Path of Exile, Gameplay Criticism

"

Jdahl22 wrote:

"

Xystre wrote:

not sure what the "top player" wants.. they already get top tier gear by crafting or being lucky, killing end bosses that the majority dont even touch..

you want the game to be hard? play hardcore, you already topped off your "skill" in softcore.. make the game for yourself, not by making everyone suffer your selfish vision of the game for your own sake.

36/40 - 40/40 players on SC but it's the same number that want the game to be "hard" but they do nothing but try to force their vision of the game on others.. play hardcore, make a new account without buying stashes, play SSF.. there's plenty of ways to make yourself the game "hard".

it's laughable (and I'm putting it very nicely here) that the make the game "hard" people do nothing in order to make the game hard for themselves but they bash with some insane low level elitism in a game where such thing is laughable again at best.

have it your way.. the game has potential, but the decisions here as lately in priorities are copying exactly the way other big companies with more resources than GGG, rather than learning from failures it seems they want to learn by doing the same mistakes..

I don't care if dev's or streamers dont post here, it only shows me they only want to see one side of the coin with forced positivity and some very abusable system to hide negative opinions for the hivemind of reddit.

my $0.0000003 cents in this thread.

You don't understand how PoE or aRPGs in general work. What the majority does in a f2p game is not something that should be taken too seriously, unless you aim for a mediocre game that it's only purpose is to make more money. A percentage of the people that don't reach endgame, don't even try to do so.
The difficulty most new players face in PoE has nothing to do with actual gameplay difficulty, but with information, complex mechanics and the learning curve.
A more simplified crafting system, a smaller in size class/skill/gear system, could work better for new players while at the same time add real depth in theorycrafting.
Harder end game content and powerful builds that can only be achieved after much more effort and not by spending just a couple of exalts, could keep people engaged for a longer period of time in each league.

''Harder end game content and powerful builds that can only be achieved after much more effort and not by spending just a couple of exalts, could keep people engaged for a longer period of time in each league. ''

I lol-ed. I have a friend here called Winter Orb. Winter Orb, meet a wannabe 1k QA team member.

Also Chris is not aiming for better content, he is aiming for more content for rushers.

"

Sol_Starving wrote:

same biological brain mechanics as smokers, social media addicts, ecc.
there are tons of neuroscientists that do ted talks about it.

Addiction is confused for "fun" very often in games.

"

Kulze wrote:

A game won't survive with being engaging alone, at least not indefinitely, a game has to be fun and enthralling, something a player will enjoy looking back to having done at any time...

I think this is a very important point.

Some trends in PoE might seem to be working in the short term, but in the absence of alternate universes to test alternatives with, all we have is reasoned arguments to predict the long term.

Arguments like "It's pointless. Our voices don't matter. It's all about money" can be applied to everything from politics to our personal lives. We need to view these as problems to be solved, not as permanent states of being. Even if they are true in the short term, living by them is worse than literal death in the long term.

I'm a casual. I come back to PoE about once a year for a month or two. This is the first league where there are delves for me. But I never have enough sulphite to delve to my hearts content, cause Niko only appears in like 5% of maps =(

"

Xystre wrote:

you want the game to be hard? play hardcore, you already topped off your "skill" in softcore.. make the game for yourself, not by making everyone suffer your selfish vision of the game for your own sake.

Where would you draw the distinction between trying to improve the game and pursuing a selfish vision?

"

Xystre wrote:

36/40 - 40/40 players on SC but it's the same number that want the game to be "hard" but they do nothing but try to force their vision of the game on others.. play hardcore, make a new account without buying stashes, play SSF.. there's plenty of ways to make yourself the game "hard".

There are different types of "hard". The types offered by hardcore and solo-self-found don't appeal to everyone.

"

Xystre wrote:

it's laughable (and I'm putting it very nicely here) that the make the game "hard" people do nothing in order to make the game hard for themselves but they bash with some insane low level elitism in a game where such thing is laughable again at best.

Should players need to impose challenges upon themselves outside the rules of the game?

Players could still impose HC and SSF modes on themselves even if those modes didn't exist (delete your character if it dies, never group or trade). But we shouldn't go too far down that road. Surely a game needs to have challenges built into the official rules. Otherwise, why have game developers at all? How can we criticize a game if players are expected to adapt to this extent?

I know this is a slippery slope from what you've said, but I think the problems discussed here are predominantly a problem with the game's design and not with its players.

"

Khalixxa wrote:

Where would you draw the distinction between trying to improve the game and pursuing a selfish vision?

That one looks like a hard question at the beginning but fairly easy to answer if looking a bit into it.

There are fundamental rules any game has to follow, the only question is which ones one actually decides to follow on.

For instance people want to feel success, much like we want to feel RL, hence a game has to be rewarding without trivializing the efforts of the player. This is an iron-clad rule which decides short-term versus long-term enjoyment.
Extremely skill-based games which need tight controls and memorization like the mod for Super Mario 'Kaizo Mario' are one option. An extreme learning curve but very enjoyable when you actually manage to beat it.
On the other hand you can also go with steady progression which always shows you 'you got further then before!' while maintaining a long road ahead.

This on the other hand shows where the detriments of GGG's design-philosophy are, RNG-based situations. If a player feels like he's 'lost control' of the situation not by their own mistakes or to showcase a new mechanic or situation by itself... then it's only frustrating.
This describes the situation about one-shots and RNG-based progression very well. While measures have been taken to alleviate those they shouldn't ever be RNG in the first place, a surefire way to progress guaranteed has to be in place, the only limitation being personal skill or a clear-cut amount of repetition of a specific content.

Also any sort of 'main progression' needs to be coherent from start to end. This was showcased even back in the day with... once again Super Mario. Upon proceeding through the levels you reached the underwater-stages, the mechanic for movement was vastly different compared to the other parts of the game. While very enjoyable as a side-area or a stage you're forced to partake in to use a shortcut... as the main progression-line it was a disaster.
The same exists in PoE as well, in the form of lab. This is a HC-mechanic inside SC, locking major progression behind otherwise not seen mechanics (traps) and a 'single chance' area which is fairly sizable.

The main reason why PoE is so successful is on one hand the new content through leagues which allows for another type of gameplay, as well as simple compulsive behavior. The second is especially obvious with the gampling-like crafting-system... which inherently is a very enjoyable thing obviously as any reward based on chance offers an adrenaline-spike. The downside is it'll only hold people for 'so long' without reinforcing it through other aspects, namely balancing and mechanically challenging content. Both of which we are missing very much by now.

Everything beyond the 'basics of basics' though for their respective areas is personal choice, HOW stuff is implemented is of no matter as long as the core is solid, right now GGG struggles to keep a solid core though, it's growing rotten ever so slowly.

"

Khalixxa wrote:

There are different types of "hard". The types offered by hardcore and solo-self-found don't appeal to everyone.

Exactly, hence why we need more mechanically intriguing content which is highly rewarding but only able to be done by having good controls of your character. For this we need to have a base-level of balance though, hence characters and mobs need to be adjusted accordingly, it shouldn't allow to be trivialized after all.

I feel the game is dictated by theory-crafters and then on top of that, dictated by hoarders and players with a penchant for making money off of youtube.

That's what's going wrong here; or right for GGG- depending on the point of view.

This is all still relevant.

"

Pikathlhu wrote:

This is all still relevant.

its all relevant in its own way i agree with OP

"

Pikathlhu wrote:

This is all still relevant.

This thread looked so familiar. AND IT IS!
It's the one from January. I watched the video then and again now. Yes it's as relevant as ever!

"

kompaniet wrote:

"

Pikathlhu wrote:

This is all still relevant.

This thread looked so familiar. AND IT IS!
It's the one from January. I watched the video then and again now. Yes it's as relevant as ever!

relevance is a relative term, i agree