The community is taking the delay really well. Surprisingly well.

"

Phrazz wrote:

"

Bleu42 wrote:

It absolutely, 100% is the plan to scrap poe1 at some point, as soon as the numbers for poe2 prove to be better.

I wouldn't call it "the plan" as much as "hope".

They hope to, over time, bring PoE 2 in such a position that PoE 1 isn't... "Necessary" anymore. And I actually think they were expecting more hype regarding PoE 2. A LOT of players play PoE 1 because of the complex simplicity of the game, if that make sense. If you really learn the game, it's easy, straightforward and rather relaxingly fast and smooth. PoE 2 seems to challenge this at several fronts.

That is exactly how I see it! I'm pretty sure POE2 will find it's community but I really don't think that a lot of us POE1 veterans will switch. POE1 is perfect for what it is! IMO is was a big mistake to switch from "POE2 is a new part of POE1" to "POE2 is a standalone game"!

"

LanPirot wrote:

"

Xyel wrote:

For as long as PoE1 leagues earn more money than what they cost to produce, then PoE1 will stay around.

Um, thats at best only partial true. Or to be more precise: this a typical misunderstanding of how "capitalism" works. In fact, thats what seperates the current economic/social system from older economic/social systems.

You have to add at least the following condition:

"... and moving all resources from poe1 into poe2 would not even earn more money, then poe1 will stay."


Well, choose your answer...

That's IMO self-evident, given that GGG has ~150 people, 8 worked on PoE1, assuming 20 % overhead that's 112 people working on PoE2. that means PoE1 runs perfectly fine with about 6.7% of their workforce, so PoE1 would have to literally die (more than 90 % revenue drop in comparison to last year) before it would earn less money than what increasing the workforce in PoE2 by 6.7 % would bring.

"

Waitubold wrote:

A. Yes, it is tricky, but you're the one who started lecturing on people misunderstanding capitalism, so pthhh.

A. Its tricky, because I have to argue on a moderated forum. A while ago I did here a harmless joke about capitalism, which got deleted. So its tricky, because this forum is neither a public nor a neutral space.

Because of that, you can simply continue with words like these:

"

Waitubold wrote:

B. Not once that I can recall have have GGG done anything which appeared to be motivated by a desire for "moaaaare" money.

But if I would argue against words like these, Im in a lot of trouble. ( I have no interest in doing so.)


B./C. I did neither tencent nor tencent business behaviour mention, only you. I didnt it, because in the context of "moaarre money", it would have left a bit of a racist taste in my mouth.

Your description of venture capital companies and then "the other companies" looks to me quite black and white. I disagree on that and I would prefer a much more ambievalent analysis, especially if we talking about the gaming/ creative industry.

I dont / cant / wanna lecture you. But if you interested in a more ambivalent description, get the summary from "Luc Boltanski, Ève Chiapello: The New Spirit of Capitalism". Yes, a summary should give you already an idea.

I dont wanna derail the thread even more and stop here.

Lets say, we both see ways in which poe1 and poe2 can coexist. But we differ in *what* conditions are necessary for this and whether these conditions are *certainly* present.

End.

The issue, Lan, is that a chunk of the playerbase hears "we messed up, we need to delay both PoE2 and the next league because our spaghetti database is taking way longer to untangle than we thought it would", and take it as proof that GGG are human beings who mess up, but are taking the responsibility of not breaking people's sensitive, often irreplaceable data very seriously.

A different chunk of the playerbase hears "we messed up, we need to delay both PoE2 and the next league because our spaghetti database is taking way longer to untangle than we thought it would", and take it as proof that GGG are lying liars who lie and there's some sort of secret conspiracy to Destroy PoE1 Forever because they said once that POE2 would not have a dramatic effect on PoE1's development.

There is an assumption that Grinding Gear is hiding the truth out of an intentional and malicious desire to deceive, which is absolutely baffling to the first chunk of people because a developer saying "we messed up, our account database is a mess and we need most of a month to un-mess it" is already pretty bad. Like, that's not an admission that makes the finance numbers go up. It's not the kind of thing you invent out of whole cloth as a smokescreen, especially when the delay being announced will almost certainly punch you square in the pocketbook already. Companies missing their publicly announced deadlines is bad, it always has negative impacts on their numbers.

So it's kind of unfathomable, and swiftly irritating and upsetting to deal with, when some people assume there's some sort of deep Shadow Cabal conspiracy to defraud them of all their stuff. Like, making sure they don't defraud you of your stuff is the entire reason behind the delay. Why assume malevolence when simple mismanagement and poor luck are far more likely candidates, and ones that have already been identified as the culprit?

"

Xyel wrote:

that means PoE1 runs perfectly fine with about 6.7% of their workforce

Thats the question - at least for me, especially under the term of "perfectly fine". Looking at no really new league on the x-mas holidays (first time since open beta, if I remember correctly ), I wouldnt describe the scenario as "perfectly fine".

"

1453R wrote:

Why assume malevolence when simple mismanagement and poor luck are far more likely candidates, and ones that have already been identified as the culprit?

My impression is, that a chunk of the playerbase is not upset, because they think there is an intentional conspiracy of destroying poe1. Most of them probably are aware, that the problems are connected with incorrectly calculated timelines, resources and technical issues. It wouldnt be the first time that such problems in poe occur. They are upset, because GGG made decisions and in these decisions poe1 got compared to poe2 shafted.

"

LanPirot wrote:

"

Xyel wrote:

that means PoE1 runs perfectly fine with about 6.7% of their workforce

Thats the question - at least for me, especially under the term of "perfectly fine". Looking at no really new league on the x-mas holidays (first time since open beta, if I remember correctly ), I wouldnt describe the scenario as "perfectly fine".

That's with zero people working on it. The eight people working on PoE1 is referencing to 2023, as I mentioned, when the number eight came out in an interview. And PoE1 was doing perfectly fine last year.

"

1453R wrote:

but which is dramatically more intuitive and available to everyone else

This remains to be seen, though, doesn't it? We will see how "everyone" will react to having to recall to town for flasks, no save-state HP on bosses and more or less no information on how intricate or in-depth it is to build a character. I understand the hype, I've been there several times, but lets not go overboard with the hyperbole?

"

I really don't know as PoE2 will be the Instant Death Knell to PoE1 that all the haters are lambasting it as. especially if the absolutely unthinkable happens and the new game is actually, y'know...really good.

"Instant death"? Haven't seen anyone claiming that. It's really hard to have a discussion with this amount of hyperbole.

Don't get me wrong here; I do agree that it "takes a lot" to really "conquer" PoE, and that it probably takes less to master PoE 2. But will it feel as good when you do?

"

Phrazz wrote:

This remains to be seen, though, doesn't it? We will see how "everyone" will react to having to recall to town for flasks, no save-state HP on bosses and more or less no information on how intricate or in-depth it is to build a character. I understand the hype, I've been there several times, but lets not go overboard with the hyperbole?

Just a brief correction: this is no longer the case. Monsters refill flasks again, though the system is tweaked from PoE1. The developers talked about this; it was actually Chris who crystallized the decision to abandon portal-to-town as the primary refill method. "When you go back to town, it should be because you're excited to identify your items, not because you need to upkeep your flasks." The team realized it simply wasn't fun and didn't fit the gameplay loop they were building, so they switched it back.

Now, monsters have a stat-which-I-forget-the-name-of which determines the percentage chance that monster has to give a flask charge. Tiny swarm monsters that attack in large packs have something like a 30% chance to give a flask charge when slain, where large powerful monsters that act more like microbosses are often going to return multiple charges even at White rarity. The idea is that killing one average monster returns one flask charge, but now GGG can tune specific monsters to account for that critter's individual strength and density-of-appearance.

Which sounds honestly cool, since it also gives more leverage for the inevitable return of Flaskfinder to do their thing.

Apparently flasks are being reworked again in PoE 2 - down to 1 life flask and 1 mana flask. Obviously this requires reworking balance and items again. Perhaps that is the actual reason for the delay?