Community Split

After 3 months and a lot of content creators and people I've been talking to there are 2 crowds of people and the community seems to be split down the middle.

The first one is either new to exilelikes/PoE or PoE1 vets who basically want PoE2 to be PoE1.5 or very close to the original PoE1 4.0 with all the QoL of PoE2, but the pacing of PoE1

The second one is everyone who enjoyed PoE2s campaign a lot more than the current endgame and would love to have the endgame be more of the campaign pace rather than a zoomfest similar to PoE1

Those 2 groups can't really be united into one game so I hope/beg GGG to modernize PoE1 and announce PoE1 4.0 or PoE2 ruthless with the original vision for the game

As a PoE1 "vet" [only been around since 3.13 -- maybe I'm not a vet??] I'd rather play a "hell difficulty" campaign as opposed to engage with the current endgame content -- at least from a fun-to-play aspect.

I would be OK with some compromise between the PoE2 campaign pacing and the PoE1 [or highly optimized PoE2] endgame zoom-zoom.

Basically there should be room for "zoomy map blasters" to have fun, make great profit, etc... There should also be room for tankier, slower builds to also have fun, make decent profit, etc...

"

KingAlamar#4071 wrote:

Basically there should be room for "zoomy map blasters" to have fun, make great profit, etc... There should also be room for tankier, slower builds to also have fun, make decent profit, etc...

Found your problem.

"

LeFlesh#9979 wrote:

"

KingAlamar#4071 wrote:

Basically there should be room for "zoomy map blasters" to have fun, make great profit, etc... There should also be room for tankier, slower builds to also have fun, make decent profit, etc...

Found your problem.

If you're saying that in a "trade" league that being economically viable [I.E. being sufficiently profitable to be an economic participant] isn't a consideration for the design layer of the game then I'd say you're possibly have a problem in understanding yourself ....

It's possible that I misunderstand your feedback though -- care to elaborate??

There's no misunderstanding.

"

KingAlamar#4071 wrote:

being economically viable

This is the problem.

"

KingAlamar#4071 wrote:

"

LeFlesh#9979 wrote:

"

KingAlamar#4071 wrote:

Basically there should be room for "zoomy map blasters" to have fun, make great profit, etc... There should also be room for tankier, slower builds to also have fun, make decent profit, etc...

Found your problem.

If you're saying that in a "trade" league that being economically viable [I.E. being sufficiently profitable to be an economic participant] isn't a consideration for the design layer of the game then I'd say you're possibly have a problem in understanding yourself ....

It's possible that I misunderstand your feedback though -- care to elaborate??

If your main concern is profit then you are definitely pushed towards a zoomy build. If you want slow and tanky there is nothing stopping you from playing a Quin69 build on SSFHC. You can also play a super slow build and sit in your hideout all day and make 10x the profit of map blasters if you know what to do. Anything done to boost loot for lower levels seems to exponentially increase the top tier loot explosions.

Completely agree with OP.

I know for myself that I can't be made to enjoy the end game or economy due to end game just being terribly unfun and the economy is screwed and hard to interact with due to drop rates and lack of any kind of crafting. I'm completely new to the genre BTW and thought the campaign was the best thing I have played in years and was like a dagger to the heart hitting endgame and realising my new amazing forever game is over in a few days of playing.

Same can be said about the other side. You can't change what people enjoy no matter how much you tell them they are wrong.

Problem I see is that one side will quit and move on but the other side would likely not actually care if certain changes are made or not.

I highly doubt all these people beating on people for not liking trade will quit if ggg make an ingame trade program. The same can't be said about the people who think it's garbage, they will quit. This example applies to every other problem that exist.

Your solution would absolety work. And I would like to see a completely new system being implemented as end game. I think the entire concept of endless mapping is lazy and garbage. It full min/maxing profits. Spend 1k to make a miniscule garbage new feature and reset all player data to make millions from new packs and skins. I would actually like to see some good new content.

The perceived 'need' for an AH is a minor segment of the previously mentioned problem.

"

LeFlesh#9979 wrote:

The perceived 'need' for an AH is a minor segment of the previously mentioned problem.

Ofcourse it is. Its an example. This applies to everything not just ah.