Im fine with the EXP Penalty.
" Yes, that is what is considered normal these days in a lot of games. There are plenty of games out there that offer maxed level players with min/maxed builds stuff to do in end game. In some games, getting to max level and having a finished build is just a formality and then the real game begins. As opposed to this game's end, where all the most frustrating factors of the game culminate into a mash up of annoyance, which almost seems to be designed to make people want to go away and stop playing. It's almost like playing part of a game has been turned into a business model that brings enough fun at the beginning to get some money for needed stash tabs out of players, then later, nudges people out to save bandwidth costs. Maybe. I'm not sure, but it does kind of make sense. And, it would make for a more efficient business model. Even having people spend most of the time offline chasing trades instead of it being handled in-game. Makes me go hmm... |
|
" wait, so you rather have 'formality' than excitement? how does that even compute here? |
|
" I'm not saying that the leveling part doesn't have to be entertaining. It normally is. But, end-game is where the rest of the game is in those games, and the leveling portion ends up being a small part of the total experience. Edit: Like, for example, in this game. What if you had enough content to be max level and have your build all done by the end of the campaign. Then, the end game could be all about honing your skills and trying to finish the maps. Not to say there wouldn't need to be some adjustments made with that, like all the creature levels could be flatter with some amount of increasing difficulty. My main point is that, yes, you can make an end-game that still has engaging activities to do, without leveling being a part of it. Plenty of games do that. People need to try to think outside of the GGG box. Dernière édition par GeoFruck#1167, le 14 févr. 2025 16:58:20
|
|
" but XP is about levelling. The whole thread is about levelling, and the higher you go in lvl the higher the stakes are when you die. how can you prefer a formality over that? it would quite literally remove the game out of the game... edit to edit- content is irrelevant here, this is about xp loss, which is one aspect of the game you would literally remove out of the game. there game doen't require for you to be 100, its just a side quest with negligible benefits you can partake in. you just want it removed for some reaosn Dernière édition par AintCare#6513, le 14 févr. 2025 17:01:52
|
|
|
The game, as a whole, is over constrained. To run tier 15+ maps your field of choice in terms of passives and gear is very narrow. The huge cost of dying narrows choice even more by saying not only do you need to play a build that is capable of clearing 15+, but you must be able to do so with 99% success rate in order to progress your level.
If they want to keep the death punishments they need to release constraints elsewhere (viable mobility skills, viable life stacking, armor that is actually worth something, etc.) |
|
" Okay, I get where you are coming from now. My initial comment was more directed toward the previous guy, who seemed to be baffled about what you do in a game when you reach max level. I was pointing out that there could be additions/adjustments made to the game to address that. For the record, I think the xp penalty is a lazy, artificial way to extend the time it takes for people to progress. With my second point, I was pondering whether or not it is an intentional mechanic, which is designed to annoy people into quitting the game. The devs have known for a long time that most players are annoyed by it, and even spun a bunch of marketing propaganda as to why it's there. The problem is, that's not why it's there, that's just lines for fanboys to regurgitate. So, why is it there? I think the most likely reason is to knowingly annoy people into leaving and stop sucking up bandwidth. By that point, (and I'm sure there are metrics to show when people make most of their purchases, earlier when gear starts stacking and people want to stash it) people have spent the most they are likely to spend, so are just being expenses. So, from a business perspective, "nudging" them out makes the most sense. At least imho, so it's probably not going to go anywhere. This would happen with most people. The rest of the folks, who stay and stick it out for whatever reason, well, they get heavily invested and immersed into the PoE world, and likely greatly appreciate all the time they can waste on this "free" game. So, they get their "I'm hardcore" chubbies, appreciate GGG, and also show their appreciation in returning monetary form. P.S. They wouldn't be able to sell the Chinese players the tokens that prevent xp loss if they got rid of it. So, I doubt it will happen, but I am against it from a gamer's perspective of one who looks for entertainment. |
|
" devs explained why its there, most of you are not interested in understanding those reasons tho, you just pick them apart or state unrelated speculative bs. |
|
" Right, and those that want your money are just going to be straight up and honest with you. They've never changed their story, put out a misleading marketing campaign, or any other kind of shenanigans. Go ahead and keep believing that. You're just the kind of customer they are looking for. |
|
" Outdated? You're the problem with modern triple a games. | |
" I was first on here to call their initial '100% free to play model' BS. you binning XP penalty into monetization via 3d chess is yet another tactic to convince more ppl to join your demands of making the game have less risks, which if done enough will destroy this game. |
|
