Harvest had 50% more players at same point, Ritual had 90% more

So... aparently customer satisfaction is irrelevant? Because once a person spend money once, itll ever spend again? A people buy packs on the start of the league and for the remaining 3 months GGG gets zero income? A product that fails to impress dont have anything to worry about because as soon as you launch an update, everyone will forget the fresh fiasco and happily buy a pack at the start of the league anyway?

Basic economics is hard i suppose

"

feral_nature wrote:

ritual was the best league and kalandra is the worst, so its like comparing apples to oranges.

But harvest league mechanic was hated (garden), and it was still 50% higher.

"

TheFazzos wrote:

How is player retention meaningful at all? Leaguestart player number is the metric that counts and Kalandra is the fourth most successful league ever.

This statement is contrary to what Chris wilson said. It is the concurrent players after the spike that they are focused on. The spike is caused by the content being NEW and persists only for a short time.

Didn't GGG themselves said they don't care about retention as much because, I quote, "it is an vanity metric they don't need to rely on"? If it doesn't matter as much from a business perspective good for them, I guess. But from a players perspective? It absolutely does. Funnily enough after retention went down more and more they introduced the third tier of supporter packs.

"

TheFazzos wrote:

How is player retention meaningful at all? Leaguestart player number is the metric that counts and Kalandra is the fourth most successful league ever.

So silly. The ONLY metric that means anything is $$$ made each league.

"

trixxar wrote:

Ill avoid the term white knighting because it oversimplifies, and just use "Pro-GGG".

Pro-GGG crowd: We have to nerf harvest because it makes people quit earlier, and retention is important.

/proves this is not only false, but backward.

Pro-GGG crowd: Retention never mattered anyway, who cares!

I recall when Harvest was a league that GGG warned the playerbase that Harvest was an experiment which, if it even made it into the base game, would be nerfed. But people haven't stopped bawling about that nerf (and those subsequent to Harvest going core) ever since. =9[.]9=

"

trixxar wrote:

"

feral_nature wrote:

ritual was the best league and kalandra is the worst, so its like comparing apples to oranges.

But harvest league mechanic was hated (garden), and it was still 50% higher.

id rather have garden than lake - so far ive got 3 reflection.

atleast with harvest i know i can craft something goddamn useful and lake is whatever... yes you can find some nice rings and amulet from all the random drops that are useful for doryani build(or mby omni) and thats it. if i got 3 reflections halfway through league, then its impossible to gamble craft anything. guess it can be done if youre super rich, but i sold my reflections because it seems pointless.

what was the problem if every second lake gave reflection? atleast i will not be forced for seventh league in a row to pick strong league starter then farm some bosses, sell stuff and sell some more stuff until you can buy hh and farm those juicy deli orb maps. and now its even worst with those loot goblins...

if lake was decent you would still make money without juicing, exploding stuff. chris says he wants to slow down the game(we probably have a different definition for that), but there is no slow and rewarding league mechanics and then he introduce the loot goblin which is only beneficial for groups or someone pushing hard to get hh and quant/rarity gear.

in ritual i could take it slow and still farm some nice crafts that i sold and buy a hh. it was mainly for fun - didnt even do that nemesis3 farm at the time. couldnt care less if other people are making ten mirrors or more, as long as game is fun for a regular joe like me - its fine. but game is not fine atm.

"

trixxar wrote:

"

feral_nature wrote:

ritual was the best league and kalandra is the worst, so its like comparing apples to oranges.

But harvest league mechanic was hated (garden), and it was still 50% higher.

Because it was so god-awfully powerful that's why.
I hated the Garden too but damn we could make some OP shit.

"

Raycheetah wrote:

I recall when Harvest was a league that GGG warned the playerbase that Harvest was an experiment which, if it even made it into the base game, would be nerfed. But people haven't stopped bawling about that nerf (and those subsequent to Harvest going core) ever since. =9[.]9=

Remember Chris even said it in an interview: "Harvest is so strong, it might even break the game" (paraphrasing here). Oh boy was he right, just not in the way he thought.

Personally, I still think Harvest is a band aid, highlighting the game's issues rather than solving them in a good way. I don't think deterministic crafting belongs in this genre. I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I can live with that. I'll rather see them fixing the game's progression issues through drops.

My opinion has nothing to do with longevity or retention. I want to acquire small upgrades WAY more often than we currently do, rather than working on ONE item I will keep for weeks. I think that is a better direction. Drops beyond 'crafting bases' should matter; Harvest removes every bit of that idea.

But I know I'm an old, grumpy snowflake, and that the game will never move in that direction.

"

Phrazz wrote:

"

Raycheetah wrote:

I recall when Harvest was a league that GGG warned the playerbase that Harvest was an experiment which, if it even made it into the base game, would be nerfed. But people haven't stopped bawling about that nerf (and those subsequent to Harvest going core) ever since. =9[.]9=

Remember Chris even said it in an interview: "Harvest is so strong, it might even break the game" (paraphrasing here). Oh boy was he right, just not in the way he thought.

Personally, I still think Harvest is a band aid, highlighting the game's issues rather than solving them in a good way. I don't think deterministic crafting belongs in this genre. I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I can live with that. I'll rather see them fixing the game's progression issues through drops.

My opinion has nothing to do with longevity or retention. I want to acquire small upgrades WAY more often than we currently do, rather than working on ONE item I will keep for weeks. I think that is a better direction. Drops beyond 'crafting bases' should matter; Harvest removes every bit of that idea.

But I know I'm an old, grumpy snowflake, and that the game will never move in that direction.

I find hard to picture that ideal scenario tbh...

Because its not like the game have any algorithym to keep track of your progress and hand upgrades at set intervals like games with linear progression. Diablo-esque games dont have a set line of progression and most of the progression is at the mercy of pure luck, so spikes and periods of no rewards are inevitable

The drop of great stuff may be terrible, but i would say its because we are used to a very twisted view of what is "good", like... any weapon that dont have something on the level of triple T2-1 extra damage prefixes with at least a pair of useful suffixes is vendor trash. The way the game currently pushes players to top content makes the pool of stuff that can be considered good very small, so i think there might simply not be a way to create a "decent" drop rate that dont involve going D3 route where you basicaly complete a build in an afternoon and for the rest of the season you are just increasing numbers

Making new sets of affixes just pushes the problem further foward rather than solving it, before anyone suggests that btw...