Diablo 4 announces that there will be a campaign skip ... its time for POE to do the same

I'm pretty casual, myself. There was a time when races weren't multi-day events, and I was mebbe... a little less casual, though I achieved my goals by brute force no-lifing, rather than any particular expertise.

Still playing, enjoying the current league, still not racing to get to maps (which, to me, are like the rides at Disneyland: You know they're supposed to be this wonderful fantasy, but then you sit down in the plastic seat with the bar over your lap, and they just don't compare to your childhood dreams...) There's no journey involved with mapping; you just pop in your li'l stone tablet and then you're there.

I look forward to the new campaign, and still enjoy fetching the Allflame for Fairgraves, wiping out the Bandit Lords, putting Dominus in his place, beating Kaom and Daresso in their own arenas, and all the rest of it. Their other-named dopplegangers in maps aren't part of any quest; they're just the meatiest part of the opposition. As for the bosses only found in maps, there's no context, just some amped-up mob at the end of the zone about whom I've never heard anything before.

Kinda sad. Like that ride at Disneyland which promises wonder but smells of grease and some kid's sick, and never delivers on the promise of the "Most Magical Place on Earth." ='[.]'=

"

Phrazz wrote:

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

Your response, sir?

My response? I think you're not reading enough into "in mind". Is most of the game designed for them? Maybe not. Do this 'economy' you're talking about need them? I would probably say yes.

And bringing up PvP ladders and races, where probably 0.0001% of the player base cares enough to even offer it a glance, is probably not the argument to use here, is it?

Maybe this hole debacle comes down to how we define 'casual'? Or is that a set term? I've always considered me a casual player, playing when I have the time between job, family, other hobbies and chores. Am I a 'veteran' in the ARPG scene? Sure. Have I ever played any of them PvP or cared about a ladder? Never. Have I ever raced? No.

I think most 'hardcore games' can be enjoyed by casuals, and I think most 'hardcore games' have systems in place for casual players in mind. PoE doesn't have many, but it has some.

'In mind' to me reads as some form of 'gives consideration to', and I'm afraid you haven't responded sufficiently to that at all. At most, what it wants to do, as someone else put it, is convert them from 'casual' to 'casual+' (a term only an Exile desperate not to acknowledge how hardcore POE is by its very nature could deploy with a straight face). I would suggest you step outside this particular circle and check out more generic gaming communities for their take on PoE but that's just inviting more subjective input. If I say I have and continue to do that, and mostly I see various flavours of 'I really like PoE as a concept but it's a job to play', will you take my word for it? And can we then build on that and see it as, perhaps, PoE as a concept being attractive to casuals/more generic gamers, but not at all made 'with them in mind'?

Of course you are right: we need to agree on what a casual is. I have already said in the past that I don't believe anyone who plays PoE even vaguely seriously is 'casual' by an overall definition of 'casual gaming' -- but then there is the rejoinder, sounding a heck of a lot like a person who drinks a litre of booze a day pointing out that some people drink 2 litres a day so they can't be THAT bad, that one can be a casual player of PoE within the spectrum of PoE players. And that's true, but it's a relative scale where even the most internally casual still sits in the more hardcore end of the gaming spectrum at large.

So I am speaking specifically about casual gamers, not casual PoE players. You specify that you are a casual PoE player and, well, I've already established that's not what I'm talking about. Does PoE cater to casual PoE players? Of course -- they're PoE players precisely because the game somehow caters to them, or at least gives them enough to work with. And frankly I couldn't give three fifths of a shit about how much or how little an Exile plays PoE. If that somehow makes them feel better about things, cool. If they want to call themselves 'casual' because they only play at this time for these hours, also cool. But as long as we are talking purely about PoE, they are not 'casual gamers' in the broader sense. That sounds absolute but what I really mean is they are not playing a game that is plug and play, or has a nicely built tutorial integrated into the start of the game, or gives players all the tools they need to 'finish' the game. Certainly, few GAAS do, which is why -- and here we come to the crux -- no one who plays a GAAS regularly, who engages with the demands of a GAAS, is a casual gamer. Fortnite might be the exception to that rule, because oh boy is that a cazh GAAS. Not necessarily a bad thing.

And lastly I think it's hard to defend PoE as a game made 'with casuals in mind' when any and all suggestions to introduce elements that would be casual-friendly are met with a LOT of local resistance by those who identify as Exiles. Whether said change is 'good' or 'bad' (with good in my estimation being the topic of the thread, bad being, I dunno, free respecs with no restrictions) is irrelevant.

It was just a strange hill you picked to die on -- a hill most Exiles happily avoid and even the devs don't really want to consider. Which is fine! PoE's entire schtick has been 'this game isn't for casuals but if it sucks you in, it sucks you in fucking good and hard'. There are worse approaches to game design.

___

Innervation: a second campaign is an incredible thing to sell an expansion on. In fact, it's probably the only thing they COULD do to justify the designation of 'sequel' -- so as usual, I think it's mostly marketing and hype. It really has nothing to do with what I say when I point out that 'good enough' isn't good enough in a situation with sufficient competition. In other words, 'Path of Exile 2' needed a content injection of 'camapaign' size to exist -- OR, and I think this more likely, they were tossing about the notion of a second campaign and realised they could flog it as a sequel.

As you pointed out, an alternative levelling system independent of campaign (be it 1 or 2) would be less work, but it's also insufficient a content addition to earn a '2'. Ironically I think an alterative levelling system offered to players who have already experienced either campaign enough to skip the dialogue and make quest choices on autopilot would squeeze far more longevity out of the game...and if there's one thing ARPGs need to be good at, it's squeezing longevity out of the game with content recycling.

So my statement stands: GGG haven't introduced such a system despite calls for them for over a decade now because they don't have to -- Exiles seem weirdly content with replaying the turgid campaign over and again, probably because it's part of playing their favourite game and they can't conceive of that game being 'just as good' if it were to embrace something other, lesser ARPGs have done (instead of the more logical, historically accurate attitude of, 'PoE does what other ARPGs do, only it does it better' -- which is, amusingly, the entire premise of the game's existence). BUT they do have to introduce a much more expensive, exhausting, resource-draining second campaign because that is the superficial selling point of the so-called sequel. The real meat and bones will likely be the gem system overhaul but good luck attracting new players with that.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

Innervation: a second campaign is an incredible thing to sell an expansion on. In fact, it's probably the only thing they COULD do to justify the designation of 'sequel'

Is it though? Or, better said, wouldn't something like:
1) Massive overhaul of the game's endgame with something innovatory like an atlas passive skill tree
2) A sweeping change to game's functional system(s), like gem-links instead of item-links
3) Introduced an alternative leveling system(s)
4) Added/reworked some extra ascendancy(ies), a bunch of new gems, and did some graphical updates

Wouldn't that qualify for 2?

To me, it would. 1 happened in 3.19, 3 would be endless heist/delve events integrated into the core game or straight up mapping from lvl1, 4 gets done bit by bit in each patch, so what's left is 2, which is already announced.

Imo the whole 'we need a new campaign to call it PoE 2' is an idea stuck in the mindset from the times when ARPGs had no endgame, the campaign being the main content.

I think it's important not to get bogged down in nuance, or semantics, in trying to define a "casual". We have the same issue when discussing build viability. (If you beat the campaign is that a good build?)

If you look at the percentages of players that make it to just maps, it's surprisingly low. Hell just clearing the acts (and Ziz just made a video about the campaign recently) can take "new" players and "casuals" 20+ hours sometimes. That could represent a number of weeks for some.

Not mention the cost of entry knowledge wise in PoE, and the amount of information you need to know. Compunding this is the fact that the pendulum is constantly swinging. It's likely, even if you just play Standard, your character passives get reset a few times a year, and you might not even know specifically why. Shit your build might not even work anymore! It's honestly crazy how unstable the game is balance wise, and how meme worthy GGG has become in obliterating builds and items. Nerf gods, truly.

Anyways if you are trying to view a "casual" game experience through a lens of a player that has been here 10 years and hasn't missed many leagues, I'm sorry, but you're a PoE veteran. Perhaps not investing as much time as previously, but it's not like you forget everything you know, and you are still plugged into the game.

I suppose people can choose to identify themselves however they want. Im certainly not going to have my mind changed on this. On how PoE is designed and who it is designed for. I've gone over it too many times to count with D4 coming, and it's different approach to different gamers. PoE is absolutely desgined with a more experienced and committed player in mind.

That's not a bad thing mind you, it's just that a function of that philosophy often alienates, or is flat out hostile, to new players and casual gamers. It's not like GGG doesn't know this, or we are breaking any news in this thread. It's clearly not a priority for them in game functionality, and they are happy (presumably), just grabbing casual money as it comes from sheer F2P volume. And honestly that was/is well and good, because there were not (imo), very solid alternatives. GGG has done very well for itself.

D4 is changing that in a big way, and I think the volumes of players we are discussing will be significant. GGG will have a long way to go to capture back the casual gamer (if they even want that), and I don't see how PoE 4.0 does that. It's literally designed in opposition. My view is that all the PoE player-hostile design, the more punishing aspects of the game, combined with the total lack of respect for the players time, has alienated a huge swath of them. They are more than ready to jump ship. We will know how many VERY soon.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

I have already said in the past that I don't believe anyone who plays PoE even vaguely seriously is 'casual' by an overall definition of 'casual gaming'

This is clearly where the heart of this discussion lies, because I wholeheartedly disagree here. As I said, as a player that doesn't chase ladders, doesn't care about challenges or "doing everything", doesn't care about ubers, races, 'making bank', measure himself actively versus other players, that plays other games with his friends during an opening launch weekend, have a 8-16 job with tons of 'homework', have other hobbies and a "family" to "entertain", I absolutely consider myself in the ballpark of "casual". Casual+? Sure, but if we have to break "casual" into sub categories, we're already sidetracked.

Do I think PoE is a casual game? Not in its entirety, no. Do I think PoE can be enjoyed casually? Absolutely. Do I think many players are playing PoE casually? Yes I do. Is a player that enjoys PoE for 7 hours a week automatically less "casual" than a player that enjoys Diablo X for 7 hours a week?

I've always defined a "casual player" based on how he enjoys a game and how (non-)committed he is at doing it at a high level, picking up the game to enjoy it for a while when he has the chance/time - and not what game he chooses to play or for how long he's enjoyed it. But hey, based on this thread, I'm clearly wrong. I can probably accept that.

Chiming in to say that I am enjoying this thread and the various intelligent viewpoints.

Carry on please.

"

Xyel wrote:

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

Innervation: a second campaign is an incredible thing to sell an expansion on. In fact, it's probably the only thing they COULD do to justify the designation of 'sequel'

Is it though? Or, better said, wouldn't something like:
1) Massive overhaul of the game's endgame with something innovatory like an atlas passive skill tree
2) A sweeping change to game's functional system(s), like gem-links instead of item-links
3) Introduced an alternative leveling system(s)
4) Added/reworked some extra ascendancy(ies), a bunch of new gems, and did some graphical updates

Wouldn't that qualify for 2?

No. None of those come even close to being enough for a sequel. I can't see anyone who isn't already an Exile even getting a slight flutter of interest over any of that.

@Phrazz: irreconcilable difference of stance then. Fair enough. DS44 is right as well; we are all probably 'correct' using our own definitions of 'casual'.

So I suppose there's just one thing left to do: figure out *GGG's* idea of casual gamer. Not casual PoE player, for whom they do make the game to some greater or lesser degree (again, in the hopes of converting them to something more hardcore and happy to open their wallets regularly). Actual casual gamer.

Amusingly, I reckon they could probably start by looking in a mirror.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

No. None of those come even close to being enough for a sequel. I can't see anyone who isn't already an Exile even getting a slight flutter of interest over any of that.

Why did people get the flutter for no man's sky then?

Conceptually, that game's premise was exactly the same as PoE's mapping and the hype for it was incredible.

Now, I will try to make my point differently. Almost all other game genres start with their main mode. Counterstrike doesn't have a campaign that you have to play before you can queue in for a match. Nor do mobas, battle royales, other shooters, 4X games, card collectors, and many others.

PoE's main game mode is mapping. It's the part of the game everyone loves, the reason people keep returning to the game, and by far and wide the strongest feature of the game.

Why does there have to be a completely different, mandatory game mode that is required to be completed before one can start playing the actual game mode.

That makes no sense.

"

Xyel wrote:

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

No. None of those come even close to being enough for a sequel. I can't see anyone who isn't already an Exile even getting a slight flutter of interest over any of that.

Why did people get the flutter for no man's sky then?

Conceptually, that game's premise was exactly the same as PoE's mapping and the hype for it was incredible.

Excellent that you'd bring up No Man's Sky because it is quite possibly the perfect example to counter your argument re: what constitutes a sequel.

People 'got the flutter' for NMS because, as a proc-gen space exploration game, it was truly something new, not a mere content addition to an existing game trying to pass as a sequel (which is exactly what PoE '2' is to me). People ALSO got the flutter for Path of Exile before it 'released' as something new too (a more complex D2+FFVII gems+FFX skill grid+Torchlight 'treasure maps'+dead babies on a beach=!!!!) -- don't forget, I was there for that too. In both cases, the flutter was warranted. In both cases, it'd take years to really see that. And in both cases, the underlying motivation would reveal itself and show us who the developers really were and what they really wanted.

Now, I'm a Day One Traveller/Interloper. Still have my physical Ps4 copy, kept the faith, played all of No Man's Sky's iterations (pun intended), all that. I have over 20 PoE garments and they mostly occupy a drawer of shame these days (except the hoodie, which is thin enough to be comfy on a fairly warm day); I have only one NMS T-Shirt and I wear it proudly.

Because where I think Grinding Gear Games sold out and are now getting *way* ahead of themselves with this 'Path of Exile 2' business, Hello Games have only fairly recently gone from 'way ahead of themselves' to 'genuine success story delivering on what was promised'. GGG started as the underdog to Blizzard's supremacy; HG debuted as a golden child of Sony. Chris and Sean are both serious wunderkind, and both of them changed the landscape of the Live Service industry. PoE remains the gold standard for 'fair' free to play; No Man's Sky created its own style of service with many of the features of the GAAS but none of the free to play trappings (emphasis on 'trap').

Although NMS is neither f2p nor cursed with mtxes, there are some interesting parallels with PoE in its history. There have been over 20 significant updates/overhauls since its launch, all of them absolutely free. Two were basically version upgrades: Next and Beyond (although Next and Origins are 2.0 and 3.0 respectively). Similarly, PoE has had 2.0 (Awakening) and 3.0 (Fall of Oriath). Both have seasonal content, although the NMS version of a league (Expedition) is much more laid-back and structured to drive a certain short-form narrative each time -- and HG tend to rerun them so there's little to no FOMO involved, whereas PoE is sort of built on various flavours of FOMO. Being a game as product, NMS simply doesn't need to rely on that.

Conversely, PoE has been fuelled by a mixture of pay for convenience and pay to not look like a tin can on legs (for those who'd rather look like a christmas tree on legs instead). NMS is a one-off purchase. Such is the cost of its horrifically bad launch -- HG were so desperate to regain goodwill they gave and continue to give away content that pretty much anyone else would monetise, one way or another. The road back from a catastrophic launch after a literally unbelievable amount of hype is neither easy nor quick. So where PoE, w has done nothing but climb consistently from its humble roots, used incremental updates to sell mtxes and support packs, NMS has had to use them just to get back to zero. And it took years. Redemption is just that much harder to attain than simple ascension.

So -- some similarities, some differences.

But at no point would HG have the hubris or almost blatant desperation to rename their game 'No Man's Sky 2' as a result of an expansion. And that's why you bringing it up is so good: you're asking why people 'get a flutter' for it? Because it's a single game operating as such. Because while it might have some conceptual similarities to PoE (although that's not the word I'd use, not given the abovementioned factors -- 'operational' would be closer), it has been through hell to get where to where it is. PoE...not so much.

Hello Games have had their redemption arc, so to speak, while Grinding Gear Games have yet to even really struggle in comparison. They started as the underdogs but didn't so much have to struggle as simply wait for the competition to shit its own bed, repeatedly. PoE launched well, and has just grown since. NMS...well, Sean Murray celebrated once it finally made it to 'mostly positive' reviews on steam. Years after its release. Their studio was flooded in the middle of NMS' development, costing them a whole hell of a lot of resources (although as Sean points out in the article, most of their work was backed up). And even now they're giving shit away that, honestly, they really shouldn't have to. That is the price they paid (and continue to pay) for their terrible launch. For Murray's many missteps as an ill-conceived PR machine. I'm not saying it didn't pay off eventually (I figure sales for NMS are just fine now -- HG is hardly a charity) but they had to work on that one product, for years, with no real profit other than one-off sales.

I cannot conceive of any feasible addition to NMS that would justify it being called 'No Man's Sky 2'. It would just look silly. Why employ such a marketing ploy when the entire aim has been to get people to approve of and buy 'No Man's Sky' as it is, as it continues to be? Not a new campaign (they already did that), not a system overhaul (they've done that too), not different levelling systems (whether we're talking wealth, combat prowess, base expansion, space combat effectiveness...they've done all that too, and continue to do that), not even a new engine. Making 'No Man's Sky' better is far, far superior to somehow getting it to some arbitrary point of improvement 'justifying' calling it a sequel.

Technically Path of Exile 4.0 should be exempt PoE from 'evolving game' awards and accolades -- if GGG want to flog it as a sequel, traditionally a 'new game', let it be judged as such. A new thing. But of course that's where GGG get to have their cake and eat it too: they get to market 4.0 as a 'numbered sequel' but of course since it's not actually a new game, it can still be considered just another evolution of the core game.

Of course, I'd be perfectly happy if a certain other game came along and stole their cake away, forcing them to remember how to full-bake their content additions and not just half-bake, but eh, realistically I don't see that happening. There'll always be Exiles eager to pretzel their noodles to justify GGG's 'good enough'.

And that's enough good metaphors for one post, I think.

Also, there's some repetition in there as I added to various edits but I'm about 98% over writing this and 100% sure I've said enough on the matter, so eh, deal. I've got Inteceptor ships to salvage and claim, hilariously simple space economies to exploit, and a weird mech to finish tricking out.

How alternative leveling may work:

-Level from 1 to 68 to unlock map device.
-Labs get unlocked at level 33,55 and 68
-Can choose any zone from the acts from the start at any order
-These zones contain different objectives or mini events
-Maybe introduce complete NEW tile sets/zone layouts and monster types for the alternative leveling
-as an extra: use Descent league as another option to level to 68

Alternative leveling modes: Endless Heist & Delve / Descent / random campaign zones in any order with different objectives and events / Complete new zone layouts + tile sets + monsters types (unlikely since PoE likes to recycle assets and give them just another color)

Again this campaign skip/alternative leveling gets unlocked once players beat the campaign the first time in a new league. Also you can still do the campaign as usual if you want to.