XP loss needs to go (566 hours play time)

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

There's no right or wrong way to play a game. If someone says they don't like the mechanic. They're just as correct as someone saying they do.

There is literally a right and wrong way to play a game.
Every single game in existence has rules and requirements; some can be bent, some can be broken, and some can be changed - but they still apply.

If you play "Magic the Gathering" but you play it like "UNO" - you play the game wrong.

If you play "Counter-Strike" but you don't help your team and shoot ppl - you play the game wrong.

If you play "Don't Starve" and never gather food and prepare for the night - you play the game wrong.

If you want to clear "Path of Exile" but you don't build your character the way it is required to actually clear the game - you play the game wrong.

Do you have to choice to play any game as you like? Sure.
Does it mean you are free from criticism if you play the game differently than it's meant to be played and complain about things then not going your way? No.

What you meant is "There is no right or wrong way of having fun" and nobody can deny that - it's 100% subjective, but games, their rules, function and requirements are not.

"

But at the same time. Lots of people on the forums argue for it to be kept in because of egotistical reasons, and not actual enjoyment. Lots of people of the forums here are quick to put others down who don't want it. Calling them bad, or insinuating that they're just not playing the game correctly.

You are misrepresenting how it is.
If someone says "I don't like the exp loss" - that's their subjective view and if someone says "I actually like it" - that's subjective too, but that's not what happens and causes issues.
If you take a closer look you often find ppl unwilling to follow the established rules and requirements of the game, then paying the price for it (exp loss in this case) and then wanting the game (rules) to be changed instead of following them - because they don't like it.
So, who are they to demand a change of the game if they are unwilling to play by the rules in the first place?

Yes, there are games that give you way more freedom, like modding the game until it breaks and fits your needs, but that's not the case for obvious reasons with "Path of Exile".
The "egoism" functions in both ways, some defend the "exp loss" for their own personal reason, but some demand the removal for their egoistic reasons too.

"

Which is what the issue is. There's no right or wrong way to play a game. If someone says they don't like the mechanic. They're just as correct as someone saying they do.

Again, a misunderstanding of "right and wrong way of playing a game" and
"right and wrong way of having fun".
The right way to play a game does not equal fun for everybody the same;
because games and ppl are different.

"

What I don't understand, is why we can't just have the option to partake in it or not. Most games let you choose the way you play. With, or without cheats, with or without mods. With easy difficulty, or hard difficulty. Not sure why the game only needs to suit one type of player. Especially an online game, and not a single player experience where the sole goal of the game is to be difficult and challenging for instance.

Technically GGG could implement "easy/normal/hardcore" and other stuff, but then these options would only be available when entirely separated from each other. It's how online multiplayer games in general and for a reason work.
The base game is the same for everybody and depending on what you are doing and what you are going for - the "difficulty" changes.
There are "easier" and "harder" games (no matter how you define it) and YOU as a player select the game that suits you and not YOU as a player select a game and demand it to change until it suits you.

"

I have never seen an online game that does well, when it focuses solely on grinding or punishing gameplay. It's usually very low in player count, and struggles financially unless they resort to predatory ways to get money. Like addiction, or manipulation. They often end up incredibly toxic, and have tons of gatekeeping in them too. Which further drives players away. Even the ones that enjoy it.

Doesn't matter what you've seen and how you interpret it as long as you cannot present any objective things to carry your argument.
There is a huge market, especially for "grindy & punishing" games. Sure, many in the Western market prefer something else, but the target audience exists and they are not only a few.
If you don't like shooting ppl - why would you play a shooter!?
If you don't like grinding with high risk - why would you play PoE!?
That's a choice you made.

"

My entire argument is that there's just better ways to engage players and keep them thrilled in game. Rather than just kicking them in the nuts if they die. I love a good challenging game, and there's so many ways they could do that, if they decided to get rid of this mechanic and put effort into it. XP loss on death is a half-assed way to add 'difficulty'.

Then make a feedback post of how you would change it and if they think (and/or many others) that your way is the "better one" - you get what you want and if they think it's not - you don't.
In the end, it's THEIR game - not YOURS, so it's their call and you decide if you accept it or not.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

There's no right or wrong way to play a game. If someone says they don't like the mechanic. They're just as correct as someone saying they do.

There is literally a right and wrong way to play a game.
Every single game in existence has rules and requirements; some can be bent, some can be broken, and some can be changed - but they still apply.

If you play "Magic the Gathering" but you play it like "UNO" - you play the game wrong.

If you play "Counter-Strike" but you don't help your team and shoot ppl - you play the game wrong.

If you play "Don't Starve" and never gather food and prepare for the night - you play the game wrong.

If you want to clear "Path of Exile" but you don't build your character the way it is required to actually clear the game - you play the game wrong.

Do you have to choice to play any game as you like? Sure.
Does it mean you are free from criticism if you play the game differently than it's meant to be played and complain about things then not going your way? No.

What you meant is "There is no right or wrong way of having fun" and nobody can deny that - it's 100% subjective, but games, their rules, function and requirements are not.

"

But at the same time. Lots of people on the forums argue for it to be kept in because of egotistical reasons, and not actual enjoyment. Lots of people of the forums here are quick to put others down who don't want it. Calling them bad, or insinuating that they're just not playing the game correctly.

You are misrepresenting how it is.
If someone says "I don't like the exp loss" - that's their subjective view and if someone says "I actually like it" - that's subjective too, but that's not what happens and causes issues.
If you take a closer look you often find ppl unwilling to follow the established rules and requirements of the game, then paying the price for it (exp loss in this case) and then wanting the game (rules) to be changed instead of following them - because they don't like it.
So, who are they to demand a change of the game if they are unwilling to play by the rules in the first place?

Yes, there are games that give you way more freedom, like modding the game until it breaks and fits your needs, but that's not the case for obvious reasons with "Path of Exile".
The "egoism" functions in both ways, some defend the "exp loss" for their own personal reason, but some demand the removal for their egoistic reasons too.

"

Which is what the issue is. There's no right or wrong way to play a game. If someone says they don't like the mechanic. They're just as correct as someone saying they do.

Again, a misunderstanding of "right and wrong way of playing a game" and
"right and wrong way of having fun".
The right way to play a game does not equal fun for everybody the same;
because games and ppl are different.

"

What I don't understand, is why we can't just have the option to partake in it or not. Most games let you choose the way you play. With, or without cheats, with or without mods. With easy difficulty, or hard difficulty. Not sure why the game only needs to suit one type of player. Especially an online game, and not a single player experience where the sole goal of the game is to be difficult and challenging for instance.

Technically GGG could implement "easy/normal/hardcore" and other stuff, but then these options would only be available when entirely separated from each other. It's how online multiplayer games in general and for a reason work.
The base game is the same for everybody and depending on what you are doing and what you are going for - the "difficulty" changes.
There are "easier" and "harder" games (no matter how you define it) and YOU as a player select the game that suits you and not YOU as a player select a game and demand it to change until it suits you.

"

I have never seen an online game that does well, when it focuses solely on grinding or punishing gameplay. It's usually very low in player count, and struggles financially unless they resort to predatory ways to get money. Like addiction, or manipulation. They often end up incredibly toxic, and have tons of gatekeeping in them too. Which further drives players away. Even the ones that enjoy it.

Doesn't matter what you've seen and how you interpret it as long as you cannot present any objective things to carry your argument.
There is a huge market, especially for "grindy & punishing" games. Sure, many in the Western market prefer something else, but the target audience exists and they are not only a few.
If you don't like shooting ppl - why would you play a shooter!?
If you don't like grinding with high risk - why would you play PoE!?
That's a choice you made.

"

My entire argument is that there's just better ways to engage players and keep them thrilled in game. Rather than just kicking them in the nuts if they die. I love a good challenging game, and there's so many ways they could do that, if they decided to get rid of this mechanic and put effort into it. XP loss on death is a half-assed way to add 'difficulty'.

Then make a feedback post of how you would change it and if they think (and/or many others) that your way is the "better one" - you get what you want and if they think it's not - you don't.
In the end, it's THEIR game - not YOURS, so it's their call and you decide if you accept it or not.

There is an intended way to play a game yes. But there is no 'wrong' way to enjoy a game. That's what I meant to say. If you have fun running around playing Don't Starve, just gathering resources and then dying of starvation. Great.

When someone gives feedback about something they don't enjoy or that they do enjoy. They're correct. And you trying to change their mind is not conducive to a healthy discussion.

You don't have to agree with their point of view on what is, and what isn't enjoyable, to support it. You can recognize that a game could have optional choices in gameplay styles, that helps everyone enjoy it more. Rather than just one type of player.

Your example of UNO vs Magic the Gathering is a false equivalency.

This is comparable to one player claiming the only correct way to play MTG is STANDARD, and another player saying "I prefer commander more" And then the player that likes standard more, telling the other person "you're wrong, there's only one way to play, and saying things like 'You're just bad at standard which is why you play commander, get better" Which is what you see on the forums.

That's my entire argument. Stop twisting it.

I also made it clear in my other post to you. That I have given plenty of feedback on the changes that I think would make the game better.

I have also pointed to the fact that this feedback is being ignored. Which was the point of the other thread I posted. That the game company itself is ignoring players feedback, and that lots of game companies are suffering the consequences of it, in terms of mediocre game outcomes, or even closure of the game company. That warning is ALSO, valuable feedback.

The feedback was. Making similar games, over and over. Isn't working anymore. We already have a grindy ARPG that caters to grindy arpg lovers. You don't need two. And ignoring this is likely going to backfire for the company. PoE 2 is essentially PoE 1, plus a dodge roll, better graphics, and less content. This is not likely to be a winning formula for GGG. Continuing on this path is risky. Hence why I said the game needed a shift in direction.


Stop trying to argue with people. It's tiring.

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

There is an intended way to play a game yes. But there is no 'wrong' way to enjoy a game. That's what I meant to say. If you have fun running around playing Don't Starve, just gathering resources and then dying of starvation. Great.

Again, if your "way of having fun" differs from the "intended way playing the game" - that's YOUR choice, but that does not mean that the "intended way playing the game" has to change to "what is fun for you".

If you have fun playing chess, but you think "Man, pawns should have more than 5 functions" and then you make up a rule like "If a pawn takes an enemy's pawn - he becomes a soldier and has his range doubled" that's fine. Fine for YOU and everybody who would accept it when playing with you, BUT your own "fun" does not change how chess officially works and if you play it officially - you follow the rules.

"

When someone gives feedback about something they don't enjoy or that they do enjoy. They're correct. And you trying to change their mind is not conducive to a healthy discussion.

Sure. But there is a difference. If someone says "nerf/buff X because I die 3 times an hour" and someone asks you "So, how does your build look like?" in relation to defences, gear in general, level, skills, etc.; that's not trying to change their mind - that's help.
But some ppl, even if we can objectively prove that their character is... horrible, to put it mildly, instead still stay ignorant to any offer, refuse to listen/improve... well, yes... ppl don't like that much.

"

You don't have to agree with their point of view on what is, and what isn't enjoyable, to support it. You can recognize that a game could have optional choices in gameplay styles, that helps everyone enjoy it more. Rather than just one type of player.

That's a bias problem. For some the removal/change of something would cause more enjoyment, but for others, the removal/change of something would cause a decrease in enjoyment.
I could say the same "Why don't you support my enjoyment (the exp loss to stay) - when I have to support yours?"

"

Your example of UNO vs Magic the Gathering is a false equivalency.

This is comparable to one player claiming the only correct way to play MTG is STANDARD, and another player saying "I prefer commander more" And then the player that likes standard more, telling the other person "you're wrong, there's only one way to play, and saying things like 'You're just bad at standard which is why you play commander, get better" Which is what you see on the forums.

That's funny because you are wrong.
In my example, someone would apply a rule set from a game that functions entirely differently to another one because he has more fun this way.

Your example just presents two different rule sets from the same game.
Translated to PoE it would be like - a "Hardcore Player" saying "Hardcore is the only right way to play the game" while, in fact, Softcore/Hardcore/Ruthless/SSF exist.

"

I also made it clear in my other post to you. That I have given plenty of feedback on the changes that I think would make the game better.

Ok, but you are still here demanding it to be changed - even with your feedback already given and furthermore, trying to discredit everyone who does not align with your view.

"

I have also pointed to the fact that this feedback is being ignored. Which was the point of the other thread I posted. That the game company itself is ignoring players feedback, and that lots of game companies are suffering the consequences of it, in terms of mediocre game outcomes, or even closure of the game company. That warning is ALSO, valuable feedback.

Ignored by whom? GGG? First of all, you have to be able to prove such a claim and secondly, and more importantly, them seeing your feedback does not equal to "they have to do whatever your feedback is".
I, myself, gave them a lot of feedback over the years and for PoE2 and while not every single thing got addressed (for obvious reasons) - they changed things I mentioned and from many others too.

You know, some could call your behaviour toxic - you give feedback - the result is not what you want (based on your expectations) and then you blame the ones that did not do what you wanted.
That's not how feedback works.

"

Stop trying to argue with people. It's tiring.

You are not in the position to tell me what to do, same goes for GGG.
If you are tired of arguing - then don't.

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

XP loss on death is a half-assed way to add 'difficulty'.

I wouldn't even consider it as adding difficulty. Extreme punishment is not increased difficulty - it just removes the value of time spent, which is particularly egregious with so many one-shot and split-second mystery deaths.

Soulsborne games also have a form of XP loss, but they're meticulously tuned to be legitimate skill checks (unlike the 360-degree RNG experience that POE 2 is building). Losing those souls - yes can be frustrating but because of the tuning and the opportunity keep the souls from being completely stolen upon death (by picking them up before the next death), it feels like a much fairer experience hence why it's an easier pill to swallow compared to this game.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

Again, if your "way of having fun" differs from the "intended way playing the game" - that's YOUR choice, but that does not mean that the "intended way playing the game" has to change to "what is fun for you".

The issue is that the two games are incredibly similar. PoE 2 has no need to be like PoE 1.

People are asking for a DIFFERENT game. The game you are defending, that you don't want changed. Already exists. That is literally the reason they were separated. So that people like you, could go enjoy your grindy, crafting/economy oriented ARPG. It's PoE 1.

And then they could experiment and try to reach a wider audience with PoE 2.

Except, all they've done so far. Is listen to people whining that PoE 2 isn't like PoE 1. And no one benefits from this.

The game likely won't reach many new players. PoE 1 or PoE 2 will become obsolete, and cease to exist. The game company itself either produces a medicore product, or potentially even more harmful outcomes. Like the loss of millions upon millions of man hours and money.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

If you have fun playing chess, but you think "Man, pawns should have more than 5 functions" and then you make up a rule like "If a pawn takes an enemy's pawn - he becomes a soldier and has his range doubled" that's fine. Fine for YOU and everybody who would accept it when playing with you, BUT your own "fun" does not change how chess officially works and if you play it officially - you follow the rules.

You keep using examples that don't reflect what is happening. No one is asking for chess to be changed or have a different ruleset.

PoE 1 already exists, and doesn't need to be changed. Everything you want to stay the same, is the same in that game.

PoE 2 is an entirely different game, and should be treated as such. Instead of trying to copy-paste PoE 1. Honestly. The name that they choose for the second game is half the issue. People are expecting the game to replace the old one now. They separated it because they didn't want that.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

Sure. But there is a difference. If someone says "nerf/buff X because I die 3 times an hour" and someone asks you "So, how does your build look like?" in relation to defences, gear in general, level, skills, etc.; that's not trying to change their mind - that's help.
But some ppl, even if we can objectively prove that their character is... horrible, to put it mildly, instead still stay ignorant to any offer, refuse to listen/improve... well, yes... ppl don't like that much.

Yup, and you're right. They don't need to change PoE 1 to suit players like that. PoE 2 however, is a new game, and can take an entirely new direction from PoE 1.

Tons of players didn't like certain aspects of PoE 1. They are literally telling you "If you change this and this, and respect my time more, I'd play the everliving shit out of this" They're asking for a new game.

This is literally the perfect time to steer the game in another direction. Gain more players. Get two different games that people can swap between to have different experiences.

Continuing down the path of wanting PoE 2 to be just like PoE 1, is only asking for one of the games, to ultimately replace the other. This is the case whenever any game company re-releases a similar, but slightly different version of the game. It either flops, or it just replaces the old one. Look at all the call of duty games, all the battlefield games. New one comes out, old one vanishes into non-existence. It's because they're VERY similar. The better one wins.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

That's a bias problem. For some the removal/change of something would cause more enjoyment, but for others, the removal/change of something would cause a decrease in enjoyment.
I could say the same "Why don't you support my enjoyment (the exp loss to stay) - when I have to support yours?"

All people are saying is. Why do you need two games the same? There's a huge group of people expressing a desire to play an ARPG game that's different from PoE 1, lots of people didn't like certain mechanics in PoE 1. PoE 2 was advertised as a different game. Why do we need to make PoE 2, like PoE 1, alienating potentially millions of players?

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

That's funny because you are wrong.
In my example, someone would apply a rule set from a game that functions entirely differently to another one because he has more fun this way.

No. My example was a correct representation of what's happening with the forums. A group of players likes Standard, and is bullying anyone that's asking for the game to be similar to Commander instead. Similar game, over-all a different experience.

The issue here is that you're not treating PoE 2, as a potential, separate game, and you want it to be similar to PoE 1.

You can just go play PoE 1. That's literally why it was separated. Asking for a similar game brings no benefit to you or the company. The old one will likely be lost, and the new one will take years and years to reach a point that will satisfy you like the old one did, and that's only IF, it actually ends up going in a direction the old players like. Which many are saying, it isn't. That the experience is horrible compared to the version of the game that's had 11 years of balance and effort behind it.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

Your example just presents two different rule sets from the same game.
Translated to PoE it would be like - a "Hardcore Player" saying "Hardcore is the only right way to play the game" while, in fact, Softcore/Hardcore/Ruthless/SSF exist.

Kind of. The issue is that the game is largely the same however. I'm not saying that I want the same game. Neither are many other players.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

Ok, but you are still here demanding it to be changed - even with your feedback already given and furthermore, trying to discredit everyone who does not align with your view.

Nope. I am infact expressing the pointlessness of re-creating the same, or very similar game. There's a huge chunk of players that clearly want a DIFFERENT game to PoE 1. Not a rehashed PoE 1. I want the game to be drastically changed. I want an entirely new game. As do most people expressing their opinions on how fucking stupid Xp loss on death is. And that this new game doesn't need it to be good.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

Ignored by whom? GGG? First of all, you have to be able to prove such a claim and secondly, and more importantly, them seeing your feedback does not equal to "they have to do whatever your feedback is".
I, myself, gave them a lot of feedback over the years and for PoE2 and while not every single thing got addressed (for obvious reasons) - they changed things I mentioned and from many others too.

They have made basically the same game. And have gone as far to tell the players expressing their desire for a different. That they aren't going to do it. The game continues down the same path. Aimed at satisfying their current playerbase. Alienating potentially millions of other players.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

You know, some could call your behaviour toxic - you give feedback - the result is not what you want (based on your expectations) and then you blame the ones that did not do what you wanted.
That's not how feedback works.

That's funny. Because all I see was that GGG promised a different game. And hasn't delivered on that promise. They separated it for a reason, and now players like you want PoE 1 mechanics in PoE 2, to make it more like PoE 1.

Like I said. They did the game a disservice, naming it PoE 2. Player expectations are now that the game be an improved PoE 1, for PoE 1 players. Rather than a different game.

Take some time and read players comments about what they want to keep in the game from PoE 1. All I'm reading is that "We need an end-game, we need map spamming, we need delves, we need heists, we need XP loss on death, we need crafting! We need the economy"

All of this is going against GGG's original desire to separate the games, and differentiate them. Most people arguing on the forums, want essentially, a carbon copy, with a few small changes.


What the fuck was the point of 6 years of development, and millions of dollars if all people wanted was the same thing as PoE 1?

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

You are not in the position to tell me what to do, same goes for GGG.
If you are tired of arguing - then don't.

Not so much telling you what to do. Just pointing out the pointless arguing that gets nowhere. You're right. I won't respond anymore. Since this wasn't a discussion in good faith, but rather one where the sole goal was to be right. Rather than look at the facts.

I used to give suggestions as well, but it's obvious that GGG doesn't listen to this one. They may believe wasting players' time is necessary. Later on, I just stopped talking about it， it doesn’t matter anymore.I’ve already decided that if this continues, I’ll just play other games instead.This is the simplest issue possible—player experience! Don’t talk about strategy or any other excuses. If the experience is bad, people will leave.Just like Elden Ring，no matter how highly it’s rated, half the players still quit before finishing the game!

A lot of people came to me saying, "Oh, it's because your defense isn't good enough, your elemental resistance isn't high enough." But even if you max everything out, it's still an endless loop—something shit is bound to happen. You get killed by a lightning orb that phases through walls.
You get killed by a mana-draining ring that isn’t even centered properly.
You get hit by over 30 projectiles in a single second, with no time to react.You'll eventually realize that even with only around 10% resistance, you'll die less often than someone who maxes it out, as long as your damage is high enough.

Today, after 3 hours of grinding, my experience gain is still zero. I just uninstalled the game because it's a complete waste of time. You farm gear for a whole week, yet not a single piece improves your current damage. The currency drops aren’t enough to let you upgrade to better gear!

You're not just losing experience—you’re losing access to map content and your loot as well. Clearly, GGG thinks the experience loss penalty isn’t punishing enough. Sometimes, even when you have Omen and it doesn't trigger, you still get one-shot by 6000+ damage.

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

You can just go play PoE 1. That's literally why it was separated. Asking for a similar game brings no benefit to you or the company. The old one will likely be lost, and the new one will take years and years to reach a point that will satisfy you like the old one did, and that's only IF, it actually ends up going in a direction the old players like. Which many are saying, it isn't. That the experience is horrible compared to the version of the game that's had 11 years of balance and effort behind it.

And you can just go play something else.
Yeah... a weird argument to make, right!?

They didn't separate it because they wanted to make an entirely new game with only the name as the connection.
"Path of Exile 2" was only meant as an update/expansion, but they realised with all the things they made - it would be better to make it a separate game.
But "new game" does not mean "everything has to be entirely new", this is not like "Warcraft" and "Starcraft" - where the genre is the connection.

GGG wants to change some things in PoE2 that we have in PoE1, but making something new does not mean that they have to change everything.
If they want to keep something in PoE2, then they keep it - if not, they don't.

We don't even know how PoE2 will look like on full release, it could be a "PoE1 clone" or something entirely different. That's achievable with minor and major changes to any sort of stuff.
But all the "doomer" stuff because the is not X or Y for new players or veterans leads nowhere.

We don't even have a major update for PoE2, imagine ppl would've "doomed" BG3 in the first months of "Early Access" without knowing anything to come.

Just fix the one shot and delayed death mechanics.

the "what killed me" mechanic is what I hate.

Now I just get to level 90 and play reckless because it is not worth leveling in my opinion.

I would rather a little reduced XP and no death penalty.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

You can just go play PoE 1. That's literally why it was separated. Asking for a similar game brings no benefit to you or the company. The old one will likely be lost, and the new one will take years and years to reach a point that will satisfy you like the old one did, and that's only IF, it actually ends up going in a direction the old players like. Which many are saying, it isn't. That the experience is horrible compared to the version of the game that's had 11 years of balance and effort behind it.

And you can just go play something else.
Yeah... a weird argument to make, right!?

They didn't separate it because they wanted to make an entirely new game with only the name as the connection.
"Path of Exile 2" was only meant as an update/expansion, but they realised with all the things they made - it would be better to make it a separate game.
But "new game" does not mean "everything has to be entirely new", this is not like "Warcraft" and "Starcraft" - where the genre is the connection.

GGG wants to change some things in PoE2 that we have in PoE1, but making something new does not mean that they have to change everything.
If they want to keep something in PoE2, then they keep it - if not, they don't.

We don't even know how PoE2 will look like on full release, it could be a "PoE1 clone" or something entirely different. That's achievable with minor and major changes to any sort of stuff.
But all the "doomer" stuff because the is not X or Y for new players or veterans leads nowhere.

We don't even have a major update for PoE2, imagine ppl would've "doomed" BG3 in the first months of "Early Access" without knowing anything to come.

I can assume that the number 40 under your avatar means you're an experienced POE player, right? What you're saying is quite strange—people are discussing this because they still care about the game. As you said, when some people stop caring, they'll move on to other games. What's so surprising about that?

Does GGG only serve you top 1% players? In a situation where no better gear drops and you spend a whole week without any upgrades, what’s wrong with giving people 5 more attribute points? It’s better than wasting time.

I also find it strange—these issues have nothing to do with you top players, so why are you so strongly opposed to it? What’s wrong with giving other players a better experience? Or is it that you can’t find your sense of superiority unless it comes at the expense of other players?

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

You can just go play PoE 1. That's literally why it was separated. Asking for a similar game brings no benefit to you or the company. The old one will likely be lost, and the new one will take years and years to reach a point that will satisfy you like the old one did, and that's only IF, it actually ends up going in a direction the old players like. Which many are saying, it isn't. That the experience is horrible compared to the version of the game that's had 11 years of balance and effort behind it.

And you can just go play something else.
Yeah... a weird argument to make, right!?

They didn't separate it because they wanted to make an entirely new game with only the name as the connection.
"Path of Exile 2" was only meant as an update/expansion, but they realised with all the things they made - it would be better to make it a separate game.
But "new game" does not mean "everything has to be entirely new", this is not like "Warcraft" and "Starcraft" - where the genre is the connection.

GGG wants to change some things in PoE2 that we have in PoE1, but making something new does not mean that they have to change everything.
If they want to keep something in PoE2, then they keep it - if not, they don't.

We don't even know how PoE2 will look like on full release, it could be a "PoE1 clone" or something entirely different. That's achievable with minor and major changes to any sort of stuff.
But all the "doomer" stuff because the is not X or Y for new players or veterans leads nowhere.

We don't even have a major update for PoE2, imagine ppl would've "doomed" BG3 in the first months of "Early Access" without knowing anything to come.

No Jakker. The 'Go play PoE 1' is actually entirely valid here. If you want PoE 2 to be like PoE 1. Just go play PoE 1. If you want PoE 1 to have some updates that you liked, ask for them. But the game everyone is asking for, already exists.

PoE 2 was originally an update/expansion. It is now beyond that. Yet you continue treating it like an update/expansion, requesting similar things to PoE 1.

I don't think GGG, or the players even know what they want. You don't consider this a new game. You even said it yourself. You want an update/expansion. And are even defending this in your comment. Yet GGG separated it because PoE 2 wasn't an update/expansion anymore, it was MORE.


Now everyone's just complaining that it's not like PoE 1. Absolute clownery.

Yes, we don't know what it will be like. But if we continue down the path of "I want to keep this and this and this and this and this and that from PoE 1"

We WILL end up with a clone. And the money WILL be wasted.

So maybe, rethink your stance on wanting all these mechanics from PoE 1.

Is XP loss on death really integral to PoE 2? Or do you think we could improve on it somehow? What about portals? Does the game even NEED portals?

Try to envision a different game.