T17 once again are ruining this league can GGG just discard t17 concept?

"

Orbaal wrote:

"

Echothesis wrote:

You are correct, this is a personal opinion, yet I know for certain there are other people with similar perspectives. And GGG cannot ignore modern gaming trends forever

They can and they should.
Doesnt mean they cant change small things here and there but knowing who your audience is and catering to that group is key.

The moment you try to cater to everyone is the moment you cater to no one and fail.


You are entitled to label your own opinion as "modern gaming trends" but at the end of the day its just your opinion and represents what you want.
It doesnt have to translate into more paying customers, if GGG were to implement those ideas. Id argue there is a good chance they´d alienate a substantial chunk of their current paying customers and might earn less as a consequence.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

Also your opinion. That's what we do here on the forums. I will add my own.

If you look at PoE2, this most recent PoE1 League, and commentary from Mark, it's clear to me that they are trying to move PoE into a more wider audience, and focus on accessibility. A Much different view than CW had.

Will that work in the end? My opinion would be yes, and that it will reflected in financial performance.

Will some more elite and hardcore players scoff at this? Probably, but if the more casual players that are attracted offset, or surpass, in revenue, I doubt Tecent will bat an eye.

"

Orbaal wrote:

...
PoE1 already comes with a commited audience that stuck with the game for a decade - give or take.
Switching things up in that scenario is dangerous and if thats your only game and only source of revenue, it might well be the last change you ever make ;)

"

Orbaal wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

Also your opinion. That's what we do here on the forums. I will add my own.

If you look at PoE2, this most recent PoE1 League, and commentary from Mark, it's clear to me that they are trying to move PoE into a more wider audience, and focus on accessibility. A Much different view than CW had.

Will that work in the end? My opinion would be yes, and that it will reflected in financial performance.

Will some more elite and hardcore players scoff at this? Probably, but if the more casual players that are attracted offset, or surpass, in revenue, I doubt Tecent will bat an eye.

Agreed.

The only thing Id point out is that PoE2 is a new game and thus is free to cater to whichever audience they like.

PoE1 already comes with a commited audience that stuck with the game for a decade - give or take.
Switching things up in that scenario is dangerous and if thats your only game and only source of revenue, it might well be the last change you ever make ;)

"

Echothesis wrote:

"

Orbaal wrote:

...
PoE1 already comes with a commited audience that stuck with the game for a decade - give or take.
Switching things up in that scenario is dangerous and if thats your only game and only source of revenue, it might well be the last change you ever make ;)

Div/ex swap was highly unorthodox move. If you wish to fix/deflate excess currency in economy, you do it carefully over time, not in one fell swoop. And not only did GGG never apologize, but Mr.Wilson actually said it was players own fault for not diversifying investments. Can you imagine other AAA project devs pulling stunts like this?

Then came alt gem wipe. Then came LMB bind removal, safe to say most of the playerbase got accustomed to using it for years. GGG didn't care in any of those cases, so their take on their audience and definition of "dangerous scenarios" may be at odds with common sense.

Same goes for T17. GGG keeps stepping on same rake, releasing overtuned and maybe untested content, which they have to nerf later anyway, causing extra work for their people and extra headache for players.

So I won't be so sure they will hesitate to suddenly make more wild changes to PoE1:)

"

Mashgesture wrote:

"

Echothesis wrote:

"

Orbaal wrote:

...
PoE1 already comes with a commited audience that stuck with the game for a decade - give or take.
Switching things up in that scenario is dangerous and if thats your only game and only source of revenue, it might well be the last change you ever make ;)

Div/ex swap was highly unorthodox move. If you wish to fix/deflate excess currency in economy, you do it carefully over time, not in one fell swoop. And not only did GGG never apologize, but Mr.Wilson actually said it was players own fault for not diversifying investments. Can you imagine other AAA project devs pulling stunts like this?

Then came alt gem wipe. Then came LMB bind removal, safe to say most of the playerbase got accustomed to using it for years. GGG didn't care in any of those cases, so their take on their audience and definition of "dangerous scenarios" may be at odds with common sense.

Same goes for T17. GGG keeps stepping on same rake, releasing overtuned and maybe untested content, which they have to nerf later anyway, causing extra work for their people and extra headache for players.

So I won't be so sure they will hesitate to suddenly make more wild changes to PoE1:)

We really are off the deep end now.

If you go into the territory of like asking what kind of "AAA company would do this?"
I could point to Blizzard,
I could point to EA,
I could point to Ubisoft,
I could point to Rockstar,
I could point to Bethesda....

Like the list honestly doesnt exclude any AAA publishers at all. They all have silly things they attempt, and go through with. Some being SUED for them as well, remember the lootboxes and microtransactions a few years back with some of these?

If you're gonna dig your heels in on "bad AAA decisions" and play video games. You are a walking contradiction at this point.


The changes you dont like? Great? Maybe move on since your demands honestly at this point would be to:

Revert back to Alt quality and Enchants from lab.
Revert back to Exalts instead of Div.
Make t17s either trivial or nonexistent.
Make content work for any build regardless of poor decision making.
Unlimited FOV
0 EXP penalty

There are other massive changes you just want, but it seems like you want an entire rework of the game when you run into issues, rather than compensate anything on your end.

"

Echothesis wrote:

Div/ex swap was highly unorthodox move. If you wish to fix/deflate excess currency in economy, you do it carefully over time, not in one fell swoop. And not only did GGG never apologize, but Mr.Wilson actually said it was players own fault for not diversifying investments. Can you imagine other AAA project devs pulling stunts like this?

Then came alt gem wipe. Then came LMB bind removal, safe to say most of the playerbase got accustomed to using it for years. GGG didn't care in any of those cases, so their take on their audience and definition of "dangerous scenarios" may be at odds with common sense.

Same goes for T17. GGG keeps stepping on same rake, releasing overtuned and maybe untested content, which they have to nerf later anyway, causing extra work for their people and extra headache for players.

So I won't be so sure they will hesitate to suddenly make more wild changes to PoE1:)

"

Orbaal wrote:

Lets agree to disagree on those.

Div/Ex swap is a non-issue as far as Im concerned cuz I dont touch standard ever. So obviously I dont care but Im aware standard players might - even so not as much as you do.

Chris cracking a crude joke doesnt bother me. I really dont care.
But I understand that the situation changes, if said change already pissed somebody off. I get that.


And T17s...
I really didnt want to go there but fine, why not.
I looked at your build and your defenses are worse than what my builds usually bring to the table after finishing the campaign.
Expecting that setup to tackle hard content is insane imho.

I mean 10k EHP, 5k Phys max, 20K ele max, 5k chaos max hit with all flasks up plus 3.5k life and no sustain to speak off is a recipe for disaster - especially if you have to go into melee range which is what Cyclone requires you to do.

Honestly I dont even think you made it to 100 using this setup.
If you did - respect. It looks like paper and must be frustrating to play.
I dont think its the games fault tho. Your defenses are not just horrible but close to non-existant.
I dont understand why you would expect this to be good enough nor why you would blame anybody else but you.


Im trying very hard to be nice here, even tho it might not sound like it.
Its just some tough love. I understand that you enjoy this playstyle and thats fine. Nothing wrong with that.
But cmon, you can do better than that and still play the way you enjoy the most.

"

Echothesis wrote:

"

Orbaal wrote:

Lets agree to disagree on those.

Div/Ex swap is a non-issue as far as Im concerned cuz I dont touch standard ever. So obviously I dont care but Im aware standard players might - even so not as much as you do.

Chris cracking a crude joke doesnt bother me. I really dont care.
But I understand that the situation changes, if said change already pissed somebody off. I get that.


And T17s...
I really didnt want to go there but fine, why not.
I looked at your build and your defenses are worse than what my builds usually bring to the table after finishing the campaign.
Expecting that setup to tackle hard content is insane imho.

I mean 10k EHP, 5k Phys max, 20K ele max, 5k chaos max hit with all flasks up plus 3.5k life and no sustain to speak off is a recipe for disaster - especially if you have to go into melee range which is what Cyclone requires you to do.

Honestly I dont even think you made it to 100 using this setup.
If you did - respect. It looks like paper and must be frustrating to play.
I dont think its the games fault tho. Your defenses are not just horrible but close to non-existant.
I dont understand why you would expect this to be good enough nor why you would blame anybody else but you.


Im trying very hard to be nice here, even tho it might not sound like it.
Its just some tough love. I understand that you enjoy this playstyle and thats fine. Nothing wrong with that.
But cmon, you can do better than that and still play the way you enjoy the most.

Actually, I rarely have my ES fully broken, even in T17 until the boss. You underestimate the mechanical effectiveness and freeze proliferation. And yes, I did reach lvl 99.5 myself on that build, then gave up and ramped the last half of the level using 5-way.

"

Echothesis wrote:

And yes, I did reach lvl 99.5 myself on that build, then gave up and ramped the last half of the level using 5-way.

"

Echothesis wrote:

Actually, I rarely have my ES fully broken, even in T17 until the boss. You underestimate the mechanical effectiveness and freeze proliferation.