[Megathread] Path of Exile

[Cyclone Jack]

and GGG cannot have it both ways and need to figure out how they want to handle it

I think this sums up the entire project.

[BeepBoo]

I think this sums up the entire project.

Lol you're not kidding:

"We can develop POE1 and 2 at the same time!" -wrong
"We can do EA but have 3 month patch rotations and still iron out everything because we understand people are treating it like a live game and will get pissed at us if we nuke their build!" -wrong
"We can have engaging combat with combo setups while also having a necessity to speed clear and blast!" -wrong

[Fencers]

I gave you a prime example of how players can help the devs understand certain changes before they go live with the hexblast skill gem being made unable to function, there's a list of other examples of things that were found in the patch notes that released a day before the update was pushed that made no sense whatsoever, but the change was made anyway, if there was enough lead time for that information to be digested by the community, and then fed back to the devs, could they have changed things ahead of the patch going live where that wouldn't have been an issue? we'll never know because they didn't give ANY FUCKING TIME for feedback to be gathered and changes to be made PRIOR to updating things.

Players were not necessarily right about that- there is no way to extrapolate their feeling from the data without playing. They felt Hexblast was not functioning.

Their feelings can't be accurate as to why.

literally everything that would be changing in this patch, never once was there anything specific mentioned in those '7 direct developer interviews', it was all vague handwaving fluff, never once was the magnitude of the changes discussed in those interviews, and never once was anything specific related to the changes mentioned outside of what they 'HOPED' would be changed relating exclusively to end game.

" Forget everything you know about the game's previous balance" / "It has all been changed" / "We are implementing changes to nearly all areas of the game" - these are direct quotes from those interviews.

True, they didn't go into the exact % of Perfect Strike's adjustments or the mana value of Spark at level 8- but that's ridiculous and useless information anyway without context and playing. It would just be feelings.

the kinds of massive fundamental changes that have been pushed with this update should have been well publicised weeks ago,

You would only be collecting emotional feedback. That's useless to the operation of the game.

How you feel playing a game is a different aspect of how a game operates. Feedback from both is valuable, but without the metrics and data generated by operation there is no way to know if the cause of issue A stems from X/Y/Z, X & Y, Z & X, X & Z but only if Y, etc.

There is no rational basis for faith in the emotive feedback of (even) very knowledgeable players of the game if they have not played the game as it operates currently.

Fundamentally, that is an absurd and unworkable position for designers and software creators.

[Edge-]

https://www.reddit.com/r/pathofexile...the_interview/

I love the memes.

Also, are these frequent gear changes/upgrades in the room with us now? Also, "So what you're really saying/asking is..." is so memeworthy.

[rogoth]

Players were not necessarily right about that- there is no way to extrapolate their feeling from the data without playing. They felt Hexblast was not functioning.

Their feelings can't be accurate as to why.

" Forget everything you know about the game's previous balance" / "It has all been changed" / "We are implementing changes to nearly all areas of the game" - these are direct quotes from those interviews.

True, they didn't go into the exact % of Perfect Strike's adjustments or the mana value of Spark at level 8- but that's ridiculous and useless information anyway without context and playing. It would just be feelings.

You would only be collecting emotional feedback. That's useless to the operation of the game.

How you feel playing a game is a different aspect of how a game operates. Feedback from both is valuable, but without the metrics and data generated by operation there is no way to know if the cause of issue A stems from X/Y/Z, X & Y, Z & X, X & Z but only if Y, etc.

There is no rational basis for faith in the emotive feedback of (even) very knowledgeable players of the game if they have not played the game as it operates currently.

Fundamentally, that is an absurd and unworkable position for designers and software creators.

no, raxx said in no uncertain terms that if the change that was planned to be made (reading directly from the patch notes) went through, then hexblast would no longer function and gave the reasoning as to why that change would break the functionality of the skill, NOT EVEN REMOTELY was that 'feeling', it was using already existing knowledge and applying that to the scenario, which was borne out to be true for the exact reasoning given AFTER the patch went live.

and that's EXACTLY let me say that again FUCKING EXACLTY what is being asked for from the devs ahead of time, none of this bullshit marketing spin nonsense, so thanks for proving my point for me then handwaving it away as 'not relevant' when it's precisely the most relevant thing in the entire discussion.

as to the rest, I can't tell if you're trolling here, or if you have been doing a jesse from breaking bad and snorting your product, because the way you're trying to characterise things as being 'unworkable' is exactly how science has worked since the birth of modern science with sir issac newton, through to modern day and continues to be done, using thousands of people around the world to apply their own knowledge and understanding to systems to figure out issues and problems before enacting any testing then putting testing into practice and working through that data set, how in the ever living fuck is this any different? I'm truly asking here because I need to understand this asinine thought process where you think the principles of modern science somehow equate to 'emotional feedback'. I'm truly trying to figure out how such a dumb take makes any sense in your mind because this logical fallacy you have here is spectacular.

On dozens of occasions over the years, I have had data handed to me by colleagues with proposed tests, and because I have professional and life experience in a similar manner, I have been able to advise changes and those changes are based SOLEY on my own knowledge, I had zero hands on experience with the tests or anything associated with them, yet I was able to state very accurately what would happen if the test was performed in the initial manner without any changes, this is the exact same thing raxx pointed out regarding hexblast, this is the exact same thing multiple other content creators pointed out about other changes purely from patch notes, they accurately deduced that some of the changes proposed made no sense, gave their reasoning, lo and behold, the exact reasons provided turned out to be true, there's nothing whatsoever 'emotional' about that, it's based on applying logical reasoning and deep understanding of the fundamental systems.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.reddit.com/r/pathofexile...the_interview/

I love the memes.

Also, are these frequent gear changes/upgrades in the room with us now? Also, "So what you're really saying/asking is..." is so memeworthy.

it's the level of dissonance you see from people who have been out of the loop for too long and no longer understand the basis of the problem being talked about needing to dredge through years of memories to try and figure out what to say next.

[BeepBoo]

it's the level of dissonance you see from people who have been out of the loop for too long and no longer understand the basis of the problem being talked about needing to dredge through years of memories to try and figure out what to say next.

But power IS all relative right? 1 damage against a monster with 10 hp is the same as 100 damage vs a monster with 1000. Ergo, you can tune the need for gear on either the gear side or the enemy power side. It just so happens fucking poe nerds are the worst type of motivated people in the gaming world (hurr durr NEED "progression" always!) and are hell-bent on this game staying POE/typical ARPG instead of allowing it to become something else. I can't wait for no rest for the wicked because it seems like what I really want out of an ARPG (the false lie POE2 sold me to buy their early access on).

And before you jump on me, I'll just tell you the types of players I consider the "best" as far as omtivation: people like those competing for top leader boards in games like MH wilds right now. Set gear, set monster, just your skill, motivated by epeen flexing and self-assessment in an otherwise static environment. Ego and internal motivation only, no other small brain shit that amounts to essentially getting paid like your job does or getting a game-given "victory" on a casino lever pull.

[Volatilis]

Lol you're not kidding:

"We can develop POE1 and 2 at the same time!" -wrong
"We can do EA but have 3 month patch rotations and still iron out everything because we understand people are treating it like a live game and will get pissed at us if we nuke their build!" -wrong
"We can have engaging combat with combo setups while also having a necessity to speed clear and blast!" -wrong

I think you bring up a good point about people treating early access as live. They don't want sweeping changes on a freshly made toon because that's annoying. But that's kind of the point of EA.

And then the developer muddies the water by saying they don't want to nuke builds but then nuke builds anyway.

They want thier cake and to eat it too basically. The game needs more time in the oven period

[Fencers]

no, raxx said in no uncertain terms that if the change that was planned to be made (reading directly from the patch notes) went through, then hexblast would no longer function and gave the reasoning as to why that change would break the functionality of the skill, NOT EVEN REMOTELY was that 'feeling', it was using already existing knowledge and applying that to the scenario, which was borne out to be true for the exact reasoning given AFTER the patch went live.

If he had no metrics, it was feeling. He felt it would be that way based on his experience. People's feeling can turn out to be proven correct- but that doesn't make it any less of an emotive impulse.

I do not agree with your point of view or opinion. I doubt there will be many developers that would do what you suggest as practiced.

[Gorsameth]

I think you bring up a good point about people treating early access as live. They don't want sweeping changes on a freshly made toon because that's annoying. But that's kind of the point of EA.

And then the developer muddies the water by saying they don't want to nuke builds but then nuke builds anyway.

They want thier cake and to eat it too basically. The game needs more time in the oven period

sweeping changes are annoying because of the effort it takes to change a character to the point where many people simply make a new one rather then change an existing character because its easier.

If they did talent/skill resets with sweeping changes I imagine people would complain less (but ofc people will always complain )

[Snakepit]

--snip--

Man, you need to chill down a bit, honestly. FUCKING FUCKIDY FUCK FUCK stuff over a game and over clashing opinions about the game is a bit... eh... whatever...

You were handed data to process with your experience - sure, it was you, one person. Raxx is one person. Educated streamers are 10,20,50 persons. Imagine that data was handed to you as a scientist and then 1000000 other people. What do you think the results would be? Don't you think they would vary? And Raxx is just as part of the community as the other 1000000 people playing the game. Ok, he knows more stuff - what if it actually happens to differ from what the rest of the community thinks and feels? In this case it might coincide. In others - it might not?

Example - D4. ALL streamers, ALL creators were unanimous - this progression in S7 is insanely fast, it's boring, it's shit, it's yada yada, proven with numbers. I agreed with them, I feel the same. Blizz opened a poll - do you think it's too fast? People who replied too fast were like 20-30%, rest thought it's fine or needs more. And then Blizz listened to streamers (partially, it's more complicated than that, but not the point here) and made it slower/harder. Community exploded with criticism. So which data is more "correct" here?

Community said - campaign 0.2 impossible. I went in, indeed got brutally murdered by the first white wolf and second mini boss, then went in prepared and started blasting and I have exactly the same, if not better/faster even, campaign experience, compared to 0.1. And I can back it up with data. And in the end I pay 30 bucks and Raxx pays 30 bucks (figuratively speaking). Who's right, then? Whose bucks weigh more?

Who defines what "slow" or "non-working" is? How do you evaluate that? I don't feel slow in PoE 2 and I don't need movement abilities added. Give me the data that supports or denies my claim. And then imagine they introduce a change that increases my speed by 5%. Is that too much? Is that too low? Tell me how you'd evaluate that, based on data alone. The whole foundation of this (and other games) is SUBJECTIVE feeling when you play, it's not a predefined model of manufacturing a car that has all the parameters and end result strictly put in, so all data changes are very objective and not a subject of interpretation.

sweeping changes are annoying because of the effort it takes to change a character to the point where many people simply make a new one rather then change an existing character because its easier.

If they did talent/skill resets with sweeping changes I imagine people would complain less (but ofc people will always complain )

That is something I TOTALLY agree with. If I choose an ascendancy, because the other one is horrendous and then they patch the other one, but I am level 92 - there is no way in hell I will level another of the same class up to that point again, just so I can try to play test the other one - I am not 18, I don't have all the time in the world and value a bit more the scarce one I have left :P

[Gorsameth]

Example - D4. ALL streamers, ALL creators were unanimous - this progression in S7 is insanely fast, it's boring, it's shit, it's yada yada, proven with numbers. I agreed with them, I feel the same. Blizz opened a poll - do you think it's too fast? People who replied too fast were like 20-30%, rest thought it's fine or needs more. And then Blizz listened to streamers (partially, it's more complicated than that, but not the point here) and made it slower/harder. Community exploded with criticism. So which data is more "correct" here?

Streamers are not ordinary players, they are very far from it. "its to fast, i'm done 2-3 days" yeah but your playing 12 hours a day. The working dad who gets to play 1-2 hours an evening if he is lucky is going to take 1-2 months to get to the same hours played. He is unlikely to call that progression 'to fast'. he is in fact happy to be able to 'finish' his character at some point before the next season rolls around.

And there are a lot more casual players who occasionally play for 1-2 hours then there are zooming streamers or high school kids with nothing but time.

[rogoth]

Man, you need to chill down a bit, honestly. FUCKING FUCKIDY FUCK FUCK stuff over a game and over clashing opinions about the game is a bit... eh... whatever...

You were handed data to process with your experience - sure, it was you, one person. Raxx is one person. Educated streamers are 10,20,50 persons. Imagine that data was handed to you as a scientist and then 1000000 other people. What do you think the results would be? Don't you think they would vary? And Raxx is just as part of the community as the other 1000000 people playing the game. Ok, he knows more stuff - what if it actually happens to differ from what the rest of the community thinks and feels? In this case it might coincide. In others - it might not?

Example - D4. ALL streamers, ALL creators were unanimous - this progression in S7 is insanely fast, it's boring, it's shit, it's yada yada, proven with numbers. I agreed with them, I feel the same. Blizz opened a poll - do you think it's too fast? People who replied too fast were like 20-30%, rest thought it's fine or needs more. And then Blizz listened to streamers (partially, it's more complicated than that, but not the point here) and made it slower/harder. Community exploded with criticism. So which data is more "correct" here?

Community said - campaign 0.2 impossible. I went in, indeed got brutally murdered by the first white wolf and second mini boss, then went in prepared and started blasting and I have exactly the same, if not better/faster even, campaign experience, compared to 0.1. And I can back it up with data. And in the end I pay 30 bucks and Raxx pays 30 bucks (figuratively speaking). Who's right, then? Whose bucks weigh more?

Who defines what "slow" or "non-working" is? How do you evaluate that? I don't feel slow in PoE 2 and I don't need movement abilities added. Give me the data that supports or denies my claim. And then imagine they introduce a change that increases my speed by 5%. Is that too much? Is that too low? Tell me how you'd evaluate that, based on data alone. The whole foundation of this (and other games) is SUBJECTIVE feeling when you play, it's not a predefined model of manufacturing a car that has all the parameters and end result strictly put in, so all data changes are very objective and not a subject of interpretation.



That is something I TOTALLY agree with. If I choose an ascendancy, because the other one is horrendous and then they patch the other one, but I am level 92 - there is no way in hell I will level another of the same class up to that point again, just so I can try to play test the other one - I am not 18, I don't have all the time in the world and value a bit more the scarce one I have left :P

I want you to ignore everything else you wrote, and focus on the part I have highlighted here, that's the thing I'm trying to emphasise, the point I'm making is that the information IS NOT handed to people to parse beforehand, it's presented a day or two before the changes are set to be implemented, if they provided the data for their planned changes in advance, and got all the feedback necessary, many of the issues that were discovered before the update went out would have been alleviated beforehand, and much of the backlash(as it relates to those changes) wouldn't exist, instead they are fighting fires in every direction because they don't share information ahead of time, and instead of focusing on a small handful of fixes for clearly broken things, they have to spread resources over everything because of their processes.

[Fencers]

0.2e patch looks pretty good. Lowering the monster speed and adjusting minion timers really caught my eye.

I kinda think the new bookmark feature seems dope.

[Snakepit]

Streamers are not ordinary players, they are very far from it. "its to fast, i'm done 2-3 days" yeah but your playing 12 hours a day. The working dad who gets to play 1-2 hours an evening if he is lucky is going to take 1-2 months to get to the same hours played. He is unlikely to call that progression 'to fast'. he is in fact happy to be able to 'finish' his character at some point before the next season rolls around.

And there are a lot more casual players who occasionally play for 1-2 hours then there are zooming streamers or high school kids with nothing but time.

But that is the problem, it wasn't just for the streamers. A professional streamer won't say a boss is easy just because it's easy for them due to their mega skills after 10 000 hours in - the good ones can differentiate. I am not a streamer, but it took me 9 hours of unoptimized gameplay to reach 60 in D4 and about 30 hours to blast through T4 with a non S+ tier build. 30 hours to conquer the highest difficulty and on farm - that's way overachievable even for the most casual dandy But people like to complain.

[Fencers]

For the love of sweet cakes, let's not bring D4's proverbial casual dad with 4 wives and 12 kids into POE2.

Like all other games, POE2's gameplay ought to be evaluated based on the robustness of its game design.

[Snakepit]

I want you to ignore everything else you wrote, and focus on the part I have highlighted here, that's the thing I'm trying to emphasise, the point I'm making is that the information IS NOT handed to people to parse beforehand, it's presented a day or two before the changes are set to be implemented, if they provided the data for their planned changes in advance, and got all the feedback necessary, many of the issues that were discovered before the update went out would have been alleviated beforehand, and much of the backlash(as it relates to those changes) wouldn't exist, instead they are fighting fires in every direction because they don't share information ahead of time, and instead of focusing on a small handful of fixes for clearly broken things, they have to spread resources over everything because of their processes.

I got you on that, and from a general perspective, it's absolutely true/valid. But I believe that would work if the scope of changes was smaller. Like, if they said "this patch we work on Mercenary" - then introduce 3 pages of mercenary changes. Then people can sit down, run spreadsheets, dissect, etc. And even then, there will be clashes about stuff - a person would be saying "Crossbows are underpowered", then another goes "why are you buffing Crossbows", then a third one "but why are you even working on Crossbows when X is untouched". And those 3 pages of notes will spawn 150 pages and 500 videos of discussions. And you have to sift through that manually, then reconvene, analyze, implement other changes, etc.

Now multiply that by 50 - if they were to do things correctly, the patches won't be released every 3 months, but every 12 due to the back and forth process. Not to mention that in order to provide patch notes, you need to have them completed and set in stone way in advance, which is not always possible and leaves development gaps. OOOR - you can drop a patch, run through your automated monitoring/logging systems and gather + analyze the data for 2 hours instead of 2 weeks, that consists of ALL people, on equal grounds, rather than relying on the most vocal majority's opinion, and have all that feedback over 2 days, and fix pain points much faster and with focus on problems that were proven to be real - much more proven, because they're in the actual game, rather than hypothesized and theorycrafted.

All I'm saying is, I still believe the problem is not in them not releasing notes - how many released notes have you seen about Half Life 1, Star Craft 1 etc? It didn't stop them from being some of the greatest games ever made - the problem is in GGG's lack of common sense on some topics, because the main pain points are some conceptual things that do not make sense even on a theoretical level.

They doused 90% of the fire with hotfixes over 1 week - I'd consider that actually pretty successful patch note and strategy, as crazy as it sounds - I suspect releasing earlier and going back and forth would've actually resulted in the game reaching the same state (with the hotfixes) at a later date than the end of this week. And this is not a 'make-it-or-break-it' situation, you don't have just 1 shot, you don't organize the Olympics once, you do iterative development, but the best iteration is the live iteration, that's why people are requesting so hard from GGG to start doing smaller and more regular patches rather than spaced out in time big ones - because playtesting during EA/PTR is the best way to get your data

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Saw that there selling loot boxes for an EA update that went over poorly and man that’s just wild.

Trying to hold out hope but every time o check any thing for PoE it seems more and more like a game getting ran into the ground and getting ready to die.

[Fencers]

These two updates are pretty good. Dare I huff the copium and say GGG is starting to cook?

[NoiseTank13]

I can only imagine the cracks in Jonathons teeth from gritting so much signing off on those changes.

[Shpriest]

These two updates are pretty good. Dare I huff the copium and say GGG is starting to cook?

Its like they poured too much salt into the soup and now they are watering it down. This whole debacle could have been avoided by nerfing what needed nerfing, not nerfing everything just because Jonathan likes way too salty soups. Something is not right at GGG. I dont think that has changed in a couple of days.