Exp loss on death topics are getting out of hand.

So if you
Couldn't respec at all

Couldn't create a new character

Couldn't change a piece of gear

Would it be bad game design or just "actions have consequences" ?

"

mrxkon#5764 wrote:

"

Vinsdvalh#0247 wrote:

Still waiting for somebody to tell me what is the purpose of XP penalty.

I think that it's been told multiple times, it just seems to be ignored. So I'll give it a try as well.

Actions have consequences, that's the purpose, as simple as that.

If you like that or not, that's a different story.

Because the reason is literally nothing more than "someone did it 24 years ago" and the defence for it devolves into nothing more than ego brag.

Not that it's a mechanic that adds positive engagement to the game, which it does the exact opposite.

"

Vinsdvalh#0247 wrote:

So if you
Couldn't respec at all

Couldn't create a new character

Couldn't change a piece of gear

Would it be bad game design or just "actions have consequences" ?

Pokemon enforces one character per game. And unsurprisingly, no it's not a good design outside of marketing. All it does is enforce families to buy multiple versions of it.

WoW also tried to dabble in "meaningful choice" and lo and behold. It wasn't meaningful at all, only aggravating.

"

Vinsdvalh#0247 wrote:

So if you
Couldn't respec at all

Couldn't create a new character

Couldn't change a piece of gear

Would it be bad game design or just "actions have consequences" ?

I'm not sure how is this relevant now, or if we entered the realm of replying for the sake of it? But to be as fair as possible I'll answer.

If you don't have gold, you can't respec. The action here would be you spending it elsewhere, or not gathering it in the first place I suppose...

There's 24 character slots, if you take up all of them, well the consequence is that you can't make yet another.

If you're carrying a piece of gear with specific requirements that you're missing, you can't equip it can you?

None of the above are "bad" or "good" designs by definition, they are just designs. If you like them or not, that's a different story and it's simply an opinion. Opinions vary though and that's the beauty of it :) .

I suspect that the XP penalty has the following effect and is used for exactly that:

initial situation:

you just grinded 40% and suddenly you lose 10%

what happens then?

Due to the loss, your “brain” suggests to you that I have to compensate for the loss and earn it again so that it feels good again

what exactly is happening here?

Just like a gambling addict in an arcade who wants to get back all the money he lost that he had previously laboriously "grinded", that's exactly how the XP penalty works in my opinion

was that all?

No, of course he also gives you the feeling that you, the master of all games, have made it to 100 because you are so good and have overcome most of the hurdles and that is also correct

was that really all?

probably yes



summary:

-promotes gambling addiction

-analyze cause and effect

"

mrfox123#7595 wrote:

Pokemon enforces one character per game. And unsurprisingly, no it's not a good design outside of marketing. All it does is enforce families to buy multiple versions of it.

So it's an excellent design as well (even just within marketing), because it brings the company more cash.

It just doesn't benefit some, so they'd be against it and call it a "bad" design. Which is fine.

And that was exactly my point, opinions vary, but the "design" is still a "design", it's neither good nor bad, it's an abstraction and we either like it or not.

Especially in the stages of an EA where plenty of things might change down the road, everything should be considered an abstraction, while in parallel allow opinions to be heard equally.

"

mrxkon#5764 wrote:

"

Vinsdvalh#0247 wrote:

So if you
Couldn't respec at all

Couldn't create a new character

Couldn't change a piece of gear

Would it be bad game design or just "actions have consequences" ?

I'm not sure how is this relevant now, or if we entered the realm of replying for the sake of it? But to be as fair as possible I'll answer.

If you don't have gold, you can't respec. The action here would be you spending it elsewhere, or not gathering it in the first place I suppose...

There's 24 character slots, if you take up all of them, well the consequence is that you can't make yet another.

If you're carrying a piece of gear with specific requirements that you're missing, you can't equip it can you?

None of the above are "bad" or "good" designs by definition, they are just designs. If you like them or not, that's a different story and it's simply an opinion. Opinions vary though and that's the beauty of it :) .

It's relevant because some actions have no consequences, some do, and the harshness of the consequence varies. The question I had was "why dying have this consequence ?" What's the purpose of it.

"

iMirageX#4580 wrote:

10% exp exist for a reason and it does not matter if you think its archaic system or not.

This is a feedback forum. If people don’t like something, this is the place they come to leave feedback on it. If there are numerous threads about one particular issue, perhaps that’s a sign to GGG that something should be looked at.

Honestly it’s kind of weird that a grown human being has gotten so upset about people leaving feedback on a feedback forum.

While we’re on the subject, a lot of things in this game feel archaic and out of place in an ARPG in 2024. The horrendous inventory system. The total lack of movement skills. Magic find being more desirable than any other stat. Minions getting constantly stuck in doorways and dying. The uninspired boring loot drops. The list goes on.

These things should be brought to GGG’s attention so they can make the best game possible. That’s the point of early access.

Which action has no consequence if I may ask ? I'm curious.

"

mrxkon#5764 wrote:

Which action has no consequence if I may ask ? I'm curious.

None actually, if you include all kind of consequences.

When you cast a spell you lose mana.

The goal from my perspective is to prevent player to overspam spells.

So what is the goal behind XP penalty ?