GGG's argument about AH/state of trade that is grinding my gears - 2018 edition

Oh, I clashed with Sickness way back in 2012, in the very first thread I made actually. Strange that I believe it was mostly over what the game could yet become, where he is clashing with you over what the game *has* become.

I read that as 'this dude just loves to clash'. Hence 'pointless'. I don't think I've ever seen him compromise in a discussion. The really sad thing is he makes good points, just as you do, just from different directions -- and I think that sometimes, that's enough to settle a disagreement. But that probably won't happen here. You're too busy disagreeing to see that there is common ground. Hence 'head-butting'. Not seeing much 'peace' here.

I'm just glad I've come to a firm decision on the matter even if it's the popular one. I have my own reasons, and that suffices. No need to engage with something about which I've made my mind up, especially if that decision is the result of a *lot* of deliberation...and especially especially if I feel GGG wouldn't agree with my stance and so won't do anything about it. Now that is the real definition of pointless.

Shit the balance. Hehehehehe.

Well i just said i understand his position, so common ground at least on my part is already attained.

However it simply doesn't line up with reality or the current game-state so ultimately is in GGG's hands.
And from all evidence or actions they have taken in the past two years or so moving forward they haven't really shown anything promising that makes me suggest they are going to go into the direction Sickness would like.

Like i pointed out already, if they really wanted to move into that direction, they could have.

But it seems fairly evident that they are a business and need to accommodate the community they are aiming their game at.(currently)

As opposed to appeasing the community they once aimed at.

I play pretty much all "versions" of PoE, sort of speak, from the very masochistic to the very lax so i don't really favor a rigid "rule-set" i just play what is fitting for my mood.
And when it comes to lax game-play(trade-league grinding etc) i really don't think they can do a whole lot more to make it EVEN MORE lax.

For me, game-play experience should reign supreme in decisions. And that means focusing on QoL for PoE.
They essentially "speed"(not sure if proper english?) up the game four-fold in the past two years without accommodating any inherent game structures for that change.

Things like selling items still happens in the same fashion as the game originally released, while the acquisition of loot has speed up tremendously. That's kind of bad in therms of player-experience.

Peace,

-Boem-

"

The_Scourge wrote:

Shit the balance. Hehehehehe.

rofl. Embarrassing typo. I meant Shift the balance, if that wasn't already clear.

"

Boem wrote:

For me, game-play experience should reign supreme in decisions. And that means focusing on QoL for PoE.

I am not arguing against your priorities or opinions.
I am explaining to you the mechanism behind why GGG are doing what they are doing: The adverse relationship between trading and self-found/craft and that it's not about the extreme postions of "no trade" and "full trade", but the spectrum in between and that ANY change to trading will affect this relationship and change where in that spectrum we find ourselves.
Exactly what that effect will be from any change I don't pretend to know and I certainly am not making any claims for what is "best for the game".

"

Sickness wrote:

rofl. Embarrassing typo. I meant Shift the balance, if that wasn't already clear.

It was clear which was why i didn't point it out.

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

For me, game-play experience should reign supreme in decisions. And that means focusing on QoL for PoE.

I am not arguing against your priorities or opinions.
I am explaining to you the mechanism behind why GGG are doing what they are doing: The adverse relationship between trading and self-found/craft and that it's not about the extreme postions of "no trade" and "full trade", but the spectrum in between and that ANY change to trading will affect this relationship and change where in that spectrum we find ourselves.
Exactly what that effect will be from any change I don't pretend to know and I certainly am not making any claims for what is "best for the game".

Then my argument would be that GGG have no clue what they are doing and that you give them to much credit.

Because to me it goes like this

trading can't be made more efficient

-> i propose we implement an indexer into the core game itself for QoL purposes

-> you argue they can't do that because it would make trading more efficient

-> i look at what GGG did in the last few years
- increase clear speed roughly four fold
- allow a better trading system to exist
- enable the ability to search based on off/on-line status
- power creep players

and i think to myself "well they might be a bit late with that notion".

So trading as a result of the accumulation of items/currency has been made four times as efficient(assuming the current power creep equates to four times the clear speed) and all of a sudden implementing a trade system into the core game is the straw that will break the camels back when it comes to "trade efficiency".

That's just not acknowledging where the current PoE is compared to PoE of the past and putting your head in the sand going "nananaananananananaanaaa".

Peace,

-Boem-

"

Boem wrote:

Then my argument would be that GGG have no clue what they are doing and that you give them to much credit.

Because to me it goes like this

trading can't be made more efficient

-> i propose we implement an indexer into the core game itself for QoL purposes

-> you argue they can't do that because it would make trading more efficient

-> i look at what GGG did in the last few years
- increase clear speed roughly four fold
- allow a better trading system to exist
- enable the ability to search based on off/on-line status
- power creep players

and i think to myself "well they might be a bit late with that notion".

So trading as a result of the accumulation of items/currency has been made four times as efficient(assuming the current power creep equates to four times the clear speed) and all of a sudden implementing a trade system into the core game is the straw that will break the camels back when it comes to "trade efficiency".

That's just not acknowledging where the current PoE is compared to PoE of the past and putting your head in the sand going "nananaananananananaanaaa".

Peace,

-Boem-

It's a shame that you are not actually reading my posts. No where in them will you find anything about an in game trading system being the straw that breaks the camels back. In fact I said in the post you just quoted that I don't have a clue of the scale of the effects of an in game trading system.
The only thing that I am trying to make you understand is that there will be some effect.
GGG clearly believes it to be significant. So here is some firendly advice, if you believe that your ideas of what GGG should do are valuable you need to understand why they are not already doing it, otherwise it is very hard to take you seriously.
Don't ask to change things if you don't understand why things are the way they are in the first place.

An extreme example to get this point across is people who whine about speed bumps on the road; "driving would be so much nicer if there were not artificial bumps on the road".
Yeah yeah, "speed bumps" to trading is not the same as on the roads, but some of the complaints are comming from the same postion of asking for a change without understanding why things ar the way they are in the first place.

My point is that the argument that you are making would be so much more believable if you didn't misunderstand the mechanics at work, even if your conclusion remains the same.
You lose all your credibility when you don't see the downsides, even if you would still believe that the upsides far outweighed those downsides.


Not that you will read that anyways.

And nowhere in your mind pops resources and manpower up when it comes to QoL changes.

No, they simply don't do those because they refuse and don't want to.

Like i stated, they gave up on the argument to "slow down trade and make it inefficient" when they increased the games speed by four fold and implemented better trading api's and structures.

They might use that stance to uphold the current implementation, but it would take a fool to believe there is any truth in that sentiment since they are the ones responsible for the current game state.

I'm fairly intrigued how much of a bummer it's going to be for you when they do in fact put trading into the game itself. Could take them a year, maybe three but i'm pretty sure it's on the agenda somewhere down the road given the games current direction.

It might not be the kind of trade i envision either, given how xbox trading is handled, but as long as it's in the core game it will serve the purpose i am requesting.

Peace,

-Boem-

You didn't read my post, what a surprise.

"

Sickness wrote:

You didn't read my post, what a surprise.

That post where you claim GGG doesn't implement in-game trading because it would make trading efficient by some "X value" marging after they themselves increased the efficiency of the trade system by a huge margin in the past two years.

While excluding the possibility there is no relation between trade efficiency and trading not being in the core game yet?

While at the same time telling me i need to move myself into GGG's position to contemplate this.

Yeah, i read that.

"

Sickness wrote:

My point is that the argument that you are making would be so much more believable if you didn't misunderstand the mechanics at work, even if your conclusion remains the same.
You lose all your credibility when you don't see the downsides, even if you would still believe that the upsides far outweighed those downsides.

Reading stuff like this is cringy at best, i hope you are aware of that.

1) you don't explain "the mechanics at work" that i am misunderstanding(convenient stuff)
2) you claim i don't see the downsides without questioning me about that fact(convenient stuff)

On the other hand, you obviously know all of the mechanics at work and are 100% correct in your assumption about the downsides.

A stellar position for discourse man.

Anyway i'm done with this. So far you claimed omnipotence when voicing GGG's design decisions and impotence when voicing your own, all the while claiming i just need to "git gud" or L2read because i don't understand you.
Which essentially puts the burden on you to explain your position better btw, not just retort with a "L2read" one-liner.

Peace,

-Boem-

edit : and to be clear i understand your position quite perfectly.

Your echoing the sentiment that GGG fears the effects efficient trading could have on loot distribution between players.

But, it's just an echo. Hell you didn't even explore if their actions enforce that statement.

I agree to an AH for specific things like currency but I do agree somewhat poe needs a type of AH. I've seen so many new players come and go just from the tedious trade experiences. Veterans of games with trade like D2 and PoE can somewhat get use to it but there aren't many of us out there. The tutorials do suck, it doesn't really make new players want to come and stay after they sit around spending an hour to buy 2-3 pieces of gear because of horrible player interactions, trade afkers and flippers. I stopped playing myself early December because I just got absolutely sick of it. It's worse in HC because not as many people to trade with. Still follow PoE updates, new content really doesn't give me the drive to play again with thing as they are, and I've played since closed beta. Heaps of people I know have quit simply due to the shit trading system.