anti-fun systems

Jesus christ guys. If anybody here thinks that going to each vendor after each level is mandatory (which is the opposite of optional), i'd say they are full of crap. There are some "optional" things that aren't really that optional like the lab if you want ascendency nodes. But going to a fucking vendor looking for chromatic items is not one of them. I stopped even thinking about going to bendors when they upped the rate of chromatic items dropping. Which was like more than a year ago.

"

adghar wrote:

tl;dr the energy put towards raging against "it's optional" might be better put towards evaluating whether the extra 0.2 chaos revenue you get is worth the -1, -2, -50 chaos expense from the shit that micromanaging does to your brain, thus creating a different choice optimality when accounting for less objective factors.

EDIT: Because I love analogies. Let's take ScrotieMcB's excellent torture room example. Economists and power gamers are likely to say that pushing the button is optimal. People for whom a moral compass overrides primitive social science will probably think, "if I push that button, the choice will weigh on my conscience so much that my future productivity will be seriously hampered. So even if the objective function is to maximize profit, I'll be incurring a net loss here because my ability to generate revenue in the future will be lowered by a greater than $5 loss per button press."

Since this is Feedback and Suggestions, the objective function of the forum itself is presumably fun per player, and thus of course it is legitimate to point out that forcing participants to shock their peers is a horrible way of producing fun. So of course it is perfectly valid to point out what could replace the whole shocking mechanism.

Thus the point of my post may be enhanced by pointing out that there are other sources of profit in the world, both in real world and the game. When one introduces a green button that dispenses $4 a press but does not shock a human, many people will probably go for the green instead of the red.

Thus there isn't really a way to deny the validity of the original poster's feedback in so much as there are ways of claiming that it's not such a big deal as one may think.

So another way to interpret "it's optional" would not be "git gud," but rather "the objective optimality of this choice is low enough that subjective factors may come into play and divert a given player towards other choices, thereby causing the fun-ness impact of this unfun optimal choice to be negligible." So, something along the lines of "it doesn't matter" or "it's not important."

I thought something like this as an afterthought, so I edited in "To some extent, you are advancing the view that human beings are more than pigeons trapped in a Skinner box" before reading your reply.

The point beneath my whole example is that in-game reward - gear, currency, XP - is not enjoyment in and of itself, but an affordance - that is, like the handle on a door which implies it is meant to be pushed or pulled open. In-game reward tells you, as plain as the change machine does, what behavior the system intends for you to perform. If you go with the flow, you follow the reward to the behaviors which provide it; it you don't do this, you're fighting against what the design is pressuring you to do.

In-game reward isn't player reward. In-game reward is supposed to guide players towards certain gameplay. The gameplay is supposed to be the player's reward.

johnKeys is famous around these parts for going on about risk-reward. And risk is a type of behavior which many find engaging. But he's really just focused on one narrow facet of a bigger principle: fun-reward. If reward systems in a game do not draw you towards the best the game has to offer, those reward systems are broken.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

....

TL;DR: Keep that "optional" shit out of Feedback, and in Gameplay Help where it (sometimes) belongs. And try to avoid using "mandatory" anywhere, because without a context of a certain goal, it never is.

I can understand where the sentiment in the long form comes from, but there is still room for interpretation. Maybe flat out saying "it is optional" is a little strong. However, it is pretty clear from what I witnessed in peoples' guides and tips over the years is that most of these things that are complained about in this thread and others is that they are "optional" because the player has choices:

1) I have never been able to find a clear decision of the community or proof of chaos recipe versus running maps and only pick up items that are small and much more likely to have nice rolls and skipping chaos recipe is the better option. Effort and focus play part in the latter option and a typical casual player probably ends up with the same currency/drop value if they did fairly fast paced maps and little vendoring and iding for 100 hours versus 100 hours of going through maps slower but focusing on chaos recipe with a focus on completing the chaos recipe fairly efficiently in regards to time and storage.

2) Vendor runs - I never looked into it in the slightest but I am fairly certain Vendor resets reflect very closely to in game drop rates, maybe a little bit better since they aren't changing constantly, especially the last 20 levels or so. So just like the chaos recipe, you have the choice of checking all the vendors or not and simply progressing and getting combat drops. They probably end up netting you the same amount of value if you spent equal amount of time on either one.

3) Master missions are the only one that I already admitted "optional" doesn't fit them. You have challenges of course, but if you want to solo self find you kind of need your masters maxed. However, ignoring challenges, masters can be left alone if one so desired. And like I said, I think the fact that masters being "optional" time wise is fine since they are "mandatory" if you simply want lvl 8 for crafting purposes, particularly to sell your crafting capabilities. Masters aren't like the proceeding 2. There is a distinct mandatoriness of it if you want to cash in on it.


As others are pointing out in the thread and I have my own view on the matter: Saying "it is optional" isn't meant to be insulting to somebody's perspective on the game design. It is trying to point out how there is more than one way to look at it. My reaction to the thread was because the OP suggests to me that the poster assumes these things are a mandatory/ desirable method of wealth management of the game. For the first 2 things, this is simply not true. Somebody may be pointing out how the design is unfun to them, but when you have 2 choices, especially since the 2nd choice is to go slay monsters and actually "play" in a sense, it seems kind of silly to complain about a design choice that isn't mandatory to develop wealth.

If GGG flat out said Chaos recipe or vendor runs were the best way to make currency quick and had the trade in value and vendor options spawn as such, sure complain that the micromanagement is an unfun design. I would too. But when you have 2 choices in each case and you could simply ignore one of the choices and end up with roughly the same end result, it is in fact optional.

I love this discussion. Lots of thoughtful posts.

Allow me to briefly kill the "it's optional" argument in a way which is simpler and with less depth than Scrotie's.

In short, responding to criticism of anything in this game with "It's optional, and therefore your criticism is not valid, or less valid," sounds ignorant for the simple reason that you are clogging the discussion with irrelevance:

1. Everything in the game is optional, strictly speaking. NOTHING is mandatory in this game without an explicitly stated goal to create context. So what the fuck is your point?

2. The statement is "Optimal paths to victory, i.e. that which the game encourages us to do, are not fun. Can we replace these optimal paths with others which are actually fun?" Whether content is "mandatory" or not has absolutely zero relevance to that very specific criticism.

"

PleiadesBlackstar wrote:

If GGG flat out said Chaos recipe or vendor runs were the best way to make currency quick and had the trade in value and vendor options spawn as such, sure complain that the micromanagement is an unfun design. I would too. But when you have 2 choices in each case and you could simply ignore one of the choices and end up with roughly the same end result, it is in fact optional.

This is a good point, but if you in fact disagree with an OP's premise that activity X is the most optimally rewarding activity, then it's better to say that outright than to label it "optional," due to the reasons above. "Other options exist which are just as rewarding a use for your time" (for example) is a much more precise and accurate (and respectful) response.

Meanwhile, we have tossers like the poster immediately below me who don't even bother reading a thread before posting.

"

PoE is a great game and most of it is really well done but it has a number of systems that may benefit you as a player to do but are distinctly unfun and a waste of time. I would like to see these systems removed or overhauled in some way:

* Chaos recipe. This fucking thing takes the time you could spend having fun killing mobs and allocates it to shitty inventory management and ilvl checking(to avoid regals). I did this recipe maybe once this league for the challenge because even though I know it helps build wealth, I'm just too fucking sick of it to do it anymore.
* Vendor runs. Every time you level, vendors reset. You then have an opportunity to run through the acts and buy/resell chromatic or 6S items. Sometimes you even get a lucky 5/6 link. Unfortunately, it is really fucking tedious(worse than the small chests in vaults of atziri). I stopped doing it ages ago because it's just so damn boring.
* Most master missions. These often involve backtracking, suboptimal play, or just standing around waiting for mobs to spawn. The only ones that are fun are vagan and unique maps from Zana. I stop leveling matters at 7.

I'm fine with frustrating content that kills you repeatedly and gives you a wall to climb. I'm fine with increasing time and effort into accomplishing my goals. However, I really don't like it when something that is neither challenging nor fun demands my time and attention. When GGG patched the chaos recipe to be ilvl 60+, it was because people were doing it with normal merveil and they didn't want something so horrendously boring to be a good way to play the game. This same reasoning should apply to the above as well.

You don't have to do any of these , they are not mandatory by any means .

OPTIONAL content for people who CHOOSE to do it .

No anti-fun systems list is complete without the mention of the lab to get the ascendancy points. Not to mention that all those you described are not even close to the mandatory nature of the lab.

"

skaterboy80 wrote:

"

PoE is a great game and most of it is really well done but it has a number of systems that may benefit you as a player to do but are distinctly unfun and a waste of time. I would like to see these systems removed or overhauled in some way:

* Chaos recipe. This fucking thing takes the time you could spend having fun killing mobs and allocates it to shitty inventory management and ilvl checking(to avoid regals). I did this recipe maybe once this league for the challenge because even though I know it helps build wealth, I'm just too fucking sick of it to do it anymore.
* Vendor runs. Every time you level, vendors reset. You then have an opportunity to run through the acts and buy/resell chromatic or 6S items. Sometimes you even get a lucky 5/6 link. Unfortunately, it is really fucking tedious(worse than the small chests in vaults of atziri). I stopped doing it ages ago because it's just so damn boring.
* Most master missions. These often involve backtracking, suboptimal play, or just standing around waiting for mobs to spawn. The only ones that are fun are vagan and unique maps from Zana. I stop leveling matters at 7.

I'm fine with frustrating content that kills you repeatedly and gives you a wall to climb. I'm fine with increasing time and effort into accomplishing my goals. However, I really don't like it when something that is neither challenging nor fun demands my time and attention. When GGG patched the chaos recipe to be ilvl 60+, it was because people were doing it with normal merveil and they didn't want something so horrendously boring to be a good way to play the game. This same reasoning should apply to the above as well.

You don't have to do any of these , they are not mandatory by any means .

OPTIONAL content for people who CHOOSE to do it .

Taken from the post IMMEDIATELY above yours:

"

1. Everything in the game is optional, strictly speaking. NOTHING is mandatory in this game without an explicitly stated goal to create context. So what the fuck is your point?

2. The statement is "Optimal paths to victory, i.e. that which the game encourages us to do, are not fun. Can we replace these optimal paths with others which are actually fun?" Whether content is "mandatory" or not has absolutely zero relevance to that very specific criticism.

"

Regulator wrote:

No anti-fun systems list is complete without the mention of the lab to get the ascendancy points. Not to mention that all those you described are not even close to the mandatory nature of the lab.

It also bears mentioning that even some fans of this content freely acknowledge that it is not fun. Those particular fans like it anyway because

(A) It is economically rewarding.
(B) Many people find it unfun and therefore don't run it. That puts players willing to endure it at an additional advantage, and thereby amplifies the effects of (A).
(C) Many people find it unfun and therefore pay for carries. Even more economic rewards.

I would add other things to the list, such as
keeping track of Offering expirations,
juggling flask timers,
playing overpowered builds with boring skills which are not balanced due to their lack of popularity (because they are boring),
monitoring Reddit in order to find the most optimal Lab runs, and
flipping items in trade.

Not all of these are unfun for every player, and some are arguably more optimal than others. Those are the two primary reasons some players will not share this opinion. Some people love the Lab's intrinsic gameplay and structure, or playing flask piano builds, or flipping items.

But for those who do share my opinion, the optimality of doing those activities makes it feel a little broken from the point of view of game design, since games are designed to be fun.

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

2. The statement is "Optimal paths to victory, i.e. that which the game encourages us to do, are not fun. Can we replace these optimal paths with others which are actually fun?" Whether content is "mandatory" or not has absolutely zero relevance to that very specific criticism.

Except like I said, from my point of view, there doesn't seem to be an optimal path to victory so to speak with chaos recipe and vendor runs. Assuming somebody is not a stereotypical ultra efficient speed runner, I doubt there is a clear distinction that chaos recipe or checking vendors every level is necessary or more efficient that just running and picking up drops. Sure chaos recipe and vendor runs may be unfun for some people, but are also probably seen as just fine to the same amount of people. Whether you "play the game" by just running maps and leveling and not care about micromanagement for chaos recipe or vendor checking, or choose to do the recipe and check vendors, They.Are.Optional.Choices. You don't find them fun? Don't add it to your activity list for playing. Somebody else like me loves the chaos recipe so I micromanage but skip the vendor checking with every level, I find that unfun so I don't do it.

I also like the lab how it is but can agree with Regulator. I see merciless and lower lab as mandatory so you actually have an argument to mandatoriness for ascendency making the lab system unfun and rightfully so to those who flat out don't like the lab style gameplay. Where somebody like Reg and I would probably differ is that I think the first 3 labs are only mandatory to do once each character and then they can ignore the lab if they so choose. We would then probably get into a further argument about how mandatory uber lab is for character progression.




You can't just summarily dismiss the argument that things are optional. Sure if the person is being rude about it and simply telling you to stfu in the process. Informing people that others find the chaos recipe and vendor checking to be fun designs is not telling you to stfu at face value, it is simply that the lack of fun in the mechanics design is subjective and there likely isn't going to be any changes due to the subjectivity of these things. If chaos recipe micromanagement and vendor checking were clearly much better wealth gathering methods than any other playstyle, calling these designs unfun would be objectively accurate. They are then essentially mandatory activities for efficient gameplay/wealth generation in that case and you would see just about nobody arguing that they need to be improved to be likable. I would be agonizing over chaos recipe if it was simply the best style of wealth generation out there as I would no longer find it optional and therefore takes the fun out of doing so.

After making my above post I realized that this is probably a hopeless debate for either side. Just like the p2w and pay for convenience argument over in general discussion and such, 2 sides simply have different definitions of "optional" that is making discussion pointless as all that is going to happen is both sides bickering about how the other side is wrong without ever fully compromising on the definition to clean up the debate.

"

PleiadesBlackstar wrote:

After making my above post I realized that this is probably a hopeless debate for either side. Just like the p2w and pay for convenience argument over in general discussion and such, 2 sides simply have different definitions of "optional" that is making discussion pointless as all that is going to happen is both sides bickering about how the other side is wrong without ever fully compromising on the definition to clean up the debate.

Possibly.

But I do encourage you to read the edit I made to my post about 5 minutes before you responded to it.