Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

ITGames InterviewFollow

#1 Jul 01 2010 at 4:53 AM Rating: Excellent
Guru
**
641 posts
A reporter for ITGames, with an admittedly sour outlook on MMOs, sat down with Final Fantasy XIV Producer Hiromichi Tanaka to find out what he was missing.

Tanaka sheds some light on his motivations and those of his team and tries to explain how FFXIV will set itself apart in a world already swamped with MMOs.

View the article here
____________________________
JPButton | Twitter
#2TheBSTGuy, Posted: Jul 01 2010 at 5:40 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I read the article I guess we will see how long FFXIV can keep the WOW ADD crowed happy, my guess is not long!
#3 Jul 01 2010 at 9:19 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,416 posts
Thanks Elmer! That was a good read.

Tanaka wrote:
With an MMORPG, the story is never finished. Friendships are born and tales are constantly woven between players... it's an RPG full of meetings and partings and many of our more passionate players carry over that experience into the real world. I find it fascinating to see how the world grows and expands outside the scope of the pre-built scenarios -- I might even call it an addiction.

I have to say, he hit the nail on the head. This is definitely the reason I play.
____________________________
Abort, Retry, Fail?
TeamAFK!

/equip Head Knowledge
You gain the latent effect of Power.
#4 Jul 01 2010 at 9:39 AM Rating: Good
Sage
****
6,471 posts
Good read. Appreciate it, Elmer.

Quote:
Tanaka: That would be the battle system, which is probably also the greatest difference from FFXI as well. The Armoury System, which I explained before, will certainly set us apart, but players can also mix abilities they learn across different classes and re-create memorable jobs from the Final Fantasy series in their own way. This is why we separated classes into Disciplines instead of giving them traditional Final Fantasy job names.


Make it work, Tanaka. I want my healing Lancer, damnit.
#5 Jul 01 2010 at 10:55 AM Rating: Good
*
63 posts
That was a very interesting read. I am really looking forward to how they will work the mixing of different classes skills together. Elemental archer sounds like a fun combined combat class.
____________________________
When life gives you lemons......BAM!!!! Ninjas everywhere!! Thousands of them!!!
#6 Jul 01 2010 at 11:08 AM Rating: Good
***
1,159 posts
Quote:
So, in essence, a game is about giving the players a place to have fun, would you say?


That was possibly the most ridiculous question I've ever seen asked in a game related interview. That's like asking the CEO of Ford, "So, in essence, a car is about giving people a means of transportation, wouldn't you say?" It would have been an ok question if it were asked 30-40 years ago at the onset of gaming but asking it now is just idiotic...where on earth do these interviewers come from?
#7 Jul 01 2010 at 1:16 PM Rating: Decent
**
411 posts
The interviewer is an amateur douche. I didn't like his questions or style.

-- "I'm not the biggest fan of MMORPGs"
And you're the one conducting the interview?

-- "I see, so it's the passion of the players that really drives a game's success."
Do you even know what a game is?

-- "So, in essence, a game is about giving the players a place to have fun, would you say?"
I want to break your face...

-- "Thank you very much for your time. Thanks to our chat, I've become a little more optimistic about MMORPGs."
Translated: 'lol i just wasted 30 minutes of your time! Good luck chump!'

Go back to your day job.
#8 Jul 01 2010 at 2:41 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
11,539 posts
Yogtheterrible wrote:
Quote:
So, in essence, a game is about giving the players a place to have fun, would you say?


That was possibly the most ridiculous question I've ever seen asked in a game related interview. That's like asking the CEO of Ford, "So, in essence, a car is about giving people a means of transportation, wouldn't you say?" It would have been an ok question if it were asked 30-40 years ago at the onset of gaming but asking it now is just idiotic...where on earth do these interviewers come from?


I read that question differently, or at least with the emphasis on a different word.

I think that if you read the question as:

So, in essence, a game is about giving the players a place to have fun, would you say?

Then yeah, it sounds like a dumb question. But consider it from a different perspective:

So, in essence, a game is about giving the players a place to have fun, would you say?

Here's how I see it: With non MMORPGs, it's about the game providing you with an interface to enjoy yourself with. Just like Windows solitaire or a browser flash game, you are being entertained through a "form of entertainment".

By placing the emphasis on the word "place" instead of "fun", you come closer to what I see it as: With an MMORPG (a good one anyway), it's not about the game, it's about the place. It's a virtual world that you simultaneously exist in with other people, and the bulk of the fun comes not from the game itself, but from the people you play with.

If you've ever gambled socially or drank socially, you'll know what I mean; poker/craps/blackjack can only be so fun; it's rather boring after a while. But the conversations you carry on WHILE playing are the main part of the allure. "Poker night" isn't about playing poker, it's about people getting together and hanging out. Poker is just something they do. Same with social drinking; the alcohol is not inherently fun, you can't do anything in public with alcohol that you can't do in private, but it's the conversations and the socializing that make it fun. The drinking is just something you do.

I see MMORPGs in the same light; it's not that I'm playing a game with other people, it's that I'm with other people and we're all playing a game. That, for me, is why I don't have much fun playing a game I can solo most of, or playing a game that none of my friends play (or that I have no friends on).

In a single player environment, the popularity of a game is directly proportionate to how "fun" the game is. In a massively multiplayer environment, the "fun" factor of the game can exist independently of the "social" factor. It's the "place" that makes the game, not the "fun".

EDIT: Remember that for years, games were mostly single player. Multiplayer pretty much meant "Take turns playing". It wasn't till later that the concept of two people playing the same game at the same time took off (and it became wildly popular to bring your system over a friend's house because playing with someone else is almost always more fun than playing alone to most people). Note that in recent years, "solely single player" games have gone downhill with emphasis on online multiplayer, and MMORPGs taking off. In addition to the rise of social networking sites (Facebook, Twitter, MySpace) compared to the early days of the internet (Geocities, Angelfire), one thing you can note is that lately, people don't care what they're doing, as long as they're doing it with someone else. I think that's probably one of the biggest selling points of things like Facebook and World of Warcraft: They're not advertising a product, they're advertising a place. "This is where everyone else is, you should be here too". When have any ads for WoW actually included anything game-related (other than a mohawk grenade?) To those that use Facebook, would you continue using the site if you were the ONLY one there and no one replied to you or commented on anything? How many MMORPGs would be even at all popular if they suddenly became single player?

That's the draw of social sites and MMOGs: It's not about the game providing the fun, it's about the place that has the people. The game is largely an afterthought to many.

Edited, Jul 1st 2010 4:49pm by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#9 Jul 01 2010 at 2:50 PM Rating: Good
***
1,159 posts
I suppose you could be right about that. The majority of people, like myself, being generally critical of interviewers aren't going to read it like that, though. I would have only thought of it the way you did if I actually heard the person emphasize that word.
#10 Jul 01 2010 at 5:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
**
641 posts
The guy appeared to not be interested in, or maybe just not experienced, with MMOs. With some of the "obvious" questions, he's more breaking down and confirming an understanding of the answers Tanaka gave. Sure, games are all supposed to be fun, but as Tanaka elaborates, designing an MMO can be vastly different, and some developers forget to include the basic elements of a game, which leaves a world with nothing to drive the players to help it grow.
____________________________
JPButton | Twitter
#11 Jul 01 2010 at 6:13 PM Rating: Excellent
*
205 posts
I have some what similar view with Mikhalia, but i still think the interview is seriously lacking in experience

So, in essence, a game is about giving the players a place to have fun, would you say?

with the word "So, in essence" it meant that he interpret that Tanaka previous answer which explain the importance of social/community game play as just having a place for that said social/community to have fun.

Which basiclly show he don't fully understand what FF community is about.
____________________________
I'm Xabac/Sleepymagi from FFXI Odin Server, if u hate/love me send me a /tell.
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 30 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (30)