Loot filter needs a rule that tests the FP on an item

Feedback and Suggestions
22

My example was

intentionally exagerrated

You don’t have to agree, but those are definitely not some imaginary straws.

I also don’t think that the examples I gave are necessarily “Quality of Life” things.

But with what you said about loot filter in a loot-centric game this is very comparable.

I didn’t say that a loot filter helps you with skills, avoiding damage or navigate boss encounter mechanics. Now you are having some imaginary straws.

I just compared something different across different genres. Obviously this is not 100% comparable. It was just a example.

We don’t have to agree, but I still firmly belive that a loot filter is not QoL.
Partially some people might consider it QoL, which is fine, but it’s most definitely not a sole QoL feature.

It does directly affect your gameplay. (needing to check fewer items and doing decision-making for you, once you gave it the parameters)

23

Oh please. Those players are free to not use such a rule in their filter if they enjoy looking at loot that much. It’s not like this is ruining the loot hunt for others, it is an option. Options are good.

24

These days I am most often killed because I am reading the loot that dropped and thus didn’t notice a threat. Especially a damn spire one-shotting me.

Secondly, excess loot that needs to be read means a player spends more time in an echo than he needs to. A more efficient filter would reduce this wasted time, hence it helps the player in general by giving more echos, more drops, more everything. More time to enjoy the game.

25

I disagree.

There are some things that are not a net positive for the game, but once implemented will become the gold standard because it is “more efficient”.

The argument: “If you don’t like a feature, don’t use it” is something that I personally don’t like at all. Especially for certain areas of certain games. (another example would be DPS Meter)

This is funny.

I think you and @DirePenguin are on the same side, but your argumentation would go for me when referring to my previous posts :smiley:

But I really disagree with the notion of your whole point:
Being efficient and “playing as much as possible” is the only thing how to enjoy playing this game.
Speaking of “wasted time” when talking about core gameplay loop is something I don’t understand at all.

I do agree that there is a point where too much loot is “excess loot”, which is unreasonable to sift through. But the notion of everything being “wasted time” if not the perfectly desired item drops is something I don’t understand.

Loot-centric games are about loot and yes there is and will be loot that might not be what you are looking for, but they might inspire you to do something else or give you different ideas.
Having the whole loot process boiled down to only seeing and picking up perfectly matching items is beyond me.

1 Like
26

Translation: everyone will end up using it? Which I would argue absolutely indicates it should be added. If everyone will use a thing, then that thing is GOOD and should be in the game.

Yeah I knew that, I just found it a very very interesting question that made me think.

Well this rule would absolutely not deliver the “only perfect items will be seen” scenario. This is a mis-assumption. It will in fact simply reduce the number of items I see dropping, which is exactly what every other loot filter rule is doing. I pick items up for a variety of reasons, so this rule simply helps me see only items that are probably worth me picking up. Again, like every other rule I could add.

What’s the difference between a rule that will only show items having Fire Damage and one that only shows items with more than 30 FP? They are just rules and both serve the exact same purpose: to allow the player to reduce the amount of loot he sees. Why is one acceptable and the other taboo?

Secondly, about the wasted time. I am puzzled. If an item gets through my filter, and I read its label, and determine it is not worth picking up, how is that not a complete waste of my time? What exactly did I get out of having to do that? (And I assure you it was not “immersive”, it was simply “darned annoying - this game has a loot filter so why the heck did I have to look at this piece of garbage?”

A loot filter that cannot be configured to hide items as I (or anyone) want it to, is not doing its job.

27

No, not all things added, even though used, will be a net positive for the game.

I think this whole topic is way beyond this loot filter discussion and will completely derail this thread.

Regarding the rest of your comment I do understand where you are coming from.

And again Tools to make items more manageable are fine.

But somewhere there needs to be a line. Otherwise we end up with a game that does everything for you. (what I explained in one of my first posts)

28

Well, if game does all the “busy work” for you. I’m fine with that.

29

There is a lot of room between letting people filter items a bit more effectively and having a game that plays itself for you.

The point is, that where you draw the line is arbitrary. There is not a morally superior way of drawing the line that is intrinsically better than the other.
Ultimately, the decision is beholden to how engaging and fun the game ends up being as a result of where you draw the line.

People here are arguing that the game would be more enjoyable for them if they could filter out items more efficiently.
From your various posts on the forum, I know that you really like the dopamine hits of seeing drops that could be good, so I know that a more efficient filter would not improve your experience of the game. However, you should not assume that everybody else enjoys the game the same way you do.

1 Like
30

I never ever did.

I just wanted to present to people that some things seem to have “an easy solution” for them to enjoy the game more, while these things might come with other consequences.

There are a lot of things that getting suggested in the forums (and on other platforms), where I know there are a lot of people that would appreciate it.

But a lot of the times these will coem with other consequences that the people suggesting don’t see.

I do not speak on behalf of the devs, but in many regards EHG seems to have a very similar mindset to waht they think should or shouldn’t be in thee game.
And I am very happy that they until this day have not given a lot of ground for many of these reaccuring suggestions (including loot filter, respec or auto loot to name the most prominent ones).

I just think it is good to show people that things are not always as one-sided as it might seem from their perspective. (There are so many people suggesting things under the assumption:“Hey devs to XYZ and the game will be better”, withotu realiszing not everybody will celebrate that change).

Also regarding that arbirary line, I agree. And I myself have made plethora of suggestions that I would like to see making the loot filter better. But FP and LP are not one of them.

31

That is reasonable, from an external point of view, that was the feeling that I got.
My apologies, it was not my intention to put words in your mouth.

True, but what are the consequences of this specific suggestion in particular?
The monkey paw curls, what does happen as a result?

The way I see it.
In a world where the rule exists, people would be able to filter out items with low FP, so they would get to see fewer items as a result. However, the items that they see, they are more likely to pick up.

In the current world, where it is not possible to filter out on FP, people see more items, and some of them they will leave on the ground because of low FP.

This is the interaction that is preserved by not introducing the FP rule.
However, this is not a particularly enjoyable interaction. At least for me. The only outcome that can ever come from this interaction is disappointment, or at best relief.
I have never looked at an item with high FP and got excited because it has high FP.
However, I have looked at promising items, only to be disappointed because their FP was too low.

One valid reason I see to not put it as an option is to protect players from accidentally making filters that are too strict. For all this argument, I would probably use that rule very sparsely, probably only in my levelling filters because exalted items have high FP anyway.

32

Hi all,

This seems to be the typical conversation where people use the same terms but with different meaning.

For my part, I tend to be on Heavy’s side.

Some of you are asking for a far more efficient LF allowing to filter on FP threshold, LP threshold, range threshold (you are not individualy asking for all of this, but as a group, yes it is where it is going)…

I can’t think this is a good thing. We are indeed playing a loot-centric game. Most of the end-game activity is based on upgrading our stuff, and thus making loot based decisions.
Players of such a game should fully agree to cope with this paradigm and be ready to analyze loot with their human brain, and not a tool.
It is as playing a Factorio-like game and not wanting to think about production ratios and waste management… you see where I’m going there ? :slight_smile:

But doing this using a “perfect” tool would be as exciting as playing Excel… and for my part, I do that enough at work.

What the current “imperfect” but still powerful LF we have allows however is something you don’t consider : the surprise element! Yes I looted a item that is not fully suitable for my build, but :

  • maybe it is a unique I did not have yet ? ==> store it just in case
  • maybe it does have a rare affix ? ==> scatter to get shards
  • maybe it would be very suitable for an alternative build ==> build reset time ?
  • maybe it is a good item for another class ? ==> reroll time ? :smiley:
  • … you get it

Having a item that drops, that was partly filtered but that is not perfect for my current character in its current build doesn’t mean that it is bad entirely. It COULD be interesting in its own, it could make me think about something, it could… break the flow.

And that, by itself, appears to me as a good thing, allowing such a game to still be a game and not a spreadsheet simulator with pretty graphics.

And didn’t I even talked about the perspective when the item factions will arise and you will be able to sell items ? I will let you think about that on your own :slight_smile:

Keep cool, and stay safe, we are all here to spend a good time on a good game :wink:

1 Like
33

That has been asked for before at various times.

A) I take exception to that & B) I presume you didn’t play Championship Manager in the 90s.

34

Replying to the overall back and forth that’s been going on about convenience vs the game playing itself too much.

I think you have to have a solid idea of what the core gameplay loop and challenge for the game is. Then you know what’s ok to compromise on and streamline and what isn’t.

To use an example from another game: World of Warcraft. I started around the time they added the dungeon finder. While some older players complained that it streamlined things too much, for me, it meant getting to play the part of the game I enjoyed by far more than anything else. To me, collaborative dungeons and raids were the thing that made MMOs stand out as a worthwhile genre. If I wanted to run around an open world on my own, I could play any number of single player RPGs out there and get a better experience. So cutting out the process of finding people and running to a load screen door somewhere in the world wasn’t really missing much.

What wasn’t great was that they then made all the dungeon content much easier to accommodate all the people who now had easy access to it. Rather than just making it more convenient to access the main meat of the gameplay, they took something away from that gameplay itself. I think my favorite time in the game was early cataclysm before the heroic dungeon nerfs. I was actually very happy spending an hour or more working out how to beat these dungeons with a more intimate group than a raid. That time I spent wiping over and over wasn’t preventing me from getting to the fun, IT WAS THE FUN.

When I think about the gameplay loop of an aRPG, I think it’s at its best when it neatly divides into 2 parts:

  1. Fun action gameplay where you get to use your build and get into a flow killing monsters.

  2. Returning home with the spoils of war then getting to adjust your build and power up from what you got.

I think the more part 2 intrudes on part 1, the less enjoyable the action is. Leaving loot for the time between runs is a nice break after playing. Needing to stop and look at loot while playing just disrupts the flow of gameplay. Besides, interacting with the loot is sort of already done through the planning you do ahead of time for your build. You HAVE interacted with the buildcrafting part of the game, it just wasn’t mixed in with the action.

So I think it’d be fine to add things like this if players felt it helped them have a smoother experience. It smooths out roadbumps while leaving in tact the strategy of making your build and the skill of piloting your build.

2 Likes
35

The game is all about killing monsters, not reading endless garbage on the ground that despite me tediously setting up a loot filter, is still dropping with 15 FP items visible even though I am level 100, and thus utterly wasting my time. That feels like trolling. Now add 4 spires that will kill me because I was forced to stop and read loot labels I had zero need to read, and we have some rather poor design in play.

Thing is you still have to read a certain amount of loot even if this rule were added. If an item dropped with 40 FP, and has 2 affixes on it I really want, it can easily still be unusable, and I still have to read it to find out (Example: it could have tier 5s on it that are useless to me and that I cannot reliably get rid of).

The idea that adding an FP-based rule would render me seeing ONLY the exact items I want is nonsense. It simply reduces the amount of crap I have to read JUST LIKE EVRY OTHER RULE I CAN ADD TO THE FILTER.

There is no difference between being able to add a filter rule that says an item has to have Spell Damage on it; and a rule that says an item has to have at least 30 FP. They both serve the same purpose (reduce the loot I see), so it is rather arbitrary that one is OK and the other is forbidden.

Forcing me to look at items with less than 30 FP is no more of a positive experience (not “immersive”, lol) than forcing me to look at items that lack Spell Damage would be. DO NOT FORCE ME TO DO EITHER PLEASE.

1 Like
36

I actually agree with @Heavy here (this is becoming a disturbing trend). I think I’m fine with filters that let you check the existence (true/false) of a stat/affix or ability. But, checking the value of them is going a little too far, imho. I think I wouldn’t be opposed to a filter that checks for LP on an item, but not the amount. Same with FP (not sure if this is different than my previous stance, since I haven’t the inclination to re-read this entire thread…but after giving it some thought, it should be a loot filter, not a loot decision maker).

3 Likes
37

Comments like these are so bizarre to me. I play video games to chill and have fun. Not sift through piles of gear that I will never use. Yes a game should be absolutely as convenient as possible and maximize actual gameplay. Awful take bud.

2 Likes
38

There are many different types of games. Even in ARPGs. There are some that have a lot of grind. There are some that have barely any grind. There are games that have all the QoL features and others that have none. Not all games have to appeal to all gamers, otherwise Dark Souls would never exist.

So I do disagree that a game should be as convenient as possible. I think what you meant is that games you want to play should be as convenient as possible. Which is not the same thing.

This is in no way a stance on whether or not the loot filter should check for FP/LP or not. I’m kinda neutral on that.

1 Like
39

I see your point and it is valid however in those games that you grind, you are rewarded for your effort. Looking at 20 pieces of gear every monolith run is not a grind for a reward but a chore. The difference being that in games who purposefully limit basic QoL features such as “filtering by FP” for example they make up for by offering a solution to their made up problem with a cash shop item. Here there is no P2W or Pay for QoL. So you basically have a situation where they have intentionally made the game more annoying with no solution. You are right though, some people prefer to lower QoL and just say “it is what it is” and find it enjoyable. I am obviously not in that camp.

1 Like
40

Again, my opinion on this is neutral. I’m fine either way. But in terms of loot filter, the one LE has right now is already not only unique but also one of the best. Most games don’t even give you one. All 4 diablos lack one, for example. Grim dawn has a pretty basic one (which was a good thing at the time since they were among the first to even give you one). PoE’s is, in terms of options and customization, superior to LE’s, but it has the huge drawback that it’s really hard to customise. You need to use a 3rd party site for it and even then it’s a pain.

Overall LE’s filter is the best I’ve seen, in my opinion. Could it be better? Of course. Could it have a few more options? Yes. The devs have said they want to improve on the filter. But it will never reach the point where you filter every single thing you don’t want and everything you see you pick up, like in PoE. For better or for worse, the devs want you to examine what drops to decide if its good or not, so you can have that great feeling when you see an awesome drop. Some players will like that, some won’t. But this is a decision the devs have made not only as game designers but also as players.

1 Like
41

Variable reinforcement schedules is a technique is used by casinos and social media platforms to keep users engaged and addicted. It involves providing rewards to users at unpredictable intervals, which creates a sense of anticipation and excitement. The user is not sure when they will receive the reward, but they know that it will happen eventually.

I see nothing wrong in utilizing this technique in loot-based videogames. But I’d like to point out, that for it to work the intervals should not be too long. If 95% of loot players have to read through is garbage, that’s probably too low, and will give an opposite effect (annoyed players). And that’s exactly the thing, that is often seen here on forums - players (including me) want a better loot filter, because they are annoyed by wasting their time reading through garbage.

1 Like