GGGs reasoning on not making a SFL?

"

DogFaceNoSpace wrote:

Trading removes too much gameplay.

This is like saying trading between players removes gameplay in Settlers of Catan or Monopoly. No, it doesn't; it expands options. You don't like the new options? That's on you.

But in all seriousness, I'm getting pretty frustrated with this thread. Apparently most of the folks who visit this thread have no problem with trading itself — it's fine if it's between characters you own — but instead a problem with dealing with other people. They don't want a single-character experience, they want a single-player experience; the former can be seen as somewhat noble, the latter is just myopic solipsism. I have no interest in debating further with those who take solipsism as a given.

Great news.
We've all had enough of your arguments.


I hold these 3 reasons of why we don't/won't have a SFL:

1. Chris and the team are making the game they want to play, heavily based on economy and RNG

2. Cost of development might not be covered

3. Severe reduction of RMT (this is for the "tinfoilers")

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

DogFaceNoSpace wrote:

Trading removes too much gameplay.

This is like saying trading between players removes gameplay in Settlers of Catan or Monopoly. No, it doesn't; it expands options. You don't like the new options? That's on you.

But in all seriousness, I'm getting pretty frustrated with this thread. Apparently most of the folks who visit this thread have no problem with trading itself — it's fine if it's between characters you own — but instead a problem with dealing with other people. They don't want a single-character experience, they want a single-player experience; the former can be seen as somewhat noble, the latter is just myopic solipsism. I have no interest in debating further with those who take solipsism as a given.

Wow, such wise, very hardcore.

Just accept that you have no idea what SFL players demand and be the man of your word and quit thread for the greater good.

That's not trading.

The whole point of an aRPG is to find cool gear and build certain characters around said gear. I have no problem with dealing with other people. In fact today I went to the store and traded my euros for bread, cucumbers, beer, soup and tea. I also like to trade my euros for other things such as a place to live, internet and insurance. I have no problems with that.

It's just not fun and not something I want to do in a video game. I want to find my own gear. It's much more satisfactory. When I trade I just feel like a zombie. Like someone doing a job.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Except there is the third option: just press forward. Don't trade, don't farm, just do. Leeroy Jenkins.

I said all this already. Are you actually reading my posts?

Uhhm, Scrotie, 'just press forward' costs currency that only the 'two methods' will produce.
The two, remember, not hardcore methods.

Jees, Scrotie.

You're assuming maps aren't sustainable. I'm assuming they are. I haven't run into any problems with that assumption in Ambush.

Wait, have we been talking Ambush here?

My apologies, I have no care for temp leagues and no experience with Ambush. All I know of Ambush is that it made the best progress to date in making this aRPG what it should be, and that it WON'T make it to parent leagues as such.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

It's hypocritical as fuck to allow trading between characters you happen to own, while prohibiting trading with characters you happen to not own.

OMFG, Scrotie, have you finally gone through?
Dafuq did I just read?

I don't RP, never have. Self = me.
While some people play SF-Character, often people who would trade but set aside a SF-challenge-char and some always have and always will play SF-Character as that's how they like to; I'd guess the majority of SF players play as if they were playing an offline SP version, I do, finding items and rolling alts to use them is one of the main points to how I play and is what gives longevity.

Contrary to what CW says, there is a fuck ton of awesome fun in finding an item and saying "Wow, I'ma roll a xxxxx now"

[Removed by Support]

It should be noted that the opinion Scrotie voices about not being able to share items with one's own characters in a SFL is one that is incomprehensibly echoed by Chris. I say incomprehensibly not because I agree or disagree, but because there's literally no precedent that would lead them to this assumption. In no other ARPG are players actively prevented from sharing items with their other characters, be it in single-player or multi-player sessions. Thus I can only assume that this opinion is an unfortunate misrepresentation of the case for SFL.

"

ephetat wrote:

It should be noted that the opinion Scrotie voices about not being able to share items with one's own characters in a SFL is one that is incomprehensibly echoed by Chris. I say incomprehensibly not because I agree or disagree, but because there's literally no precedent that would lead them to this assumption. In no other ARPG are players actively prevented from sharing items with their other characters, be it in single-player or multi-player sessions. Thus I can only assume that this opinion is an unfortunate misrepresentation of the case for SFL.

Lol, I'm torn between thinking this is testimony of just how out of touch Chris is with aRPG players while stuck in his own bubble of how he and a few friends played, and, this was a 'get out' from backlash caused by his ignoring and often belittling of aRPG players who play different to how he did.

Note he goes on to say "it comes back to the core aRPG thing where the reason you value the items is because other people 'want them'"

Like, no, hell fucking no, that is not 'the core aRPG thing'.

Lol

Chris doesn't know what hes doing

that is why the game is dying.

However, in that video, Chris directly says they have SFL plans for the future.

So the only thing left is wait and see how they implement it. There have been numerous quality suggestions by the community already, so it will definitely be interesting to see what GGG opts for. I've no problem waiting a bit for it to happen.

I can't say I agree with everything Chris' states (that's normal I guess), but I'm glad to (once again) hear they're listening to the community. Thanks!