Please do not tie aspirational content to player progression

From my understanding, aspirational content should be content that players are NOT EXPECTED to be able to clear.

you would need to be using a very optimized build with good gear and an understanding of how to deal with the content.

most players should NOT be able to clear aspirational content.

i believe that should be a good definition of "Aspirational" content.

seeing that aspirational content is made in a way that most players are not even expected to clear them, i would argue that player progression should NOT be gated behind aspirational content.

the point of argument would then be "what is player progression"?

there are many forms of progression such as

Story Progression
Character Progression
Gear Progression

what i consider mainly as "player progression" are permanent bonuses. lets have a run down on what permanent bonuses we can get in POE:

Passive Points
- Gained via leveling up/doing quests
- Aspirational? Nope. Getting to level 100 is a bitch but technically most players CAN get it thru sheer determination and by using time.

Ascendancy + Ascendancy Points
- Gained by unlocking trials and running lord's labyrinth with increasing difficulty
- Aspirational? Nope. The toughest trial is a level 75 zone. Players are expected to be able to clear all the trials/labs.

I would add, the lab has an aspirational aspect where they can run harder versions of the lab. they reward more loot/enchants, you dont "permanently unlock" something by doing the aspirational versions.

Crafting bench options
- Gained by running maps and perhaps some delving/story progression
- Aspirational? Nope. I would say it's reasonably easy to get. The syndicate crafting options are a bitch to unlock but any player can unlock all of them with more effort.

Map device slots
- Gained by running legion content.
- Aspirational? Nope. You just need to complete ONE run successfully within a generous time frame. Most players should be able to complete it but it can be difficult for less optimized builds.

Atlas passives
- Gained by clearing maps and maven invites
- Aspirational? PARTIAL.

Uh oh.

I would argue that maven invites are plainly aspirational. not every build can clear em. it's a huge dps check.

Voidstones
- Gained by killing pinnacle bosses
- Aspirational? PARTIAL.

the last 2 stones are gated behind 2 of the most difficult content in game.

It doesnt matter that atlas passives gained from invites only contribute maybe 6-10 points out of 130. you can argue that it's a small fraction. i would argue it still is player progression.

the voidstones is even worse. its 50% power loss for not having access to the final 2 stones.

Players lose out ability to gain t16 maps, have to run the same maps over and over again till the end of time (mine was volcano+dune).

Players lose out ability to use 4 sextants (only can use 2).

Players also lose out on the mapping bonus granted by the 2 voidstones (25% chance a map drops 1 tier higher each IIRC)

Counter arguments:

You don't need x/y/its a small fraction etc
- it's still player progression

So you want a free mageblood?
- No one is asking for a free handout. gear progression is something that players can work towards. gear is something interchangeable. you can replace your gear but if you're missing a few permanent bonuses, those bonuses cant be replaced.

You dont deserve the bonus if you dont cant clear the boss
- If you're talking about gear progression and anything NOT related to player progression via permanent unlocks, yeah i agree with you. but i am specifically mentioning permanent unlocks. we can simply disagree on that all day and not budge.

But if you really want it so bad you can get a carry
- i find it VERY ironic, that in many cases, many people who argue that if you cant clear aspirational content, you dont deserve the reward are the same people who would then go to this point.

I would not ask the player. I would ask GGG. What is the purpose of aspirational content if the BEST solution for the average player is to get someone to carry them and pay a fee?

GGG intentionally made trading hard, one of the reasons was so players "spent more time playing than trading". (i m aware there are other reasons such as keeping economy healthy)

But what does gating player progression behind aspirational content do? for an AVERAGE player to GIT GUD, they need to invest in improving their build. In order to learn how to GIT GUD, they may need to have several attempts to learn the content mechanics. gaining access to aspirational content ONCE may take 100 maps (assuming maven via 10 bosses invites x 10). to gain access to uber elder+shaper requires MINIMUM 16 shaper/elder maps which have what? 1% chance to drop from t14 bosses?

The best way for an average player to unlock the bonuses is NOT PLAY the game. instead it's to use a carry.

Don't get me wrong, I feel aspirational content MUST exist. It still is a badge of honour. I will never want to take that away from anyone, however I would say aspirational content should NEVER gate player progression.

Aspirational content can still be extremely rewarding by having better loot.

The lord's labyrinth and the improved offerings are a perfect example of aspirational content. If you can run them, you'll be rewarded greatly. If you can't, you dont lose anything.

Stronglly disagree. Keeping interest on PRO content was actully original PoE vision and we need spirational prizes to keep the interest. Making more prestige levl itemization will keep casuals in, because if you can trade mailstones and such you could earn ez 2-3 exalt. This will keep supply-demand so that casuals can buy these items.

I'd argue by default we need more balanced prizes for trade, so pro playrs can also sell it and thus make it available marketwise. High end prestige xp should be tied to tradable mailstones.

Also, buff labyrint traps and Izuro. Making them exiting should be prio. I like the idea of putting progress tied to aspiratonary non-casual content.

I'm fairly certain the campaign is considered the "main game" and the post game in its entirety is a bonus that's not expected to be cleared by everyone. Whether you agree with that or not, that seems to be how GGG views it.

Way too long not gonna read.

Git gud
Git carry
Or git deal with it

Maven in particular, think I saw that somewhere in all that blabber.

Git concise skill gem while you’re at it.

"

vmt80 wrote:

Stronglly disagree. Keeping interest on PRO content was actully original PoE vision and we need spirational prizes to keep the interest. Making more prestige levl itemization will keep casuals in, because if you can trade mailstones and such you could earn ez 2-3 exalt. This will keep supply-demand so that casuals can buy these items.

I'd argue by default we need more balanced prizes for trade, so pro playrs can also sell it and thus make it available marketwise. High end prestige xp should be tied to tradable mailstones.

Also, buff labyrint traps and Izuro. Making them exiting should be prio. I like the idea of putting progress tied to aspiratonary non-casual content.

in regards to items, to clarify, i m ok with items being tied to aspirational content. items are interchangeable. you dont "lose" anything for not having an item.

PROS will always find ways to earn exalts. triple watchers eye can be worth mirrors if rolled correctly. casuals arent expected to get that and thats fine.

what i am against is any permanent gains such as passive points/unlocks.

to state again, i support aspirational content for existing and for them to be rewarding but strongly disagree if the aspirational content is required for player progression / permanent unlock/buffs

"

Chickenwink wrote:

Way too long not gonna read.

Git gud
Git carry
Or git deal with it

Maven in particular, think I saw that somewhere in all that blabber.

Git concise skill gem while you’re at it.

i tried path of concise. it usually devolves into a discussion that ends up with me explaining everything over again. this is a forum, a place of discussion. i do admit i tend to make things quite lengthy. i will not compromise. if that makes people like you choose not to read it, so be it.

"

kaijyuu2 wrote:

I'm fairly certain the campaign is considered the "main game" and the post game in its entirety is a bonus that's not expected to be cleared by everyone. Whether you agree with that or not, that seems to be how GGG views it.

maybe you're right maybe you're not. we dont really know.

one thing i can say is that hogm used to be tied to player progression (permanent buff reward). i dont know if it was due to GGG listening to player feedback or not. but it was a win for me. it showed that GGG wanted to keep a divide between making aspirational content optional and not tying it to player progression.

i rejoiced.

then they introduced maven. :/

There was a longer forum thread I contributed to, I agree with the op's concern in general, if not supporting it for every unlock.

You don't need 12 favorite slots. Seriously, you don't. You can sustain T16 maps with much less, even a single T16 map with effort and less. You don't need 4 voidstones solo. That said, the jump from 2nd voidstone to 3rd is severe. My suggestion is keep 1&2, 3-4 elder-uber elder or equivalent. The 4th can still be tough, the 3rd should be more manageable. If you want to sustain a specific T1 map as T16, buck up and get a carry. Or yeah, git gud.

I like the new atlas unlocks far more than old, but a hard look at some of your concerns is warranted.

A more consistent rise in power for the third and fourth voidstones should be Elder or Shaper then Sirus. Going from quest bosses to Uber Elder and Maven is a huge leap forward in difficulty, especially when you look back at the bosses we used to fight in the previous atlas.

Ehh the problem is the two voidstones everyone is complaining about are aspirational too, you don't need them for anything and i'm surprised how fixated a few players are about how their experience is so gutted without them.

I played 90% of this league with 2, I didn't even think about them and I was ready for Maven/UE long before I actually got around to doing the fights. Obviously I only represent myself but I could easily see many players just not feeling put out by this, sextants aren't even common enough to sustain on 2 anymore so you'd be trading for that aspect anyway.

Basically what i'm saying is you moved some content out of being aspirational because you personally don't view it as aspirational content, the developer does though clearly or they wouldn't be where they are :p.

I would have liked a tiered system where each one drops off the rough content tiers, so you get 1 from guardians, 1 from searing/wobbly, 1 from shaper/elder/sirus and the last one from Maven, UE, Feared, Forgotten etc. This is splitting hairs though and isn't as sound lore wise.

I'll reiterate what I said before though in that GGG created most of this problem by making 2 voidstones essentially free, whereas the other 2 are challenging its not a good blend, would probably help if Maven/UE didn't take ages to farm the fragments for.

"

Draegnarrr wrote:

Ehh the problem is the two voidstones everyone is complaining about are aspirational too, you don't need them for anything and i'm surprised how fixated a few players are about how their experience is so gutted without them.

My concern is map variety and availability.

2 voidstones may give you more T16s than the previous maxed atlas did, but now you have a lot of maps that are lower than T14 which you will never run. Overall, that leaves you with very little map variety and that'll create burnout from running the same ones over and over again.

This would be a completely different subject if 2 voidstones made all maps T14 and slotting additional ones increased how many of them become T15 and T16, but that's not the case.

"

Draegnarrr wrote:

Ehh the problem is the two voidstones everyone is complaining about are aspirational too, you don't need them for anything and i'm surprised how fixated a few players are about how their experience is so gutted without them.

as mentioned. it's simply player progression. no one needs to be level 100 but knowing we can get to 100 and get the passive points is something that can reasonably be achieved through sheer effort.

no one need 4 voidstones but having them is good and help map sustain MORE. sure you dont need the extra 2 but they do help.

we dont need 15 fav map slots but they help.

we dont need 10 extra atlas passives, but if you do get 10 extra atlas passives, you will get HUGE benefits.

also theres a "completionist" angle where players want to unlock them because it gives benefits. simple as that.

just because you're OK with it means everyone else should be ok with it

"

Draegnarrr wrote:

Basically what i'm saying is you moved some content out of being aspirational because you personally don't view it as aspirational content, the developer does though clearly or they wouldn't be where they are :p.

well, aspirational content is content that most players cant clear. when i killed maven, the steam achievement showed me that only 0.9% steam players has achieved this. so yeah if thats not aspirational then i really dont know what aspirational is.

"

Draegnarrr wrote:

I'll reiterate what I said before though in that GGG created most of this problem by making 2 voidstones essentially free, whereas the other 2 are challenging its not a good blend, would probably help if Maven/UE didn't take ages to farm the fragments for.

on the flipside, i would say that the first 2 voidstones are a vast improvement to their gating philosophy.

in order to unlock them, you didnt need to run 24 influenced maps. you needed a smaller number. UNTIL you defeated the pinnacle boss, you could actually LEARN how to fight the boss as the barrier of entry was set lower.

this is how organic difficulty should be. start off easy then progress to hard. once you've managed to kill the pinnacle bosses, the games like OK enough hand holding. for the next kills you gotta farm the invites the LONG way.

that said, the barrier for entry to attempt the last 2 voidstones are ridiculously high. just as you mentioned.

i would also add, the last 2 are not only challenging. the mechanical difficulty is significantly much higher.