death penalty, race to 100: philosophical conflicts?

So the talk Jonathan had with gazzy and darth recently it was asked now that dying in a map is very punishing do we need death penalty? i think theres philosophical conflicts here in the design intentions.




jonathan talked about still needing an xp death penalty because of the race to 100, how legit is the race if the person winning it can die 1000 times just zerg running content with mass dps vs making a proper build and playing properly to get there? this was the thinking behind still having the penalty.


the reason for the highly punishing death mechanic in maps is so that you cant run 75% of a rare valuable node, intentionally die and then get to rerun the first 75% of it over and over.





my thoughts: both of these are fair points but the end result is overkill and in a game where you hope to have a broader audience than poe1 i dont think its a good idea to be even more punishing on death.

you are pitching this game like a soulslike where you learn through dying during the campaign, jonathan has said its right to die a couple of times to a boss in order to learn it. but then you are being way more punishing on death than poe1 in endgame by having xp penalty and map bricking.



how is a race to 100 in softcore trade ever meaningful? surely hardcore and hardcore ssf is where the only meaningful lvl100 ladder race is happening? unless of course because of how soulslike you are going where you claim this game has the hardest content ever and unlike poe 1 you are supposed to die a lot this means hardcore is now less viable and softcore is even more then intention? but then you are punishing those deaths in softcore more than ever?




i feel like theres a huge conflict in philosophy here where you are trying to make a game with less baggage that appeals to a wider audience while making people die more intentionally but then punishing people even more for dying which is telling them they are bad at the game and making them feel bad. im a supporter of death penalty in poe1 because we need a mechanic to make dying matter but it is a harsh and disheartening mechanic already and thats in a game originally designed to be very viable in hardcore back in 2013 at least. that doesnt seem to be poe2 with jonathan saying he expects you to die 3 times to a boss before you beat it.








i think its way too much, either the idea that a race to 100 in softcore matters should be waved off and the xp penalty removed entirely or the bricking of the atlas nodes should be removed.

its possible to do this via a mechanic where if you die you lose what was on the node and the node is replaced by another type of node that you get when you die there. a very vanilla node that lets you move through that line to get to whats behind it but it does not have the special things the original node might have contained so you cant abuse rerunning it.






i think first impressions really matter, do you want to go in with a system setup that puts off A LOT of people because its too punishing, people who might not come back and give you a second chance? or do you want to go in with a system where the 0.001% of players who care at all about the lvl100 ladder push are left feeling the ladder push meta is a bit too cheesy?

this thinking is in conflict with a lot of the other game design and it is catering to a tiny fraction of players who are already die hard poe fans and will not leave if you get it wrong first time at the expense of a larger section of players many of whom will be giving this game a chance for the first time.

Agreed they should cater to the 50%+ not the 1%, it’s just good politics and PR and business.

No, you want to face roll into a map and think dying should have no penalty, you can play other games. GGG has been clear about this.

The fact that they not only have not listened, thankfully, to no exp death penalty for years but doubled down on POE2 and you outright lose the map now, tells you their philosophy on what dying in this game should carry. And I agree.

You want an everyone’s game or “catering to the 50%”, play D4 that’s what that game does. And it’s the largest reason that game fails

"

Snorkle_uk#0761 wrote:

how is a race to 100 in softcore trade ever meaningful?

Isn't that what they are addressing? Obviously the fact its trade makes it messy (and I don't personally believe this)

However to go to your original title Snorkle the problem is a philosophical one but nothing to do with 100, its because a not insignificant portion of their game is setup to enable build development which is the cornerstone of ARPGs imo.

What they want is to avoid what PoE1 has become, which is everyone cuts the maximum defensive corners (will come back to this) while still completing content in the permissible portal allocation.

Why do players do this? Because its the most efficient by far, it feels more powerful and you farm content quicker its also arguably less risky for the real endgame content like Ubers, high Delirium or 17s because DPS is so effective at lowering your incoming damage.

Nobody actually cares about the XP penalty because its a pretend penalty, you can buy to bypass it and its fairly trivial to overcome even solo you just have to put the time in if you value 100.

Who it does affect is the newer, less experienced or more experimental players and these are the ones that your original statement rings true for - for these players losing a map is probably enough, they don't really need to lose xp for a death either. They aren't dying because they cut build corners they are dying because they don't even know the build corners to begin with or are playing weird shit without them.

However we play together and the game pace is dictated by the regulars not the noobs so they can't give lenient/no penalties without it being abused by the experienced players.

Now coming back to cutting the maximum defensive corners why this is a problem is the philosophical debate, does the above matter? Its pretty much to personal taste but one road makes the game more shallow by removing multiple build requirements and the other doesn't.

Some players really don't give a shit about that and they aren't wrong its a personal taste thing, they want to play a 2k life TS deadeye and turn their brain off blasting and having fun.

Some on the other side though just think that's wasting a huge chunk of the games systems, it wastes boss design, any defensively exciting item and cuts builds down drastically as the only viable output is "what blasts everything" anything else is secondary. Are they right? Yes to me because its my taste lmao but I can recognise easily that players like different things.

tldr:
penalties for death add depth to character development that can't be replaced any other way. Noobs have to suffer as they are attached to regulars. Personal choice as to whether that depth is important though it clearly is to the designers are they put a significant effort into it.

Edit: and as I see a 50% vs 1% statement you can't ever just put the numbers out and assume it works like that, many noobs love the iterative development process and its what attracts them to the game just as much as it puts some players off. Niche audiences tend to be more supportive and long lasting due to not having competitors to pinch them. Also GGG's goal is to make a successful game (i'd think) successful doesn't automatically means making the most money or it'd be a mobile game with gacha ready to launch in china.

Don't forget PoE1 has been very successful. If I was Chris/Mark etc and I made a game I wanted to make and it was very successful i'd call that a huge win I wouldn't automatically think "i'm gonna change it for another dollar"

all this will achieve is 95% of skills and builds being not played because 'why risk it'


why? because this is still POE, still the same people with the same ideas - one of them is the shortest 'time to kill' ever in ARPG history. in no game other than POE your well built character can just die to some random multi-multiplication of damage multipliers that happen once 100 maps. and devs think it is fun.

if that shit is still in - and there is zero chance it isnt given that GGG builds their world on random - then you have 3 options:
- play as usual and accept you just wont go far
- cut all defenses because they dont matter anyway and replace quantity with quantity of farmed content. be lucky, too.
- play few defensive setups that work 99,9% of the time. there wont be many and as with current game you wont get there using 'normal items'. Defiances of Destiny, Progenesis and shit exist for a reason. their copies will make it into POE2 sooner than latter.


POE2 long term survivability depends on how fun, rewarding and engaging the option '1' is. aka the option majority of the players are going to play

i stated it several times now: GGG invested 100s of millions into this game. they wont care if few wannabie hardcores are happy because they can type 'git gud' few more times. they are going to care about financial return. and you wont get money back IF all you achieve is push regulars away to satiate few 100s hardcores (some of them wont be playing anyway)

or do you want everyone to play necro AGAIN?

im all for logout macro removal, dont give a f.. about xp pen or map deletion - wont be playing POE2 anytime soon (and i know they will revert some of this after riot and poor reception) but these are issues BECAUSE devs insist on killing players out of spite, making some content broken as f.. because they can and providing 0 learning opportunities because 'technical reasons'

if endgame bosses are to be challenging (without obtuse overuse of invuln phases) there has to be a resemblance of damage output balance. you cannot make bosses 'fun' and interesting when melee plays with 5 or 10m dps while hexblast miners deal 150m. POE2 will have different numbers, names and visuals - but i do not see any reason to believe that this problem will dissapear

why fuck around with a boss for 5 minutes when you can zap him in 10 seconds? why? that strategic souls-like boss gameplay looks cool and all but.. it is like any other pre-release video footage that did not survive contact with real players

"

Snorkle_uk#0761 wrote:

the reason for the highly punishing death mechanic in maps is so that you cant run 75% of a rare valuable node, intentionally die and then get to rerun the first 75% of it over and over.

uhm.. can someone enlighten me how is this viable? is the instance not saved upon death, but somehow saved through the user logging out? because you know, you can run 75% of 'rare juicy node' leave through the portal.. and log out, log in, repeat

"

Mashgesture#2912 wrote:

No, you want to face roll into a map and think dying should have no penalty, you can play other games. GGG has been clear about this.

The fact that they not only have not listened, thankfully, to no exp death penalty for years but doubled down on POE2 and you outright lose the map now, tells you their philosophy on what dying in this game should carry. And I agree.

You want an everyone’s game or “catering to the 50%”, play D4 that’s what that game does. And it’s the largest reason that game fails

ah yes, the 'not catering to the masses'. I wonder if the same philosophy was used when the game was designed around a controller this time around.

btw- you can play Ruthless here, there is no 'face rolling' content but you sure have few tries to finish the map. Learning the boss mechanic with 1 try is going to be SO MUCH FUN!

"

Mashgesture#2912 wrote:

No, you want to face roll into a map and think dying should have no penalty, you can play other games. GGG has been clear about this.

The fact that they not only have not listened, thankfully, to no exp death penalty for years but doubled down on POE2 and you outright lose the map now, tells you their philosophy on what dying in this game should carry. And I agree.

You want an everyone’s game or “catering to the 50%”, play D4 that’s what that game does. And it’s the largest reason that game fails

This is exactly how I feel about it and I am so glad that of all things, this isn't something GGG has caved in. Death penalties are necessary and healthy in a game like this - others within the same genre got rid of said penalties and it was more detrimental than beneficial.

I trust GGG knows better than a small vocal minority on these forums and reddit.

"

AintCare#6513 wrote:

"

Mashgesture#2912 wrote:

No, you want to face roll into a map and think dying should have no penalty, you can play other games. GGG has been clear about this.

The fact that they not only have not listened, thankfully, to no exp death penalty for years but doubled down on POE2 and you outright lose the map now, tells you their philosophy on what dying in this game should carry. And I agree.

You want an everyone’s game or “catering to the 50%”, play D4 that’s what that game does. And it’s the largest reason that game fails

ah yes, the 'not catering to the masses'. I wonder if the same philosophy was used when the game was designed around a controller this time around.

btw- you can play Ruthless here, there is no 'face rolling' content but you sure have few tries to finish the map. Learning the boss mechanic with 1 try is going to be SO MUCH FUN!

Terrible comparison. Controller support was added for access to play the game. That’s not game design or philosophy, that’s accessibility.


Pleasing, or attempting, to please a broad audience is always riskier and usually a failure. Not just in gaming but in business. Having a more narrow audience or customer base is always a better option, distinguishing oneself is better than being the same as everyone else. This is, again why, D4 fails so miserably, they try to please everyone and end up pleasing nearly no one(as seen by retail WoW as well)

You don’t know what learning a boss will be like yet. You haven’t played the game, much less mapping. So you should hold off whether it’s enjoyable or not until you …. Actually know

"

Mashgesture#2912 wrote:

Terrible comparison. Controller support was added for access to play the game. That’s not game design or philosophy, that’s accessibility.


Pleasing, or attempting, to please a broad audience is always riskier and usually a failure. Not just in gaming but in business. Having a more narrow audience or customer base is always a better option, distinguishing oneself is better than being the same as everyone else. This is, again why, D4 fails so miserably, they try to please everyone and end up pleasing nearly no one(as seen by retail WoW as well)

You don’t know what learning a boss will be like yet. You haven’t played the game, much less mapping. So you should hold off whether it’s enjoyable or not until you …. Actually know

really? you think controller in PoE2 is just a compatibility thing? you get to move with WASD now, you have A LOT of skills/other buttons to press, and they have a couch co-op mode. They even have a revive in campaign. I think I saw a game like this before....

I might not know what a boss fight is like, but we know very well that humans learn by repetition and through failure. So bosses have to have a very well telegraphed skills that are intuitive and not lethal, you know- couch co-op friendly content... otherwise this process will be simply not fun. which one do you think its going to be?

"

AintCare#6513 wrote:

"

Mashgesture#2912 wrote:

Terrible comparison. Controller support was added for access to play the game. That’s not game design or philosophy, that’s accessibility.


Pleasing, or attempting, to please a broad audience is always riskier and usually a failure. Not just in gaming but in business. Having a more narrow audience or customer base is always a better option, distinguishing oneself is better than being the same as everyone else. This is, again why, D4 fails so miserably, they try to please everyone and end up pleasing nearly no one(as seen by retail WoW as well)

You don’t know what learning a boss will be like yet. You haven’t played the game, much less mapping. So you should hold off whether it’s enjoyable or not until you …. Actually know

really? you think controller in PoE2 is just a compatibility thing? you get to move with WASD now, you have A LOT of skills/other buttons to press, and they have a couch co-op mode. They even have a revive in campaign. I think I saw a game like this before....

I might not know what a boss fight is like, but we know very well that humans learn by repetition and through failure. So bosses have to have a very well telegraphed skills that are intuitive and not lethal, you know- couch co-op friendly content... otherwise this process will be simply not fun. which one do you think its going to be?

Again, Controller support isn’t appeasing to the masses from a balance, or philosophical standpoint. It’s there to introduce people who may not have access or prefer a different mode of controls (game accessibility)

Much like settings we have that don’t alter gameplay:
Brightness
Contrast
Keybinding
Resolution
Etc etc




Saying you wont enjoy something, you haven’t played;I don’t know how you are coming to a conclusion whether you enjoy it or not.

The core game is still there so it’s not like they showed you an FPS and you hate shooters.

You sound like you just hate bossing in general in which case turn around now lmao.

Fortunately for me, I wait to actually taste something before I say I don’t like it. Up to you whether you want to assume, since that’s what you are doing, the worst about things you don’t experience, engage, experiment or test yourself.

Or simply say you don’t know until you actually experience it. There are small cases where this does not apply but in gaming this is not the case. We haven’t been shown end game or mapping and we(select few) got to play the early parts of the campaign. Would suggest some humility rather than knowing everything somehow.