Dear GGG..

"

ExaltedReapers#1455 a écrit :

(Edited for clarity)
Teetering on whether to do this or not since I was first placed on probation, but I'm right and I'm tired of coming here and seeing others disagree on objective truths in video games.

The endgame is too punishing, which seems to be well-established in the community. But the general sentiment; that any changes regarding loss of XP/Maps will kill the developer's vision of the game, or ruin the playerbase’s fun, needs to be checked.

Games are entertainment products first and foremost. Not challenges, not art, not scoreboards to be climbed, and especially not jobs. A game can be difficult, absolutely. Can a game be extremely punishing/unfair? Yes. But when it comes to MMOs, there has to be a balance to this, otherwise, you cap your player base and limit any growth potential.

What you say is, in fact, not "objective truth".

Furthermore, your statement about "what a game is" is heavily flawed.
Games are entertainment products, period. And depending on the game you play and what kind of person you are the entertainment of a game varies.
Some games have the challenge as their main focus, some are mainly about lore and art, some are about competition, and some are based on time investment or a combination of multiple things.

People don't play "Journey" (2012) because of the competition, they play it because of the art.

People don't play "Counter-Strike" because of the lore, they play it for the competition.

You get the point.

The art, lore, competition, challenge, whatever... THAT'S the entertainment.
If the "entertainment" of a game is not for you - the game is probably not for you.

Different games are made for different ppl for different reasons.
"Path of Exile 2" is NOT an MMO, it is an ARPG and thus comes with some things you find in other games of the genre and some unique changes.

The "10% exp loss" has a deeper reason than "GGG wants to punish you", it's a bumper to prevent you from "brute forcing", so you improve before you go further.

The "1 death per map" makes sense too and is not some new thing in gaming they came up with.
Here is your map (dungeon) go in and kill everything and at the end, you get your loot, but if you die you don't. The only difference is, that GGG allows you to get your loot while running the "dungeon", so it's even less difficult than a classic dungeon crawler.

You say the game does not respect your time, I say... you don't respect the game.

"

ExaltedReapers#1455 a écrit :

Easy, I don't delude myself on what a purchase means. I was talking with my friends about the value of painted art and how its entirely subjective and that artist can charge especially whatever they want as long as there are customers that are willing to pay. My friends all thought I was stupid for being willing to pay (if I had money like that) 5 figures for an original hand painted piece that I liked, and guess what I agreed with there reasoning. I didn't delude myself with sweat nothings about how the art will surely go up if/when the artists passes, or how I was doing some noble thing by supporting a local aspiring artist. They were right, its a little silly that I would essentially gamble on the value of something like that when the value is entirely subjective and there's nothing to show that it will even maintain the value id be willing to pay. I don't lie to myself that multimillion dollar companies are making these entertainment products simply for the love of the game, I know they are only truly interested in profit because they literally have a legal obligation to be as such. I framed my post as such to appeal to GGG not the "gamer", average or hardcore. I spoke to them as a customer dissatisfied with there experience and laid out my reasons for it. In the end only time will tell if the experience I had is enough to effect the numbers and will all come down to whether GGG is willing to tank a hit to sales to satisfy there vision or bow out to the market. Games are not anything more then products to the companies that sell them regardless of the beauty beholden in the eyes of fans.

Why did you quote me and write all that? What the heck does that have to do with anything I said or even what you said? Why didn't you write it in a less obnoxious format so someone could actually read it?

Nothing you wrote leads to the last sentence that you threw in there, I sincerely hope you realize that....

And lets talk about that last sentence, since its the only thing that really makes any sort of sense in that *cough* paragraph.

"Games are not anything more than products to the companies that sell them"

Yes.....that's true. But it ignores nearly everything about WHY that product was even made in the first place. The product doesn't just magically appear. It's not something that's left at the doorstep of a company with a "sell me" sign on it. It is a conscious project, with specific rationale that goes into WHY it will sell, WHY its a product even worth making in the first place, etc

And what are those reasons? Well...the second half of your sentence: "the beauty beholden in the eyes of fans". That is the reason for the product's entire existence.

In fact, unlike some art that is exclusively made for the artist's personal pleasure with no interest in profit or sale, companies make games for the EXPRESS PURPOSE of selling them, with the customer's tastes re: "beauty" being one of the most important drivers of the development. Otherwise....it wouldn't sell. Otherwise.....it's a huge waste of money and manpower. Otherwise....it would not exist.


And boy, you are mixing up subjective and objective all over the freaking place.
Objective = not influenced by your own emotions and feelings
Subjective = yes influenced by your own emotions and feelings

1) It is an "objective truth" that products such as games are designed with the customer's needs and feelings and thoughts in mind. That is precisely what makes it a product. There does not exist a "product" being sold that this isn't true about.
2) It is a "subjective truth" that you may or may not like the product being offered.
3) It is an "objective truth" that games are art and/or a challenge and/or a competition and/or a job. Subjectively, they may not represent that TO YOU.
4) Entertainment itself is "subjective". Some prefer challenge, some prefer idle cakewalks. Some prefer music, some prefer silence. Some prefer paintings, some prefer movies. Some prefer reading and will never ever touch a video game. The "value" you place on any of that (such as your art purchase example i guess) is utterly meaningless in the context you were responding to or that you yourself wrote in the OP.


You know....I just spent a solid 5-10 minutes re-reading your initial post (not sure why I did), and I can't find a single sentence that is "objective" or even a "truth". The only statement that came close was about D4's broad "appeal". I say close because appeal is yet another subjective term. D4 sold a crapton of games marking it as exceedingly successful (objective truth), but that is not equivalent to having "broad appeal" (subjective opinion).

As for your edited explanation of MMO being the "original term" for live service.......that is laugh out loud made up nonsense. Since the literal invention of "graphics" in gaming back in the 80s, MMO has only ever meant "massively multiplayer online" ie: many people in one shared game space, at the same time.

It never EVER referred to just any and all online games with a lot of players.