|
|
On January 20 2017 06:32 Lachrymose wrote:
What if GGG announced, instead of the port, they were making a completely unrelated Xbox game? Would that only be okay with you if it was funded entirely by venture capital and not by Path of Exile?
It's tricky at first but you're saying all profits from Path of Exile should be reinvested in Path of Exile and that's the same as saying Path of Exile should not be profitable.
Do you take that attitude with any other company? If you bought Starcraft 2 did you expect 100% of that revenue to go toward Heart of the Swarm and not a dime toward Hearthstone or Heroes of the Storm or whatever else?
If they actually announced what they were doing we wouldn't have had this issue. I fully expect Blizzard to continue developing games and new universes. I did not expect GGG to develop a console version of Path of Exile.
|
On January 20 2017 07:51 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 06:32 Lachrymose wrote:
What if GGG announced, instead of the port, they were making a completely unrelated Xbox game? Would that only be okay with you if it was funded entirely by venture capital and not by Path of Exile?
It's tricky at first but you're saying all profits from Path of Exile should be reinvested in Path of Exile and that's the same as saying Path of Exile should not be profitable.
Do you take that attitude with any other company? If you bought Starcraft 2 did you expect 100% of that revenue to go toward Heart of the Swarm and not a dime toward Hearthstone or Heroes of the Storm or whatever else? If they actually announced what they were doing we wouldn't have had this issue. I fully expect Blizzard to continue developing games and new universes. I did not expect GGG to develop a console version of Path of Exile.
aka you have to approve of the use of all revenue from Path of Exile aka Path of Exile is not to be profitable.
|
On January 20 2017 07:56 Lachrymose wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 07:51 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On January 20 2017 06:32 Lachrymose wrote:
What if GGG announced, instead of the port, they were making a completely unrelated Xbox game? Would that only be okay with you if it was funded entirely by venture capital and not by Path of Exile?
It's tricky at first but you're saying all profits from Path of Exile should be reinvested in Path of Exile and that's the same as saying Path of Exile should not be profitable.
Do you take that attitude with any other company? If you bought Starcraft 2 did you expect 100% of that revenue to go toward Heart of the Swarm and not a dime toward Hearthstone or Heroes of the Storm or whatever else? If they actually announced what they were doing we wouldn't have had this issue. I fully expect Blizzard to continue developing games and new universes. I did not expect GGG to develop a console version of Path of Exile. aka you have to approve of the use of all revenue from Path of Exile aka Path of Exile is not to be profitable.
The idea that I'm approving their revenue by voicing my concerns about a project that they've been hiding for a year when they've been communicating with the community the entire time I've been playing this game since closed beta just doesn't add up.
and if you don't understand the other viewpoint then I suggest we just agree to disagree because there isn't any more evidence to present.
|
On January 20 2017 08:07 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 07:56 Lachrymose wrote:On January 20 2017 07:51 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On January 20 2017 06:32 Lachrymose wrote:
What if GGG announced, instead of the port, they were making a completely unrelated Xbox game? Would that only be okay with you if it was funded entirely by venture capital and not by Path of Exile?
It's tricky at first but you're saying all profits from Path of Exile should be reinvested in Path of Exile and that's the same as saying Path of Exile should not be profitable.
Do you take that attitude with any other company? If you bought Starcraft 2 did you expect 100% of that revenue to go toward Heart of the Swarm and not a dime toward Hearthstone or Heroes of the Storm or whatever else? If they actually announced what they were doing we wouldn't have had this issue. I fully expect Blizzard to continue developing games and new universes. I did not expect GGG to develop a console version of Path of Exile. aka you have to approve of the use of all revenue from Path of Exile aka Path of Exile is not to be profitable. The idea that I'm approving their revenue by voicing my concerns about a project that they've been hiding for a year when they've been communicating with the community the entire time I've been playing this game since closed beta just doesn't add up.
I don't know why this is so hard for you to understand. 'Voicing your concerns' that it's unethical that they spent money on something other than server or development costs is saying you have to approve of how they spend money because some of that money came from sources that contain language about 'supporting' PoE.
'Supporting PoE to be profitable' is a completely reasonable interpretation. Much more reasonable in fact than the 'supporting PoE to subsist' interpretation that people like you seem to believe.
It is unreasonable to expect that none of the revenue PoE earns from mtx/'support' goes into a bag called 'profit' and therefore it's unreasonable to feel defrauded when some of the money comes out of that bag for a non-PoE project.
|
I think you aren't getting Blitz's point Lachrymose. GGG's relationship with its playerbase is a lot different than for blizzard for example. They built their core on being "crowd-funded" and listening to the fans, being transparent. They still have the last word in what they are going to do with the money of course and everybody knows that. However, there is a massive difference in announcing the info to get intel about what the community thinks and take that into the equation as compared to your claim that people try to claim the right to approve the decision GGG is making. All Blitz is asking for is the option to voice concerns and for GGG to take that into consideration. He is not asking for an option for the fans to actually approve anything GGG is doing. The decision is still in GGG's hands in the end.
|
I'm surprised at the reactions. This seems like a mundane deal getting blown out of proportions. If it's a profitable venture, why wouldn't they do it? And since Xbox is a different version with different balance and servers, why should we care? They're basically making an Xbox game loosely based on PoE with money they most likely cannot spend on PC development (and they might have help from Microsoft or some other entity along the way).
It feels like people are retroactively applying every clearspeed meta decision to the xbox port, when new hard content followed by power creep has been happening forever.
Will we get a balance speed bump? Sure. Will we miss content on the PC? No, we'll get more. Will the game be more casual? Yes, but that would have happened anyway, as it is clearly the more popular option. PoE has never had more players. Will the game be more difficult in 3.0? I hope so, but if it isn't, it has nothing to do with the xbox port.
As for communications, when was the right time to announce it? It was a risky idea. They hired ppl to work on the engine with the Xbox in mind, but their plan B was always the DX11 optimizations. Should they announce it when there's still a risk of cancellation? The timing is a marketing equation. Now they have a few months to build up Xbox hype on top of 3.0 hype. If the Xbox version gets a delay, they can still keep the hype alive with 3.0. It's pretty damn convenient.
GGG's formula can't reasonably be applied to console development. Consoles work way more on marketing and momenthum than on game quality and developer support. You think Chris didn't want to share it all along? If it hurts GGG in the process, his hands are tied.
|
On January 20 2017 08:36 Miragee wrote:
I think you aren't getting Blitz's point Lachrymose. GGG's relationship with its playerbase is a lot different than for blizzard for example. They built their core on being "crowd-funded" and listening to the fans, being transparent. They still have the last word in what they are going to do with the money of course and everybody knows that. However, there is a massive difference in announcing the info to get intel about what the community thinks and take that into the equation as compared to your claim that people try to claim the right to approve the decision GGG is making. All Blitz is asking for is the option to voice concerns and for GGG to take that into consideration. He is not asking for an option for the fans to actually approve anything GGG is doing. The decision is still in GGG's hands in the end.
The difference is it's not a concern that it's a bad business decision or something that's being approached impartially. It's not even about the specific decision at all. Criticising GGG for spending development funds on Lab instead of Masters is one thing. People aren't saying 'shouldn't they have made a PS4 port, not Xbox?'. I'm not arguing against people saying it's a bad idea because focusing on PC content would have been more profitable or anything like that.
To put it more plainly: His concern is not "this isn't the best move for the company, let's discuss why and what they can do better." His concern is "They took my money under false pretenses, let's discuss how this is not ethical and should not be allowed."
It's about whether or not it's ethical for PoE to make a no-strings-attached profit given the language of 'support' in what they sell. Whether it's ethical for them to spend any money on something which is not PoE.
Primarily, people are saying that it is not ethical and they are very mad about this.
It is.
|
On January 20 2017 08:55 Lachrymose wrote:
To put it more plainly: His concern is not "this isn't the best move for the company, let's discuss why and what they can do better." His concern is "They took my money under false pretenses, let's discuss how this is not ethical and should not be allowed."
It's about whether or not it's ethical for PoE to make a no-strings-attached profit given the language of 'support' in what they sell. Whether it's ethical for them to spend any money on something which is not PoE.
That isn't my concern at all actually. I haven't spent money or played seriously since Forsaken Masters so you're just wrong here. Please keep wrongly assuming my position though instead of understanding what I'm saying.
|
On January 20 2017 09:17 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 08:55 Lachrymose wrote:
To put it more plainly: His concern is not "this isn't the best move for the company, let's discuss why and what they can do better." His concern is "They took my money under false pretenses, let's discuss how this is not ethical and should not be allowed."
It's about whether or not it's ethical for PoE to make a no-strings-attached profit given the language of 'support' in what they sell. Whether it's ethical for them to spend any money on something which is not PoE.
That isn't my concern at all actually. I haven't spent money or played seriously since Forsaken Masters so you're just wrong here. Please keep wrongly assuming my position though instead of understanding what I'm saying.
Oh please, your position is not meaningfully different from that. "Not literally my money, idiot!" Yeah, obviously.
|
On January 20 2017 09:25 Lachrymose wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 09:17 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On January 20 2017 08:55 Lachrymose wrote:
To put it more plainly: His concern is not "this isn't the best move for the company, let's discuss why and what they can do better." His concern is "They took my money under false pretenses, let's discuss how this is not ethical and should not be allowed."
It's about whether or not it's ethical for PoE to make a no-strings-attached profit given the language of 'support' in what they sell. Whether it's ethical for them to spend any money on something which is not PoE.
That isn't my concern at all actually. I haven't spent money or played seriously since Forsaken Masters so you're just wrong here. Please keep wrongly assuming my position though instead of understanding what I'm saying. Oh please, your position is not meaningfully different from that. "Not literally my money, idiot!" Yeah, obviously.
How do you even know my position when I haven't posted it? My first post is about how game design is inherently hindered by multi platform hardware concerns which sounds exactly like 'why this isn't the best move for the company.' The second thread is about how Blizzard doesn't communicate as much as GGG has in the past. I think it's pretty clear that this backlash has reduced GGG's credibility and they might not be seen that way anymore.
My intent of saying I haven't spent money or played seriously in the past two+ years was that I haven't liked the direction of the game in awhile. They never took my money under false pretense and I've gotten more than my money paid out of this game. I'm saying that GGG threw a curve ball at everyone by not announcing something when they've been great at communicating for the past five years. Ethical concerns are never black and white as you make it out to be.
|
That's not the tone of the message your were posting in support of.
"What leaves a sour taste in my mouth is that since over a year [some of] every dollar spent went to a project at least I would have never supported."
This is very clearly espousing the idea I was arguing against.
This "teehee, not technically my money" "teehee, not technically my position, just the one you were arguing against that I started supporting, gotcha!" nonsense is ridiculous.
Yes, I'm talking in general about the thing I've been arguing against from the start that people here and elsewhere are expressing, I don't care about you as an individual in particular.
|
On January 20 2017 09:31 Lachrymose wrote:
That's not the tone of the message your were posting in support of.
"What leaves a sour taste in my mouth is that since over a year [some of] every dollar spent went to a project at least I would have never supported."
This is very clearly espousing the idea I was arguing against.
This "teehee, not technically my money" "teehee, not technically my position, just the one you were arguing against that I started supporting, gotcha!" nonsense is ridiculous.
Yes, I'm talking in general about the thing I've been arguing against from the start that people here and elsewhere are expressing, I don't care about you as an individual in particular.
This isn't a gotcha. I am talking about developer expectations. I don't even disagree with you that what GGG was ethical. What they did was not 'wrong.' I'm saying that people expected better because of their past interaction with the developer. Evo has already stated that his statement was hyperbolic so there's not really much to argue with. I never intended to take up that position and you assuming it and then repeating the same points over and over again is not productive.
I thought my statement to you about the video articulating Evo's point better was clear, but I'm thinking now that you thought I meant that I agreed with the video.
|
On January 20 2017 09:52 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 09:31 Lachrymose wrote:
That's not the tone of the message your were posting in support of.
"What leaves a sour taste in my mouth is that since over a year [some of] every dollar spent went to a project at least I would have never supported."
This is very clearly espousing the idea I was arguing against.
This "teehee, not technically my money" "teehee, not technically my position, just the one you were arguing against that I started supporting, gotcha!" nonsense is ridiculous.
Yes, I'm talking in general about the thing I've been arguing against from the start that people here and elsewhere are expressing, I don't care about you as an individual in particular. This isn't a gotcha. I am talking about developer expectations. I don't even disagree with you that what GGG was ethical. What they did was not 'wrong.' I'm saying that people expected better because of their past interaction with the developer. Evo has already stated that his statement was hyperbolic so there's not really much to argue with. I never intended to take up that position and you assuming it and then repeating the same points over and over again is not productive.
It's only hyperbolic in that he meant 'some of' not 'all'. It's not meaningfully different for my argument and I cited the correction from the beginning..
Your expectations of 'better' are unfair and unreasonable. There's no reason to expect they could or should disclose more than they did when they said they were looking into porting it back in 2014.
Why would they do that? So we could have this "they stole PC money to pay for Xbox!" nonsense already going? So instead of complaining about whatever design compromises they were allegedly making for Xbox for what they are (simpler new skills, reduced trigger rates, etc) we could instead complain about them because they're for Xbox? Is there anything to gain that doesn't come back to "I wouldn't have spent money on PoE if I wasn't living in the dream world that PoE wasn't trying to make a profit"?
|
On January 20 2017 10:04 Lachrymose wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 09:52 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On January 20 2017 09:31 Lachrymose wrote:
That's not the tone of the message your were posting in support of.
"What leaves a sour taste in my mouth is that since over a year [some of] every dollar spent went to a project at least I would have never supported."
This is very clearly espousing the idea I was arguing against.
This "teehee, not technically my money" "teehee, not technically my position, just the one you were arguing against that I started supporting, gotcha!" nonsense is ridiculous.
Yes, I'm talking in general about the thing I've been arguing against from the start that people here and elsewhere are expressing, I don't care about you as an individual in particular. This isn't a gotcha. I am talking about developer expectations. I don't even disagree with you that what GGG was ethical. What they did was not 'wrong.' I'm saying that people expected better because of their past interaction with the developer. Evo has already stated that his statement was hyperbolic so there's not really much to argue with. I never intended to take up that position and you assuming it and then repeating the same points over and over again is not productive. It's only hyperbolic in that he meant 'some of' not 'all'. It's not meaningfully different for my argument and I cited the correction from the beginning.. Your expectations of 'better' are unfair and unreasonable. There's no reason to expect they could or should disclose more than they did when they said they were looking into porting it back in 2014. Why would they do that? So we could have this "they stole PC money to pay for Xbox!" nonsense already going? So instead of complaining about whatever design compromises they were allegedly making for Xbox for what they are (simpler new skills, reduced trigger rates, etc) we could instead complain about them because they're for Xbox? Is there anything to gain that doesn't come back to "I wouldn't have spent money on PoE if I wasn't living in the dream world that PoE wasn't trying to make a profit"?
People expected PoE to be profitable and be kept up to date on what the company has been working on as was happening for the past forever. You say that my expectations are unfair and unreasonable, but why would I expect the company that has shared everything about their game development for the past four or five years with the community to stop doing so and announce a project that clearly was not received well and presumably wasn't shared because they knew it wouldn't be? I think the shit storm that has developed from this clearly indicates that my expectations are at least common. That they're unfair or unreasonable from a rational standpoint is irrelevant.
Yes, people would absolutely still disagree with them because consoles have historically been terrible for PC gaming. If Chris told me that they thought developing a console version of Path of Exile a year ago when they actually started I'd absolutely be disappointed, but his tidbit about how it isn't going to effect PC development might have some credibility. At this stage it has none and of course people are going to look back at design decisions and question whether they only happened because of consoles. That's what happens when you betray people; they second guess every decision you've made because you can't be trusted.
This is the emotional angle that I've been trying to lead you to.
|
Sorry to interrupt, but I'd like to know if I'm missing something here.
Trying to figure out if I should craft suffix and slam this in BSC:
+ Show Spoiler +
Only reason I'm considering it is that even hitting T5 ES% still allows to craft a 2nd resist and not brick it.
Hitting T1 ES% puts it at 920-960ES, which should be worth anywhere from 50 to 100ex (With exalts around 48chaos currently). Problem is, bricking it costs somewhere around 4-5ex because it could be sold for ~400chaos as is, and is back to scour/alchs otherwise (~220c for an ilvl84 6L).
Market looks like this from what I figured (but hard to tell with this kind of gear, also I would probably use it anyway):
+ Show Spoiler +T1 = 60-80Ex
T2 = 30-40ex
T3 = 18-24ex
T4 = 14-18ex
T5 = 10-13ex
T6 = 5-7ex
As is = 8ex
Brick = 4.5ex
With these numbers, I get a small loss on average by slamming, which is pretty disappointing but might still be worth doing for science. Also, I didn't check if exalting for suffix is worth it, but I doubt it.
Advice?
|
It's pretty unlikely that it will hit ES, and more unlikely that it will hit ES that is as high or higher than 68%, but it sure would be nice right.
Assuming you are using it, I'd only slam if you can buy another 750 es 50 int chest if you get say thorns. If it's purely for $ then it depends if you want to be gambling your 9 ex (8 for current plus 1 for the roll) at this point in the league. I probably would be gambling but depends on ur situation and goals.
|
I already have a 750ES double res chest, so it's more of a value and gambling thing.
Edit: It's worth over 9ex, which makes bricking hurt that much more.
|
Good luck if you choose to try it.
I just checked my standard stash for old race rewards. Demigod's stride is at 140ex in standard lol. Only got one tho, Goratha/Throzz and occasionally Helmann always owned me as I raced with Marauder. Not that I need currency on standard as I'm playing leagues only... I'm sort of missing races though, too bad GGG dumped them.
|
I miss races too. I didn't know they were totally out. Isn't there a race week or two between leagues sometimes?
Also, not gonna slam the regalia, it's worth almost 10ex, so it hurts too much to brick.
But in the meantime, I got double T1 ES% and hybrid, and slam->bricked it to satisfy my hunger.
Edit: Sold it for 10ex. And 3alch/scour into the new one:
+ Show Spoiler +
Any way to know what the ES% rolls are? Could be worth a divine with the low Flat ES...
Edit2: Did the math, on average the % will go down, mainly due to T1 hybrid hitting the high end of T3 ES%, and the other rolls being mostly neutral.
|
I'm pretty sure I remember GGG saying that race seasons are not gonna happen anymore, but they said race marathon weekends like it happened 3? months ago would be a possibility. Between leagues there usually is just a one week or two week or one month league, which of course could be seen as a race.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4YsbGqP.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/IAS9Pvm.png)
