GET RID OF XP LOSS! Not fun at all, bad game design!
" Devs listen to feedback. They said they will work on preventing oneshots and other enemy balancing which is imo much much better than just remove xp penalty (and 1 portal) and call it a day. XP loss is only frustrating if happens too often which is something devs want to reduce. On the otherhand it also may indicate that you build suck which is completely in your hands to change. People argue that this lead to playing boring meta builds but that's just not true - you don't need to play these builds in order to not die and progress. That's just laziness of many players who don't want to invest their time in this game and improve. 最後に Sakanabi#6664 が 2025/01/16 4:18:20 に編集
|
|
" Agreed, I even pointed that out as a big difference between Sekiro/FS and POE2/GGG. Much louder voices than I complained about Sekiro and it was never adjusted in any way that I recall. " It doesn't need to be one or the other, nor should it. They can smooth out the difficulty and rebalance the death penalties at the same time. Enemy balancing just means you're less likely to get randomly 1-shotted on what should be an easy map just like the 5 maps prior. It doesn't address the fact you are heavily incentivised not to run maps that are even slightly challenging overall due to the XP loss. " It may or may not be within someone's power to change significantly depending if they are following guides or homebrewing or trading or SSF. But even if it is, anyone who got past the campaign knows they need to improve their character to improve their progress. The XP loss is like taking a sledgehammer to your car to try and pop out a dent. Or kicking someone in the face while they are on the floor. Completely overkill and just makes things worse. " You didn't address the point you made - it does incentivise using meta builds and therefore leads to that result. That's not the same as it being impossible to progress otherwise - you can, it's a just slow, boring and frustrating experience. " Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better. Most players are happy to invest their time and improve, in fact that's necessary to even get through the campaign. They just don't want to be kicked in the face every time they stumble in the process. |
|
" You can walk into McDonalds and order a Whopper a thousand times, but you'll still be rightfully judged for doing it, but sure...nothing stopping you. |
|
" That's a terrible argument and you surely know it. I'm not posting on Blizzard's website asking them to change POE2. The better analogy is I am going to Burger King and asking for a Whopper without Onions. Or gherkins. Or whatever the least popular Whopper ingredient is. Or in fact, it's like BK have been putting sawdust in their Whoppers which most people have decided to just chew carefully for added fibre or spit out. But I'm suggesting their Whoppers would be much improved without the sawdust, imagine how many more customers they might have. Nothing in GGGs design ethos or their Pillars necessitates or even implies XP loss as some core immutable feature, the devs have even said so themselves. Mark said he'd rather change this than the 1 portal system and described it as "insult to injury". Jonathan is clearly reconsidering it as he said "maybe that's not the right way to think about it". So, they are listening. As they should, because it's completely valid feedback on their new game. I believe this scares some people because they have learned to accept it from years of POE1, they feel somehow protective over this pet feature they think adds something valuable, rather than accepting it could be improved and trying to suggest better solutions to the same problem they try to shut down the discussion instead. 最後に Orion_3T#9801 が 2025/01/16 4:54:18 に編集
|
|
" Not at all. There are tons of people who come in here asking for things against the core of the company's game design choices, and usually demanding, not asking. People don't usually give the "this game is not for you, stop trying to change it" if you ask for clarification on which is the top tier for each affix. It's when people come in going "XP ON DEATH MEANS YOU NEVER GET MY MONEY WHICH IS WORTH MORE THAN ALL THE OTHER MONEY >.<" that you get the McDonalds Whopper response. |
|
" But it adds something valuable. It adds extra layer of tension to mapping. It's like increasing bet in poker each time you play but in PoE you can influence which cards you use. If you die before lvl 90, you can get those xp back quite easily of your build does not suck. Levels above 90 are just something extra which should be chased only th most dedicated players and those know the stakes. If you die alot then you need to improve. 最後に Sakanabi#6664 が 2025/01/16 5:06:16 に編集
|
|
" But it adds something valuable. It adds extra layer of tension to mapping. It's like increasing bet in poker each time you play but in PoE you can influence which cards you use. If you die before lvl 90, you can get those xp back quite easily of your build does not suck. Levels above 90 are just something extra which should be chased only by the most dedicated players and those know the stakes. If you die alot then you need to improve. 最後に Sakanabi#6664 が 2025/01/16 5:07:23 に編集
|
|
" It isn't core, their last interview made that clear for those who didn't believe it before. They had their reasons for keeping it in, they are now reconsidering those reasons in light of the fact they added other ways to make death meaningful. Multiple axes as Mark puts it. Death being meaningful is something they don't want to lose, that's clear. And I agree with that. But it doesn't necessitate losing XP, an idea they are apparently coming around to. There are better ways to achieve the same thing and they already implemented some. Jonathan was asked about this in a pre-release interview and absolutely left it open for reconsideration. He could easily have said "XP loss is something we aren't willing to compromise on" and made it clear but he didn't. Quite the opposite. If he had, it would have shut all of this down (ok maybe not all, but I certainly wouldn't be wasting my time if he had said something like this). Their latest interview was even more open to it, Mark in particular did not seem to like it using the phrase "insult to injury". |
|
" The goal of "death should have consequences" is valuable, but it can be achieved in better ways. XP loss is a very blunt instrument that feels frustrating and punishing because it removes progress from previous successes. They already implemented some of that - losing the map, dropped loot, map mods, map mechanics and so on. Lots of other suggestions have been made, for example give bonus XP on map completion and increase that bonus XP for every successive map completion. Adjust XP curve if necessary to compensate. It's going backwards that sucks. |
|
" They only said that about “possibly before 90…” So even if there were a change, which there won’t be, it would still be in the game |
|
