Dear GGG: You NEED to watch this video! I cannot emphasize this enough! WATCH THIS!

"

LVSviral#3689 wrote:

"

I quote Shinshin hes talking about POE1 "This game does not have lasting appeal." That is factually wrong. Players come back with every new season. And over time the playerbase just grew and didnt go down. The Numbers went up with every new content release or every reset. They didnt go down.

The players came back for updates yes, but those updates failed to retain anyone for long periods of time. If GGG updated the game slower they wouldn't get any long term profits due to horrific retention numbers. The shinshin guy DID state that GGG is amazing at making updates that bring people back. His point was that the designs GGG said were "good" for the endgame had no notable impact on if people actually played the game more, meaning their endgame designs achieved nothing.

"

_rt_#4636 wrote:

I also never quite understood why GGG makes their own lives so much harder. Just give everyone easy 6-links and balance out the game around that fact. Same for gear: why bloat the game with full-RNG-crafting and unidentified drops only to force yourself to balance another set of weights and numbers that will dictate each skill's power?

"

LVSviral#3689 wrote:

I don't think it's misleading. The devs just said they want the pace for getting to screen nuking to take longer. They did say they want that to be the late-game though.

"

While the comparisons aren't live service games (elden ring DOES have online though) the fact that PoE has terrible retention despite having so much content, regardless of updates, is in itself very bad. No one plays standard and the fact that updates NEED to reset everyone every single patch in order to get people to play is not ideal.

"

The biggest issue most people have with this is that PoE2 can have BOTH via content and juicing options, but the game only gravitates towards the screen nuking option with nothing else coming close. The video really hammers this home towards the end how damn bad it is.

"

The players came back for updates yes, but those updates failed to retain anyone for long periods of time. If GGG updated the game slower they wouldn't get any long term profits due to horrific retention numbers. The shinshin guy DID state that GGG is amazing at making updates that bring people back. His point was that the designs GGG said were "good" for the endgame had no notable impact on if people actually played the game more, meaning their endgame designs achieved nothing.

"

Shame you didn't watch the full thing. You stopped right before the undebatably problematic parts that he covers. Basically the devolution of endgame balance.

"

Snorkle_uk#0761 wrote:

"

_rt_#4636 wrote:

I also never quite understood why GGG makes their own lives so much harder. Just give everyone easy 6-links and balance out the game around that fact. Same for gear: why bloat the game with full-RNG-crafting and unidentified drops only to force yourself to balance another set of weights and numbers that will dictate each skill's power?

its an item hunt game, the primary goal is to have really rare, random and desirable loot, not to have a balanced game. in fact making loot and builds exciting can only really happen when there is the potential for things to become extremely unbalanced if you get a jackpot outcome.


this isnt counterstrike or starcraft.

"

LVSviral#3689 wrote:

https://youtu.be/lCUUFZKfxs4

This dude's video shines a light on a lot of development problems and serious issues.

"

LVSviral#3689 wrote:

"

He says that teh gameplay he chose to show is what the developers want, that is a missleading statement. What they were talking int he interview is a different in pace. Maps feel very different from Campaign. More mobs, faster pace etc.

I don't think it's misleading. The devs just said they want the pace for getting to screen nuking to take longer. They did say they want that to be the late-game though.

"

He proceeds to compare offline games to onlien games. Thats just nonsense.
You cant do that. Every Online service game that has things liek season or new releases will see a large increase in Player numbers in that time. That will dip down over time.

While the comparisons aren't live service games (elden ring DOES have online though) the fact that PoE has terrible retention despite having so much content, regardless of updates, is in itself very bad. No one plays standard and the fact that updates NEED to reset everyone every single patch in order to get people to play is not ideal.

"

Now coems his big statement where he says that people do not love obliterating maps and then to next map etc. because the Devs said people love that. And yes some people dont liek that, other do like that.

The biggest issue most people have with this is that PoE2 can have BOTH via content and juicing options, but the game only gravitates towards the screen nuking option with nothing else coming close. The video really hammers this home towards the end how damn bad it is.

"

I quote Shinshin hes talking about POE1 "This game does not have lasting appeal." That is factually wrong. Players come back with every new season. And over time the playerbase just grew and didnt go down. The Numbers went up with every new content release or every reset. They didnt go down.

The players came back for updates yes, but those updates failed to retain anyone for long periods of time. If GGG updated the game slower they wouldn't get any long term profits due to horrific retention numbers. The shinshin guy DID state that GGG is amazing at making updates that bring people back. His point was that the designs GGG said were "good" for the endgame had no notable impact on if people actually played the game more, meaning their endgame designs achieved nothing.

"

His proof that rerunning the campaign is not boring is that poe number drop after 1 month. Getting through the campaign does not take 1 month it takes a couple days which means. That many Players do paly a lot of endgame content in POE 1. What he says is just incorrect.

I think he was referring to the game pacing more than the actual campaign, but I see your point.

"

I stop watching now he didnt think things through he made crucial mistake his. Some of his arguments are just wrong. And his comparisons are nonsense. Got to min 37 and nothing of value came from it.

Shame you didn't watch the full thing. You stopped right before the undebatably problematic parts that he covers. Basically the devolution of endgame balance.

"

These playerbase booms and busts are by design. I know this because GGG devs themselves admitted to such, back when I attended a media event for Ascendancy in 2015. This was also around the time when David Brevik was helping GGG bring PoE to China.

After sitting down to play the then-WIP Labyrinth, some other game journalists and I got to chat with Chris Wilson and the other devs. One of the questions that came up had to do with player retention in the long run, and how GGG planned to monetize their game in the future. Chris' response: PoE was modeled after MMOs, where the highest periods of player spending were at the start of major patch cycles. While we tend to think of sweaty whales as the big spenders, MMOs tend to earn most of their money when dolphins and minnows re-sub every season to try the new patch, play for a few weeks, then bounce until the next major patch rolls around. Path of Exile is no different. PoE rakes in the cash at League start, where casual players trudge through the campaign once again, make a few impulse purchases on MTX and supporter packs, then play maps for a week or two before leaving. The fact that they don't stick around hardly matters. What matters is that they bought supporter packs, and that's how GGG earns their cash.

So yeah. That was 10 years ago, but the fact that GGG hasn't deviated from the rollercoaster playerbase model means it either works for them or it's too comfortable for them to change (as in, their dev cycle is strictly structured around hooking players for a few weeks so they make impulse purchases). And they won't change it until they see a reason to change how they run their games.

"

Gwonam#5505 wrote:

True, but at the same time, that's no reason for 90% of the game's skills and items to suffer while a few easy builds are leaps and bounds better than everything else. That makes for a boring game; PoE1's greatest strength is that it lets you make viable builds out of almost anything due to the sheer number of options and interesting interactions available. Which, of course, are possible due to over a decade's worth of updates and leagues. But it should still be something the devs keep in mind when tuning PoE2.

Believe it or not, relative balance actually does matter in an ARPG.

"

Gang5ter15#1071 wrote:

I mena there is quiet a bit of diversity in the game. Yes that some builds like Spark are so omnipresent because they are the easiest ot build and to play. Does not mean other not viable. I can name you 20 different viable builds that work.

"

Gwonam#5505 wrote:

True, but at the same time, that's no reason for 90% of the game's skills and items to suffer while a few easy builds are leaps and bounds better than everything else. That makes for a boring game; PoE1's greatest strength is that it lets you make viable builds out of almost anything due to the sheer number of options and interesting interactions available. Which, of course, are possible due to over a decade's worth of updates and leagues. But it should still be something the devs keep in mind when tuning PoE2.

Believe it or not, relative balance actually does matter in an ARPG.

"

Snorkle_uk#0761 wrote:

"

_rt_#4636 wrote:

I also never quite understood why GGG makes their own lives so much harder. Just give everyone easy 6-links and balance out the game around that fact. Same for gear: why bloat the game with full-RNG-crafting and unidentified drops only to force yourself to balance another set of weights and numbers that will dictate each skill's power?

its an item hunt game, the primary goal is to have really rare, random and desirable loot, not to have a balanced game. in fact making loot and builds exciting can only really happen when there is the potential for things to become extremely unbalanced if you get a jackpot outcome.

"

Gwonam#5505 wrote:

This is probably by design, unfortunately. It's good for business, and good for addicts. Bad for everyone else. But hey, it's what makes money. I'll just copy and paste what I posted on that video here:

"

These playerbase booms and busts are by design. I know this because GGG devs themselves admitted to such, back when I attended a media event for Ascendancy in 2015. This was also around the time when David Brevik was helping GGG bring PoE to China.

After sitting down to play the then-WIP Labyrinth, some other game journalists and I got to chat with Chris Wilson and the other devs. One of the questions that came up had to do with player retention in the long run, and how GGG planned to monetize their game in the future. Chris' response: PoE was modeled after MMOs, where the highest periods of player spending were at the start of major patch cycles. While we tend to think of sweaty whales as the big spenders, MMOs tend to earn most of their money when dolphins and minnows re-sub every season to try the new patch, play for a few weeks, then bounce until the next major patch rolls around. Path of Exile is no different. PoE rakes in the cash at League start, where casual players trudge through the campaign once again, make a few impulse purchases on MTX and supporter packs, then play maps for a week or two before leaving. The fact that they don't stick around hardly matters. What matters is that they bought supporter packs, and that's how GGG earns their cash.

So yeah. That was 10 years ago, but the fact that GGG hasn't deviated from the rollercoaster playerbase model means it either works for them or it's too comfortable for them to change (as in, their dev cycle is strictly structured around hooking players for a few weeks so they make impulse purchases). And they won't change it until they see a reason to change how they run their games.