Zoom is not fun. It's loot FOMO
|
- - - - - - - - - - What This Is About - - - - - - - - - -
This thread encompasses numerous interconnected issues which include: - AoE clear meta Vs. Attrition style engaging combat - Visual clarity - Monster density & skill effects - Incentive structures and the subjectivity of meta perceptions - Game balances which affect any or all of these - Anything which is related to these topics - - - - - - - - - - Original Post (revised) - - - - - - - - - - Many people claim that 'Zoom' (definition below) is something that the player base wants as the standard for game-play in PoE2, and they point to the popularity of zoom builds as their evidence. I want to challenge that assumption and try to show how this play-style is only popular because players generally do not want to miss out on acquiring more loot by playing a sub-optimal play style. Players gravitate toward these builds not because they are ideal game design for an Arpg, but because without them, they feel like they would miss out on a better farming strategy, or not progress as fast as others. I want to begin with an analogy: Let’s test the idea that if many players engage with the game in a certain way, it’s either because it’s fun or because it reveals how the game should be designed. Imagine that all the players were given a button in their inventory screen labelled "generate divine orb", which they could click as many times as they want to, and it will create a divine orb in their inventory. You can easily imagine how using & abusing this button would be a very 'popular' activity for the players. I would even assume, that if you were to look at the statistics, you would find that the 'Divine Orb Button' was the most utilized strategy for obtaining currency. But I think it would be obvious to everyone that referencing the usage of this feature is not a convincing argument for why it should be in the game, and I don't think many people would agree that it should be in the game; even if they themselves are using it at the same time. Now, this example is a Reductio ad absurdum. It is intentionally obvious in order to isolate and test the principle of popularity equating to fun game design. Another consideration, asked in two different ways: - If you had the option to play a build & style that could clear screens of enemies incredibly fast, but in order to play this build/style you had to take the ascendancy node "95% less item quantity" would you still play it? - Conversely, if there was a build which moved fast, and attacked quickly, but could only kill enemies 25% as fast as the above build, but by playing this build you gained access to the ascendancy node "1000% more item quantity" would you play it? Another Reductio ad absurdum. The purpose of these two questions is not to convince you that 'Zoom' is not fun, but to show that your selection process for which build you play, might be more influenced by your concern for the loot you would miss out on, and less about what you consider to be a fun combat experience. - - - - - - - - - - - - - EDITS - - - - - - - - - - - - - What is 'Zoom'? There are different interpretations of what 'zoom' means. Because of this, a lot of equivocations emerge when discussing it. For the purposes of this thread, 'zoom' refers only to the way the player instantly clears screens of enemies. It does not apply to movement speed, or attack speed. I consider mobility, fast attack speed, and fast-paced combat to be more than fine, and they make the game better by offering another aspect of build diversity. Here, I am only talking about the way that players use high damage and AoE to quickly delete monsters off the screen. And by extension, all the externalities and game balances associated with that play style being part of Path of Exile 2. What Zoom Means: - Near-instant killing all monsters on the screen. - Repetitive cycle of -> Click -> Everything Dies -> Move -> Repeat. What Zoom Does Not Mean: - Fast movement / mobility - Fast attack / cast speed Why is 'Zoom' a problem? - Lower visual clarity - Repetitive combat loop - Monsters & their mechanics feel the same, because they die instantly - Promotes rippy one-shots from monsters, as the only counter to player zoom - Limits build diversity for many players, once one adopts the premise that zoom is standard and mandatory for efficiency If it's bad, then why do people play zoom? - It's the best method for obtaining loot - It's the best method for completing most content - The game's incentive structure promotes Zoom both as the best defense, and the optimal farming strategy. If defenses are inadequate for preventing sporadic, and often unseen one-shots due to visual clarity, then the best way to ensure survival is to meet an AoE & Damage threshold where you can clear the screen before monsters can attack, and before your defenses can become a relevant factor. What contributes to 'Zoom' game-play? - High monster density - Extreme variation in player power, making it difficult to balance monsters - High monster damage relative to player defenses - High player sustain (leech, regen, etc) make high monster damage & one-shots mandatory as counter-play. Which in turn, makes player defences even less beneficial, and killing those monsters before they can one-shot your life pool that much more important. - As a loot based game, Zoom conforms to the goal of maximizing loot acquisition efficiency. There is nothing inherantly wrong with trying to maximize loot acquisition efficiency, and it should not be changed. But loot acquisition is still a factor that contributes to the incentivization of 'zoom' and should therefore still be taken into account when viewing the big picture. Okay, but what is the alternative? Attrition based methodical combat. Instead of: - Players recovering their life instantly - Players being killed instantly (mandatory for high player sustain) - Constant fast swarms & bullet hell (to counter screen-clear play) - Monsters being killed instantly - One (or two) primary attacks that are used repeatedly We get: - More interesting overall combat - The type of monsters you are fighting matters - Casting short-term debuffs/support buffs are actually important outside bosses - Valuable healing skills (non-abusable) for yourself and for allies anyone? - Consideration for having more tools at your disposal, instead of one primary skill - Improved visual clarity from reduced monster count - Improved visual clarity because bullet-hell type counter-play isn't as necessary - Hugely improved visual clarity from player skills, which I'll elaborate on later - Melee becomes a viable and appealing archetype, not something to circumnavigate with AoE slams to compensate for lack of range. Part of the reason that the first itteration of combos was so unpopular, besides the 'railroading' aspect where "If you use this one skill, you have to use the others", was that the game was not adequately balanced to complement that style of play. This is why the reported issues tend to be: - "Well it was okay at first, but later on it became untenable to use" and - "I'm expected to parry against a large pack of monsters to gain charges, when I could just use <insert AoE clear skill> to clear the screen and meta zoom?" So you want the game to be harder? Sort of. But that depends on what you mean by "harder". - If by "harder" you mean that you're going to be constanly one-shot by monsters before you can kill them, then no; quite the opposite. Killing the player quickly will no longer be necessary to maintain a challenging balance in the game, because the player will be receiving more incoming attacks due to monsters surviving long enough to fight back. - If by "harder" you instead mean that monsters will not die as quickly, and that an optimal strategy to fight them might involve a more diversified usage of various skills, and applying debuffs to aid in the duration of the fight, or the use of croud control skills, and a concern for how much damage you take without the ability to instantly recouperate it, then yes. But how could you ever balance players and monsters so that players won't just find another way to easily screen-clear? That's an extremely important question. There are several changes you can, and would make to ensure that players would not (easily) reach a clear-capacity which would render the content appropriate for their level to be trivialized. (Areas that are far below the player's level, you would expect to feel godly). If you really sit down and think about it, you'll likely find that it comes down to one fairly specific answer: - The potential power curve for players and monsters, must be made more linear, rather than exponential, or you will never be able to anticipate the relative power between the two. I'm talking about the "more" and "less" multipliers, and I'm talking about the way monster modifiers synergize on map, and rare monsters. - The basic idea here, is to be assiduously mindful of the impact individual scaler values will have on power; whether that be defensive or offensive. - This will both lower the extreme high-end of the player power ceiling, and as a result, organically raise the floor for previously 'non-viable' builds whose power are now being measured against monsters which have been balanced with respect to a lower power ceiling. This 'narrowing' of the power gap between builds due to less exponential scaling, would mean that player power could be more easily anticipated, and allow lower-end builds to be more viable against monsters that would otherwise be balanced with a higher possible player power ceiling in mind. (which is now gone) In simple straight-forward terms, what are the basic things that would need to change for engaging combat? This change isn't one where you can only tweek one aspect and expect it to work. There is interplay/interdependant mechanics which prevent 'incrementalism' in these changes. Some more important changes are: - Reduce Mob Density - Increase monster life relative to player damage - Reduce monster damage relative to player defenses - Drastically reduce player's ability to sustain/replenish life, except for special cases, where careful consideration of abuse must be considered. - Reduce Skill Spam - Skills capable of AoE clear should not be spammable - Improve visual clarity - Mob density & Player skills - Increase Xp & Loot rewards to match 'zoom meta' - Monsters are fewer and take more time to kill - The monster density should be a product of the new combat experience, and the expected amount of time to complete an area. In otherwords, if the monsters take longer to fight, and we have an expectation of time to complete an area, that will give indication of what the monster count should be. Won't this destroy ascendancies like Blood Mage? Builds/mechanics which provide life-pool sustain that is so high, that the only way for monsters to kill the player is to one-shot their entire life pool, is antithetical to the entire concept of 'meaningful' or attrition-based engaging combat. It would have to be reworked in an interesting way that maintains the Blood Mage theme, perhaps with some (reduced) recouperation/regen mechanics, or something more creative than that. But these changes 'create' far more than they destroy. - - - - - - - - - - - Common Counter-Arguments - - - - - - - - - - - There has been considerable interest and engagement with this topic. So, in an attempt to make this post more useful, I'll be updating references to reoccurring counter-arguments that have been made in this thread. This is a paraphrased list of those counter-arguments and brief versions of the responses that have been made by myself or others here. Feel free to take issue with any of the responses, and reply to them if you think they are invalid or unsound. This section is a work in progress. "The top meta builds are the most used because they are the funnest play styles. The top meta builds are virtually all efficient loot farming / clear builds. Therefore, efficient loot farming / clear builds are the funnest play style." - This argument is actually thinking of the situation backwards; in reverse. Popular (fun) builds didn't become loot farmers. Loot farmers, became popular builds. Path of Exile is a loot-oriented game. Because of this, players will generally (there are always exceptions) have a proclivity towards builds that they perceive as effective at obtaining loot. The most effective builds for obtaining loot, are those which adopt some form of the "clear monsters in maps as fast as possible" strategy. Seemingly without fail, the most played builds, (assumed to be played for their innate funness) just happen to all be builds which have a play style that is highly conducive to obtaining loot. I don't believe this is a coincidence. I believe that these builds are not being selected based on how fun they are perceived to be, but by their perceived efficiency in farming loot. In other words, people are selecting these builds based on FOMO of loot missed by playing less efficient play styles for loot farming, and not necessarily because they are fun. Any genuine fun that any particular player might have while playing these builds is totally legitimate, and I want them to have fun playing the game. But their fun is incidental, and not the reason for the large usage numbers of loot farming zoom builds. "But I have fun farming loot. Farming loot is a huge part of the game. Are you saying we should not be wanting to farm loot? Why do you want to make me grind longer for less loot? That's not fun." - There is nothing wrong with trying to farm loot. It is an important part of the game that I love. I don't want players to stop trying to get loot, that's not even possible. I don't want there to be a reduction in loot that the player gets. Balancing the game to reduce zoom also means balancing the game to give much more loot & experience to compensate for the different play style, so that progress in terms of level and drops are not changed, only the experience of killing monsters is changed. "You can already play a slow build if you want to. Why do want to take away my ability to play Zoom? You are limiting player freedom." - We have been speculating in this thread about the possibility of having alternate content to engage with in end-game that are oriented toward different play styles. Unfortunately, aside from it only applying to the end-game, it also introduces a plethora of issues, regarding how those activities are gate-kept from builds which do not conform to any concrete play-style archetypes we come up with. However, credit to IonSugeRau1#1069 for pointing out, that if the game were balanced for engaging attrition combat, it would be very easy to do the reverse: to create optional/side content for endgame, where the monsters have their HP lowered, and their damage increased, which almost any build could engage with to experiences a very similar type of 'zoom' style game-play. Then, the players who would excel the most in that specific content, would be ones who could AoE clear, and move around the map fast between packs. Remember, zoom has nothing to do with movement speed. Eliminating 'zoom' still lets you build a very fast character. "You just want to take away people's fun." - This thread is for us to discuss how to make the game more fun. I don't want people to have less fun. I want to see changes that I believe will make the game more fun. "You are just jealous of people with zoom builds." - I consider this to be a very disingenuous argument, with no substantive feedback about the subject. I've played arpgs nearly all my life, going back to Diablo 1 with family and friends. We are not in "awe" of meta zoom builds that a relatively new player can follow a build-guide for. I know how to use trade, and obtain currency. I play zoom builds myself quite often, for the loot acquisition incentive I outlined above. Build craft has always been my favorite part of PoE, and arpgs in general. "Players want zoom, that's why it's popular." - Addressed above, and throughout this thread. It's the main point of this thread, so if you are making this point you should slow down and revisit the argument being made above. "As PoE1 became more 'zoom' it got more popular." - Not causative. PoE's popularity grew steadily over time for many reasons, and so have the complaints about its direction. This is why PoE2 was supposed to take a new direction, and the reason many people got on board with it. A sequel advertised as a 'More methodical PoE" having shattered PoE1's player count should be enough for anyone who thinks this is important, or reliable. I personally, do not think we should decide what is fun based on how we interpret numbers to support the kind of game we want. But instead, we should be discussing perceived flaws, in order to make changes that will make PoE2 even better. "Egonomics is a factor. If I have to use more skills, my wrists will hurt." - A more engaging tactical combat system would encourage the use of a diverse repertoire of attack and supporting skills, not make them mandatory. The idea is to give you situational options during combat. Using only one skill is always possible, though likely suboptimal. - - - - - - - - - - Related Threads - - - - - - - - - - Obsolete / contradictory systems and designs https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/3709985 How "More" multipliers are ruining skill design philosophy https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/3689783 The real issue with support gems https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/3826991 - - - - - - - Related Video Discussions - - - - - - - 787prada - Why you can't have fun in PoE2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHrdRJY6j2o "What Went Wrong With ARPGs?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUexUVRXWB0 A must-watch video explaining exponential scaling https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOinIJafuHw - - - - - - - - Related Video Examples - - - - - - - - An example of bad visual clarity https://www.youtube.com/shorts/1hMMImCVxYI Another example of bad visual clarity https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcfqgWvzaBk - - - - - - - - Also See - - - - - - - - Zoomer & Engager sit down to play Mortal Kombat https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/3884098 Last edited by WhisperSlade#0532 on Dec 6, 2025, 9:41:42 PM Last bumped on Dec 9, 2025, 11:31:00 AM
|
|
|
Players are the issue.
Not playing for fun, but making a job out of the game instead. GGG needs to work with that. |
|
|
Awwwww...
Very poor attempt. Degrading the idea to an absurd, so you can prove your point, is very good idea. But with this -95% and +10000% you totally messed up. You need to learn how to do it more subtle. You cannot go and say "if we cut your both arms will you play zoom zoom? No? See you don't want to play it" P.S: Did you see what I just did... |
|
" The reductio ad absurdum is intentional, and works fine. Which is why you can't answer the questions I posed. Your comparison of cutting off limbs is a false equivalence, because nobody is playing their zoom build to keep their arms. It is also a self-defeating point, because the implication of your example is that you are only playing a zoom build to save your arms; not because it's fun. And that dear friend is the point. People care about the loot first, then post-hoc rationalize that it is fun to thoughtlessly click one button. |
|
|
Is that true really? Do we care about loot?
If GGG tells me tomorrow: we decided that you get 1 divine per hour. Do what you want, 1 div is what you get. What will I do according to you? I will start cosplaying captain America and charge with a shield? Swinging my hammer above my head for 3 seconds like a cartoon character? And dodging, blocking, comboing? Please... I will go zoom zoom again. Everyone would. |
|
" Yes, loot acquisition is a core part of the game. Glad I could help. " If loot drops were somehow homogenized (not what I want) people would then play their preference, yes. My initial post posed a question that hasn't been answered, so you are instead responding with a caricature of other play preferences. " Yes you, strike me as the type who hasn't considered this issue in much depth. " Clearly not. Last edited by WhisperSlade#0532 on Nov 29, 2025, 3:00:19 PM
|
|
|
I dont believe it is that easy and fun is very subjectiv.
For some people the fun is to have very high DPS and see them character clear the screen in a second. Just for the satisfaction of being powerfull. I do believe some people would still play "zoom" build even without better loot. Some people find them fun into being virtualy rich and race league start with the most effectiv build to reach that goal. They might swap later to crafting if it is the best method to reach that goal also. Because them fun, the satisfaction they find, is being rich. Some people find fun to play very weird build even if thoose arent as effectiv. Just for the satisfaction to make a weird combination work after all. Some people find fun in fighting monsters, not carring as much of the build or the loot but finding satisfaction in the combat, movement and interaction with the game. This last exemple is where i place myself personaly and maybe you also if i understand correctly. That doesnt mean the others arent having fun because them fun is different. I loose interest when i can clear the whole screen on sight while some others would loose interest if they were playing like me. Because they enjoy it differently. People who get the fun out of being rich are more the target of your post i would say. And i think it shouldnt be a problem if it's what make them enjoying them time in the game. Now you have to be extremely efficient and have a lot of time for that goal and it feel unfair for a lot of people participating in the economy. The only concern is more the danger of RMT or gambling addiction but that exist in every online game with an economy and is not related to a gameplay style zoom or not. I believe the game industry doesnt have much solution for it since not every RMTer is botting. Again, i'm pretty sure a lot of zoomer would give up rarity affixes for more DPS just to clear the screen 0.1 second faster. That's why i think your reasoning is incorrect in saying "It's not fun and they all do it for the loot". SSF player
|
|
|
Yes, absolutely incorrect.
And yes, if rarity gets removed I would swap it for MS/DPS at that very moment. |
|
" Yes of course, people are entitled to their own preferences and that is competely fine. It is nearly impossible to talk about the opinions of a broad group without speaking in generalities; I am not trying to imply that different people do not have different preferences for play. But what I am saying is that the player numbers do not reflect a genuine desire for play styles, and that many people play a particular build because they believe it will be an effective loot farm, because they (and reasonably) think that loot acquisition is an important part of the game, and not necessarily because the type of gameplay that entails, is their idealized form of fun. So of course, everyone has, and is allowed their preference. So why am I even bringing up this issue? Well, the problems only arise as a reult of the monster balance in relation to the power that has been granted to the players, which allow them to trivialize the content to the point of zoom and AoE clear. That, combined with an environment of player trade economy, means that both the gameplay and rewards incentivize (or more adequately described; 'pigeonhole') players to participate in the zoom meta, regardless of how they prefer to play. So I'm afraid we sort of have to decide between whether we want the player and monsters to be balanced to allow zooming to be the logical end-point of the meta, or not. There isn't a whole lot of room in between; sure you may not care about player economy, and you can elect to play a build which is not suited for the monster balance, and you may be able to look past the fact that if you chose one of the zoom-archetypes you could be acquiring loot much faster. But I don't think you can have both.. unless. A potential solution: the end-game needs to be multi-faceted and supply content that different play styles excel at. Some content zoomers will be best suited, and other content where only extremely defensive and smart tactical combat will excel. Then at least the game will be more balanced in terms of loot acquisition, and the player only has to choose between whether they want to apply thinking and skill to the combat, or zoom instead. " Not the case. Which is why inc rarity gear is sought after and expensive. It's about the loot. Clear speed is just another aspect of gaining loot, which is a product of both things. Last edited by WhisperSlade#0532 on Nov 18, 2025, 4:18:29 PM
|
|
|
The question posed in my initial post remains unanswered. And it's not a mystery why. The question is not ill-posed, or disingenuous. It's a question of whether loot is a major influencing factor.
It is not satisfactorily answerable, because loot is a major influencing factor, and zoom produces the most loot. Last edited by WhisperSlade#0532 on Nov 29, 2025, 3:06:11 PM
|
|
