assuming that lab isn't hurting them. There's no concrete evidence available to any of us to support that contention. There's no unbiased source of direct information about how much players enjoy lab and how much of a factor it is in deciding to stay or leave. The best indirect measure would be player retention rates, but that itself has the key flaw that it's difficult to know how significant an influence lab might be for those who voted with their feet and went elsewhere. Still, on that note, here's some data about player retention over the past six months that you can look over: No data source is perfect and this certainly is not. But, you'd need to be seriously delusional to believe that player retention is in good shape when less than four months after their hugely popular FoO release, where concurrent players peaked at just under 100,000 players, they have less players in the game than before it was released. Now that prestige classes will finally leave lab in 4.0, will GGG get it right this time or will they find new ways to repeat old mistakes?
|
|
" Even if my voice is the minority, which you haven't in any way established or proven, even if it's 10 percent of the player base that is still a huge portion. Or even 2 percent of the player base. The changes I'm asking for would not in any way effect those who like labs, it would only make the experience better for those who don't enjoy labs. The only effect from that is bringing in more customer and more money, and creating more loyalty. The statement that the experience of the minority doesn't matter is pure business ignorance. All it takes is one customer with a loud enough voice. After one customer of United Airline made a complaint that, if you had taken the call it sounds to me like you wouldn't care, the value of United Airline's stock dropped 20 percent due to that customer voicing his opinion. Any serious business needs to care about the opinions of those consuming their goods and services. Especially when there are so many alternatives. "You do understand that the entire point of this kind of game is risk vs reward right? Of course you can run white t1 maps, but you will gain a load less of experience and lose a great deal of potential loot compared to a yellow, corrupted, 45% pack size, sextanded t15 map." This same argument could be made to say that Kitava should be rebuffed back to his original state and the ability for others to kill kitava should be removed. Because this game is about "risk vs reward." So since you are using that logic you want the ability for friends to kill kitava for you to be removed and Kitava to be rebuffed? Because that's where your logic leads. "just remember that this is a game, you're a "user", voluntarily, don't like it? quit." I did. And since GGG is a business if enough people follow they will and should care. Any business that doesn't care about those consuming their product will be consumed about a company that does. Especially a company who has such prominent competition like a videogame company. If PoE was one of 3 videogames in the world then maybe it would be ok for them to disregard their customer's like you are advocating for. But if they want to grow, they need to listen. Especially when given a solution that can only possibly help them and can't possibly hurt. And unless you can think of a reason why making labs optional would personally hurt you, if you actually want to support GGG, you should be on my side. if you want to hurt GGG, then keep advocating against the Win-Win solution. |
|
|
tl;dr:
GGG has to change the game asap, whenever someone demands it else they are a shit company... Sure, what could possibly go wrong |
|
" I think we can both agree that labs aren't really "hard work." They are just tedious. So this line of reasoning is complete bullshit and you know it. They just wanted to make diverse content. Just so happens that they made very unenjoyable content. They gave kitava the abiility to be bypassed by buying him, they should just do the same for labs. It wouldn't hurt the game at all. Saying "well if you are going to do that than you might as well remove rng" is completely rediculous and I honestly don't even understand how you made this leap in logic. Hell, if you are arguing that giving us the ability to bypass labs would somehow lead to a slippery slope of "then people would grind less," then can't the same by said about giving people the ability to bypass Kitava? Since many builds would have to grind heavily to safely do kitava without the ability to buy the kill. So are you advocating against the ability to buy kitava kills? IF you aren't, then the same lame you are jusing to justify Kitava kills is the same logic you should use to want labs to be able to be skipped in the same way. Even if it means having the ability for someone to teleport you to the end room after having bypassed all the traps. Or at least teleport you to the final Izaro boss fight, having bypassed all the traps. But even that's generous because, again, this logic appplies to buying Kitava. |
|
