Start selling your game and update min spec requirements.

PoE at 1440p at 120 mhz is one of the most demanding titles in existence. People should use PoE under a breach to do benchmarks instead of crysis.

Show me any rig that run keep a PoE at a steady 120 fps without drops at 1440p high settings. I don't think it exists.

"

Nephalim wrote:

PoE at 1440p at 120 mhz is one of the most demanding titles in existence. People should use PoE under a breach to do benchmarks instead of crysis.

Show me any rig that run keep a PoE at a steady 120 fps without drops at 1440p high settings. I don't think it exists.

And yet this has nothing to do with its F2P model.

"

sainthazard wrote:

Second, take a look at your logic. Let's assume you're correct for a moment and free2play games pander to a less wealthy crowd of gamers. Studies have shown this to probably not be the case, but for the sake of argument let's assume that to some degree it is. Since we acknowledge that it requires man hours to adjust the hardware requirements of their game, and since you've acknowledged that your championed crowd won't spend money on a high-end computer to play games let alone the games themselves, what economic incentive does GGG have to put more man hours and therefore more of their own capital towards catering to people who won't spend money and therefore render an economic return on that spent capital?

they do have an economic return on their spent capital.

A higher base-line community provides a better/active economy which is a vital part of this game to provide enjoyment to "all" layers of participants.

And since PoE uses a pyramid model they require a large base to effectively balance around that economy.

And i think we have free2play to thank for that large base on which the game is build.

Whatever though, people seem to hung up on the definition of free2play and min spec i used in the OP to realize the point i'm trying to make.

Peace,

-Boem-

I started to write this reply, Sunday, in the Potato Graphics thread but it would just be rubbing people's noses in it, not to mention off-topic. The poor potato graphics users probably wish they had my problems - first world problems, indeed. Which wouldn't be as bad if I wasn't also trying to push 1440p.

Anyhow TL;DR: The fps lag is getting progressively worse with each patch and each change they make to the graphics settings.


i5 3570k, overclocked to 4.2
MSI 7950 3gb
And a 1440p monitor.

A league or two ago, (Maybe Legacy league?) I could play with my Catalyst/GPU overriding the game with 16x/12xEQ Edge Detect, (High texture quality, high shadows, high water, medium light, and post processing on) and it ran just fine.

When they introduced the dynamic resolution options and all, I eventually had to turn that off (looks like crap), and turn off vertical sync to stop it from dipping to 30fps, then I had to start playing in borderless windowed mode to stop the screen tearing too. (All of those changes they made that patch just destroyed the graphics.)

Then, I had to change it to let the game handle Anisotropic and AA and put it at no AA, and the Anisotropic at 4x. That worked fine for last league and for Turmoil/Mayhem.

The last two days the game seemed fine, except that it lags in town now that they let everyone have all of these flashy MTX everywhere! Probably about 30 fps in town. 40 fps standing in my hideout.

But I just got to maps last night and played some maps today and it's just atrocious. Dropping to 40 fps, 30 fps, even below 20 at times. I now have a headache.

PoE became successful due to its free to play model. Otherwise game probably wouldn't even exist nowadays.
The large and expanding player base is also related to it.

It's unrealistic to think that it can ever turn into a P2P game.
If we assume it could happen, it's about to commit suicide.

The middle ground is the paid leagues, it would probably be the swan song of PoE 1, and sooner or later it's about to happen while it lasts.

"

Boem wrote:

If you advertise free2play and your minimum specs are actually accurate to deliver an enjoyable game experience...

No correlation between F2P and specs. Period.

Why are some of most successful chinese f2p freemium games like from 1995-2005 in graphics? Because they want huge playerbase.

OP has a point. People let their interpretation see this as criticism of model, while its actually a criticism of design decisions that disregard the base of success, and that is availability.

I borderline wanted to quit multiple times, but still continued to do all content on 10-35 fps for few leagues. Now with semi-working dynamic resolution I get up to 40 fps at moderately messy areas.

There is a few free to play games that actually failed and closed down, months after release, because not they were bad, but because they had either insane requirements or they were straight up badly optimized.

How much free to play is a game that forces you to buy a new pc every 2 years for optimal experience?

Thing is, even d3, no matter how many bad design choices they made, they still released x64 client and optimized things so that you literally cannot have low fps. (yes there were lags in high grifts due to numbers, but that was fixed in reasonable amount of time too)

What is easier, to buy a 1500 euro pc, or donate 15 euros to GGG in shop? Some poor guy can't afford to buy a 1k euro pc, but he can afford to play a f2p game and spend 10 euros occassionaly on GGG, which favors GGG.

Now imagine having even bigger playerbase, where there are many who can afford to buy few tabs every few months and bring a stable income to ggg over time.

For me poe is 9/10. That one point lacking for perfect score is in their effort to make this game good and optimized for everyone which would make this game a true f2p top title of recent times.

I don't expect them to optimize the game engine any better, since its a gigantic task, but it would be nice not to be stubborn and let users who suffer the most downgrade graphics on custom scale, just like they allow various macros and tools.

I'll eventually buy a new pc, but that won't make me forget the years of suffering on 10-30fps.

Also for anyone defending game optimization, just go to tech support forum for a week, and you will see that its totally different than some say.

"

cipher_nemo wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

If you advertise free2play and your minimum specs are actually accurate to deliver an enjoyable game experience...

No correlation between F2P and specs. Period.

Stop it cipher, it's pointless.

Your arguing "F2p" from how it is today and handled which has changed a lot in the past years when compared to when GGG entered the market.

Their original game and angle was very much aimed at undercutting the regular "shop purchase games" consumer part and free market.

You could run the game perfectly on a "potato" when they where still aiming to gather a large enough player base to get a functioning economy running and enable "lift-off" for their game.

Now that they have that lift-off they should address their min spec(recommended spec whatever) to reflect that potato users are no longer required or needed, flat out, cause development is already at/beyond that point.

Peace,

-Boem-

...........

"

Boem wrote:

By advertising free2play your inviting a big portion of people with low income and low-end specs.

While I do agree with your overall "wish", I think the statement I quoted here is a little bit... 2003? There are plenty F2P titles out there aiming for decent computers. There's even plenty of e-sports F2P games, where high FPS and refresh rate of your monitor are "more or less required" to be competitive.

But why do they have to make the game non-F2P to take the next step? Do you think the game would suddenly appeal to "high end users" just because it got a pay tag - after 5-6-7 years of existence? Or do you think the whining from "low end users" would hinder GGG?