I havent been here for some time. Last I remembered EHG had announced Cycles as being similar to POE leagues with the major difference where you get access to cycle content on “standard/legacy” with the caveat that the cycle exclusive bosses being unavailable to standard players and would only be available to them once any cycle player defeats them in the dedicated cycle realm.
has this changed? i’ve been trying to find more info and many gaming sites simply explain cycles as being similar to POE leagues where standard leaguers are locked out of cycle content.
so which isit?
on a separate note, if EHG decides to exclude cycle content from legacy, i find myself having a big reason to avoid playing LE entirely. i really hate feeling like a second class citizen being locked out of content.
Abberoth was the only thing currently unavailable to certain game modes, because EHG wanted to avoid people going in with too powerful or cheated characters.
Other than that the plan always was too have some kind of cycle content that will not immediately be available to legacy.
But all of the additions in the last cycles and in the coming 1.2 cycle will be available to all game modes.
I think EHG still wants to fill the fundation of the game with core features and content before really moving to the “exetior mechanics”, that might or might not get added permanently to the game.
I would very strongly assume that EHG will be very clear with this, once they do add a mechanic like this. And what will happen with it after a given period.
Maybe EHG wants to avoid bloat and specifically not integrate certain mechanics or adjust/change them.
So for now I think you can be fairly safe that this is not gonna happen soon, at least a few more patch cylcles.
i agree, EHG really should be clear on their plans moving forward.
to me i see the idea of playing cycle content on legacy can be one of EHG’s biggest selling points.
i’ve played POE for over a decade. i’m primarily a standard league player and everything i ever do is only to make my standard character stronger. one big factor whether or not i jump into a temp league is does the league have any gears/items that i can bring back to standard that can make my character stronger.
if the answer is yes, then i would play the temp league or else i’d avoid it like a plague. i can say without exaggeration I HATE having to farm everything up all over again. I hate having to regear my character all over again. and with cycles being a time limited event, the best way to play in a new cycle is to go meta/follow a build.
i m getting old. i dont want to repeat this tiresome process anymore. i want to enjoy the game.
Actually I would also prefer if EHG avoided bloat. not all cycle content needs to be ported to core. if the mechanic needs to be reworked. take it out of the game. just make sure that any gear we got for our efforts remain on legacy.
let legacy have their fun. cycle enjoyers will play in dedicated cycle realms.
if EHG wants to just be the same like other diablo-clones, then i might as well just go back to play poe or something else.
the sooner EHG announces their stance on this, the more loose (or tight) my wallet will be depending on which direction they choose.
When Mike was asked about this on stream (more than once) he always replied that for now they’re adding core stuff, so everything gets added to all modes like was said above, but that he would also like to eventually start making season-exclusive content, but they have no idea yet what that would be like. “Possibly starting with something like season-exclusive uniques” is what I believe he said.
Wouldn’t be anytime soon either (at the time, this was a few months ago).
I know all of that and how EHG stands. They are all intentionally vague, because I am sure they themselves do not know what they want to do exactly.
WhatDJ said for example is something I personally think they will do very likely in the future.
Something that is cycle exclusive, but isn’t a fundamental feature or core system, like a few specific Uniques only dropping in the cycle.
They are a couple of other things they could do like that.
At the end of the day, we will have to wait, but I think it will at least take another 2 or 3 major patches until LE’s foundation is in a very good state so they can add cycle exclusive stuff.
I do disagree here.
While there are some people that would be sold on this and possibly play LE because of that, the number of these people is very likely extremely low, to the point that it is not worth trying to catch them with a feature like that.
On the other hand there will be people that will specifically not getting catched if they is not enough stuff to warrant a fresh cycle start.
I do understand people don’t want to regear, but that exactly is the part fo the game that keeps a lot of people from coming back whether you like it or not.
The concept of resets and season based content is not enough to say LE is a diablo-clone though. Regardless of cycles or seasons. LE has more than enough to stand on its own.
And at the end of the day you might need to choose between those diofferent games, if you don’t want to invest time into multiple ones.
You will have to wait for this. I do think EHG themselves do not know their exact stance on this, because right now they are not focusing on things like this yet.
Why should they focus on this yet, when they don’t know how their game will look in 2-3 major patches?
Making promises like that just to put boundaries and limits on themselves just to please a certain type of player can become a hinderence to them further development of the game.
I am afraid, if this is such a big reason for you to decide if you want to play or support the game more you need to wait a even longer time.
then i would ask, what benefit does EHG derive from denying legacy players access to cycle content?
Let’s take a quick look:
Case1: Current POE practice (temp leagues require players to start from scratch)
Standard players that like the game regardless would play the game regardless
Temp players that like a fresh reset will play the game
Standard players that like the game but would find the temp league gear useful but dont want to restart could feel left out. After a few “cycles” of being left out, they quit because of FOMO.
Older players who have played for years have no reason to come back
Case 2: Standard players gain cycle content
Standard players who like the game will play regardless - No change
Temp league players who like temp league will play - No change
Standard players feel their time is respected and will not feel FOMO or forced to jump into resets would see a reason to keep playing - Player retention
Older players will always come back to check for new league content since they dont necessarily need to refarm everything over again - Player retention/ Marketing to draw older players to come back
Its all positives.
The reason why leagues are the way they are is because of how GGG originally visioned temp leagues where temp leagues were a form of “marketing” to make players keep coming back, as well as serve as a beta test allowing them to consider adding the mechanics into the core game.
This is actually a brilliant idea. it gave a way for the devs to test out new and interesting ideas, while giving players an excuse to reroll and play on a fresh economy. but things changed. temp leagues became more important and temp leagues became the main way to play the game. it went to the point GGG themselves were very reckless with standard. i lost at least 1-4 mirrors worth of loot on standard because of how GGG decided to retroactively change things. what ever happened to gear permanency?
this is where i’m jaded. if standard/legacy is going to be the bastard step child, i m fine with it, but let us play with the same toys that cycle players have. if not, theres no reason for me to play on. i m really sick and tired of being a second class citizen for no reason.
very true. thats why i’ve already moved on from poe1. poe2 seems promising, i have been mostly positive and hope it becomes the best diablo clone ever, but i have huge doubts on how GGG will achieve it. also even if it does, i’m pretty sure GGG will keep their current league practices.
so what happens when you realize a game is not for you. i move on.
my suggestion might be selfish, but i m literally telling the devs. if you do this, me and players like me would have an additional reason to play your game and it “hurts no one”.
if i m being really honest i’m actually done with temp leagues that force you to start from fresh.
if i wanted that game play, i would be playing vampire saviour type games or rogue like/lites. in fact i do play those games and i find those game much more satisfying as the game quickly brings you back to power in literal minutes. they excel at that game play and if i wanted to restart from scratch i would play such games.
i tend to use diablo likes and diablo clones interchangeably. i’m trying my best not to use diablo clones because its archaic and inaccurate, but that was how such games were labelled back in the day, but sometimes old habits die hard and i slip up.
the entire genre of arpg+looter+dungeon crawler+hack and slash+isometric can be summed up with “diablo clone/like”. its too much of a mouthful for me or to anyone to keep typing all that out. i know that to call modern games diablo likes can be seen as an insult to some people as the newer diablo games are very divisive. but thats what the games are, they’re “like diablo” hence diablo likes. until the day gamers unite to give this genre a specific name, people will use diablo likes as the game genre.
on a sidenote. diablo 1 is the grandaddy of the genre. it was pretty solid when it came out and i would even argue being called a diablo like is an honour. no ones saying diablo4like.
i ll be honest. i actually prefer games that have more classlessness such as poe and tli or even GD/TQ, where players can equip any item regardless of class. but i m rooting hard for EHG to succeed and i do like LE. despite LE lagging behind d4 in terms of graphics, EHG is really innovative. i have more faith that EHG can be a market leader and do their own thing rather than follow old trends.
i mentioned how i am done with rerolling for cycle content? one HUGE reason is because of how EHG announced how they wanted to implement cycles.
it hit me hard. WHY DO I NEED TO KEEP REROLLING TO BEGIN WITH? its a moment of sheer epiphany. i’ve been eating dogshit for years and got used to eating dogshit that i forgot whats it like to actually eat good food.
and thats where i’m at. i will definitely play LE s2. but whether or not i stay on playing LE all depends on where EHG goes. as for my monetary support. you dont need to worry about that. the ones that get my money if i like this game enough is EHG. i’ve learned to vote with my wallet.
and yeah you’re right on “why should they focus on this” before the next major patches.
they have more important things to worry about.
i m looking for a game to replace the void left behind by POE. LE seems to be the obvious choice but its not the only choice.
It’s a pure retention question there. A player in Legacy has a vastly lower retention rate compared to someone playing in Cycle. The time needed to play up a character in Cycle and then experience the new content given is after all substantially higher then simply bypassing everything besides the new content.
Hence having access to it outside of Cycles causes people to swiftly check out the newly changed things, experience them for a day or 2… and then leave again after seeing how it is. Their character is after all already ‘done’ at that point, the progression itself being missing.
There is a small group of people enjoying things like Standard or Legacy as a permanent place to steadily play, but for the recurring players it’s actually a detriment playtime-wise. They already have no chance to stay in the first place, preferring to switch over to something else for a new experience, hence unlike a ‘classic’ Standard player EHG has no upside to give them such an environment as it wouldn’t lead to the numbers actually staying, or keeping the market in a stable condition. Also players are very prone to burn themselves out while usually enjoying weeks or months with that new state and actively reducing their own enjoyment inadversely this way.
It’s a bit of an odd thing… but overall a positive that recurring content and permanent content have a different time-table.
All right, lets break this down.
Not sure where to start and I will probably forget something.
You are making a lot of generalizing assumptions. While you can put players in rough categories there is a lot more nuance to this.
Also I really don’t like the use of “FOMO” here, while it has parts of that, the whole “FOMO-part” is only a sympton, but not the core reason why developers do these “fresh cycles”.
Couple of things off the top of my head, but there are probably plenty more.
Fresh start for everybody:
Gives greater incentivice to test new things
Better player retention
More design space for the devs to make new features blend into existing systems
The problem with giving people access to this new content with already fully fleshed out and developed characters is:
People will instantly jump into the new things an figures things out way too fast. Uncovering everything within a couple of hours/days.
Even the people that enjoy fresh starts feel they would be missing out on experiencing the new stuff, if they don’t jump into they existign chars.
People already playing the game a lot would also oftne jump in, look at the new thing and test it out for a few hours maybe and then leave already, because they were already burned out.
Even though these fresh starts are “artifical” they serve a good purpose.
And from my personal experience, even though I love starting over fresh (have multiple SCF chars), I think having cycle content be available in legacy would dimish my fun that I would have with a fresh cycle start, because I know what I will experience is just anotehr click away, if I woudl log into my fully developed legacy character.
Its funny that you mention that, but I belive these temporary things do waaaaaaaaay mroe for player retention and peopel coming back.
For both sides, people that already sunk dozens, hudnreds or thousands of horus into the game and also the casual people that just every few months jump into the game for a couple of days or weeks.
Having a fresh start, when everybody will ahve a fresh start is a way better incentive to return to the game, then to log into your old character just to test out the new hot shit for a few hours and then leave again.
No its not. It depends on the player and everything you described is not necessarily true for everybody.
Just because you think that way, doesn’t mean everybody does.
And a lot of the assumptions you have are biased or false.
And again, you think it will hurt noone, but with the suggestion you made it will impact people that enjoy these temporary things. And it would dimish their impact, once EHG decides to do stuff like this.
The thing is. Even if you play the same build, the experience you have on multiple characters, playing the same build will still vary a lot, especially early.
I played my two main go-to builds Crit Harvest Lich and Erasing Strike VK numerous times already fresh and the loot that drops vastly changed the experience, at leastduring the campaign and early monoliths. And both of these builds are not even relying on any uniques or specific items.
On top of that many many players do not play the same build, but rather seize the opportunity of these fresh starts to try something new.
Yeah diablo-like and diablo-clones have vastly different implications. I don’t agree with both of them for many similar games, because enough of these games have brought enough to the table to stand on their own, even though the basic concept is very similar.
I get that, it is the same with music. Putting a label on something is often not very accurate, but it is the best way to convey what rough type or “genre” a game is with someone who doesn’t know that game, but does know other simialr games.
But then again, same as music, I think this urge to put labels on everything or put things into “boxes” really does not do justice to a lot of these things.
I really hate classless systems, depending on how they are implemented. It puts a lot of burden onto the devs to make interesting things, that are not breakable or abuseable.
I think as long as a singel given class has enough variety within itself, it gives the devs much, much more freedom to actualyl come up with crazy interesting things.
Because if a class only has excess to limited number of tools, but not the entire toolbox, each individual tool can be made more handcrafted.
PoE2 did a good job in trying to change this from PoE1, but they are defintiely not on the level of LE with that. Support gems are very generic for the most part and while they do transform skills a lot, it doesn’t compete with how transformative soem key nopdes in LE are on certai nskills, especially when you combine multiple ones.
So while with these classless systems you have access to so many tools, each individual tools is less interesting most of the time. And you are also losing a lot of theme and character identity.
That is fair, but similar to politics or other things, there is probably never “the perfect fit”, every game, every political party, every artist you like, they will always have something you don’t like. So it is never to look for the perfect fit, but for the fit with the most overlaps.
So you have to decide which one it will be, but don’t wait too long, because what you want may never arise.
Also you can totally play and support multiple games.
i dont know what you’re getting at. isnt it established that temp content does indeed have player retention and cause players to come back?
regardless of case 1 or case 2 that i established, temp content will cause temp lovers to come back.
what do you mean better incentive? its simply catering to a different group. based on the 4 groups i’ve mentioned, having a fresh start simply caters to temp lovers.
i can tell you from my biased opinion that i hate that process. so i can agree with you that it can be a great incentive to a group of players but i will point out that it does not mean it applies to all players. there are other players like me who HATE having to restart everything all over again.
the difference between you and me is i dont pretend to speak for everyone. i acknowledge that there are many different groups of players.
you say what i described is not true for everyone, i agree. you say i am biased. i agree. but what did i mention that you deem false? can you please pinpoint? i specifically broke down the community into those 4 groups because i know that each group has different needs.
i can speak very clearly for the group i represent and i have not said anything against the interest of any other group. but please point it out if i have so i can reassess what my words so that i can correct my self or clarify.
many players but not all. hence the groups.
thats fine. its a personal preference. you hating classless systems is the same like me hating fresh start cycle contents. i m not saying fresh start cycle content is bad. i WANT fresh cycle content as i know people like you enjoy it. i m not asking anyone to take it away from you. i just want to get cycle content onto standard/legacy.
from this itself you can see theres a divide between players. different players have different wants and needs.
but it all goes back to my question
what benefit does EHG derive from denying legacy players access to cycle content?
you do realize that there are many different players with different goals? you may be right for one group of players but wrong for a different group of players.
there are a ton of reasons why players enjoy a new cycle reset
Test out their build/new builds
Chasing fame/ladder/firsts or completing challenges and earning challenge rewards or achievements
Economic advantage (sometimes i play temp leagues in poe coz of the fact that some mirror tier gear are sold for a significantly more affordable price. in fact some timeless jewels on standard are 100s of divines but on temp league its only 1-10 divines).
Cycle mechanic is engaging and fun, can keep players wanting to continue playing more.
Cycles can be a time where friends come back to play the game together for a few weeks
what you just said dismisses all of this and makes a big assumption that the leveling process is a huge portion of why players play cycles.
speaking from personal experience, it takes me 1-3 weeks for me to get my build up and running in poe leagues. but i usually stick around for another 1-2 months and sometimes even stick to the very end if i find something that aligns with what i want (such as economic advantage).
you’re downplaying the cycle’s content by a huge lot by saying people would quickly leave after checking it out. like dude, what about players who try the content, realize its fun and continue playing?
do you know the concept of foot in the door marketing tactic?
marketing is all about casting a large net and see what you can catch.
if i rephrase my original 2 scenarios but only talk about fish caught by the cycle content.
EHG has a player base, implements current strategy
cycle content enjoyers will try it out and dont mind the reset. those that like it will stay longer while the rest drop off.
legacy players could consider jumping in IF they think the rewards are good. some may enjoy the experience but some (like me) will hate it
newer players might try the game/content because of the hype
reset haters will not even bother trying
then if EHG uses a different strategy where legacy has access to cycles
1.2.3 LITERALLY NO CHANGE. all net positives.
4. reset haters actually try the cycle. some get bored of it leave but some actually like it and stay.
given these 2 scenarios, doesnt it prove that with the 2nd strategy you actually gain MORE players playing in a cycle?
sure. you’ve replied me a few times. but you havent pointed them out yet. shrugs.
i mentioned different group of players having different needs. as mentioned i agree with you on your statement but with the caveat that this is true only for certain groups of players. in fact i would remind you that certain group of players hate that they have to play from scratch.
and you havent actually shown how the numbers would be higher.
i have already given the 2 case scenarios for comparisons where any one could make an educated assessment that having it my way would bring in higher numbers. maybe not a big number but still higher.
you are aware enough that different behaviours of type of players exist but only talk from the perspective of one particular behaviour.
i m still waiting for you to tell me what that is. what is the impact?
You’ll realize in case 2 suddenly the situation changes.
Yes, true. Which is the majority of people.
The minority are heavily invested into the game, the majority does come and go. Hence why Path of Exile has around 10% players in Standard and 90% in Leagues commonly. Even with the aspect that content can only be accessed there we would still need to see a substantially higher percentile to deduct that it wouldn’t cause negative effects.
The majority of people simply isn’t built mind-wise to stay with a single thing long-term, otherwise the need to experience something ‘new and fresh’ would be a lot weaker, hence leading to more players being content staying in Standard and just playing on. But that’s not the case.
Agreed, me being in that group even. I dislike it, I hate it even. Unless I get something distinctly unique and new experience wise (hence having a specific build or class I haven’t tested out) I won’t actually play temporary content. Making a second ‘Wraithlord Necro’ is something I personally can’t handle.
But I also understand the need for it as I’m in a *vast vast minority. I can’t expect game devs to cater to me as it would actively hurt them, and their game was never designed to cater especially to my rather rarely happening needs for that aspect.
I would love a game which does though! But there’s none combining the important aspects for me on the market yet, maybe in the future.
I’ll point it out instead of Heavy actually, because while not inherently ‘false’ it’s not quite broad in the assumptions, hence the likelyhood of it being ‘false’ is extremely high.
Case 1:
Why? Can’t they buy the things which people have created in the League and acquire it this way? There’s a good amount of overlap after all.
Also, if someone wants something really really much… would the effort to acquire it not be taken into account? So without starting out fresh but instead looking up potential end-results you can decide if you want to put the effort into acquisition. So you’re not missing out… you’re making yourself miss out.
It being times is the issue here, hence said content being phased out.
What would happen if said content isn’t phased out but goes 100% into permanence, just later? Is a timed exclusive a negative as to why someone would have FOMO? Why would said person have FOMO if they don’t share the time with others for their creations… hence group-play and missing out to play with other people? The only situation is then providing showcases… but with 100% permanence the amount of Standard players would also respectively rise which causes a distinct sizeable group only looking at Standard content to be there to still look at it and enjoy it, hence giving the expected return of appreciation for the effort.
Hence it’s neither inherently false nor true, it’s purely situational.
Why not? New things are new things. That’s individually perceived. Some might deem it enough, others not. This for example is inherently wrong.
Following us to Case 2:
This is the primary false statement in the whole premise.
Which incentive is there to create a new character in a Cycle when you have access to the content through Legacy?
And I’m not talking about a fresh economy, LE has a 50% split (or expected split, it shifted by now) between MG and CoF. Hence it would only count for MG. Name a single incentive for playing a CoF character in Cycle compared to Legacy.
Yes, you’re not taking into account that permanent players are less then recurring and leaving players. If we see the split of 10% to 90% in PoE… then adjust for 100% permanence after a league (hence content getting brought over 1 to 1 without fail each time) we’ll likely reach 25-35% playerbase there.
That still means for every single player retained in Legacy you would need to keep the playtime of 2 Cycle players intact.
We’ve already established that a quite vast amount of players will use the ‘shortcut method’ and simply test out the new content for a few hours.
Hence this method would demand that the ‘floor’ of the playerbase (hence off-cycle) would be at least 33% of the 1 week (very short-term players weeded out) player-count.
We simply don’t have that.
We’re talking about at least 20k players off-cycle instead of the currently 3k to make it a feasable solution. We can even take awful numbers and say 10k… but that still would demand triple the amount of the current state.
Grim Dawn works on that method and has hence fairly stable playernumbers overall, but this leads to substantial reductions in peak numbers and hence overall play-time.
Hence a false argument.
That’s also a quite false statement. That would demand that every single Cycle has substantial quantity of content which would be causing a viable reason to return.
The reality is that those older players returning usually do so after long-term periods of inactivity to accumulate enough unplayed content to hence allow it to be a viably different experience compared to before they stopped playing for a long while.
Also returning numbers are always sufficiently low for this category of players overall. People ‘move on’ rather then returning to what they did. Some do but the percentile tends to be low.
So also… not a true statement, rather a false one. Could theoretically become true though.
Hence by design this is false.
No, you can’t. You lack the ability to perceive the needs of the people which are not in your group, which is a mandatory aspect of being able to properly speak for your group decisively.
Especially so since the second part of that sentence is factually wrong.
You’re quite close though. Discerning the needs of the different kinds of players while also finding out the rough percentile of presence for them as well as the percentile of ‘impact’ on longevity of the product would cause that to become a true statement. But you’re speaking from the position of ‘a frog in a well’ there. Not knowing that the world is massive because you only see the walls limiting your own world.
Perception-bias.
Retention time.
Financial influx.
Following the former 2 the ability to provide a better product then otherwise, hindering even the retention time of the other groups.
Yes, there’s 2 groups.
They’re not equivalent in size.
No, your example group is neither as large and even less so larger. It’s substantially smaller.
Why would I say that? Because it’s based on prevalent psychological markers which have been found in our species, as well as how the brain perceives rewards and hence ‘fun’.
So yes, your sentence is right, the implications beyond are - sadly - not.
As said, I’m in the group of the people not enjoying cyclic content which gets phased out, I detest it. But I see why there’s the need for it as I’ve informed myself in-depth about those things already. Took a long time and I was in your position as well.
To get into detail about some of your points:
No, that’s actually wrong.
If they would enjoy to test builds then permency favors that. Hence it’s inherently a false statement.
What they enjoy is progressing their builds. The ‘zero-to-hero’ part. That’s a fine but important difference.
They only need a event cycle for their duration, not a complete full-scale one. So partially right, but not even remotely a main aspect of a fresh cycle.
This is a perception fallacy actually.
Given you’ll have a substantially more advanced character in a permanent league and given your example… getting 100 divine is a time investment of ~10-20 hours in Standard in PoE for someone knowing how to juice their maps but not going the ‘extreme’ route. 5-10 divines is the common return rate nowadays.
Hence when you compare it to a 10 divine jewel in a League you’ll have to factor in the time needed to progress through the campaign and early maps to reach a space where you’ll have the lenience to actually have 10 divine at hand, which is a longer timeframe then in Standard.
It’s a very common mistake since currency is not equivalent in value between those leagues after all.
Also you’ve to take into consideration that you’ll be able to farm said content very likely yourself when you get in the position to buy those items already, hence not only being able to personally hunt for it but also having a character which gets commonly ~3 timeless jewels per 5 minute run (7 with common downtime and not rushing) and hence will be able to list a good amount of them. Timeless jewels with a quad tab for sale does provide a return amount in Standard of roughly 25 div per hour. If you go for essence maps it’s 15 divines. That actually pushes said timeframe further down, the estimates above are given in your favor, not the realistic one.
Is it? Not always as there’s a good chunk which actually is badly received. Hence bringing them immediately over to the permanent league can cause detrimental effects when the need to phase them out for whatever reason comes up. Long-standing characters will have changed their builds by then and not function at all anymore (worse then balance changes over time) and hence leave those players perceiving it as a decrease in value of their account overall rather then an increase. The opposite of what permanent leagues are supposed to enact.
Which they wouldn’t do if they can just experience the new content in 4 hours rather then a completely fresh environment which makes them progress steadily with their friends on the side while also being in a fresh economy and the ability to hence snowball away.
Only the combination of a new mechanic not overall available, the progression and the economic aspect together cause the highest incentive for a variety of reasons to ensure player groups will not dismantle prematurely and hence cause a reduction in overall play-time for group-players.
Because you’ll have a large portion saying ‘Yeah, lemme check it out if it’s something for me in Standard first’ and when they see it’s not a mechanic they personally enjoy then they don’t start a character.
Otherwise they would start a character and stay for the societal aspects after, but the incentive to be pulled into that is missing without the exclusivity.
Because it is.
Not for everyone… but yes… the gradual progression is the necessity behind it for a very… very large group of people.
4 Days here, I’m playing a lot when I start, I know what I do and I know how to deal with the market, craft and progress my content accordingly. I’m at the forefront of progressing players overall.
I’m a so called ‘forever player’ though. I stick with stuff until it ends or I see no proper way to progress.
I’m the exception, not the norm.
The ‘norm player’ does actually stop when their progression crawls to a pace which is too slow to be meaningful for them, and the attention span of the overall player is loooooow. Hence my argumentation that it would be detrimental. Because you sticking for 1-2 months would mean a player which already only sticks for a month would only play half a week as they are already ‘set up’ and don’t need to substantially progress.
Yes, they exist. And since they focus primarily on said content then all the available one it gets boring that much faster.
So even they would see a substantial decrease in retention time.
Not to speak of those not enjoying it, their retention time is basically non-existent.
Once more, we’re outliers, not the norm.
Yes, I do, so why do you want to remove the foot? The leveling is the foot after all Makes you already invested in your character. Sunken-cost-fallacy playing a big role.
Yeah, so make the net larger, not smaller. I fully agree!
Also I’m not going into the cases again, sorry, even for me that would be too large of a post and too many quotes.
That would only be true when the metrics to discern the outcomes would’ve been more fleshed out.
You’re working from a flawed premise still. The markers are more manyfold then you think. You’re oversimplifying it.
Basically the same as saying ‘Out of the most commonly used vehicles cars cause the most accidents and have the highest space usage in the world. So we should all move over to planes since they have the least amount of accidents per user and the smallest space needs currently!’. It’s all true… but it doesn’t take into consideration the circumstances that the infrastructure would then expand and cause more space needs then the cars… as well as suddenly making plane travel so prevalently needed and substantial that accidents per user would also ramp up and make it overall more unsafe.
That’s not how you read statistics, that’s the common error on how it’s done actually, so nothing to blame you there, it’s to be expected after all.
And once more, all different sizes as well as all different impact.
Hence they have different value, if we want or not.
i actually went thru your points and actually was addressing alot of your points. but as i kept going thru i would just summarize as i feel that some points keep repeating.
Players have different goals and enjoy the game differently
If cycle players could jump to legacy, test out the content they would be bored quickly.
I agree. some of them would but i would argue if thats the case they were never invested in the cycle to begin with. This is either due to the player not liking the content or the content is weak
Why would anyone want to play a cycle if they can skip the incremental growth?
Thats a question that EHG has to answer. but to their benefit as well as for furthering this discussion i’ll go out and say it. GOOD CONTENT. as long as the content is good/fun/rewarding players will WANT to play cycle content. in fact the entire reason i started bitching is because i WANT to play cycle content but without the grind.
If we’re giving freebies then heres another answer. Challenge MTX rewards. some players actually go into leagues for the sole purpose of hitting 40/40 regardless. But by having challenge rewards, and making it tied to reset cycles. i believe it would be a good compromise. you want to access the cycle content on legacy? you can but you cant earn the challenge rewards.
I would also argue that if you need to rely on sunken cost fallacy (since the player spent so much time and effort to get to the “fun part”) then the cycle content is simply bad. This is the game devs content issue. Not the players. For sure if you just want to pad numbers then yeah… EHG is free to do that. POE has been doing that “forever”.
If you give players the option to skip the leveling process they probably will
True and false. Its highly depending on the player. Each may have their own unique reason to do what they do
Playing a certain league/game mode in itself is a reward/achievement. Why do hardcore players play hardcore? They could easily play in standard and achieve the same, but they dont get to brag. hence they would go hardcore. similarly SSF functions similarly. this is one sample reason.
Economic advantage. you “debunked” this claim but i’ll simply just state that you’re severely downplaying how much economic advantage players can get. you personally said you need 4 days to get up and running. more optimized players only need 1 day. this is another sample reason
some players want to test their builds/new builds. you simply say its false. i will agree that at the very high end of optimization that the best place to really test a build is on standard. But that point is sidestepping the fact that some players WANT to do so. i’ve done that few times where i go into a new league with a rough idea and “see what happens”. the fact i do what i say a player might do means its not possible for you to say my statement is false. this is another sample reason
some players WANT A REASON to replay the game. regardless of rewards or anything. this is proven true with phrecia. phrecia imho is the shittiest low effort league that GGG has ever shat out but it made so many people happy because they got to try playing POE in a different way. none of the ascendancies are permanent. but to some its an excuse to replay the game. for sure you may say “they might have other reasons” i ll accept that and i ll even accept “that might not be the real reason”, but it still is another reason.
some players put a lot of value into the leveling/growth process. and some don’t. but its still a reason
cycle content brings in the most retention
i have agreed to this repeatedly and i have pointed out that this should be true regardless of this feature being implemented.
this is addressed in points 1,2,3. you’re pointing at symptoms but not the cause. if the cycle content is truly good, players will stay either way. every negative point stated is actually solid points but lets be real. theyre actually excuses for bad content.
legacy players are the minority and having them play in a cycle is such a minimal gain
agreed. i would add. if the content is good, whether or not this feature is enabled, the cycle enjoyers that would jump on the league would be the same. BUT with hit feature enabled, we get this minimal number of legacy players returning back to the game. which logically means regardless of how small the increment is, it is MORE than without this feature. so it still is a gain and it still is more beneficial
more players is almost always good. more chances of players spending money. in fact i would argue that many aging gamers have relegated themselves to slower gaming habits. it is more likely that these aging gamers have more money and are more loose with their wallets.
in summary i see some of your points but i find most of them are you making up excuses for bad cycle content. and to be honest, if the cycle content is bad i dont even want to play the game lol. you can gatekeep cycle content if thats the case. i really wont even ask for it.
from my perspective you and heavy really dont trust EHG enough to deliver good cycle content.
the fact i m asking for this access shows how much i trust EHG would deliver good cycle content that i preemptively ask for this feature so early on.
but yeah. in any case. all we can do is talk. i have said what i needed to and i 've not seen any real reasons to why its a bad thing.
in fact, i can throw you guys a bone and argue against myself.
none of you mentioned that having cycle content in legacy could potentially harm legacy economy in serious ways. a random bug or exploit could have players finding ways to earn a huge amount of currency which could devalue other things in irreparable ways.
and i know why. the simple fact of the matter is “NO ONE” cares about standard/legacy.
you guys keep coming from the “this will hurt cycle enjoyers” and hurt EHG pov. but as i said in reality its just making excuses for poor content.
the reality is you guys DGAF about standard. and to that. i m not going to engage in this topic as i’ve already laid out all the points that i want to make. feel free to disagree. the target audience of this post is not you guys. its EHG.
What you’re not accounting for is that there is a very sizable portion of the playerbase that is neither a standard nor a temp lover and they will swing with whatever is being offered. In PoE, these players will join a temp league and in LE they won’t. In one, they will play for a month, in the other they will play for a week.
For example, I’ve played PoE leagues for years. I’ve definitely enjoyed them and creating a new character and chasing the new mechanics and rewards. In each league I’ve played for at least a month, usually more.
In LE, I have yet to create a single seasonal character. There is no point to it. So when new content comes, I have a fully leveled character already and I’m done with the content much sooner. There is nothing to progress. So I play only a week or two before moving on.
In PoE I would regularly come back for a few days on and off just to have some fun until the new league comes. In LE I do the same. So the difference between both is that I play LE for less time overall at a new season start than I did with PoE.
So yes, some players will play less if you use the standard seasonal model. But some will also play less if you don’t.
Which one would bring more players? Only the devs can know that.
You are, though. You’re trying to fit everyone into 4 separate groups when there are more groups than that and varied nuances.
Fair argument but a overgeneralization.
As mentioned, it’s simply a psychological aspect of people that is very prevalent.
You can see the extreme version of that like a player which cheats in Single-player before playing through it normally for the first time. Acquires top equipment, makes a overly powerful build right away and goes along to skip the campaign outside of bosses for example. After 2-3 hours that person is through the game completely, has experienced everything… and suddenly the urge to re-play it normally is just… gone. Hook, line and sinker failed there… the Hook’s gone this way.
The same happens in a milder version for league content, if it’s frontloaded people just don’t get hooked as easily. Yes, they would’ve fun overall… but they don’t built up the feeling of progression and success as they usually would.
What you said makes little sense there. You’re complaining about the need to re-play… but you want to re-play. You can’t have a reset without re-doing the grind after all. What you talked about was that you don’t wanna be forced into it - fair - for the new items that might only be available during that time.
So… wouldn’t the 100% persistence between Cycle and then following Legacy not achieve exactly that? You can experience things in a fresh economy… or you have to wait but can experience it afterwards.
That’s my personal contention point with GGG’s content for example, that it doesn’t move over reliably. But if it either permanently stays (including all the rewards derived) or goes forever (also with all the specific rewards from the new mechanics going) then it would’ve no impact on that, right? Timed exclusive at best… or failed project at worst.
Fair, that’s a good point. Extra incentive works well, but gameplay is the major thriving factor to keep one going. It’s just another Hook, you want to have as many of them to catch as many fish as possible.
Partially true, yes. But also partially not. It’s a bit of a complex thing. I’ll bring back the example of game development and water levels there, which is a surprisingly well researched topic since it baffled people a lot. Simply spoken… if you make a game which is throughout extremely well designed and rather ‘flawless’, hence providing no frustrating places or those which ‘hinder’ your progression in some annoying way then surprisingly… the ‘perfect’ game is received less well. Mind you, small parts of the overall play-time are only allowed to include that, but our brain seems to tend to enhance positive experiences only when it has a negative one related to it to compare it to. Which is the psychological aspect behind it.
Sounds odd but works, and is directly causing people to have actually more fun… by shortly not having much fun.
That one I sadly have to disagree with. There’s a sort of normative behaviour at work. Our brains are actively wired for efficiency. Meaning we derive enjoyment from shortening a process… without taking into consideration if the process itself gives us enjoyment or not. For example Factorio is a game primarily built to fulfill that efficiency urge we have and making us feel good by doing stuff better… reasonably far or not.
It’s surprisingly the exception to go against that, and our brain loooves to cut us out of 50 hours of enjoyment solely to optimize it to a single hour. It’s a part of ‘optimizing the fun out of the game’ but self-inflicted.
But it’s a pre-defined challenge, a new framework if you play HC, SSF or any other challenge league. If you’re going the ‘self choosen route’ being the uppermost important aspect… then why include it as a distinct separate option anyway? There has to be a reason for it after all.
Can’t you play Hardcore… in Softcore? You simply stop playing after dieing once, right?
Can’t you play SSF… in normal Softcore? You simply don’t touch the stuff from other characters (Fairly spoken we can have the argument here that it’s a hassle to discern properly though).
Still… devs actually put effort into providing those frameworks and hence spending development resources to include those into their games. So something very very important seems to happen that makes it viable to do so.
And that’s that a person simply works better with a externally provided framework then self-imposed limitations.
Partially agreed there. It’s dependant on the player itself to a degree. But it’s not the norm to be in the 0,01% of 1-day players. It affects a very small amount of people overall… even if we say it’s ‘only’ 1% of long term players which do that… or even 10% of those staying for a respectable time. The others don’t experience it though. Once again a simple aspect of ‘the group is simply larger and more impactful’. But yes, you can definitely make great deals if you’re at the absolute forefront which saves a bit of time compared to Standard. But… in Standard you can also farm up a mirror quite regularly. 1200 divines is ‘only’ 120 hours gameplay time after all with 10 div income per hour. With some specific farming methods that are very repetitive (like boss fights that only a fraction of players can beat reliably) it jumps up significantly though.
Would you do it outside of a economic reset though? Hence simply in… let’s say month 2 of an ongoing league? Why wait for a fresh start? There has to be something which gives extra incentive for it after all. You want to play a new build… but without the extra incentive you simply don’t feel enough urge to do so. Another Hook.
It’s no league, it’s solely a event. And called for that as a reason. But they didn’t play the game without it… so does that now mean the game is ‘bad’ without it? Or do you think people would’ve come back reliably if it’s something provided in Standard as well to the same degree? Without the economic reset?
The re-grind and incentive to start fresh itself has massive value, yes… but only with a Hook beyond. And the more Hooks you have the more likely to reel someone in simply.
The timed exclusive aspect is simply a very strong Hook.
Yes, so if you make it the same as permanent Leagues… what defines the Cycle hence forward? For example extraction shooters like Tarkov fare surprisingly bad over long periods of time despite initial massive influx of players. This is true for each of them… be it Tarkov, Dark and Darker or any other.
The reason is that they don’t offer permanence but full-scale resets only. Nothing stays. You don’t receive ‘permanent value’ and hence even new inclusions loose their effect surprisingly… even for people which actually only play the timed content.
The mental option for that ‘fallback method’ needs to be there. But that also means on the counter-side that the incentive to pull people in needs to be respectively big to attempt said temporary game mode… and once more… the more hooks the more likely.
Those answers also overlap with (5) already, so I won’t go further into that. And partially (6), albeit I want to get into some things specifically still.
Not quite. The effort is a different kind then to simply farm content in a sort of ‘braindead’ manner. It’s the difference on how very complex and invested mechanics versus simplistic ones are received. Our brain hates complexity and wants to simplify it… but it loves to solve complex things. So having to repeatedly solve complex aspects is bad… but solving a single complex thing is good.
Which is why for example ‘Harvest’ league in PoE was extremely badly received at the beginning when you had to set up your farm with a proper planned out setup every… single… map… But!.. it immediately did well when simplified. The slow cadence (3-4 months) of resetting is one such ‘complex problem’, hence the full scale progression throughout the game. If you would reduce the timeframe substantially then people wouldn’t do it anymore, for example ‘Once Human’ struggles with that issue, which is why they implemented permanent Servers a few days ago… their cycles simply where too short and it caused people to stop playing.
Logically you’re absolutely right! Sadly though… humans aren’t logical
Nope, that’s a fallacy. More players is not always good.
It’s a massive topic even as to why that is, but it’s been known not to be the case.
Many large games fail while there’s still thriving ages old small-scale games out. A prime example would be in the RTS scene ‘Supreme Commander’, the first one with the expansion. That’s a very very old game and it’s still surprisingly heavily played nowadays. Why? Because the experience and gameplay style was unique and caused massive replay value, up to a degree that a full rebalance community mod with a full-scale separate lobby-system and modding system was created for it with still ongoing professional competitions… in a 2007 game. Something which the vast majority of games can only dream of.
That on the other hand I’ll agree with. But that content is after all the major and biggest ‘hook’ provided. But still… numbers don’t take a massive hit despite bad temporary content… like ‘Crucible’ or ‘Lake of Kalandra’ in PoE. Both very badly received but still keeping retention up well despite that.
Why? Because people which would’ve not come back to the game stay when already invested in playing up a character until that one is ‘done’ at least in their mind. They were hooked by the mechanic, they stayed for the core gameplay… but they wouldn’t have returned solely for the core gameplay, and they also wouldn’t have stayed in a permanent league as they already attempt it then likely with a ‘done’ character in their mind.
It’s the combination of aspects which cause such a severe effect. Obviously if the cyclic content is generally ‘bad’ then that incentive goes away before long. Good content is universally a good thing
Yes, I don’t.
EHG has never proven to date to do that after all. We’re reaching 1.2 over a year after release with the content provided in 1.0 still being borderline broken or with quite a lot of design flaws for comfortable handling.
Obviously I don’t
Really? I’m btw a Legacy/Standard player. Just to mention.
Devs don’t care much about the space… but they provide it for a reason.
And it would also aid their games very very well if their permanent place is top-tier qualitative handled. Neither GGG nor EHG do a very good job with that yet though.
Makes you already invested in your character. Sunken-cost-fallacy playing a big role.