Developer Q&A - Part I
|
Time for some good ol bedtime reading and story tellin .....
|
|
|
Trade still fked, nice
|
|
|
gating recipes behind RNG is bullshit
|
|
|
Very good, very good!
Last edited by Z0MBIE2#1932 on Jul 10, 2019, 10:48:17 PM
|
|
" I guess this is their attempt at trying to talk about trade Basically saying - Stop asking us about trade I guess this means no improvements to the already POS api that updates so slow people in a dead league cant have items refresh correctly Trade is and always will be a joke in POE until they make some serious improvements " Thanks for confirming that its the dunces in the Q&A team making decisions for the entire community based on what they want instead of what the entire community wants Last edited by Bloomania#2606 on May 2, 2019, 8:50:42 PM
|
|
" In a MMORPG I played couple years ago, they had the same issue, I know this game was litterally different than PoE, but the idea is kind of the same. You had some skill lvl for crafting (like master crafting recipes unlocked or not) When they realised that people were scamming others, they implemented an invite to craft, on the person who had the crafting skill lvl to de the crafting he would see the items added in a trade-like window, and could ask for a payment in another tab of "payment". So the ingredients of the person buying the service were never handled by the trader, and the craft could happen. and the crafter could decline if the person buying would'nt give what he was asking for. No scam either way. Ressources are taken from the buyer, processed by the crafter's bench and the result would output in the buyer's inventory. That's what I'm thinking everytime I let someone taking my items for a service or taking an item from them for a service. It's complex and stuff, but it's something |
|
|
NOTHING about the questions I asked about new player experience.. so far not looking good for new players as I kinda suspected.
VERY skeptical with the second part of this q&a the game is a crafting simulator rather than ARPG style. "Parade your victories, hide your defeats. Mortals are so insecure." "The strange voice showed Aul a future where his legacy was forgotten, where new cultures broke themselves upon Aul's ruined world." Take me back when poe was the actual focus. Last edited by Xystre#4581 on May 2, 2019, 8:50:24 PM
|
|
|
Loved the part where you threw Sony under the bus about cross play; good for you (shame on Sony!).
|
|
|
So... if you knew that Turmoil and Mayhem didn't allow for challenges to be carried over then why was Bex allowed to tease it in her announcement?
Did you really not see that that would cause problems when you then put on a tame rather boring and not worth starting over in Flashback race? Are you that unaware of your playerbase? You can release big Q&As and statements from Chris as much as you want but if you keep pushing out hype based on things you never intend to do then you are just doing the game and yourselves harm. |
|
" " Ok so here's the thing both of the answers are fine alone, and together they are total incompatible nonsense. If you think it's important for trading to be an awful experience that's fine, and if you think it's important for content to be trade it's fine. You cannot have both, it's insane. What these two statements together read is "If you want to play your favorite part of the game more, you need to play the part of the game that we made intentionally awful and miserable more." Tradeable content cannot be a solution to giving players choice when you intentional make trading bad. If you want to keep trading bad you have to make obtaining content without trading easier not harder. If you want to make trading awful that's fine, but then you have to treat it like it's an awful part of the game. Last edited by j33bus#3399 on May 2, 2019, 8:56:13 PM
|
|








































































































