Good luck guys, I've uninstalled.

No assumptions, same thing can be said for 99.9% of games.

The point of BETA is to test the game and help making it better by playing it and telling the Devs what works and what doesn't. The more people who play it and give their honest feedback, the better the game will be in the end.

I've been in enough beta test phases in various games to know that despite anything that John or Mark said, NOTHING is final. There's still at least a year worth of development time to go. Everything will be changed by the time the game is released.

If you didn't buy the supporter pack to test the game, then maybe you should try and get a refund, and come back when it's done.

My only real hang up is that they charged people to test it, so it doesn't feel like a BETA test, but an unfinished game. I think that was a mistake because the expectations are too high, because when people pay money for it, they expect it to be polished.

"

LennyGhoul#7115 wrote:

The point of BETA

But that's the one of the problems here. It's called EA, not beta.
And EA means something very different.

There's actually not that many real issues here, it's how they adress them, that's what's making ppl angry most of the time.

Me for example. I really. Like really hate getting relevant info by sifting through video on YT. Not against a format, it's good and all...

But can you freaking type relevant info after? Or better yet frigging patchnotes? List of issues at work and how you plan adress them?

-1

Like, wtf. The overly dramatic nature of the post aside, ALL of the things they're implementing in new patch are spot on improvements that the community was asking for. Are they implementing everything that needs to be implemented in this patch? NO. It takes a lot development time to fix all the problems, they need to do it step-by-step. For the amount of time they had since release in my opinion the patch overdelivers on the much needed changes.

And if you really listened to the interview, in most cases they told loud and clear that they eighter need to look more into things or that it will come at a later date once they find a good solution for the problem.

Even tho I'm one of the people that hate 1 portal and XP penalty, and I was really vocal about it on this forum, many changes that are coming will help with those issues. Insta kills from outside the screen will be fixed, monster abilities will be more visible, some monster skills will deal less damage - all of that will reduce the amount of deaths, especially the more frustrating ones. I for one am willing to see how those changes will play out and maybe they'll be enough so that I will no longer need 6 portals and maybe the XP penalty will no longer seem like a big deal. I don't know yet, however I'm willing to wait and see before crying and throwing a tantrum like a little spoiled baby.

One thing I don't agree with the devs is that I think balance changes should be done without the worry about economy. Waiting till league reset is in my opinion a mistake. Fixing balance mid league can help with keeping the game fresh, making people try new things etc. Especially buffing things that need to be buffed should not take a whole league to implement. However delivering a balance patch takes a lot of tinkering and internal testing, it will take some time and that is to be expected. Firstly they should fix the crashes and other technical issued. It's naive to think all of this can be done within few weeks time.

The lack of compassion and understanding that some people have is surreal to me.

Gotta love these huge overreactions. They acknowledged that baked in action times to mace skills was removing an offensive scaling vector and that white mob phys damage was too close to boss damage (along with different armour scaling value than poe1) was preventing armour from mitigating small hits like intended. They also acknowledged that they need to add another defensive layer to warriors, but haven't decided what that is yet.

Maces scaling with attack speed better would go a long way to fixing the clunkyness of maces. Dialing in white monster damage and armour formula to bring mapping ehp in line with Ev/Es will also help. Finally, more sources of additional PDR and %life would help as well.

The other factor is how do they want to balance endgame? If they want a slower game inline with campaign they could make monster move/skill speed slower, lower density of trash mobs and make loot more top heavy towards unique monsters and bring attack and cast speed of other classes in line with mace.

Personally I would enjoy either direction, though slowing the game down to match the warrior would be a more interesting choice to me as it would differentiate PoE2 from PoE1 more. Until then, my warrior is benched for my double herald pillar howa gemling.

"

Knuk#4425 wrote:

"

ShadySlipper#9001 wrote:

"

Knuk#4425 wrote:

No ones care dude.

17 pages of discussion begs to differ.

Don't forget that ppl enjoying the game don't tend to post on forums. They are just playing thr game. For every [Removed by Support] here there are 10,000 ppl having fun. You are a minority.

What the hell are you talking about?

"

auspexa#1404 wrote:

"

AceNightfire#0980 wrote:

Do you really think the investment is so big, that people would actually keep playing the game, even though it's not fun for them? Do you really think they sit there and think "I paid 30$ for that, so I have to keep playing now!".

Yes.

$30 is a lot of money for a lot of people.

Again, you don't know any statistics at all. Your "falacy" doesnt work on a game like poe2. There is no big investment and players didn't expect a big profit at the end, which makes the "loss" of 30$ very bearable.

To show you what I mean, take a look at these statistics:

https://deathisawhale.com/2021/01/20/how-many-players-actually-finish-games/

Even though all these games cost money, many players don't even finish the tutorial (52%) or the story (35%) of these games. So if invested money in a game would "force" players to keep playing, why do 2/3 of the players not finish games at all? How does that fit with your sunk cost falacy theory?

ya know what i find amusing right now is all this complaining and im just sittin here saying to myself" regardless how much they do actually fix in ea, EA CHARS ARE GOING INTO THERE OWN LEAUGE AND NEVER BEING TOUCHED AGAIN after the release ....soooo whats the problem?

"

AceNightfire#0980 wrote:

"

auspexa#1404 wrote:

"

AceNightfire#0980 wrote:

Do you really think the investment is so big, that people would actually keep playing the game, even though it's not fun for them? Do you really think they sit there and think "I paid 30$ for that, so I have to keep playing now!".

Yes.

$30 is a lot of money for a lot of people.

Again, you don't know any statistics at all. Your "falacy" doesnt work on a game like poe2. There is no big investment and players didn't expect a big profit at the end, which makes the "loss" of 30$ very bearable.

To show you what I mean, take a look at these statistics:

https://deathisawhale.com/2021/01/20/how-many-players-actually-finish-games/

Even though all these games cost money, many players don't even finish the tutorial (52%) or the story (35%) of these games. So if invested money in a game would "force" players to keep playing, why do 2/3 of the players not finish games at all? How does that fit with your sunk cost falacy theory?

It works on every game that costs money. $30 is a big investment and the return people expect is the enjoyment they get out of it, so they keep investing their time into the game, expecting the game to become more fun to play.

These statistics are irrelevant because they're all story games, and people are less likely to complete the games they bought during a sale anyway. I have crap ton of games on Steam I haven't even played once.

"

ShadySlipper#9001 wrote:

"

LennyGhoul#7115 wrote:

The point of BETA

But that's the one of the problems here. It's called EA, not beta.
And EA means something very different.

Does it? Or it's just a newly invented marketing term?

Poe 1 had closed beta, then open beta and then release, simply because 'early access' term was not yet invented. It means the same thing; a playable, but yet unfinished game with bugs, exploits, imbalance, missing content...

And we bough exactly into this unfinished game to provide data for GGG to debug, polish and balance it. We are beta testers. People who understand this are giving feedback (positive or negative) and (some) people who don't understand this are complaining and raging.