Please Remove 10% Exp Loss on Death

"

Turtledove wrote:

It does seem kind of strange to me that there's a HC league and then a softcore league with the death penalty. I mean I've had to get used to the death penalty but it is really off putting for a lot of people. I think GGG likes it this way because they love the level 100 chase goal. If the death penalty was replaced with some other kind of penalty then there would no longer be the level 100 chase goal or it would at least be radically different.

No, it'd still be a chase goal because of the way XP scales, you could just play more of the game while still chasing it.

"

NoIguanaForZ wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

It does seem kind of strange to me that there's a HC league and then a softcore league with the death penalty. I mean I've had to get used to the death penalty but it is really off putting for a lot of people. I think GGG likes it this way because they love the level 100 chase goal. If the death penalty was replaced with some other kind of penalty then there would no longer be the level 100 chase goal or it would at least be radically different.

No, it'd still be a chase goal because of the way XP scales, you could just play more of the game while still chasing it.

That's my view! But the chase goal would be changed and I think that's what GGG doesn't want.

I know players that have started playing PoE on my urging and quit when they ran into the experience point loss. Their reasonable view was that the game was taking something away from them that had been earned. I remember when I first ran into it I was shocked for that very reason. I asked my friend that had turned me on to PoE if my gems also lost their experience points. If they had I would have quit the game completely that day. :-)

So, my personal view is that the experience point loss costs GGG players. But GGG just loves the level 100 chase goal too much the way it is.

"

NoIguanaForZ wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

It does seem kind of strange to me that there's a HC league and then a softcore league with the death penalty. I mean I've had to get used to the death penalty but it is really off putting for a lot of people. I think GGG likes it this way because they love the level 100 chase goal. If the death penalty was replaced with some other kind of penalty then there would no longer be the level 100 chase goal or it would at least be radically different.

No, it'd still be a chase goal because of the way XP scales, you could just play more of the game while still chasing it.

Or you could improve your character/build so that you can do more content. Two chase goals this way instead of one.

"

SaiyanZ wrote:

Or you could improve your character/build so that you can do more content. Two chase goals this way instead of one.

the "improving" part is kinda hard in this game i for example get really fast to the point where i need gear in the mirror or 100ex+ section
and im not the guy who makes money by sitting there night and day and flipping
also one of the reasons i dont play ssf even now with harvest its to difficult to get good gear if i play alone
i played like 6-8 hours a day this league and i didnt even got 20 exalts out of this league pure drops

"

Turtledove wrote:

Spoiler

"

NoIguanaForZ wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

It does seem kind of strange to me that there's a HC league and then a softcore league with the death penalty. I mean I've had to get used to the death penalty but it is really off putting for a lot of people. I think GGG likes it this way because they love the level 100 chase goal. If the death penalty was replaced with some other kind of penalty then there would no longer be the level 100 chase goal or it would at least be radically different.

No, it'd still be a chase goal because of the way XP scales, you could just play more of the game while still chasing it.

That's my view! But the chase goal would be changed and I think that's what GGG doesn't want.

I know players that have started playing PoE on my urging and quit when they ran into the experience point loss. Their reasonable view was that the game was taking something away from them that had been earned. I remember when I first ran into it I was shocked for that very reason. I asked my friend that had turned me on to PoE if my gems also lost their experience points. If they had I would have quit the game completely that day. :-)

So, my personal view is that the experience point loss costs GGG players. But GGG just loves the level 100 chase goal too much the way it is.

Wrong.

Level 100 stopped being a "chase goal" as soon as someone actually hit 100 on Softcore/Hardcore. And I do mean the first ever character.

For that "achievment" to remain a proper "chase goal" and even more so, an unobtainable one, they should have always scaled the required EXP directly - aka always make the next level require at minimum 2 times the required EXP of the previous one, if not 3 or 4 times more - and then they would have had that permanent "chase goal".

As I said before, TencentGGG conceded the level 100 STOPPED being the "chase goal" as soon as they scaled the EXP gain penalty at higher levels (seriously, their flimsy "argument" that players enjoy a "longer grind there" was asinine from the start as it was NEVER properly supported by a danger/reward EXP gain adjustment regarding difficulty), and then immediately introduced "sanctioned cheats" to bypass that.

The other huge elephant in the room, is that the current EXP system, that actually locks you to level 100 status ON EVERY DAMN LEVEL UP is FLAWED BY DEFINITION, as it is even worse regarding providing proper incentive regarding improving defensive mechanics for running difficult content, and ALWAYS make them rely on the number of attempts for content completion as the REAL DEATH PENALTY.

There is a reason why "zerging" is detrimental to the game, and that is actually because it makes players get the impression that throwing "bodies" should be a viable "strategy" to progress, and they keep this as their guideline later on, when it should have been clear from the start that IS NOT AN OPTION...

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

I know players that have started playing PoE on my urging and quit when they ran into the experience point loss. Their reasonable view was that the game was taking something away from them that had been earned. I remember when I first ran into it I was shocked for that very reason. I asked my friend that had turned me on to PoE if my gems also lost their experience points. If they had I would have quit the game completely that day. :-)

So, my personal view is that the experience point loss costs GGG players. But GGG just loves the level 100 chase goal too much the way it is.[/spoiler]

Wrong.

Level 100 stopped being a "chase goal" as soon as someone actually hit 100 on Softcore/Hardcore. And I do mean the first ever character.

Bzzzt wrong. The first ever character to hit 100 on softcore was implicitly disavowed by GGG, because it was at the time believed the only way they could have hit 100 that quickly was via underhanded means. GGG were loath to acknowledge that, so it wasn't until Baker hit 100 on HC that anyone made any fanfare about it at all.

I could have sworn I posted about this elsewhere recently and that you either commented or at least saw it.

Also, not to be too much of a shit about it, but just saying 'wrong' like a honking goose trying to scare a farmer into dropping his hat is something best left to the stable geniuses of the world. TD wasn't wrong, but neither are you when you say it's no longer a real achievement in GGG's eyes to hit 100.

__

On-topic: I can guarantee people have quit because of it, because I have more than once and last I checked, I'm people. I've had other friends do much the same thing, because like me they're used to games that not only punish you for dying but typically give you some means of recuperating some of the loss as part of the process.

Even the infamously difficult 'Souls' games do this by encouraging/taunting you to try to recover the lost souls from your corpse. At no point should a more creative death experience than simply chunking away a bunch of what was gained before that death be perceived as 'making the game too easy'. Death in any game should be a learning experience rather than simply a big step backwards.

PoE doesn't have a creative or even intelligent death system, and it's frankly outdated and primitive in this respect. Once a casual player realises that the death penalty is all about forcing a player to be safe and boring in their long, slow climb to the next level, they're going to walk away because at that point the futility of the treadmill is pretty fucking hard to ignore. But that's okay -- casual players are acceptable losses at this point. People who play and support PoE habitually have come to accept the death penalty as simply part of the game. So there's no point asking GGG to remove something that is key to the identity of the game. But eh, can't really hurt to ask I guess.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

Spoiler

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

Spoiler

"

Turtledove wrote:

I know players that have started playing PoE on my urging and quit when they ran into the experience point loss. Their reasonable view was that the game was taking something away from them that had been earned. I remember when I first ran into it I was shocked for that very reason. I asked my friend that had turned me on to PoE if my gems also lost their experience points. If they had I would have quit the game completely that day. :-)

So, my personal view is that the experience point loss costs GGG players. But GGG just loves the level 100 chase goal too much the way it is.

Wrong.

Level 100 stopped being a "chase goal" as soon as someone actually hit 100 on Softcore/Hardcore. And I do mean the first ever character.

Bzzzt wrong. The first ever character to hit 100 on softcore was implicitly disavowed by GGG, because it was at the time believed the only way they could have hit 100 that quickly was via underhanded means. GGG were loath to acknowledge that, so it wasn't until Baker hit 100 on HC that anyone made any fanfare about it at all.

I could have sworn I posted about this elsewhere recently and that you either commented or at least saw it.

Also, not to be too much of a shit about it, but just saying 'wrong' like a honking goose trying to scare a farmer into dropping his hat is something best left to the stable geniuses of the world. TD wasn't wrong, but neither are you when you say it's no longer a real achievement in GGG's eyes to hit 100.

__

On-topic: I can guarantee people have quit because of it, because I have more than once and last I checked, I'm people. I've had other friends do much the same thing, because like me they're used to games that not only punish you for dying but typically give you some means of recuperating some of the loss as part of the process. Death in any game should be a learning experience rather than simply a big step backwards. PoE doesn't have that, and it's frankly outdated and primitive in this respect. Once a casual player realises that the death penalty is all about forcing a player to be safe and boring in their long, slow climb to the next level, they're going to walk away. But that's okay -- casual players are acceptable losses at this point. People who play and support PoE habitually have come to accept the death penalty as simply part of the game. So there's no point asking GGG to remove something that is key to the identity of the game. But eh, can't really hurt to ask I guess.

Well, I might have been condescending (when I say "Wrong" that way, I'm merely trying to convey the impact of a different point of view better, 0 condescending intentions), and yes you did offer the argument for my point of view.

It's exactly because GGG disavowed of the first level 100 in Softcore and the reverse happened with the "celebration" of the first level 100 in Hardcore that they understood "the chase goal" ideal was DOA, because they missed the proper implementation of said goal - even if they didn't even felt it, it is the only sane answer to their contradictory decisions regarding EXP gain penalty and death EXP penalty past that point onwards...

As I always said, it is never about removing the aspect that makes the game better, and everyone should admit that with all it's flaws, death EXP penalty made, and still makes the game better.

It's a question of properly implementing this to not feel "unfair", and to actually do it's job regarding the proper support of a danger/reward ratio concerning the difficulty of the game.

And sadly, the current implementation of the death EXP penalty (helped by other "flawed" aspects, of course) doesn't even manage to convey a proper sense of progression, succeeding into providing only frustration instead.

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

Spoiler

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

Wrong.

Level 100 stopped being a "chase goal" as soon as someone actually hit 100 on Softcore/Hardcore. And I do mean the first ever character.

Bzzzt wrong. The first ever character to hit 100 on softcore was implicitly disavowed by GGG, because it was at the time believed the only way they could have hit 100 that quickly was via underhanded means. GGG were loath to acknowledge that, so it wasn't until Baker hit 100 on HC that anyone made any fanfare about it at all.

I could have sworn I posted about this elsewhere recently and that you either commented or at least saw it.

Also, not to be too much of a shit about it, but just saying 'wrong' like a honking goose trying to scare a farmer into dropping his hat is something best left to the stable geniuses of the world. TD wasn't wrong, but neither are you when you say it's no longer a real achievement in GGG's eyes to hit 100.

__

On-topic: I can guarantee people have quit because of it, because I have more than once and last I checked, I'm people. I've had other friends do much the same thing, because like me they're used to games that not only punish you for dying but typically give you some means of recuperating some of the loss as part of the process. Death in any game should be a learning experience rather than simply a big step backwards. PoE doesn't have that, and it's frankly outdated and primitive in this respect. Once a casual player realises that the death penalty is all about forcing a player to be safe and boring in their long, slow climb to the next level, they're going to walk away. But that's okay -- casual players are acceptable losses at this point. People who play and support PoE habitually have come to accept the death penalty as simply part of the game. So there's no point asking GGG to remove something that is key to the identity of the game. But eh, can't really hurt to ask I guess.

Well, I might have been condescending (when I say "Wrong" that way, I'm merely trying to convey the impact of a different point of view better, 0 condescending intentions), and yes you did offer the argument for my point of view.

It's exactly because GGG disavowed of the first level 100 in Softcore and the reverse happened with the "celebration" of the first level 100 in Hardcore that they understood "the chase goal" ideal was DOA, because they missed the proper implementation of said goal - even if they didn't even felt it, it is the only sane answer to their contradictory decisions regarding EXP gain penalty and death EXP penalty past that point onwards...

As I always said, it is never about removing the aspect that makes the game better, and everyone should admit that with all it's flaws, death EXP penalty made, and still makes the game better.

It's a question of properly implementing this to not feel "unfair", and to actually do it's job regarding the proper support of a danger/reward ratio concerning the difficulty of the game.

And sadly, the current implementation of the death EXP penalty (helped by other "flawed" aspects, of course) doesn't even manage to convey a proper sense of progression, succeeding into providing only frustration instead.

If you read my post more carefully, it should be obvious that we're on the same page. I agree with you. I think the experience point loss is bad and should be changed. GGG is wrong to not change it. So, by saying I'm wrong you're saying your own argument is wrong. All I was saying is that GGG doesn't change it because "blah blah blah". I'm not saying what "blah blah blah" is again because I don't want you to go down that rabbit hole again because I'm a kind soul and I like you. :-)

Can either of you, or indeed anyone, help me come up with a term to describe the situation core to this thread? What we have is a 100% negative experience that any serious player will encounter at least occasionally -- a loss of gains incurred by not strictly adhering to fairly unspoken rules. In this case, the loss of experience by not playing it safe. And even then, we've seen myriad examples of when even doing that isn't enough. There is no way to recuperate that loss other than by doing the exact same thing that incurred it. This strikes me as just plain bad game design. And yet people have embraced it because they see it as a fundamental part of something they love. At worst they'll put up with it, but we've all seen ardent defenders of it -- even though the totality of their argument is something really flimsy like 'it makes the game challenging' or 'there has to be some repercussion for failure'.

This isn't quite Stockholm Syndrome. If anything, it seems to be closer to the concept of Learned Helplessness, except that LH also stipulates that someone who has developed it won't take the positive path even if it's presented to them. PoE presents no real positive option beyond 'don't do that again, whatever it was'.

It's also a little Pavlovian on a number of levels. Literally -- see that life or ES level drop, prepare for death, maybe alt-f4 or fight it out, and deep down ready yourself for an eradication of the past ten minutes to an hour, depending. And it's Pavlovian in that as soon as someone questions it, suggests there might be a better way, the instant reaction is 'don't attack my game just because you're not good enough' etc. There is no real reasoning with someone who can no longer see alternatives.

So is there a word for this phenomenon? It reminds me of when someone stays with someone abusive because they love other aspects of them, but again that seems to indicate that a person can't just quit the game. Take the bad with the good? That's one way of putting it. I'd like a cleaner, more specific term for what's going on here. I DO think there's an element of abuse to the fact that GGG are very aware that it's going on -- that players are allowing themselves to be conditioned by this death penalty system even though as the developers they could have and should have come up with a better death system by now. The only reason they don't isn't because people aren't complaining -- they/we have been complaining for years. It's because they know for all the complaints, the effort required to address it, to patently improve the game, probably can't be justified in raw financial terms. Creating a better, more intuitive death system would be seriously above and beyond for no real gain at this point, and no one's expecting that of GGG now.

After all: why serve people lobster when you've managed to teach them that eating dry bran cereal is as good as it gets? GGG keep joking that once you're Mapping, they have your soul -- and it's really only Mappers that are affected by any sort of real death penalty. So yeah, they know exactly what they're doing, and what they can get away with.

"

Turtledove wrote:

Spoiler

If you read my post more carefully, it should be obvious that we're on the same page. I agree with you. I think the experience point loss is bad and should be changed. GGG is wrong to not change it. So, by saying I'm wrong you're saying your own argument is wrong. All I was saying is that GGG doesn't change it because "blah blah blah". I'm not saying what "blah blah blah" is again because I don't want you to go down that rabbit hole again because I'm a kind soul and I like you. :-)

I know what you meant, and I know we're on the same page, (I like you too, btw ^^ ), I actually wanted to discuss the wrong focus placed on the problem of the "chase goal", which is hollow and was hollow since a long time ago, around the time GGG lost their confidence in their content and stopped scaling it properly...

It was always an artificial distorted view, as I said previously.

You can do things the proper way or the wrong way, my gripe is with TencentGGG's decision to do it the wrong way...