Game is turning into a glass cannon only builds

"

awesome999 wrote:

In the sense as the worse players in a game are the deciding factor when they are the judges, POE would fail miserably.

That is just not how the world works, and based on some of the petty complaints I've seen in reviews, the absolute worst type of players cannot properly articulate themselves and won't post anything useful, i.e. "No Ultrawide support. Game sucks!" or "low FPS! sh1t game!" (while playing a 2024 game on a 2013 machine). Then you also got the opposite end of the spectrum, with useless reviews such as "<insert copy pasted ASCII image>" or "Good." or "Boobs."

Immature reviews from terrible players at large does not quantify the quality of a game as a whole. Same can be said for certain reviewers, some of which that are notorious for being absolute bottom of the barrel, that will spend a short time looking at a list of checkboxes and then form an uninformed, biased opinion delivered as a review of the game. Often with little to no nuance.

"

awesome999 wrote:

What if they can't beat the game? If they can't beat it, POE is THE PROBLEM.

Some people are bad at games. Some video game journalists are invited to play POE2 and they couldn't beat the boss. They solve the problem by simply quitting. Zizaran say it negatively affect the game.

Making a video game bloody hard when Everyone is different. If they don't see THE PROBLEM, not playing it is indeed what GGG want. Quitting is fine.

Can I ask you a question? Or a few?

There a millions of games out there on the market and more being released every day. Lots of them being similar, lots of them being different. You should think that most gamers could find a game that suits them, right?

Now, shouldn't it be OK for some games to be a little more niche than others, appealing to a certain crowd? Like PoE? Or EVE Online? Games that are very hard to really "get into", and that require a certain amount of time investment to really beat the game? Should games like this be illegal? Or should they be irradicated? Should the developers force them to be "more casual"? Or, again, should there be room for a FEW of these games on the market, when all other games are turning into interactive "story modes" without any challenges?

So is "PoE the PROBLEM"? No. The contrast between what the player wants and what the game aims to do/achieve is the problem. If not tending to EVERY players needs and wants makes a game "a problem", it seems like you want every game to appeal to everyone and casualize everything on the market, making every game "the same", with no room for niche games.

There are a lot of "normies" playing PoE, and there will be a lot of "normies" playing PoE 2, even though the game is probably not aimed at them from an "do it all" perspective. Players that know that they will never be able to do everything, but get enjoyment out of the game regardless.

Last question: Should a "normie" be able to beat every game on the market? Is every game that a "normie" can't beat a "PROBLEM"? And who is it a "PROBLEM" for?

Disclaimer: I'm not saying that PoE is perfect; it's not. I'm not saying that PoE 2 will be perfect; it won't. But PoE being grindy, requires a certain time investment and knowledge to "beat it" and be rather complex will never go away. Also; I have been playing for more than 10 years and there are still certain Ubers I haven't beaten yet. I do not blame the game for that.

I'd be upset if I invited games journalists to play my game and they could beat the boss.

Isn't that kind of the joke/meme/problem/falsehood(sometimes) about games journalists?

Its very hard to attribute whether that is a problem or not also, not just because of what Phrazz is saying about different games for different players but because there are games whose difficulty sells the product especially when marketed at "normies".

Souls games get bandied about all day these days for example but the truth is dank souls: prepare to dank was never that hard - it is however very hard if you aren't accustomed to the type of game it is.

They absolutely made bank off that fact and the fact most players struggle with it is part of the appeal.

To bring this back to GGG the appeal of difficulty in a well structured and balanced game is immense to some players - if I can play on SC and feel challenged both in terms of my mechanical skill and in terms of my big brain PoB/character creation skills that is a recipe for success for players like me.

Meanwhile some players will be absolutely disgusted if they have to put anything more than cursory effort into understanding something. That reads like an insult but it isn't its entirely different goals of a hobbie.

You cannot simultaneously please these two crowds it is not possible you choose one and that's all there is to it.

"

Draegnarrr wrote:

You cannot simultaneously please these two crowds it is not possible you choose one and that's all there is to it.

I believe they could. They make their hard game harder with ruthless mode. A game can be changed for individual players with game mode. They simply choose not to divert their resources for other purposes. They choose not to.

"

BaumisMagicalWorld wrote:

That is just not how the world works, and based on some of the petty complaints I've seen in reviews, the absolute worst type of players cannot properly articulate themselves and won't post anything useful, i.e. "No Ultrawide support. Game sucks!" or "low FPS! sh1t game!" (while playing a 2024 game on a 2013 machine). Then you also got the opposite end of the spectrum, with useless reviews such as "<insert copy pasted ASCII image>" or "Good." or "Boobs."

Immature reviews from terrible players at large does not quantify the quality of a game as a whole. Same can be said for certain reviewers, some of which that are notorious for being absolute bottom of the barrel, that will spend a short time looking at a list of checkboxes and then form an uninformed, biased opinion delivered as a review of the game. Often with little to no nuance.

"No, you must be wrong," argued the blind man.

What is the moral of the Three Blind men and the elephant?

Their 5/10 will be 5/10 and your 10/10 will be 10/10. Subjective experiences emphasizes the role of the subject because they're the one having the experience. The game can be both good or terrible to different people. Subjective experiences can be equally true. If they don't like something, they don't like something.

"

awesome999 wrote:

I believe they could. They make their hard game harder with ruthless mode. A game can be changed for individual players with game mode. They simply choose not to divert their resources for other purposes. They choose not to.

Doesn't work for the reason you've said they don't do it, supporting wildly divergent player groups is tantamount to running two games at once.

Now they could run two games if that is the level of solution you are trying to grasp at here - but one is enough work already frankly.

I cannot think of a single example of a game that simultaneously courts wildly different player groups and maintains them. I know you want to believe its possible but it isn't at least so far. If anyone has any good examples chip them in i've played alot of games over the year and forgotten half of them :p

Difficulty modes are not an answer, they exist to provide a little flexibility and freedom for the minimum expense/time that is their role and always has been. For example SSF probably took GGG all of a couple of hours to implement, disable trade/party interactions - done.

Couple of hours work, SSF players are happier. That isn't the same as getting a substantial number of casuals onboard not even close.

"

Draegnarrr wrote:

Doesn't work for the reason you've said they don't do it, supporting wildly divergent player groups is tantamount to running two games at once.

Now they could run two games if that is the level of solution you are trying to grasp at here - but one is enough work already frankly.

I doubt it. It is probably similar to Elden Ring reasons. Easy mode contradict with its own fundamentals game design about challenge and perseverance. Their developers have stated that an easy mode would go against their vision for the game. People would be missing out on the true Dark Souls experience if you change the difficulty. Base on developer's own personal value and principles that it would "ruins" the game. They respectfully decline to implement an Easy mode. It isn't they couldn't, they don't want to.

"

awesome999 wrote:

I doubt it. It is probably similar to Elden Ring reasons.

Elden Ring is a bad example to use here because it attracts different crowds within the same genre. That is not the same thing as attracting different crowds as a whole. You cannot reasonably expect a Starcraft player to enjoy the gameplay of a Fantasy RPG. A Horizon player would be more likely to get enjoyment out of Elden Ring because the genres are fairly close. Still, Horizon players are not drawn to it because the core gameplay is vastly different and so is the setting. That doesn't mean that either game should change to appeal more to the other. That's just a really bad take.

My 2 cents on this topic is that difficulty shouldn't be confused with the learning curve transparency.

When you play Elden ring, you have no problems seeing all available tools on the table, and can combine/test those tools at will, with minimum time sink. When you die in Elden Ring, it is obvious what you should do next, without leaving the game: practice moving better, or go gain more levels/weapon upgrades if you see you are underleveled.

When you play poe, you (as an average player, not no-lifer with 8 years experience) have no idea what other tools are available, there are just too many gimmicks. And testing those gimmicks is grindy and expensive venture in itself. When you keep dying playing poe, you have only one idea about what to do next: quit the game, open POB, open wiki, open market, open craft of exile... Otherwise chances of average player figuring out the best and cheapest way to fix his build are small.

Players who take pride in their poe status would call the above "difficulty", "reasonable demand from the game to the player". I would call it unnecessary tedium and a mess. And I would prefer to download and complete another videogame in the time frame it would take to theorycraft and construct another viable poe build.

"

Echothesis wrote:

Otherwise chances of average player figuring out the best and cheapest way to fix his build are small.

Here's the problem with your post though. Why do you expect them to immediately figure out the "best and cheapest way"? Why is that the gut instinct here? Isn't it far more reasonable to assume a player is going to make incremental steps towards improving their character and knowledge?

You talk as if the entire game is min/maxing at EVERY step: every failure, every upgrade HAS to be the best possible choice.....or its completely and utterly useless. That just isn't true. And its not true of most other games either.

This game offers you plenty of information when you die. It also offers you plenty of information as you play, and as you grow, and as you build your character. It's how many players learn the game, as long as they aren't told by folks like you that their only choices are "quit or download these 12 programs". There is an enormous amount of information BETWEEN those options that you simply ignore because maybe you are simply unable to personally handle a game like that. Maybe you need a nice big shiny green message saying "This item/choice gives you 10% more damage!" and if you don't get that, you curl up into the fetal position.

Min/maxing requires research and potentially 3rd party tools. But nearly everything else in the game? Nope.


I sincerely wish we as a playerbase could STOP telling newer players that there exists this false dichotomy within PoE....that there are only two options to every situation and you either HAVE to look it up / follow a build / watch youtube / spend 1000 hours / nolife the game, or else quit. This simply isn't the reality, and it never was.

"

mefistozxz wrote:

This game offers you plenty of information when you die.

Are you serious?