GGG do not give in to the crying masses

"

_Seze_ wrote:

All this game needs are mobs that instantly rush and oneshot anything with ranged attack. Let's restore the balance >:]

Turbo rhoas? Turbo Vaal?

Most the casuals are playing ranged builds (mostly bow), hences why no real fixes have been made yet towards them. Funny how one jumps from mainstream game to another and than to a side game like this you can see the casuals path they take Let's use WoW, LoL and this (fill in any trendy thing accordingly like with D3, since I refused to touch it for it's condensed stat padding and skill allocations). WoW (anything in the game but mostly ranged) > LoL (Mostly adcs good portion of them are mid which is borderline the same thing), and now here with bow builds... seriously anything that doesn't take a good thought process is what they're playing and quite frankly like how they didn't nerf anything ranged in WoW that was worth a damn ever, takes forever to nerf any "curvaceous" women or anybody who isn't ranged (their are very few melee examples that people will debate on), and now here with bow builds.... All you got to do is find the easiest thing to do in the game, then you know where most the casuals go to. If you want see GGG take a step in the right direction, let's see them nerf LA... they nerf LA which their are threads with plenty, I mean plenty of hard numbers why it should be, then we know where their direction is at.

Oh the irony of this post.

You're telling GGG to follow their vision and do what they want, by telling them what to do? Absolutely pathetic elitism. We give feedback, and it's up to GGG to decide what they want to implement. You simply represent the other side of the arguments, and are no different than any of the "casuals".

Here's the funny thing: two sides that almost never agree (those who want change vs those who don't -- wow, like this is anything new) are agreeing -- it's ultimately up to GGG to sift through the feedback from all perspectives.

Can we leave it at that? Because I honestly don't see this going anywhere beyond accusations of people being either 'casual' or 'elitist'.

The majority of people here claiming that the game shouldn't be nerfed for casuals are casuals themselves

Which is the ironic thing

"

deteego wrote:

The majority of people here claiming that the game shouldn't be nerfed for casuals are casuals themselves

Which is the ironic thing

QED.

"

Udja wrote:

"

@iCrackmonster wrote:

Stryker bro, what are you so mad about?

Maybe he belongs to the proletariat?? I'd be angry too lmao!!

Flamebate trolling post eh? Fooled me and many others by the look of the page count...

Isn't there a unmoderated anything goes garbage forum this post can be moved to? If not there should be, if so, this turd is past due for a flush....

"

Charan wrote:

"

deteego wrote:

The majority of people here claiming that the game shouldn't be nerfed for casuals are casuals themselves

Which is the ironic thing

QED.

I guess that depends on what you define as hardcore and what you don't

For one thing, the game typically being compared to PoE (D3) in regards to hardcore/casual, was both much harder than PoE (in terms of difficulty). Yes in D3 there were certain builds/classes that worked in inferno, but everything else was just terrible in Inferno without ridiculous gear (i.e. same scenario with D3). And although that difficulty was removed in subsequent patches, the same thing happened with PoE (cast time on mobs with cold snap and flicker strike, Piety had her lightning ball damage greatly nerfed, etc etc etc).

Both games have received as much "nerfs" as the other whenever a massive brick wall happens, and both games have a long way to go (in regards to removing brick walls while still maintaining decent difficulty). Both games also have the problem where certain classes/builds completely dominate others in regards to effectiveness

The only real things that PoE has over D3
1. Not a screwed up economy (due to how the currency is designed and no AH/RMAH)
2. The potential to have a lot more depth due to gems,maps and the passive tree

Note that #2 is just that, potential. PoE has a massive way to go before the gem system and tree is fully realized. A lot of people claim the build diversity actually went backwards massively from CB to OB, and they are right

"

Azdrubel wrote:

"

Crackmonster wrote:

The masses want it easier eternally, and do not look back, ever.

The masses will bring the game to the point where the few with leave because they cannot distinguish themselves by their skill and knowledge, and then the masses will leave because they follow and secretly wants to be like the few.

Some serious elitism right there.

But... you are still right.

pretty hard for OP to be elite when he/she can't even formulate a complete sentence.

i've thought about this subject overall -- amidst the apparent mass exodus of players since OB opened -- and it occurs to me that no matter how "elite" GGG wants to portray/position their game as, it is, at the core, a business endeavour, and I'm not sure driving away so many median (and median-ish) players is compatible with that, profitability-wise.

to put it another way: driving casuals away from this game, by keeping it so "elite"* might actually do more harm than good as far as POE being viable, financially, and thus, y'know, existing at all.

(*for the sake of argument, let's assume for the moment that GGG's approach to design and implementation actually is elite. personally i think that matter is actually up for debate, but that's a whole 'nother {sic} thread.)

"

xSTGx wrote:

(*for the sake of argument, let's assume for the moment that GGG's approach to design and implementation actually is elite. personally i think that matter is actually up for debate, but that's a whole 'nother {sic} thread.)

You've misused 'sic' here, and I'm only pointing it out because you jumped on the OP's grammar.

___

I think GGG's approach is entirely elite.

Elitist? Not so much.