D4 no gud, send me poe2 thx

"

Reinhart wrote:

"

Destructodave wrote:

But until PoE2 will probably always have ties to PoE 1 for these reasons. Too many MTX, too much invested value, and they are afraid they will run off their playerbase if they invalidate all of it. So we are always going to be stuck with these fake "2" sequels that arent sequels at all.

There will be new gameplay features and a new campaign. That is more changes than Resident Evil 7, 8 and 9 so to speak.

And some are dead set to only call it a new game if it has a new engine, but that is not the definition of a sequel.

A sequel is a work of literature, film, theatre, television, music or video game that continues the story of, or expands upon, some earlier work. In the common context of a narrative work of fiction, a sequel portrays events set in the same fictional universe as an earlier work, usually chronologically following the events of that work.

So POE 2 is a sequel.

In the end it doesn't matter what GGG calls it. PoE2, PoE 4.0, PoE: Remastered, PoE: The Last Exile.

The thing that matters is what the players garner from it, and if it matches their expectations. As some others have mentioned, if the PoE 4.0 expansion is more campaign and story driven, and less around endgame, mechanics, loot, gear progression, and how the game feels in general as you play, many will be very disappointed.

Again, as I have said before, for what we know, I think that there will be many returning folks that will for one be confused that PoE2 isnt actually a "new game", and two, shocked that it took this long (likely over 5 years), to get essentially what amounts to a big expansion to PoE1, after all this anticipation.

So yeah if GGG was hoping D4 was going to flop or be a disaster, it's already clear that's not happening. At worst it appears D4 will be a good game, and at best with some work, historically great. And PoE2 isn't close to ready either. At best we might see a public beta in 2023 for PoE2, and a 2024 1st quarter launch of 4.0; that's such a long time, and competitive gap (if they are actually even competitors at this point)

That gives D4 like 9 months to tweak, roll out their first season(s), add content, fix glaring issues, establish a playerbase, and more. It's not like we are talking about the death of PoE here, there is a decent percentage of folks that are invested in the game and won't be "leaving" it. But damn, the large segment of crossover, or non-PoE purists, that will be enjoying D4, they might never return if there is no reason to do so, or at least not until PoE2 comes out. Even then if it isnt' what people expect, they will go back to D4.

I'm sure it's development Hell over at GGG (and probably has been for a number of months), filled with anxiety about what they are going to say and present at Exilecon. Maybe they will knock it out of park. But then again maybe not...

Playerbase size is not a good metric for what constitutes a quality game, neither as the amount of articles published gives a good idea of a great scientist.

"

Destructodave wrote:

Its funny people bash D4 for MMO-qualities, when PoE flirted with them(and used some) way before D3-D4 ever did, with shared towns, player housing(hideouts), letting people into your instances(various events early on).

That's more of a remnant from D2. You could see other players in town in public instances. They extended that with limitations to hideouts, which probably came to be because enough people bitched about being in town with a bunch of other players and poor load times.

"

Reinhart wrote:

Playerbase size is not a good metric for what constitutes a quality game, neither as the amount of articles published gives a good idea of a great scientist.

Says who? You? You and a friend? You and a group of your friends?

Im sure you can see the problem inherent with this logic.

I'd agree somewhat, but only as far as saying playerbase isn't the only metric. "Quality" itself which is often subjective, typically does have some objective measurement as well depending on the topic or item being discussed.

If a million scientists agree the Earth is round, and a dozen say it's flat, I think the size of the sampling matters in that context to establish credibility or quality of opinion. No?

"

Nubatron wrote:

"

Destructodave wrote:

Its funny people bash D4 for MMO-qualities, when PoE flirted with them(and used some) way before D3-D4 ever did, with shared towns, player housing(hideouts), letting people into your instances(various events early on).

That's more of a remnant from D2. You could see other players in town in public instances. They extended that with limitations to hideouts, which probably came to be because enough people bitched about being in town with a bunch of other players and poor load times.

I think the point was PoE does in fact have some MMO elements, as it helps with their monetization & general game health. CW has even spoken how shared hubs also make the game "feel" full, even if it really isn't. Which I guess is important to the psyche of players in games.

Now whether your immersion is broken when some guy wearing a demigod and circus clown mtx is running a circle around you in a dilapidated act1 hub, that remains to be seen lol. I'd argue its detrimental at times for sure.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"

Nubatron wrote:

"

Destructodave wrote:

Its funny people bash D4 for MMO-qualities, when PoE flirted with them(and used some) way before D3-D4 ever did, with shared towns, player housing(hideouts), letting people into your instances(various events early on).

That's more of a remnant from D2. You could see other players in town in public instances. They extended that with limitations to hideouts, which probably came to be because enough people bitched about being in town with a bunch of other players and poor load times.

I think the point was PoE does in fact have some MMO elements, as it helps with their monetization & general game health. CW has even spoken how shared hubs also make the game "feel" full, even if it really isn't. Which I guess is important to the psyche of players in games.

Now whether your immersion is broken when some guy wearing a demigod and circus clown mtx is running a circle around you in a dilapidated act1 hub, that remains to be seen lol. I'd argue its detrimental at times for sure.

Spoiler

and yeah we really have jumped the shark on mtx and general PoE atmosphere.

The first M in MMO is important. ARPGs can be multiplayer. When the numbers grow beyond a small number, it enters massive territory of an MMO. Seeing other players in a public instance isn't new to ARPGs as I said about D2, which I view as the true cornerstone of ARPGs.

Shared instances doesn't make something an MMO. It just makes it multiplayer (the 2nd M). The existence of an instance rather than an open world without instances is very much an MMO thing. The number of players in that instance is important, and events that require a lot of players is an MMO thing. MMOs force interactions with others to perform events rather than solo such as a raid, world boss, group quest, etc. You also have the choice to do things solo and not share an instance in an ARPG; an option not available in MMOs. An ARPG in my eyes enables small multiplayer grouping but does not require it to do quests and kill things. It's one of the reasons I hate the current events. They force you to play with someone else. Nope.

Seeing 5-10 people in town certainly is not an MMO unique feature, unless we're ready to call D2 an MMO (purely rhetorical).

"

Nubatron wrote:

Seeing 5-10 people in town certainly is not an MMO unique feature, unless we're ready to call D2 an MMO (purely rhetorical).

D4 instances (or shards), max out at 12 people. It's not like there are hundreds in the towns.

Idk know if you knew that, does that change your opinion on D4 if 12 is the max?

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"

Nubatron wrote:

Seeing 5-10 people in town certainly is not an MMO unique feature, unless we're ready to call D2 an MMO (purely rhetorical).

D4 instances (or shards), max out at 12 people. It's not like there are hundreds in the towns.

Idk know if you knew that, does that change your opinion on D4 if 12 is the max?

I seem to remember something about 25 people in instances for world bosses. Is that not accurate?

The number of people in town means little to me since I can just view them as more active NPCs bringing the town to life. Seeing them in the actual gameplay is different though because they can interact with my kills.

"

Nubatron wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"

Nubatron wrote:

Seeing 5-10 people in town certainly is not an MMO unique feature, unless we're ready to call D2 an MMO (purely rhetorical).

D4 instances (or shards), max out at 12 people. It's not like there are hundreds in the towns.

Idk know if you knew that, does that change your opinion on D4 if 12 is the max?

I seem to remember something about 25 people in instances for world bosses. Is that not accurate?

It's 12 max for all situations

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

It's 12 max for all situations

That's certainly on the lower end for an MMO, but the lack of an option to do the instance alone still makes it feel like an MMO. 12 is a lot more than what I would categorize as an ARPG as well.