Points for Improvement

Hello from Japan! I’m using machine translation, so I apologize if my English sounds strange!

  1. Lack of Weight in Sound Design
    The most critical issue I wish to highlight in this review is the weakness of the sound effects. Overall, the hit sounds lack impact, and the sense of realism and exhilaration accompanying attacks is insufficient, resulting in a lack of tactile feedback during combat. In action games, sound plays a vital role in conveying the weight and power of strikes—often more intuitively than visuals. The current underwhelming audio diminishes the excitement of combat, leaving very few moments that feel genuinely satisfying to control. Furthermore, the sound effects for item drops are subdued, failing to deliver a rewarding impact. Rare drops should be accompanied by suitably lavish and memorable sound cues. Without clear auditory feedback, players struggle to feel a sense of accomplishment or excitement, making it difficult to perceive rewards as meaningful. In summary, enhancing the sound design is an essential step to significantly improve immersion and overall player satisfaction.

  2. Underdeveloped Storyline
    While the time-travel element offers a fresh concept, the overall narrative feels underdeveloped due to its overly complicated and drawn-out structure, unconvincing developments, and simplistic presentation. Even after reading explanatory websites, the story remains difficult to grasp and leaves a sense of unresolved confusion.

  3. Poor Translation Quality
    The text frequently gives the impression of being machine-translated, with noticeable typographical errors. This undermines the gameplay experience in the Japanese language environment.

  4. Lack of Status Display in Inventory
    It is inconvenient not to be able to check status values such as resistances when switching equipment. A simplified status display within the inventory screen would greatly improve usability.

  5. Cumbersome NPC Dialogue
    Every time a player interacts with a merchant NPC, a short dialogue begins, requiring the player to skip through it just to access the item list. A more practical option would be to allow direct access to the item list.

  6. Difficulty Distinguishing NPCs from Other Players
    It is often difficult to distinguish NPCs from other players based solely on the small marker above their heads. This leads to many situations where clicking on NPCs becomes cumbersome in crowded areas. Clearer visual differentiation is needed.

  7. Unclear Item Rarity Indicators
    The background color indicating item rarity is too faint, making it easy to accidentally sell valuable items. Improvement is strongly recommended.

  8. Insufficient Stash Search and Sorting Functions
    Currently, only tab-specific highlighting is available, making it extremely inconvenient to search or manage items across multiple tabs. A comprehensive search and sorting system is highly desirable.

  9. Inefficient Placement of Stash and NPCs
    In certain areas, the stash and NPCs are placed too far apart, causing unnecessary movement. The layout of key facilities within the hub should be optimized for better convenience.

  10. Skill Level Reduction Upon Respecialization
    In the hack-and-slash genre, there remains a design tendency toward deliberate inconvenience, aimed at “padding content” or “prolonging playtime.” The temporary reduction of skill levels upon respecialization is a prime example. The true appeal of hack-and-slash games lies in the freedom to experiment with various skill and equipment combinations to build and refine one’s strategy. Penalizing respecialization restricts this flexibility and acts more as a deterrent to experimentation than an incentive for creativity.
    For new players in particular, the penalties for mistakes or reallocation are too steep, discouraging exploration. While some argue that such mechanics encourage responsibility and planning, this only holds true when diverse and flexible choices are guaranteed. Beginners cannot possibly grasp the full intricacies of skills, synergies, and enemy behavior at the outset. Expecting “correct” decisions from the start is unreasonable and leads to cautious, imitative play rather than bold experimentation.
    Additionally, some defend the limitation as a means to slow content consumption and extend game longevity. However, this merely delays access rather than providing new experiences. Longevity should be achieved through positive engagements, such as discovering new builds or encountering new content—not through mechanical constraints or slowed progression.
    It is worth noting that class switching is restricted in a way that is partially mitigated by the presence of alternative characters, maintaining some design consistency. However, imposing such inconvenience even on minor adjustments that naturally arise as characters grow is a structural flaw that undermines the genre’s core appeal: the freedom to create and adapt.
    In conclusion, the current system that lowers skill levels upon respecialization, though ostensibly framed as a strategic feature, ultimately suppresses player experimentation and undermines both flexibility and replayability. Modern game design should move away from such outdated mechanics and instead support satisfying, flexible build creation as the key to both player enjoyment and long-term game success.

Thank you for reading all the way to the end!

2 Likes

Thanks for the extensive feedback.
I agree with everything but this last piece.

This was the biggest part of your feedback, but you failed to touch on the very reason why the system is built this way.
There’s nothing about prolonging play time, or being a strategic feature…
The system works like this simply and only to prevent a respec meta, where people would Run X tree specialization for clearing maps, and Y tree spec for killing bosses… While it’s still possible to do exactly that, (you can completely respec a skill and get it to lvl 20 in less than 5 minutes running monos) the amount of friccion is enough to prevent most players from doing it. Instead, it incentivizes players to aim for a build that can handle both AoE and Single Target fights.

It also brings a sense of character identity, making it so a character cannot swap his skills at will. They have to re-train the skill if they want to change it.
But now that they added mastery respec, the whole character identity aspect is kinda fading in this game, so they might as well allow people to freely respec skills at some point.

I like it this way, but if I were to suggest some changes, I would say they could allow for free skills and mastery respec up until the character unlocks empowered monos. From then on, their masteries would be locked, and their skills would have to be releveled again if respecd.
This way they could prevent the respec meta, while also allowing low level characters to be experimented on.

4 Likes

Thank you for your thoughtful response! Your perspective—particularly on preventing a respec meta where players alternate between AoE and boss-killing builds—is now much clearer. The idea of maintaining a degree of friction to encourage commitment to a build is understandable within that framework.

Your proposed compromise of allowing free skill and mastery respecs up to the point of unlocking empowered monos is quite compelling. It strikes a thoughtful balance: safeguarding endgame integrity while promoting creativity and discovery earlier in the game. That approach feels considerably more player-friendly without undermining long-term design goals.

While I see the thematic appeal of preserving character identity, as you noted, the introduction of mastery respecs has already softened that aspect. In light of this, enabling more flexible skill experimentation—especially during early progression—feels like a natural and constructive evolution.

Thanks again for the insightful exchange—discussions like this always bring valuable perspective to game.

1 Like

I was acutally about to make a short suggestion about this, but now I at least understand the goal of this re-leveling mechanic. I agree that “character identity” is a weak argument now that we can respec the masteries. The only “permanent” decision in the game.

I managed to nerf myself for the rest of the campaign just becasue I wanted to try to spec into one of the later mastery skills. Which I ended up not liking. I didn’t realize how fast it is to respec lategame. The design goal was related to late game, but it ended up punishing early game exploration more.

When I first read the suggestion to make respeccing harder later in the game it felt weird, although it made sense mechanics wise. But I think you can make it work with a few lines of lore.

  • When you first reach end of time, you are just one of the many schemes of your possible selves. At level 20 you gain the ability to freely choose mastery, redistribute passive points, and respecialize skills at any point. Skills still need to be leveled, but they keep the level if you unspecialize them.

  • You as a player and your character has time to find out who they really are. The campaign and monoliths also stabilize your character. Empowering the monoliths require a stabilized character. After empowering you can only respecialize masteries and passives with the help of an NPC. Even unlearning skills could require the NPC. It’s a question of QoL vs. consistency.

1 Like

I gave it a vote but got one stipulation:

This is the only point I don’t agree with. The timeframe to respec is utterly miniscule to handle (I did it in 100 corruption empowered monoliths just today, took me 5 minutes actively killing enemies to get to the max again) and hence does exactly what the system is supposed to do.

Which is avoiding players to create methods to respec before bossfights and hence create a prime venue where one ‘optimizes the fun out of the game’ happens.

I agree 100% for the new player experience on the other hand. Early on the system is - and always was - a failure simply.

3 Likes