Warning for Ultra widescreen Mod after I disabled it

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

I don't want to be right. I am defending my position. I already told you, I am willing to be wrong. I actually want to be proven wrong. Please provide data to back up your claims.

You want to be right. In fact, you want to be right so hard that you even pretend that statements from Chris (GGG) are not valid enough, you know, the ppl who ACTUALLY know better than everyone else.
Every single time someone presents you with data, statements, and explains to you why you make basic conclusion fallacies, you try to find a new nonsensical goalpost to "be right".
Hell... you don't even argue only against me, you argue against others who told you in different ways WHY you are not right. Ever wondered why nobody comes and helps to defend your bla!?

"

I also don't see how Achievements are inaccurate. They're accurate enough to paint a picture of what parts of the games people play, and player retention.

Already explained it to you multiple times. If you cannot comprehend why Steam achievements are not reliable data to base your claims on, nobody can help you.

"

You argue PoE 2 needs to stay the same for these whales. I say, GGG could 'lessen' some of the worst attributes of this game, and gain new players, as there is an enormous untapped potential playerbase that likes OTHER aspects of the game more than what the whales like.

Not what I say. Anyway.

Have you watched the interview I linked to you now... what... over a day ago!?
THERE you would get your answer WHY they don't change some things, even IF it would mean more ppl who play the game. But again, you don't care and/or ignore because you want to push your agenda.

Sorry, I hit submit by mistake in my original. Please go back and re-read! Thanks.

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

How are we to choose what's okay, and what's not okay?

We dont, GGG does. They decided 32:9 is not okay and acted accordingly. Deal with it.

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

Having a 4k monitor is an advantage.

Lol, no. Just stop already. It's embarrassing. There is absolutely no difference between 1080p and 4k. I wonder why that is? Oh right, they're both using the same aspect ratio! Wild concept.

1080p


4k

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

What about games like Hades, using a paid model, an ARPG maintaining 80% of players compared to PoE? It doesn't have XP loss on death, or many of the mechanics claimed to keep PoE thriving.

Hades isn't even an ARPG. Are you trolling?

https://steamcharts.com/app/1145360
https://steamcharts.com/app/1145350

Please show me the math where 4,382 of 54,015 and 4,460 of 102,386 are 80%, respectively. I'll wait.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

Regardless. Not all ToS from a company are legally valid. They can over-reach. I would say banning customers for using a resolution in the game that you don't want them to. Would be scrutinized by a good Judge.

Nope. They alter the game (client) with a mod to achieve this change, thus, their actions against it are legally supported. You accepted the EULA, break it and you have nothing in court to rely on.

If someone hits you, you are in a self-defence situation which legally allows you to defend yourself.
That doesn't mean you would be allowed to pull out a knife and stab that person in the neck 47 times.

Even if it's in the ToS that you are not allowed to modify the games files, a judge would indeed look at your intent, which was not malicious in this case as your not trying to cheat but simply fix something that probably should have been in the game to begin with.

So nuking that persons account, that they invested hundreds of hours and hundreds of dollars into would seem like an over reaction - akin to the knife example.

Notice how I'm correcting you in this case without insulting you. And notice how if you had stated it as an "opinion" instead of a "fact" I would not have had to "correct" you, we could simply have different opinions and agree to disagree. Please consider being more humble, the only reason your not getting schooled most of the time is simply because most people would consider engaging in that beneath them.
There are a lot of secrets in this world that require an open mind to discover.

"

Ulsarek#7159 wrote:

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

How are we to choose what's okay, and what's not okay?

We dont, GGG does. They decided 32:9 is not okay and acted accordingly. Deal with it.

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

Having a 4k monitor is an advantage.

Lol, no. Just stop already. It's embarrassing. There is absolutely no difference between 1080p and 4k. I wonder why that is? Oh right, they're both using the same aspect ratio! Wild concept.

1080p


4k

You're correct. It's not a huge advantage. But it still does have advantages over 1080p. Particularly with clarity. That -is- an advantage.

I could make the argument that 4k lets you see, and dodge small projectiles easier, as they are easier to see! Especially compared to a small, 1080p monitor.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If they don't want to support 32:9. They don't have to.


But it is ultimately up to the player what settings and peripherals they use on their computer. Banning a resolution, an aspect ratio is a joke mate.

Why are you defending it?

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

Now. The issue that you have to look into now. Is how this is unhealthy, exploitative of players. And how the game quality suffers because of these design decisions.

Subjective claim - based on what you personally rate as unhealthy, exploitative, or the quality of a game.

"

Yes, it hooks you.

But addiction isn't enjoyment.

Subjective claim - for you, "addiction" is not enjoyable.
Furthermore, things can be addictive because they are enjoyable.

"

If you are the target demographic. 5% of players, out of 100%, and 90-95% leave. You are the minority in that situation.

Nonsensical claim - you confuse "overall demographic" with "target demographic".
So it doesn't matter how much bigger the number of ppl is who are not the target demographic, because they are NOT the target demographic.

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

You're correct. It's not a huge advantage. But it still does have advantages over 1080p. Particularly with clarity. That -is- an advantage.

I could make the argument that 4k lets you see, and dodge small projectiles easier, as they are easier to see! Especially compared to a small, 1080p monitor.

No. As far as gameplay is concerned they both look and behave exactly the same. You know what doesn't? Anything beyond 21:9, which is why they nuked it.

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

But it is ultimately up to the player what settings and peripherals they use on their computer. Banning a resolution, an aspect ratio is a joke mate.

It is up to the player, within reason and only as long it is line with the games ToS. Which everyone agreed upon logging in and playing. Break it, don't be surprised if you get punished.

Besides, no one is stopping anyone from using ultrawide screens. You just have to live with the limitations / boundaries set by the developer. They made an decision, respect it.

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

Why are you defending it?

Because it was heavily abused in the past and I am an advocate for fair play. For the same reason other games like Elden Ring don't support these niche resolutions. Setting a standard and enforcing fair play for everyone is good.

I'm done talking to you. It's literally a waste of time and energy. Good luck on your weird crusades, nothing will change. For good reasons.

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

Regardless. Not all ToS from a company are legally valid. They can over-reach. I would say banning customers for using a resolution in the game that you don't want them to. Would be scrutinized by a good Judge.

We can argue what constitutes a cheat all day long, but at the end of the day, currently, by fact of this thread, is considering it a cheat, just not yet punishable by dea- uh, ban. They are modifiyng the game in an unlicensed way. Which by the way:

Grinding Gear Games grants you a limited licence ("Licence") for the purpose of accessing, as applicable downloading, and making use of the Website, Materials and Services (or any parts of such as Grinding Gear Games may make available to you from time to time) and the related Rights for your own personal and non-commercial use in accordance with these Terms of Use. For the further avoidance of doubt, pursuant to clause 4, any rights you may have in respect of any elements or aspects of PoE (including without limitation in respect of the in-game characters and Virtual Items) are strictly limited to a personal 'licence to use' such as part of the Licence and at no time do you acquire any ownership rights in respect of such. Any contravention by you of these Terms of Use or any other terms or conditions notified to you by Grinding Gear Games or any behaviour which Grinding Gear Games deems in its sole discretion is not in keeping with the intended spirit of participation in PoE, immediately terminates the Licence, or such aspect of the Licence as Grinding Gear Games may otherwise provide you notice of. Termination of the Licence, or any aspect of the Licence, by Grinding Gear Games may without limitation also result in the taking of any of the further actions described in clause 17.

"Behaviour which GGG deems in its sole discretion is not in keeping with the inteded spirit of participation in PoE.", which currently, this is included in.

I haven't found any precedent in which ruled in favour of the players in video games lawsuits, but found plenty that upheld ToS in favour of the company, so i'm not so sure this would fly in a court, given that GGG gave a technical reason to limit it.

"

Chacruna#2474 wrote:

Even if it's in the ToS that you are not allowed to modify the games files, a judge would indeed look at your intent, which was not malicious in this case as your not trying to cheat but simply fix something that probably should have been in the game to begin with.

In the case of online games or platform bans, receiving a warning before being banned (e.g., for cheating, exploiting, or violating community guidelines) and continuing to violate the rules could lead to a stronger justification for the ban. Developers may argue that the player chose to ignore the warning, demonstrating willful misconduct. So, yes, they will look at intent, and in this case, malicious or not, contempt and willful disregard can make the ban stick in spite of intent.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

Subjective claim - based on what you personally rate as unhealthy, exploitative, or the quality of a game.

Nope. Not subjective. This is why I backed my arguments with Data about mental health issues, governments taking action against games with -unhealthy- mechanics in it.

Experts around the world agree that some games are very psychologically manipulative. Manipulating people is -wrong-. Also something experts agree on.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

Subjective claim - for you, "addiction" is not enjoyable.
Furthermore, things can be addictive because they are enjoyable.

Being an addict. Is based on compulsion. Altered reward structures in the brain. If you are hooked on something. You are compulsively playing it.

This is what I mean by 'addiction isn't enjoyment'. Addiction is compulsion. It's an inability to stop. You might LIKE, or ENJOY what you're playing. Yes.

But you are unable to stop.

Problematic - Game companies know people get addicted - choose to design their game in a way that amplifies that - addicts have lowered inhibitions, impulse control, self control issues - Spend more money because of it.

This is how it is - exploitative/predatory - It is a choice. to take advantage of this. To profit.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

Nonsensical claim - you confuse "overall demographic" with "target demographic".
So it doesn't matter how much bigger the number of ppl is who are not the target demographic, because they are NOT the target demographic.

It's clarification.

Your arguments are based around the fact that you're the target demographic for PoE 1. - Yes. Your arguments carry weight in this aspect. PoE 1 was clearly designed for a niche playerbase. It has very specific mechanics that those players enjoy. - I never disputed this.

This makes you the 'majority', as the target demographic for the game.

But if this game is to reach a wider audience. It needs to listen to the majority of gamers. Not just Niche PoE 1 players.

In this case - you are the minority - You have preferences and expectations with this game, that most other players don't share. Minority vs Majority.

This helps with understanding.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"

Ulsarek#7159 wrote:

.

This entire debate is a false equivalency.

PoE is a game with competitive elements. That does not mean it is a fully competitive game that requires 'fairness' for everyone.

The nature of the game is also important. Direct PvP games, where competitive fairness matters. VS a Game with mindless grinding and an Economy to help some players enjoy it more.

An example.


WoW - You can have a 80:9 Aspect ratio in it, multiple monitor setup with nvidia surround. More competitive than PoE is by miles. No one cares. Game supports whatever resolution you can throw at it.


The only reason this is a heated debate is because GGG wants to maintain integrity for the small amount of the playerbase. A loud vocal 'target demographic' that complains when someone else has an advantage over them. Their customer base. The whales that make them millions of dollars each year.

This is a mindset of competition. Not that the game is actually competitive. Some people feel this game is very competitive. A matter of perspective. Not realizing most players just play it because it's an ARPG and you can explode enemies. They aren't competing.

Anyways, thanks. You're right. I'm on a White Knight crusade to save people from Companies that completely over-step. Remember. Just because it's written down as a rule, doesn't mean it's a good rule!

Best of luck to you.

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

Nope. Not subjective. This is why I backed my arguments with Data about mental health issues, governments taking action against games with -unhealthy- mechanics in it.

Your claim is subjective, and you TRY to back it up with random data.
Nothing you presented so far is able to verify the truth of your claims besides "I have data - I make connection - truth".
That's not how things work, period.

You just say "somewhere or in another case - it's this way (true), thus it's true here too" without hard evidence.

"

Being an addict. Is based on compulsion. Altered reward structures in the brain. If you are hooked on something. You are compulsively playing it.

This is what I mean by 'addiction isn't enjoyment'. Addiction is compulsion. It's an inability to stop. You might LIKE, or ENJOY what you're playing.

Problematic - Game companies know people get addicted - choose to design their game in a way that amplifies that - addicts have lowered inhibitions, impulse control, self control issues - Spend more money because of it.

This is how it is - exploitative/predatory - It is a choice. to take advantage of this. To profit.

Cool story, bro. Next time you discover that every single consumable thing in existence can be addictive and used by ppl to profit from that addiction.
Like I said, you always make up the next thing to support your nonsense.

"

Your arguments are based around the fact that you're the target demographic for PoE 1. - Yes. Your arguments carry weight in this aspect. PoE 1 was clearly designed for a niche playerbase. It has very specific mechanics that those players enjoy. - I never disputed this.

This makes you the 'majority', as the target demographic for the game.

But if this game is to reach a wider audience. It needs to listen to the majority of gamers. Not just Niche PoE 1 players.

In this case - you are the minority - You have preferences and expectations with this game, that most other players don't share. Minority vs Majority.

"Reaching a wider audience" does NOT equal "need to listen to the majority of gamers".
GGG has a vision/plan that they follow to make the game MORE accessible for new players and implement these things with PoE2. That's not the same as "making the game FOR new players (another demographic)".
This CAN include that they change things regarding new feedback, but that does not mean they HAVE TO.

Imagine you have a club where ppl can dance, enjoy music and get drunk or whatever, and now you wanna make the club "more accessible" for another demographic.
In this case, ppl in a wheelchair. How would you do that? Well, you would build a ramp so these ppl have... easier access.
Do you change the rules of the club so everyone HAS TO sit in a wheelchair? No.

So, if YOUR "majority" now gives feedback on something, but GGG decides not to change it, how this "majority" wants it... what is the conclusion!?

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

Your claim is subjective, and you TRY to back it up with random data.
Nothing you presented so far is able to verify the truth of your claims besides "I have data - I make connection - truth".
That's not how things work, period.

I do have Data. And you can read it yourself and then connect it to all that I am saying.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

without hard evidence.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563223001176

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352853222000104

https://research.tilburguniversity.edu/en/publications/the-hidden-cost-of-microtransactions-buying-in-game-advantages-in#:~:text=More%20specifically%2C%20we%20find%20that,functional%20benefits%20are%20respected%20less.


https://www.blog.udonis.co/mobile-marketing/mobile-games/psychology-behind-user-retention

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10447318.2024.2325171

https://solsten.io/blog/player-retention-strategies

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0736585323000163

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9874295/

https://www.mdpi.com/2078-2489/14/7/399

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9595588/#:~:text=The%20results%20of%20optimal%20control,detailed%20and%20reliable%20control%20strategy.

https://games.jmir.org/2021/4/e30310/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26359616/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22624087/

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268503238_Sunk-Cost_Fallacy_and_Cognitive_Ability_in_Individual_Decision-Making

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10525914/

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

Cool story, bro. Next time you discover that every single consumable thing in existence can be addictive and used by ppl to profit from that addiction.
Like I said, you always make up the next thing to support your nonsense.

This is what's known as a bandwagon fallacy. Everyone does it/it's everywhere, so it's excusable.

That's why there's regulations for stuff like this! Just not videogames in most places.. Yet. But it's coming.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

"Reaching a wider audience" does NOT equal "need to listen to the majority of gamers".
GGG has a vision/plan that they follow to make the game MORE accessible for new players and implement these things with PoE2. That's not the same as "making the game FOR new players (another demographic)".
This CAN include that they change things regarding new feedback, but that does not mean they HAVE TO.

Never claimed they needed to make a game for new players.

I am specifically talking about altering the game in ways that retains more of the playerbase that leaves before finishing the acts. The people that quit because of things like XP loss, or forced economy.

Give them a separate gamemode!

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

Imagine you have a club where ppl can dance, enjoy music and get drunk or whatever, and now you wanna make the club "more accessible" for another demographic.
In this case, ppl in a wheelchair. How would you do that? Well, you would build a ramp so these ppl have... easier access.
Do you change the rules of the club so everyone HAS TO sit in a wheelchair? No.

Not sure what this is about. Could you clarify?

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

So, if YOUR "majority" now gives feedback on something, but GGG decides not to change it, how this "majority" wants it... what is the conclusion!?

My conclusion. Is that GGG doesn't want to change things to be fairer for other players, because they're making money off the whales and addicts. Change the game, these players get unhappy. GGG likes it's millions and millions of dollars.

Morality argument from me. They should change, because it's not good to treat players like this. Using people for profits. Offer a fair product, and it will sell! No need to manipulate.

I am NOT saying they have to change. Not once have I ever said that.