Stop bloating this place (which is not being read) with things that aren't happening

"

bloomhead#3858 เขียน:

XP is a part of this game, and will be, as GGG has stated. If you don't like that, you can either get over it, stop playing, or waste your time complaining on a forum.

For some 100 is the hard cap, for some 95 and for others 90. So?

1. GGG is already walking back its position on the XP death penalty with the introduction of the new omens.

2. GGG has grown is size (number of employees), resulting in having to spend more money per month for salaries and costs. Thus, GGG needs a larger player base that enjoys the game. Having the game be too punishing, whilte encouraging toxic elitism to boot, is not the way to sustain a growing studio.

"

xxn1927#3319 เขียน:

"

bloomhead#3858 เขียน:

XP is a part of this game, and will be, as GGG has stated. If you don't like that, you can either get over it, stop playing, or waste your time complaining on a forum.

For some 100 is the hard cap, for some 95 and for others 90. So?

1. GGG is already walking back its position on the XP death penalty with the introduction of the new omens.

2. GGG has grown is size (number of employees), resulting in having to spend more money per month for salaries and costs. Thus, GGG needs a larger player base that enjoys the game. Having the game be too punishing, whilte encouraging toxic elitism to boot, is not the way to sustain a growing studio.

They still have XP loss and you won't have these omen 24/7.

They have money from Tencent and the extra chinese market will give them more money, which isn't even reflected in the steam charts, because of the great firewall.

Calling others 'elitist' just because you don't enjoy a mechanic and can't work with it is just sad. Others don't call you 'trash noob' just because you don't like xp loss, do they?

"

xxn1927#3319 เขียน:

"

bloomhead#3858 เขียน:

XP is a part of this game, and will be, as GGG has stated. If you don't like that, you can either get over it, stop playing, or waste your time complaining on a forum.

For some 100 is the hard cap, for some 95 and for others 90. So?

1. GGG is already walking back its position on the XP death penalty with the introduction of the new omens.

2. GGG has grown is size (number of employees), resulting in having to spend more money per month for salaries and costs. Thus, GGG needs a larger player base that enjoys the game. Having the game be too punishing, whilte encouraging toxic elitism to boot, is not the way to sustain a growing studio.

GGG is walking back on nothing. This omen exists in poe1 also. Nothing new.

"

SpankyKong#9805 เขียน:

"

DistributedAutomaton#5739 เขียน:

Do you realize that you are admitting to engaging in toxic, unhelpful behavior?

If you despise the game design so much, find something to do that brings you joy, not something where you try to spread your bad attitude to others, and cost money to a free-to-play game.

Which part is toxic, communicating to the devs where my red line is? Or being undeterred, by elitist bullies, from sharing my view?

1. Absolutist Language & Hostility

- "XP loss will never be ok with me..."
- "I will always speak against it..."
- "I will never spend another dollar..."

Why it’s an issue: These extreme positions close the door to dialogue and suggest inflexibility, which can come across as aggressive or dismissive of other perspectives.

Toxic potential: It’s not just a preference — it's framed as an unchangeable battle stance.


2. Aggressive Dismissal of Developers

- "Will never spend another dollar in support of these devs..."

Why it’s an issue: Harshly cutting off support and announcing it publicly can feel performative or punitive.

Toxic potential: It weaponizes consumer status as leverage, often seen in toxic feedback loops where players try to shame developers into changes.


3. Dismissive Toward Other Players

- "I really don't care if it bothers the people who want imaginary prestige..."
"...but don't have the balls to play hardcore..."

Why it’s an issue: Refers to others’ goals as “imaginary prestige” — which invalidates their enjoyment.
Uses mocking language ("don’t have the balls"), implying cowardice or inferiority in others.

Toxic potential: Directly insulting or belittling a group of players is one of the clearest signs of toxicity in a gaming community.


4. Overgeneralization & Division

- "Where the 'never die' & 'muh leaderboards' mentality is already catered to."

Why it’s an issue: It creates a “us vs. them” scenario — assuming bad faith in a whole group.

Toxic potential: Overgeneralization promotes hostility, even if unintentionally.


So much to your "opinion"....

I want to remind everyone who is participating in the discussion that GGG is a commercial company.
This means that all of GGG's efforts will be directed first and foremost - making a profit.
Therefore, GGG will make the game in such a way as to maximally retain the audience that is willing to pay money.
And if, let's say, even one third of the players don't like the experience penalty for death, but this audience is willing to invest their money in the game, then GGG will remove this penalty. And the other two thirds of the players who don't mind the death penalty will continue to play anyway and GGG will only gain in profit, which is what a commercial company needs.
So don't expect that the experience penalty for death will always be there.
p.s. In fact, I am confident that those people who want the death penalty to be removed are much more than a third of the total number of players.

"

Ondrugs#1147 เขียน:

1. Absolutist Language & Hostility

- "XP loss will never be ok with me..."
- "I will always speak against it..."
- "I will never spend another dollar..."

Why it’s an issue: These extreme positions close the door to dialogue and suggest inflexibility, which can come across as aggressive or dismissive of other perspectives.

Toxic potential: It’s not just a preference — it's framed as an unchangeable battle stance.

Sure I could be more precise with that first statement by adding "in the form they've given us"... but I'm more flexible than you hope to portray, given that you've also omitted the context where I specify "in the most casual mode available to players." As I've mentioned in other threads where I've fleshed out my position with greater nuance... I believe if XP loss was removed from softcore - there could be another difficulty option available for the punishment lovers, or they can reduce the punishment to XP gained in the map that you died in. I'm curious though, have you ever called out the toxic "unchangeable battle stance" of others who've essentially said that there should never be an option for the players who oppose XP loss? Maybe like OP as one example? My prediction is a solid no but a surprise would be nice.

"

Ondrugs#1147 เขียน:

2. Aggressive Dismissal of Developers

- "Will never spend another dollar in support of these devs..."

Why it’s an issue: Harshly cutting off support and announcing it publicly can feel performative or punitive.

Toxic potential: It weaponizes consumer status as leverage, often seen in toxic feedback loops where players try to shame developers into changes.

You know, when it feels like the door is being held shut in my face - there's really not much else I can do besides share my perspective and vote with my wallet. I also don't want them to misunderstand the data that I play the game without buying MTX. They could interpret that as prices are too high, or the art is not interesting, or any number of other reasons. My clarification serves to remove ambiguity.

"

Ondrugs#1147 เขียน:

3. Dismissive Toward Other Players

- "I really don't care if it bothers the people who want imaginary prestige..."
"...but don't have the balls to play hardcore..."

Why it’s an issue: Refers to others’ goals as “imaginary prestige” — which invalidates their enjoyment.
Uses mocking language ("don’t have the balls"), implying cowardice or inferiority in others.

Toxic potential: Directly insulting or belittling a group of players is one of the clearest signs of toxicity in a gaming community.

Many proponents of XP loss point to leaderboards and the prestige of the 100 club in softcore. I totally acknowledge the accomplishment of achieving it in hardcore... but as for softcore - can we not be real? Hardly anybody knows who they are or cares that they did it. Is it improper to be honest about that? & besides, if I didn't call it out that way - it then implicitly lends legitimacy to their bogus argument as to why more casual players should not be allowed an option.

"

Ondrugs#1147 เขียน:

4. Overgeneralization & Division

- "Where the 'never die' & 'muh leaderboards' mentality is already catered to."

Why it’s an issue: It creates a “us vs. them” scenario — assuming bad faith in a whole group.

Toxic potential: Overgeneralization promotes hostility, even if unintentionally.


So much to your "opinion"....

See above, and also let's not pretend like I invented the "us vs them" divide on this topic. Again I could refer to OP as an example that you had nothing to say about.

Weird attention seeking thread from OP. This is a feedback forum. Feedback that XP loss is bad is still feedback even if you don't agree.

More than happy to turn this into another thread about XP loss though. What an abysmal mechanic.

"

Immoteph#2974 เขียน:

- No, exp on death is never going away.
- No, endgame isn't unbearable
- No, your PC issues aren't global issues.
- Yes, waystones should have randomized mods.
- Towers make up the current endgame, deal with it or play when it's changed.
- Yes, some league content is better designed for PoE1 because it was made for PoE1.
- No, you shouldn't get all gems immediately, it's called a progression system.


C'mon if you're among these people, can you just go away so we can get an actual feedback forum instead of this random crap combined with technical issues?

- I'm ok with exp loss.
- THE ENDGAME IS UNBEARABLE
- The pc issues not egal with SERVER issues. Even the GGG know about the spikes, but of course, you know it better. Almost 8k euros pc, but sometimes the game unplayable laggy....
- Randomized, but not 80% fkin temporal chains!..
- Tower system is a .... If they can't get feedback about this, they think its fine...
- Then maybe redesing need, before putting it into the game ?
- Its ok.

If lot of peoples dont like the same thing. lot of peoples complain about this. Isn't that logical? If the GGG maybe make their servers good after half year, you can't read about this problem. If you dont like to read these post, maybe dont read them. And was yours the appropriate feedback you were talking about?

Bumppty bump bump


We need more trolls please, post is getting boring

"

Immoteph#2974 เขียน:

- No, exp on death is never going away.
- No, endgame isn't unbearable
- No, your PC issues aren't global issues.
- Yes, waystones should have randomized mods.
- Towers make up the current endgame, deal with it or play when it's changed.
- Yes, some league content is better designed for PoE1 because it was made for PoE1.
- No, you shouldn't get all gems immediately, it's called a progression system.


C'mon if you're among these people, can you just go away so we can get an actual feedback forum instead of this random crap combined with technical issues?

Yes chat, only post stuff the OP agrees with. Keep it clean!