I give up on party in this game.

"

GusTheCrocodile wrote:

So, cooperation against a challenge that isn't other human players is just, what, an invalid concept?

No, it just becomes repetitive and stale. Especially this genre is not exactly known for it's difficulty or smart AI.
Adding a human factor simply makes it more challenging and diversified.

Well you're entitled to your opinion of course. As are the many people out there who enjoy playing cooperative games who disagree with you. I would only note that "not playing against humans gets boring" is a markedly different statement than "multiplayer is always about competition", especially seeing you were attempting to apply the latter to other people, not just yourself.

What about the both-way?

A) Optional Loot System:-
1. Free for All loot
2. Loot By Class.
3. Random Loot
4. Sequence Loot
5. Roll Loot

B) Loot for:-
1. Normal and above
2. Magical and above
3. Rare and above
4. Unique and above


note: if i miss out more pls add on to it.

Thus indeed of forcing players on fixed loot system, give them the abiliy to select YES or NO.
Nowadays games are made in the way that they dont give player the option to CHOOSE anymore.. which i feel is a too restrictve. One of my main requirement for a game is, freedom to CHOOSE.

I am trying to tell you how most successful co-op games are successful because of the competition and how multiplayer is always about competition, even with your teammates. Again, when you complain about FFA, you sound like you are one of the players who cry about killstealers ("Bawww, I didn't get the XP for the kill because someone else took it" - sponsored by BF3). What I wrote about "REAL teamwork" is simply the fact that players will unite stronger if the enemy isn't an AI but actual players. As long as you fight NPCs, people stick together for the sole purpose of getting more XP and loot for their character, not because the AI is only beatable when teaming up.
If you can't compete, you play singleplayer or with people who are very, very nice and treat you like a special little snowflake.

I will repeat myself a last time before I give up discussing this with you:

If you don't enjoy FFA, play alone, with friends or with a clan. Heck, you can even KICK unwanted players from your party.
There is literally NO reason to implement a personal loot system.


This thread is about a missing concept for automated casual party play like every game of this genre has. I already stated several time why FFA loot has NOTHING to do with this. Again, see Diablo 2, the spiritual predecessor of PoE.

"

StealthNerf wrote:

I don't party generally because I like to go at my own pace, and not feel forced. The whole game feels like a race to kill the next monster in a party.

Party play is pretty good with someone you know, but with randoms I often find the two play speeds to be too different.

Same here - I play to relax after work, and go-go-go games just annoy me. (And I must annoy others by being a slow poke.)

-- CH
"I like to be able to stop and smell the corpses..."

"

Vitacia wrote:

I will repeat myself a last time before I give up discussing this with you:

If you don't enjoy FFA, play alone, with friends or with a clan. Heck, you can even KICK unwanted players from your party.
There is literally NO reason to implement a personal loot system.


This thread is about a missing concept for automated casual party play like every game of this genre has. I already stated several time why FFA loot has NOTHING to do with this. Again, see Diablo 2, the spiritual predecessor of PoE.

Your perspective is heavily flawed.

First of all.. FFA has everything to do with this. Please try to understand that just because you like FFA doesn't mean everyone does. Your opinion is not and never will be the only opinion.

Nothing you have stated is factual. Just opinion.

As I said before.. If you think saying "my way is the only way" makes sense.. your opinion should not be considered.

The best answer is to provide multiple loot options for parties to choose from. Unless you can provide a reason that is bad for the game, you are failing to make a valid argument.

To say, "If you don't like it, play solo." is just a poor attitude and again, makes your opinion not worth consideration.

"

starsg wrote:

Thus indeed of forcing players on fixed loot system, give them the abiliy to select YES or NO.
Nowadays games are made in the way that they dont give player the option to CHOOSE anymore.. which i feel is a too restrictve. One of my main requirement for a game is, freedom to CHOOSE.

No. This encourages players like this next poster to join a party and then standing around forever sorting their inventory while complaining about missing all the action:

"

StealthNerf wrote:

Same here - I play to relax after work, and go-go-go games just annoy me. (And I must annoy others by being a slow poke.)

This is a hack'n'slay game, and not "Idling in the City: Lookatmygear edition".

Vitacia, I wasn't advocating any kind of loot system. I was advocating not being a prick by telling people the way they play somehow doesn't exist. That you make your central point about "uniting stronger" seems to show that you really do need to see competition in everything - because stronger than what? If you're not competing there is no "stronger", there's just playing. Even if in many cases cooperative play does involve some little sub-games of friendly competition, that doesn't mean that this particular kind of competition (racing for loot) is enjoyable by particular people.

Which is to say that none of this nonsense you brought up about AI players making bad coop opponents demonstrates anything anyway. But hey, by all means continue turning everything into toughguy bullshit ("if you can't compete"..."special little snowflake"). Priorities.

"

Panda413 wrote:

The best answer is to provide multiple loot options for parties to choose from. Unless you can provide a reason that is bad for the game, you are failing to make a valid argument.

To say, "If you don't like it, play solo." is just a poor attitude and again, makes your opinion not worth consideration.

I have stated the reason in nearly every single post from me in this thread. Why are you consequent ignoring this and act like my observations of this genre are opinions?
It slows gameplay down, it robs players of competition and forces everyone to play with personalized loot because of the players greed. Nobody will turn on FFA because everybody wants everything for himself. As long as there is FFA, people are FORCED to socialize if they want something. They are FORCED to keep up with the party or they will get nothing.

Also, I ask you to stop quoting me out of context. I didn't say you should play solo, I said you COULD play solo, but you should play with friends or a clan/guild/group/whatever of you don't enjoy competition.

"

Vitacia wrote:

Nobody will turn on FFA

This sums it up perfectly.

Why would you force players to use a system that they don't want to use.

You aren't understanding the basic concept I'm presenting. (Or you do get it and just refuse to answer because you know you are wrong)

If FFA, Ind Distribution, and Roll were made options that the party could choose from, how does that hurt the game or create imbalance in any way?

What you are saying is.. "I like apples. Therefore everyone should like apples or choose to not eat."

What I'm saying is.. "I like oranges, but recognize some people like apples and some like bananas. I think people should be given the choice whether they eat apples, oranges, or bananas. It doesn't impact me negatively in any way to allow others to choose."

The argument you fail to present in EVERY SINGLE RESPONSE is anything defending why the option to choose shouldn't be available.

It comes off as shortsighted and selfish.