GGG has taken the first step.

"

hasatt0 wrote:

The question really is, do you want your ARPG to be a trading simulator (AH or not) or want an SSF-balanced experience.

This is a false dichotomy (largely proliferated by GGG themselves).

There is zero intrinsic necessity for maintaining current levels of "availability" of any given resource, which is their argument against increasing quality of trading.

Tying one to the other is entirely the choice of GGG, and not one that is necessary in any fashion. They could itemize every aspect of the game tomorrow, not touch drop or "encounter" rates, and the game would vastly improve as a result (while not affecting SSF at all).

"

Pashid wrote:

Or just player with enough experience out of other games to already know about all the problems a instant buy system can cause. But I'm sure people are so thrilled about dealing with more market manipulation, bots and more rmt fiesta just for the sake of having a "instant buy" feature.

Poe2 and even PoE1 would be better without any trading at all, or the bare minimum of short allocated party trading the same way D3 did it.

You couldn't be more wrong.
And POE1/POE2 would be a virtual ghost town if there wasn't trade. You think GGG wants to lose all of that MTX money from people who only play trade?

The only thing trade in PoE has ever needed is to fill directly from the stash tab without having to go through the silly confirmation process that's in place now.

For those who won't buy a stash tab they can leave the trading channel in place and then come here to complain about getting ripped off.

"

Ceahlau wrote:

I like the current trading, has a bit of drama in it.

In my opinion people who want this instant trading they grew up with a ipads in their hands, and instant feedback and rewards. Might be a mindset clash between generations.

Not everything has to be instant. Even in the current trading you have to fight to get what you want. And its fine.

Seem to notice a correlation between people being pro instant buyout and having generally low achievement/investment in PoE too. Unfortunately it's already been decided so it is what it is. It's always someone else's fault.

We'll adapt, as usual. They'll find something else after to complain about instead.

"

Hanarae wrote:

"

Ceahlau wrote:

I like the current trading, has a bit of drama in it.

In my opinion people who want this instant trading they grew up with a ipads in their hands, and instant feedback and rewards. Might be a mindset clash between generations.

Not everything has to be instant. Even in the current trading you have to fight to get what you want. And its fine.

Seem to notice a correlation between people being pro instant buyout and having generally low achievement/investment in PoE too. Unfortunately it's already been decided so it is what it is. It's always someone else's fault.

We'll adapt, as usual. They'll find something else after to complain about instead.

Because one type of player wants changes for themselves, while players who are more invested in the game want what's best for the game. Generally speaking, of course. There will always be exceptions and confused people 'voting' against their own interests

"

Gulch wrote:

You couldn't be more wrong.
And POE1/POE2 would be a virtual ghost town if there wasn't trade. You think GGG wants to lose all of that MTX money from people who only play trade?

And how would they lose out on mtx money?
Players who've already paid for their tabs won't be able to get their money back out of the sudden, and people who enjoy the game will continue to buy packs and new mtx. Lot's of people would continue to play the game and the player count would likely be even higher past the few weeks cause more players get to enjoy the game without being frustrated about the trading or the terrible loot balance around trading. Only the very small part of trade heroes, rmt fucks and helpless instant gratification players would be upset and leave to a different game cause they have to play the game in order to gear up for content, and not straight up huy everything right away in various ways. Not a big loss for the game after all.

"

ArtCrusade wrote:

Because one type of player wants changes for themselves, while players who are more invested in the game want what's best for the game.

One of the most bankrupt types of argument is "Everything I want is for the overall good of the game, and everything people who disagree with me want is selfish and self interest and less informed".

You no longer even have to bother using logic, reasons, examples for your arguments, you just claim they are for the greater good and your opponent is selfish.

"

trixxar wrote:

"

ArtCrusade wrote:

Because one type of player wants changes for themselves, while players who are more invested in the game want what's best for the game.

One of the most bankrupt types of argument is "Everything I want is for the overall good of the game, and everything people who disagree with me want is selfish and self interest and less informed".

You no longer even have to bother using logic, reasons, examples for your arguments, you just claim they are for the greater good and your opponent is selfish.

I can see why you would argue that but I have seen enough examples of this over the years I've played the game to know it to be true. You are welcome to have your own opinion

“What’s best for the game” is a conveniently undefined idea, allowing it to sound like it must be a good goal (it must be, right?) without ever exposing itself to questioning by…meaning anything in particular.

"

GusTheCrocodile wrote:

“What’s best for the game” is a conveniently undefined idea, allowing it to sound like it must be a good goal (it must be, right?) without ever exposing itself to questioning by…meaning anything in particular.

Because what I said is a concept, not anything specific.

Something specific would be a new person complaining about the difficulty of endgame bosses. They'd state "endgame bosses are too hard" when really the statement should be "at my current skill level, I find them too difficult" and you would check their character and their character is a hot mess.

Maybe I didn't word it well enough and I'll grant you that