Chat GPT is the best thing to happen to this game for New Players

"

BimboBoy1994 wrote:

"it's immediately obvious which replies are written by chat gpt" — honestly, i doubt that. you're just making assumptions based on your expectations of what an AI response should sound like.

It's actually pretty obvious which posts are from ChatGPT. It's not because of "absence of humanity" or punctuation or anything superficial like that.

It's because of the syntax, structure, and content that is almost impossible for a "human" to duplicate. ALL chatgpt responses sound like a "form response" like you would get from a company, or an automatic system.

ChatGPT has an "eerieness" to it that, when you read it, you can't ever forget it. You actually learn the "personality" of the AI.

And then, if you suspect, you can always just run the text through an AI detector.


Don't ever forget that it is actually very hard for a human to imitate a machine. In sort of the same way its very hard for a machine to truly imitate a human. There is almost no way someone wouldn't recognize AI text if they've ever encountered it before.

"

BaumisMagicalWorld wrote:

Josh actually makes a very good point here. Basic game design issues that could be avoided. I remember from way back when, as people were introducing it to others, the most common immediate reaction was confusion. It looks like bloat to someone who has not yet found footing in this game. Which is a fundamental problem.

Sorry....but no. It's not a good point. What was the first thing that sold this game over its competitors way way way back in 2013? The skill tree and the skill system. There was actually nothing else unique about PoE. Traditional gameplay, traditional leveling, traditional progress. It is the literal claim to fame that PoE has over anyone else. If someone is turned off just looking at something, that's a gamer fault not a design flaw. Or that the game just isn't for you.

That "first glance OMG" moment is precisely why it was designed that way. And also why it remains that way for 12 years now, and moving into the next generation of the game.

If it was such a "design flaw/failure", the game would not be where it is today and it would have been changed drastically during the 3 year beta, the 1 year alpha before that, and any of the first....12 years of the game's history.

"

mefistozxz wrote:

Sorry....but no. It's not a good point.

It is, actually. Being infamous for something does not mean it's generally good design. It attracts a certain crowd, which is reflected in the game's actual popularity and not its perceived popularity.

Infamous? More like famous for. The huge skill tree is a defining factor of the game, a USP. The type that shies away from the game because of it are not the target audience anyway. The devs have gone over this time and time again, even somewhat recently when Chris talked to Josh Strife Hayes.

Only you add that negative connotation there, which again speaks to bias while you claim objectivity.

"

BaumisMagicalWorld wrote:

"

mefistozxz wrote:

Sorry....but no. It's not a good point.

It is, actually. Being infamous for something does not mean it's generally good design. It attracts a certain crowd, which is reflected in the game's actual popularity and not its perceived popularity.

No...the debate over whether its "good" or "bad" design is reflected in its literal popularity. It has grown exponentially, it has been around 12 years and is widely known across all circles of the arpg world, and more than all that...it's made wild amounts of money.

Good design literally translates to success for a video game. If it were actually bad design, that game would not still be running. Especially in a f2p model, most of which go belly up after a year because of ACTUAL poor design.

Confusion and a feeling of being overwhelmed is not inherently bad design. It is what's known as being different. Or even a better word: innovative.


You might subjectively find the skill tree design to be bad. But objectively? It isn't. Objective measures like game success, longevity, growth, etc. all point to it being a wildly GOOD design choice.

Just because it might be less popular than other competitors overall doesn't automatically mean its bad. It means it caters to a different crowd.

People might think Indian food is bad, but does that literally mean indian food is bad cuisine? No....it means that person subjectively doesn't like it. But if an indian restaurant closes because the food it serves is generally bad....then that is BAD cuisine.

Food analogies....watching Hell's Kitchen right now and it is greatly affecting my state of mind.

"

mefistozxz wrote:

Good design literally translates to success for a video game. If it were actually bad design, that game would not still be running.

No, it does not... PoE literally wouldn't be where it is today without all the exposure it got from Kripp and everyone else over the years. It being infamous for its complexity in combination with all the media coverage is why it's at where it's at. Chris has literally stated this in the past. It still very much is bad design and the game would have failed if it weren't for what I previously stated. Sheer fucking luck, for the most part.

Moving the goal posts won't change that fact. If it weren't bad design, we wouldn't be getting constant QoL updates since Mark took over. He has a better understanding of what needs to happen if GGG wants to get past the ~230k all-time player peak.

PoE's complexity is both its blessing and its curse. Obscurity can be mysterious and fun, as seen in the Souls games, but it has its limits.

"

BaumisMagicalWorld wrote:

It still very much is bad design and the game would have failed if it weren't for what I previously stated. Sheer <redacted> luck, for the most part.

Seriously....you think its "luck" the game is where it is?! You think its "luck" that a company rose from a garage to a multi-million dollar global operation? You think its "luck" that the doors remained open and growing for 12+ years and currently leading to a whole new game? All while having "bad" design which defines the game? That you still play? Man, that is some statement to make.

"

mefistozxz wrote:

Seriously....you think its "luck" the game is where it is?!

Mostly, it is. PoE had the perfect timing. You seem to forget that it was released after D3 failed spectacularly and it was being compared to it non-stop and marketed as the D3 replacement. Your perception of events does not reflect what actually happened.

Daunting statements, but this explains so much.

"

BaumisMagicalWorld wrote:

"

mefistozxz wrote:

Seriously....you think its "luck" the game is where it is?!

Mostly, it is. PoE had the perfect timing. You seem to forget that it was released after D3 failed spectacularly and it was being compared to it non-stop and marketed as the D3 replacement. Your perception of events does not reflect what actually happened.

Except that......the game didn't actually start to take off until WELL after that. Clearly you don't quite remember the beginning years. PoE was fairly stagnant until around 3.0. And you also used D3 as a comparison?! The thing about D3 that was BAD design was the AH. And guess what happened to it? It COMPLETELY DISAPPEARED. It failed. Because it was BAD design. That is what happens when something is actually, objectively BAD. It doesn't stick around.

D3 and RoS was WILDLY popular and successful. It was GOOD design. Many d2 players, myself included, HATED it. But it is a very clear example that a subjectively BAD game does not inherently mean bad design. It was designed very well....for a new, different diablo audience.

A GREAT example of a game that proves BOTH points:
Bad Design (AH) = unsuccessful, removal, closure, cessation of growth
Good Design (the game itself) = successful, continued growth, massive profit, longevity.


Perfect timing can only get you so far....you also need to have a fundamentally good product lol.

I suppose its also mostly luck that someone has great timing when getting hired to a new job that just posted.....and then also still has that job with a higher pay over a decade later. Definitely it is mostly luck that he wasn't fired because of that perfect timing at hiring.