My experience in this game has been nothing but negative and harassive.

Beware of the chinese

"

Crackmonster wrote:

@ NotEchoMending

ROFL, dat name. :D

Huh, what's so funny? I think I missed the joke…

The disconnects are a horrible issue. I've had multiple characters die due to a DC/desync death. It is exactly the same how Kripp died in one of the recent races where mhe character does not respond to any actions and when i log out and back in I'm in default.

And each character that reaches merciless suddenly starts to desync in certain zones..but it's still a good game none the less, just needs some fine tuning that should've happened already.

I think people really don't read the developer manifesto, the issue is that people think
they can 'dumb' down the game by complaining. The issue isn't the game, its YOU.
The whole system is set up to reward the knowledgable. Races are won through skill/daring
and knowledge. If you lack any of the 3, you will never win.

I hope its painfully clear why GGG can never stray from the hardcore arpg mantra. I'm quite
surprised that most people don't get it. It doesnt take an economic genius to understand
that dumbing the game down is not a competitive advantage.

When you stray away from your niche, you need to compete against financial heavyweights.
No sane company would ever do that. You dont see ferarri try to out build and cost down
their cars against toyota. And its the same reason you dont see PoE try to dumb down
and compete against d3/tl2 etc. It should be OBVIOUS.

Now apart from the economics, they have a vision, they stick to that vision. And 'constructive' player feedback is always welcome. Example of constructive feedback:

I think we should tune skill X so that it provides a certain advantage in this case
and a certain weakness in other cases.

Example of retarded feedback:

I want the mob damage reduced, i want the removal of xp penalty, i want my loot instanced.

The problem with the above feedback is that its Totally contrary to the game. Its like
your designing a car and someone asks it to fly. Stop it, just stop being stupid.

"

yuwy wrote:

It doesnt take an economic genius to understand
that dumbing the game down is not a competitive advantage.

it doesnt' take an economid genius to understand that less players means a dead game and much less development money which will lead to content updates every 3 years...

this kids when they talk about economics....so funny

Unfortunately everyone I know, including family members, have quit. I tried to encourage them to return later in case things improve for them, but none want to return. These aren't people that leave games lightly, so hopefully there will be a magic fix in the future, whatever that may be.

"

Cronk wrote:

Spoiler

"

mkmaddage wrote:

It can only generate feelings of guilt if the ninja in question views the action as objectively 'wrong' in some way. Some feel - quite justifiably - that, as the mechanic allows for and actively promotes this type of gameplay, they have nothing to feel guilty about because they are simply playing the game as intended.

If you are saying that, in general, people don't like this system and it therefore generates more negative feeling than an allocated system would, I would tend to agree (though, as I have no idea of the actual stats for this, I wouldn't proclaim it as a given). But that is why I react to people saying "if you like this, you're not human / you're lying / whatever other accusations arise" - because that is an unfounded, unreasonable extrapolation; the real discussion is not whether it's right or wrong to like the system, it's whether it's right or wrong to change the system to suit what may be the majority or whether it's better to maintain the integrity of the original design goals of the game for the niche audience who like it.

I didn't bring the concept of 'like' into my 'offending' paragraph. I stated a simple fact. Stealing something allocated to someone else is a wrong. Enacting a wrong generates a sense of guilt. That is a human process. That's not a debatable concept, it's a core element of an emotion. In war, soldiers are permitted to kill people, they are permitted guiltless killing. However, even soldiers consider someone to be 'a bit on the edge' if they do not pertain to feelings of natural guilt while performing their duties.

You are free to 'like' the system, but I do not understand why anyone would argue is a system which doesn't generate feelings of guilt. Perhaps you are 'a bit on the edge'?

Sorry bud, you're stating the obvious but missing the point. I was clearly wrong in assuming that we weren't discussing 'right and wrong' - even though it has no logical bearing on this discussion. It always blows my mind when people try and drag "morality" into a discussion about conduct within game mechanics... Conduct AROUND the game - sure. How you treat people on the forums and what you whisper to them ingame is governed by rules that are outside of the game systems. But we're talking about an ingame system.

I can state categorically that I'm not "on the edge" and I do not feel ANY guilt at all about what amounts to pretending to "steal" virtual objects that do not belong to anyone but the company who created them - we're all just borrowing them and how we play with them is defined by GGG.

You're trying to compare (so called) objective moral conduct to 'rules of play' within a game system. Who cares about soldiers killing people in war or thieves stealing from poor families following a natural disaster? These sort of examples are not even slightly relevant to accepted conduct within a game system (by accepted I mean that the game designers allow for that behaviour) and they are generally only used to add perceived emotional 'weight' to the argument. They have no effect on me, however, in this context because they are irrelevant.

As a blatantly obvious example - you have no problem killing other players in FPS games because that conduct is allowed within the game systems. They provide the mechanism for you to kill other players - you don't have to, but more often than not, you do because you are playing a criminal assassin (for example) who kills people for money.

In the game of Werewolf players LIE and try to KILL other players - within the rules of the game system. They're not allowed to steal the other player's cards (in the cardgame version, let's say) but that's because that rule is not within the game system.

So yes, to state the painfully obvious, it is considered wrong to steal from another person. Within the rules of the game, it is completely fine to take the loot lying on the ground. You don't have to take it, but you're welcome to it, if you want to because you are playing a criminal cutthroat out to serve themselves. The loot doesn't really belong to you anyway - it's a virtual asset owned by GGG that they provide to you for your enjoyment.

I can only assume all the confusion about this occurs because people are less able to divorce reality from games like PoE that have very human looking avatars that move and act 'realistically'. No one seems to have a problem with card and boardgames where the characters are all just pictures on a card or a gameboard - stealing within the game rules is never an issue. There doesn't seem to be any issue with the "morally wrong" behaviour of killing other players in FPS or fighting games either but going any further into that is a different discussion.

I'm not trying to say that you don't have a point, I'm just saying that the point lies somewhere else. If I were to take a guess, I think the real problem is that GGG don't state it out loud and clear - like they do now with the "Hardcore = death" message - that 'stealing' loot from others is allowed and is a part of the game. The reason they don't, in my opinion, is because they, like myself and others, take these things for granted. I guess they're not that obvious to everybody...

This game requires a player to be able to murder a player in town and loot their stash to be more cutthoat and also pvp in maps. There is nothing wrong if a player is an asshole if he is an asshole but if he can grief you and you can't do anything to pay him back it's negative and harassive.

"

yuwy wrote:

I think people really don't read the developer manifesto, the issue is that people think
they can 'dumb' down the game by complaining. The issue isn't the game, its YOU.
The whole system is set up to reward the knowledgable. Races are won through skill/daring
and knowledge. If you lack any of the 3, you will never win.

I hope its painfully clear why GGG can never stray from the hardcore arpg mantra. I'm quite
surprised that most people don't get it. It doesnt take an economic genius to understand
that dumbing the game down is not a competitive advantage.

When you stray away from your niche, you need to compete against financial heavyweights.
No sane company would ever do that. You dont see ferarri try to out build and cost down
their cars against toyota. And its the same reason you dont see PoE try to dumb down
and compete against d3/tl2 etc. It should be OBVIOUS.

Now apart from the economics, they have a vision, they stick to that vision. And 'constructive' player feedback is always welcome. Example of constructive feedback:

I think we should tune skill X so that it provides a certain advantage in this case
and a certain weakness in other cases.

Example of retarded feedback:

I want the mob damage reduced, i want the removal of xp penalty, i want my loot instanced.

The problem with the above feedback is that its Totally contrary to the game. Its like
your designing a car and someone asks it to fly. Stop it, just stop being stupid.

Amen Brother.