Player based will leave and this game will die out if they don't remove the XP Penalty
" I disagree. Please focus on "progression" because your example is a bit too off. "Turn-based combat" doesn't really identify as a way to progress into something. Here's an example: You have a pet that can level from 1-50 and each time it dies it loses EXP. Of course as a gamer you would think that one of your main goal is to reach max level on each of your pets. But if there are existing random mods/mechanics that can one shot your pet you would feel like leveling for hours and losing 5-10 hours of progress isn't worth playing. Now that doesn't mean that the game isn't for you specially if you enjoy the game and its mechanics. So going back to your solution, you'd be okay to lose players, and possible trades from them just because you don't want them to play this game for suggesting the removal of the penalty and it isn't for them, correct? |
|
|
of course i'm pissed when i fucked up by running in the wrong direction or my old man reflexes prevented me from pressing buttons in time.
but at least i'm blaming myself for the failure and i'm not trying to change the rules to win age and treachery will triumph over youth and skill!
| |
" This entire "EXP-loss" discussion reminds me of "Harvest". GGG released Harvest, then don't kept it and really vocal ppl complained like ppl do here with all the same lines "I won't come back" or "Play the game anymore" or "The game will lose it's player base" yadda yadda. The only thing that happened is - GGG implemented a super soft version of Harvest after a really long time so ppl can at least play around with the mechanic when they like it without breaking GGG's vision too much and some of the ppl who were "outraged" never came back. For GGG's growth, no harm was made. But to their sanity dealing with this shit? Oh boy. [Removed by Support]
|
|
" Don't be shy you can give out examples of those "many" games that turn sh*t because of people wanting to remove EXP loss penalty. I wouldn't tell them to "git gud" and say they're the ones that are toxic. How can you tell they were the minority when most of them has left the game? Is there a poll somewhere that I missed? |
|
" What progression? It was never intended that a big amount of players will ever make it to level 100. Because it is actually a trade-off and has always been. How often do you actually die if you unspecc everything that raises the difficulty of a map? PoE has been a game of decisionmaking. If you want level 100 you simply avoid anything that puts you in danger. You will loose a ton of currency but you want to achieve a goal that not everyone has, right? If you want to farm double-vaaled 82 maps with an evasion build or 8/8 bosses you don't expect to ever get to level 100 and that is fine, because you can do something not everyone can. If your goal is to zoomzoom maps you obviously don't care about layers of defense and level 100. But again you progress to something not everyone has. Making level 100 the only indicator of progression is missunderstanding the game imo. So why do people defend things they are not affected from? First of all to make the achievents worth the time spent. I don't want to be forced into HC like in D3 to achieve a bare minimum of something that not every player has after 2 days. And second it never stops at the beginning. First it's the 6 portal, then it's the XP loss. After that it is the waystonesustain. Give the people all that and they start complaining about boss difficulty and how hard it is to obtain rares for endgame. I honestly think GGG made already too many steps in the wrong direction and the removing of XP loss would not be crucial in itself but in combination with everything that was made already to make the game easier. I mean that already made some core supporters leave the game and wait for 3.26. So in the end one side has to go anyways and it is up to GGG to chose between the people that paid their bills for the last decade or the big amount of new players with different expectations. I could even live with second option as long as there are frequent updates to poe1. |
|
" Can YOU focus on the topic? It doesn't matter what the mechanic is. Gameplay, progression or related to whatever is secondary. The progress the top-end would make indirectly affects the low-end negatively without the penalty. And no, I wouldn't think that your "Pet Game" isn't worth playing when this 5-10 hour penalty exists. If I like the game, I figure out what can cause the death of my pet, then prepare for it, build against it - deal with it. So I make sure that my progress is affected in the slightest way possible. Sure, if my pet dies to a bug - that would suck, but it's literally a bug. It's then up to the developer to fix it so it doesn't happen anymore and only the "skill/knowledge-based" (intended) risks stay. And yes, I would be ok to lose these players in PoE. They contribute basically nothing. IF you are so deep into the "low-end" that the EXP-loss is your biggest problem that keeps you from playing the game - your presence or absence will basically have 0 impact on the game. And to be more precise. I am not against "noobs". I wrote guides for beginners, I helped ppl with basically everything the game has to offer and spent more time than I should finding solutions to their problems, but I DON'T care the slightest about someone who has the mentality "The game has to respect my time" while refusing to "respect the game" and actually put something in from there side besides time. [Removed by Support]
|
|
" Yes, you are totally right. ALL the people that left PoE2 EA so far left BECAUSE of XP loss and only that. That's obvious. Also all the people that died in the last two months died because of wasting their time on PoE2. That's obvious. |
|
" Why straw-man the argument? Nobody is saying it's the sole reason, but it's certainly one reason - do you dispute this? |
|
" Huh? We're not talking about leveling to 100. Even without a penalty you can choose not to level 100. We're talking about progression and if you say that it's misunderstanding the actual game then why would there be an option to level in the first place? Is it to bait expectations from players wanting to max level? I also don't need to max level so I don't know why you would assume that, but some players do so why not let them decide that for themselves? If you're forced into HC then that's on you. You don't have to bring your problems to me. Also, I don't understand why you're bringing up the 3.26 drama considering GGG already made an event for PoE 1. Let's just be grateful for it. |
|
" Someone also probably quit playing because they died, or their computer exploded, or their house burned down. Do we know how many? No. Do you know how many left for your reason? No. It's all just farting into the wind until someone has data. |
|
