|
Personally id happily give up any and all uniques for making it easier to get decent rares. I had a shavs drop 2 days ago(the first ever rare unique ive had) and because i never ever expected it to drop i have no use for it lol o the irony. "Sell it" you say truly id rather vendor it then enter the madness that is POE trading.
"Blue warrior shot the food"
|
Posted bymaxoron Sep 1, 2015, 11:50:01 AM
|
"
So basically you're going to throw the concept of item scarcity out the window [Removed by Support]
This is a clear example of why it's important to design for your intended audience, not your audience. This game clearly has gotten more "accessible" over the years, increasing the audience, and increasing the screams for more garbage changes like these. "Wah wah I want more maps! I want more items!" These are the cries [Removed by Support] who don't understand that the longevity of the game depends on most people not getting to level 100 or having top tier builds, ever. And GGG is listening to them.
Consider Diablo II, the game whose footsteps you have followed so well. Do you know what killed off the long term population of that game? Duping. Once the previously super rare high runes were made to be common, everything became more accessible and the scarcity of the top tier of items made progression a joke. People suddenly found that they'd done everything, tried every meaningful build variant that had any appeal to them.
The only reason I can see for GGG to make a change so contradictory to the game's original design is money. These changes obviously serve to draw a wider audience. A wider audience means more money for GGG, both from new players and from players who previously liked the game, but didn't like it enough to spend money on it. This change to the core of the game itself, and at the expense of its original audience feels like more of a money grab than any cosmetic effect or supporter pack ever could. Please, GGG, please reconsider.
Progression is important. Item scarcity is important. Striving towards an item that very few players around you have is important.
Now, wait just a minute there! I play 4.5 hours/week! :)
|
Posted byDeletedon Sep 1, 2015, 11:50:03 AM
|
"
So basically you're going to throw the concept of item scarcity out the window [Removed by Support]
This is a clear example of why it's important to design for your intended audience, not your audience. This game clearly has gotten more "accessible" over the years, increasing the audience, and increasing the screams for more garbage changes like these. "Wah wah I want more maps! I want more items!" These are the cries [Removed by Support] who don't understand that the longevity of the game depends on most people not getting to level 100 or having top tier builds, ever. And GGG is listening to them.
Consider Diablo II, the game whose footsteps you have followed so well. Do you know what killed off the long term population of that game? Duping. Once the previously super rare high runes were made to be common, everything became more accessible and the scarcity of the top tier of items made progression a joke. People suddenly found that they'd done everything, tried every meaningful build variant that had any appeal to them.
The only reason I can see for GGG to make a change so contradictory to the game's original design is money. These changes obviously serve to draw a wider audience. A wider audience means more money for GGG, both from new players and from players who previously liked the game, but didn't like it enough to spend money on it. This change to the core of the game itself, and at the expense of its original audience feels like more of a money grab than any cosmetic effect or supporter pack ever could. Please, GGG, please reconsider.
Progression is important. Item scarcity is important. Striving towards an item that very few players around you have is important.
Although respecting your opinion I couldn't agree less. Did you complain about map drops in 1.3 being too good? If you didn't then 2.0 is still (considerably) worse.
As many people have said 0x4 is still zero. I play (easily) an average of 3-4 hours per day (as much as work and having a wife etc allows lol, it could already be considered borderline unhealthy). I havent had a T1 drop all season. Or decent T2 lol. I don't have enough currency to buy even one T2 because they are so rare now. Surely 100+ hours should give just a bit more right? (And I usually run some decent MF).
Having said that notice that I want my drops and builds hard and rare and satisfying unlike D3 excessive loot but when a game is so thoroughly unrewarding even hardcore players that really love it will quit sooner or later, and it's THESE PLAYERS that most play and promote the game (and support it) that GGG shouldn't want to lose.
Last edited by Rachel on Sep 1, 2015, 11:59:04 AM
|
Posted byDrakkon1on Sep 1, 2015, 11:53:56 AM
|
|
If ppl want to limit how fast the progression is we need some limits to trading. Because as it is atm, the smart way to "progress" is not to play the game, but to hang on poe trade whole day, fliping items for profit.
|
Posted byJergal2on Sep 1, 2015, 12:03:48 PM
|
|
PROPER AUCTION HOUSE IMPLEMENTED WHEN!?
▒█▀▀█ █▀▀█ █▀▀ █▀▀ █▀▀ ▒█▀▄▀█ G O O D MTX Seal of Quality
▒█▄▄█ █▄▄▀ █▀▀ ▀▀█ ▀▀█ ▒█▒█▒█ O Verified by M-posting, Inc.
▒█░░░ ▀░▀▀ ▀▀▀ ▀▀▀ ▀▀▀ ▒█░░▒█ Y
|
Posted byosaifhon Sep 1, 2015, 12:10:16 PM
|
|
I find it interesting that the majority of the people who do not like this change play in permanent leagues, where saturation is eventually going to occur regardless. You are all free to reroll in the temporary leagues if you feel that other people having good items decreases your enjoyment of the game. On top of that the parent leagues already contain legacy items that will never drop again.
Anarchy/Onslaught T shirt
Domination/Nemesis T shirt
Tempest/War Bands T shirt
|
Posted byreboticonon Sep 1, 2015, 12:28:33 PM
|
"
PROPER AUCTION HOUSE IMPLEMENTED WHEN!?
The answer is never.
The devs have mentioned several hundred times that an AH is against their core design theory and will never exist in Path of Exile.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad (for you) news.
|
Posted byDeletedon Sep 1, 2015, 12:29:00 PM
|
|
So it has begun... GG GGG -_-
|
Posted byGlurmoon Sep 1, 2015, 12:30:01 PM
|
"
So basically you're going to throw the concept of item scarcity out the window [Removed by Support]
This is a clear example of why it's important to design for your intended audience, not your audience. This game clearly has gotten more "accessible" over the years, increasing the audience, and increasing the screams for more garbage changes like these. "Wah wah I want more maps! I want more items!" These are the cries [Removed by Support] who don't understand that the longevity of the game depends on most people not getting to level 100 or having top tier builds, ever. And GGG is listening to them.
Consider Diablo II, the game whose footsteps you have followed so well. Do you know what killed off the long term population of that game? Duping. Once the previously super rare high runes were made to be common, everything became more accessible and the scarcity of the top tier of items made progression a joke. People suddenly found that they'd done everything, tried every meaningful build variant that had any appeal to them.
The only reason I can see for GGG to make a change so contradictory to the game's original design is money. These changes obviously serve to draw a wider audience. A wider audience means more money for GGG, both from new players and from players who previously liked the game, but didn't like it enough to spend money on it. This change to the core of the game itself, and at the expense of its original audience feels like more of a money grab than any cosmetic effect or supporter pack ever could. Please, GGG, please reconsider.
Progression is important. Item scarcity is important. Striving towards an item that very few players around you have is important.
Hold your horses. 4 x 0,00000000001 is still pretty scarce. You could probably multiply the chance with 10 and it would make but a tiny, tiny difference. The exception is that the community feels that GGG is listening to them (as they are).
''It was nice but not really great'' in memory of rondanashu 13.4.2016
|
Posted byrondanashuon Sep 1, 2015, 12:33:15 PM
|
|
I love it how everyone that has some of these upper tier items have all posted negative comments on this thread, while almost all the other commenters have been positive and supportive of the decision made by GGG.
Excellent change!!! :]
|
Posted bymrjoey523on Sep 1, 2015, 12:40:14 PM
|
