Casualization worries
" Dude or dudette, example: Tree should have (hypothetical design): - 100 quantity - 100 rarity - 100 map something - 200 X - 200 Y - 200 Z Imagine they plan for those values you have 50 points available. Why is it better to have those max values split between 300 nodes than 50 only? You are still able to reset and target farm... The further you progress the less resets you need to do... Looks good QoL for me... Besides, you have 36/40 challenges, this means you are at least top 5% of player base... Why are you so concerned? You are on the bracket and that should chew through and make a victory dance 😂 |
|
" I'm going to assume you meant something closer to "inherently or necessarily" and not "exactly" because, as I'll get into, yea, it does exactly make for a better experience. Sure, complexity and lots of choices/options in skill allocation does not inherently "a better experience" make. If we take FF10's (final fantasy) passive tree and put it into FF4's or a some zelda game's system, we're not going to have more fun because upped our inherent customization options. But we're not in a vacuum stripped of context, and this isn't another game. This is poe...literally all of our in-game mechanics are "artificial", and also, macro-managing. Even levels and attributes in the main paths on the tree are all artificial. I think I even feel safe speaking for everyone, casual or not, by saying that we're all here for this. We're all here to enjoy building and customizing our characters, our game experience, the aesthetic, the skills, etc. We aren't here to play Ocarina of Time. Point being: Yes, 50 allocatable points for a 70-100 passive point tree does translate to a better experience, unless we turn the last 10-20 points into an opportunity cost of other resources instead, like time, which would be unhealthy. Otherwise, well, you tell me. What even is a passive tree, and what is its purpose? Can you even see it as a passive tree if you don't have a limit to how many points you can allocate (ie - opportunity cost)? Oh, and if so, would you say the same thing and apply this logic to other passive trees, which are, by definition, limited by the amount of allocatable points? " I'm not sure where you got this, but I'm certain at least some of my supporter packs fund poe2. In the case that none of the supporter packs fund poe2 directly, pretty sure it gives money to GGG, who...ultimately develop the game. " I agree but you're missing that, by the same token, without the upper tiers of players or upper tiers of every league economy, low end farming also means nothing. If it's true that the casual players (however we measure this label) fund more than 50% of the game, then that's great. I'm not sure I'm making arguments to remove any existing feature or upcoming feature that "onboards" newer or more casual players if it doesn't, itself, remove something else. Take the new "build guiding" file...thing. idk what they called it. That doesn't change or remove anything for anyone. It just adds something to the game, and I told my friend about as much in the OP. Removing choice once reach mapping though? Regardless of reason they're thinking about it, or actually going for it, this should appropriately be seen as an issue. |
|
" Sorry, there may have been a miscommunication here. The issue isn't fewer points, it's being able to allocate all the points into, what is supposed to be, a skill tree. You're not picking and choosing anymore, or building towards a specific farming style, you're just...idk what you would even call it. But anyways, I think I basically elaborated enough in my prev post 3mins ago, I'll just eagerly await your reply there. |
|
|
I think you kinda miss the point, while you can allocate all points on the tree there are plenty nodes where you must make a choice one way or the other. And they said themselves it lets them put more interesting bonuses in the tree they couldn't otherwise have.
There's also that I'd wager the average player will be slower to unlock their full tree than the blasters. So for them there is still choice overall on where to go first etc. I think the concept is fine, I just want to see the density and monster hp being something we can tinker. I don't really like the end game turning into speeding around 1 shotting packs. I would prefer beefier monsters I can combo and engage with their individual mechanics with more. Not to mention it would just be nicer to my fps to have less crap on the screen. |
|
|
I dont see much difference between 100 nodes and 50 points and 100 nodes split onto 50 nodes with 50 points... There is the same choice in both, just that pathing nodes are shared. If its not enough choice they can just make all "notables" on the tree choice.
Also comparing it with PoE1 tree wont work cause they have split out "mechanic" trees for breach and stuff in PoE2. So you cant really choose what to run... so as long as they are not combining it all, you cant really make good upside/downside nodes that like increase one mechanic and reduce another one. But i dont think thats the problem of having all passives allocatable, rather having distinct trees. Lets just see how it feels before judging it. |
|
" But we want to be Gods blinking through any map in under 20 seconds and destroying everything and only needing to click 1 button. They should change the passive tree to be just like this, so we can get all the passives. Give us 10 passive points per level instead of 1. Everyone knows challenge is bad and the game is only really fun when your character is immortal and destroys all enemies before you even see them and you can keep clicking the cookie. |
|
" Youd be bored as soon as you get that level. If you have everything, what use is there to play more? You need some things to complete, stuff to hunt, items drops that do something for you... IF you are op, then you finished the game... If I have my build finished, kill pinacle bosses in seconds and all that (still dont think thats good balance) - I either make a new char for a different build or stop playing for that league. Gameplay like this can be in roguelikes, since they force you to reroll after every game. You have like the character building and the final build compressed into ~1h then its gone and you make a new one. In PoE you keep the char, as soon as its completely op, I dont see any reason to play anymore. Last edited by KäsePizza#3007 on May 8, 2026, 8:20:57 PM
|
|
|
Sorry, I guess you need to tag sarcasm for people to understand it. I was making fun of all the people who genuinely feel that way.
As soon as a character can walk through T16 scaling abyss maps and wipe out pretty much everything on screen with a single attack I lose all interest in playing that character. Without genuine challenge, there's no point. It's just clicking a cookie eternally to get more imaginary monies. |
|
" I would also love to see this concept put into the atlas passives in a way other than just the 2 keystones from poe 1 that give monsters morelife+lessdmg, or moredmg+lesslife. It might be the case that the masters get something like this. Guess we'll see soon, or in 1.0. " I hate to say this, but I have to turn this back around on you so that there's no confusion about what I'm saying. I think you are missing the point(s) I and others have been making. Can you max out the entire tree, y/n? >Y Will you progress in mapping to augment further mapping by allocating points along a path, y/n? >Y Will there be some people who don't even bother to try completing the atlas? >Y, there always will be Will this mean we effectively have only one mapping build at end-game for everyone, y/n? >Y So, if you have the feeling of "building" a mapping experience (atlas customization) only as you are progressing and unlocking the tree because you specifically don't have everything unlocked, what happens once you do have it all unlocked? Did the "path" you took, let's say, focusing more on a "beefy rare enemy farming" build, lose all significance because you ended up taking all the other nodes too? The answer here, unfortunately, is also Yes. As I highlighted in previous posts: without the opportunity cost, there's no real weight to the choice. Further, without that, there's no meaningful player expression in the tree....aaaand moreover, again, it's not even a "tree" if you can just take everything. |
|
|
If you can fill in any tree completely then in the end there's no point in player interaction with it. It's just another time sink menu that could fill in a random point every time you complete a map and have the same effect in the end. It could do that behind the scenes without even having a menu screen and have the same effect in the end.
It's just more layers of time sink fluff piled on top of the endless atlas system most people were never fans of to begin with. |
|
