Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Now to be fair this plan has been scaled back during early access (among the many kickstarter plans that were scaled back but thats another story) but it wasn't scaled back due to them not liking the idea, merely that they have neither the time nor resources to devote to developing it now.
But yes it will at some point have a trading system almost definitely.
Now if you are asking will the game be balanced around trading, then probably not no but who can say.
Are we really in such a state of game development that an Auction House is too much work? or did I misunderstand you?
I tried hunting back and found this, now granted there is some of me 'reading between the lines' here so take it as you wish but I'll post the announcement below as it appeared then discuss the context.
Now you can say 'oh well they just decided on a different approach' but this was a whole post of them removing things planned since kickstarter to 'focus on MP and launch' so it doesn't take a genius to figure out they have neither the time nor inclination to implement these ideas before launch.
So yes pretty much at this point they are cutting features and in some cases even working old bugs into features to prevent fixing them (see map permanence) cause their release schedule is slipping.
Now it should be noted all games do this to some degree it is not unusual or even anything to overly panic about, but I don't like the way they spin things and rewrite their own history.
Like the bazaar back in kickstarter was touted as a key feature now 'due to feedback' we are told they aren't doing it?? Also we never received that post in the coming months, it was just never mentioned ever again.
It's not outlandish to think that what was originally PLANNED as a unique feature to set the game apart got scrapped after realizing (due to player feedback or otherwise) that is wasn't going to produce the desired result. Lets not forget that the endgame direction has changed pretty significantly for LE (I think most people would agree for the better) - systems that were designed to work in conjunction with the original endgame mechanics may not make as much sense anymore.
@Ravenkid "Basic features common in MP games for years and years?" Oh yeah? That's why PoE trade relies on dedicated 3rd party websites? How bout the D3 "auction house"? Your statement makes it seem like it's ubiquitous - it's not. The idea has been around for years and years, but the proper implementation is rare and there's likely a good reason for that.
Also, every company has a limited budget and development time. Do you want a well fleshed out game with plenty of fun and interesting content with basic trading like a trade channel & direct trading? Or do you want a WoW style auction house with a lacking end-game? If they're in a position where it's one or the other, people are going to complain either way, but most people want to play a game that has ... game to play,, vs a more convenient method of trading. They may have changed their plans as far as the Bazaar goes, but they've also added a whole lot of content not originally planned, so it's not like they promised the world and delivered a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ little shack.
Finally, the dungeons are meant as an alternate levelling path as well as a way to implement a unique endgame feature. There's nothing questionable about it, and it's not strictly endgame. You may be shocked to find out that some people actually enjoy the levelling process, and adding some variety to that process makes it all the more enjoyable, especially for HC players who, even if you stick to a single character are bound to have to start fresh sooner or later.
I don't think EHG is above criticism, but presented the way they are your complaints reek of entitlement and a lack of understanding / insight into the game development process. I know that showing contempt for things "we" don't understand is a pretty standard thing these days (and historically too I guess), but it's ignorant as ♥♥♥♥ and frankly nobody wants to listen to those people, so it's really not doing yourself any favors if your goal is to provide meaningful input - and if it isn't, then why bother even posting?
The difference is that PoE is a "Design Choice" as the developers have stated multiple times they do not wish to add in such features. Now you can argue about it being a good or bad decision but to compare it is misleading at best.
Again you missed the point. My point is making them required X. Seems to me like if you present features in a game and then have to scale them back and bring in outside resources to assist your basic development process it seems a bit telling. Its not about coming for your dungeons, or your entertainment, its just another easy way to present what a lot of people see as a questionable design goal. Sorry you missed it.
I get it, you like LE, that's fine but gurl don't come for me, I did not send for you.
Frankly I don't even play LE - there's just something about the art style that bothers me. It looks nice, I just can't get into it for some reason. What bugs me is that I can't put a finger on what it is... But anyway, it doesn't matter whether it was a design choice or not for PoE - it's one of the main alternatives in the genre, and your "basic feature thats been around forever" isn't around. Go ahead and name a handful of successful, current ARPGs with an in-game auction house / bazaar. Maybe you're right and I've just never heard of them, but if you can't, then ironically you're proving my point that your original statement was misleading.
Originally you were talking about an auction house being "Too much work" - that's not a "design choice" that's a resource issue - if you're gonna try and argue your points, don't move the goalposts - it's not a good look. Changing your position about something mid discussion isn't necessarily a bad thing, but making one statement then saying "nono you're wrong I actually said this" ... Like it's literally right there.
Understandable it is difficult to keep track. I said it was an opportunity cost, in time/resources etc. YOU said it was a design choice, I only brought up the design choice with regard to PoE. As for shifting goalposts, between design choice and opportunity cost it is both. Given how much work they put into dungeons, I feel like its a fair statement to make that its not entirely resource cost and thus leans more to being a design choice, one that in my view is just another example of making lazy decisions and cutting corners.
I said it was pretty much a staple, and much like flytrap plants some exceptions are bound to happen. The exception that proves the rule. Much like how PoE sticks to their design choices and as an exception proves the rule so to speak. Further given how many "Side resources" are available to ease the trading in PoE only proves that the community overall wants an easy way to make such trades, almost like an auction house style system would be well received by the players, but apparently despite the overlap in players when it comes to LE they suddenly don't want it? make it make sense.
Where as LE has cut content, for "reasons" and to conflate it with never intending to introduce those features is misleading at best. Now you can argue about what those reasons are but its not really my point.
We can argue points all day long, for me and feel free to clock my playtime, what ended LE for me was that overall design choice and how it has been implemented, I think I have been pretty clear about that in my posts, even when I add in a spoonful of sass to help the medicine go down.
Final point about dungeons: I mean it can be intended to be a lot of things, much like how you can intend to build a suspension bridge out of tomatoes, but its not going to work out well for you. If you intend the dungeons to be an alternative then its a poor design choice. See how it all circles back to design choice. Mainly as you still need to run the story AND the Empowered Monoliths because of the rewards for doing so, so its not really an alternative at all is it? One of the more level headed youtubers Thyworm has a few videos on the dungeons as an alternative and he puts it into better perspective then I am willing to do here.
Maybe I'm just tired, but there's a lot of this stuff that you're referring to that I'm not seeing above. Are you thinking of this post specifically? Did you maybe drop some comments in a different thread and confuse it for this one? Like the bit about being a staple - your elaboration makes sense, but all you said in relation to that before now is "Are we really in such a state of game development that an Auction House is too much work? or did I misunderstand you?" and "basic features common in MP games for years and years? ..." Same with design choices ending it for you and a few other statements - I respect your stance, but it's not even implied above contrary to what you're saying.
As for the PoE resources, that indicates a focus on crafting, not trading. Obviously crafting materials in a game that largely revolves around crafting are going to become currency in practice, whether the game calls it that or not. Only a small percentage of PoE players actively engage in trade to any substantial degree. (http://br.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2025870/page/1) Around 10%, Probably a bit more than that, but that's not much. Some of it is probably because of how much of a PITA it is, but there are more players than you seem to think who play SSF or just don't trade.
You're right, sitting here and debating will serve no purpose, especially if we can't make and then address points clearly. Isn't that the point of public forums, though? To voice opinions, debate, and maybe come to different conclusions / adjust our perspective on things?
My mistake I figured when you came for me with "but presented the way they are your complaints reek of entitlement and a lack of understanding" I just assumed you had done a bit of post history. Especially given that you almost entirely alone have caused more forum action then has been seen in days.
Yes you are correct, we ultimately will never know 100% either way. Having said that how many things are accepted as fact in general without 100% proof? Its a bit like 4 out of 5 dentists, its a bit of a deflection in my view. At the end of the day if you are trying to market your game the perception of that game is what matters far more then what factually is. Example take WoW: MoP was polarizing to say the least, a lot of people had strong reactions to it. Now many years later things have softened, and the perception has changed. The same happened in MtG with the first Kamigawa set. What does it mean? when it comes to sales perception is often reality. So taking a bit from your other posts, you may not agree with something, but if enough players do like the handling of mtx, regardless of how right or wrong it is, regardless of how you can prove it one way or the other that perception becomes reality. Not really wanting to get into the gritty debate but just an example.
As for PoE and trading 10% of PoE is 10K current 24 hour peak, and that is just steam version. Where as LE is struggling to break 1K current for the same 24 hour peak. Given how many people are waiting for MP seems to me like diverting any resources away from that goal to lets be honest and say questionable content at best, just seems silly.
The majority of players do not engage with any out of game resources/forums addons etc. When it comes to voicing our views it is often to a small percentage of the player base and often to developers with deaf ears. Consider you are making a game and the players on your forum want X. If you are disinclined to provide X its easy to say to yourself well its only a small percent of the players I can just ignore that. Not an accusation just an illustration of an overall trend in development, especially with 1st time developers working on their baby so to speak.
I agree with pretty much everything you've said here, except that I'd add a bit of nuance to your diverting resources from MP statement - I agree that MP should be their #1 priority because of how much hinges on that system right now (and it'll only get worse until the balloon pops, which if it does, then I reckon it's gonna be a very sad tailspin), but an important consideration is that they might not have the expertise to move things along any faster.
Now to some it may seem like I'm grasping at straws in their defence but this is a very real possibility which would really kneecap the MP efforts; If the vast majority of their employees are salaried, they can't just get rid of them and replace them with others who's expertise is in networking. Maybe it's just a mismanagement of resources, or poor planning, I really don't know, but it's also entirely possible that they only have a couple people with the required skills to move THAT component along and they may or may not have the financial means to remedy that effectively in a way that's compatible with their longer-term projections. If that's the case, or something along those lines, then even if the other content wasn't being made, the MP wouldn't be getting done any faster either; You'd just have devs twiddling their thumbs or working on a different project entirely.
I'm not trying to be right, but rather to point out that there are a lot of potential constraints that we as consumers generally don't stop to consider, and we're also generally not privy to the kind of information that would allow us to determine the real reason behind certain decisions / delays / etc. I have no stake in whether they look good or not at the end of the day, I'm just tired of people yeeting ♥♥♥♥ at each other without stopping to really make sure it's even warranted.
You do seem a lot more sensible than most people I interact with on Steam forums though, so again I think the harshness of my original criticism was unwarranted. I don't think the statement about entitlement / lack of insight was unwarranted based on what I knew at the time, but you certainly didn't deserve the hostility that accompanied it. Sorry about that.
Except no...
The feedback would be at best the people in their discord or the few dozen people who regularly post on the official forum.
That is not enough feedback to warrant scrapping an entire system. Now I'm not gonna suggest nobody expressed concern or dislike for the proposed system but its very much allowing a very limited sample size to inform a decision that entirely suits them.
We can see lots of aspects have been scaled back or cut, we still don't have concrete information on whether the much touted single player offline mode will even happen. So I find it EXTREMELY hard to believe that a system was scrapped for anything except time and monetary reasons.
What's more the end game has not functionally changed so that's no viable excuse.
We have also seen as developers they are lets say willing to stretch the truth a little when it suits their message.
For years we were told the lack of permanence in the maps when zoning in and out was a known 'issue' and was due to be fixed when MP dropped. Now we are told that its a design feature and they have completely erased all memory of it ever being any other such thing from existence.
Now again it could be that thousands of players begged them to keep this 'bug' in the game, but it seems more likely that they have neither the will, time or money to fix it now so just span it as a feature.
Yeah I follow your reasoning and it makes sense; My personal beliefs align a lot more with what you laid out here than not, but I'm playing devil's advocate because while it's logical and sensible speculation, it's speculation none-the-less. Businesses in any industry, not just gaming, will piss on your leg and tell you it's raining; That's the whole PR industry in a nutshell, and largely marketing as well for that matter.
However, people are also prone to going on witch hunts and creating their own narratives when it suits them (which I'm not saying you are), so it's worthwhile to look at both sides of the coin and recognize that we don't have all the facts. It's not a question of defending anyone or playing some BS 4d chess lol; It's about thinking critically, not just *being* critical, and part of thinking critically is realizing that while this may sound hard to argue against, it remains conjecture.
Now what you, as in the general you, do with that information is entirely up to you. Just as your for lack of a better term "White Knighting" is up to the general you, you do with that what they wish.
Personally I find it distasteful when someone defends and their entire position seems to boil down to you can't know for 100%. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯