I'm aware that PoE's stronghold was extremely lacking in almost all of the things that players generally expect or wish to see. The point of the first section of my post was only to provide the counter perspective that it was not devoid of all value. However I'm confused as to why you think I've missed the point. The rest of my post was aimed at explaining what would create a meaningful and interesting player experience with a stronghold wholly unrelated to PoE's. I must admit that I feel you've missed the point of my post in favor of your intolerance for my enjoyment of a stronghold you dislike. I'd encourage you to reread and possibly offer counter arguments or ask me to clarify on specific points further on in my post.
I don't care if you like it or not, so shouting "muh subjectiveness" ad nauseam doesn't fly with me (you aren't, but I've heard it enough times). This isn't about personal preference. It's about how well the game/narrative is structured. I was just musing on what type of person would like it, considering the creators themselves have admitted to making it meaningless. "The death of the auteur" also doesn't fly with me :p
To reply to some of the ideas you've stated in reply to me; In my explanation of a better framework for player bases in general, I suggested filling them with content that was just as accessible to all players as any other content within the game. In that way no content would be unneccesarily gated by basebuilding mechanics. The basebuilding would instead be an additive reward for first completing quality content in the form of quests/narrative/npc interaction that also carried its own rewards for completion - concurrent with the rest of the games standards. In my eyes this would be almost identical to a dungeon or town in which it was required to complete quests or combat in order to progress.
That is exactly what people mean by "content gating", base-building IS content gating as well. If you mean that you complete totally unrelated quests and getting rewards for the stronghold, then what's the point? It's neither logical nor needed. Making content for the stronghold means not making other, more meaningful and related to the context of the game, content
I also don't agree that any stronghold should necessarily be integral to the overall narrative of the game. This is a viable strategy that could very well improve both the narrative and the stronghold but in no way necessary for either to work and be desirable, quality content. Providing a stronghold with its own narrative that ties into the lore or possibly parts of the main narrative of the game could very well add depth and content to a game if the developers wished to use it for that purpose.
Having disconnected elements is jarring and destroys any suspension of disbelief.
On a side note, I'm interested to hear what assumptions you believe rpg's work on
Way off-topic and it can't be explained in a single thread post.
