Attrition based combat is a tedious mechanic. I support Health/Endurance on a per encounter basis, but the POE1 rest system was just a chore.
I do not want to be dismissive of your view on this. Many people share it and express it I know. I recall a line from the Steam board that sums it up nicely for me:
"Casting spells is a lot more fun thatn hoarding them"
I accept that this arguement is not easily dismissed.
What I do think though is those who hold this view also believe that the dificulty problems with this game and Tyranny can be fixed by better balancing, better AI etc. They are unwilling to accept that this mayu not be so and that relaxing resting mechanics and shifting to per-encounter casting may intrinsically/automatically reduce difficulty and challenge or make the games feel more one dimesional and bland. This unwillingness tends to be aspirtational rather than based on evidence or analysis. The evidnece suggests otherwise.
I wouldn't say a full party should be necessary for the 0.01% of hardest-core gamers, but demanding that the very hardest difficulty cater to your wish to be able to finish with a very harsh, self imposed handicap that goes against the original premise of the game, is more than a tad petulant (Not saying this is necessarily so in your case but there were a few of these in POE1).
You are absolutely correct that most of the comment against per-encounter etc comes from a relatively small group of elite players. It's not 0.01%, it's about 1-2% based on, for example, the number of players getting a PotD achievement on PoE1.
However this is not the whole story:
1. The opinions of these elite players have a major impact on the general climate of opinion about a game.
2. Part of the reason why is that many, many players aspire to greater things and want to play harder games better
3. Games that have the "hard as nails" tag do far better than those with the "dumbed down" tag. The latter is a kiss of death.
The exception to this are "pretty" games like Skyrim. But as far as isomestric cRPGs and 4X/strategy games go, this genenerally holds.
In summary, what people are doing is choosing games that are generally held to be "good" by elite players, which usually means (in the opinion of these elite players) they have "depth" and "challenge". The "Full Monty". The "Real Deal". That's what people want.
Examples of this effect are legion: Crusader Kings 2 and Europa Universalis 4, Dark Souls, Cuphead, DOS1/2, Pillars of Eternity, Factorio, Rimworld. These are all million sellers.
In contrast Wargaming made a collosal error of judgement with the new Masters of Orion reboot. Thewy thought they could afford to piss off the small but fanatical hard core MoO2 fanbase in persuit of a mass market of new 4X players wating a lighter more glitzy experience. They thought wrong.
This effect applies mostly to more "cerebral" genres like cRPG, 4X/strategy, roguelike and platforming. IMO it is why Tyranny didn't make the million seller lists and why Deadfire might not make it either.
Edited by Gregorovitch, 10 June 2018 - 02:30 AM.