The wall of real problems that prevent PoE from being a god-tier game

"

tinko92 wrote:

"

KenshiD wrote:

Spoiler

Spoiler

Okay the let me ask you. What is it you trying to achieve?

Do you want GGG to remove part of the RNG?
What are you alternatives which will not shorten the game? because face it, they want the game to go on as long as they can.

The major flaw I see in D3 now is that it will become stale after a while if it becomes to easy to access everything there is.
(Which is why I play HC since then I still can die and have do start from scratch).

I mean I see you complain about gated content the entire time, you obviously don't like it, but do you actually care if it was removed?

Okay let's take maps.
They drop randomly, but you dislike that.

Please (and I am serious) give me your idea how to make it so that it would suite your needs, and then make it so it would suite your needs but would also make the rest of the people happy.

That is basically the challenge anyone has who wants to change the game system. Taking into account what will work not only for them but for the entire game.

(which is why I don't think self found league will be all that great since it only cares about the selfish needs of those who don't want to trade and live with a game that has a build in economy)

Spoiler

I'm bringing up other sides of the story, discussing the game on a forum, I'd say that's working as intended.

I've already said, gate the content behind difficulty, not RNG.
I also want a long life for the game.

It is easy to access to content in D3, however, can you handle it?
No? -> go to the lower difficulty.
Yes? -> stay and kill monsters you are capable of.
However, in PoE, it's this situation: can you handle it?
No? -> don't bother trying to get up with your map pool.
Yes? -> see if you're lucky enough to participate in the harder content, if not, you can buy your way in or go to the lower map tiers.

Again you with that I don't like it, almost nobody likes it, that's the situation, for a reason.
I actually do care, because that would be 1 out of 2 steps that would bring me back. If I don't care I wouldn't post about it at all, as nobody does, except the obvious trolls and dickbags.

Maps provide a forced variety, and players in the very end of the endgame play 2 or 4 maps constantly, no variety in that, and the endgame variety should be to break the monotony as much as possible to the players who invest a lot of time, logically.

What I would like to see, what I've already said, a content gated behind difficulty.
Rough example:
- maps are available from vendor for free, any level (66-78) and any area, meaning? You can play a 68 lvl Gorge, or a 77 lvl Underground River.
- you still roll maps the way you do now, currency sink is still here, at least other than the market value of maps
- experience gained is severely reduced and based on maps IIQ, example: 100% IIQ map gives 33% of the experience of a same level map with this system, maybe even lower, 25%, 20%. That would promote a real variety and a content gated behind difficulty, however, it would hurt the economy part of PoE, and that's again, a fucking shame that these kind of bullshit stuff prevent PoE of being a lot better game (overall, I'm sure that gambling addicts don't like this)
- unique maps still drops as they do now

Sure you can say "but everyone will do 78 Gorge's all the time", why the hell not? It's not our fault that it's the best tileset mainly because it's on open area and the desync is much easier then in Catacombs.
Why punish a player because of game's problems?
Or add some additional IIQ on indoor maps, something can be done to balance things out, if only someone would put a thought to it.

I find your post to my liking, Tinko

"

raics wrote:

"

RagnarokChu wrote:

There is no "middle ground" that doesn't have the >exact< same few complaints.

'Golden middle' isn't just a phrase, it's an ideal to strive for.

Only a small percentage of people are adamant about extremes, most are willing to accept some shade of gray. If you hit the right shade you will lose only those that are unwilling to compromise even a bit.

Not to mention there probably aren't any people that actually like dropping trash so the 'other extreme' doesn't even exist, so you will find the perfect ratio and then move it a bit left. You don't want to starve your kids, just keep them from eating only candies until their teeth fall out.

Balance is the key.

Guys are missing the point, what dictates the golden middle. The golden middle is different per person, why is D3 the extreme and PoE the other extreme? Just because there aren't any other modern ARPGS we use those as the standard?

Even with a "golden middle" that appeals to the "masses" you lose out people on either "extreme" which is still then a large chunk of people. Let's say each extreme appeals to 20% people and the "golden middle" appeals to 60%.

You still have 40% that won't play your game and will complain.

Inherently you want to design the game to be ultimately fun for as many people as possible, not around subjective things as being "rewarded" with some sort of material good (it should be supplementary to the actual game-play). If the game is lacking in tools you need to survive it has to be fun, and people do that find that find in stuff like zombie survival games and ect.

Another example would be skyrim, even if people use shitty gear they don't feel "bad" for playing the game. They have just as much fun as anyone else with gear progression, they don't care if other people have the legendary sword of +10 awesome or other people can become powerful even faster. The gear is an enchantment to the gameplay, not a focal point of why people play the game.

"

RagnarokChu wrote:

Another example would be skyrim, even if people use shitty gear they don't feel "bad" for playing the game. They have just as much fun as anyone else with gear progression, they don't care if other people have the legendary sword of +10 awesome or other people can become powerful even faster. The gear is an enchantment to the gameplay, not a focal point of why people play the game.

Bad example. Skyrim is a stupidly easy game. Unless you go pure caster, and then you get fucked by static damage output with scaling enemies.

Anyway, I think it's you that's missing the point. 'Rewarding' gameplay means you're overcoming challenges and getting progressively better, opening up new opportunities. PoE, you can overcome challenges, but chances are, your progression won't budge.

"

tinko92 wrote:

"

UnderOmerta wrote:

So you run a rip map for 1/3rd of the xp that you get out of running a current map white?

Are you trying to make it even more masochistic for the people trying to level?

100% can be a vanilla map as a 40% can be a RIP one.

But that would promote playing against hard content, that would actually make the game "hardcore".
And yes, because you wouldn't be forced to play weaker content because you weren't lucky enough.
It would prevent "buying" top levels as they are being bought now.
It would put a stop to things like: log-in, want to play high lvl maps, none of them in your stash, check public parties, none of them being run at the moment.

People constantly claim that D3 is a faceroll game, guess what? PoE is even more of a faceroll.

It has nothing to do with whether or not the content is a faceroll. I play in high level map parties that can faceroll pretty much any map. It has everything to do with time-investment for XP. The XP grind is already a nightmare past 90, where 78 maps progress from a handful of xp % to fractions as you get higher.

Sitting there and drastically cutting the XP gained form high level maps is a terrible idea for anyone that actually wants to play the game at a high level. I'd much rather pay for maps and keep this RNG-fest than take a 75% penalty to XP, and I'm one of the most vocal advocates against RNG here.

"

b15h09 wrote:

Bad example. Skyrim is a stupidly easy game. Unless you go pure caster, and then you get fucked by static damage output with scaling enemies.

And even pure caster can stunlock enemies to death. Not very fast, but quite safe.

"

People constantly claim that D3 is a faceroll game, guess what? PoE is even more of a faceroll.

Indeed.

"

tinko92 wrote:

But it's clear that a huge majority doesn't like that gambling and the gated endgame content, and it has nothing to do with how hardcore someone is, it has to do with ones gambling tendencies.
In this kind of game, it's logical to gate the content behind difficulty, not luck or wealth (hence why this is the only game that has a gated content of this magnitude).

For me, this is currently the most glaring issue as to why I'm starting to dislike playing any further.

I levelled a character to 85 and I feel like progression is gone and playing any further is close to pointless. Yes, I can level up some more, and I can upgrade my gear to even better stuff. However slow this has become, I am perfectly fine with that. Levelling and gear upgrading remains a fun goal, even if it slows down.

What I cannot abide is that the game has no challenge left, which completely eradicates the point of both levelling and gear upgrading. I want to do hard stuff, enemies that make me want better gear and more levels in the first place. But the game won't let me, even though the content is there. Unlike the previous 200 hours I've played, now that I'm running maps the game suddenly no longer allows me to challenge myself with more and more challenging content.

And that was what I liked about the game, the difficulty and challenges. I played, died horribly at the Butcher in normal, got better gear, more levels, then got owned by Vaal Oversoul, and later by Dominus, and then again by their even stronger versions when I got to merciless. I levelled, upgraded, tweaked my build, looked for advice, and got rewarded with progress through more difficult content.

When I did my first few maps, I jubilantly made use of the additional difficulty/reward from adding reflect phys/ele, enfeeble, vulnerability, I even did some temp chains and fracture maps, although they are just boring rather than challenging. Anyway, so far difficulty just kept ramping up and up, and the only limit to how difficult I wanted the game to be was simply dependant on my choice as to how fast I wanted to progress.

And now that's suddenly all gone. The highest level maps I've run so far were 75's, and for some reason they were easier than some of the lower 70's I've done. Since then I haven't gotten any replacements for my 72-75 maps and I'm now back to running 70s. They are absurdly boring, tripe, tedious grindfests by now. Everything dies in a few hits, nothing comes close to being dangerous.

I have two choices. Either I buy maps to experience a challenge in the 78's and blow my entire currency-tab to experience the privilege of being challenged, or I grind lower level maps effortlessly and endlessly so that every once in a while the game, perhaps, throws an outlier high lvl map at me and challenges me again. This is silly. It's as if the game requires you to play through the entirety of normal difficulty again every time you have depleted your stack of high level maps.

It makes me feel like I've finished the game, even though there are another 3 levels of maps and multiple lower level maps I've never even seen, never mind Atziri. Perhaps those maps and levels are difficult. I don't know. I probably never will know because to get there the game asks an entrance fee priced in boredom.

PS: Perhaps I should've rolled a hardcore character to begin with, so that I can die to desynch at level 85 and start all over again. Or an invasion character so I could die randomly to either desynch or an invasion boss. This is, however, not what I like as a challenge.

"

UnderOmerta wrote:

It has nothing to do with whether or not the content is a faceroll. I play in high level map parties that can faceroll pretty much any map. It has everything to do with time-investment for XP. The XP grind is already a nightmare past 90, where 78 maps progress from a handful of xp % to fractions as you get higher.

Sitting there and drastically cutting the XP gained form high level maps is a terrible idea for anyone that actually wants to play the game at a high level. I'd much rather pay for maps and keep this RNG-fest than take a 75% penalty to XP, and I'm one of the most vocal advocates against RNG here.

It has something to do with a faceroll content. It's too boring when you go up leveling to 100, or at least when you aim for 90+.
Content is a faceroll, it's boring, and there is no incentive to play harder maps.

Maybe we can add increased effect on 100%+ IIQ maps.

There is much to do with the whole endgame, it's just a matter of will.

And I doubt that 100%+ IIQ maps are faceroll for those kind of parties, I've been in them, most of them are facerolling easy maps. I know when I wanted to put some challenging map, people wanted me to reroll it.
Because, as I've said, there is no incentive to play harder maps.
Risk vs. reward in this game is almost non-existent.

Don't take my numbers for set ones, that was just an example. For content to be available it needs to yield less exp.

Maybe add extra experience gain in 130%+ maps, we now have Vaal orbs that can roll 8 mods on a map, and therefore make 130%+ IIQ maps a lot more "common".
Maybe, if the map has 140% IIQ, it yields 50% more experience than a map does now.

It's all adjustable and has a promise, as long as it's made right.


@Fleve
Believe me, most of players sympathize with you, and I fully know what you're talking about.
Gated content is a big issue that has driven many players out of the game, including me.

"

RagnarokChu wrote:

Another example would be skyrim, even if people use shitty gear they don't feel "bad" for playing the game. They have just as much fun as anyone else with gear progression, they don't care if other people have the legendary sword of +10 awesome or other people can become powerful even faster. The gear is an enchantment to the gameplay, not a focal point of why people play the game.

Skyrim can be beaten with the gear you find in the tutorial area, easily even if you don't level up. Bit harder but very possible if you do.

I look forward to seeing you kill Merc Dominus with a rusted sword and a few lvl 1 magic items.

"

tinko92 wrote:

Spoiler

"

UnderOmerta wrote:

It has nothing to do with whether or not the content is a faceroll. I play in high level map parties that can faceroll pretty much any map. It has everything to do with time-investment for XP. The XP grind is already a nightmare past 90, where 78 maps progress from a handful of xp % to fractions as you get higher.

Sitting there and drastically cutting the XP gained form high level maps is a terrible idea for anyone that actually wants to play the game at a high level. I'd much rather pay for maps and keep this RNG-fest than take a 75% penalty to XP, and I'm one of the most vocal advocates against RNG here.

It has something to do with a faceroll content. It's too boring when you go up leveling to 100, or at least when you aim for 90+.
Content is a faceroll, it's boring, and there is no incentive to play harder maps.

Maybe we can add increased effect on 100%+ IIQ maps.

There is much to do with the whole endgame, it's just a matter of will.

And I doubt that 100%+ IIQ maps are faceroll for those kind of parties, I've been in them, most of them are facerolling easy maps. I know when I wanted to put some challenging map, people wanted me to reroll it.
Because, as I've said, there is no incentive to play harder maps.
Risk vs. reward in this game is almost non-existent.

Don't take my numbers for set ones, that was just an example. For content to be available it needs to yield less exp.

Maybe add extra experience gain in 130%+ maps, we now have Vaal orbs that can roll 8 mods on a map, and therefore make 130%+ IIQ maps a lot more "common".
Maybe, if the map has 140% IIQ, it yields 50% more experience than a map does now.

It's all adjustable and has a promise, as long as it's made right.


@Fleve
Believe me, most of players sympathize with you, and I fully know what you're talking about.
Gated content is a big issue that has driven many players out of the game, including me.

I'm pretty sure I heard Chris talk about EXP on maps.

I personally would find that a good idea, as long as there is no better alternative for EXP gain.

On the other hand I see that if it would become easier to get to level 100 it would lose its value. I mean since it is damn hard to get to 100 (and yes I mean hard as in time investment and everything else that is required to level a lot), it would be kinda a new QQ about how easy it is now to get to level 100.


About difficulty. Well since we always bring up D3 lately, I think the main thing that makes D3 difficult are monster mechanics/ai.

While in PoE the burst damage is much more common, in D3 monsters have way more deadly mechanics which I personally really like.

Nemesis added some of those in PoE too, and I just wish they would make more of them (and balance them) to make stuff more hard.

Also then add things like "all rares in the map have a nemesis mod" as a map affix, that would be cool.

Agree. Sounds like a good map mod.