Give us a {CENSORED} configurable disconnect timer

"

goetzjam wrote:

Moddable offline client won't ever happen as long as GGG is still actively developing the game, its counter-intuitive to what they are doing in terms of business and design, the absolute greatest wish of mine and almost anyone that likes poe is an offline modable version, but that doens't make you any money.

"

Protip: You can charge money for offline clients. Companies have made a lot of money that way.

That doesn't fit for this game. There is a reason why people don't do offline games as much anymore and its simply because its too easy to pirate. Find the 10 most popular games right now and tell me they sell this offline version thats so much better then the online version that removes the ability to cheat, or at least seriously reduces the ability to.

"

goetzjam wrote:

@Char1983 has ISP\connection issues, hes made it well known that he could probably change isps, but says it will be equally as bad. He won't work with support to do a traceroute to see if there is something different, he hasn't mentioned if the new Brazil gateway has improved this at all. He literally refuses to do anyhing constructive to fix his issue.

"

Good fucking look arguing with an ISP, in a language you don't speak.

You poor child. Find a friend that speaks the language and work with them or better yet address the problem with GGG support and do the very basic troubleshooting tips to see if the problem can't be fixed by GGG checking the routes their server provider take into.


I have also posted a traceroute thingy here, which looked fine to everyone. That was to the Texas server, though. Run it to the server you actually use.

"

1) Not only you and people who think like you have supported this game. I have supported this game with my money. Please do not try to tell me what I want this game to be.

Its not about what you want the game to be don't use your little $30 supporter pack as any sort of actual indication that your support actually matters in the long term, $30 isn't even 5 min of dev time.

"

2) In every league, the highest level characters after a few days are hardcore characters. I do not think that is because of the death penalty.

That point has no meaning in this discussion. Its about attrition in terms of SC leagues, the best players in this game almost always play in HC, so without a doubt HC players will level faster when they go no life.

"

First, arguing for changes made to reduce the harshness of the death penalty at high level is not the same as asking for no death penalty.

It has similar effects though.

"

Second, people who have just leveled or who choose not to level have effectively opted out of the death penalty - there's no more added penalty for them (as well as players who have reached 100) - we see this with iir/iiq farming and speed running in standard, we see this when people try new maps or bosses for the first time right after leveling. In fact, the majority of players just give up on leveling after reaching a target level and play the game as if no added death penalty existed. If you believe the concept of no penalty or a reduced high level penalty has such a negative impact on the game, you should devote some effort into advocating for a way to actually punish everyone for death all the time.

They are punished every time they die because they aren't achieving further character progression. As for level 100 characters, their eternal reward is not having to worry about mistakes being as punishing.

This isn't the place to discuss the XP penalty. But I could argue with you in another thread if you'd like.

"

I've supported this game, and I play standard because I definitely want a different experience than hardcore.

Maybe experience wasn't the correct word, the design of the game should remain the same.

"

If instead of having 500 players reach level 100 after 3 years, we had 5000 or 50000, damn I would consider that a very positive indication of game success.

This just shows how naive you are. Level 100 shouldn't be this hand me down bullshit easy to achieve. The progression of character improvement shouldn't be guaranteed, at least not like this. 5,000 wouldn't be that bad, but 50,000 would be an indication of failure.

"

GGG should want players to feel motivated to participate in long-term leveling.

Why would they want this. Almost all the elitist assholes are people that have 1 level 100 character and play absolutely nothing else. Long term leveling encourages players to play in standard\regular hardcore, which is exactly the opposite of the mentality of play in the temp leagues that GGG encourages.

"

The current numbers are embarrassing, really abysmal, tragic. 500 (or 600, 700, etc)? It's not a figure to place on a pedestal and be proud of. GGG can't even claim it's an example of hardcoreness when the motivated few are able to do it in 2 weeks.

Yeah I mean if you no life you can achieve what would take players years. It isn't abysmal it makes it clear GGG focuses more on temp leagues then they do on long term character progression.

"

In fact, given the cycling temp league and race season format, the game would be better off if those players sticking to standard were more readily able to satisfy their progression goals (using the builds they find entertaining). They'd have more fun with the game if they felt they could take time off standard to enjoy events/ temp leagues.

Characters that don't take time off to play in temp leagues don't do it because they haven't progressed a longer term character its because they don't want to leave the character they spent so much time on and don't want to deal with starting from scratch. So please get the idea that letting people rush to the end somehow makes the finish line better is terrible misunderstanding.

"

the balance standard level differential, if it actually mattered, already exists.

But why make it worst? Its the same mentality people use to excuse any form of balance in standard. Except this would also have a very negative effect in SC temp leagues.

"

They can make money via an offline version - same way as other games make money. Sell an offline client ($30, $40, $50, whatever target price they determine is optimal) and require online authentication to prevent piracy. They can do that and still offer the FTP online only client. [or maybe only offer the FTP online client, to prevent confusion in steam store pages, and sell the offline client via GGG points/in-game/forum shop]

Yet they choose another method of making money. Every game that has an offline only version is committing both financial and stability security. You can't keep a game secure without being online only. Online authentication, yeah that hasn't been tried and failed on programs that retail for thousands of dollars.


If you'd like to argue further on any of these points that aren't directly relevant then we should take it to other various discussions.

"

Level 100 shouldn't be this hand me down bullshit easy to achieve. The progression of character improvement shouldn't be guaranteed, at least not like this. 5,000 wouldn't be that bad, but 50,000 would be an indication of failure.

Is the progression of character improvement guaranteed to level 90? (rhetorical, the answer is no). Given that the majority of players don't even make it passed level 85, reducing (i.e. capping) the XP penalty for levels 90-100 isn't going to make level 100 easy to achieve or guaranteed. It may motivate more players to try leveling that high (or even play the game in the first place), but the journey there is still one heck of a grind.

And 50,000 level 100's after three years would definitely be an indication of greater success compared to 500. If it's possible to hit 100 in 2 weeks, having under 1k do it after 3 years indicates that the game has failed to attract a large audience and/or fails to engage players in higher leveling.

"

"

GGG should want players to feel motivated to participate in long-term leveling.

Why would they want this. Almost all the elitist assholes are people that have 1 level 100 character and play absolutely nothing else. Long term leveling encourages players to play in standard\regular hardcore, which is exactly the opposite of the mentality of play in the temp leagues that GGG encourages.

Because it's better for a player to feel motivated to continue leveling than just quit the game? Player retention rates are abysmal. Moreover, the time horizon for leveling should be decreased if GGG wants players to participate in temp leagues, especially softcore temp leagues that are supposed to cater to more casual players. I'd be content with 10% of temp league players reaching max level before the temp league ends (it's currently what, 0.0003%?). Of course, that assumes a sufficiently large player pool. Maybe in a couple years we'll see 10% of temp league players hitting 100 before the league ends, when there's under a 1000 temp league players. :p

With respect to player retention: looking at just the players who are able to get to merciless, GGG's main problem is that playing end-game content costs money. RMT may be illegal but there's still a real $ value associated with high level maps, due to how scarce they are. At high levels the death penalty can create a situation where players not only see no reward for their efforts, but may even feel like they're going backwards. I am not sure how GGG expects to retain more players without ensuring they continue to feel some net reward/progress for their play time. Don't get me wrong, some death penalty is fine. But losing 6 hours of playtime? (and over $50 in map cost)? Way too niche.

"

Characters that don't take time off to play in temp leagues don't do it because they haven't progressed a longer term character its because they don't want to leave the character they spent so much time on and don't want to deal with starting from scratch. So please get the idea that letting people rush to the end somehow makes the finish line better is terrible misunderstanding.

Hi. I'm a player who typically doesn't take time off to play in temp leagues, precisely because I'm still progressing on a character in standard.

"

Every game that has an offline only version is committing both financial and stability security. You can't keep a game secure without being online only. Online authentication, yeah that hasn't been tried and failed on programs that retail for thousands of dollars.

You keep the online only client secure. You keep the offline client (including saves, characters, etc) separate. The point of an offline client is so it's not secure, to allow modding and customization (as well as to alleviate the OP's main concern - connection stability issues). Nearly every AAA title with million+ copies sold in the last 5 years is offline capable. Some require authentication first (like starcraft 2 or steam games in offline mode, i.e. skyrim, GTAV, civ5, all the recent fallout games, borderlands, etc). And some are DRM free (witcher series, and gog games).

"

Is the progression of character improvement guaranteed to level 90? (rhetorical, the answer is no).

it is if there isn't anything stopping you from not loosing XP.

"

Given that the majority of players don't even make it passed level 85, reducing (i.e. capping) the XP penalty for levels 90-100 isn't going to make level 100 easy to achieve or guaranteed. It may motivate more players to try leveling that high (or even play the game in the first place), but the journey there is still one heck of a grind.

The motivation should come from other aspects of the game, not just because its easier.

"

And 50,000 level 100's after three years would definitely be an indication of greater success compared to 500. If it's possible to hit 100 in 2 weeks, having under 1k do it after 3 years indicates that the game has failed to attract a large audience and/or fails to engage players in higher leveling.

It wasn't possible to get to level 100 in 2 weeks even a year ago. The additional level of maps and the changes in 2.0 have made the 2 week thing a possibility, but look at the playtime it takes to reach that. Plus these aren't your everyday people only a very small amount of people can pull something like this off currently.

It isn't about a larger audience, this game isn't meant to go head to head with D3, if it were then players like myself wouldnt of invested so much into. This game was meant to be a specific niche and not for everyone (aka doesn't appeal to casuals as much)

The higher leveling is multiple layers, for example people don't want to do maps that aren't higher levels, but the current mapping system still needs work. The lack of engaging in higher leveling also has to due with only a fraction of the players actually playing in long term leagues. I wish we had a more up to date stat on this, but like most things its always 1+ year old information and a lot has changed.

"

Because it's better for a player to feel motivated to continue leveling than just quit the game? Player retention rates are abysmal.

You don't have the data on that and steam numbers are such a small fraction of the playerbase it isn't an indicator you or anyone has been able to use in an argument. The motivation to continue to play can come from other things then just strait level 100, additional endgame content like whats upcoming is one way, map improvements is another.

"

Moreover, the time horizon for leveling should be decreased if GGG wants players to participate in temp leagues, especially softcore temp leagues that are supposed to cater to more casual players.

That is the misconception, SC leagues aren't there to specifically cater to casual players, it there to offer a non perma death option for players that enjoy the DESIGN OF THE GAME. Essentially its a hardcore league without perma death, because the whole game is designed to be played with the hardcore mentality.

"

I'd be content with 10% of temp league players reaching max level before the temp league ends (it's currently what, 0.0003%?). Of course, that assumes a sufficiently large player pool. Maybe in a couple years we'll see 10% of temp league players hitting 100 before the league ends, when there's under a 1000 temp league players.

That isn't a good assessment of success. Games like this thrive on ladder resets for 1 month and fall off super hard after that. Even D3 which is the casual of casual ARPGs fall off even quicker then that. You reach max level so quickly that absolutely nothing except max level is important, that isn't a good game design, D3 is designed like an MMO, no suprise there but poe isn't, it truly is designed as an ARPG where reaching max level isn't the goal all players should strive to achieve. I would rather play 2 builds to level 95 then one to level 100, especially with the complexity that PoE offers with different choices, D3 fails in that lack of complexity, there is probably 2 builds for each class at any given season.

"

With respect to player retention: looking at just the players who are able to get to merciless, GGG's main problem is that playing end-game content costs money. RMT may be illegal but there's still a real $ value associated with high level maps, due to how scarce they are. At high levels the death penalty can create a situation where players not only see no reward for their efforts, but may even feel penalized. I am not sure how GGG expects to retain more players without ensuring they continue to feel some net reward/progress for their play time. Don't get me wrong, some death penalty is fine. But losing 6 hours of playtime? (and over $50 in map cost)? Way too niche.

Your numbers are way off basis. An exalt is usually around $5 in a temp league and less then $1 in standard (based on observations), the 82 map is less then an exalt in the temp league and just a little over one in standard. So the only way your $50 price is correct is assuming the player is in the temp league, not standard, which is counter intuitive against your long term progression argument. In addition you wouldn't be "buying" maps if you didn't have a build that could stay alive.

You don't have to do the tier 15 maps only to level at a high level, it is much quicker (less now but still quicker) but these aren't designed and can't even be sustained except for by the .001% or less (might be different in darkshrines)

RMTers will eventually get caught, they will make a mistake one time and that one time will be when they lose their entire account. People like Walmart girl that abused the RMT market to corner all mjolners and stuff, eventually they will view the patterns of trades and discover something.

"

Characters that don't take time off to play in temp leagues don't do it because they haven't progressed a longer term character its because they don't want to leave the character they spent so much time on and don't want to deal with starting from scratch. So please get the idea that letting people rush to the end somehow makes the finish line better is terrible misunderstanding.

Hi. I'm a player who typically doesn't take time off to play in temp leagues, precisely because I'm still progressing on a character in standard.

"

You keep the online only client secure. You keep the offline client (including saves, characters, etc) separate. The point of an offline client is so it's not secure, to allow modding and customization (as well as to alleviate the OP's main concern - connection stability issues). Nearly every AAA title with million+ copies sold in the last 5 years is offline capable. Some require authentication first (like starcraft 2 or steam games in offline mode, i.e. skyrim). And some are DRM free (witcher series, and gog games).

His connection issues are his owndoing, GGG can't and shouldn't just develop this offline mod because a part of the world has shit internet. Hes better off playing some offline game that is DESIGNED to be offline. GGG cannot cater to everyone and shouldn't deviate from its design just to appeal to Mr. entitled supporter that spent $30 on a supporter pack.

Just makeup shit statistics without backing anything up. Lets start with one thing, this isn't a AAA game, they can't do as much as those games do regardless. In addition its meant to be played with other players and have an interactive community, thats why you don't have smart loot, thats why the system is designed the way it is. A single player offline moddable version goes against the complete design of the game.

OP wouldn't be playing poe as designed by GGG if he didn't have the interaction with the online method, its quite simply boils down to that. So as a game designer why release a product that competes with what you are trying to accomplish? If they charge for this offline version then people will still pirate it, if they don't charge how exactly are they making money off of it, because if its moddable you will just increase your stash space and enable all the mtx's you want. There isn't a single counter argument you have here. They already released a F2P online ARPG they literally cannot release another version that doesn't have any way to increase the amount of money they make.

Look at all the downsides of this offline version aside from the fact it absolutely makes no since financially. Players that are able to play on the online version might opt for the easier offline version that they can do whatever they want with it. Which decreases league participation and participation of the online servers, which means less interacting and less economy in the leagues.


Much like making softcore leagues even more different then hc leagues in terms of experience, making an offline version goes against the design of the game they are trying to achieve. We can't even get paid leagues to be a thing yet after 3 years, where people literally pay to have various things the way they want and you think they will make an offline client while they are still profiting nicely from this business model. (ROFL)

"

goetzjam wrote:

The problem is it takes dev time to "fix" an issue you won't work on AT ALL YOURSELF. Its clear you have isp\connection issues and do nothing about it. THAT IS THE PROBLEM NOT THE GAME DESIGN, its an online game if you can't reliably connect to the servers without randomly getting spikes because of shitty isps, that is in no way GGGs fault, they absolutely should not work on adding something to fix an ISP issue unless its on a much larger scale (im talking desync level)

When you take the Dilbert principle and put it with the Peter Principle, you realise everyone can be stupid sometimes, and people can also inflate their view of their own intellect to the level of constant functional stupidity.

Seriously, if support don't give a shit about your relentless responses to every.single.damn.thread saying 'GGG SHOULD NOT DO THIS I DON'T WANT THEM TO YOU ARE WRONG' then I feel I'm quite justified in saying 'jesus christ dude shut the living fuck up and go play the game for once'. As it is I've played for far less time than you and made many more levels. Catch up!

postscript: your quote-driven novels don't help much either.

"

goetzjam wrote:

GGG cannot cater to everyone and shouldn't deviate from its design just to appeal to Mr. entitled supporter that spent $30 on a supporter pack.

Are you critical of this persons feedback/suggestion because they only spent $30? Would you be less critical of their feedback/suggestion if they spent $1200? Does it matter?

Often, the most valuable feedback comes from the masses who have spent nothing.

I'm not sure why you bring this up. The OP certainly didn't say "hi GGG, I bought a supporter pack so please do XXX for me." You brought it up in an earlier post by asserting that all supporters collectively want YYY, not XXX. Obviously this encourages supporters who want XXX and not YYY to point that out to you. But to turn that around and say they are acting entitled? Pure silliness.

Anyway, if GGG only stuck with their original design intent/ideals, we wouldn't have had many of the changes that have actually improved the gameplay experience for the majority of players, such as permanent allocation.

Oh, and GGG can actually cater to everyone (or at least, more audiences), via custom leagues or offline mode. ^^

"

davidnn5 wrote:

Seriously, if support don't give a shit about your relentless responses to every.single.damn.thread saying 'GGG SHOULD NOT DO THIS I DON'T WANT THEM TO YOU ARE WRONG' then I feel I'm quite justified in saying 'jesus christ dude shut the living fuck up and go play the game for once'.

OMG!! So much this.

"

davidnn5 wrote:

Seriously, if support don't give a shit about your relentless responses to every.single.damn.thread saying 'GGG SHOULD NOT DO THIS I DON'T WANT THEM TO YOU ARE WRONG' then I feel I'm quite justified in saying 'jesus christ dude shut the living fuck up and go play the game for once'. As it is I've played for far less time than you and made many more levels. Catch up!

It's not his fault, the people want him to do this :C

"

goetzjam wrote:

Really I get PM's about every month with someone appreciating the fact that I spend the time I do to respond where others don't have the time to do so.

... but I don't think GGG asked him to be their PR :>



Back to topic. The function is already implemented, not user-side tho... there is much to be said for, but other than "could be abused... but don't know how" nothing against. If fast (forced) disconnect is the concern... it would be much much easier with the already used cports (logout script).

"

davidnn5 wrote:

Seriously, if support don't give a shit about your relentless responses to every.single.damn.thread saying 'GGG SHOULD NOT DO THIS I DON'T WANT THEM TO YOU ARE WRONG' then I feel I'm quite justified in saying . As it is I've played for far less time than you and made many more levels. Catch up!

postscript: your quote-driven novels don't help much either.

Again another comment which could easily just be a PM. TBH your comment adds nothing to the discussion at hand its just another I don't want to view this persons post anymore (btw you can filter out my post if you so want)

I've edited out your rude comment, that is uncalled for. As for playtime levels aren't as important as experience. You have a level 94 character I have a very high amount of 85+ characters. I play this game as much as I like, the time I spend responding to threads here is NOT time that I can be spending playing in the game. I can argue for you to ignore me as you clearly don't want to read my comments at all, but you took this way too far and your behavior is unacceptable and quite frankly very rude.

If you look at the number of feedback threads you can see I only respond to a very small fraction of them, you make it seem like I post in every thread about never changing anything. Like usual you chime in without any hint of knowledge on the discussion\history between me and OP, as well as his issues.

"

Are you critical of this persons feedback/suggestion because they only spent $30? Would you be less critical of their feedback/suggestion if they spent $1200? Does it matter?


Anyway, if GGG only stuck with their original design intent/ideals, we wouldn't have had many of the changes that have actually improved the gameplay experience for the majority of players, such as permanent allocation.

Oh, and GGG can actually cater to everyone (or at least, more audiences), via custom leagues or offline mode. ^^

No that line was a jab because he made a point that he's supported the game as if it did have a factor in making his suggestion better.

Perm allocation is very much different then your suggested difference in HC\SC gameplay differences and your offline version vs online version.

They actually aren't large enough to cater to everyone, they are a business so doing things that don't increase the income they take in like an offline version won't improve their pocketbooks. Custom leagues won't be a free to pick anything and everything you want, they've specifically said they won't do increased drop rates or stuff like that, so clearly not everyone.

"

goetzjam wrote:

You poor child. Find a friend that speaks the language and work with them or better yet address the problem with GGG support and do the very basic troubleshooting tips to see if the problem can't be fixed by GGG checking the routes their server provider take into.

Oh man, reading is really not your strong suit, is it? I already wrote that I tried that, but they refused to help because they think it is pointless to try that in this country. I trust them, because they have been living in this country far longer than I have.

I am not asking GGG to make a fundamental change to their game. I am just telling them that a change they have already thought about would be tremendously helpful for people like me.

Also, besides the fact that it doesn't matter, you have no means to determine how much money I have spent on this game.

And luckily, your opinion doesn't matter any more than mine either.

Finally, I would play an offline version of this game in exactly the same manner as I play the online version of this game, though itemization would be a bit harder. In the end, it would probably still be easier, because the lag makes playing this game a LOT harder. And yes I can tell, because I have tried running this game from Switzerland... soooo smooth compared to anywhere in South America.