If you're bad at video games you shouldn't review games at all.

"
CAPSLOCK_ON wrote:
I started this game some days before 3.0 was released and had never even completed the 4 acts before, then i started again on harbinger league and completed all acts in less than a week, because i'm not mentally disabled and followed a new player guide so that i wouldn't get lost in a game that is very complex like that ign reviewer. yes, i did die some 3 or 4 times to kitava, but it wasn't even a dps problem, just me being a noob not knowing how to dodge some of kitava's attacks, but still took me 5 minutes to kill it also counting my deaths.

The ign reviewer had TWO THOUSAND dps on sunder at lvl 71, and he should be ashamed for reviewing a game he is so pisspoor at, as if he knew wtf he was talking about. stop defending this dude you sjw cucks


In fact only one who is "sjw cucks and mentally disabled" is you: come here and tell, that to play and beat the game you have to use guide and then act like an hero is in fact act of cowardice. There are games that tells you, if you are ready enough for enemy or not. This game does nothing in that regards. This review is one of best feedbacks GGG could get. If they react to it adequately, PoE will be much better experience even for players, who are not arpg fans at all.
"
Rexeos wrote:
If they react to it adequately, PoE will be much better experience even for players, who are not arpg fans at all.


And we hope they never do. Many players like this "out dated" ARPG. There's nothing else like it out there.
Last edited by Shagsbeard#3964 on Aug 24, 2018, 9:44:43 AM
"
Shagsbeard wrote:
"
Rexeos wrote:
If they react to it adequately, PoE will be much better experience even for players, who are not arpg fans at all.


And we hope they never do. Many players like this "out dated" ARPG. There's nothing else like it out there.


I belong to players who get into lvl 95 only by playing (try stuff - fail or win, first 6L on lvl 96), nevertheless I was given a hint about poe.trade around lvl 89... So yes, it really depends on who GGG wants to attract, but money are strong power .). .. But if there would be hints in game along the road or log how player died, than the game would be much user friendly though..

Playing game with peaking into internet to find out how to play is not what gaming is about and it was not 20 years ago for sure .).
Last edited by Rexeos#3429 on Aug 24, 2018, 10:04:58 AM
"
kaepae wrote:
too much text to quote reasonably


the game does introduce mechanics, it has a now full glossary of terms and introductions and it slowly introduces elements by virtue of the early game being vastly easier than later on giving you room to see what hot and whats not.

How do I know? Because a competant player can get to act 5 without spending passives its awkward but the amount of leeway at the start of the game is not low I feel like you don't appreciate how much room there is to be bad at the start of the game.

I find all the dead game arguments pretty funny on all sides, people invoke it like they have a golden formula for why its dead, heading to dead, was dead, will become dead or is currently alive but only due to necromancy when it may or may not have been dead earlier.

Looking at it from above GGG continued to provide quality content and support the game while there is very little competition in the space, it isn't going to die under those conditions unless they do one of two things - stop supporting the game, or change the game into something where it then competes with a better product. Basically its never been dead and would have to be extremely mismanaged to die in the near future regardless of what they aim for in terms of balance.
Here's my question to the apologists in this thread - if it's someone's profession to review games, shouldn't they be GOOD at games? If a person sucks so much at PoE that it takes them 75 hours to beat the campaign in Softcore, what value does their opinion have exactly? It's like listening to a barely literate book reviewer. The whole reason this guy's opinion has any authority is because he's employed by IGN, that's it. Take his job away (which IGN absolutely should if they weren't the fucking McDonalds of game reviews) and you're left with a bad player whining about a game.

I had no idea what I was doing in PoE when I first installed it. I played Hardcore Bestiary, alt-tabbed every two minutes to look at Youtube guides, played like a complete pussy and still reached Act 10 Kitava in 30 hours (and died). 75 hours is an absolute joke and compares nicely to Polygon's absurd DOOM video or that one journalist who couldn't beat Cuphead's tutorial. I CANNOT believe that money switched hands so this PoE review could be made.
"
ChefoSLR wrote:
-snip-


i just checked that doom video made by polygon because it peaked my interest when you mentioned it, and wow, it's like it was that person's first time ever playing a game
"
eLeF wrote:

He is a total noob for sure but nothing he said was necessarily wrong. Is it true that some elements in PoE are outdated? Yes. Is it true that you are being railroaded into a few specific viable builds? Absolutely. Do you have absolute freedom to play anything you want and it will get you into endgame? lolno! It was a harsh review perhaps but the truth hurts.


They review was based on him beating the 10 acts: no one is being "railroaded" into builds to finish the 10 acts. The fact that he managed to finish it with a basic sunder/heavy strike build with no damage demonstrates the fact nicely.

Someone posted a Lightning Warp Totem build beating Shaper a few days ago: https://youtu.be/FmPZS9Rfk3s. Just because something is not "the best ultra speed farm build" does not mean it is not viable.
"
ChefoSLR wrote:
Here's my question to the apologists in this thread - if it's someone's profession to review games, shouldn't they be GOOD at games? If a person sucks so much at PoE that it takes them 75 hours to beat the campaign in Softcore, what value does their opinion have exactly? It's like listening to a barely literate book reviewer. The whole reason this guy's opinion has any authority is because he's employed by IGN, that's it. Take his job away (which IGN absolutely should if they weren't the fucking McDonalds of game reviews) and you're left with a bad player whining about a game.



the counter argument is if your profession is to review games you should probably represent the largest segment of your readership possible, people who are good at games aren't the majority.

However being so bad at a game that you become unusual then creates another problem and generally somebody who is too good at a game can better grasp whats hot and whats not than somebody who struggles with the basics at the lowest level, especially if many of a games systems are aimed at better players.

My friend was telling me a funny similar case from gamescom this year (I think it was gamescom) where the journalists were getting to play some gameplay segments from Devil may cry 5, but the music changes depending on how well you are doing so all the journalists were complaining that there was little to no music because they were doing so badly >< Its a real problem these days if your trying to get a decent review.
"
Draegnarrr wrote:
the game does introduce mechanics, it has a now full glossary of terms and introductions and it slowly introduces elements by virtue of the early game being vastly easier than later on giving you room to see what hot and whats not.

How do I know? Because a competant player can get to act 5 without spending passives its awkward but the amount of leeway at the start of the game is not low I feel like you don't appreciate how much room there is to be bad at the start of the game.


It has gotten a lot better and can improve in various ways still. I'm glad GGG took this direction. I'm also looking for arguments from people who are against this, even with the idea that there could be a mode that caters more to their desired challenge.

Again, I'm not asking for numbing down, I'm asking for more linear learning opportunities and an all over friendlier approach for the new while preserving the challenge for the experienced. Somehow this leads to a reminisce of what PoE used to be and how the entire game has turned mainstream by comparison (which it isn't).

Tracing what happened, in game build templates, smoother introductions to mods on rares, and so on. It's hard for experienced people to pinpoint how hard things are for new players. Design-wise, I favor the new at the start of the game. In the end game I favor the experienced. All over I prefer modes to cater to different levels of competence and to offer players choices.
Did you try turning it off and on again?
poe community is toxic as fuck (this includes myself)

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info