Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

What are your fears or worries regrading FFXIV?Follow

#52 Jan 03 2010 at 3:19 PM Rating: Good
**
736 posts
I support min/maxing and Elitist players.
But I don't think you need to worry too much about it in XIV. Min/maxing and Elitism can coexist with personal preference. Especially in a game like XIV, that's taking pains to emphasize low time investment and solo friendly play.

Min/maxing by itself is a good thing. It's an interesting tradition of metagaming that naturally comes with MMOs. I think it's essential to a healthy community to have those few willing to dig through the nuts and bolts of a game and figure out how it works in an effort to be better at it. It encourages a large part of our out-of-game community interaction.

Min/maxing creates the Elite class of players, that is to say the people who do the research behind min/maxing or are willing to do whatever it takes to make the best possible use of that data. Part of what makes the Elite class what it is is the rarity of it. The results of these effort must be recognizable enough to be worthy of status, but minimal enough with a high enough price of admission that not everyone is inclined to follow. In other words, Elitists are so voluntarily, they're acutely aware their rewards are negligible but aspire to perfection anyway.

XI is often blamed for being too riddled with Elitists.
I'd say the fatal error in that game was that there was no distinction between elitist and normal players. The mathematical revelations that min/maxing could discover lead to gameplay the developers did not predict, were unwilling/unable to correct, and marked a drastic discrepancy between maxed and normal play. The reason this gap was so huge, is because SE took to the practice of hiding gameplay information from the players. So even the simplest of discoveries was highly signifigant, and not something SE had necessarily balanced the game around us knowing.

The price of admission was the practice of timesink, a worthless hurdle when the game itself was structured to appeal to the niche MMO demographic of yesteryear that famously had this resource in spades. With too much incentive, no proper barrier that delineated one player from another, in the hyper-competitive atmosphere of enforced grouping, caused min/maxing to become a part of normal play and elitism a standard.



Edited, Jan 3rd 2010 5:42pm by Zemzelette
#53 Jan 03 2010 at 5:47 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
The problem with elitists as I just described in another thread is that they are often not people who are just trying to be the best they can be, but competitive people who want to be recognized as the best.

Which is all fine and good on its own, but the dynamics they create with other types of players once they decide that not enough people recognize how good they are is what leads to the climate of high social expectancies. If you can be a great min/maxer and just enjoy being great at what you do, that's fantastic. A lot of people decide instead that more people should be worshipping them, or at least, paying tribute with the sincerest form of flattery: imitation.

MMOs also offer them the convenient excuse that others NEED to be as good as they are, for everyone's sake. Because it's about everyone performing the absolute best they can as a cog in the machine, rather than everyone enjoying themselves and bettering themselves on their own merits as a player.

But bashing elitists is rather pointless. Ultimately how adversely they affect the game will depend more on the game itself and to what extent it fosters a competitive environment with high costs for failure.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#54 Jan 03 2010 at 7:28 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,793 posts
That it'll have an endgame that enforces mutually-assured botting (MAB) to progress as a LS.
That it won't support wanting to solo throughout the game when you don't have a lot of time to play.
That it'll still believe sitting on a sand dune and pulling crabs is the most efficient way to get to 75.
Crabs.
Crabs.
Crabs.
Sometimes a Pugil from the Nine Depths of ****.
Crabs.
Crabs.
Pointless quests are pointless.
Knowing your reputation and critical strike chance taking 4 years to figure out, because everything is such a mystery.
That money will still be in such short supply, it practically feeds the RMT, which is about 50% of the reason why FFXI's endgame sucked such horrible ****.
The other 50% is the undeserved sense of elitism the supposedly 'hardcore' endgame (of which I once belonged, to my chagrin) carries throughout this game, even though they're now about 5 years behind the MMO curve and hog-tying themselves into the belief that they're outdated, Puritan-style game, and themselves, are still relevant.
____________________________
Come into the sand, and the dust, and the sky
Go now, there's no better plan, than to do or to die
Free me, pray to the faith in the face of the light
Feed me, fill me with sin, and get ready to fight

Snooochie wrote, concerning BST forums:
Quote:
This forum used to be all about "How can we overcome this?" Now it seems to be all about "How can someone else fix this for me?"

#55 Jan 03 2010 at 7:57 PM Rating: Good
**
736 posts


Oh sure, I didn't mean to imply they were altruistic saints.
It's a social game, afterall, varying degrees of vainglory is practically expected.

But yes, I think whether or not min/maxing is a quaint playstyle that might produce the occasional arrogant thorn in your side, or the almighty armageddon of player choice is largely how the game itself is structured. It's not like this is the first classless(-ish)/levelless MMO. Sometimes they get it right...emphasis on the sometimes.
#56 Jan 03 2010 at 9:44 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,153 posts
I fear I might be hijacking the thread, so everybody please just ignore the following stuff.
'cept for Kachi, of course.


In reply to:
Quote:
Basically I mean that it's "enjoyable" (even if it's boring) up until it becomes apparent that the only reason you're doing it is for the reward. At that point you no longer do it because it's enjoyable-- you do it if you deem the reward to be sufficiently motivating.
,
Quote:
That article actually seems to more aptly discuss the notion of overjustification to me.
and
Quote:
Well, yes, that's exactly what overjustification deals with.


No. Overjustification != Cognitive Dissonance != Intrinsic/Extrinsic Motivation. The so-called "overjustification effect", for example, just implies that the external reward (extrinsic motivation) may interfere with the internal reward (intrinsic motivation), meaning the former requires, for its definition, the latter two concepts; it's a related, but not the same thing. While this might not be part of the (Educational Psychology) curriculum at your University, there are quite a few instances overjustification alone can not explain, but the tendency to reduce Cognitive Dissonance will.


In reply to:
Quote:
Customarily in my field cognitive dissonance refers more exclusively to the notion of perceptions being shown to be inconsistent with reality.
,
Quote:
Well... no?
and
Quote:
I beg to differ?

Since your first statement was simply wrong (within the field of Psychological Science), and the overjustification effect is one of the few psychological phenomena commonly known even among business students, I (falsely?) got the impression you were into marketing.

In the present example, the label "overjustification" would imply that the external (a quite blurry label in this special case, mind you!) reward provided by reaching some in-game goal decreases simple enjoyment of the game in a way that it demotivates the act of playing in itself. But that's not what the OP laments about. He actually still enjoys the game as a whole (quote: "stressful but enjoyable", "a pain but each and every slow and mundane task truly did add a certain depth "), and is clearly not demotivated. Also, it would imply that doing those things the OP (rightfully) described as quote: "grind", "stressful" and "a pain" were enjoyable per se, originally. That's why I - kiddingly - asked also whether he was *********; who else would not accept the formula "boring != enjoyable".
Quote:
I mean that it's "enjoyable" (even if it's boring)

Well, perhaps that's something you should discuss with your wife, hahaha ^.-!? (Just joking, please don't be offended. I guess I might possibly understand what you actually intended to say. Although I don't agree.)


In reply to:
Quote:
I don't know what your background is with the subject, but don't place too much stake in Professor Wiki.


If you really deem it necessary, I will consider telling you (and providing proof) about my background in a pm. But this is about contemporary Psychological Science, and not about educational status. I've had completely stupid, uneducated subjects enlighten me on a very complicated matter (hard to swallow, I admit!), and distinguished congress participants utter complete nonsense; somewhere along the road I decided to pay less attention to the speaker, and more to the things spoken.
Besides, I quote Wiki not because it is my alma mater, but because it is a public source of information most people have access to, and written in a way many can understand.


And, if you can take another bad joke:
Quote:
overjustification-- a more parsimonious and generally accepted explanation.

my answer will be:
Quote:
don't place too much stake in Professor Wiki

...nor in the personal opinion of your professor for Educational Psychology at your university ^.^/

P.S.: I guess nobody besides the two of us is in any way interested in this type of discussion. It would be best to leave this thread alone and switch to pm?
#57 Jan 03 2010 at 9:45 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
240 posts
Maybe the word elitist is being taken out of context. Someone who striving to be the best can be considered elitist. The kind of person who thinks he's good at his job and lords it over everyone else in a negative manner is considered a huge douche.

The real elitists were too few and far-between, the ones that politely tell others how to gear or use skillchains rather than shunning everyone that's not as good as they are.



Edited, Jan 3rd 2010 8:52pm by RaideLeonn
____________________________
Raide < Railock / Hume(M) / "Asura" ***Missing Pandemonium***
80 Dragoon / 80 Black Mage / 80 Blue Mage
#58 Jan 03 2010 at 10:08 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
2,153 posts
Besides, Kachi, your post on the elitist problem is right on the spot.
Just as the Wikipedia article is, in my opinion. Given its brevity and natural simplicity, it is quite accurate and comprehensive. Where do you get the notion:
Quote:
That article actually seems to more aptly discuss the notion of overjustification to me (...) and the studies they review don't support the presented cognitive dissonance theory as compared to overjustification

from? Only the brief sections on the Boring Task Experiment and Self-Perception theory tap on something similar to the overjustification effect (similar only on the surface, as the original task here was not intrinsically motivating in the first place).

And while we are at it, please elaborate a little on the statement:
Quote:
I only read that first wiki because the explanation that you offered from it was so inconsistent with what I've read in multiple texts.


If my argumentation is flawed, please point me exactly to the issue. As I said, I've been corrected before, and I, for my part, guess I can swallow it. Though, naturally, pride and confidence in my work will see me put up a good fight. ^^


Edited, Jan 4th 2010 1:38am by Rinsui
#59 Jan 04 2010 at 2:23 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
No. Overjustification != Cognitive Dissonance != Intrinsic/Extrinsic Motivation. The so-called "overjustification effect", for example, just implies that the external reward (extrinsic motivation) may interfere with the internal reward (intrinsic motivation), meaning the former requires, for its definition, the latter two concepts; it's a related, but not the same thing. While this might not be part of the (Educational Psychology) curriculum at your University, there are quite a few instances overjustification alone can not explain, but the tendency to reduce Cognitive Dissonance will.


I never said that overjustification was related to cognitive dissonance. What I said is that the article for cognitive dissonance seems to describe overjustification moreso than cognitive dissonance. Overjustification, as we've established, is related to intrinsic/extrinsic motivation.

Cognitive dissonance reduction certainly accounts for things that overjustification doesn't; however, I was not saying that the OP was experiencing overjustification-- as you point out, he's not demotivated yet, though he has probably begun to -trend- towards demotivation and may eventually become overjustified as his reasons for playing depend increasingly on the rewards while he finds the activity less enjoyable. That depends largely to what extent he might say, "I just realized, I'm only doing this because SE keeps dangling new carrots in front of me."

Though I'm sure there are a few masochists who play, and I have even posed the question to a few people. More often I think the person has a compulsion problem and simply finds it less desirable to feel "incomplete" than to continue engaging in the task.

As for your credentials, I'm uninterested. Like you, I don't place too much stake in them. However, on the subject of "what is cognitive dissonance," I am going off of at least three texts and two professors from two different universities. Cognitive dissonance is one of the most basic aspects of Ed Psych, right after the developmental psych, as a key educational strategy-- not exactly obscure (any teacher with a bachelors should know it). Overjustificaton, on the other hand, is an unfamiliar concept to most teachers, for future reference, that they will likely only learn about in a graduate psychology class.

I guess what I'm saying is, you probably are more or less as aware of what cognitive dissonance is as I am; however, we might disagree on the effect of consequence salience in the validity of the interpretations taken from the studies described. In retrospect, perhaps I meant to be less critical of the wiki than to your applying it in this situation.

Cognitive dissonance is a phenomenon that leads to coping, whereas I do not see this as an issue of coping as much as a shift in motivation alongside simple delay of gratification. Sometimes people "enjoy" doing things they don't really enjoy doing because they perceive the rewards to be worthwhile (note that, like in this case, future pride and enjoyment is an extrinsic motivator), not because they are rationalizing conflicting perceptions.

PM me if you want, though some people might find this discussion interesting, and if they don't, it's not so hard to scroll past it.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#60 Jan 04 2010 at 3:49 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
899 posts
The term "Elite" is being used for everything honestly. whenever someone wanna suggest that you improve your gear and farm to do so he is magically an elitest. when an LS reject a melee since they have so many melees , they are elitest. when a puller sucks on his job and ppl advice him to read online , they are elitest "OMGZ I SHOULD READ FOR VIDEOGAME!!11 ELITEST I HAZ A LIFE!". when in fact its how you read it and how you accept it.

Once you belong to any group (exp party, LS , mission etc) , you are bound to the rule of the group , since what you do and your preformance effect them.

Sure someone will be a jerk about it but over the years of playing FFXI , I've seen so many ppl use ELitest on anything (that they are lazy about it) , more then that I've seen an actual jerks. (personally I've been called an elitest coz I didnt answer tells asking me about NM's TOD while camping the same NM...)

What I fear is not having anything to differ who put more time in game then who log for 1-2h (before someone use Real life card, I work for +8h/day and some night shifts, attend gym ,go out etc)
____________________________
Falasi of Bismarck.
THF75/WAR75/BLU75/RNG75/DRK75/MNK75/SAM66
ZM:done. PM:done. AM:done.
Assault: Captain
#61 Jan 04 2010 at 4:27 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
4,775 posts
It's not the advice that makes them elitist, it's the attitude behind it. A recent thread in the SAM forums was locked for this very reason. Some person asked a question to improve themselves and just because the answer is common knowledge to most people in 2010, the guy was told he's an idiot. I don't find that acceptable at all. I happen to know a lot of players in game that don't take this game as serious as most of us on the forums. So instead of calling them idiots, I educate them. The term "Elite" and jerk usually are one of the same.
#62 Jan 04 2010 at 5:11 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
931 posts
You guys are just grouping together elites and as*sholes. Someone who knows a lot about the game can be just as much of a **** as a newbie. I know you're smart enough to know that. There IS a large amount of elitist @#%^s on FFXI in particular, but do not confuse these players with those of us who are just trying to maximize their efficiency by gearing/playing as well as possible
Just because you have that "fun no matter what", "play PUP cuz you like it", "@#%^ statistics" attitude doesn't mean everyone else should. Some people just like to WIN when they're playing a game, they get absorbed into the competition. IMO there is nothing wrong with that. They are after a different experience than you.

Your way of playing is not wrong, but this is why everyone hates Alla because of these judgments you make on elitists, and **** some of you still even diss Windower when not using it is a clear disadvantage, it adds so much to the game that should be included already.-<(little off topic but still)

tl;dr just let people play the way they want.

Edited, Jan 4th 2010 6:26am by Poubelle
____________________________
MUTED
#63 Jan 04 2010 at 6:01 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
4,775 posts
There is nothing wrong with competition. That's not the issue. Elitists are megalomaniac players who feel as they're above everyone that doesn't follow their philosophy towards the game. This has nothing to do with Allakhazam either. That other community site is a breeding ground for elitists. It's not the knowledge of elitist players that bother me, but the attitude and overall lack of respect for others. A competent player knows their job and the basic mechanics of the game. An elitist knows everything and judges by appearance. If you don't have XYZ gear, you're a noob. If you don't have XYZ merits, again you're a noob and so forth.

Elitists are known to circumvent the game's code because they don't believe they should honor the ToS. The ToS is for normal players, not them. The drama resulting from the Duping hacks only proves my point. The elitists kept the glitch a secret and then cried foul when they got burned by SE for cheating. I could go on but hopefully my point has been made clear.
#64 Jan 04 2010 at 10:10 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Right, there's a big difference between being elite and being an elitist. There are alllll kinds of people who are one and not the other on both sides-- great players who are just content to be great, and ****** players who think they're the game's gift to everyone else, if only we revered them as they deserved.

And I'm not accusing anyone in this thread of anything, but very often it's the ****** elitists who are nowhere near elite that are the first to cry, "you people think all elite players like me are ********!"

The difference is in whether or not you're content to be good, or if you insist that other people recognize how good you are, conform to your ways, or be branded a hopeless noob. You can't be an elitist and claim "live and let live" because that's not what elitists do. Being an elitist is not a compliment-- if you want to be someone who always strives to make your character the best, then you're a min/maxer, and that's fine. Or if you just want to improve your skills as a player, all good as well. But elitist is synonymous with "*******" in the MMO world, so don't accept that label and try to defend it if it's not what you are.

To give you an example of real elitism-- take a game like Rock Band. You can play online with other people, and all pick different difficulty levels. There are people who refuse to play with those who aren't playing on Expert, even when it makes absolutely no difference to them whatsoever. They just don't want to play with people who aren't "in their league." Likewise there are people in MMOs who will use the teamwork aspect as an excuse to pull the same crap, even if the end result is nearly identical.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#65 Jan 04 2010 at 12:18 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,793 posts
Back on topic: Losing items on failed synthesis. Who thought this was a good idea? Really?

Level down. Level down. Level down. Level down. Level down. Level down. Level down. Level down. Level down. Level down. Level down. Level down.

Monsters chasing you ALLLLL the way across the freggen' zone, even after you've clearly left any monster's reasonable range to track you.

The "Every monster is a boss" concept. Yeah, that's great, but it gets old having to grind on them repeatedly, fast.

The god-forsaken Dynamis loot system, dear god. Just the god-forsaken Dynamis loot system. Can we have tokens, please?

Dynamis/Limbus/Any instance lock-out because of server capacity is just inexcusable in this day and age.

Weapon rankings, and starting players out with their C- rated weapon. Again, who thought this was a good idea?

5,000 gil for a starting set of armor, when the money-making system is so obscure and difficult to get into, the average player at level 15 starting the game is lucky to have 1,000 gil.

Zero loot or 'crystal-onry' policy on high-level boss monsters with desired loot tables. It has to drop SOMETHING a player would want; not a freggen' Fire Crystal, FFS, RASKKKKK! (I care about this one, obviously)

21-24 hour HNMs; because everyone loves getting out of bed at 2 AM on a workday to turn on their bots for 3 hours, and have a high chance of coming away with NOTHING!

Teleports/Warps a little closer to a destination, kthx. Who wants Tele-Mea? Anyone? Anyone at all?

Please, God, no more chokepoint boss pop mobs on 4-8 hour respawn timers, and campable by multiple LSs, holding the key to not only one of the most desired bosses, but THE most desired big boss in the area.

They shouldn't call it leveling; they should call it: Vana'diel Genocide, because that's about what you do, instead of any mass killing with a sense of at least a shred of purpose.

Edited for spacing.

Edited, Jan 4th 2010 1:25pm by Warne

Edited, Jan 4th 2010 1:28pm by Warne
____________________________
Come into the sand, and the dust, and the sky
Go now, there's no better plan, than to do or to die
Free me, pray to the faith in the face of the light
Feed me, fill me with sin, and get ready to fight

Snooochie wrote, concerning BST forums:
Quote:
This forum used to be all about "How can we overcome this?" Now it seems to be all about "How can someone else fix this for me?"

#66 Jan 04 2010 at 12:26 PM Rating: Default
**
555 posts
My only fear/worries about FFXIV at this point with the information provided so far would be..Cash Shops.

Warne, are those fears and worries or rants/complaints? ::shrug::



Edited, Jan 4th 2010 1:34pm by Skeptic
____________________________
Retired 75PLD
Hades Server
Obsidian Linkshell

WoW Fails.


#67 Jan 04 2010 at 7:44 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,630 posts
1. Tedious XP grind (group or solo)
2. Death penalties that discourage players from adventure.
3. Unattainable end-game gear for a casual player.
4. Lack of progressive gear for leveling and end-game.
5. HNM/NM spawn system.
6. Gimp race/class combos. lol Elvaan BLM 4tw!

Left FFXI for all those reason. WoW got a handle on a lot of them, just hope that FFXIV improves upon them further.
#68 Jan 05 2010 at 4:32 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
2,153 posts
- Hijack post, please skip -

@Kachi

I guess we can then agree on the (mutually face-saving) compromise that the use of the label "cognitive dissonance" for "the notion of perceptions being shown to be inconsistent with reality" is, strictly speaking in the context of Psychological Science, faulty labeling - even if it was not your fault. It's a fixed term to describe a certain phenomenon, and using it in a colloquial way to describe something else is - well, just flurry. Once people start to adorn their writings with scientific terms as if they actually understood their meaning, you quickly leave the realm of meaningful discussion, as the interpretation of its contents become arbitrary. Bad, bad professors ^.^. Wherever those

Quote:
three texts and two professors from two different universities.


come from - I hope there isn't more of it. What makes me wonder is the question how CD could work as a

Quote:
key educational strategy (... and ...) one of the most basic aspects of Ed Psych


Sounds like an interesting application of theoretical knowledge to me - I just can't imagine how it would work.

In reply to:
Quote:
I guess what I'm saying is, you probably are more or less as aware of what cognitive dissonance is as I am


Well, looking at my own books, former notes and the first 15 entries Google has for "Cognitive Dissonance" somehow reassured me that my colleagues haven't suddenly agreed on changing the meaning of this central concept after all. The valiant defense of "your" definition actually made me become a little unsure. Again, as I do not know where those "three texts and two professors" lurk about, I am not too sure about how serious your spin on the concept is.

In reply to:
Quote:
we might disagree on the effect of (perceived) consequence salience valence (?) in the validity of the interpretations taken from the studies described


Definitely. Especially since - as I already mentioned in a previous reply - only two of the studies cited in the Wikipedia article have a surface similarity to something reminiscent of, e.g., the overjustification effect.

In reply to:
Quote:
In retrospect, perhaps I meant to be less critical of the wiki than to your applying it in this situation.


Again: Please point me exactly to my mistake. The one I'm still unable to see.

In reply to:
Quote:
Cognitive dissonance is a phenomenon that leads to coping, whereas I do not see this as an issue of coping as much as a shift in motivation alongside simple delay of gratification.


I already refuted that objection in a previous reply. There is no shift in motivation observed in the OP, and even if there was, it wouldn't support your point because the actions he describes were not intrinsically motivating in the first place. Btw, CD may lead to coping, but doesn't necessarily have to. Unless you use the term coping in a colloquial sense again.

In reply to:
Quote:
Sometimes people "enjoy" doing things they don't really enjoy doing because they perceive the rewards to be worthwhile


Not in my universe^^. You may like a job because of it's rewards, even if you don't enjoy doing it. But it's pretty hard to "enjoy" something you don't enjoy. But that is a little nitpicking on my part.

I'm actually beginning to like this. Keep going ^.^/
#69 Jan 05 2010 at 9:39 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
I'm tired, so I'm just going to refrain from responding to your criticisms in depth and just suffice it to say that I don't necessarily agree.

Quote:
Sounds like an interesting application of theoretical knowledge to me - I just can't imagine how it would work.


Well, it doesn't take much imagination. You believe that the stick I'm holding will sink in water. I put it in water and it floats. You experience cognitive dissonance.

You possess a certain worldview that conflicts with another, but do not see how they are related. I explain the relevance of one to the other.

There are a million examples.

Quote:
Well, looking at my own books, former notes and the first 15 entries Google has for "Cognitive Dissonance" somehow reassured me that my colleagues haven't suddenly agreed on changing the meaning of this central concept after all. The valiant defense of "your" definition actually made me become a little unsure. Again, as I do not know where those "three texts and two professors" lurk about, I am not too sure about how serious your spin on the concept is.


Quite serious, but I don't get the sense that they are that conceptually different either way. It's not surprising that a practical field would use a narrower definition of a term than a theoretical counterpart. It's also not surprising that a broader field would be more heavily represented than a narrower one in a Google search :p I only skimmed this (and nothing else) but it seemed decent enough for the third google hit on "cognitive dissonance education"
http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/dissonance.htm

Quote:
Definitely. Especially since - as I already mentioned in a previous reply - only two of the studies cited in the Wikipedia article have a surface similarity to something reminiscent of, e.g., the overjustification effect.


Not valence-- salience. And I acknowledge that they are not direct parallels to the overjustification effect; however, I think it is much more than a surface similarity. Read also the controversy section.

Quote:

I already refuted that objection in a previous reply. There is no shift in motivation observed in the OP, and even if there was, it wouldn't support your point because the actions he describes were not intrinsically motivating in the first place. Btw, CD may lead to coping, but doesn't necessarily have to. Unless you use the term coping in a colloquial sense again.


I find your assertion that he was not intrinsically motivated in the first place pretty contentious. Neither of us know for sure, but I would place large odds that he was at least on the more intrinsic side of an extrinsic motivation at the very least. By coping, I meant your analysis of cognitive dissonance reduction.

We have already established that he is not demotivated, but motivation is not simply intrinsic, extrinsic, or absent-- there are at least four distinct phases of extrinsic motivation. From where I sit, it's pretty indisputable that he was more intrinsically motivated than he is now (it's virtually an inevitability).

Quote:

Not in my universe^^. You may like a job because of it's rewards, even if you don't enjoy doing it. But it's pretty hard to "enjoy" something you don't enjoy. But that is a little nitpicking on my part.


Even in your universe. It's an emotional response to anticipation of a reward, and is what makes us so adept at delaying gratification.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#70 Jan 05 2010 at 1:43 PM Rating: Good
"My biggest fear is that SE will continue on the path of selling in-game items to the point where a few hours and one hundred bucks would equal months of work."

THIS.
#71 Jan 05 2010 at 1:56 PM Rating: Good
Sage
***
1,246 posts
Hmmmmmm
1. Getting in to the Beta, but the download going at 2kb/s because they use a crowded direct server download
2. (Wouldn't be too miffed if I didn't make the Beta but...) Buying the game and having to wait a week to register the game
3. And probably a ridiculous retail price, concurrent with a close to FFXIII release date. It's bad enough I have to fork out loads for XIII, but if XIV comes out say, weeks later and costs the same that'll be annoying
____________________________
Meowth!
#72 Jan 05 2010 at 3:07 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,793 posts
ditx wrote:
Hmmmmmm
1. Getting in to the Beta, but the download going at 2kb/s because they use a crowded direct server download


Oh god, this. THIS. This for any patch or content update. Because having a cable connection capable of at least 800 kb/s reduced to dial-up rates is still acceptable in today's gaming world.
____________________________
Come into the sand, and the dust, and the sky
Go now, there's no better plan, than to do or to die
Free me, pray to the faith in the face of the light
Feed me, fill me with sin, and get ready to fight

Snooochie wrote, concerning BST forums:
Quote:
This forum used to be all about "How can we overcome this?" Now it seems to be all about "How can someone else fix this for me?"

#73 Jan 05 2010 at 3:34 PM Rating: Default
***
2,169 posts
Elitists are simply players who are very good at the game, and refuse to play with you or acknowledge you. They believe you are a lower form of life (in the game) essentially and will laugh among themselves and call you noob behind your back.

Elitists will typically try to acquire really good gear so you can inspect them and gawk in awe.

When you are in a PT and a really good warrior is doing 50% of your PTs damage but is silent the entire time without a /p chat line, chances are they are talking about how much they are owning everyone in damage in /ls chat and how noob the other DD is.

Elitists are almost always passive-aggressive b/c they don't want to be portrayed as douche, so they keep their elitist feelings quiet.
____________________________
FFXIV - Currently Playing on Selbina Server
Name: Itachi Akatsuki (THM)
LS: UnitedBBQ

www.guildwork.com - best guildhosting site period

FFXI - Pingpong - Retired 2007
http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/profile.xml?6988
75rng | 75nin | 75blm | working on RDM
RNG Gration solo: http://pingpongwww.livejournal.com/15532.html
#74 Jan 05 2010 at 5:26 PM Rating: Decent
Avatard
*****
11,630 posts
RaideLeonn wrote:
Maybe the word elitist is being taken out of context. Someone who striving to be the best can be considered elitist. The kind of person who thinks he's good at his job and lords it over everyone else in a negative manner is considered a huge douche.

The real elitists were too few and far-between, the ones that politely tell others how to gear or use skillchains rather than shunning everyone that's not as good as they are.



Edited, Jan 3rd 2010 8:52pm by RaideLeonn


I use the word "elitist" to describe a person who won't settle for OTHERS putting out less than optimal performance.

These "elitists" that I talk about are those who make sure nobody else use the less than optimal choices.

As a game I really think "anything goes" should be the design philosophy. You could make armor do nothing at all, except looks for example. Would probably cut down a lot on elitism (but be annoying since I want to look hot!)
#75 Jan 05 2010 at 11:43 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Why would that be annoying? Wouldn't it be the other way around.

Personally I didn't like the way FFXI forced me to choose between being less than optimal, or looking like I just fell ***-first into a costume closet.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#76 Jan 06 2010 at 1:31 AM Rating: Good
**
336 posts
One of my fears is that there will be too many "instances" and teleporting. I don't want exploration and running into people while exploring to be thrown out. I want to feel like I'm with thousands of players, not just having an isolated 8 player match in whatever FPS is popular this week.

I know the complaint against this is crowding and competition but hopefully they've changed the game from FFXI in a manner to compensate.

Another fear is being forced into a class/earning an ability I don't like because what I like isn't appealing to partiers/quests/missions.
#77 Jan 06 2010 at 3:06 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
2,153 posts
As usual: Skip it, skippers. This ain't got nothing to do with your fears about FFXIV. Just with Truth, Science, Nitpicking - and a good bit of digital ****-dueling.

@Kachi the Unwavering
Well, this time let's to it down-top for a change.


In reply to:
Quote:
Not in my universe^^. You may like a job because of it's rewards, even if you don't enjoy doing it. But it's pretty hard to "enjoy" something you don't enjoy. But that is a little nitpicking on my part.

Even in your universe. It's an emotional response to anticipation of a reward, and is what makes us so adept at delaying gratification.


Not in my universe. No offense intended - but you really seem to have a faible for bending the meaning of exactly defined terms. What you describe is - just as you actually write - anticipation of the reward, not intrinsic enjoyment of the action itself. Or would you claim that somebody who is (for example) publicly humiliated enjoys the humiliation if he's paid money afterwards? There's actually an amusing (while pretty colloquial) book by a practitioner called Hochschild on that kind of emotionally taxing, but well-paid occupation. Pretty fun to ready. Well, maybe I just love to indulge in the misery of others? Who knows. http://www.amazon.co.jp/Managed-Heart-Commercialization-Human-Feeling/dp/0520239334

No, those people are not happy at work.


Actually the money you receive for dull, painful or time-consuming work is partially considered a compensation for the unpleasant experience (or the opportunity costs) you had during the task; in some work-related contracts, the word "compensation" is explicitly used. I don't think this is a coincidence. Why would you have to "compensate" someone for a pleasant experience? Besides, delaying gratification would be pretty easy (we all know it is not) if the emotional experience during the task was actually enjoyable.


In reply to:
Kachi:
Quote:
I find your assertion that he was not intrinsically motivated in the first place pretty contentious.


OP:
Quote:
Each day I wanted to throw my keyboard at the wall due to the stress of having to make more arrows


So you assume that he actually liked it for a significant amount of time at first, and, more importantly, would have liked the endless repetition ad infinitum, if it hadn't increased his woodworking skill?


In reply to:
Quote:
I only skimmed this (and nothing else) but it seemed decent enough for the third google hit on "cognitive dissonance education"


Well enough, and I'll let the fact that you didn't actually search for "cognitive dissonance" slip by. The point is just that the definition for cognitive dissonance you gave in your first reply was - wrong. This term does not describe (quote, for the third time): "the notion of perceptions being shown to be inconsistent with reality", as you falsely stated. That's just not true. False. A mistake. Even in Educational Psychology. A fact that is apparent even from the text on "how cognitive dissonance can be used in an educational context" you just quoted, so it's not just a matter of a "narrower definition of a term". Cognitive dissonance is the result, the thing you experience, or rather: the thing you may experience (some people actually don't, but that's another topic!), not the cause. And there doesn't even have to be an "inconsistency with reality" for CD to occur; two conflicting notions - both of them may be perfectly "true" objectively - are all you need.

To sum it up: "the notion of perceptions being shown to be inconsistent with reality" is neither sufficient nor necessary for Cognitive Dissonance. Even if teachers make good use of the fact that both phenomena tend to occur together with significantly greater than chance likelyhood, your spin on the definition was critically flawed, and that's what I wanted to point out. Some very few people might still be reading this, after all.^^/


In reply to:
Quote:
Read also the controversy section.


I did. That's why I am so confident. Though you almost got me. Hot-headed as always, I didn't read it before my second reply. ^u^


In reply to:
Quote:
Sounds like an interesting application of theoretical knowledge to me - I just can't imagine how it would work.

Well, it doesn't take much imagination. You believe that the stick I'm holding will sink in water. I put it in water and it floats. You (may) experience cognitive dissonance.


Thanks for the explanation. An interesting practical application I've never thought of. Educational Psychology is not my focus -.-;

In reply to:
Quote:
I'm tired, so I'm just going to refrain from responding to your criticisms in depth and just suffice it to say that I don't necessarily agree.


Yeah, this discussion has come to burn by far more resources than I originally imagined. Just one thing I would really, really still like to know is:

Quote:
In retrospect, perhaps I meant to be less critical of the wiki than to your applying it in this situation.


Again: Please point me exactly to my mistake. The one I'm still unable to see.


(?)
#78 Jan 06 2010 at 3:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
**
899 posts
You two... get a room already >.>;;
____________________________
Falasi of Bismarck.
THF75/WAR75/BLU75/RNG75/DRK75/MNK75/SAM66
ZM:done. PM:done. AM:done.
Assault: Captain
#79 Jan 06 2010 at 4:22 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
4,775 posts
Rinsui wrote:

Actually the money you receive for dull, painful or time-consuming work is partially considered a compensation for the unpleasant experience (or the opportunity costs) you had during the task; in some work-related contracts, the word "compensation" is explicitly used. I don't think this is a coincidence. Why would you have to "compensate" someone for a pleasant experience? Besides, delaying gratification would be pretty easy (we all know it is not) if the emotional experience during the task was actually enjoyable.


I think this paragraph sums up 99% of FFXI endgame events. Carry on with the psychobabble discussion.
#80 Jan 06 2010 at 6:33 AM Rating: Good
Avatard
*****
11,630 posts
Kachi wrote:
Why would that be annoying? Wouldn't it be the other way around.

Personally I didn't like the way FFXI forced me to choose between being less than optimal, or looking like I just fell ***-first into a costume closet.


You can probably see how it would be annoying to be a WHM/BST or something and try and make your own party and people just /sea, see the combo, then say "No thanks" just because you didn't conform to the optimal WHM/SCH practice.

That is just one example of probably 1000 combinations that people would just straight out say no to because they are "elitist" enough to not accept anything below max job combo. (Though they may not be elitist enough to only accept best geared people on said max job combos)

I guess if XIV is very solo friendly you could avoid all those problems, but then you'd be playing a MMO without other humans.
#81 Jan 06 2010 at 7:28 AM Rating: Excellent
***
1,013 posts
I'm afraid they will completely kill the cooperative aspect of FFXI instead of vastly improving on it.
#82 Jan 06 2010 at 10:13 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:

Not in my universe. No offense intended - but you really seem to have a faible for bending the meaning of exactly defined terms. What you describe is - just as you actually write - anticipation of the reward, not intrinsic enjoyment of the action itself. Or would you claim that somebody who is (for example) publicly humiliated enjoys the humiliation if he's paid money afterwards?

...

No, those people are not happy at work.


I have no interest in "digital ****-dueling." You would be far from the first person who did not accept that I was right about something, and my resolve to allow people on the internet be wrong grows e'er stronger by the day.

To the point, no. One can experience intrinsic enjoyment of the anticipation and excitement of a reward without enjoying the action that will yield the reward. This is a point of theoretical consensus: enjoyment relates to positive affect, and the emotion of "hope" (or whatever you want to call the emotion that stems from an expectancy cognition) is a positive affect. In practice you can see this in gamblers, for example.

On this, at least, our dispute is not semantic, but conceptual. I am not misappropriating terminology, though if you're expecting me to parse myself word by word, I guess you'd just be out of luck.

As for public humiliation, possibly, but not necessarily. That's the thing about expectancy cognitions-- you have to be having them to enjoy them. I imagine that if you're being humiliated or are otherwise highly discontent, you're not thinking about how excited you are to get the reward, but I wouldn't write off the possibility. But someone playing a video game in their leisure time is not even remotely analogous to a person making a living at a job they hate.

Quote:
Why would you have to "compensate" someone for a pleasant experience?

*Edit: I assume you can infer from my other responses what I would say to this, but in case you can't, I'll answer cutely that, "Some whores enjoy their work."

Quote:
So you assume that he actually liked it for a significant amount of time at first, and, more importantly, would have liked the endless repetition ad infinitum, if it hadn't increased his woodworking skill?


I assume that he enjoyed the game for a significant amount of time at first, and eventually began adopting behaviors consistent with his goals in the game that were not enjoyable on their own. I'll add that developing competence is consistently shown by the literature to enhance intrinsic motivation, so to the extent that he is enhancing competencies that he values, yes, he could enjoy an otherwise boring activity indefinitely (in theory).

Quote:
Again: Please point me exactly to my mistake. The one I'm still unable to see.


What we have been discussing all this time.

As for the definition of cognitive dissonance, in Ed Psych it refers explicitly to the narrower application I described. I concede that the broader field of psychology adopts a broader definition. I'd just like to put the pedantry aside, because as I said before, conceptually there is no real problem. Different fields use different jargon, or the same jargon with different applications. They always have, and always will.


Edited, Jan 6th 2010 8:29am by Kachi
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#83 Jan 06 2010 at 10:18 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:

You can probably see how it would be annoying to be a WHM/BST or something and try and make your own party and people just /sea, see the combo, then say "No thanks" just because you didn't conform to the optimal WHM/SCH practice.

That is just one example of probably 1000 combinations that people would just straight out say no to because they are "elitist" enough to not accept anything below max job combo. (Though they may not be elitist enough to only accept best geared people on said max job combos)

I guess if XIV is very solo friendly you could avoid all those problems, but then you'd be playing a MMO without other humans.


Quote:
You could make armor do nothing at all, except looks for example. Would probably cut down a lot on elitism (but be annoying since I want to look hot!)


It could be that I'm running on empty, but I'm not seeing the connection. Help me out here:

You want to look hot.
If they made armor purely cosmetic, you could look however you want.
=You would be annoyed if they made armor purely cosmetic?

But it seems like we're talking about completely different things.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#84 Jan 06 2010 at 10:41 AM Rating: Default
**
423 posts
My only fear is either it will be too WoWish or too FFXI'ish(the bad parts) or not FFXI'ish enough(the good parts).

Theres a ton of things that "could" have been fixed in FFXI to make it 100x more appealing to people, the level sync was a great idea... but too little wayyyy too late. That's just one example too.

Then again on the same token i don't want a handout game like WoW is. I want a challange, all wow is, you do it you get it good job. Any game that rewards you for simply being there and putting in minimal effort makes me want to shoot myself. Every patch they make the game easier, lower level mounts, easier leveling etc all to push people to the easy endgame... well what about midgame? I want a challange there too... but no it's been elliminated almost completely.
#85 Jan 06 2010 at 10:42 AM Rating: Good
**
736 posts
For what it's worth, I'm finding that a bit confusing too, Kachi.

Armor that served largely aesthetic purposes sounds delightful.
There's really no reason the Power carrot has to be attached to an item we wear, we're just so used to it at this point we take the idea for granted.
#86 Jan 06 2010 at 11:00 AM Rating: Good
**
566 posts
boriss wrote:
Every patch they make the game easier, lower level mounts, easier leveling etc all to push people to the easy endgame... well what about midgame? I want a challange there too... but no it's been elliminated almost completely.




This is necessary as games become top-heavy 5+ years into their existence. If the devs don't do things like these, new players who don't have the same support network they may have had coming into the game when it was new may get bored of not being able to accomplish things they need to finish to progress, and subsequently quit, taking money out of the devs pockets.

You could very easily make WoW a harder game to level through, nobody forces players to set up their skill trees for maximum DOT, or to get their mount at 20. If you want to walk until 50+, walk. Play through to 80 without using a single skill point. Use all white gear, no blues or purples. I guarantee you won't consider it such a cakewalk then.


There are similarities in FFXI. If you want a "challenge", try leveling a new job with a static party from 10-75 the old way, no level sync, no FoV, no past, no ToAU zones, no lolibri for 43 levels, and no parties over 7-9k/hr. The devs aren't forcing you to use these devices, the player base is.
#87 Jan 06 2010 at 11:11 AM Rating: Excellent
**
565 posts
A crafting system where the HQ of a target recipe is undesirable at best, useless at worst.

Example of the former:

Carbonara (56 cooking) requires Buffalo Jerky (36 cooking). High level chef attempting to HQ the Carbonara? Better have a mule or a friend make your jerky! HQ Bison Jerky's only uses are as gimp high level melee food [Strength +5, Mind -2 and Attack +18% (Cap: 70 @ 388 Base Attack)] or guild points.

Example of the latter:

Again, referring to Carbonara, it also requires Stone Cheese (61 cooking). Again, if you are a higher level in cooking and attempting to HQ Carbonara while saving money by crafting your own ingredients, the HQ of Stone Cheese, Rock Cheese, is even worse: [HP +5.5% (Cap: 45@818 Base HP) and HP Recovered While Healing +1]. Oh, and it can't be used for guild points.

Sorry, but if I'm making a friggin' BLT in real life and I use pancetta instead of bacon, it's gonna knock the quality and the price tag up a few notches.
____________________________
~ Retired...? Maybe not... ~
#88 Jan 07 2010 at 6:17 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
You could very easily make WoW a harder game to level through, nobody forces players to set up their skill trees for maximum DOT, or to get their mount at 20. If you want to walk until 50+, walk. Play through to 80 without using a single skill point. Use all white gear, no blues or purples. I guarantee you won't consider it such a cakewalk then.

There are similarities in FFXI. If you want a "challenge", try leveling a new job with a static party from 10-75 the old way, no level sync, no FoV, no past, no ToAU zones, no lolibri for 43 levels, and no parties over 7-9k/hr. The devs aren't forcing you to use these devices, the player base is.


The problem with that is that people want to be REWARDED for overcoming challenges, not punished.

Dumbed-down content is neither an inevitability nor desirable. If you force them to choose between developing competence as a player vs. the competence of their character, they're generally going to choose the one that's most visible and important.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#89 Jan 07 2010 at 9:07 AM Rating: Good
***
1,596 posts
Quote:
2) Class change "on the fly". Could cause a broken system where people can solo or duo stuff meant to be harder content for groups. Again can't say for sure until game is released and see how it works, and what the content will be like.


My largest fear is that the game will revolve around this ability to the point where some encounters will revolve around being able to swap Physical and Magic DDs on the fly. This will make DDs have to level their favorite job along with a Blm style job because their LSs require it.

____________________________
FFXI: Ragnus Rondain of Phoenix Nin 75,Whm 75,Rng 43 (Retired 5/21/10)
FFXIV: Noemi Rondain of Saronia Arc/Mnr/Pug (On hold until the game stops sucking)
WoW: Ishkabibble of Antonidas Orcish Hunter of 17th level (Kinda active)

Allakhazam's Rating System: Simplified

If you post with the majority opinion: Rate Up
If you post against the majority opinion: Rate Down
If you post against the majority opinion but make a good argument: Slight Rate Down
#90 Jan 07 2010 at 10:18 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
casual and Hardcore

This please. I've had MANY friends quit FFXI because of the time requirements to actually play the game. About 8 RL friends left the game and the remaining 3 of us eventually gave it up in October (mainly in preparation of XIV).

My friends have told they really want to play this one but only if they can actually accomplish something with an hour or 2 of playing.

Obviously they don't expect to get Ultimas flaming sword of doomstick in their lifetime, they just want to be able to play together, level regularly and not have to spend 6 hours fetching Yagudo necklaces just becaue they love Ninja but got to level 12 and didn't have Utsusemi: Ichi or the money to buy it.

Psychology Thing

An interesting theory in relation to FFXIs punishment. I don't think it applies so much to everyone leveling a craft, but it definitely has it's play. Like "Goddamnit I hate leveling Red Mage but I want to get into merit parties more and my Blu isn't getting invites"

I'm mostly worried that it might be TOO similar. I want a similar experience, but I also want a complete overhaul in a positive way. I could take a hammer to so many XI mechanics.
____________________________

[ffxivsig]1183812[/ffxivsig]
#91 Jan 07 2010 at 11:53 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,842 posts
Here is what I don't get, everyone wants to accomplish something during leveling in the span of a couple of hours because they don't have alot of time to play but when it comes to end game everyone is ok when the raids take 6+ hours to finish.

Or how everyone wants to solo because it's a pain to get a group to level but when it's end game getting 18+ people together for a few hours isn't a big deal.

Sorry but these double standards are just funny to me.
____________________________
FFXIV Dyvid (Awaiting 2.0)
FFXI Dyvid ~ Pandemonium (Retired)
SWTOR Dy'vid Legacy - Canderous Ordo
#92 Jan 07 2010 at 1:18 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
everyone is ok when the raids take 6+ hours to finish.


Pfft, uh uh. I can assure you that a lot of people, proportionally, are not okay with that. Personally I hated it. 3 hours, maybe, if it's a really exciting raid, but as far as XI went, I was sick of most before the second hour was up.

Quote:
Or how everyone wants to solo because it's a pain to get a group to level but when it's end game getting 18+ people together for a few hours isn't a big deal.


Not a big deal? Considering it often takes coordination through a privately run webpage, rule structures and penalties?

I don't even like the 18-man events, and I can offer several reasons why, but what it boils down to is more=!merrier. More= more coordinating, more waiting on people, more stressed out leadership, and less actual fun and conversation, because people need to listen and not crowd the chat log.

Now 18-man events where you can just throw any decent 18 people together would be one thing, but it's almost never that easy.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#93 Jan 07 2010 at 1:56 PM Rating: Decent
Avatard
*****
11,630 posts
dyvidd wrote:
Here is what I don't get, everyone wants to accomplish something during leveling in the span of a couple of hours because they don't have alot of time to play but when it comes to end game everyone is ok when the raids take 6+ hours to finish.

Or how everyone wants to solo because it's a pain to get a group to level but when it's end game getting 18+ people together for a few hours isn't a big deal.

Sorry but these double standards are just funny to me.


It is actually understandable.

You want to be able to play short bursts and still get something done. But you also don't want to meet up with all your friends for just 30 minutes of playing.

Same thing with the other part. People don't want to wait for pickup people or rely on party members that may be sick or have to pick up their daughter or similar. But at the same time they want to play in a larger group.



All in all you could actually solve both these things in FFXI today... if you removed the exp penalty for more members. You'd have parties of 6-18 members, depending on how many friends were logged on at the same time.

Then again the optimization of people would make it "18 ONLY!!!" and people would have parties of size 15 and still stand in jeuno and shout "15/18 meripo. Need RDM and BRD!"

Guess you really have to remove the exp on kill system and rather just make it "exp per hour in battle". Which also is wrong since then you just need to toss a rock at a mob and kite him for hours on hours and then have a friend kill it to gain massive exp.



It is kind of depressing when you see how players are going to ruin anything a developer does just because they'd rather be handed everything on a platter and not play at all. (Except they'll scream like mad that they want hard content, but they won't play it any other way than the easiest way...)
#94 Jan 07 2010 at 2:17 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
4,775 posts
So Mellowy, have you changed your mind about playing FFXIV or you just sick of arguing about SMN? By the way, SMN won't be in FFXIV sorry.
#95 Jan 07 2010 at 3:28 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,793 posts
Gerbilization. Map design that can be best summed up as: tunnel->open space->tunnel->open space->tunnel->pretty sight->tunnel->event wheel->tunnel wash, rinse, repeat.
____________________________
Come into the sand, and the dust, and the sky
Go now, there's no better plan, than to do or to die
Free me, pray to the faith in the face of the light
Feed me, fill me with sin, and get ready to fight

Snooochie wrote, concerning BST forums:
Quote:
This forum used to be all about "How can we overcome this?" Now it seems to be all about "How can someone else fix this for me?"

#96 Jan 07 2010 at 4:22 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,523 posts
Quote:
So Mellowy, have you changed your mind about playing FFXIV or you just sick of arguing about SMN? By the way, SMN won't be in FFXIV sorry


I don't really understand why you're assuming this.
____________________________
____(>°°)D_->__(O°°)>-_<(;,,;)>_C-(°°Q)__O~~_t(°°<)_(;o0)___<(;,,;)>_<(;,,;)>_<(;,,;)>_<(;,,;)>_<(;,,;)>_____
[ffxivsig]499417[/ffxivsig]
#97 Jan 07 2010 at 4:54 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
4,775 posts
RedGalka wrote:


I don't really understand why you're assuming this.


Well because SE has hinted there won't be any pet jobs. Beyond that, SE never fixed SMN in FFXI. So it's kinda silly to reintroduce SMN to FFXIV if they couldn't even balance the class in FFXI. I think there's a better chance of seeing the BST or Trainer class.
#98 Jan 08 2010 at 3:58 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,523 posts
1) They said there aren't any pet jobs at the start. Which is basically the same as it was with FFXI.

2) It could be that this time around Sumoner won't even be a pet job. It may very well be that the player can shift into avatar (hybrid) forms and gain abilities in this way.

3) Isn't there information released already that the avatars will be having a major part in FFXVI? I really doubt they go threw all that trouble and not have some offspring job in addition.
____________________________
____(>°°)D_->__(O°°)>-_<(;,,;)>_C-(°°Q)__O~~_t(°°<)_(;o0)___<(;,,;)>_<(;,,;)>_<(;,,;)>_<(;,,;)>_<(;,,;)>_____
[ffxivsig]499417[/ffxivsig]
#99 Jan 08 2010 at 4:25 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
4,775 posts
RedGalka wrote:
1) They said there aren't any pet jobs at the start. Which is basically the same as it was with FFXI.


By the NA release, SMN was released with just Carby if memory serves. Still my point about SE's failure to understand the SMN class 7 years later holds more water than your theory.

Quote:

2) It could be that this time around Sumoner won't even be a pet job. It may very well be that the player can shift into avatar (hybrid) forms and gain abilities in this way.


That's more possible than a pet class, but I see no proof to support such a theory yet.

Quote:

3) Isn't there information released already that the avatars will be having a major part in FFXVI? I really doubt they go threw all that trouble and not have some offspring job in addition.


No, there isn't beyond the imagination of a few savvy Pro-SMN fans. The Beastmen races worship the Avatars as Gods. That's all we know so far. What people seem to forget is how many Avatars that weren't playable in FFXI.

Bahamut
Phoenix
Alexander
Atomos
Ixion
Fenrir and Diabolos weren't playable always either.

So don't make it seem like just because there are Avatars in the game, that's concrete evidence there will be a SMN/Evoker class in FFXIV.
#100 Jan 08 2010 at 4:26 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,754 posts
what would be cool is to fight along side/against massive summons in epic quest battles :)
____________________________
The Accursed Being Sent By Heaven; Jenova: The Calamity From The Skies

WoW - EU - Al'Akir - Goblin Warlock
Taoquitok

FFXI - Bismarck
Jenovaomega
#101 Jan 08 2010 at 4:30 AM Rating: Default
3 posts
Great topic.

1. The whole Disciples of the Land/Hand thing seem like blazing bright warning flares to me. Are they gonna require you to spend as much time and effort as say leveling a damage job to level a craft? I hope to god not. People dont want to spend forever leveling crafts. It leads to relatively few people with lots of time, or gold sellers, controlling the markets with throws the economy irrepairably out of whack. I played FFXI a long time and forgave alot of bad things about it, but Ive yet to come across another MMO with such a horrendously, insane, unbalanced economy as FFXI.

2. That there wont be many instanced dungeons/quests and instead a repeat of the monster camping fiasco of FFXI.

3. That there wont be separate servers for North America, Asia etc. Dont want to make broad generalities, but it seemed to me that in Asia they are abit more hardcore about their MMO's. They inevitably morph the games into elitist controlled, min-maxing tedium, and their western counterparts follow their lead. Too much of "this job/ combo only, etc"

4. That you wont be able to make progress solo. While the days of a good group grinding it out for hours like a well oiled machine had it charms, those days have ended.

Finally a comment on some previous posters disparaging WoW and the supposed easiness. WoW is currenly the best MMO for good reason. They take no shame in taking the best elements of other MMO's and incorporating them, and they react and implement changes quickly by MMO standards. You know why? Because the millions of casual gamers paying their subscription fees gives them the resources to.
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 1 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (1)