Turning off XP loss/gain as an option?

The only problem PoE have is new players can't survive this game without a Guide it's some kind of geek game. Every league starts by those "PRO players/a.k.a. streamers" showing you the right way.

I call some new people to play this game with me, but they absolutely lost there, they don't know what to do, when to do, how to do, literally I have to play for them and babysit. They want atlas in 1 day as they have seen mr.streamer did so, they are searching for the only right way to play the game.

They all left. Not everybody sick enough to study game for two years till they can make decisions. They just want it all and want it now.

Game shouldn't designed around those players who run 500 maps per day, it should more favorable to those who explore game, clearing and learning everything at their speed.

Now it's a geek game where you can't call anybody to play with you. They just can't.

I myself started game with whatever I liked, bodyswap/soulrend spells, and played with those all the way for like two years. I did acts in 10days, and I enjoyed it. Played with blue items whole Kalandra league. I not expect to be on same level with somebody who play this game for his lifetime or when this game becomes somebody's job.

In PoE level 100 is the matter of 2-3 days for a regular non juiced play, just need to not die for these 3 days. Sounds easy enough, this must be your personal achievement.

Dear, GGG, please consider to return death penalty and exp loss at bosses. People can still be better at managing their exp bar and go risk to death when they just level up. The problem not their level, the problem is people not understand gem system, not understand how skills work, what are attacks and what are spells etc etc. You need to read a book before you can just try this game. And many many spell/skill gems nerfed to the ground just because somebody made an ultimate build with it and destroyed the game. So now those spells are crap or only be usable if you do his exact build to play with it. A noob can't just choose whatever skill he like and start playing.

"

Sarno#0493 wrote:

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you - the "majority" we heard about back on Page 2.

...you do realize this has been a constant complaint for over a decade, yeah?

This thread alone is a poor sample to use, so much for "strawman arguments". You usually have better takes than this, but this one was awful and seemed rather tone deaf, tbh.

"

Sarno#0493 wrote:

According to Steam Charts, the phenomenon where players quit the game and do not come back happens to some games (e.g. Last Epoch; no XP loss on death) more than some other games (e.g. Path of Exile; XP loss on death).

You know what else has "EXP loss"? Elden Ring. Why on earth would you use Steam Charts as a metric for this? It's complete nonsense.

I, for one, stopped playing LE cuz I found it boring and unpolished, and I don't like their Diablo/Grim Dawn-esque form of passive tree. PoE's way of character building is what I consider the new standard for this genre, in the same way Dark Souls reshaped the landscape for Action/Adventure Fantasy RPGs.

"

Toforto#2372 wrote:

You know what isn't fun? Dying and losing hours of your progress for literally no reason except "oh the game has always been like that".

This implies there are games where dying IS fun, because the unfun part of dying to you is "losing progress".

What sorts of games do you play where dying is fun for you?

"

BaumisMagicalWorld#0673 wrote:

...you do realize this has been a constant complaint for over a decade, yeah?

Yes.

"

BaumisMagicalWorld#0673 wrote:

This thread alone is a poor sample to use, so much for "strawman arguments".

I don't know what you think that expression means, but it definitely isn't what it actually means.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Toforto did comment on a "majority" of people allegedly desiring the removal of the XP penalty on death. It is, therefore, not a straw man argument. Now if you disagree with my response to Toforto, then it is what it is - but that does not a straw man argument make. Words mean things.

"

BaumisMagicalWorld#0673 wrote:

You usually have better takes than this, but this one was awful and seemed rather tone deaf, tbh.

I also have no idea why you're telling me my response is tone-deaf.

It's not that it can't apply in this circumstance necessarily, it is just... a very strange thing to reach for. I could see it if you said the same thing towards a GGG employee. But, like, some random person on the internet is being tone-deaf for having their own opinion? Like, I am entitled to that.

In particular I'm nonplussed by the author of this post telling me I am being tone-deaf. I was accused of being "disingenuous" and "feeling like a superior player". Now its author is of the opinion that I have been a bit careless where their feelings are concerned?

"

BaumisMagicalWorld#0673 wrote:

Why on earth would you use Steam Charts as a metric for this?

It is not my intention to assign another's words to you. But I would frankly love to know why my rebuttal to someone else's entirely unfounded claim is being focused on by you for citing metrics you consider suboptimal while their unfounded claim remains unfounded.

Apart from the burden of proof lying with the one staking a claim rather than those that disagree with said claim, I would think you disliking my methodology is something of a lesser sin than... there not being any methodology. Unless Toforto & you citing there being more than one thread on the subject is considered some kind of great evidence of the imagined majority, in which case I don't know. If that's where the standard is I'm not sure the conversation is worth bothering with.

Double standards do become aggravating to deal with, btw. Usually rather quickly at that.

"

Jadian#0111 wrote:

"

Toforto#2372 wrote:

You know what isn't fun? Dying and losing hours of your progress for literally no reason except "oh the game has always been like that".

This implies there are games where dying IS fun, because the unfun part of dying to you is "losing progress".

What sorts of games do you play where dying is fun for you?

The ones where dying doesn't delete hours of your progress for no reason whatsoever. Those are the kinds of games I play. You know, games where I can just try again without the game kicking the player while they're down if they die or fail a single time. PoE is far too punishing, its an outdated archaic type of game design that should be extinct by now.

"

Sarno#0493 wrote:

But, like, some random person on the internet is being tone-deaf for having their own opinion? Like, I am entitled to that.

Just because you are entitled to an opinion, doesn't mean it can't be a shit opinion. I entirely disagree with your stance and I think you are acting abrasive for the sake of ruffling some feathers, rather than making a point.

It's the same as with other threads created with the opposite stance, typically phrased in a derogatory manner, just to piss people off. The worst plague this game has is the elitist circle jerking from the very beginning, since early beta days. The same kind of stinky attitude that drove me away from Grim Dawn forums.

If you want a game that fulfills every "hardcore" desire, make your own and add survival mechanics for the real RPG experience. And make it so your entire gear drops on death, and you can only revive once a month or start from scratch.

"

BaumisMagicalWorld#0673 wrote:

If you want a game that fulfills every "hardcore" desire, make your own and add survival mechanics for the real RPG experience.

....and yet its YOUR side of the argument that's demanding the game change to suit your own desires. Do you not see this? How can you write this thought, read the previous comments, and not make that connection to precisely what you are arguing for?

A point that has already been highlighted a few times in this thread.


PoE has ALWAYS....from the very beginning....been harder and far less forgiving in certain aspects than most other arpgs. It is why it took a few additional years for the masses to catch on to how good the game was. This was and remains its core identity: a harder arpg with an immense scope of customization and knowledge required to push the upper limits . YOU, meaning the "you" constantly complaining about the exp loss, are the ones on the wrong side of this argument, when what you should be doing is going to a different game that ISN'T built on an exp penalty and certain difficulties.


It's amazing that the contradictory comments and entire contradictory rationales aren't being noticed...but hey, at least GGG noticed and hasn't removed the penalty in 13 years of development and the minority "always" complaining about it. I also cannot believe that Sarno's posts can be read and considered "abrasive", given the posts they are responding to and the EXTREME amounts of restraint and professional tone of the responses.

"

BaumisMagicalWorld#0673 wrote:

Just because you are entitled to an opinion, doesn't mean it can't be a shit opinion.

Yes, Baumi.

Speaking as someone who in his prior post described himself as - and I quote - "some random person on the internet", I would be inclined to agree with you. Any of us are capable of having a "shit" opinion - albeit I'm not entirely convinced by the assumed utility of such a designation.

"

BaumisMagicalWorld#0673 wrote:

I entirely disagree with your stance

Well, I mean, yeah - of course you do.

We entirely disagree with each other's stances. That's how an argument goes. As my late grandmother would have said - "Nobody is better than you, but you're better than no one."

"

BaumisMagicalWorld#0673 wrote:

I think you are acting abrasive for the sake of ruffling some feathers, rather than making a point.

I don't know, Baumi.

I have not at any point in this thread insinuated people on the other side of the debate don't sincerely hold the preferences they claim to have. It's a shame such a courtesy was not returned to me.

I have also never once sought to disrespect those on the other side of the argument by seeking to create a caricature of their perceived preferences - this, too, is a courtesy that has been one-sided.

In my previous post I mentioned double standards. Having just been accused of being tone-deaf, I am now the recipient of this post. The sheer unfairness of it is really quite remarkable.

I believe those that claim to hold a different preference than I do regarding the on-death XP penalty in Path of Exile do so earnestly, in good faith, and are attempting to provide the best feedback they can to help the game become the best version of the game that it can possibly be. I don't share their views, but I also do not attack the authenticity of what they are doing.

"

BaumisMagicalWorld#0673 wrote:

If you want a game that fulfills every "hardcore" desire

• I don't want that
• I never claimed to want that
• I struggle to grasp the good-faith reason someone would suggest that I do want that?

---

I have a different personal preference to you regarding one feature of a video game.

Not everything is a personal affront.

"

Sarno#0493 wrote:

• I don't want that
• I never claimed to want that
• I struggle to grasp the good-faith reason someone would suggest that I do want that?

It's funny, at least in this thread I don't think ANYONE has said anything remotely of the sort. There are certainly other threads and other people that do the tongue-in-cheek response of "they should INCREASE the penalties"...but I don't believe that has come up here. And the folks who do want this already have the option in the form of private leagues, which many DO play instead for the harder experience.

The truth is the game ALREADY has some of those aspects within it, and they have ALWAYS been a part of the game. Choosing to play this game, and play it for YEARS, shows a thorough acceptance of the systems the game was built upon. But if you fail to adapt to those systems over that length of time....no one, not even a different game, can help you.
The side asking for changes to the game's systems is....not the side he is attempting to obfuscate. There is such a major disconnect between two halves of the same side of the argument here that keeps ending in contradictions, and putting words in other's mouths.

Good faith, indeed.



Analogy time:
imagine a person who claims to love playing chess. This player has decided he never wants to learn how the knight piece moves, and thus struggles in games because he cannot use his knights. Instead of learning how to use the knight using the guidebooks provided by the game, player instead goes to public chess forums and places and complains that the knight SHOULDN'T move the way it does because its bad for the game of chess. He constantly gets called out that he really just needs to learn how to use the knight, or perhaps chess isn't the right game for him to play......but he ignores it all and claims with absolute confidence that the knight piece simply shouldn't be in the game. Meanwhile magnitudes more players play and have absolutely no issues: the knight remains an integral part of the "strategy" and gameplay of the game.

THAT is how this argument comes across. Not just from one player, but from many players who share the same unwillingness to play the game as it has been made. I don't know when the "shift" happened in certain gamers' minds that makes them think the proper response to barriers and difficulty is to complain about their existence, rather than actually learning to overcome them and ignore them over time through experience. But its this baseline unearned entitlement that makes any semblance of legitimate argument fall completely flat.