XP penalty and likely 1 portal is NOT going anywhere

"

cowmoo275#3095 wrote:

.

Even experienced players make mistakes. PoE is a complex game, and part of its appeal lies in the unpredictability of what can happen in a map run. When you take away that buffer of six portals and make it just one, you're taking away the room for error. In a game like PoE, where everything can spiral out of control very quickly—especially with high-tier content—losing that single portal can feel punishing. It's not about being "stupid" or "not learning"—it's about the unpredictability that comes with pushing your build and character to the limit. Sometimes, it's not about mistakes, but about the sheer chaos that can happen during tough encounters. One small misstep or an unforeseen mechanic can wipe you out. The stress from knowing you only have one shot to get it right can be overwhelming, and it changes the way players approach content.

Additionally, while the learning process in PoE is key to improving, the emotional aspect of having a limited number of retries shouldn't be underestimated. The six-portal system allowed for a more balanced approach to risk-taking without punishing players too heavily for a single failure. By limiting players to one portal, the game could shift from a space where you take calculated risks and push boundaries to a space where players feel forced to play ultra-cautiously. This might take away some of the excitement and freedom that many players love about PoE. It’s not about treating players as incompetent, but about giving them the room to experiment, fail, and try again without it feeling like the stakes are insurmountably high.

Ultimately, it's not about "stupidity" but about finding a balance between challenge and accessibility. PoE has always had a steep learning curve, and adding the element of 1-portal only increases the stress around every map run. It's important to consider that players enjoy a certain level of engagement where they can still feel like they have room to grow without the constant fear of one mistake costing them everything. The goal is to maintain that sense of excitement and achievement without crossing into frustration.

Edit:The real challenge of the game should come from the difficulty itself, not necessarily from an artificial increase in stakes like reducing portals to one. PoE is a game where the depth of your build and the strategy you employ should be what determines your success, not just how much you’re willing to risk per run. A single-portal system would force more cautious play, sure, but it could also make the game feel less about testing your limits and more about avoiding any risk at all.

"

Z3RoNightMare#7140 wrote:

read it

Again....this entire post assumes that 1 map is the end-all, be-all. Players run 100s of maps, THOUSANDS of maps. Even 10s of thousands of maps.

Stressing out over ONE map is a personal problem, not a game problem.

"

Z3RoNightMare#7140 wrote:

Edit:The real challenge of the game should come from the difficulty itself, not necessarily from an artificial increase in stakes like reducing portals to one. PoE is a game where the depth of your build and the strategy you employ should be what determines your success, not just how much you’re willing to risk per run. A single-portal system would force more cautious play, sure, but it could also make the game feel less about testing your limits and more about avoiding any risk at all.

Lol....and what is 1 portal if not "the difficulty itself". You need to be ready. You need to be on. You need to have a functional build. THAT is literal game difficulty, nothing artificial about it.

And again....you are assuming players are idiots. People do not play games and just "play it safe" the entire time. Very few do that. Those are the HC crowd. Anyone in softcore is going to push beyond their means and die at some point.

And really....what does it matter to you if a player decides they want to camp at t1 maps? That's their choice. You can make a different one during YOUR gameplay.

"

cowmoo275#3095 wrote:

.

I think the concern isn’t so much about the number of maps overall, but about the experience each individual map run creates. For many players, it's not just about the one map; it’s the cumulative effect of repeated deaths, especially when they’re pushing the boundaries of difficult content. In PoE, the stakes can feel high, and losing everything on a single map—whether it's due to a mistake, a random mechanic, or even a build that isn't perfect for that particular map—could start to wear on a player. The stress is real, and it’s not just personal; it’s about how the game design influences player behavior.

Even if the stress is personal, the game itself is partly responsible for how players perceive those stakes. If you remove a player's buffer, it changes the way they approach the game. Some will love that challenge, but for others, it might lead to burnout, especially when content already has a high difficulty curve.

In short, it's not so much about "one map" being the problem—it's about how the design choices affect the overall player experience across many maps and the longer-term engagement with the game.

Edit: Yes, you should be ready for hard content. But having one portal as the sole consequence for failure can make players feel like they’re constantly battling against the fear of failure, rather than engaging in the thrill of overcoming hard content. The problem isn’t that it makes things hard; it’s that it creates a situation where risk-taking, experimentation, and a sense of exploration can feel unnecessarily restricted.

"

1453R#7804 wrote:

"

CPTBRUMBL3Z#3146 wrote:

Your relentless hyperbole is unnecessary.

Love how people always accuse me of hyperbole instead of y'know, actually arguing. Sure, I like to be colorful and creative instead of boring as a Path of Exile with absolutely no failure state and thus no success state. Does it actually change the essence of anything I'm saying?

We've reached inception levels of hyperbole. No doubt we can go deeper.

"

Z3RoNightMare#7140 wrote:

Edit: Yes, you should be ready for hard content. But having one portal as the sole consequence for failure can make players feel like they’re constantly battling against the fear of failure, rather than engaging in the thrill of overcoming hard content. The problem isn’t that it makes things hard; it’s that it creates a situation where risk-taking, experimentation, and a sense of exploration can feel unnecessarily restricted.

re-read this paragraph....this doesn't make sense in any game or gamer or situation I have ever known in my life.

"Constantly battling against the fear of failure vs. Overcoming hard content": guess what this is? A MENTAL issue, not a game issue. These are both two sides of the same coin. Whereas one player fears failure, the other welcomes it as a possibility.

Challenge CANNOT EXIST without failure. If you are looking at the game as an endless string of failures....that's a YOU problem. The game is a series of challenges and walls that you break through and overcome. Yes, 1 portal is one of them. 1 map is meaningless in the grand scheme of the game, and well-balanced players absolutely know that.

"

cowmoo275#3095 wrote:

.

The core of the discussion is how much failure is fun versus how much is frustrating. It's not about avoiding failure—it's about how failure is framed in the context of a game’s design. The issue isn't just the fear of failure, it's the repercussions of it. In PoE, a game with a deep progression system, a single failure on a high-tier map can feel crushing, especially when so much is riding on that one shot. The challenge should come from navigating complex mechanics, adapting strategies, and mastering the content—not from having to constantly worry about every minor mistake costing you everything.

Some players might thrive in that environment, but for others, it can be more frustrating than fun, especially if they feel their only choice is to grind lower-tier content because the stakes feel too high in endgame. The balance between failure and reward is a delicate one. Too much punishment for failure can make a game feel unfair, even if it's technically 'challenging.'

It’s not about coddling players, but ensuring that the challenge doesn’t feel like an endless grind of avoiding failure for fear of the punishment. Some of the most fun moments come from overcoming obstacles after a failure, not from a constant state of failure with little room for recovery.
-----------------------------
But here’s where the inconsistency lies, though: you say it's a personal issue if someone views the game as an endless string of failures, but at the same time, you're insisting that one map (or one portal) is a perfectly fine challenge to overcome. Isn’t that kind of a contradiction? If the game is about overcoming obstacles, then the consequences of failing those obstacles—whether it’s one map or one portal—should be fair and encouraging, not a massive roadblock that makes players feel like they’ve wasted their time. You seem to think the punishment for failure should be part of the challenge, yet you're disregarding the idea that some players might find the intensity of that punishment discouraging rather than motivating.

"

Z3RoNightMare#7140 wrote:

Some of the most fun moments come from overcoming obstacles after a failure, not from a constant state of failure with little room for recovery.

You keep saying this....and I'll keep repeating: THE GAME IS NOT ONE SINGLE WAYSTONE. It is not a "constant state of failure" in the least....you always have more waystones.

You want more portals? Think of waystones as "more portals". They serve the same function: more tries to get loot to improve your character.

If you die at t6, try another waystone at t6 and die, try another waystone at t6 and die...etc, etc. that's just plain stupid. If you are getting stressed about that...my friend, that is YOUR fault.

"

CPTBRUMBL3Z#3146 wrote:

"

stecheese1#0850 wrote:

Why would they? the only death mechanics are respawning right before where you died and collecting your droped currency. Actually the stakes of Marika checkpoints outside of every boss room, is an addition they made. It obviously drastically reduces one of the major consequences of dying. Not sure you're really thinking your arguments through.

And you start to learn to make the most of your current soul count before entering any new or dangerous zones, saving consumables until you need to eek out a few more points to get that level point, making death far more tolerable.

There it is again. 6b)"Elden Ring doesn't take away all of your XP if you just play well.", I even highlighted the contradiction so you won't miss it.

PoE 2 doesn't take your xp away if you just play well. It is a guarantee that every single Elden Ring or Souls player at some point lost 100% of their XP because they failed to retrieve their corpse after 1 death. So what happened there? Did the players go to Fromsoft forums to whine about it and Fromsoft nerfed it? No, you Got Gud instead and learned to not try bosses before you leveled up first.

See what I mean about XP loss whiners never actually having any good points whatsoever and always arguing in circles? You cannot debate in good faith with people who refuse to debate in the first place.

"

cowmoo275#3095 wrote:

.

If every time something goes wrong, you just say 'It’s your fault,' you’re ignoring the broader issue of game design. Some players might not mind the high stakes, but for others, it’s a frustrating experience that could easily be addressed by tweaking how failure impacts the player’s progression.

It's not about 'blaming' players for not being perfect; it’s about creating an environment where failure is a learning opportunity, not just a setback that makes people feel like they're being punished for every minor mistake. So, when you say 'It’s your fault,' it’s almost like you're shifting the blame onto the player, without recognizing that the design itself can sometimes create a cycle of frustration rather than growth.