|
I totally brigade through content and have no illusion of ever hitting max level. (92 with 700 deaths atm and no intention of ever changing).
You have to look at this from the perspective of a normal player, so at what point do we have enough death penalties?
1 deaths XP loss in high level is hours upon hours of grinding or even days days for some people. We have plenty of video of cheesy 1 shot mechanics or after death effects with near 0 tells. On top of that if you're mapping end game, you lose the node, you lose the map, you lose the loot you left on the ground.
For a casual player (your main consumer), you're out of your mind if you think all that is even remotely acceptable.
Something has to change here.
|
Posted byTardbark#4137on Jan 6, 2025, 6:05:35 PM
|
Anyone that's ever tried it, realizes it's just a bad experience overall.
Might do it on a boss or two, maybe a few zones, but it gets old FAST. It eats up a significant amount of time.
And for me. Nope.
I just don't like the mechanic because it's a huge punishment, and dying doesn't need to be a huge kick to the nuts.
They do the exact same thing in WoW, where if you die you have to walk back to your body, but they stick the graveyard so far away it's like a 15-20 minute trek back. And all that happens is people get frustrated waiting around, and leave.
It's all just padded gametime for little to no benefit, and huge amounts of frustration for players.
I'd rather more skill based/challenging content exist and remove a system like this.
"
I totally brigade through content and have no illusion of ever hitting max level. (92 with 700 deaths atm and no intention of ever changing).
You have to look at this from the perspective of a normal player, so at what point do we have enough death penalties?
1 deaths XP loss in high level is hours upon hours of grinding or even days days for some people. We have plenty of video of cheesy 1 shot mechanics or after death effects with near 0 tells. On top of that if you're mapping end game, you lose the node, you lose the map, you lose the loot you left on the ground.
For a casual player (your main consumer), you're out of your mind if you think all that is even remotely acceptable.
Something has to change here.
This is the main issue. People not understanding that if you want a game to do well. You can't make it around 10% of players who have been no-lifing video games for decades.
The other 90% is what matters. And mechanics like XP loss on death are just a frustrating mechanic.
Last edited by Akedomo#3573 on Jan 6, 2025, 6:14:16 PM
|
Posted byAkedomo#3573on Jan 6, 2025, 6:09:01 PM
|
"
"
This has nothing to do with other games or people's opinions. Please stay focused on the two mechanics and their stated purpose/function.
On the contrary examples from shallower "dumbed down" games help starkly contrast the subject matter.
Maybe thats why you want to restrict them from the conversation? To be sure they pretty irrefutably contradict the idea that removing consequences is a good idea.
We have empirical proof of what happens to a game that panders to players who want consequences for bad play removed, in fact two very good ones within this genre alone and many others without.
"
And once again, as GGG stated, the purpose of XP penalty on death is to make death feel meaningful. The purpose of the omen is to mitigate the XP penalty on death almost completely. So, the omen's effect cancels the XP loss. It does not mitigate death itself.
And again, this is not about the way to play. Everyone plays the way he sees fit. This is about two game mechanics having exactly the opposite purpose thus contradicting themselves.
As I said before, either drop the omen or the XP loss on death. Having both of them at the same time does not make sense.
But your dichotomy is false. There's no inherent contradiction in providing multiple solutions to the same problem in any game. I was trying to be conversational and not get bogged down so I glossed over your assertion and provided examples that were meant to suggest to you that you might be wrong. Apparently you prefer to hand wave them and call them out of bounds.
So I guess its probably pointless to highlight that 75% mitigation of a consequence due to "gaming it out" (AKA smart gaming if you're prone to bad habits) isn't an absence of consequence: It's actually a reward for being less bad at the game and only serves to expand how much "gaming" can be done by your players.
1. I did not exclude anyone or bogged you down. I only stated that the fact of there being XP loss upon death for "educational" purposes and a way to nullify that exact purpose has nothing to do with other games or other players' opinion. These are two facts of POE. Stop putting words in my mouth and stay focused on the topic.
2. Your examples are all pointing in the same direction: Ignoring the fact that the stated purpose of the XP loss on death opposes the purpose of the said omen. It has thus nothing to do with "smart playing" or anything of the likes. It has nothing to do with gameplay.
3. Again, using the said omen does exactly the opposite of what you claim to be important - the consequence of death.
It is very important to distinguish between problems and consequences. Death is the problem posed by the game. We have a lot of tools in the game to solve that problem - which is great. XP loss is the consequence of dying with a very specific purpose. If you die - you lose XP. By using the said omen, you are NOT solving the problem of dying, you are mitigating the CONSEQUENCE of it. By mitigating the consequence of death you are nullifying the whole purpose of the consequence itself - which is to educate the player.
And once again, all I'm advocating for is for GGG to stay consistent in what they actually say and do. Either enforce XP loss without means of mitigation or drop it completely. XP loss is not the problem, death is. Let us solve that and not cheese around its consequence.
|
|
"
I only stated that the fact of there being XP loss upon death for "educational" purposes
What's not educational about 5%? Or 2%? What's not educational about losing the map node and loot? What makes 10% so special?
You can view XP loss as both good and bad thing. It's good because it makes the player concerned about dying but it's not the ONLY penalty for dying. At the same time, it's also bad because the 10% loss becomes a significantly disproportionate penalty for the time it takes to level 85+.
There needs to be a balance and right now, the penalty for dying is simply not balanced unless your intent is locking casual players out of the end game.
|
Posted byTardbark#4137on Jan 6, 2025, 9:03:22 PM
|
"
"
"
This has nothing to do with other games or people's opinions. Please stay focused on the two mechanics and their stated purpose/function.
On the contrary examples from shallower "dumbed down" games help starkly contrast the subject matter.
Maybe thats why you want to restrict them from the conversation? To be sure they pretty irrefutably contradict the idea that removing consequences is a good idea.
We have empirical proof of what happens to a game that panders to players who want consequences for bad play removed, in fact two very good ones within this genre alone and many others without.
"
And once again, as GGG stated, the purpose of XP penalty on death is to make death feel meaningful. The purpose of the omen is to mitigate the XP penalty on death almost completely. So, the omen's effect cancels the XP loss. It does not mitigate death itself.
And again, this is not about the way to play. Everyone plays the way he sees fit. This is about two game mechanics having exactly the opposite purpose thus contradicting themselves.
As I said before, either drop the omen or the XP loss on death. Having both of them at the same time does not make sense.
But your dichotomy is false. There's no inherent contradiction in providing multiple solutions to the same problem in any game. I was trying to be conversational and not get bogged down so I glossed over your assertion and provided examples that were meant to suggest to you that you might be wrong. Apparently you prefer to hand wave them and call them out of bounds.
So I guess its probably pointless to highlight that 75% mitigation of a consequence due to "gaming it out" (AKA smart gaming if you're prone to bad habits) isn't an absence of consequence: It's actually a reward for being less bad at the game and only serves to expand how much "gaming" can be done by your players.
1. I did not exclude anyone or bogged you down. I only stated that the fact of there being XP loss upon death for "educational" purposes and a way to nullify that exact purpose has nothing to do with other games or other players' opinion. These are two facts of POE. Stop putting words in my mouth and stay focused on the topic.
2. Your examples are all pointing in the same direction: Ignoring the fact that the stated purpose of the XP loss on death opposes the purpose of the said omen. It has thus nothing to do with "smart playing" or anything of the likes. It has nothing to do with gameplay.
3. Again, using the said omen does exactly the opposite of what you claim to be important - the consequence of death.
It is very important to distinguish between problems and consequences. Death is the problem posed by the game. We have a lot of tools in the game to solve that problem - which is great. XP loss is the consequence of dying with a very specific purpose. If you die - you lose XP. By using the said omen, you are NOT solving the problem of dying, you are mitigating the CONSEQUENCE of it. By mitigating the consequence of death you are nullifying the whole purpose of the consequence itself - which is to educate the player.
And once again, all I'm advocating for is for GGG to stay consistent in what they actually say and do. Either enforce XP loss without means of mitigation or drop it completely. XP loss is not the problem, death is. Let us solve that and not cheese around its consequence.
Man, I agree. XP loss on death is literally a core gameplay feature. Honestly, I wish the punishments were even more impactful. Let's make it like 50% XP loss on death. And then make it possible to de-level. Then players will have a real challenge while leveling. To keep the game interesting, and to really force them into optimizing their gear and builds.
Honestly can't think of a reason why 50% wouldn't be a good amount either. It separates us true PoE players from the noobie complainers. And it really adds some thrill to the game. 10% just isn't cutting it.
Last edited by Akedomo#3573 on Jan 6, 2025, 9:10:57 PM
|
Posted byAkedomo#3573on Jan 6, 2025, 9:06:52 PM
|
"
2. Your examples are all pointing in the same direction: Ignoring the fact that the stated purpose of the XP loss on death opposes the purpose of the said omen. It has thus nothing to do with "smart playing" or anything of the likes. It has nothing to do with gameplay.
Again omens do not eliminate the punishment only mitigate it and only when you have them. They are a tool that ADDS MORE GAMING to the game, more ways to adapt and overcome our own skill shortcomings or stubbornness.
Also omens are not available until generally speaking maps which is well after a newer player has already been shown the punishment for bad play enough to learn it.
So yeah I disagree that it matters or becomes a reason to remove XP penalty.
Pandering to players who don't want consequences for their mistakes is a perfect description of what went fundamentally wrong with D3 and 4.
If they wanted mindless mobile game time waster gameplay they sure did make some perplexing choices and marketing statements for 6 fucking years.
|
Posted byalhazred70#2994on Jan 6, 2025, 9:08:28 PM
|
"
Man, I agree. XP loss on death is literally a core gameplay feature. Honestly, I wish the punishments were even more impactful. Let's make it like 50% XP loss on death. Then players will have a real challenge while leveling. To keep the game interesting, and to really force them into optimizing their gear and builds.
Honestly can't think of a reason why 50% wouldn't be a good amount either. It separates us true PoE players from the noobie complainers. And it really adds some thrill to the game.
Can't tell if sarcastic, but in any case you can get 100% XP loss on death in HC so I think 10% is fine.
I'd be okay wqith up to 20% but the main reason I don't play HC is that I have shit rural NA internet and at some point higher penalties just infringe on the HC mode and make the modes not really as distinct and serving of the intended playerbase.
Speaking of modes I would also be okay with GGG making a new "journey mode" or "creative mode" where XP loss and most other things were eliminated. This would serve to allow them to heavilly balance and nerf the "normal" modes and they could leave creative mode for the clear speed zoomers who want to farm maps and watch netflix without ruining the SECOND POE game for players like me who want some challenge.
We already kind of have that in POE1 vs 2 provided GGG actually nerfs the busted stuff thats been popping up in 2 nd manages to make it a better game in that regard than POE1 at endgame. So maybe they should consider this. Let POE1 be the easy mode that some people want (I mean trade SC already is super easy but whatever some people want it even easier)
Pandering to players who don't want consequences for their mistakes is a perfect description of what went fundamentally wrong with D3 and 4.
If they wanted mindless mobile game time waster gameplay they sure did make some perplexing choices and marketing statements for 6 fucking years. Last edited by alhazred70#2994 on Jan 6, 2025, 9:18:48 PM
|
Posted byalhazred70#2994on Jan 6, 2025, 9:14:30 PM
|
"
"
Man, I agree. XP loss on death is literally a core gameplay feature. Honestly, I wish the punishments were even more impactful. Let's make it like 50% XP loss on death. Then players will have a real challenge while leveling. To keep the game interesting, and to really force them into optimizing their gear and builds.
Honestly can't think of a reason why 50% wouldn't be a good amount either. It separates us true PoE players from the noobie complainers. And it really adds some thrill to the game.
Can't tell if sarcastic, but in any case you can get 100% XP loss on death in HC so I think 10% is fine.
I'd be okay wqith up to 20% but the main reason I don't play HC is that I have shit rural NA internet and at some point higher penalties just infringe on the HC mode and make the modes not really as distinct and serving of the intended playerbase.
Speaking of modes I would also be okay with GGG making a new "journey mode" or "creative mode" where XP loss and most other things were eliminated. This would serve to allow them to heavilly balance and nerf the "normal" modes and they could leave creative mode for the clear speed zoomers who want to farm maps and watch netflix without ruining the SECOND POE game for players like me who want some challenge.
We already kind of have that in POE1 vs 2 provided GGG actually nerfs the busted stuff thats been popping up in 2 nd manages to make it a better game in that regard than POE1 at endgame. So maybe they should consider this. Let POE1 be the easy mode that some people want (I mean trade SC already is super easy but whatever some people want it even easier)
Why are you only asking for 20%? This mechanic adds so much to the game, wouldn't it really be better at 50%? What's wrong with 50%?
|
Posted byAkedomo#3573on Jan 6, 2025, 9:20:10 PM
|
"
If you're butting up against the XP penalty a lot: its because you're not playing the ARPG correctly. You're intentionally losing; Stop that. You'll enjoy the game a lot more if you stop intentionally losing.
Your instinct as a gamer playing a hack and slash ARPG when you die to often should be to go back to a previous or optional zone and farm a bit. Get some upgrades, maybe a level. Why do you think you're supposed to just steamroll ahead until the last boss dies or you reach a leveling equalibrium because you lose XP throwing your face at it faster than you gain XP? Thats not the intent of the game or genre.
Playing well in an ARPG mostly means killing things for loot until you're powerful and not dying. Unlike a souls game or a platformer or a strategy game, here the entire goal of the game is to outscale the content with a powerful character. NOT puzzle solving acumen, 4d chess, thinking 20 moves ahead, not precise flinch jumping skills at the pixel edge of a platform and not pattern recognition of what moves the enemy always does on repeat. (though ofc POE2 is weaving a bit of this in, again though its still mostly outscalable as it should be using the ARPG gameplay loop)
Imagine this mindset in a strategy game: I'll just keep using the same tactic and hope for a different result via some RNG; sounds like the definition of insanity right? Its sure as hell not gaming.
I know this seems obvious to some but the amount of complaining about XP penalty suggests that a LOT OF PEOPLE CLEARLY NEED TO HEAR IT.
Stop losing intentionally.
And how are we supposed to find upgrades?
Vendors only refresh on leveling up, so they're out.
The majority of people don't have enough currency to craft their own gear, so that's out.
Can't buy upgrades for the same reason - that costs currency, especially if you're looking for specific stats combos.
Drops are pretty random, as well, so you might be farming forever before you find a drop that way.
----
Hell, a lot of people can't even tell what an upgrade IS because, once again, the game is very convoluted, and you receive very little help.
|
Posted byOrrion300#4027on Jan 6, 2025, 9:21:34 PM
|
"
Why are you only asking for 20%? This mechanic adds so much to the game, wouldn't it really be better at 50%? What's wrong with 50%?
So multiple things (ignoring what you seem to be trying to do here which is to try and turn an argument of degrees into one of absolutes); the penalty becomes harsher the higher level you are. When you level past 90 that 10% starts representing a much stiffer penalty. You could argue (I would) that higher just becomes unreasonably harsh for "SC" at higher levels and that because the game does have "confluence of bullshit" deaths that are not earned that these become too extreme.
If the game was balanced better I would play HC BTW, and 50% wouldn't phase me at all. But its not, and also lag and server problems are real things so...
10% is tried and true, and derived from years of play testing its enough to feel like punishment. Its balanced, except for the fact that there's always going to be some players who don't want any negative consequences in their games and thus will always rage about it on the forums if they're bad at the game and in some cases refuse to even consider that adapting and gaming and not the XP penalty might be their problem.
Again at some point a larger penalty starts pushing the current basic mode of the game closer to the territory of HC, if GGG devs decided they wanted both ways of playing to be considerably closer to each other though I'd live with it. I don't guess they want that which explains their balance point. Which I agree with and think is fine at 10%.
Plenty of shit I don't agree with GGG on, but this one I do.
Pandering to players who don't want consequences for their mistakes is a perfect description of what went fundamentally wrong with D3 and 4.
If they wanted mindless mobile game time waster gameplay they sure did make some perplexing choices and marketing statements for 6 fucking years.
|
Posted byalhazred70#2994on Jan 6, 2025, 9:40:49 PM
|
