Is this what it means "throwing the towel"?

I haven't looked but my gut says that Legacy was one of the most popular leagues. My gut is often wrong though, and quite biased because I freakin' loved Legacy.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

I haven't looked but my gut says that Legacy was one of the most popular leagues. My gut is often wrong though, and quite biased because I freakin' loved Legacy.

Popular in which sense? How people regard it after the fact?

"

ArtCrusade wrote:

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

I haven't looked but my gut says that Legacy was one of the most popular leagues. My gut is often wrong though, and quite biased because I freakin' loved Legacy.

Popular in which sense? How people regard it after the fact?

Oh no, in the sense we're talking about here. Steamcharts and retention. I figure a league that gives that much freedom over which 'league' mechanic you use would keep people around longer than one that has only one such gimmick. It's kind of cheating but it's also not.

For me personally, especially in a F2P game, player retention and engagement are the most important.

You do this in terms of percentages so that it's an even comparison.

PoE has obviously grown significantly, so raw player numbers are up, but if the percentage of those players don't engage, or quit (this league at record pace), thats... well bluntly, a problem.

Having a ton of people play your game is great. Having them leave in record fashion because the league is subpar, is not.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

"

ArtCrusade wrote:

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

I haven't looked but my gut says that Legacy was one of the most popular leagues. My gut is often wrong though, and quite biased because I freakin' loved Legacy.

Popular in which sense? How people regard it after the fact?

Oh no, in the sense we're talking about here. Steamcharts and retention. I figure a league that gives that much freedom over which 'league' mechanic you use would keep people around longer than one that has only one such gimmick. It's kind of cheating but it's also not.

Legacy wasn't actually that popular and well received. Perandus wasn't adjusted and mostly irrelevant, managing league stones was tedious as fuck and let's not forget the exploit that became known late enough to already ruin the economy. For a 6 month league that alone was a reason to quit for many. The addition of SSF was very nice however and in my personal opinion, despite its flaws, Legacy was a nice send off for the 2.X era.

I would like to see something similar for when PoE 1 eventually gets an actual 4.0 patch at some point.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

TQ after GD would be INCREDIBLY difficult to enjoy. GD overcooks TQ from a TQ perspective, but from a GD perspective, TQ is a mere melody to GD's symphony.

Especially with mods. My god GD mods hard. Adding D3 classes, TQ classes...shit like that. Great.

But TQ2 will be different since it's not from Ironlore/Crate. It's THQ Nordic, and so far their additions to TQ have been...uneven. So that's why I said it's a dark horse atm. No one quite knows what THQN can produce from scratch...

the graphics in GD are far much more modern than tq.
gd discards the concept of "different difficulty upgrade mats"
gd reworked recipe scrolls into "memorized formulas" so you no longer need to farm the scrolls.
gd introduced the constellation system which gave a new level of scaling and is a fun sort of minipuzzle.
gd is constantly updated by the devs with recently adding ability to active roll/dodge and basic life/mana potions are "unlimited" but are on cooldown and dont require purchase.

so many improvements.

but i actually prefer TQ's themes more than GD. which is tragic coz i cant bring myself to play tq anymore

"

kyobusa wrote:

I wonder if its because D4 is doing okay. Feel like if it was the other way around everyone would be hootering and hollering. But since its the former, people are like "who cares stfu"

its interesting how deep hatred people can have. when d4 was released i would say a huge portion of us agreed it was bad, hence it was acceptable to say it was bad.

different people had different reasons to say its bad, so we did not care for the reason as we know the game has so many issues that theres 1001 legit reasons to hate it.

when blizz actually finally made it better, many people changed their opinions and say d4 good. but some people have deep hatred/bias against d4 and still maintain its bad in a very stubborn manner, not realizing that its no longer the norm to just paint it bad as 990 of the 1001 problems have already been fixed and people see those who say d4 bad now are being extra nitpicky.

i actually believe its ok to have an opinion. but the disgusting difference between having an opinion adding insult to the opinion. you can say "i dont like d4", but saying "d4 is a piece of garbage" is unnecessary and quite juvenile tbh.

"

Ulsarek wrote:

Legacy wasn't actually that popular and well received. Perandus wasn't adjusted and mostly irrelevant, managing league stones was tedious as fuck and let's not forget the exploit that became known late enough to already ruin the economy. For a 6 month league that alone was a reason to quit for many. The addition of SSF was very nice however and in my personal opinion, despite its flaws, Legacy was a nice send off for the 2.X era.

I would like to see something similar for when PoE 1 eventually gets an actual 4.0 patch at some point.

i think it had many players as they came in for the sole purpose of getting legacy uniques like 1000hp kaoms heart.

personally i've been begging ggg to allow us to just choose what leagues we like to run and this was ggg giving me exactly what i wanted.

unfortunately i HATED the micromanagement of keeping my league stones properly stocked and keeping them optimized. at a point i rage quite because i just did not want to look at my page full of leaguestones anymore.

it really is bittersweet to see ggg finally implementing many things i've asked for but usually too late or in poe2.

i like to imagine that GGG read my feedback and implemented it into the game. i like to imagine i contributed in a way besides money.

anyway. POE2 hype COME ON! woot woot. dammit. i literally have stopped gaming for a while coz i kinda lost the mood to game as every game i play is not poe2.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

For me personally, especially in a F2P game, player retention and engagement are the most important.

You do this in terms of percentages so that it's an even comparison.

PoE has obviously grown significantly, so raw player numbers are up, but if the percentage of those players don't engage, or quit (this league at record pace), thats... well bluntly, a problem.

Having a ton of people play your game is great. Having them leave in record fashion because the league is subpar, is not.

Totally agree. Could not have said it better.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

Players can of course play both games, and this is healthy, but I'm not a huge fan of "who cares and nothing matters" mentality in terms popularity or player reception. I think its somewhat relevant from the player perspective, and should be very important to GGG/Blizzard at the business level.

I really do not think player numbers after 4-5 weeks is of any real concern to GGG. This intense focus on "a player has to play all 4 months non-stop, or else the league is a dud" is tiresome. IMO, the important numbers available to us, are who many players return for the next league with the intention of playing a few weeks.

I remember Chris talked about it in the past; the early days of a league is where they make the most money. So if a longer break (after a few weeks of play) makes a player more motivated to get back and play more the next league, I really can't see the negative thing here. Sure, players leaving a league is bad - for the league - but in the long run?

Who cares? We just don't know the numbers to have any idea how this affects anything in the long run - so it's hard to really "care" about. I think 'most' people will be back trying the new league, and if that's a banger, how does Necropolis affect it? No one knows, no one will ever know, hence; I don't care.

"

Phrazz wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

Players can of course play both games, and this is healthy, but I'm not a huge fan of "who cares and nothing matters" mentality in terms popularity or player reception. I think its somewhat relevant from the player perspective, and should be very important to GGG/Blizzard at the business level.

I really do not think player numbers after 4-5 weeks is of any real concern to GGG. This intense focus on "a player has to play all 4 months non-stop, or else the league is a dud" is tiresome. IMO, the important numbers available to us, are who many players return for the next league with the intention of playing a few weeks.

I remember Chris talked about it in the past; the early days of a league is where they make the most money. So if a longer break (after a few weeks of play) makes a player more motivated to get back and play more the next league, I really can't see the negative thing here. Sure, players leaving a league is bad - for the league - but in the long run?

Who cares? We just don't know the numbers to have any idea how this affects anything in the long run - so it's hard to really "care" about. I think 'most' people will be back trying the new league, and if that's a banger, how does Necropolis affect it? No one knows, no one will ever know, hence; I don't care.

It might matter for some players who buy big supporter packs every league. If they pay $90 and "only" get 2 weeks of enjoyment out of a league, and quit early before reaching their usual goals (such as challenges) it can leave a bitter aftertaste.

Saying that to steelman their position. Personally, I buy supporter packs because I genuinely believe they're trying to deliver good content, and apart from some nitpicking I can only find a few things worth criticizing about Necropolis. Won't be true for everyone of course