Lets bump PoE on Metacritic

"

Burmeister99 wrote:

"

Appren wrote:

Before 1.0 I'd probably give the game a 9/10, but after the horrible nerfs in 1.0 I dunno, maybe a 6/10, game is still good, but the nerfing is just ridiculous.

yes because fixing stuff in beta, that you don't agree with deserve a bad review at release. Please for the of god never become a game critic becuase holy hell man

Link your gear please, I'd like to quantify your "-I'm alright Jack-" stance.

For some of us, yes the change was too much, not enough time to re-evaluate, nor test an entirely different approach to passives, and passive logic.

Does it make me a 'bad player'? Fine I'm a "bad player" then, who cares what you label me.. I'm expressing my position.

So how long until official reveiws start to land?

Not sure when reviews will land, but I do hope GGG get positive results. I do not want to see all the hard work over the last year or so go down the pan over something like this.

I will be reading the reviews extremely clearly. They will however be reviewed by unbiased virgin PoE testers.. Probably completely unaware of what it was like back in the 'day'. Hope they play through ALL three difficulty levels, not just base an opinion on 'normal' act one through three. These guys need to experience what it is like for a virgin player to hit cruel and merciless with "normal" gear, and novice understanding of passive tree..

Will watch closely.

"

oBLACKIECHANo wrote:

I had a lvl 80 BM duelist that DID run anger/wrath/grace, it got fucked over. But guess what? Who gives a fuck? I don't. The entire point of the game is to make new characters and try new stuff out, and with the new 4 month leagues there is no reason not to, they are the superior version of the game.

This.

:|

You realize you can't see my character history right? You want me to link some of my spoils?

Just for clarification:



So... Say what you will.

Yes, I could've traded to get all of that, but unless I was obscenely lucky and got an Exalt to drop (been here since a month after Open Beta started and haven't seen one drop for me) or have a high level friend who just likes to give useful stuff away (the maps specifically), I don't see how I could've gotten all that with purely level 20 characters. I have other maps, but I'm not good at maintaining a map pool. RNG and all that. I have a few others, but most are just white 66 maps.

Some people like to delete old characters and start new ones at each major patch. Some people like to try new things, and some people like to level multiple characters at once to bolster their currency and equipment selection.

I'm sorry you didn't realize that.

"

TremorAcePV wrote:

"

oBLACKIECHANo wrote:

I had a lvl 80 BM duelist that DID run anger/wrath/grace, it got fucked over. But guess what? Who gives a fuck? I don't. The entire point of the game is to make new characters and try new stuff out, and with the new 4 month leagues there is no reason not to, they are the superior version of the game.

This.

:|

You realize you can't see my character history right? You want me to link some of my spoils?

Just for clarification:

Spoiler

So... Say what you will.

Yes, I could've traded to get all of that, but unless I was obscenely lucky and got an Exalt to drop (been here since a month after Open Beta started and haven't seen one drop for me) or have a high level friend who just likes to give useful stuff away (the maps specifically), I don't see how I could've gotten all that with purely level 20 characters. I have other maps, but I'm not good at maintaining a map pool. RNG and all that. I have a few others, but most are just white 66 maps.

Some people like to delete old characters and start new ones at each major patch. Some people like to try new things, and some people like to level multiple characters at once to bolster their currency and equipment selection.

I'm sorry you didn't realize that.

I told you I wasn't trying to offend you, I was just going by the characters it lists when you click on your profile now. Unless you played after 1.0 with one of those characters, I still think the point stands. Also, and I'm sure you will be offended again, 68 maps are still not difficult and not what anyone is talking about. High level character clears them in 3-5 mins max solo.

In less than 1 week in HC (it's not my preferred league):

These 69s/70s are also a joke. 72+ is when it matters.

Also the 20 characters are in HC, not in Nemesis, so I don't know why YOU would say "new leagues is what it is about."

"

Hilbert wrote:

And even then D2 drops were better than PoE with OB+
But I think it's funny that players having only some level 2X characters and namereservers(botterboard nameselling) try to judge/provocate me.

I'm honored that you took the time to check out my profile, but ad hominem attacks won't help your argument. Besides, it's not against the rules to have multiple accounts, is it? :-P

"

Hilbert wrote:

"

Are you sure that botting is the sole reason for the game restrictions in D2? The restrictions were clearly added to punish gameplay that relied on rapidly hopping from game to game. There was absolutely nothing forcing bots to spend a short time in each individual game.

Yes I am sure. You clearly show that you know nothing about the D2 history.

The first diablo 2 bots were designed for a toolkit named d2hackit, they were primitive and could do only 1 task. They weren't any scripting engines involved like in modern bots that have a core and a scripting engine.
There were 3 pindlebots and 1 mephbot (the author even visited a talkshow promoting his bot.)

I'm very familiar with the history of D2. At the time, the biggest hurdle for longer runs would have been pathing. The mephbot clearly had pathfinding, so there was no technological reason for the bots to restrict themselves to short games. They did it because it was efficient. Legit players (even the non-primitive ones :P) did the same thing.

"

Hilbert wrote:

Blizzard added queues, Failed to Join, tagging and realm down solely for the purpose of reduce economical damage of bots they couldn't detect.
And the damage was like 500 pindle runs per hour or 300 meph runs per hour.

Queues were added before bots were even a problem. Failed to join was the side effect of something unrelated. Realm down messages related to game rate were added to prevent very quick magic find runs, for both players and bots.

"

Hilbert wrote:

Queues were introduced to slow botters down.
Realm Down was introduced to heavily slow botters down.

Again, queues were added before botters were a problem. Realm down was introduced to slow both players and botters down. If the realm down was intended just to target botters, why wouldn't they ban accounts that triggered it?

"

Hilbert wrote:

Bots created games instantly so every 5 games one creation failed.

Failing to create a game very quickly wasn't aimed at traditional botters. It's just a side effect of a character being locked for a short time after leaving a game. The lock happened after leaving every single game (not 1 in 5) and it was to help stop certain exploits.

"

Hilbert wrote:

You are obviously a child of 1.10+

Nope :)

"

Hilbert wrote:

Diablo2 HAD their own Antidetection prior to 1.11.

Yes, but it was very limited and quite frankly terrible. That's beside the point though. The point is that there was no anti detection that would encourage bots to do shorter runs until warden was added, and that was after they already made changes to restrict short runs.

"

Hilbert wrote:

Diablo 2 DID ban cheats prior to 1.10.
Blizzard BANNED accounts trying to create too many games(FTJ counter). They even disabled CD-Keys from playing in closed b.net(not the entire server like 1.11+)

They banned cheats prior to 1.10, but not bots themselves. Banning people who duped and used chesthack is a different thing all together. They did not ban accounts that tried to make too many games.

"

Hilbert wrote:

Also the 45 second rule only applies only to clientless bots because they never responded to warden. It was just a cat and mouse game to give a proper response(till blizzard got lazy) or they had to emulate warden entirely which has been done only by a few coders.

Cliented bots also had the option of ignoring warden response in return for 45 seconds of carefree botting.

"

Hilbert wrote:

"

Furthermore, even if the restrictions were solely designed to hurt botting, an important question remains. Under your definition of an ARPG, why would Blizzard even bother to try to slow down bots? To preserve the economic integrity of the game? Isn't that the exact same reason that GGG would move a waypoint away from a unique monster?

NO.
Because bots are 4-5 times more efficient than the biggest no lifer.

But why does it matter that bots are 4-5 times more efficient than the biggest no lifer? It matters because they wanted to preserve the economic integrity of the game. When there is a specific farming technique in PoE that that is 4-5 times more efficient than any other type of farming, shouldn't they do the same thing that Blizzard did and slow down that farming method?

"

Hilbert wrote:

Or look at the beginnings of crafting. They removed the 1.08 receipes which required runes around hel-lem and made the receipes use el-sol in 1.09.

They also reduced the power of the 1.08 crafting recipes when they did that. Ignoring that, isn't GGG doing a very similar thing by making it easier to get a 4 link item? They are also doubling boss drops.

"

Hilbert wrote:

Despite bots the chipped gem/perf skull/pg/um and ist trading in D2 was quiet active and the prices were stable.
9 chips= 1 PG 2 Pgs = 1 Ps 40 PGs = um 60 Pgs = ist 3 um = 2 ist
You had to pay 10 pgs for shaftstopper early in 1.09 and also also the last moments before 1.10.

I'm not sure what type of argument you're trying to make here. Are you trying to say that Diablo 2 was able to have a stable economy even though it had (in your opinion) more rewarding MF runs? Diablo 2's economy was anything but stable, especially in the time period that you're talking about.

Done ;)

I hope GGG reads the negative reviews on metacritic. Addressing those concerns would go a long way to reaching a broader audience. That's why I buy packs in the first place, I want POE to grow.

Why are there two elders rambling on about the history of diablo 2 in a thread about rating path of exile on metacritic?

I read many reviews on metacritic and almost all the negative ones reasons are almost all simply false. I read someone who said this game was an economy simulator lmao.

"

Delmas wrote:

Why are there two elders rambling on about the history of diablo 2 in a thread about rating path of exile on metacritic?

Because everybody knows PoE's Metacritic score is based solely on Diablo II...

Edit: I did learn some cool things though from it :)

In all seriousness though, I'll vote however I want :) I don't really dislike any of the 1.0.0 patch, but then again, I can't really say if any of what I do was even affected or not.

I redid my passives on my Fireball Witch with CI close (if not exactly) the way I had it pre-patch, and manage to kill stuff just as well. Not sure if the requirements for Chain changed or not, but I didn't have enough Dex all of a sudden (could of been a spec error on my part). No big deal.