3.5/5 - GameRevolutionFollow

Actually one of the few fair reviews I've seen, he points out the negatives as well as the positives in the game quite well without going overboard in either direction.

http://www.gamerevolution.com/review/final-fantasy-xiv-a-realm-reborn

Hah! Pretty accurate review. I see the author hasn't gotten past Titan yet, otherwise he would have mentioned all the nub nubs running around in the big boy dungeons thinking its a contained fate party or something. No offense. I know you guys are trying to have fun too...

I just don't really know what everyone expects besides "fetch quests." What other options are there, really, that XIV doesn't also provide in some limited quantity?

At least the characters in ARR are pretty good about explaining why they want the thing they want.

There are fetch quests? Quests that ask you to kill monsters? If I didn't know better I might think Final Fantasy XIV is an MMO.

Seriously, if you don't want MMO style features, perhaps don't play an MMO. You don't see me reviewing Halo and complaining I have to shoot things.

I love it that of the many reviews I have read so far, a 3.5/5 is the lowest score!

SE really hit a home run with ARR!

Edit: My two Nitpicks with this review:

1) this guy criticizes quests for being too simple, but then says the story is too complicated. Kind of strange... I could see him making one complaint or the other, but I would lean toward quests being too simple while the storyline is delightfully complex for the MMO genre (as any FF title should be).

2) this guy also hasn't realized that you don't need to accept every damn quest you encounter. Through FATES, leves, dungeons and the story, there is no reason to feel like this game is a quest grind. People need to shed their old methods of playing before blaming their boredom on the game, which has plenty of ways to level classes.

Otherwise, good review!

Edited, Sep 17th 2013 7:35am by Thayos

Elder Scrolls Online has supposedly found a way around this problem. I'm not sure how yet, bet they claim they have.

I didn't put any spin on it at all, I simply posted a fair review. Simple as that. He is even going to update the score as he plays the endgame content more.

I like quest grinding. It's too bad I'm gonna run out of them real soon.

I've always preferred Kill X mob over Collect X item.

Edited, Sep 17th 2013 12:37pm by TwilightSkye

Instead of "kill 10 wolves", it was a quest to come back with an R/Ex item that dropped 10% of the time off of some wolves. Some times, you did it in less than 10 kills. Some times, more than 10 kills. Some times, far far far more than 10 kills (think Elshimo Marble).

And there were plenty of the "grab 5 sheepskin" variety too. I remember two starting quests in San d'Oria like that, one that asked for X number of rabbit hides and another that asked for Y number of bat wings.

Without doing a count, I would venture to guess that XIV is going to have far more distinct quests than XI, mainly due to the fact that questing is intended to be a major source of exp in XIV. And because there are so many more, they're going to come across as being less creative and original than the quests in XI.

Yes, the story is convoluted. And FFXIV is also one of the few MMORPGs that has one at all.

I guess the storyline becomes hard to follow around LV30, when all you do is skipping dialogues in order to save time. ^.^/
P.S.: I love soothing Dodos.

You're asking that question? Why is it every MMO decide to basically be a carbon copy of each other instead of standing on its own? For example people had HUGE hopes for Tera...then it came out and well surprise, aside the battle system everything is the exact same game as every other MMO before it.

It's not a question of why has no other MMO because it's obvious why none have. I'm sure you have enough common sense to realize SE chose to go the safest and done to death route instead of trying something else. I actually read every line of dialogue in this game quest wise, none of it justifies why you're doing x in the grand scheme of things.

You can only have so many iterations of:

"rid my x of y infestation, please."

Before you realize the quests are meaningless in the long run. So you're asking "what" they could have done? It's very simple, if they decide to go the defacto route they could have at least disguised it better instead of it being essentially the same set of quest lines from 2004.

There is a virtual plethora of ideas mmos or rpgs could take on doing with quests. Fresh would start out a novelty then be emulated by others so different is only different for so long. Unfortunately not only SE but every other rpg developer is guilty of choosing a format and sticking to a particular type for most of the game rather than drawing from all games before. I don't know if the reason is budget, time, or what factor draws this out but it is what is. Before I share my thoughts again on this subject I just want to point out that I do like ARR, I think the game will do good, it is not an SE exclusive problem, and I doubt it will get fixed. I don't like the quest format SE chose, but either deal with it or move on. This isn't the saga of one person, it's the saga of a whole playerbase.

1.Personality- Character is what makes each interaction feel different. You can do the same thing with various people. And every time it will be a little different. If every person or npc had the exact same personality, it would vary less.

2.Mood- The emotional and contextual feeling behind an activity. Different activities/quest evoke or different emotions. Fear, joy, mysterious, funny, sad,anger, resentment,etc. Quest that do not take you through an emotional roller coaster seem bland and don't feel too different.

3.Setting- Everywhere we look real life or game, we all do most of the same things daily. Yet experiences vary due to whether you are alone, with someone, or with a lot of people. Where and when it happens can also affect how impactful something is. Is it a trivial or mundane quest or is it something vital?

4.Introduction- How you learn about quest. Do you eavesdrop and pick up clues? Does an npc flat out ask you for something? Do you stumble upon a quest as it is happening? Do quest have multiple branches or one root? Do you have to coerce it? Is the quest objective evident like a natural disaster or do you read about it?

5.Mechanics- Does every quest require the same way to be dealt with? Why if everything has an opposite? Kill or save, sicken or heal, deliver or take-away, reward or steal, gather or scatter, fortify or sabotage, follow or escape, love or hate, distract or attract, escort or attack escort, brute force or wits, etc. People with weapons might seem to only focus on the outcome, but they each have different motives and ways to realize their goals.

6.Rewards- Why is the only reward currency, an item, or experience points? What about honor, social standing, love, friends, enemies, alliances, skill bonuses, etc.

I could go on but it will fall on deaf ears, I am not a game designer, and I'm sure game developers are busy enough as it is. The point I was trying to make is there are various shades you could add to each quest to differentiate them. Does every quest have to be unique? No, but most quest shouldn't fall into the 1-2 dimension category. The wheel doesn't have to be re-invented, but use every wheel that has been invented not just three brands or types.

I enjoy the game currently and will play until I no longer enjoy it. But please stop making it seem like SE is the only culprit here guilty of taking the easy route.