Diablo 4 announces that there will be a campaign skip ... its time for POE to do the same

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

For the mechanics of leveling, GGG could have endless Delve, or modified Heist, or literally offer some sort of "maps" at level 1. Sure they would have to figure out campaign specific rewards, but they have the tech to do this already with the endless versions I discussed.

See that's what I mean. The campaign is not fit for repetition like the Atlas.

With alternative modes there would not be skip button, but you'd feel like skipping it, perhaps. What would be better is to spruce it up and allow many more choices. Have atlas passives affect the areas, have mods, have your own route through areas of your choice (integrating campaign in atlas).

D4 is still being made, they're not stuck with existing legacy or anything. They should take all the ARPG lessons learned from their earlier releases and all others out there, and make a campaign that is fun and fit for repetition.

People hated endless delve league. The current campaign is much more interesting than an endless delve "skip-campaign" mechanic.

The game will also receive a new campaign which will be much better than the current one. Why in gods sake you want to play some shitty endless delve mechanic as replacement?

But that is not the crux of the matter, people just want their lvl 80-90-100 char ready to go. Because why stop at campaign, why not demand a level 100, fully decked out, ready to defeat aspirational uber-bosses.

People in general are just lazy and to camouflage their laziness they demand "qol".


EDIT:

What about all the leveling uniques?

What about Hardcore or Ruthless?

What about the fact that in every classical rpg, you start from level 1 and build your character along the way?


If you cant stomach the meat of the game (campaign), play something else.

This game started as a hardcore rpg, but is turning into a power fantasy simulator.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

NO ONE REASONABLE IS SUGGESTING AN AUTOMATIC CHARACTER BOOST TO 70

I clearly misinterpreted the sentence "Why is forcing the players to complete the campaign every season a net positive anyway? Just make it optional" without a mention of an alternative. Anyhow, then we agree perfectly, so no reason to debate it any further.

"

And lastly, I won't even get into the low tier bait of asking "why people are still here", or "why don't I just leave" You are better than that...at least I thought so. Don't make this personal, people like what they like, and there is nothing wrong with wanting a game to evolve. It's not like GGG must cater to what I'm saying, it's literally just opinion.

Seriously, this wasn't bait, nor was it personal, really. But to me, you seem to really lash out at any corner of the game. Sure, you're here because you want the game to evolve, but what parts of the game do you actually like? What is it about PoE that makes you think it can evolve, or redeem itself, if you'd like? Is there anything in the game that GGG should hold on to?
[/quote]

"

Phrazz wrote:

What is it about PoE that makes you think it can evolve, or redeem itself, if you'd like? Is there anything in the game that GGG should hold on to?

It's not redeeming per se, it's a function of GGG evolving as the player and game does. I think flexibility and adaption is key. And to be fair they have done that to varying degrees. It's just not even remotely enough for how they are marketing. If they had remained a niche game, and not tried to appeal to a different larger segment of player, then no, they wouldn't have to change anything. By doing this however, and not addressing how different players would receive the game experience they have created this friction that exists. It's a self-inflicted wound suffered because they want more money.

That said, some things that GGG should hold on to?

1. Their monetization and anti-p2w stance. I think that is a fundamental part of the game and how players feel about it. I mean some things turn me off, like the mystery boxes, and how anti-player the stash tab design is, but that is far more preferable to a full p2w situation.

2. I think they should also keep the flexibility and complexity of builds. How gear & the passive tree work together with notables, jewels, clusters, and so on. I believe there is definitely room to provide players more information and tools, so the reliance on 3rd party applications is reduced, but overall the depth of PoE is a differentiator and selling point.

3. I think they should keep the build diversity, even amongst the different classes. I do think there is room for specialization, as I think a total lack of identity is counterintuitive in the arpg space, so I'm glad they are adding more than a dozen ascendancy options with PoE2 (although I'm quite dubious on the balance here as they can't get the existing ones quite right)

4. I think they should keep the economy functioning on a currency system like how it is. Perhaps an expanded currency selection with Lani or a new vendor, to at least provide a floor / ceiling for prices in the market, and not require people to trade for common items. I understand that GGG is never going to introduce an AH, so this seems like a good compromise.

5. I think they should keep the mapping system, and further enhance the atlas passive tree, which I have said is one of the best things they have implemented in many years. The player advocacy this provides, with map favorites, focusing on mechanics you like, control of how you play the endgame, all are outstanding. (this is why I think there should be alternatives to how players get there, it really is the best part of the game)

That's just to name a few. Sure I'm hard on GGG at times, mostly because I think they have the talent to do so much better. They, and especially CW, can be supremely stubborn at times, to the benefit of no one. We saw this a number of times, especially the last 18 months, starting with Expedition. They often don't appear to understand their own player base, seem caught off-guard with obvious issues in many leagues, have communicated poorly on changes (nerfs), and are constantly sending mixed messages on the vision for the game (Ruthless).

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

It's not redeeming per se, it's a function of GGG evolving as the player and game does. I think flexibility and adaption is key. And to be fair they have done that to varying degrees. It's just not even remotely enough for how they are marketing. If they had remained a niche game, and not tried to appeal to a different larger segment of player, then no, they wouldn't have to change anything. By doing this however, and not addressing how different players would receive the game experience they have created this friction that exists. It's a self-inflicted wound suffered because they want more money.

I like your post very much, but I have some issues with the paragraph I quoted.

Who are these player they are marketing towards? In what forums are they marketing? And what kind of marketing are we talking about here? I must admit, I rarely see PoE marketing these days, that aren't aimed towards existing players. Anyhow, I don't really go around looking for PoE advertisement, so that's probably on me.

That said, I firmly believe that there's TONS of fun to be had in PoE for all kinds of players. Could GGG improve the new/casual player experience? Of course they could. And I do think we'll see more in-game systems in PoE 2 tailored to help those players. They have to, because there will probably be an influx of new players.

But this advertisement critique? Seems a little bit as a strawman to me. All games want to grow - and reach as many players as they can within their visions for the game. Just because they want to make a complex, hardcore game at its core, doesn't really mean that casual players can't find some fun here? It doesn't really mean they should stop advertising?

I feel like I'm misunderstanding yet again, if so; I'm sorry.

"

Exhumer1 wrote:

It's a novel idea, on paper. Diablo IV is a more casual-oriented game where QoL features such as campaign skip and an auction house are accepted as the “norm.”

when people like this guy act like doing the Campaign makes the game hardcore.

"bro while you just threw grass seed down and left it, i watched my grass seed day and night and talked to it until it grew! you're just a casual!"

"

Reinhart wrote:

People hated endless delve league. The current campaign is much more interesting than an endless delve "skip-campaign" mechanic.

The game will also receive a new campaign which will be much better than the current one. Why in gods sake you want to play some shitty endless delve mechanic as replacement?

well then here is a thought i know its hard for the "POE fanboy elites" to come up with solutions but

but no one is saying you CAN'T keep doing the campaign, no one is saying that the campaign should be removed. I just want OPTIONS, why is this so hard to comprehend.

diablo 3 you still have the option to play through the campaign, that option never goes away.

as for ruthless ... different rule set
ladders - simple characters eligible need to complete the campaign (and most reasonable people here said that they would be fine if the first character of a new season went through the campaign so that takes care of the ladder characters)

delve would be a nice option as it provides quite a good amount of exp even in early level. It just feels quite wasted in the current state cause you still have to do all the acts and skill points quests

Imagine poe actually getting good things and not a narrow vision of what a director thinks it's hard and exciting.

"

edriel86 wrote:

P.S. On a related note while I dislike doing the campaign I HATE doing the labyrinth. That thing should be completely an optional feature and the ascendancies should be associated with other mechanics.

I am absolutely with you on this one. ;)
Since the introduction of the lab, I have to force myself to do it each and every league.
If I wanted to play a jump and run / platformer... I#d be playing Super Mario, not PoE ^^