I have to say it...PoE is better then Diablo 2
" I am neither a reroller or a no lifer and I'm pretty happy with the game the way it is. Try and make something that appeals to everyone and generally all you end up with is a bland steaming pile of crap. |
|
" But then again who are you to measure "steaming pile of crap"? There are plenty people out there who think PoE is the steaming pile of shit (PoE's popularity sure didn't help arguing otherwise)... heck PoE is easily a bigger steaming pile of shit than D3, if we measure the crappiness using cold hard cash earned (none of your anecdotal bs, talking about cold hard truth of $$ here) for the publisher/developer. There are many diablo wannabes out on the market and PoE is surely one of them... but stop and think about it... PoE is probably one of the best H&S ARPG (aka Diablo clone) yet the market share of PoE is still so tiny... I am seriously surprised that a game so well made like PoE could stay niche for so long (other than the extreme obnoxious community). I understand many of you would rather PoE to die and stay niche forever than the smallest change to at least attempt to appeal to greater audiences... but unlike most of you on this forum I really think PoE/GGG deserves more than staying niche forever. The real hardcore PoE players and the elites sit in town and zoning in and out of their hideouts trading items. Noobs that don't know how to play PoE correctly, kill monsters for items. It's pure fact, it will never change. Welcome to PoE. Последняя редакция: Pewzor#2343. Время: 7 февр. 2016 г., 07:40:42
|
|
|
still there are some things that are objective and some other that are subjective. We discuss about objective things:
1) legacy exist 2) game is not balanced around legacy objective thing is: game is umbalanced subjective thing is: i like umbalanced or balanced game, that is subjective but "normal" people should to prefer a balanced game. "people who don't have them usually think they are bad things" I have legacies, also a Kaom. IGN: SeaLaser
Sea Builds, Characters, Shops, Links & Records: https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/972683/ |
|
" What is wrong with being niche? How would you appeal greater audiences without changing the DNA of the game? " Speaking about DNA: the game IS DESIGNED around rerolling. You know the core aspect of any RPG. I am wondering if you are not better suited playing an asian mmo if one wants to dedicate himself to a sole character. Heart of Purity Awarded 'Silverblade' to Talent Competition Winner 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDFO4E5OKSE I am one of the rare fair players/collectors. Последняя редакция: Reinhart#6743. Время: 7 февр. 2016 г., 09:33:36
|
|
" Let me just point out this - considering someone "normal" is again subjective. Those that are not "normal" would disagree and will call those who don't think like them "not normal". As for game being unbalanced ... it has to do with so many other factors than just legacy gear, and i must say that i didn't like the fallacy you've used there. You've stated an objective fact ( game is unbalanced ) but you've attributed that fact JUST to one cause even if there are multiple causes for that fact, And again you think of it from this perspective - legacy gear exists and it is nit just better than the current version ( which is not true for all legacy items ) but it is overpowered ( which again is not true in all cases .. some legacy items where overpowered when they went legacy but now they are nowhere near overpowered and the current versions are just bad ) that makes the game unbalanced and that's bad. Ok that's all good but think about legacy gear from a different perspective - legacy gear exists and some legacy items allow certain builds to be even playable ... something that the non-legacy version just does not allow ( due to overnerfing ), thus the legacy gear provides more build and gear diversity. So let's see .. you would say that: objective thing is: legacy gear gives more options subjective thing is: i like a game with more options, that is subjective but "normal" people should prefer a game that gives them more options. You see how such an incomplete analysis of a certain thing is not enough to fully understand how it affects the game? Discussing just one "bad" aspect of something without even considering all of it's other aspects is dishonest at best. Not to mention that interpreting that aspect as good or bad is fundamentally subjective ... which again brings us to my initial concept - there isn't better or worse when it comes to liking or disliking something because objectively it's neither. The user .. the person who is subjected to that thing perceives it as good or bad, as better than another thing or worse .. based on his preferences, based on his views of what's entertaining and what's boring. Objective truth does not exist here. We could say that the claim - "D2 exists" is objective, but the claim - "D2 is good" is subjective and the claim "D2 is better than PoE" is again subjective .. but even more because it involves comparing your subjective opinion of D2 to that of a second game. And that's why this thread ( and those like it ) are pointless. If i make a thread "I have to say it...Twin Peaks is better than Lost" what would be the point of it? What discussion can such a thread hold? It will be full of people who like Twin Peaks more than Lost and vice-versa each screaming on top of their lungs that they are right, that their sensibilities are the right sensibilities, that they are the "normal" people and everyone should be like them. Don't get me wrong .. i understand that most people are like that on everything ... most people are so self-centered and think that their view of the world is the only "correct" view and when someone else tells them that they view the world differently all hell breaks loose. That's an understandable position but still .. pretty close-minded and ignorant. "I'm going to show you pain you never knew existed, you're going to see a whole new spectrum of pain!!!!! Like a RAINBOW!" Последняя редакция: KorgothBG#4084. Время: 7 февр. 2016 г., 09:23:30
|
|
|
you have flipped the omelette.
there is no point on some objective things, like legacies. Legacies are an important and direct factor to the balance of the game, that the reason they become legacy. I didn't say there is only one balance problem, it's an example, but very important one. Welcome to the real objective world. IGN: SeaLaser Sea Builds, Characters, Shops, Links & Records: https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/972683/ Последняя редакция: RoyalStar#5086. Время: 7 февр. 2016 г., 10:20:13
|
|
|
Why are we talking about individuals preferences? If we have to be objective about it, we need numbers that are measurable. Financial success or popularity is something that is measurable. You are more successful if you have bigger numbers. If you have a niche market, you have smaller number of players, you make less money, you are less successful game comparably. I hope this is not something alien to you.
|
|
|
@RoyalStar
I guess it comes down to this. You can't accept that there are good qualities to legacy items thus your opinion will always be: "They are bad for the balance thus they are just plain bad and i don't care of any other aspects related to them - they are the worse! Plain and simple." It's a position that cannot be disproved to you because it is driven( and clouded ) by your own feelings towards the legacy items. You can say that they are bad because of A and B and that while they have positive features you still want them to be removed or vice versa but that just subjective opinion on the matter nothing else. Legacy items are bad for balance and that's bad. That's somewhat objective. Legacy items are bad because they are bad for the balance. That would be objectively true if they had nothing else about them. If being bad for balance is all that they are, their essence it begins with that and it ends with it then that would also be objectively true. But since that's not their sole feature, and you know that perfectly well, by ignoring everything else that they bring you end up with a subjective opinion and nothing more. Again there is nothing wrong with that, but just don't present it as the objective truth - because that is dishonest. Ignoring all features of an object while describing and giving a conclusion about its nature is a fallacy ... let me try to give you an example. Cutting off once arm is painful. Experiencing pain is bad. Cutting off once arm is bad because it causes pain. That's all true until you explore other features of that event - like having the limb amputated because of a peripheral arterial disease. Legacy items are unbalanced. The lack of balance is bad. Legacy items are bad because they cause imbalance. That's all true until you explore other features of the legacy itmes - like increasing build and gear diversity, providing end-goal in permanent leagues for some etc. etc. @deathflower While popularity and financial success are measurable they tell you nothing about the artistical value of a product. H.P. Lovecraft was never popular while he was alive, nor he achieved financial success. But now he is praised of one of the greatest horror fiction writers of all time and the father of the modern horror literature. Current popularity and financial success indicates just that - current popularity and financial success and nothing more. For example Justin Bieber is more popular and makes more money than Franz Schubert does that mean that he is in fact a better musician? Well he is and isn't at the same time ... based on who you ask, based on the subjective opinion of the listener. Furthermore saying that financial success is indicative for what's better is again your subjective opinion on what's more important. I hope this is not something alien to you. "I'm going to show you pain you never knew existed, you're going to see a whole new spectrum of pain!!!!! Like a RAINBOW!" Последняя редакция: KorgothBG#4084. Время: 7 февр. 2016 г., 10:54:43
|
|
|
No serious players used gold as currency... runes were currency.
|
|
" H.P. Lovecraft died in poverty and more people listen to Justin Bieber than Franz Schubert. There is nothing subjective about who make more money... Or who is more popular. Justin Bieber Fans outnumber Franz Schubert. Financial success and popularity is indicative for what's better. Whether it has better artistical value is a different issue. Subjective opinions are also one of yardstick that we can measure what's better. If you think Franz Schubert is the greatest musician of all time in your own subjective experience, by all mean. Someone can think Justin Bieber is the greatest musician of all time. However both of you would have to agree that Justin Bieber make more money and has more fans. |
|
