Path of Exile, Gameplay Criticism
" One thing that I kind of dislike, is players saying "you are afraid of leveling at the end of the level but not at the start !", without explaining how/why this would be a bad thing, and how to create risk without something like this. To me, this way of thinking is only when one think that his build is going to fail ... doesn't that mean that there is room for improvement in such a case ? People don't follow such a pattern in HC after all, and I personally think that HC is / should be the basis for balancing. I find no problem with having clear "threshold" as objectives that allow you to chill more once you got them, if anything ... it allows for more flexibility to me, more than "make the grind boring" later on. SSF is not and will never be a standard for balance, it is not for people entitled to getting more without trading. Last edited by Fruz#6137 on Jan 19, 2019, 3:07:14 AM
| |
" "everyone"  [Removed by Support]
"Your forum signature was removed as it was considered to be inappropriate and a breach of our Code of Conduct." ...it was quotes. from the forum. lolz! |
|
|
No death penalty league sounds like an awesome idea. No more boring forum threads made by the same people, everybody will be playing witch/ranger and brag about their level 100. Feels good.
|
|
|
Thank you for the time that you put into your feedback, Fruz. I can tell you put a lot of thought into it.
" For punishments to be effective at conditioning behavior, they need to be obviously connected to the "mistake". The rate war shortens the time that players have to react to things, sometimes to much shorter than human reflex time. In other words, the time between "the warning" and "the punishment" can be too short to be realized. This destroys the connection. For example, it can be like yelling "dodge the ball" after the ball has already hit someone. "What you lose" and "why you lose it" are too "tenuously connected" to serve the conditioning goals of punishment, wholly apart from the severity of it. " It seems like they would have created an "instant teleport to town" hotkey rather than town portal scrolls if their intention was to balance around logging out. Did a developer ever say this? " I don't see why easier conditions should matter more than the attempted rewards themselves do in determining a penalty. Would you argue that someone should be punished for something when they stood to gain nothing (and no one else stood to lose anything) from it? " If addition requires some mathematical rigor, I would expect that rigor to carry over into subtraction using the inversion of whatever logic led to the addition. The simplicity of the XP penalty in contrast with the XP gain is strong evidence that they don't follow the same logic. " I wouldn't bring hardcore into any discussion of penalty, because the entire draw of hardcore is the penalty. Analogies aren't tenable. " This means that there has been a move away from "reaction" in favor of "prevention" due to the aforementioned shortening of the time that players have to react via the rate war. "Playing the game wrong" was hyperbole. " My entire presentation was to demonstrate this point. If you want, change the language to "seldom produces a proper challenge". " This is a better argument for reducing the number of portals available than for an additional penalty (when that penalty even applies). (Also, declaring that someone has "lost all credibility" is very risky.) " I did in my supplemental video linked in the description. But, no, I didn't say much positive at all in the main one, which was by admission at the beginning. " Neither of us speak for the game developers. |
|
|
I did, I spent more time than I thought I would thinking about what you said in the video and answering tbh.
Allow me to put all that in a spoiler, it's getting a bit long !
Spoiler
" It does happen in case of bugs or glitches. But not otherwise. The things that will one shot/instantly kill you are the telegraphed hits, that you are supposed to dodge, or the things like bearers, volatile, etc ... and are supposed to be mechanically avoided. If so many are reaching lvl 95+ and 100 HC and SSC HC, it clearly shows that people just don't get killed instantly. Now, the screen clutter is really not helping anybody here and things that should be seen by the player and then dodged .... aren't always that obvious, and there I think that we have a problem. For the rest, I disagree. There is one exception though : Reflect. Somebody attempting Queen Atziri for the first time will likely blow himself up on the split phase unless using a damage source immune to reflect, and I'm really against reflect in its current state. " I'm not sure if Chris directly said it or implied it, but it has been discussed in podcasts / interviews in the past. I wish I could find you a source right now but there is way too much material where that could be for me to look through all of it. They surely followed D2 regarding this (never played D2, only D1), but liked it ended up balancing the game around it I guess. " They don't matter more, they have the same impact : none. I would indeed argue that someone trying hard to do something and makes a mistake can be more easily forgiven than someone who does just pretty much nothing and makes the same mistake. It all depends on the context though, I don't think that such an abstract analogy is really going to lead us anywhere. "I really don't think that they need to, at all. "Did you know that HC players are also affected by the xp penalty ladder-wise ? When a character dies in HC, he looses 10% of xp then the char is moved to the parent league. Of course, most people don't really care about it. My point was : it's not more a boring grind for SC player than for HC players, and if you end up needed to resort to hitting a level to try some content out (we all have done it I think), it means that you can improve somewhere, it means that you are scared of the content. I like having some scary content in the game. The game is not balanced around players chickening before reaching a level. " Maybe I should have said "most" instead of "all", and this is of course only my opinion. The portal arguments really does not hold any water imo. Maps are raining from the sky in the current league. Reducing the number of portals could be arguable though, but you would make the 'deadly' encounters of the game (much) less accessible. There would be less occasions to try it out, and then less error margin. This plus the fact that if you would really make it costly, it would need to be reduced to 1 or 2 portals. It would also either : - kill party play - make it 'cheezable' through party play " Alright I haven't checked it, maybe I will give it a look later! " We don't, I just find that your tone was more of a "you should really listen to me GGG, because I know what I'm talking about (and your game will die if you won't)" than suggestions. Pardon me if that was a bit harsh, but that kind of is the feeling I had. I've seen too many "Do this or you game will die GGG !" threads/messages around here I guess though, and too many people who think that designing a game is easy and that they know it all. SSF is not and will never be a standard for balance, it is not for people entitled to getting more without trading.
| |
|
GGG contradict itself in design many times, people are just to blind to see those contradictions.
But ok, if people that defend death penalty can solve this contradiction created by GGG itself (except for the two poor reasons that I will list and devalue myself) then you are good to go and continue your white knighting. First we will start with stating facts: 1)GGG created maps that have 3 grades (white,yellow, red), to enter each map you use an item that open 6 portals 2)The higher your level is the less exp you gain, even if you go on red maps that are highest tier, you will still get around 0,3%-0,5% of your level 3)If you die you lose 10% exp Now try to solve the design ridle made by GGG. The riddle goes as follows: GGG give you possiblity to enter the area 6 times. Why 6 and not 1? 6 means you can die up to 6 times losing up to 60% of your exp, where in return you get 0,3-0,5% of exp per map. Each map give you 6 entrances meaning the design was created in mind of dying up to 6 times per map. Otherwise why would we need so many portals? 2 poor reasons that I promised to post myself: 1)Because you need to take out items from the area or exit in order to trade Poor reason because the higher level you are, the less junk you pick up, the more you filter loot and the less you actualy overload yourself. Only valid for really rare cases where stars align and you have enough luck to find so much valuable junk to clutter your whole invetory. Additionaly trading can wait those 3 minutes or less till you finish, so thats not a reason for the 6 portals aswell. 2)Because you can use other portals in order to party play. It is also really poor reason, since most people in POE dont partyplay at all. The second reason why it is poor, its because you can easly change the game to spawn one portal for each person that is only visible for that person. Last edited by herflik#4390 on Jan 19, 2019, 6:30:10 AM
|
|
" PoE is a multiplayer game, end of the riddle. SSF is not and will never be a standard for balance, it is not for people entitled to getting more without trading.
| |
" This has to be saved for future generations. Wow, the logic, its too much. |
|
" lol, I didn't really read past that first sentence actually! SSF is not and will never be a standard for balance, it is not for people entitled to getting more without trading. Last edited by Fruz#6137 on Jan 19, 2019, 9:29:54 AM
| |
" but is he serious tho? I thought that was sarcasm :S i hope it is for his sake by that i mean this part " Trust your mind and strengthen your abilities! Last edited by MrsDeath_#3960 on Jan 19, 2019, 9:22:29 AM
|
|
