The interview had major "Do you not have phones?" energy

"

drkekyll#1294 wrote:

"

Nyon#6673 wrote:

1. How have I been disingenious?

Nevermind. Apparently, it's not intentional.

"

Nyon#6673 wrote:

2. Quantity x Quantity would not yield the same results as Rarity x Quantity does, yet again proving my point that their not the same, it would be like me saying that 4 is the same as 5 because you could multiply 4 with both of them. Your being illogical.

They... absolutely could yield the same results. It's literally a matter of what values you choose to give them. And the claim is closer to saying "3 x 4 is functionally the same as 2 x 6" than what you suggested.

"

Nyon#6673 wrote:

Also I feel it incredibly stupid having to explain at such a basic and detailed level why quantity isnt the same as rarity when it should be obvious to anyone who understands anything about the game, its two vastly different mechanics that affect different things and have different impacts. If it was the same then why would it be called two different things? I could make multiple examples but honestly it would just be sounding condescending at this point, would be like explaining to a grown man that the grass is green.

I find it incredibly stupid to have to explain to someone that two things needn't actually be identical to function the same. If you can exchange higher tier currency for more lower tier currency, then rarity is functionally quantity. It's baffling to me that you can't understand this.

"

IcyMistV#5121 wrote:

my response to the GGG interview...

and maybe i am too cynical here. I am HOPING for the best because some aspects of poe2 are actually AMAZING... a 10/10 experience but i notice a devolution of gameplay in maps.


HERE IS MY POST:

This is a serious issue. And for Jonathan Rogers to come out and say that at some point in the game you are meant to feel incredibly powerful... is a massive red flag. That power fantasy mediocrity that defined poe1 and diablo4 is gameplay that people largely get sick of. There is a reason why poe1's zoomfest screen clearing gameplay didn't appeal to the majority of players who tried it.

Instead of expanding the audience towards more sophisticated methodical gameplay like what they showed in previews it seems we may end up stuck with this... ''one shot or be one shot'' gameplay loop.

That kind of poor design might destroy the future potential of the game. But I guess they can take over diablo's audience and just turn poe2 into a shut off your brain stat check experience and a legion of people will be happy. But it will not make for the best gameplay experience.


People largely love the campaign... but map gameplay largely is mediocre and uninspired. feels like a copy paste from poe1. Last gen experience in a new next gen combat package. It feels undercooked imo.

Maps need more interesting things happening and I don't understand how the best feature of the game... BOSSES.... aren't available on every single map. They could even be OPTIONAL and NOT required to BEAT the map. But give us the OPTION to engage with that fantastic content. What a waste. All these resources put into 100 unique bosses and they make up 0.01% of the gameplay. I feel so sorry for those developers who will never get the respect they deserve while someone who traded 1 exalt for a good weapon shows up and the boss dies within 10 seconds.


PARTIAL SOLUTION FOR MAPS: more enemy HP, less enemy damage, smaller maps. = more meaningful combat.

Please share your thoughts and ideas...

"

IcyMistV#5121 wrote:

PARTIAL SOLUTION FOR MAPS: more enemy HP, less enemy damage, smaller maps. = more meaningful combat.

Please share your thoughts and ideas...

"

Nyon#6673 wrote:

1. Weither its intentional or not is irrelevant, you shouldnt be hurling insults or accusations without providing any content. Thats actually the part thats disingenious.

2. There is no possible universe where they could yield the same results. You lack basic understanding of maths.

3. So if you agree that quantity and rarity is not identical then why are you arguing with me? Are you litterally just arguing for the sake of arguing?

So your hurling accusations with no content, and arguing with me on a mute point just to concede right after that their not infact the same, and im the disingenious one?

"

Nyon#6673 wrote:

"

drkekyll#1294 wrote:

Okay, I generally disagree with OP, but your arguments in this particular conversation thread have been a bit disingenuous. That another modifier could stack multiplicatively with the current rarity is irrelevant. You could also just have two quantity modifiers that stacked multiplicatively. So that isn't really evidence that Rarity != Quantity.

Anyway, OP expresses it poorly, but what they're getting at is that, in a Trade League (where there is a currency exchange), getting higher tier currency is functionally the same as getting more lower tier currency.

2. Quantity x Quantity would not yield the same results as Rarity x Quantity does, yet again proving my point that their not the same, it would be like me saying that 4 is the same as 5 because you could multiply 4 with both of them. Your being illogical.

"

Pl4t1numX#4325 wrote:

"

IcyMistV#5121 wrote:

PARTIAL SOLUTION FOR MAPS: more enemy HP, less enemy damage, smaller maps. = more meaningful combat.

Please share your thoughts and ideas...

how does "more enemy HP, less enemy damage" work towards methodical gameplay? i would just build even more glasscanon and zoom zoom

"

drkekyll#1294 wrote:

"

Nyon#6673 wrote:

1. Weither its intentional or not is irrelevant, you shouldnt be hurling insults or accusations without providing any content. Thats actually the part thats disingenious.

2. There is no possible universe where they could yield the same results. You lack basic understanding of maths.

3. So if you agree that quantity and rarity is not identical then why are you arguing with me? Are you litterally just arguing for the sake of arguing?

So your hurling accusations with no content, and arguing with me on a mute point just to concede right after that their not infact the same, and im the disingenious one?

I meant it was clear that you weren't being disingenuous, you simply don't understand things as well as you think you do. But you're pretty determined to not get it, so I'm done.

"

Nyon#6673 wrote:

Well your never going to convince me that you can somehow skew the results so 4x5 can give the same result as 5x5.

Also as I said I dont even see why you started arguing in the first place if you agree that rarity isnt the same as quantity, which was the whole point of the guy i was replying to.

We will just have to agree to disagree on how basic math works.

"

Nyon#6673 wrote:

"

drkekyll#1294 wrote:

"

Nyon#6673 wrote:

1. Weither its intentional or not is irrelevant, you shouldnt be hurling insults or accusations without providing any content. Thats actually the part thats disingenious.

2. There is no possible universe where they could yield the same results. You lack basic understanding of maths.

3. So if you agree that quantity and rarity is not identical then why are you arguing with me? Are you litterally just arguing for the sake of arguing?

So your hurling accusations with no content, and arguing with me on a mute point just to concede right after that their not infact the same, and im the disingenious one?

I meant it was clear that you weren't being disingenuous, you simply don't understand things as well as you think you do. But you're pretty determined to not get it, so I'm done.

Well your never going to convince me that you can somehow skew the results so 4x5 can give the same result as 5x5.

Also as I said I dont even see why you started arguing in the first place if you agree that rarity isnt the same as quantity, which was the whole point of the guy i was replying to.

We will just have to agree to disagree on how basic math works.