Open letters to GGG - A Remedy for the Community Divide

- - - - - - - - - - Original Post - - - - - - - - - -
I'll keep it brief for now, but update the idea if it becomes an engaging topic.

As most people here know, there's a division among players in their preference for which game philosophy PoE2 should take.
• Fast-paced screen clearing with many monsters.
• Attrition-style engaging combat with fewer monsters.

The endgame atlas passive tree could potentially provide a solution to satisfy both play styles. I believe the original intent was to enable players to customize their experience with regard to which league mechanics they engage with.

But what if it could also enable players to customize meta gameplay aspects with keystone nodes which gave a clear choice between:
• More monster density / pack size.
• Or drastically reduced density with increased effectiveness.
And to approximate the reward balance as best you can.

The new atlas tree being added in 0.5 already has the perfect mechanism in place for this concept to work -> where players must make a choice between the two options, rather than allowing them to use both to compound drop rates.

It would be important to closely balance the reward incentives between these two, because it is my belief that unless they are perceived as having proportional loot / rewards for the time investment, players engaging with the endgame will by and large gravitate toward meta play styles that yield the most reward for their time.

For more detail about why this is, please see this other post, which discusses player-incentives, and the perception of clear-meta as popular, due to clear-meta being the most rewarding in terms of loot rewards.

Zoom is not fun. It's loot FOMO : https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/3879773

Thanks for your consideration, and please keep replies cordial.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - EDITS - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Thanks to everyone who shared their thoughts.
I'll do my best to reply to those who made valid points.

- - - - - - - - - - - Common Counter-Points - - - - - - - - - - -
"This would require separate leagues."
"It's basically making a different game."
While I would like to see PoE2 take a more official direction toward interesting combat, a complete rebalance was never proposed; only an option between two different variables. We already have pack size on Waystones, and effectiveness on tablets. You can choose to run either, both, or neither of these modifiers on your map. All this post is proposing, is to move those modifiers onto the atlas tree, and to make balance drops between the two, proportional to map completion times.

"There's no reason for GGG to do this; financial or otherwise."
The broadened appeal and freedom of customizability if something that GGG is best at. And it's well worth adding nodes with some basic loot tuning.

"If players can still one-shot tougher monsters, then they might start investing into effectiveness in order to blast through maps faster, if that turns out to be a more lucrative strategy. So this won't acheive the "engaging combat" you are looking for."
That's correct, this change alone wouldn't yield a satisfying result for engaging combat. But it would reveal that players behave according to what is lucrative, not what is objectively more interesting to play. It would be a move in the correct direction, but much more would need to change in the way of balancing relative player power, player sustain, and monster damage. Currently players who are engaged with endgame, make choices based on viability and maximizing loot acquisition. We keep that incentive, and offer alternative means.

At the very worst, we will have the same clear meta, with better visual clarity due to reduced pack size.

I think this only works if it's broken into separate leagues, and of course GGG would need to see a financial reason to devote resources to balancing both leagues. I'm guessing if they even wanted to do this it would be a long long way off. It's basically making a different game.

Sadly as someone who doesn't like the current direction they're heading "fast-paced screen clearing with many monsters" I can acknowledge it's probably better for them to focus on this exclusively, and deal with the current bugs and issues plaguing the game in general.

With the current gameplay mechanics it would be a monster task to implement and properly balance "Attrition-style engaging combat with fewer monsters"...It's just so far past that point I think those in the community who would have preferred it, myself included, would be better off just letting it go and moving on.

The fix is balance the game to where you can "zoom" in maps but have to focus on bosses in an attrition style fight.

This requires several things to happen first tho. Main thing is defense needs to be significantly buffed (besides ES) and/or bosses need all their one shots removed outside the most obvious stuff in the world. Like Arbiter... cool stand in circle to live. Great no problem. But when he fires the one shot death laser on the circle, that is too much. If that kind of cheese was all gone and normal attrition bosses could be achieved while still feeling godly and screen clearing the trash mobs, I would be a happy camper.

The problem is some want to turn POE into NRFTW and I am sorry but no. The game would no longer be POE if it played like that at all. 2-3 mobs on screen, parry, dodge roll 20 times to stab once. That is not POE.

For all the vision people who latched on to the slow methodical combat need to rewatch a lot of the interviews where he also said by late game it would be the same as POE1. Also please go further back and remember POE2 was originally an expansion/graphics update to POE1. Meaning the original creation was not slow and methodical.

It feels like we’re going in circles discussing endgame philosophy when the devs have already made their choice. Why is the request for an engaging campaign being completely ignored? While everyone argues about fast vs. slow endgame, the campaign experience is being overlooked, even though this is what decides if many of us will even bother to return each league.

For many of us, the current campaign feels like a waste of time because it’s too easy. We should have the option to choose a higher difficulty within the starting trade league. The devs argue this messes with pacing, but I’d gladly accept a slower pace if the combat felt meaningful, especially if that difficulty was compensated with better loot from the final campaign boss. Something like a guaranteed 5-socket Uncut Gem would make that extra time feel worth it.

Version 0.2 showed that a harder campaign actually works. If the devs are worried about pacing, they should realize that making the campaign a forgettable speed-run is a much bigger problem than letting players choose a challenge that's actually worth their time. This wouldn't affect anyone but the people who choose it, so there's really no reason for others to complain about it.

Feels like PoE 1 and 2 are so vastly different games that they shouldn't even share the same title.

"

Burn4#0434 wrote:

It feels like we’re going in circles discussing endgame philosophy when the devs have already made their choice. Why is the request for an engaging campaign being completely ignored? While everyone argues about fast vs. slow endgame, the campaign experience is being overlooked, even though this is what decides if many of us will even bother to return each league.

For many of us, the current campaign feels like a waste of time because it’s too easy. We should have the option to choose a higher difficulty within the starting trade league. The devs argue this messes with pacing, but I’d gladly accept a slower pace if the combat felt meaningful, especially if that difficulty was compensated with better loot from the final campaign boss. Something like a guaranteed 5-socket Uncut Gem would make that extra time feel worth it.

Version 0.2 showed that a harder campaign actually works. If the devs are worried about pacing, they should realize that making the campaign a forgettable speed-run is a much bigger problem than letting players choose a challenge that's actually worth their time. This wouldn't affect anyone but the people who choose it, so there's really no reason for others to complain about it.

Because no matter how engaging the campaign is, once you have done it several times, it is no longer engaging and just annoys a lot of players.

.2 shows that a harder campaign works? Was that not the absolute worst league for players and retention?

If you let players choose a challenge, then that will obviously be followed up by more loot for harder content. Which means that is the only way to play. Thus the cycle repeats.

The fix is scale it to a nice middle ground, let newer players have that challenge and improve. Let the medium tier players have a good time and can even challenge themselves somewhat by using weaker skills. The advanced players HAVE to challenge themselves. Interesting how the vast majority asking for challenge also refuse to impose any on themselves.

The campaign is already too long and still has 2 full acts to be added. The calls for "campaign skips" which should just be an alternate leveling path that opens up after you complete the campaign the first time each season are only increasing.

This is what I say in every thread about it... No matter how good the campaign is, once you have done it so many times it is no longer good and enjoyable. Having the option to level up just killing monsters in the level scaling zone or "cow level" to take a break from talking to 1000 NPC's, clicking water levers, and moving the caravan to get off to talk to get back on to move to blow a horn to get back off again stuff....

"

Soulsniper1313#7576 wrote:

This is what I say in every thread about it... No matter how good the campaign is, once you have done it so many times it is no longer good and enjoyable. Having the option to level up just killing monsters in the level scaling zone or "cow level" to take a break from talking to 1000 NPC's, clicking water levers, and moving the caravan to get off to talk to get back on to move to blow a horn to get back off again stuff....

Genuine question - how is killing things with no goals in a brain-dead kind of way any better? Are you guys listening to what you're saying even?

You know what the real problem is? The campaign is not challenging at all. Well, the game in general at this point. There's nothing exciting there anymore. It just feels like a to-do list. That's why it feels like a damn chore to you.

But let's say you receive that cow level nonsense... what then when you reach endgame after still a long ass process of semi-afk braindead monster mowing.... more semi-afk braindead monster mowing...? Oh wow, how exciting.

Are you guys trying to reduce your playtime from two weeks to one week? Damn, that some serious dedication to try to combat that loot dopamine addiction. Shorten all of it down, I can appreciate that.

"

IonSugeRau1#1069 wrote:

"

Soulsniper1313#7576 wrote:

This is what I say in every thread about it... No matter how good the campaign is, once you have done it so many times it is no longer good and enjoyable. Having the option to level up just killing monsters in the level scaling zone or "cow level" to take a break from talking to 1000 NPC's, clicking water levers, and moving the caravan to get off to talk to get back on to move to blow a horn to get back off again stuff....

Genuine question - how is killing things with no goals in a brain-dead kind of way any better? Are you guys listening to what you're saying even?

You know what the real problem is? The campaign is not challenging at all. Well, the game in general at this point. There's nothing exciting there anymore. It just feels like a to-do list. That's why it feels like a damn chore to you.

But let's say you receive that cow level nonsense... what then when you reach endgame after still a long ass process of semi-afk braindead monster mowing.... more semi-afk braindead monster mowing...? Oh wow, how exciting.

Are you guys trying to reduce your playtime from two weeks to one week? Damn, that some serious dedication to try to combat that loot dopamine addiction. Shorten all of it down, I can appreciate that.

No we just actively enjoy that, that's the reason we started playing GGG games. :)

Also vastly understating the effort that goes into build creation and crafting items and playing markets. But for 90% of my moment to moment content, yeah I want it to not by hyper engaging and stressful. I played Elden Ring for that; there's a reason I didn't play it for more than a couple hours at a time and more haven't touched it in forever. A game I plan to sit with for 12+ hour sessions, I just don't want to be hyper focused. That honestly makes me fall asleep way faster than the brain-dead farming.

its sad, they will probably make us wait along time for ruthless, cus they now balance this game basacly for begginers. they just need to make dificulty in this game to have meaning. I want to believe there are alot of us who liked how game was at 0.1. just make that be ruthles, or give it other name. If game has no dificulty game is bad for me. I feel 0.5 will be the easyest game version of all time. So they will satisfy new players and those poe1 trash zoomers, and we are all left on hanging.

I JUST HOPE WE DONT WAIT ALONG TIME GGG !

"

IonSugeRau1#1069 wrote:

"

Soulsniper1313#7576 wrote:

This is what I say in every thread about it... No matter how good the campaign is, once you have done it so many times it is no longer good and enjoyable. Having the option to level up just killing monsters in the level scaling zone or "cow level" to take a break from talking to 1000 NPC's, clicking water levers, and moving the caravan to get off to talk to get back on to move to blow a horn to get back off again stuff....

Genuine question - how is killing things with no goals in a brain-dead kind of way any better? Are you guys listening to what you're saying even?

You know what the real problem is? The campaign is not challenging at all. Well, the game in general at this point. There's nothing exciting there anymore. It just feels like a to-do list. That's why it feels like a damn chore to you.

But let's say you receive that cow level nonsense... what then when you reach endgame after still a long ass process of semi-afk braindead monster mowing.... more semi-afk braindead monster mowing...? Oh wow, how exciting.

Are you guys trying to reduce your playtime from two weeks to one week? Damn, that some serious dedication to try to combat that loot dopamine addiction. Shorten all of it down, I can appreciate that.

The campaign being challenging means nothing if it is the exact same thing every time with no difference. Same NPC. Same water lever. Same caravan. Same horn. Same everything. It is annoying and tedious.

Killing monsters and getting stronger is the fun part. Clicking water levers for the 20th time is not. How is that hard to understand? Do you not even listen to what anyone is saying? Yourself and myself both? It is very clear what is being asked for.

Lets saying there is the "cow level" and I get to take a break from talking to NPC's and doing the same fetch and talk quests that interrupt the part I find fun. I can then enjoy getting an alt leveled up to try a new build. Then maybe I create a third character but feel like doing the campaign again. I can choose to do that.

By your logic of maps being semi afk braindead monster mowing, is that not what you have done already for 4 leagues? Have you not done the same thing in the exact same static campaign? This argument makes no sense. How can maps be semi afk braindead but the campaign is not?

Am I trying to reduce my playtime? No. I would be much more eager to make new characters if I did not have to repeat the campaign. I have not even logged in since January and am already dreading having to re run the campaign yet again.

Your argument can be the exact same in the inverse. Are you trying to artificially inflate play time by forcing the campaign? Are you trying to lessen replay ability by forcing the campaign? All these same questions can be condescendingly redirected back to you as your are to me.