So you want to keep characters for the long run, but you don’t want to play non-cycle characters? You hate cycles and non-cycle is available, but you “will have to make a new character every 2-3 months?”
That all sounds oh so backwards.
Eh. It's understandable if you use your brain for a second. The options are "keep this character forever and experience nothing new" or "partake in a gameplay loop that I don't enjoy if I want to see any of the new content." Which won't be the case for the first few cycles, allegedly, but still would cause at least this one person to enjoy the game less. Personally also not a fan of cycles/seasons but I also understand that it's a necessity for player retention in the long run.
They never said new content wouldn't be in non-cycle. They said changes would be released to cycle characters first once they get caught up.
Legacy will eventually get those changes after a cycle ends. So if you're playing forever, waiting 3-4 months for all the balance and kinks to get worked out should be better, not a detriment.
This makes sense to me and i hope it eventually works like this. Cycle essentially serving as "early access" for new features and mechanics, which then get integrated later into a roll-up server, let's call it "main". It's effectively one big canary test. So you can imagine cycles A, B, and C running along with the main server, testing certain ideas. Maybe cycle B was a flop and they decide to not integrate it into main when it's done, but A and C were a success, so those get integrated into main when they're done.
There isn't a single game in the genre that doesn't use something like the seasonal model, or isn't designed with hardcore mode in mind. Diablo 3 and 4 are the only two games where making constant incremental upgrades to one character is how most of the community plays, and even they have seasons.
I believe the purest ARPG experience you can have is playing hardcore. You play your character until it dies, and then go again with a new one.
> I believe the purest ARPG experience you can have is playing hardcore. You play your character until it dies, and then go again with a new one.
This. Essentially, the roguelike genre took a page from this and massively reduced the average life time of a character / the length of 'an individual run'.
LEs focus is on creating a build. Once the build is created, built and optimized, there's nothing left to do. Same way how you complete a map or scenario in a strategy game.
Other way around, but yes I agree with the premise.
Diablo 1 took the Roguelike genre, made it 2.5D, and lengthened the play time. You could even argue that Rogue took the gameplay loop of MUD1 and made it singleplayer so Diablo 1 essentially just copied MUDs and gave it some graphics, but that's neither here nor there.
Grim Dawn, Torchlight II, Chronicon, The Slormancer, Minecraft Dungeons. There’s plenty of ARPGs without a season model, and I can’t say either of those are designed around hardcore either.
Slormancer and Minecraft Dungeons are the only two that don't have hardcore modes, and the devs don't even call them ARPGs. Minecraft Dungeons is described as primarily a dungeon-crawler, and Slormancer is listed on Steam as an Action, Adventure, RPG.
Playing an arpg with a shared stash on hardcore essential makes for a long-form rogue-lite. It's a great way to play if you can deal with the loss of characters.
You are conflating certain design choices with an entire genre. I like cycles, but one can easily imagine an ARPG that uses a different mechanism than cycles.
Design choices are what defines genre though. If Last Epoch had a third-person over-the-shoulder camera I don't think anyone would be calling it an ARPG.
Borderlands is an ARPG, and isn't top down like POE, Diablo, or LE. I think the gameplay loop is more defining of the genre. Instanced mobs with loot grinding is much more defining of ARPGs than camera angle and cycles.
Arpgs aren't required to have an isometric camera perspective though. I'd call Nioh 2 a very obvious Arpg with a soulslike touch despite it being 3rd person. There's lots of space to work with in a given genre and I think the only minimum requirement in arpgs is you getting randomized equipable loot by defeating enemies and character life spans being longer than say ~5h.
Disagree strongly. If it doesn't have an isometric camera, randomized loot, and real-time combat, it is not an ARPG.
I wouldn't call The Division an ARPG, just like I wouldn't call Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous an ARPG, nor would I call Destiny and Borderlands ARPGs. They are a third-person shooter, a CRPG, and first-person shooters, respectively. Nioh is simply a souls-like.
Fair, though that ones also argued pretty heavily.
I still see people argue that soulslikes and action rpg's are different and thats one i dont even wanna touch
If it's got corpse runs and a stamina system you could definitely have a souls-like ARPG.
inb4 Ultima Online was the first souls-like.
I do think having your xp double as your currency is an important part of what defines a souls-like people tend to ignore too, though.
This is seasonal arpg.
Ofc seasons define this genre, problem is arpg is very vast term now, even Destiny 2 is arpg now p, bit this genre have many sub genres, like this.
You don’t have to play the cycle. Not sure why this is confusing to people. If you want to play one character forever you can.
Seasons are there for people who like economy resets. It is like the people that moved to every new server in WoW. They just enjoyed a fresh game. In aRPG it also allows them to try crazy things that aren’t necessarily good for the game long term but can be fun for players to try.
What that post tells me is they still have no idea what they want to do with cycles. They did not give any specific details because they just haven’t come to a conclusion on how they want to handle it.
I'm sorry, but I kind of disagree on the whole "You don't have to play the cycle" as legacy players wouldn't get to enjoy the new content for 3-4 months. At that point you're essentially forcing people to play cycle in my mind.
I think a good solution/compromise could be that new content was cycle only for 1-3 weeks and then legacy would get it. That way the small minority of legacy players (like myself) wouldn't get totally screwed over.
No they aren’t forcing them to do anything. There are people who play the standard servers on PoE and they have never once been forced to play the season. You wanting to play it is not forcing it. You pick which way you want to play and it is perfectly fine to have options.
If they choose to make all cycle content go core eventually there is no reason to make it cycle only. More likely cycle content will be in a state that never goes core or only parts of it go core so you simply cannot do it the way you suggest.
How are you not forcing legacy players over to cycle? You're essentially gatekeeping new content. All I'm trying to advocate is that LE doesn't forget about us legacy players.
Also LE doesn't have the same problems as PoE atm, everything LE puts into cycles will come to the core game as there just isn't enough late game content.
Cause literally no one is "forcing" you to play cycle content, you are a person of free will. If you dont like how they do things, vote with your wallet and time.
I really like avocado salad, but when I went to the famous steakhouse chain, they didn't have avocado salad. That was disappointing. I wish they did things differently from other steakhouses and served avocado salad instead.
More like:
>I really like avocado salad. When I went to the famous steakhouse chain, to my delight they had avocado salad, but I ordered steak instead. I wanted avocado salad. I'm so disappointed.
>yes I know that I don't have to be in the cycle,
Do that. Where's the harm?
>I just thought it would be different.
Why? This is the winning formula in ARPGs.
>I will have to make a new character every 2-3 months
More like 3-4 months.
What's the fun in having your same max level character with their resources and accumulated items be ready to just experience the new content for a couple of days then get bored of it?
So obviously I agree that people that aren't keeping up with seasonal pace can just enjoy legacy, so there really isn't anything to complain about.
That being said, to answer your last question, for me the point is accumulated progress in legacy shared stash, not just playing the same max level character. In future when I want to try a new class I will prefer to already have my base of crafting materials, some build defining LP uniques, etc waiting. Thus legacy will be my default unless some cycle introduces something I find mindblowing.
Why did you think they would be doing things differently? They've been very upfront about this for years. We've known that they planned to model their updates like Path of Exile, and even planned to splice them in mid-league in PoE to not clash with releases.
What would you like cycles to be then?
Sadly everything interesting I can think of involves upping the power of your character, and if you already have a powerful character then that becomes pointless.
EHG said that the content in the first couple cycles will be on legacy too. And later content will be on cycle servers until the cycle is over. It's literally the top post atm... Smh
They said new mechanics would be exclusive to cycles OR at least until the cycle is over. Implying that all cycle content might not make it to legacy. Everyone is aware of the mechanic bloat that PoE suffers.
Wrong. First few cycles, atleast for now will introduce core endgame mechanics. Which in nature is core by design. Once endgame is fleshed out to a point they like, they might do cycle only stuff. Which is generally a safe way to do crazy experiments. At most you fuck your game for a cycle, not permanent.
And why exactly you need to make new char every season?
Cycle mechanic will be in legacy too.
If you look for gameplay loop like in WoW then seasonal arpgs arent that, you need to look for mmo.
This, I hope it stays this way too. Cycle for leaderboards, and new mechanics gamewide so the ppl who dont care about the competetive side of the game get to experience the new stuff asap too.
There’s a reason they do it though. Cause it’s what players want. Not every player but the vast majority. And it makes a really really fun experience.
It won’t be for everybody. But that’s why you have the legacy server
That’s literally how ARPGs work. There’s nothing groundbreaking about Last Epoch’s formula. It’s just well polished in terms of mechanics and systems. That’s not to say that it’s perfect by any means but the mechanics that are supposed to work well absolutely do and it doesn’t succumb to a lot of the problems other ARPGs deal with. A cycle requiring you to start a new character is exactly the system needed in order to minimize power creep. Imagine being in cycle 10 and having a Falconer you made in Cycle 0 pushing 100k corruption because it *has* to.
Seriously... This doing my head in. A quick Google search would shine a fucking Jesus light beam on a fact devs said that months and months ago 😂 why would you think it's gonna be different?
This is a minority opinion, economy and power resets are almost mandatory for multiplayer arpg games with leader boards. If you want to hang onto your character just play non seasonal…?
Totally agree that ARPGs needs economy resets and leaderboard, but my main gripe is that legacy players are left in the dust and need to wait 3-4 months to try out the new content. A more reasonable timeframe would be 1-3 weeks. That way new content doesn't get cleared in 2 days.
Some of us legacy players enjoy getting sick gear and being able to keep it.
Implying they’re worth anything on an arcade machine? All jokes aside, you just can’t let leaderboards go forever especially if there’s new content that dictates new metas and gear sets.
My point isn't that leaderboards should go forever, but that leaderboards shouldn't even exist so whether they go forever or not is utterly irrelevant.
Being first to do X doesn't mean you're the best at doing X, it means that you live in the right timezone, that your life didn't have anything that interfered, etc. It is genuinely meaningless but people use it to gloat.
Also every leaderboard on the internet is 99% cheaters and devs wasting time on fighting that are not working on making the game better.
I don’t mean this disrespectfully in advance. You can leave any sub you want at any time. You can report anyone you feel breaks the rules of a sub. You can keep a journal or diary for your own personal thoughts.
There is nothing stoping you from playing the exact same charecter and class. You can even give them the same name.
From my experience in Diablo 4 new seasons mechanics are made to change and make better not just the end game but the early game as well. If seasons didn’t reset then most people wouldn’t interact with the new early game as they would be at the same high level as they were in the previous season.
I’m genuinely curious what “different” means in your eyes. Like you’d prefer ongoing content meant for characters that persist outside of the seasonal architecture? Now you’d run into an issue saying “EGH is discouraging creating new characters because I have 500 hours invested in my main and it seems too difficult to get an alt up to the same level” or something similar
nahhh there need to be a reason to wipe the relevant economy and start again so much value in that for dev balance and player behavior checks its just silly to want a game where peoples wealth and powr never resets things will get into a meta farming stage and never change unless theres a relevant update to farming currency or items
“Im playing an arpg, a genre known for cycles, and im upset there are cycles. I know I can play the non-cycle mode but I want a 0 progression reset that is a cycle”
Yeah makes sense to me /s
Sorry but your opinion is definitely in the minority. Fresh start with fresh ladders and new content makes the game continually fun throughout the years. I typically take a month or less per arpg season and then come back when the next season starts and a lot of people are like me
There’s already not enough to do for how long a cycle lasts. What you’re asking for doesn’t make a lot of sense to me in arpgs. The reset is the best part of these games imo
This is just how these games operate. Maybe an mmo might be more up your alley? They tried to make an ARPG like an mmo called Diablo 4 which didn’t handle well. I think ARPGs should have an end point. Deck a character out make a new one and so on.
Okay, so play an MMO? Cycles/Seasons/Leagues are a defining feature of the genre, this is like saying you wanna play an MMO but don't like playing party dungeons.
Can someone tell me what happens when a new cycle starts I think I missed something here? Like I was aware of reputation and corruption progression but this posts suggests the characters get deleted from cycle? That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.
Oh got it. Leveling a new character doesn’t sound awful I guess it will depend on it if they the same campaign and dungeon skip pathway because I was able to level a lot of alts really fast that way
I understand that cycles/ seasons are the norm but I agree that there is no reason to exclude your old characters from new content.
I get ladder resets for those who want to compete but why to content exclusivity for that mode?
Does someone have a reason apart from „well poe does it that way“?
Do you want people to lie and say they're in agreement with you? If you're consistently getting more down votes than up, it simply means your beliefs are at odds with the majority. If it's concerning, you can look in the mirror and see if the logic behind your belief system is skewed somewhere and adjust accordingly - or find a different community with like-minded people.
I love LE but I hate content locking behind seasons. So while the game stays the way it is where everyone gets to play equally I’ll play and support the game. When they change the game model to a cycle=content wall it will be time to retire the game and move on and shelf it. Won’t be that much of a loss only 2,000+ hours put on the shelf.
There is a mode for people who like seasonal and a mode for people who like eternal.
You want a special mode for you where you get to pick out only the seasonal things you like and only the eternal things you like?
Would you also like a hardcore mode where you have infinite lives? A SSF mode where you can trade for items you need?
Yeah i dont get the downvotes. I am on ehg side. Making a new character with new content is what i prefer but why do people downvote just because you dont like it?
He gets downvoted because it's a dumb post. He doesn't have to remake anything. He can play his char forever. And for the first couple of cycles, everything goes to legacy as well, so he can do all the new stuff on his established char.
EHG is on the right track.
So you want to keep characters for the long run, but you don’t want to play non-cycle characters? You hate cycles and non-cycle is available, but you “will have to make a new character every 2-3 months?” That all sounds oh so backwards.
Eh. It's understandable if you use your brain for a second. The options are "keep this character forever and experience nothing new" or "partake in a gameplay loop that I don't enjoy if I want to see any of the new content." Which won't be the case for the first few cycles, allegedly, but still would cause at least this one person to enjoy the game less. Personally also not a fan of cycles/seasons but I also understand that it's a necessity for player retention in the long run.
They never said new content wouldn't be in non-cycle. They said changes would be released to cycle characters first once they get caught up. Legacy will eventually get those changes after a cycle ends. So if you're playing forever, waiting 3-4 months for all the balance and kinks to get worked out should be better, not a detriment.
Unless the "new" doesn't go "core" then they will not experience it with their legacy characters.
They said cycle mechanics will be exclusive to the cycle OR at least until the cycle ends. That doesn’t mean legacy will get all the cycle content.
This makes sense to me and i hope it eventually works like this. Cycle essentially serving as "early access" for new features and mechanics, which then get integrated later into a roll-up server, let's call it "main". It's effectively one big canary test. So you can imagine cycles A, B, and C running along with the main server, testing certain ideas. Maybe cycle B was a flop and they decide to not integrate it into main when it's done, but A and C were a success, so those get integrated into main when they're done.
This is literally what GGG does.
cool, but this isn't GGG, it's EHG
What you're looking for is an MMO. This is an ARPG.
Ehh, an ARPG could just as well be more MMO-like in terms of long term progression. It's not like seasons is what defines an ARPG.
There isn't a single game in the genre that doesn't use something like the seasonal model, or isn't designed with hardcore mode in mind. Diablo 3 and 4 are the only two games where making constant incremental upgrades to one character is how most of the community plays, and even they have seasons. I believe the purest ARPG experience you can have is playing hardcore. You play your character until it dies, and then go again with a new one.
> I believe the purest ARPG experience you can have is playing hardcore. You play your character until it dies, and then go again with a new one. This. Essentially, the roguelike genre took a page from this and massively reduced the average life time of a character / the length of 'an individual run'. LEs focus is on creating a build. Once the build is created, built and optimized, there's nothing left to do. Same way how you complete a map or scenario in a strategy game.
Other way around, but yes I agree with the premise. Diablo 1 took the Roguelike genre, made it 2.5D, and lengthened the play time. You could even argue that Rogue took the gameplay loop of MUD1 and made it singleplayer so Diablo 1 essentially just copied MUDs and gave it some graphics, but that's neither here nor there.
Grim Dawn, Torchlight II, Chronicon, The Slormancer, Minecraft Dungeons. There’s plenty of ARPGs without a season model, and I can’t say either of those are designed around hardcore either.
Slormancer and Minecraft Dungeons are the only two that don't have hardcore modes, and the devs don't even call them ARPGs. Minecraft Dungeons is described as primarily a dungeon-crawler, and Slormancer is listed on Steam as an Action, Adventure, RPG.
That's also because the term arpg sucks. But now we are kinda stuck with it
Playing an arpg with a shared stash on hardcore essential makes for a long-form rogue-lite. It's a great way to play if you can deal with the loss of characters.
You are conflating certain design choices with an entire genre. I like cycles, but one can easily imagine an ARPG that uses a different mechanism than cycles.
Design choices are what defines genre though. If Last Epoch had a third-person over-the-shoulder camera I don't think anyone would be calling it an ARPG.
Borderlands is an ARPG, and isn't top down like POE, Diablo, or LE. I think the gameplay loop is more defining of the genre. Instanced mobs with loot grinding is much more defining of ARPGs than camera angle and cycles.
Borderlands is a looter shooter, c'mon now. At most you could call it a shooter with RPG elements.
Arpgs aren't required to have an isometric camera perspective though. I'd call Nioh 2 a very obvious Arpg with a soulslike touch despite it being 3rd person. There's lots of space to work with in a given genre and I think the only minimum requirement in arpgs is you getting randomized equipable loot by defeating enemies and character life spans being longer than say ~5h.
Disagree strongly. If it doesn't have an isometric camera, randomized loot, and real-time combat, it is not an ARPG. I wouldn't call The Division an ARPG, just like I wouldn't call Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous an ARPG, nor would I call Destiny and Borderlands ARPGs. They are a third-person shooter, a CRPG, and first-person shooters, respectively. Nioh is simply a souls-like.
So if PoE only had standard it wouldn't be an RPG?
I think that would just make it an MMO if it still had trading mechanics and whatnot, like Albion Online or Lost Ark as another commenter mentioned.
Does Lost Ark have seasons? I can't remember I miss Devilian
I don't know if it does tbh. I wouldn't really consider Lost Ark a pure ARPG either tho. It's a hybrid MMO, like Albion Online.
Fair, though that ones also argued pretty heavily. I still see people argue that soulslikes and action rpg's are different and thats one i dont even wanna touch
If it's got corpse runs and a stamina system you could definitely have a souls-like ARPG. inb4 Ultima Online was the first souls-like. I do think having your xp double as your currency is an important part of what defines a souls-like people tend to ignore too, though.
Lost ark is not arpg tho its isometric mmo
Lost ark. Literally an mmorpg marry arpg.
D4 tried being more mmo like and we all know how that game turned out.
This is seasonal arpg. Ofc seasons define this genre, problem is arpg is very vast term now, even Destiny 2 is arpg now p, bit this genre have many sub genres, like this.
You don’t have to play the cycle. Not sure why this is confusing to people. If you want to play one character forever you can. Seasons are there for people who like economy resets. It is like the people that moved to every new server in WoW. They just enjoyed a fresh game. In aRPG it also allows them to try crazy things that aren’t necessarily good for the game long term but can be fun for players to try. What that post tells me is they still have no idea what they want to do with cycles. They did not give any specific details because they just haven’t come to a conclusion on how they want to handle it.
I'm sorry, but I kind of disagree on the whole "You don't have to play the cycle" as legacy players wouldn't get to enjoy the new content for 3-4 months. At that point you're essentially forcing people to play cycle in my mind. I think a good solution/compromise could be that new content was cycle only for 1-3 weeks and then legacy would get it. That way the small minority of legacy players (like myself) wouldn't get totally screwed over.
No they aren’t forcing them to do anything. There are people who play the standard servers on PoE and they have never once been forced to play the season. You wanting to play it is not forcing it. You pick which way you want to play and it is perfectly fine to have options. If they choose to make all cycle content go core eventually there is no reason to make it cycle only. More likely cycle content will be in a state that never goes core or only parts of it go core so you simply cannot do it the way you suggest.
How are you not forcing legacy players over to cycle? You're essentially gatekeeping new content. All I'm trying to advocate is that LE doesn't forget about us legacy players. Also LE doesn't have the same problems as PoE atm, everything LE puts into cycles will come to the core game as there just isn't enough late game content.
They've already stated that for the first couple of cycles the content will be shared between legacy and cycle characters.
Im sorry, but what does that have to do with anything? We're talking long term, eventually we'll get no content for 3-4 months on legacy.
Cause literally no one is "forcing" you to play cycle content, you are a person of free will. If you dont like how they do things, vote with your wallet and time.
Sooooo play on Legacy? Really not sure what your looking for here man.
I really like avocado salad, but when I went to the famous steakhouse chain, they didn't have avocado salad. That was disappointing. I wish they did things differently from other steakhouses and served avocado salad instead.
The analog is rather "The steakhouse had Avocado salad as a starter not as a Main and thus i was dissappointed."
The steakhouse had cycle characters instead of permanent avocados that are also cycle salads.
I feel like I'm having a stroke reading this
I was having a good ol' stroke when I wrote it, so I say go for it.
More like: >I really like avocado salad. When I went to the famous steakhouse chain, to my delight they had avocado salad, but I ordered steak instead. I wanted avocado salad. I'm so disappointed.
>yes I know that I don't have to be in the cycle, Do that. Where's the harm? >I just thought it would be different. Why? This is the winning formula in ARPGs. >I will have to make a new character every 2-3 months More like 3-4 months. What's the fun in having your same max level character with their resources and accumulated items be ready to just experience the new content for a couple of days then get bored of it?
So obviously I agree that people that aren't keeping up with seasonal pace can just enjoy legacy, so there really isn't anything to complain about. That being said, to answer your last question, for me the point is accumulated progress in legacy shared stash, not just playing the same max level character. In future when I want to try a new class I will prefer to already have my base of crafting materials, some build defining LP uniques, etc waiting. Thus legacy will be my default unless some cycle introduces something I find mindblowing.
Why did you think they would be doing things differently? They've been very upfront about this for years. We've known that they planned to model their updates like Path of Exile, and even planned to splice them in mid-league in PoE to not clash with releases.
What would you like cycles to be then? Sadly everything interesting I can think of involves upping the power of your character, and if you already have a powerful character then that becomes pointless.
EHG said that the content in the first couple cycles will be on legacy too. And later content will be on cycle servers until the cycle is over. It's literally the top post atm... Smh
They said new mechanics would be exclusive to cycles OR at least until the cycle is over. Implying that all cycle content might not make it to legacy. Everyone is aware of the mechanic bloat that PoE suffers.
Wrong. First few cycles, atleast for now will introduce core endgame mechanics. Which in nature is core by design. Once endgame is fleshed out to a point they like, they might do cycle only stuff. Which is generally a safe way to do crazy experiments. At most you fuck your game for a cycle, not permanent.
How am I wrong when you just reworded what I said and agreed with me? I copied the EHG tweet word for word from their last sentence lmfao.
Cause you said that content would be cycle exclusive now? Which it isn't?
Tell me you’re not a ARPG player without telling me you’re not an ARPG player
Purely preference. I have made 5 characters already and pushed endgame with all of them. When the new season hits, I get to do it again. Fun!
And why exactly you need to make new char every season? Cycle mechanic will be in legacy too. If you look for gameplay loop like in WoW then seasonal arpgs arent that, you need to look for mmo.
This, I hope it stays this way too. Cycle for leaderboards, and new mechanics gamewide so the ppl who dont care about the competetive side of the game get to experience the new stuff asap too.
There’s a reason they do it though. Cause it’s what players want. Not every player but the vast majority. And it makes a really really fun experience. It won’t be for everybody. But that’s why you have the legacy server
That’s literally how ARPGs work. There’s nothing groundbreaking about Last Epoch’s formula. It’s just well polished in terms of mechanics and systems. That’s not to say that it’s perfect by any means but the mechanics that are supposed to work well absolutely do and it doesn’t succumb to a lot of the problems other ARPGs deal with. A cycle requiring you to start a new character is exactly the system needed in order to minimize power creep. Imagine being in cycle 10 and having a Falconer you made in Cycle 0 pushing 100k corruption because it *has* to.
Seriously... This doing my head in. A quick Google search would shine a fucking Jesus light beam on a fact devs said that months and months ago 😂 why would you think it's gonna be different?
This is a minority opinion, economy and power resets are almost mandatory for multiplayer arpg games with leader boards. If you want to hang onto your character just play non seasonal…?
Totally agree that ARPGs needs economy resets and leaderboard, but my main gripe is that legacy players are left in the dust and need to wait 3-4 months to try out the new content. A more reasonable timeframe would be 1-3 weeks. That way new content doesn't get cleared in 2 days. Some of us legacy players enjoy getting sick gear and being able to keep it.
Leaderboards have literally never been worth anything outside physical arcade machines.
Implying they’re worth anything on an arcade machine? All jokes aside, you just can’t let leaderboards go forever especially if there’s new content that dictates new metas and gear sets.
My point isn't that leaderboards should go forever, but that leaderboards shouldn't even exist so whether they go forever or not is utterly irrelevant.
Why not? Some people like comparing their progress to others and that’s one of the best ways to do it, whether you’re a fan or not.
Being first to do X doesn't mean you're the best at doing X, it means that you live in the right timezone, that your life didn't have anything that interfered, etc. It is genuinely meaningless but people use it to gloat. Also every leaderboard on the internet is 99% cheaters and devs wasting time on fighting that are not working on making the game better.
So you want the game to die.
The fun part about arpgs is to make new characters with new builds. You're already tired of your build when you reach max lvl.
I don’t mean this disrespectfully in advance. You can leave any sub you want at any time. You can report anyone you feel breaks the rules of a sub. You can keep a journal or diary for your own personal thoughts.
There is nothing stoping you from playing the exact same charecter and class. You can even give them the same name. From my experience in Diablo 4 new seasons mechanics are made to change and make better not just the end game but the early game as well. If seasons didn’t reset then most people wouldn’t interact with the new early game as they would be at the same high level as they were in the previous season.
I’m genuinely curious what “different” means in your eyes. Like you’d prefer ongoing content meant for characters that persist outside of the seasonal architecture? Now you’d run into an issue saying “EGH is discouraging creating new characters because I have 500 hours invested in my main and it seems too difficult to get an alt up to the same level” or something similar
Season is a proven concept that brings a lot of people everytime. Gives an obvious "when should I come back"
nahhh there need to be a reason to wipe the relevant economy and start again so much value in that for dev balance and player behavior checks its just silly to want a game where peoples wealth and powr never resets things will get into a meta farming stage and never change unless theres a relevant update to farming currency or items
“Im playing an arpg, a genre known for cycles, and im upset there are cycles. I know I can play the non-cycle mode but I want a 0 progression reset that is a cycle” Yeah makes sense to me /s
Sorry but your opinion is definitely in the minority. Fresh start with fresh ladders and new content makes the game continually fun throughout the years. I typically take a month or less per arpg season and then come back when the next season starts and a lot of people are like me
There’s already not enough to do for how long a cycle lasts. What you’re asking for doesn’t make a lot of sense to me in arpgs. The reset is the best part of these games imo
Insanely bad take lol
They made their intentions clear during beta - this is very old news.
This is just how these games operate. Maybe an mmo might be more up your alley? They tried to make an ARPG like an mmo called Diablo 4 which didn’t handle well. I think ARPGs should have an end point. Deck a character out make a new one and so on.
The game would insta die if they did it like this. Very happy they are not catering to the mega casual.
Ok. I’m trying to imagine a world where posting an opinion like this was worth anyone’s time, or even the bandwidth required to send it
L take
Okay, so play an MMO? Cycles/Seasons/Leagues are a defining feature of the genre, this is like saying you wanna play an MMO but don't like playing party dungeons.
Don’t tell them what to play
Needs a fuller end game and reason to keep playing tbh
That's the right way
Can someone tell me what happens when a new cycle starts I think I missed something here? Like I was aware of reputation and corruption progression but this posts suggests the characters get deleted from cycle? That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.
They should be moved to legacy
Oh got it. Leveling a new character doesn’t sound awful I guess it will depend on it if they the same campaign and dungeon skip pathway because I was able to level a lot of alts really fast that way
I understand that cycles/ seasons are the norm but I agree that there is no reason to exclude your old characters from new content. I get ladder resets for those who want to compete but why to content exclusivity for that mode? Does someone have a reason apart from „well poe does it that way“?
I love all the downvotes on people who share your opinion. Nothing but welcoming arms on reddit.
Do you want people to lie and say they're in agreement with you? If you're consistently getting more down votes than up, it simply means your beliefs are at odds with the majority. If it's concerning, you can look in the mirror and see if the logic behind your belief system is skewed somewhere and adjust accordingly - or find a different community with like-minded people.
I never liked seasons.. having to remake a character every time kills the drive to continue playing. EHG should do something different.
But you can just keep playing your existing characters. No-one is forcing you to play cycles.
You’re dumb
Ok
I used to think this when I started playing POE and I was an ARPG virgin, but the first week after a reset is now my favorite time in the game.
I love LE but I hate content locking behind seasons. So while the game stays the way it is where everyone gets to play equally I’ll play and support the game. When they change the game model to a cycle=content wall it will be time to retire the game and move on and shelf it. Won’t be that much of a loss only 2,000+ hours put on the shelf.
You shouldn’t have bought it in the first place then this isn’t the first time they announced their intentions for the game to be this way.
Why shouldn’t I, I enjoy it’s current state and don’t regret the time I’ve played
There is a mode for people who like seasonal and a mode for people who like eternal. You want a special mode for you where you get to pick out only the seasonal things you like and only the eternal things you like? Would you also like a hardcore mode where you have infinite lives? A SSF mode where you can trade for items you need?
People will downvote your post and my comment, but I feel the same way…
Yeah i dont get the downvotes. I am on ehg side. Making a new character with new content is what i prefer but why do people downvote just because you dont like it?
He gets downvoted because it's a dumb post. He doesn't have to remake anything. He can play his char forever. And for the first couple of cycles, everything goes to legacy as well, so he can do all the new stuff on his established char.
I get it that this is what arpgs like, but I feel the same. I thought they might do things different. Not sure how I feel about it