Build Complexity vs Casual Gamers

"

Charan wrote:

I actually started playing much as you describe it, OP. I fiddled with the website's tree for a while but when I got in-game, I just went a little nuts.

I had a lot of fun doing so, too.

Unfortunately, I realised pretty early on I hadn't made an 'end-game' build, so I started over.

That's the key, right there. The game was good enough that I didn't give up or quit. Instead, I conceded a conditional defeat -- the game was better than me, rather than me being better than it. But the defeat wasn't crushing, it wasn't depressing.

It was encouraging.

And I think that is the sort of 'casual' player GGG have made this game for. Because I've YET to make an end-game character (merciless is okay, I've never run a map) and I'm still having a blast. Not all casual players need to reach end-game; I content quite a few don't. That's part of what makes us casual. We can enjoy the game at various levels.

For a casual, end-game isn't always all that important.

So I find the initial query a little baffling. On one hand, it's trying to ask how many casuals would make it to the end-game based on how complex the builds are, but on the other it completely ignores what a casual gamer's idea of 'end-game' actually is.

It ignores that casual gamers are notorious for finding pleasure in things that 'hardcore gamers' can't comprehend, like exploring zones and delighting in finding little details. Like tweaking a low level build. Like chatting in Global.

I would therefore argue that what the OP has defined as 'end-game' is not a necessary goal for a casual player.


...The magic of PoE is it's so good, so enticing, so inviting, so maddeningly frustrating, that it makes relatively hardcore gamers out of those same casuals. Then they start reading the forum, asking questions in chat, playing more with the skill tree...

That's when you know a game is really good. When it effortlessly converts casuals to hardcore.

PoE does that.

"

Mark_GGG wrote:

We're pretty against this kind of colour-coding in descriptions because it ends up looking really ugly and making the text harder to read.
Bufs/debuffs/charges are probably one of the less innately obvious parts of the game at the moment, but the things I can change to rectify that are mostly making sure we use the terms consistently. I'd like to redesign some of the systems and passives relating to this stuff, but that's a long-term goal.

"

Mark_GGG wrote:

"

Upem wrote:

Only thing I can think of to make it more straightforward is to maybe color code the tags on gems and in the passive tree.

We're pretty against this kind of colour-coding in descriptions because it ends up looking really ugly and making the text harder to read.
Bufs/debuffs/charges are probably one of the less innately obvious parts of the game at the moment, but the things I can change to rectify that are mostly making sure we use the terms consistently. I'd like to redesign some of the systems and passives relating to this stuff, but that's a long-term goal.

"

Upem wrote:

"

Ladderjack wrote:

tl;dr: I wanna get to end game but I don't wanna put any thought or effort into it. Can you guys get right on that??

Funny you posted here as you have a topic going currently requesting help for something in the same neighborhood as what I'm talking about. Your "thought and effort" went about as far as asking on the forum.

http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/53882


EDIT: Hell you have multiple threads asking about things I mentioned.

http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/53784

You are actually a prime example of what I'm talking about. Now put yourself in the position of someone just trying to make a build from scratch and not understanding how all these passives effect each and every skill. Would be pretty tough to learn by trial and error without reading or asking on the forums.

"

Ladderjack wrote:

No, I'm not. You've apparently dug through my history. . .did you find any posts where I am whining about the complexity of this game?? No. Why?? Because I like this game not in spite of the complexity but because of the complexity. I have serious doubts that any game with the complexity to keep my interest is going to have an on-board reference that is thorough enough to share all the details of the game mechanics and I like it that way. I prefer that the abridged reference for games like this are external to the game client because that makes it easier for me to use other tools for character design.

"

Upem wrote:

"

Ladderjack wrote:

No, I'm not. You've apparently dug through my history. . .did you find any posts where I am whining about the complexity of this game?? No. Why?? Because I like this game not in spite of the complexity but because of the complexity. I have serious doubts that any game with the complexity to keep my interest is going to have an on-board reference that is thorough enough to share all the details of the game mechanics and I like it that way. I prefer that the abridged reference for games like this are external to the game client because that makes it easier for me to use other tools for character design.

No reason to get angry man, just having a conversation about a game. If you can't have a normal debate about the mechanics of a GAME without getting hostile then you need to take a step back do a quick self-analysis and figure out why you get emotional about a trivial thing like a game.

"

Upem wrote:

No reason to get angry man, just having a conversation about a game. If you can't have a normal debate about the mechanics of a GAME without getting hostile then you need to take a step back do a quick self-analysis and figure out why you get emotional about a trivial thing like a game.

"

Ladderjack wrote:

I'm not mad about a game, dude. However, if someone else misrepresents me, puts words in my mouth or tells me what to do (like stop and reflect on myself when they know absolutely fuck all about me) in a community that I am active enough it for it to qualify as "public" for me, I'm gonna reply and not be too friendly about it.

Next time you quote me, I suggest you make sure you've got it right. . .and then all of this can be avoided.

edit: spelling