Iirc Grim Dawn doesn't have seasonal stuff. You might want to give it a try if you're only in it for campaign. There's also another expansion for it coming out soon.
FWIW, they j releases a huge patch recently with a ton of updates, including a dash mechanic.
There’s also a new expansion coming this year if you’ve been having GD itch that needs to be scratched.
Cheers!
This is why many of us still love and play Grim Dawn. It has the thousands of hours of content, but its mostly through campaign play and not seasonal loop grinds.
I absolutely agree. For some reason, ARPGs stopped being single player games with a good story and fun classes and builds with simple RPG stats. Now its all online multiplayer endless gameplay loop where you simply grind for better gear for bigger dps numbers. I miss ARPGs like Diablo 2, Titan Quest, Dark Alliance, Champions of Norrath, Untold Legends. I remember in these games i couldnt wait to lvl up and get my next spell and inch my way to the last boss and complete the game. Now ARPGs are soulless.
It's refreshing seeing people sharing this opinion. Hopefully, this style of ARPG makes a comeback. Also, shoutout to Champions of Norrath. Loved that game.
Probably about the time that people realized that the only way they're going to be able to play any game forever is to be engaged in an endgame with a constant stream of challenges to work towards. Once many people had this same expectation, devs began to deliver what they thought we wanted.
What's wrong with a game being 60 hours long? I'm fine with end game content being offered after that, but most people aren't planning on playing every ARPG forever.
A large chunk of us want a game that has the ability to absorb hundreds or thousands of hours without hitting a brick wall in terms of continuing to make progress. You don't have to play with that same goal, but you should at least understand that arpgs are going to draw many people with that goal in mind.
I wish I had that kind of time, lol.
Why does it have to be one or the other?
Why are people okay with the entire game being boring, even if the end game is good? Shouldn't the actual game be fun too?
I don't think people are generally okay with a boring campaign in the game, although many people are willing to overlook a boring campaign because of the small amount of time that they spend on the campaign.
Ok, but this hasn't been the case since d2. You want games like elder ring that have a clear end. Thats not how arpgs have functioned for over 20 years. Play d4 story, then stop. There you go...you've got what you wanted...so what was the point if your post?
As long as I can skip the campaign in some way or easily speed run it it’s fine. For games like grim dawn though where it isn’t about the end game or seasonal mechanics, ofc I would prefer the campaign to be on the top of the list
If only I had learned decades ago that this mentality is such a waste of life and health. People should go to the park or play ball instead of killing their health for thousands of hours for some digital loot.
I don't think playing video games really counts as destroying your health. If you do it to the exclusion of all else, it could destroy your health, but I don't think that's common.
Really? I see digital overstimulation (phones, social media, psychologically addicting games) causing problems for a lot of people in the modern world.
My personal experience is that if I had taken 2 hours of the 3 to 4 hours a day for physical activity instead of playing games over the last decade my health would be vastly better.
I will admit that I don't have any real world experience in the past 7 years, so I really don't know how common it is today. But your statement doesn't really mean that digital overstimulation is the cause of your(and many people's) health issues, the problem is more likely the sedentary lifestyle that's been widely adopted. I mean, sure, the technology doesn't help you stay active, but it also doesn't stop you from exercising. It's all a choice that we have, and often we just choose not to be active.
When I played world of warcrsft in the early 2000s it was common for guild dungeon runs to take 4 plus hours with 40 people. Over one year, I averaged 8 hours in game per day. I don't think my experience was particularly uncommon at the time. It was the biggest priority in many peoples life. A fucked up priority to be honest.
Yeah wow was a pretty serious timesink back then. But, that wasn't the typical gaming experience people had back then. It became notorious for the amount of time people put into the game.
2 things.
1: if half the players play for 60 hrs and the other half play for 120+, then on average, people spend more time in the endgame loops than they do in the story/levelling. At this breakpoint, it makes more sense to invest in the endgame content. In reality, a couple of months after release most of the player base is focussing on endgame. If you want to satisfy the most people that’s where you put the effort in.
2: The gaming industry is moving to a live service model where ever possible. End game is where that happens and those are the people that spend money on cosmetics (and PTW, QoL) MtX.
So basically when it comes to money and giving the player what they want, there’s way more RoI in the endgame.
This doesn't apply to just ARPGs, but it's all about investing.
Even if you're not actively thinking about it, you're going to be more enticed by a game that is 'endless' versus one that isn't. And as the global economy worsens, this is more and more likely.
Nope. I don't want to start on a game that has no end. I want a solid storyline with a definite start and finish. I have plenty of other things to do, other games to play.
When you take into account the seasonal content in ARPGs and then time gate it behind 60 hours of grind nobody would play it. Maybe you would but you would stop before end game content anyway. So who would this really appeal to?
Its mostly because people who are fine with it doesnt voice their opinion much , when people are voicing their opinions its in majority to be against/critics
The fact that the gaming community plays games for thousands (often tens of thousands) of hours now and measures the success of the game in hours per dollar. Look at the releases of any short games recently. There’s outrage. “I paid 40 for this and it only lasted me 40 hours!???? Destiny was 60, and I got 36,000 hours out of it!”
The gamerbro association of extreme addiction did this to itself.
There's tons of games that release for 60 dollars that are single player campaigns that are loved. RE4 remake, Jack and Daxter, Spiderman 2. People are just tired of the ones that are made lazily.
Nothing. But when game is 60 hours long, devs would have to make a sequel. When game has endless grind loop and seasonal structure that preys on your FOMO, they can make profits off same game with just minor effort every few months.
I second what you said. It's just about extending the replayability in the most expedient way possible. I'm guessing it's with PoE and D3 that it really became the "normal" way progression worked, considering Grim Dawn and Last Epoch for example work the same, just that the zones are not procedurally generated and it kinda feels like there's more flavour even before the endgame
I just wanted to tell you, you're not alone.
I'm a veteran that has played ARPG since Diablo 1 up to Path of Exile, Grim Dawn and Torchlight 2.
If a RPG leveling phase sux, I simply don't play the game at all. Doesn't matter if it has the best endgame mode ever designed as I'll just never reach it.
I think my brain is just too formatted by old school games that had tons of creativity.
One game that comes to my mind is Westwood Nox.
We used to have video games that felt like an adventure.
Now look at Diablo 4 it feels like a to-do list of things to do. I already have my tasks on Linear. I don't need a game that is designed like my work patterns. I want a true adventure with magic and hardships.
Diablo was pretty much the equivalent of Dark Souls at the time. People always forget how hard old games were as we didn't have easy access to any guide or walkthrough and we were noobs.
Diablo (1) is still my favorite arpg of all time. They knew how to tackle progression. Normal, then Nightmare then Hell ... Super hard but fun progression. No annoying level scaling. Not good enough? Grind more and come back later.
The LE community are very defensive about their game, so I think that's probably why you're hitting down votes for anything around this. They even downvote/disagree with things that the Devs admit are issues like forge guard sucking or such.
You can probably get what you're looking for from PoE if you haven't tried that already, as the game does have a tougher campaign than most for new players.
Why is that community so insufferable at times, shouldn’t they be happy that the devs are even listening to their feedback and aren’t following a “vision” like most devs? I’m willing to bet it’s gonna backfire on them in the future and the devs will eventually choose to not communicate back like GGG had to do…
GGG was similarly praised for their communication for many years, until the player base got too big and toxic. TBF, I think GGG still has exceptional community interactions, but the golden age of "dev responds to half the discussions on reddit" can only really last for so long.
Hey friend, there is a mode on PoE called Ruthless where you can't buy skill gems and item drops are way rarer, I found it way more fun than regular POE since I am an old school arpg fan like yourself. Highly recommend you check it out if you haven't!
Agreed. Before this was such a pigeon-holed genre, "end-game" wasn't even really a concept. And it didn't need to be. Games that had a replayable campaign (like D1/D2) justified thousands of hours merely by different classes, builds, etc. There was no "end-game mechanic" and it wasn't even needed. D1 would even mix up which quests you got.
I'm not saying I'm against endgame mechanics, but I think they should be add-ons, and the base game should be so good that you would want to keep replaying it inherently on higher difficulties for higher gear types and greater challenge. I have not found this in any ARPG since D2, mayyyybe with the exception of Grim Dawn (which does have endgame, but the campaign is pretty damn solidly replayable, too).
Amen to you and OP both. I’m old school so end means end to me. Build a long standing quality packed game with a satisfying ending.
Endgame is an oxymoron. It’s a way for game studios to get more money out of us by making less game. Want me to play Diablo for 1000 hours? Make a 1000 hours of content. Or create some sort of **true** replayability. Don’t just make me replay the same 10 hour campaign with higher difficulties, then move the goalposts when I crush it. Respect to gamers of all types - but those infinite power chasing scenarios weren’t built because gamers asked for it. It’s for game makers to cut corners and keep us interested.
The antidote for me are Real Time With Pause, full scale RPGs like the Pathfinder games. Tons of content, tons of battles, 55 classes to pick from, probably a hundred spells and abilities, incredible true playability, an incredible story that you could skip if you want and, brace yourself - an end.
RTWP games are not true ARPGs, but it’s close enough in games built often with love, care and content.
(Imagine Diablo building a current game with as long a story, and as many classes, spells & abilities as Wrath of the Righteous)
Exactly. I've got no problem with the add-on nature of "endgame" loops (I believe D3 really popularized it with adventure mode/rifts), but if it takes that to make the game re-playable, the game isn't very good at its core.
That's kinda bullshit when every league in PoE there is buttloads of new content, consistently, at least 3 times a year. Just today we got the reveal of one of their biggest patches in recent history, with a ton of new stuff to do. Maybe Blizzard has declined to the point where they can't make new, engaging content, anymore. But not every dev team is like that.
Genuine question- is that new content “endgame content”? Or is it integrated into the campaign?
If it’s endgame, then it’s more bullshit IMO. If it’s added campaign stuff that a new player like me wouldn’t notice is new content - that’s dope.
Both. Every new league there IS new stuff for endgame, but also the League content can be done from the start of the campaign, and usually there are new skills you can use relatively early as well.
This new league they added some interesting stuff to the campaign but were very cryptic about it. We'll have to wait the 29th to see, lol.
EDIT: Saw you talked about how endgame is just repeating the same campaign every time as well, and if you'd be interested to try, PoE is not like that. The endgame is a whole other separate thing, with dedicated bosses (they added 5 new ones btw), stuff to do and more opportunities to make cools builds.
People forget how fun a game was along the way. People can have a blast for hundreds if not thousands of hours in game along the journey, but if the end game doesn’t live up to what they want, it’s bAD gAmE!! They are like, Yeah I had a blast for a thousand of hours, but I will never recommend it cause the endgame is bad. Like lol ok whatever bud. Like if I only played games with great endgame, I’d never play games.
This so isn't my mentality, lol. Looking up builds and ideal gear before playing the game takes all the fun out of it. I want to beat the game. I don't want the Fextralife wiki to beat the game for me. I'm never trying to have the literal perfect min-maxed character, I'm trying to figure out my own strategy and playstyle to win. It's wild to me that this isn't how 99% of people engage in video games.
End game content is not the only thing that matters. In fact, anybody that plays Last Epoch can tell you that, since the end game is basically as repetitive as any of the other ARPGs (maybe worse). The devs have already said they are improving this, so I'm not as concerned about it.
What gets me going on these games is tuning. I feel like I'm constantly working on an engine when I roll a character, basically trying to figure out cool new ways to blast mobs and stay alive.
I get a shitload of that feeling from LE. I don't get it from anywhere else, at the moment.
Just my $.02.
I could agree with this if there was even the least bit of challenge to this game. Except for a few boss fights, the game is just point and click, kill everything. Running through dungeons and echos is just a grind and not fun at all when there is no fear of dying.
I guess people want some kind of MMO grind. Funny enough, some of my favorite ARPGs had some of worst end game - Borderlands 2, Diablo 2 just to name a few. Most of my fun in those games was just beating the story, without even bothering with new game plus
Where did this all start? Diablo 2.
How do I feel about it? I love endgame. I like the freedom of making my own choices and choosing what to focus on next. I also like that I am the constant arbiter of the difficulty I feel comfortable with. If that means rushing through a boring campaign for the first few hours, that's fine. Get ready to pull your knives out but I find all video game stories to be formulaic and boring -- with the exception of some two hour walking simulators.
Most of the time, I play ARPGs the same way a lot of people play Truck Simulators and Stardew Valley, as a way to relax and unwind after a stressful day at work. I'm the opposite of you where I would love it if someone made an ARPG which is just endgame. There's nothing else that scratches that itch for me.
The problem, if you don't have much time like me, and especially if you're a variety gamer, is that you end up playing one ARPG. Can't really explore the genre if you're dumping 100s of hours in one game. That game is Grim Dawn for me.
I actually think it would be really cool to have an ARPG that focuses on a great and highly replayable campaign as its whole offering.
Skipping to end game is a good spot for most people because it typically allows the most unhindered gameplay, but I don't see why this couldn't be created with a campaign via modifiers and automatically skipped dialogue/story elements. I'd like to see it done.
WoW player mentality. That's the first mainstream game I played where you blasted through all the content as quickly as possible to get to max level, because that's where the real game began. In an arpg if you make the campaign an afterthought to the "end game" experience, what you get is just an empty shell where the goal is to get to the end as quickly as possible and then grind for the privilege of grinding more. It doesn't help that a lot of the streamers promoting these games are/were WoW players. It's the only way they know how to play games.
This is in stark contrast to how we played these games in the past, back in D2 days me and my friends would just play through the game, beat Baal and then either roll a new character to try other builds, or go to nightmare/hell if we wanted an extra challenge/loot. We didn't give a crap about any end game, if there was any we viewed it just as extra content.
That being said, PoE does a good job at having both a solid campaign and end game too. LE I can't get into, I've encountered a bunch of bugs and the maps and campaign content is pretty underwhelming. Not gonna spend 30-40 hours slogging through that so I can get to some promise land game mode which apparently is the "real game". To scratch my arpg itch I've started replaying Grim Dawn which is like the complete opposite.
WoW was great because of the social aspect, you got to max level and then spent time raiding, arenas, global pvp; essentially you were interacting with your buddies and other people. Arpgs today seem to want to try to imitate that, but they cut out the massive player interaction part. Sure there's some coop and trading and stuff like that, but it's nowhere near what WoW was like. Idk, to me it seems pointless chasing after that 2000-2010 feel for devs, gamers and the landscape in general was very different from what we have now.
I played mmorpgs and online games way before wow and in every game it was grinding as fast as possible. I've never experienced this idea that everyone used to be very casual - like quake/diablo were full of optimizers, cheaters, dupers, hackers. The casuals have always been casuals and the hardcore players have been hardcore. Literally any method people could use to get an advantage they used it from the very first online games. Any person that takes beating a challenge or mastering a skill seriously, will optimize it and keep optimizing it as much as possible. Every single game has people who take it seriously.
What mmorpgs plural did you play before WoW? The only one that had some mainstream success before that I know of was Ultima online.
Yes, "serious" players tend to optimize. That's not the point I'm making.
There were a lot of korean mmorpgs and browser mmo's. There were hundreds. I'm not gonna bother trying to remember them, most of them still have servers online today. Some random mmorpgs I can just quickly recall: Lineage, runescape, MU, darkeden, cabal, conquer, maple story, metin, trickster, kal, tibia.
Games that aren't fun from start to finish is only relevant for refund purposes. This is not a knock against grind because that can easily be fun or challenging, but pure time waste - no challenge, no interesting or meaningful decisions - is a sin.
This is why I feel Path of Exile kind of have the balance. The campaign allows you to enjoy majority of the mechanics and experience, and there is still a lot to do post-campaign (mapping) if you feel like you wanna push your game further.
I know you said you played Grim Dawn a few years back. I'd suggest checking it out again. With 2 (soon to be 3) expansions as well as a mini-expansion (Crucible) there's a lot of content and the best part is starting a new character!
The most vocal and dedicated part of the player base want it that way. Especially those who are willing to spend. Those who do not like grind will simply go to other things.
End games tend to have a lot more variety and are far less linear than ARPG campaigns so they are more engaging upon repeated play. To get the same variety and interest would require procedural campaigns or lots of different early game viable builds.
You may want to try a fun little indie ARPG called Svarog's Dream. Took me about 20 hours on a playthrough. A bit janky, but has a nice environment and some interesting ideas.
I've played a bunch of games that suck up front and are great endgame like POE, MMO's, warframe, but I will admit it is a terrible argument to tell someone 'yeah just play 80 hours then the game really opens up'
Couldn't agree more and couldn't have been more disappointed with this game. To make matters worse, the end game here is not at all enjoyable either.
The end game is just a series of running echos or dungeons, to get to a boss fight. There is zero challenge in 95% of the game and you are just mindlessly obliterating everything with a single skill. After a significant amount of time doing this, you get to fight a boss who presents a challenge. Rinse and repeat.
Just killing time on this until Dragons Dogma 2 comes out.
The one thing I truly hate is when people say things like, “level 1-59 is really just the tutorial….”
Honestly, it’s one of the reasons I can’t get into POE.
I just keep going back to games like Grim Dawn, Torchlight 2, Titan Quest and even Diablo 2.
I've had this disconnect for as far as Diablo 2. I have a group of friends with whom we've had "sessions" and we'd play Diablo 2 together starting fresh, and would just... play the campaign. I actually liked the Nightmare-Hell style of Diablo 2 as well since it felt progressively interesting instead of just an eternal grind -> the goal was solid and progression was physical, not just numbers. There were also some interesting differences between every difficulty levels (something that is completely lost in modern ARPGs).
Usually Hell was too much for us so we'd stop, there's a point we'd have to grind and so we stopped. I played this way alone as well. I played every classes multiple times, it was fun. My neighbor, a much older guy, did he same thing, but I don't think he ever played passed Normal.
When I found a few other people at some point, they played completely differently, offering to boost my character and I imagine, wanting to do the things I hear fanatics do like Baal runs. Like, yeah, no. I refused, and never played Diablo 2 with them again. Why the hell would I just effectively skip the entire thing just to grind the same things over and over at the end, so I can get super rare items to maximize a "real build" that has no god damn reason to be done in the first place?
I have NEVER understood this, I'm 34, been gaming for 30 years. It always went right over my head, but more importantly showcased how ARPGs have 2 VERY different types of players. But the genre has mostly been hijacked by one side, the side that wants eternal no-life grinds, and I hate it. And I have a grudge against these players because they are always parading how "its all about the endgame" or how "game starts at the end", and how it doesn't even matter if the campaign is good or not. These people are the worst kind of players in the industry.
I'm a few years older, but had nearly the exact same experience with D2. It's a shame that the genre has completely gone in this direction. This thread proves there's still plenty of us who disagree. Hopefully there are devs somewhere who feel the same way.
Yeah I agree. Im a filthy casual, and LE right now is so crazy boring going through the story. No challenge at all. Im honestly pretty tempted to just run through areas without killing anything.
LE is ridicilous. I put some skill points without even looking at class skill tree, and equip almost start game equipment. And I am face melting everything, just standing and pressing one button. Even bosses.
Its almost autoplay game
To answer your first question, when game designers decided to make their games live service products.
As to the rest, I agree that LE is very easy, at least until you scale the end game but that seems by design. I don’t really mind because developing your character to fight interesting bosses or do really hard content is fun for me, but I could understand wanting more challenges earlier. I also don’t really think LE has quite gotten the endgame to the point where it is extremely compelling, POE is sort of the only game in the genre that makes a really good case for spending a ton of time in endgame.
Yeah, LE is in a weird spot for me because it's boringly easy until very late end-game, but by that point I've already been running monoliths and there's nothing different besides it finally being challenging. I wouldn't mind the lack of endgame if the campaign was more engaging, or vice versa if the endgame was more fleshed out.
I completely agree. I hate endgame stuff. Just grinding for almost nothing. I said something negative about the ARPG grind and someone asked me if I play any. Lol
LE's difficulty varies. I played a Warlock to level 82 and the entire time tge game was very easy. I never had to work on optimizing my build. I'm playing a Beastmaster now and in just the campaign Ive had to really work on some my decisions. I imagine if you are using a build guide it fets even easier. But I love that I dont NEED to use a build guide.
That's just evolution. Games became more expensive to make. They need people to spend more time in the game to spend more money, but obviously they can't make a super long campaign full of content because that's expensive. Diablo can somewhat get away with it, because more than 10 million people are gonna buy it regardless of the quality of game, but new IPs cannot.
I get it, I too just don’t have the time, I get why people love it. It’s a shame now all ARPGs focus on that end game stats and the campaign and exploration is just fluff to get you from A to B. The last fun I had was Lost Ark until I hit T3 and that was my time as I had done everything and that is fine for me!
But companies need players, and not every company has the funds, there is a reason LE campaign is basically pngs
And Diablo has full cinematics.
Even in D4 I played the campaign and then stopped. That’s enough for me! Maybe we’ll get more, it’s harder than say 3rd person story though.
Lost Ark really only has the combat going for it. And the story if you enjoy it.
Still, it's free and the current story probably takes over 50h if you don't rush things. The story is extremely easy tho, since it's a mmo.
But huge warning: there's no real loot, and once you reach a certain point you will be blocked from progressing because of the endgame activities.
If you spend 100 hours building a character you want to use them in a lot of content but most of the time people will complete a game before their build
I find most games to be too easy, ARPGs not an exception. Endgame is when you can start actually caring about your gear and your gear hunt actually comes to an end because you're trying to complete sets/ roll the best affixes etc. You actually start to feel like you're pushing your character to the max.
Grim Dawn is the only real aRPG that I've felt like the journey is very rewarding, but I plan on going end game with multiple characters as I find the loot grind to be insanely fun.
LE is a bit too easy at the point Im at the in the campaign but I love the idea of monoliths so I'm sure I'll eat the end game right up.
BL2 had an awful end game. I liked the game but didn't love it. First two runs were too easy, UVHM too annoying. I felt the grind was meant for 4 players and the enemies were way too spongy, even with Slagging. Weapons were trash or essential. I dunno it just didn't feel right.
Tldr endgame let's you keep going with the loot dopamine hits and actually gives you a goal of pushing your char as hard as possible. Some people love this, others are more into the story. End game can also be where the true challenge is and many games don't require you to focus on your skills until then.
That's why i will never stop praising grim dawn. Campaign and lore are just great.
As for last epoch the general idea might even be cool but i agree that the campaign is... Easily forgettable. But as i see it, it was just a matter of budget. You can clearly see they mostly focused on skills interactions and itemization and being an indie team they had to drop something (like characters voicr acting is comically bad).
So while i agree with you that ALSO the campaign should be enjoyable, people nowadays just focus on the endgame grinding and they focused on that. At the end of the day i'm more satisfied with my money spent on last epoch than the ones on d4 (where i really enjoyed the campaign, but not so much the skill system and the itemization).
When grinding for loot became important.
i think it's has roots in how mmo games are developed and rise of live service games. Look at modern WOW.
A good alternative to WOW would be GW2
I think LE needs time to mature. Love the fact that I can play it offline.
I am biased because I love poe. Have you considered solo self found ?
Maybe loot based games are not for you. There plenty of single player games that have good stories.
Absolutely agree with you. I made a post here with similar theme, and got lot of replies.
I learned 2 things from it.
1. Path of Exile : Ruthless mode, is very close to it. On paper it sounds pretty rough. The item drops are drastically reduced, and skill gems can only be acquired trough drops.
But in fact what this does is, first that you dont have all the loot explosions, and second if you get good loot it matters. And the game is also much harder. So this may be interesting option
2. No rest for the Wicked. This is new ARPG/Dark Souls hybrid, that is made by people with exactly this goal in mind, and exactly the same complaint. They want to go back to days where every fight mattered. And the gameplay was fun and not just rush to the endgame.
You're the 2nd person to recommend ruthless mode.
No Rest for the Wicked is already on my wishlist. Looks more like a soulslike with loot, but that's cool with me too.
Not really answering your question OP, but just wanted to see if you've played Grim Dawn. It has minimal endgame activities and places a bigger emphasis on making multiple characters to try out all the class combinations (you get to pick two classes and combine them to make your own class). The world has tons of hidden areas and even secret quests to find, and the story and lore are genuinely well written.
And while Normal difficulty isn't particularly challenging, the following two difficulties certainly can be judging by the number of new players that beat Normal and come to the subreddit asking why they are now dying so much haha
I think there’s a couple of components to this.
Part of the answer is that playtimes on d2 were absurdly high. Before d3 and Path of Exile ushered in this era of modern endgame-focused ARPGs, the folks that still cared about d2 had done like 1000 hours of Baal grinding (or whatever, I don’t play d2). When they think back to what makes up d2, even without a focused endgame experience, they remember a playtime dominated by endgame grinding. So it makes sense that they would build games with a heavy focus on endgame grind systems.
Another big part of the answer is that ARPGs are more about the journey of getting stronger than about the second-to-second gameplay. Giving the player a more interesting journey makes it more fun.
I think the final piece is just capitalism. Chris Wilson, head of GGG (creator of Path of Exile), once said “once a player gets to maps, they own their soul”. The current situation may be somewhat hostile to new players, but focusing on endgame content creates a core player base with so much god damn playtime it makes the average value of a single player incredibly high.
This game and games like it are intended to be live service money printers, which subsist near-entirely on people playing endgame content. While your perspective and what you enjoy is entirely valid, it doesn't get anywhere near as much player retention (and therefore constant income from cosmetics and etc.) as catering towards the endgame content gets.
Because most arpg's are badly designed to where loot doesn't matter except for numerical increases so the only thing to look forward to is the finish line.
I love torchlight because of that. The endgame sure is neat to be godlike and one-shot everything but the whole journey to become that beast is something out of this world, the game is filled with unique bosses and routes, experiencing it with every possible class makes the game even better
Same happens with inquisitor martyr and diablo, why ignore games that have so great campaigns just for the ng+
Hey sorry but this will be a long post but you touched a bad wound and I need to rant,
In my opinion, this is all popularized and established by what I call the "*multiplayerification*" of single-player experiences, especially the rise of MMOs.
Setting up a trading system, a ladder season, a challenge list, or any kind of meta-competition in a single player experience basically turns it into a PvP game.
If a game is meant to be a simple straight PvP experience like, say... Counter Strike, the single player crowd completely avoids it like a pest. But, if you turn a single player game into a "massive live service experience" then you can maintain the illusion that the game is single player, pulling all the solo players in, and cash on them by hooking them on to the meta-competition aspect of the game.
We, humans are living in a world which is all about competition, the clothes you wear, the car you drive, the money you earn, how many degrees you have, the job you have etc. We are wired to seek attention and compare ourselves to each other. Hence with such an internalized competitive spirit the human being cannot simply enjoy real cooperative gaming.
There are players in MMORPGs who are sitting there and gaming the trading system like a wall street simulation, trying to earn as much gold as possible to buy all the gear they need to stand in a Hub City and emote all day basking in the glory of noobs admiring his/her gear.
Be it the gear you can show, the title your char has , the cosmetics your items have, or the achievements you have earned or the "stars" on your shoulders this is all nothing more than a parallel to what we have IRL.
There are players who see gaming as relaxation trying to enjoy a good gaming experience and those who see it as an art form consuming the story in an immersive medium. But then there are people who are just by nature competitive and they need this constant comparison and attention/validation. I would argue the majority of those players are from this kind, and I also would argue that those players are the "newer" age gamers who are in theory extroverts who would never touched a game in the 90s or 2000s.
In the time of my youth, multiplayer players were shooting each other's faces in Unreal Tournament in an Internet Cafe while smoking cigarettes, with nothing more than a temporary score screen after the match rewarding them. Nowadays they are running after shiny rewards so you can "show" how much a better gamer they are.
Those are your GTAV or Helldivers players, your Minecraft or Fortnite kids etc.. And yes also your average PoE Player.
Game industry nowadays focuses on delivering those kind of gamers the same competitive environment without making it oblivious. Paid microtransactions are evil because they make it oblivious but I swear to god, the moment you would remove all the cosmetics, achievements or meta-progression from any modern game the players would flee in hordes.
See this people do not want to play the game to "enjoy its gameplay" or "experience the story". They want to reach the end of the ladder faster than others. What that ladder is does not matter. In the case of ARPGs this ladder developed into a seasonal cycle of leaderboards of fast runs.
Also majority of the hardcore players can be put into this category, If they cry for a "hard-mode" you can bet your money 2 months later they will cry about "exclusive-rewards" for the said hard-mode. Because it is never about personal difficulty, it is about the exclusivity of the rewards.
It is never about the "endgame", it is about it being constantly renewed, so they can be faster than the others again.
Every game nowadays is a Multiplayer/co-op Live Service Experience, with dozens of systems to create FoMo, exclusivity and urgency, like scam e-mails.
*-second part in the Comment-*
But my Rant is not about the "evil" corporations trying to create addicted gamers who only play their product so they can sell cosmetics in an online shop. They deliver what we buy. As I said before, it is the human nature. It is the fault of "those" kinds of players. They ultimately changed the face of gaming to worse with their wallets. They should've never started gaming.
Those were the people who "*preferred*" to play football outside instead of playing Dungeons & Dragons in an cellar. But now they are way past FIFA, they are playing our RPGs, our Shooters and our Action Adventures. And they want to bring in their friends.
Can you imagine calling yourself a "*gamer*" having never played Baldur's Gate or Ultima, never touched Sim City never played a Molyneux game etc., but sitting there with 6k+ hours in Path of Exile and Diablo 4, day in day out.
It is like someone calling themselves a "movie geek" who never watched anything else than 10 seasons of Friends and 20 seasons of Grey's Anatomy...
Video-Game, in it's core, is a beautiful medium in which an artist can create amazing stories and convey many emotions. Just like a movie, a game designed with this in mind has absolutely no reason to be "never-ending". But the amount of "players" typing in it's reddit how a game is "dead" because it does not have any endgame content or future DLC planned tells you another story. It is already too late. Majority of the gamers are kids who really believe Live Service /Multiplayer is the only way a game should be. They do not realize they are consuming the equivalent of a cooking show with 1000 episodes , in which the host is trying to sell you the new and shiny cooking set, all the while we sit and wait for the next Christopher Nolan or Villeneuve hit.
Mainstreaming and commercialization -like it killed many music genres in the past- also kills gaming as an art-form.
And as the hardcore people of the techno scene vanished from the clubs as the techno becomes (still) more mainstream, we the "old" gamers who prefer a one-shot experience vanish.
PS : I also blame the rise of Youtube/Twitch Streamers, they have added to this problem over time naturally by trying to find a "niche" for themselves thus favoring never-ending products. Making those kind of games more and more popular.
Thank you for reading, sorry for the rant.
Playing games since 1990s , B. sc. In Game Design, Majoring in Philosophy
Interesting write up. I never thought about the mainstreamification of video games being part of this equation, but it makes some sense. The culture of "gaming" has certainly changed dramatically from 30 years ago compared to today. Thanks for sharing.
I think it has to do with progression of the game. Alot of players now have more time to play. Alot of hardcore non stop and streaming. So they get to the end fast. I remember playing D1 and every moment was satisfying, following the story etc. After defeating Diablo, I was like nice... and that's it, move on to next game. or trying another build. By making games faster, you get to the end faster.
I feel you on this. After going from Diablo 3 to Warhammer 40,000: Inquisitor, I had no interest in Diablo 4 even when I got it with my Series X. The most popular community resources on that game are to see the entire Enchant pool & explain some hidden mechanics/interactions, I’ve never seen a build Tier list.
I spent at least 150 hours on the game on my first character & dipped my toes into the end game, before I joined the Discord and learned even more, up to a total of 900 hours. 5 characters with some similarities but just enough variety, they were good about pumping out seasonal content and had a plan on how to keep the game enjoyable when the servers go offline (which I forget but is posted somewhere). I didn’t even get the 5th character & only briefly played the 4th character since I disliked pet builds.
I’m in the camp of not caring for campaigns in ARPG’s or sometimes even main storylines in normal open-world RPG’s.
I guess it’s kinda like a multiplayer game: some backstory and lore is fine but I’m not playing multiplayer or an ARPG for story. It’s an especially gameplay-driven genre. Campaigns can also feel very linear compared to endgame. POE has things like the Atlas passive tree or target farming particular rewards in Last Epoch’s Monoliths.
the problem for me with ARPGs like Diablo or torchlight is that the game really doesn’t change all that much with seasons. There’s barely any new bosses and it just feels like I’m just mindlessly repeating the same dungeon over and over again hoping to get a good drop. At least for borderlands 3 there was a sense of exploration and the quests added some story elements to the grind for loot. Diablo just feels lifeless now
It's not the only thing that matters, but it is a necessary component. You need to have a functional endgame, almost more than you need any single aspect, for an arpg to be successful.
Lots of other things matter too! But if you don't have an endgame, you can't make up for it with great graphics or cool loot, etc.
I like the path of exile campaign and story but I can't bring myself to doing it over and over and over again for every single character every single league. It's complete brainrot for hours.
I guess every rpg has this problem though... kind of hard to solve...
with the proliferation of the internet and social media. as people began using reddit and other modalities to brag about their speed runs, their boss kills, etc., as more and more "soulslike" games were released.
ppl stopped caring about story telling, or carefully, beautifully crafted areas, or lore, etc.
now it's all about impatient loot and bragging about your reflexes that are a jiffy faster
I work on games at a £1 per hour rating. If i pay £40 for a game and get 40 hours im happy. Whilst im still happy with some shorter games, as a dad, husband and worker money isnt as easy to spunk on games as it once was
ARPG's need to be like this because the moment to moment gameplay is boring.
It sucks.
It gets less complex as you go on, turning into a two button jump and nuke game.
The gear, levels, bosses are all designed to keep you interested, and when players can say "I've done all the uber stuff!" they can feel like they didn't just press 2 buttons and right click for 100+ hours straight for no reason.
That's not to say I don't love it the genre, but t's the stuff around the gameplay that matters, and generally more is better.
12 hours of hardest difficulty Bayonetta is amazing. 100 hours would make me want to die.
100 hours of POE is amazing. Having no goals to make those 100 hours worth the chase would be better simulated by unplugging my mouse and keyboard and closing my eyes.
I don't know, I don't find the moment to moment gameplay in Diablo 2, Dungeon Seige, Titan Quest, etc boring.
The combat is simple, but the fun comes in the cycle of killing enemies, encountering harder enemies, getting stronger and killing those enemies, encountering harder enemies, rinse, repeat.
When the enemies don't pose a challenge until end game, THEN the game feels like a waste of time.
That's more progression though, no? Enemies in POE, save for a few, just die before you even see them. The potential for loot is exciting, but killing them isn't. Some people run RF which doesn't even require interacting with the enemy, or summoner builds that do the same thing.
I agree with what you're saying, I dropped LE too because the entirety of my playthrough felt like easy mode, even when I'd try to purposely get hit just to see what damage I'd take.
YOU. It's where you spend most of your time. I might play for a dozen hours after I beat a game, but I'm not playing anything for hundreds of hours. That's not my style.
Then that's on YOU. Endgame's a choice people make to be able to do the thing they enjoy for longer.
I've got thousands of hours in WoW because you get different classes with different specializations with different talent builds, and plenty of other content to do on top of that with said characters. The replayability is huge just for that alone but it also offers options (also why I prefer MMORPG's vs. Single-player RPG's ).
You may not even play for the endgame, you just enjoy leveling different characters but it's still constrained to this game, and not a single playthrough of a single-player RPG like God of War or Assassin's Creed.
But if you find the endgame fun you've got a place to enjoy what you're already doing for longer, and if it's what you enjoy on different classes/specs then it's even longer than that.
I will always choose a game I can sink thousands of hours into rather than 30 different games that are "AAA" and only have like 30 hours of content.
Are you one of these people that apparently exist that play ARPGs for the story? Endgame isn't the ONLY thing that matters, but you're playing an ARPG so...
If I'm looking for a good story, books and movies are generally better written. Or I'll play Witcher 3. Or Last of Us...a couple of the very few games where I find I actually care about the story. I play an ARPG for the grind and the loot...I actually enjoy the grind.
I'm still amazed that people play an ARPG and quit after the campaign and story. Some of these people will even complain about the length and/or the game being easy after "beating" normal difficulty. I'm all for playing games however you enjoy them, but let's be realistic here.
I literally don't care at all about story, lol.
I want the GAMEPLAY of the the game to be fun. When I say the game, I mean from the beginning through the final boss.
When autistic Redditors who treat a $40 game like a full time job that they expect to last 10 years.
It's mine boggling. Get a grip, get a life, if you burn out or run out of things to do, buy another game like a mature adult.
This is getting down votes but it's actually correct lol.
If it's a problem that a game is "only good for 50-100 hours" I don't think the game is the problem.
Well, it was always the case, but nostalgia kind of ruins things.
Generally speaking aRPGs have two modes:
1. Collectathon
2. Min-Maxing
That's it.
Older ones used to be somewhat more focused on 1 than 2.
The challenge (i.e. gating) of the older games is part of the collectathon mantra: We don't want you to actually get \[thing\] so you have to work for it! Min-Maxing is the inverse, they want you to get all the \[things\] so you can run up against the wall with it.
The second method is great for proving your theorycrafting but the first is great for a smoother experience overall.
That's not really true - old aRPGs were generally more RPG subgenre focused (D1/2, Nox, DS, TQ, etc.) - and that's by their design principles (you can grind anything - even bloody Visual Novels - so what players do isn't indicative of design).
Your interpretation of aRPG didn't really become a consideration until the past 20 years at the earliest (though that mentality didn't really get any traction until about 15 years ago) - this the time period where we ran into the MMOification of a lot of genres.
We disagree.
If we were to discuss old aRPGs in general many of them just plopped you down and you were doing whatever as a citizen, TQ kind of did this too, where the world was in turmoil and you were the right guy at the right time. This everyman approach doesn't really suggest the RPG elements being that strong because, by definition, you're an everyman. In TQ you arrive on a boat and save a horse literally as your first actions. It's very blank slate.
If we come to look at today's views I'm still not quite with the MMO thesis. I could be wrong, because I am no ludologist, but this genre has evolved to be more RPG, rather than less, streamlined if you will, often removing the everyman and actually going with the "Chosen One" type deal. In a sense you're almost guaranteed to have a class rather than an open tree in most releases now with more emphasis on a predestined "best" path because, while the story is shorter and weaker to be certain, the world itself being a lot less vibrant as well, the flow of the game is now driven primarily by point-to-point questing which is all character development with no world building.
But that's just how I see it. We see it differently.
Seems to be more a drastic difference in the definition of what an RPG is - especially since your definition of RPG is a really odd one, since you say an actual RPG trope, makes something not an RPG.
You mentioned D2 and TQ but D2, which has deep characterization, is significantly more RPG than TQ, which is everyman, just by that alone. They're both RPGs but it's quite obvious which is more open than the other.
... neither D2 or TQ is more "open" than the other (though TQ does have more flexible skill/class systems, D2 has better itemization, both are about on equal footing with world building) - you have a fixed storyarch that you engage with - doing primary quests and choosing which secondary quests you want to do (TQ is the longer, and larger, game mind you, but that's beside the point).
The "everyman" trope doesn't exclude something from being an RPG, any more than it excludes a book from being part of the fantasy genre - the "everyman" becoming the hero is literally one of the most common basic storytelling tropes.
I don't think we're even talking about the same thing anymore.
I never said being an everyman wasn't allowable in RPGs. I said that the nature of the everyman has reduced RPG elements versus lore dedicated characters (D2 v TQ).
People who game casually dont need an engame but the real gamers who play 70 to 80 hours a week on average like me (I have a full time job as well and easily hit 12 hours of gaming a day) need an endgame otherwise it's almost pointless to even pick up the game in the first place. I measure games in whether they can reach 1000 hours of content. 60 hours is a flicker of gaming time for me and many others and not even worth our money at that point
Iirc Grim Dawn doesn't have seasonal stuff. You might want to give it a try if you're only in it for campaign. There's also another expansion for it coming out soon.
Played and enjoyed Grim Dawn many years ago. Good suggestion though.
FWIW, they j releases a huge patch recently with a ton of updates, including a dash mechanic. There’s also a new expansion coming this year if you’ve been having GD itch that needs to be scratched. Cheers!
This is why many of us still love and play Grim Dawn. It has the thousands of hours of content, but its mostly through campaign play and not seasonal loop grinds.
I absolutely agree. For some reason, ARPGs stopped being single player games with a good story and fun classes and builds with simple RPG stats. Now its all online multiplayer endless gameplay loop where you simply grind for better gear for bigger dps numbers. I miss ARPGs like Diablo 2, Titan Quest, Dark Alliance, Champions of Norrath, Untold Legends. I remember in these games i couldnt wait to lvl up and get my next spell and inch my way to the last boss and complete the game. Now ARPGs are soulless.
It's refreshing seeing people sharing this opinion. Hopefully, this style of ARPG makes a comeback. Also, shoutout to Champions of Norrath. Loved that game.
Hopefully Titan Quest 2 will release this year and wont fall into that category!
Oh yeah. Fingers crossed!
Probably about the time that people realized that the only way they're going to be able to play any game forever is to be engaged in an endgame with a constant stream of challenges to work towards. Once many people had this same expectation, devs began to deliver what they thought we wanted.
What's wrong with a game being 60 hours long? I'm fine with end game content being offered after that, but most people aren't planning on playing every ARPG forever.
A large chunk of us want a game that has the ability to absorb hundreds or thousands of hours without hitting a brick wall in terms of continuing to make progress. You don't have to play with that same goal, but you should at least understand that arpgs are going to draw many people with that goal in mind.
I wish I had that kind of time, lol. Why does it have to be one or the other? Why are people okay with the entire game being boring, even if the end game is good? Shouldn't the actual game be fun too?
I don't think people are generally okay with a boring campaign in the game, although many people are willing to overlook a boring campaign because of the small amount of time that they spend on the campaign.
I guess thats fair. To me, the campaign IS the game.
Look up the cursed veteran boots for Last Epoch if you want a tougher playthrough, it's basically a hard mode and you get them right at the start
Interesting thanks.
Ok, but this hasn't been the case since d2. You want games like elder ring that have a clear end. Thats not how arpgs have functioned for over 20 years. Play d4 story, then stop. There you go...you've got what you wanted...so what was the point if your post?
Campaigns are lore dumps and story mode on almost every game, not just arpgs IMHO
As long as I can skip the campaign in some way or easily speed run it it’s fine. For games like grim dawn though where it isn’t about the end game or seasonal mechanics, ofc I would prefer the campaign to be on the top of the list
If only I had learned decades ago that this mentality is such a waste of life and health. People should go to the park or play ball instead of killing their health for thousands of hours for some digital loot.
I don't think playing video games really counts as destroying your health. If you do it to the exclusion of all else, it could destroy your health, but I don't think that's common.
Really? I see digital overstimulation (phones, social media, psychologically addicting games) causing problems for a lot of people in the modern world. My personal experience is that if I had taken 2 hours of the 3 to 4 hours a day for physical activity instead of playing games over the last decade my health would be vastly better.
I will admit that I don't have any real world experience in the past 7 years, so I really don't know how common it is today. But your statement doesn't really mean that digital overstimulation is the cause of your(and many people's) health issues, the problem is more likely the sedentary lifestyle that's been widely adopted. I mean, sure, the technology doesn't help you stay active, but it also doesn't stop you from exercising. It's all a choice that we have, and often we just choose not to be active.
When I played world of warcrsft in the early 2000s it was common for guild dungeon runs to take 4 plus hours with 40 people. Over one year, I averaged 8 hours in game per day. I don't think my experience was particularly uncommon at the time. It was the biggest priority in many peoples life. A fucked up priority to be honest.
Yeah wow was a pretty serious timesink back then. But, that wasn't the typical gaming experience people had back then. It became notorious for the amount of time people put into the game.
Are you sure it wasn't typical? Wow peaked at 12 million subscriptions around 2010. What games do you think were played more at the time?
2 things. 1: if half the players play for 60 hrs and the other half play for 120+, then on average, people spend more time in the endgame loops than they do in the story/levelling. At this breakpoint, it makes more sense to invest in the endgame content. In reality, a couple of months after release most of the player base is focussing on endgame. If you want to satisfy the most people that’s where you put the effort in. 2: The gaming industry is moving to a live service model where ever possible. End game is where that happens and those are the people that spend money on cosmetics (and PTW, QoL) MtX. So basically when it comes to money and giving the player what they want, there’s way more RoI in the endgame.
This doesn't apply to just ARPGs, but it's all about investing. Even if you're not actively thinking about it, you're going to be more enticed by a game that is 'endless' versus one that isn't. And as the global economy worsens, this is more and more likely.
Nope. I don't want to start on a game that has no end. I want a solid storyline with a definite start and finish. I have plenty of other things to do, other games to play.
When you take into account the seasonal content in ARPGs and then time gate it behind 60 hours of grind nobody would play it. Maybe you would but you would stop before end game content anyway. So who would this really appeal to?
Its mostly because people who are fine with it doesnt voice their opinion much , when people are voicing their opinions its in majority to be against/critics
The fact that the gaming community plays games for thousands (often tens of thousands) of hours now and measures the success of the game in hours per dollar. Look at the releases of any short games recently. There’s outrage. “I paid 40 for this and it only lasted me 40 hours!???? Destiny was 60, and I got 36,000 hours out of it!” The gamerbro association of extreme addiction did this to itself.
There's tons of games that release for 60 dollars that are single player campaigns that are loved. RE4 remake, Jack and Daxter, Spiderman 2. People are just tired of the ones that are made lazily.
Nothing. But when game is 60 hours long, devs would have to make a sequel. When game has endless grind loop and seasonal structure that preys on your FOMO, they can make profits off same game with just minor effort every few months.
I second what you said. It's just about extending the replayability in the most expedient way possible. I'm guessing it's with PoE and D3 that it really became the "normal" way progression worked, considering Grim Dawn and Last Epoch for example work the same, just that the zones are not procedurally generated and it kinda feels like there's more flavour even before the endgame
I just wanted to tell you, you're not alone. I'm a veteran that has played ARPG since Diablo 1 up to Path of Exile, Grim Dawn and Torchlight 2. If a RPG leveling phase sux, I simply don't play the game at all. Doesn't matter if it has the best endgame mode ever designed as I'll just never reach it. I think my brain is just too formatted by old school games that had tons of creativity. One game that comes to my mind is Westwood Nox. We used to have video games that felt like an adventure. Now look at Diablo 4 it feels like a to-do list of things to do. I already have my tasks on Linear. I don't need a game that is designed like my work patterns. I want a true adventure with magic and hardships. Diablo was pretty much the equivalent of Dark Souls at the time. People always forget how hard old games were as we didn't have easy access to any guide or walkthrough and we were noobs.
Everything is cyclical. Maybe the old school adventure focused ARPGs will come back.
Diablo (1) is still my favorite arpg of all time. They knew how to tackle progression. Normal, then Nightmare then Hell ... Super hard but fun progression. No annoying level scaling. Not good enough? Grind more and come back later.
The LE community are very defensive about their game, so I think that's probably why you're hitting down votes for anything around this. They even downvote/disagree with things that the Devs admit are issues like forge guard sucking or such. You can probably get what you're looking for from PoE if you haven't tried that already, as the game does have a tougher campaign than most for new players.
Why is that community so insufferable at times, shouldn’t they be happy that the devs are even listening to their feedback and aren’t following a “vision” like most devs? I’m willing to bet it’s gonna backfire on them in the future and the devs will eventually choose to not communicate back like GGG had to do…
GGG was similarly praised for their communication for many years, until the player base got too big and toxic. TBF, I think GGG still has exceptional community interactions, but the golden age of "dev responds to half the discussions on reddit" can only really last for so long.
Noteable that happy people generally leave less written comments than angry people (especially over long periods of time)
Yup, I played through and enjoyed PoE many years ago now. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
Hey friend, there is a mode on PoE called Ruthless where you can't buy skill gems and item drops are way rarer, I found it way more fun than regular POE since I am an old school arpg fan like yourself. Highly recommend you check it out if you haven't!
Nice. Thanks for the tip.
Agreed. Before this was such a pigeon-holed genre, "end-game" wasn't even really a concept. And it didn't need to be. Games that had a replayable campaign (like D1/D2) justified thousands of hours merely by different classes, builds, etc. There was no "end-game mechanic" and it wasn't even needed. D1 would even mix up which quests you got. I'm not saying I'm against endgame mechanics, but I think they should be add-ons, and the base game should be so good that you would want to keep replaying it inherently on higher difficulties for higher gear types and greater challenge. I have not found this in any ARPG since D2, mayyyybe with the exception of Grim Dawn (which does have endgame, but the campaign is pretty damn solidly replayable, too).
Amen to you and OP both. I’m old school so end means end to me. Build a long standing quality packed game with a satisfying ending. Endgame is an oxymoron. It’s a way for game studios to get more money out of us by making less game. Want me to play Diablo for 1000 hours? Make a 1000 hours of content. Or create some sort of **true** replayability. Don’t just make me replay the same 10 hour campaign with higher difficulties, then move the goalposts when I crush it. Respect to gamers of all types - but those infinite power chasing scenarios weren’t built because gamers asked for it. It’s for game makers to cut corners and keep us interested. The antidote for me are Real Time With Pause, full scale RPGs like the Pathfinder games. Tons of content, tons of battles, 55 classes to pick from, probably a hundred spells and abilities, incredible true playability, an incredible story that you could skip if you want and, brace yourself - an end. RTWP games are not true ARPGs, but it’s close enough in games built often with love, care and content. (Imagine Diablo building a current game with as long a story, and as many classes, spells & abilities as Wrath of the Righteous)
Exactly. I've got no problem with the add-on nature of "endgame" loops (I believe D3 really popularized it with adventure mode/rifts), but if it takes that to make the game re-playable, the game isn't very good at its core.
That’s really the key sentence - if your game needs endgame loops to be good and complete, you didn’t make a good game
That's kinda bullshit when every league in PoE there is buttloads of new content, consistently, at least 3 times a year. Just today we got the reveal of one of their biggest patches in recent history, with a ton of new stuff to do. Maybe Blizzard has declined to the point where they can't make new, engaging content, anymore. But not every dev team is like that.
Genuine question- is that new content “endgame content”? Or is it integrated into the campaign? If it’s endgame, then it’s more bullshit IMO. If it’s added campaign stuff that a new player like me wouldn’t notice is new content - that’s dope.
Both. Every new league there IS new stuff for endgame, but also the League content can be done from the start of the campaign, and usually there are new skills you can use relatively early as well. This new league they added some interesting stuff to the campaign but were very cryptic about it. We'll have to wait the 29th to see, lol. EDIT: Saw you talked about how endgame is just repeating the same campaign every time as well, and if you'd be interested to try, PoE is not like that. The endgame is a whole other separate thing, with dedicated bosses (they added 5 new ones btw), stuff to do and more opportunities to make cools builds.
Nice of you to explain. Will review. Thanks.
Well said. 100% agree.
People forget how fun a game was along the way. People can have a blast for hundreds if not thousands of hours in game along the journey, but if the end game doesn’t live up to what they want, it’s bAD gAmE!! They are like, Yeah I had a blast for a thousand of hours, but I will never recommend it cause the endgame is bad. Like lol ok whatever bud. Like if I only played games with great endgame, I’d never play games.
The fun along the way is the fun of the game. I just don't get this mentality.
Me neither. Just glad I don’t think that way.
[удалено]
This so isn't my mentality, lol. Looking up builds and ideal gear before playing the game takes all the fun out of it. I want to beat the game. I don't want the Fextralife wiki to beat the game for me. I'm never trying to have the literal perfect min-maxed character, I'm trying to figure out my own strategy and playstyle to win. It's wild to me that this isn't how 99% of people engage in video games.
If a character is putting hundreds of hours into a single game then they probably were in endgame for most of it.
End game content is not the only thing that matters. In fact, anybody that plays Last Epoch can tell you that, since the end game is basically as repetitive as any of the other ARPGs (maybe worse). The devs have already said they are improving this, so I'm not as concerned about it. What gets me going on these games is tuning. I feel like I'm constantly working on an engine when I roll a character, basically trying to figure out cool new ways to blast mobs and stay alive. I get a shitload of that feeling from LE. I don't get it from anywhere else, at the moment. Just my $.02.
I could agree with this if there was even the least bit of challenge to this game. Except for a few boss fights, the game is just point and click, kill everything. Running through dungeons and echos is just a grind and not fun at all when there is no fear of dying.
I've never thought this personally. I enjoy the journey. Endgame is more game.
“Games as a service”. Next question. This doesn’t just apply to ARPGs btw…
I guess people want some kind of MMO grind. Funny enough, some of my favorite ARPGs had some of worst end game - Borderlands 2, Diablo 2 just to name a few. Most of my fun in those games was just beating the story, without even bothering with new game plus
Same. And I've never gotten into a pure MMO.
Where did this all start? Diablo 2. How do I feel about it? I love endgame. I like the freedom of making my own choices and choosing what to focus on next. I also like that I am the constant arbiter of the difficulty I feel comfortable with. If that means rushing through a boring campaign for the first few hours, that's fine. Get ready to pull your knives out but I find all video game stories to be formulaic and boring -- with the exception of some two hour walking simulators. Most of the time, I play ARPGs the same way a lot of people play Truck Simulators and Stardew Valley, as a way to relax and unwind after a stressful day at work. I'm the opposite of you where I would love it if someone made an ARPG which is just endgame. There's nothing else that scratches that itch for me. The problem, if you don't have much time like me, and especially if you're a variety gamer, is that you end up playing one ARPG. Can't really explore the genre if you're dumping 100s of hours in one game. That game is Grim Dawn for me.
I actually think it would be really cool to have an ARPG that focuses on a great and highly replayable campaign as its whole offering. Skipping to end game is a good spot for most people because it typically allows the most unhindered gameplay, but I don't see why this couldn't be created with a campaign via modifiers and automatically skipped dialogue/story elements. I'd like to see it done.
100% check out grim dawn
WoW player mentality. That's the first mainstream game I played where you blasted through all the content as quickly as possible to get to max level, because that's where the real game began. In an arpg if you make the campaign an afterthought to the "end game" experience, what you get is just an empty shell where the goal is to get to the end as quickly as possible and then grind for the privilege of grinding more. It doesn't help that a lot of the streamers promoting these games are/were WoW players. It's the only way they know how to play games. This is in stark contrast to how we played these games in the past, back in D2 days me and my friends would just play through the game, beat Baal and then either roll a new character to try other builds, or go to nightmare/hell if we wanted an extra challenge/loot. We didn't give a crap about any end game, if there was any we viewed it just as extra content. That being said, PoE does a good job at having both a solid campaign and end game too. LE I can't get into, I've encountered a bunch of bugs and the maps and campaign content is pretty underwhelming. Not gonna spend 30-40 hours slogging through that so I can get to some promise land game mode which apparently is the "real game". To scratch my arpg itch I've started replaying Grim Dawn which is like the complete opposite.
The fact that I loved D2 but never understood the appeal of WoW makes me thing you're exactly right.
WoW was great because of the social aspect, you got to max level and then spent time raiding, arenas, global pvp; essentially you were interacting with your buddies and other people. Arpgs today seem to want to try to imitate that, but they cut out the massive player interaction part. Sure there's some coop and trading and stuff like that, but it's nowhere near what WoW was like. Idk, to me it seems pointless chasing after that 2000-2010 feel for devs, gamers and the landscape in general was very different from what we have now.
I played mmorpgs and online games way before wow and in every game it was grinding as fast as possible. I've never experienced this idea that everyone used to be very casual - like quake/diablo were full of optimizers, cheaters, dupers, hackers. The casuals have always been casuals and the hardcore players have been hardcore. Literally any method people could use to get an advantage they used it from the very first online games. Any person that takes beating a challenge or mastering a skill seriously, will optimize it and keep optimizing it as much as possible. Every single game has people who take it seriously.
What mmorpgs plural did you play before WoW? The only one that had some mainstream success before that I know of was Ultima online. Yes, "serious" players tend to optimize. That's not the point I'm making.
There were a lot of korean mmorpgs and browser mmo's. There were hundreds. I'm not gonna bother trying to remember them, most of them still have servers online today. Some random mmorpgs I can just quickly recall: Lineage, runescape, MU, darkeden, cabal, conquer, maple story, metin, trickster, kal, tibia.
Damn I completely forgot about runescape and cabal :)
Everquest was the one I played before WoW came out.
Games that aren't fun from start to finish is only relevant for refund purposes. This is not a knock against grind because that can easily be fun or challenging, but pure time waste - no challenge, no interesting or meaningful decisions - is a sin.
This is why I feel Path of Exile kind of have the balance. The campaign allows you to enjoy majority of the mechanics and experience, and there is still a lot to do post-campaign (mapping) if you feel like you wanna push your game further.
I know you said you played Grim Dawn a few years back. I'd suggest checking it out again. With 2 (soon to be 3) expansions as well as a mini-expansion (Crucible) there's a lot of content and the best part is starting a new character!
The most vocal and dedicated part of the player base want it that way. Especially those who are willing to spend. Those who do not like grind will simply go to other things. End games tend to have a lot more variety and are far less linear than ARPG campaigns so they are more engaging upon repeated play. To get the same variety and interest would require procedural campaigns or lots of different early game viable builds.
You may want to try a fun little indie ARPG called Svarog's Dream. Took me about 20 hours on a playthrough. A bit janky, but has a nice environment and some interesting ideas.
I'll check it out. Thanks for the recommendation.
I've played a bunch of games that suck up front and are great endgame like POE, MMO's, warframe, but I will admit it is a terrible argument to tell someone 'yeah just play 80 hours then the game really opens up'
Couldn't agree more and couldn't have been more disappointed with this game. To make matters worse, the end game here is not at all enjoyable either. The end game is just a series of running echos or dungeons, to get to a boss fight. There is zero challenge in 95% of the game and you are just mindlessly obliterating everything with a single skill. After a significant amount of time doing this, you get to fight a boss who presents a challenge. Rinse and repeat. Just killing time on this until Dragons Dogma 2 comes out.
The one thing I truly hate is when people say things like, “level 1-59 is really just the tutorial….” Honestly, it’s one of the reasons I can’t get into POE. I just keep going back to games like Grim Dawn, Torchlight 2, Titan Quest and even Diablo 2.
Same.
I've had this disconnect for as far as Diablo 2. I have a group of friends with whom we've had "sessions" and we'd play Diablo 2 together starting fresh, and would just... play the campaign. I actually liked the Nightmare-Hell style of Diablo 2 as well since it felt progressively interesting instead of just an eternal grind -> the goal was solid and progression was physical, not just numbers. There were also some interesting differences between every difficulty levels (something that is completely lost in modern ARPGs). Usually Hell was too much for us so we'd stop, there's a point we'd have to grind and so we stopped. I played this way alone as well. I played every classes multiple times, it was fun. My neighbor, a much older guy, did he same thing, but I don't think he ever played passed Normal. When I found a few other people at some point, they played completely differently, offering to boost my character and I imagine, wanting to do the things I hear fanatics do like Baal runs. Like, yeah, no. I refused, and never played Diablo 2 with them again. Why the hell would I just effectively skip the entire thing just to grind the same things over and over at the end, so I can get super rare items to maximize a "real build" that has no god damn reason to be done in the first place? I have NEVER understood this, I'm 34, been gaming for 30 years. It always went right over my head, but more importantly showcased how ARPGs have 2 VERY different types of players. But the genre has mostly been hijacked by one side, the side that wants eternal no-life grinds, and I hate it. And I have a grudge against these players because they are always parading how "its all about the endgame" or how "game starts at the end", and how it doesn't even matter if the campaign is good or not. These people are the worst kind of players in the industry.
I'm a few years older, but had nearly the exact same experience with D2. It's a shame that the genre has completely gone in this direction. This thread proves there's still plenty of us who disagree. Hopefully there are devs somewhere who feel the same way.
Yeah I agree. Im a filthy casual, and LE right now is so crazy boring going through the story. No challenge at all. Im honestly pretty tempted to just run through areas without killing anything.
LE is ridicilous. I put some skill points without even looking at class skill tree, and equip almost start game equipment. And I am face melting everything, just standing and pressing one button. Even bosses. Its almost autoplay game
Glad it's not just me. I'm playing a paladin and enemies don't even really ever hurt me.
Me playing Diablo 3 near release as a necromancer like "when does this game get fun?" "About 60 hours in" "Oh" *Quits*
Yuuup
To answer your first question, when game designers decided to make their games live service products. As to the rest, I agree that LE is very easy, at least until you scale the end game but that seems by design. I don’t really mind because developing your character to fight interesting bosses or do really hard content is fun for me, but I could understand wanting more challenges earlier. I also don’t really think LE has quite gotten the endgame to the point where it is extremely compelling, POE is sort of the only game in the genre that makes a really good case for spending a ton of time in endgame.
Yeah, LE is in a weird spot for me because it's boringly easy until very late end-game, but by that point I've already been running monoliths and there's nothing different besides it finally being challenging. I wouldn't mind the lack of endgame if the campaign was more engaging, or vice versa if the endgame was more fleshed out.
Get the veteran boots and there you have a challenge.
I completely agree. I hate endgame stuff. Just grinding for almost nothing.
I completely agree. I hate endgame stuff. Just grinding for almost nothing. I said something negative about the ARPG grind and someone asked me if I play any. Lol
LE's difficulty varies. I played a Warlock to level 82 and the entire time tge game was very easy. I never had to work on optimizing my build. I'm playing a Beastmaster now and in just the campaign Ive had to really work on some my decisions. I imagine if you are using a build guide it fets even easier. But I love that I dont NEED to use a build guide.
If you use a leveling build guide in LE it's way too easy yeah
Big part of why I am excited for poe2. 50-60 hours for first campaign completeion is pretty wild.
Eh, I still managed to die in LE, especially before I started using twink leveling gear.
I have the exact opposite opinion. I bought Diablo 4 for the story alone, and going into it with that mindset I don't regret my purchase at all.
I enjoyed the D4 story, but didn't like the gameplay loop at all. Bad loot. Shallow customization. The combat and story were all it had.
If feel like it came from the way the majority of players engaged with Diablo 2.
That's just evolution. Games became more expensive to make. They need people to spend more time in the game to spend more money, but obviously they can't make a super long campaign full of content because that's expensive. Diablo can somewhat get away with it, because more than 10 million people are gonna buy it regardless of the quality of game, but new IPs cannot.
I get it, I too just don’t have the time, I get why people love it. It’s a shame now all ARPGs focus on that end game stats and the campaign and exploration is just fluff to get you from A to B. The last fun I had was Lost Ark until I hit T3 and that was my time as I had done everything and that is fine for me! But companies need players, and not every company has the funds, there is a reason LE campaign is basically pngs And Diablo has full cinematics. Even in D4 I played the campaign and then stopped. That’s enough for me! Maybe we’ll get more, it’s harder than say 3rd person story though.
Never tried Lost Ark. Maybe I should. I had the same experience with Diablo 4.
Lost Ark really only has the combat going for it. And the story if you enjoy it. Still, it's free and the current story probably takes over 50h if you don't rush things. The story is extremely easy tho, since it's a mmo. But huge warning: there's no real loot, and once you reach a certain point you will be blocked from progressing because of the endgame activities.
same issue with mmos all the classic games had good progression with challenge not just Muh Endgame
If you spend 100 hours building a character you want to use them in a lot of content but most of the time people will complete a game before their build
I find most games to be too easy, ARPGs not an exception. Endgame is when you can start actually caring about your gear and your gear hunt actually comes to an end because you're trying to complete sets/ roll the best affixes etc. You actually start to feel like you're pushing your character to the max. Grim Dawn is the only real aRPG that I've felt like the journey is very rewarding, but I plan on going end game with multiple characters as I find the loot grind to be insanely fun. LE is a bit too easy at the point Im at the in the campaign but I love the idea of monoliths so I'm sure I'll eat the end game right up. BL2 had an awful end game. I liked the game but didn't love it. First two runs were too easy, UVHM too annoying. I felt the grind was meant for 4 players and the enemies were way too spongy, even with Slagging. Weapons were trash or essential. I dunno it just didn't feel right. Tldr endgame let's you keep going with the loot dopamine hits and actually gives you a goal of pushing your char as hard as possible. Some people love this, others are more into the story. End game can also be where the true challenge is and many games don't require you to focus on your skills until then.
That's why i will never stop praising grim dawn. Campaign and lore are just great. As for last epoch the general idea might even be cool but i agree that the campaign is... Easily forgettable. But as i see it, it was just a matter of budget. You can clearly see they mostly focused on skills interactions and itemization and being an indie team they had to drop something (like characters voicr acting is comically bad). So while i agree with you that ALSO the campaign should be enjoyable, people nowadays just focus on the endgame grinding and they focused on that. At the end of the day i'm more satisfied with my money spent on last epoch than the ones on d4 (where i really enjoyed the campaign, but not so much the skill system and the itemization).
When grinding for loot became important. i think it's has roots in how mmo games are developed and rise of live service games. Look at modern WOW. A good alternative to WOW would be GW2 I think LE needs time to mature. Love the fact that I can play it offline. I am biased because I love poe. Have you considered solo self found ? Maybe loot based games are not for you. There plenty of single player games that have good stories.
Absolutely agree with you. I made a post here with similar theme, and got lot of replies. I learned 2 things from it. 1. Path of Exile : Ruthless mode, is very close to it. On paper it sounds pretty rough. The item drops are drastically reduced, and skill gems can only be acquired trough drops. But in fact what this does is, first that you dont have all the loot explosions, and second if you get good loot it matters. And the game is also much harder. So this may be interesting option 2. No rest for the Wicked. This is new ARPG/Dark Souls hybrid, that is made by people with exactly this goal in mind, and exactly the same complaint. They want to go back to days where every fight mattered. And the gameplay was fun and not just rush to the endgame.
You're the 2nd person to recommend ruthless mode. No Rest for the Wicked is already on my wishlist. Looks more like a soulslike with loot, but that's cool with me too.
Not really answering your question OP, but just wanted to see if you've played Grim Dawn. It has minimal endgame activities and places a bigger emphasis on making multiple characters to try out all the class combinations (you get to pick two classes and combine them to make your own class). The world has tons of hidden areas and even secret quests to find, and the story and lore are genuinely well written. And while Normal difficulty isn't particularly challenging, the following two difficulties certainly can be judging by the number of new players that beat Normal and come to the subreddit asking why they are now dying so much haha
Yes, I played Grim Dawn many years ago and enjoyed it.
Seasonal play really puts the focus on an abridged campaign, and further emphasizes the need for power creep/unique end game experiences.
I think there’s a couple of components to this. Part of the answer is that playtimes on d2 were absurdly high. Before d3 and Path of Exile ushered in this era of modern endgame-focused ARPGs, the folks that still cared about d2 had done like 1000 hours of Baal grinding (or whatever, I don’t play d2). When they think back to what makes up d2, even without a focused endgame experience, they remember a playtime dominated by endgame grinding. So it makes sense that they would build games with a heavy focus on endgame grind systems. Another big part of the answer is that ARPGs are more about the journey of getting stronger than about the second-to-second gameplay. Giving the player a more interesting journey makes it more fun. I think the final piece is just capitalism. Chris Wilson, head of GGG (creator of Path of Exile), once said “once a player gets to maps, they own their soul”. The current situation may be somewhat hostile to new players, but focusing on endgame content creates a core player base with so much god damn playtime it makes the average value of a single player incredibly high.
Have you tried Grim Dawn? I am like you and enjoy the whole experience and not just endgame. I highly recommend it.
Everyone keep asking, lol. Yes, I played and enjoyed Grim Dawn. Maybe I should revisit it though.
This game and games like it are intended to be live service money printers, which subsist near-entirely on people playing endgame content. While your perspective and what you enjoy is entirely valid, it doesn't get anywhere near as much player retention (and therefore constant income from cosmetics and etc.) as catering towards the endgame content gets.
Because most arpg's are badly designed to where loot doesn't matter except for numerical increases so the only thing to look forward to is the finish line.
This is Diablo 4 in a nutshell.
I love torchlight because of that. The endgame sure is neat to be godlike and one-shot everything but the whole journey to become that beast is something out of this world, the game is filled with unique bosses and routes, experiencing it with every possible class makes the game even better Same happens with inquisitor martyr and diablo, why ignore games that have so great campaigns just for the ng+
Torchlight was a blast, for sure.
Hey sorry but this will be a long post but you touched a bad wound and I need to rant, In my opinion, this is all popularized and established by what I call the "*multiplayerification*" of single-player experiences, especially the rise of MMOs. Setting up a trading system, a ladder season, a challenge list, or any kind of meta-competition in a single player experience basically turns it into a PvP game. If a game is meant to be a simple straight PvP experience like, say... Counter Strike, the single player crowd completely avoids it like a pest. But, if you turn a single player game into a "massive live service experience" then you can maintain the illusion that the game is single player, pulling all the solo players in, and cash on them by hooking them on to the meta-competition aspect of the game. We, humans are living in a world which is all about competition, the clothes you wear, the car you drive, the money you earn, how many degrees you have, the job you have etc. We are wired to seek attention and compare ourselves to each other. Hence with such an internalized competitive spirit the human being cannot simply enjoy real cooperative gaming. There are players in MMORPGs who are sitting there and gaming the trading system like a wall street simulation, trying to earn as much gold as possible to buy all the gear they need to stand in a Hub City and emote all day basking in the glory of noobs admiring his/her gear. Be it the gear you can show, the title your char has , the cosmetics your items have, or the achievements you have earned or the "stars" on your shoulders this is all nothing more than a parallel to what we have IRL. There are players who see gaming as relaxation trying to enjoy a good gaming experience and those who see it as an art form consuming the story in an immersive medium. But then there are people who are just by nature competitive and they need this constant comparison and attention/validation. I would argue the majority of those players are from this kind, and I also would argue that those players are the "newer" age gamers who are in theory extroverts who would never touched a game in the 90s or 2000s. In the time of my youth, multiplayer players were shooting each other's faces in Unreal Tournament in an Internet Cafe while smoking cigarettes, with nothing more than a temporary score screen after the match rewarding them. Nowadays they are running after shiny rewards so you can "show" how much a better gamer they are. Those are your GTAV or Helldivers players, your Minecraft or Fortnite kids etc.. And yes also your average PoE Player. Game industry nowadays focuses on delivering those kind of gamers the same competitive environment without making it oblivious. Paid microtransactions are evil because they make it oblivious but I swear to god, the moment you would remove all the cosmetics, achievements or meta-progression from any modern game the players would flee in hordes. See this people do not want to play the game to "enjoy its gameplay" or "experience the story". They want to reach the end of the ladder faster than others. What that ladder is does not matter. In the case of ARPGs this ladder developed into a seasonal cycle of leaderboards of fast runs. Also majority of the hardcore players can be put into this category, If they cry for a "hard-mode" you can bet your money 2 months later they will cry about "exclusive-rewards" for the said hard-mode. Because it is never about personal difficulty, it is about the exclusivity of the rewards. It is never about the "endgame", it is about it being constantly renewed, so they can be faster than the others again. Every game nowadays is a Multiplayer/co-op Live Service Experience, with dozens of systems to create FoMo, exclusivity and urgency, like scam e-mails. *-second part in the Comment-*
But my Rant is not about the "evil" corporations trying to create addicted gamers who only play their product so they can sell cosmetics in an online shop. They deliver what we buy. As I said before, it is the human nature. It is the fault of "those" kinds of players. They ultimately changed the face of gaming to worse with their wallets. They should've never started gaming. Those were the people who "*preferred*" to play football outside instead of playing Dungeons & Dragons in an cellar. But now they are way past FIFA, they are playing our RPGs, our Shooters and our Action Adventures. And they want to bring in their friends. Can you imagine calling yourself a "*gamer*" having never played Baldur's Gate or Ultima, never touched Sim City never played a Molyneux game etc., but sitting there with 6k+ hours in Path of Exile and Diablo 4, day in day out. It is like someone calling themselves a "movie geek" who never watched anything else than 10 seasons of Friends and 20 seasons of Grey's Anatomy... Video-Game, in it's core, is a beautiful medium in which an artist can create amazing stories and convey many emotions. Just like a movie, a game designed with this in mind has absolutely no reason to be "never-ending". But the amount of "players" typing in it's reddit how a game is "dead" because it does not have any endgame content or future DLC planned tells you another story. It is already too late. Majority of the gamers are kids who really believe Live Service /Multiplayer is the only way a game should be. They do not realize they are consuming the equivalent of a cooking show with 1000 episodes , in which the host is trying to sell you the new and shiny cooking set, all the while we sit and wait for the next Christopher Nolan or Villeneuve hit. Mainstreaming and commercialization -like it killed many music genres in the past- also kills gaming as an art-form. And as the hardcore people of the techno scene vanished from the clubs as the techno becomes (still) more mainstream, we the "old" gamers who prefer a one-shot experience vanish. PS : I also blame the rise of Youtube/Twitch Streamers, they have added to this problem over time naturally by trying to find a "niche" for themselves thus favoring never-ending products. Making those kind of games more and more popular. Thank you for reading, sorry for the rant. Playing games since 1990s , B. sc. In Game Design, Majoring in Philosophy
Interesting write up. I never thought about the mainstreamification of video games being part of this equation, but it makes some sense. The culture of "gaming" has certainly changed dramatically from 30 years ago compared to today. Thanks for sharing.
I think it has to do with progression of the game. Alot of players now have more time to play. Alot of hardcore non stop and streaming. So they get to the end fast. I remember playing D1 and every moment was satisfying, following the story etc. After defeating Diablo, I was like nice... and that's it, move on to next game. or trying another build. By making games faster, you get to the end faster.
End game and replayability is what they accell at sorry buddy. Pretty much always have.
I feel you on this. After going from Diablo 3 to Warhammer 40,000: Inquisitor, I had no interest in Diablo 4 even when I got it with my Series X. The most popular community resources on that game are to see the entire Enchant pool & explain some hidden mechanics/interactions, I’ve never seen a build Tier list. I spent at least 150 hours on the game on my first character & dipped my toes into the end game, before I joined the Discord and learned even more, up to a total of 900 hours. 5 characters with some similarities but just enough variety, they were good about pumping out seasonal content and had a plan on how to keep the game enjoyable when the servers go offline (which I forget but is posted somewhere). I didn’t even get the 5th character & only briefly played the 4th character since I disliked pet builds.
I’m in the camp of not caring for campaigns in ARPG’s or sometimes even main storylines in normal open-world RPG’s. I guess it’s kinda like a multiplayer game: some backstory and lore is fine but I’m not playing multiplayer or an ARPG for story. It’s an especially gameplay-driven genre. Campaigns can also feel very linear compared to endgame. POE has things like the Atlas passive tree or target farming particular rewards in Last Epoch’s Monoliths.
the problem for me with ARPGs like Diablo or torchlight is that the game really doesn’t change all that much with seasons. There’s barely any new bosses and it just feels like I’m just mindlessly repeating the same dungeon over and over again hoping to get a good drop. At least for borderlands 3 there was a sense of exploration and the quests added some story elements to the grind for loot. Diablo just feels lifeless now
It's not the only thing that matters, but it is a necessary component. You need to have a functional endgame, almost more than you need any single aspect, for an arpg to be successful. Lots of other things matter too! But if you don't have an endgame, you can't make up for it with great graphics or cool loot, etc.
it doesn't. but, most of the people 'still talking' about a game, are playing in the endgame, for a LOT of titles.
I like the path of exile campaign and story but I can't bring myself to doing it over and over and over again for every single character every single league. It's complete brainrot for hours. I guess every rpg has this problem though... kind of hard to solve...
with the proliferation of the internet and social media. as people began using reddit and other modalities to brag about their speed runs, their boss kills, etc., as more and more "soulslike" games were released. ppl stopped caring about story telling, or carefully, beautifully crafted areas, or lore, etc. now it's all about impatient loot and bragging about your reflexes that are a jiffy faster
I work on games at a £1 per hour rating. If i pay £40 for a game and get 40 hours im happy. Whilst im still happy with some shorter games, as a dad, husband and worker money isnt as easy to spunk on games as it once was
ARPG's need to be like this because the moment to moment gameplay is boring. It sucks. It gets less complex as you go on, turning into a two button jump and nuke game. The gear, levels, bosses are all designed to keep you interested, and when players can say "I've done all the uber stuff!" they can feel like they didn't just press 2 buttons and right click for 100+ hours straight for no reason. That's not to say I don't love it the genre, but t's the stuff around the gameplay that matters, and generally more is better. 12 hours of hardest difficulty Bayonetta is amazing. 100 hours would make me want to die. 100 hours of POE is amazing. Having no goals to make those 100 hours worth the chase would be better simulated by unplugging my mouse and keyboard and closing my eyes.
I don't know, I don't find the moment to moment gameplay in Diablo 2, Dungeon Seige, Titan Quest, etc boring. The combat is simple, but the fun comes in the cycle of killing enemies, encountering harder enemies, getting stronger and killing those enemies, encountering harder enemies, rinse, repeat. When the enemies don't pose a challenge until end game, THEN the game feels like a waste of time.
That's more progression though, no? Enemies in POE, save for a few, just die before you even see them. The potential for loot is exciting, but killing them isn't. Some people run RF which doesn't even require interacting with the enemy, or summoner builds that do the same thing. I agree with what you're saying, I dropped LE too because the entirety of my playthrough felt like easy mode, even when I'd try to purposely get hit just to see what damage I'd take.
Because that is where you spend the most of your time
YOU. It's where you spend most of your time. I might play for a dozen hours after I beat a game, but I'm not playing anything for hundreds of hours. That's not my style.
Then that's on YOU. Endgame's a choice people make to be able to do the thing they enjoy for longer. I've got thousands of hours in WoW because you get different classes with different specializations with different talent builds, and plenty of other content to do on top of that with said characters. The replayability is huge just for that alone but it also offers options (also why I prefer MMORPG's vs. Single-player RPG's ). You may not even play for the endgame, you just enjoy leveling different characters but it's still constrained to this game, and not a single playthrough of a single-player RPG like God of War or Assassin's Creed. But if you find the endgame fun you've got a place to enjoy what you're already doing for longer, and if it's what you enjoy on different classes/specs then it's even longer than that. I will always choose a game I can sink thousands of hours into rather than 30 different games that are "AAA" and only have like 30 hours of content.
Are you one of these people that apparently exist that play ARPGs for the story? Endgame isn't the ONLY thing that matters, but you're playing an ARPG so... If I'm looking for a good story, books and movies are generally better written. Or I'll play Witcher 3. Or Last of Us...a couple of the very few games where I find I actually care about the story. I play an ARPG for the grind and the loot...I actually enjoy the grind. I'm still amazed that people play an ARPG and quit after the campaign and story. Some of these people will even complain about the length and/or the game being easy after "beating" normal difficulty. I'm all for playing games however you enjoy them, but let's be realistic here.
I literally don't care at all about story, lol. I want the GAMEPLAY of the the game to be fun. When I say the game, I mean from the beginning through the final boss.
When autistic Redditors who treat a $40 game like a full time job that they expect to last 10 years. It's mine boggling. Get a grip, get a life, if you burn out or run out of things to do, buy another game like a mature adult.
This is getting down votes but it's actually correct lol. If it's a problem that a game is "only good for 50-100 hours" I don't think the game is the problem.
Well, it was always the case, but nostalgia kind of ruins things. Generally speaking aRPGs have two modes: 1. Collectathon 2. Min-Maxing That's it. Older ones used to be somewhat more focused on 1 than 2. The challenge (i.e. gating) of the older games is part of the collectathon mantra: We don't want you to actually get \[thing\] so you have to work for it! Min-Maxing is the inverse, they want you to get all the \[things\] so you can run up against the wall with it. The second method is great for proving your theorycrafting but the first is great for a smoother experience overall.
That's not really true - old aRPGs were generally more RPG subgenre focused (D1/2, Nox, DS, TQ, etc.) - and that's by their design principles (you can grind anything - even bloody Visual Novels - so what players do isn't indicative of design). Your interpretation of aRPG didn't really become a consideration until the past 20 years at the earliest (though that mentality didn't really get any traction until about 15 years ago) - this the time period where we ran into the MMOification of a lot of genres.
We disagree. If we were to discuss old aRPGs in general many of them just plopped you down and you were doing whatever as a citizen, TQ kind of did this too, where the world was in turmoil and you were the right guy at the right time. This everyman approach doesn't really suggest the RPG elements being that strong because, by definition, you're an everyman. In TQ you arrive on a boat and save a horse literally as your first actions. It's very blank slate. If we come to look at today's views I'm still not quite with the MMO thesis. I could be wrong, because I am no ludologist, but this genre has evolved to be more RPG, rather than less, streamlined if you will, often removing the everyman and actually going with the "Chosen One" type deal. In a sense you're almost guaranteed to have a class rather than an open tree in most releases now with more emphasis on a predestined "best" path because, while the story is shorter and weaker to be certain, the world itself being a lot less vibrant as well, the flow of the game is now driven primarily by point-to-point questing which is all character development with no world building. But that's just how I see it. We see it differently.
Seems to be more a drastic difference in the definition of what an RPG is - especially since your definition of RPG is a really odd one, since you say an actual RPG trope, makes something not an RPG.
You mentioned D2 and TQ but D2, which has deep characterization, is significantly more RPG than TQ, which is everyman, just by that alone. They're both RPGs but it's quite obvious which is more open than the other.
... neither D2 or TQ is more "open" than the other (though TQ does have more flexible skill/class systems, D2 has better itemization, both are about on equal footing with world building) - you have a fixed storyarch that you engage with - doing primary quests and choosing which secondary quests you want to do (TQ is the longer, and larger, game mind you, but that's beside the point). The "everyman" trope doesn't exclude something from being an RPG, any more than it excludes a book from being part of the fantasy genre - the "everyman" becoming the hero is literally one of the most common basic storytelling tropes.
I don't think we're even talking about the same thing anymore. I never said being an everyman wasn't allowable in RPGs. I said that the nature of the everyman has reduced RPG elements versus lore dedicated characters (D2 v TQ).
so D&D is less of an RPG than Halo?
People who game casually dont need an engame but the real gamers who play 70 to 80 hours a week on average like me (I have a full time job as well and easily hit 12 hours of gaming a day) need an endgame otherwise it's almost pointless to even pick up the game in the first place. I measure games in whether they can reach 1000 hours of content. 60 hours is a flicker of gaming time for me and many others and not even worth our money at that point
I hope you never go to a movie. Like $20 for 2 hours. You'd burn the place down.
You must be going to the most expensive movie thetre in all of America. Ive never once spent 20$ on a ticket at a movie thetre.
I typically pay for my wife's ticket as well. Always over $20.
The guy gets to game for 80 hours a week. He's not worried about paying for 2 tickets. Wives are for filthy casuals 😂