Forum Settings
       
1 2 Next »
This Forum is Read Only

Is SE serious?Follow

#52 Aug 21 2010 at 8:30 AM Rating: Excellent
**
409 posts
Humster wrote:

Well, I think it brings us back to philosophies of life, some view things that are restrictive and counterproductive and ask questions, others see the restrictions and work around it. Asking VS Acceptance.


The difference between tolerating something that is unjust and speaking out against it....

Anyhow, I commented on how glad I was that there was no system like this in FFXIV ( about a month or so ago). Me and my big fat mouth, I swear SE moniters my posts and does nothing but scheme of ways to **** me off...
____________________________
Q: How many SE employees does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: None, it's working as intended.
#53 Aug 21 2010 at 8:57 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,233 posts
So does this mean when retail gets released we're going to see the hardcore gamers start posting threads like "Leveling Guide: How to Avoid Surplus!" ?

Maybe I'm the minority here, but I like the surplus system (at least what I understand of it so far). I'm a perfectionist/completionist too, but this isn't going to ward me from playing multiple hours a day.

I see it like this:

Paracleets levels a Pugilist to 10, enjoys the **** out of it, wants to continue leveling it next time he logs in, but he talks to his friend who's been leveling a Marauder and just got `Cool ability 5`, which would be awesome for Pugilist. So now he decides that he needs to level up Marauder to be a better Pugilist, but he can't be a good Marauder until he levels Gladiator etc etc

It's not truly forcing you to do anything, but it helps to create a better player if you can't just grind your way to the top without key sub-abilities.

There were multiple ways in FFXI of the game kinda forcing you to stop leveling and do something else before you could start again. Limit Breaks, Subjob (Quest/Leveling), AF, etc. I seriously don't see how this is that different.
____________________________
"I'm gonna get nice and drunk, then play video games until my eyes bleed." Charlie (It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia)
#54 Aug 21 2010 at 10:47 AM Rating: Good
***
3,178 posts
The Surplus EXP system sounds horrible. I imagine the hardcore crowd are trying to weigh their love of the FF series against their compulsive need to play-play-play. I may poke fun at the hardcore crowd, but honestly, I'm just envious.

It's likely I just have too many kids to be affected by the surplus system. That said, on those rare moments when I have 16 hours straight to play (once a year perhaps?), being limited by the game itself is completely unacceptable. Not debatable, or horrible, or unfair, or counter-productive. Unacceptable.
#55 Aug 21 2010 at 10:55 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
*****
12,709 posts
RufuSwho wrote:
The Surplus EXP system sounds horrible. I imagine the hardcore crowd are trying to weigh their love of the FF series against their compulsive need to play-play-play. I may poke fun at the hardcore crowd, but honestly, I'm just envious.

It's likely I just have too many kids to be affected by the surplus system. That said, on those rare moments when I have 16 hours straight to play (once a year perhaps?), being limited by the game itself is completely unacceptable. Not debatable, or horrible, or unfair, or counter-productive. Unacceptable.


How are you limited? I'm not limited and I have a main class for grinding that hasn't been struck with surplus yet because as said, I branched my activities out.

Also surplus just cuts your exp down, it doesn't kill it (and its a known bug when you don't get class exp at all). In the BETA, it seems worse because there's NO balance yet. In retail it will make a lot more sense because not only will you have A LOT more things to do, but because there will actually be balance to everything, whether its good balance or not is a different story but unlike a test build, it will be balanced.

So I don't see any limitations. Maybe if I stuck to just one class and 1 class alone I would understand the problem with this surplus thing..but I honestly can't see the limitation, especially with the current bugs in general.
____________________________

#56 Aug 21 2010 at 12:19 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,842 posts
Yea, open beta is going to be the real proving ground for this "Surplus" system. I still think there is a better way like resting bonus. I mean if a players really wants to get lvl 50 in a week first, so be it. That's their choice on how they play and can then chose to level another class after that. Whether you spend 200 hours leveling each class to 50 separate or alternate it's still going to take 200 hours to get there regardless.


Edited, Aug 21st 2010 12:21pm by dyvidd
____________________________
FFXIV Dyvid (Awaiting 2.0)
FFXI Dyvid ~ Pandemonium (Retired)
SWTOR Dy'vid Legacy - Canderous Ordo
#57 Aug 21 2010 at 1:03 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
163 posts
Cadant wrote:
Not sure how many of you haven't played the beta yet but you need to realize how fast you can reach surplus currently. I'd say within 3 hours, not non stop mind you, I was about level 14 PUG and started getting surplus. I've since been on fisherman for about an hour a day at the most, but some people say they still have surplus even after not playing that class for 2 days.

If it stays like it is currently there are going to be a lot of angry people, hardcore AND casuals. ****, some people on the BG forums say they were getting surplus and playing maybe 6 hours a week. Just what is SE's definition of casual?


Agree. and I have to wonder to what SE's definition of casual is?? I work a full time job and alot of overtime so I'll be lucky to get on during the week. I'd be pretty mad if my Archer gets surplused on sunday and the following saturday I'm still surplused.
____________________________
So I rated you up for no good reason, big deal. Wanna fight about it?
#58 Aug 21 2010 at 1:11 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
11,539 posts
I think this thread is best summed up by two opinions.

1) This affects me and I don't like it.
2) This doesn't affect me and I don't care who it affects, I'm fine with it and/or support it because it punishes people who don't play my way.

Why does it seem like whenever a game punishes a player for playing the way THEY want, the typical community response is the second type saying "Well you shouldn't be able to play the way -YOU- want anyway, you should play the way -I- prefer to play, which is _____. You won't get penalized that way. Your way is wrong."

Edited, Aug 21st 2010 3:11pm 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.
#59 Aug 21 2010 at 1:14 PM Rating: Good
***
3,450 posts
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
I think this thread is best summed up by two opinions.

1) This affects me and I don't like it.
2) This doesn't affect me and I don't care who it affects, I'm fine with it and/or support it because it punishes people who don't play my way.

Why does it seem like whenever a game punishes a player for playing the way THEY want, the typical community response is the second type saying "Well you shouldn't be able to play the way -YOU- want anyway, you should play the way -I- prefer to play, which is _____. You won't get penalized that way. Your way is wrong."

Edited, Aug 21st 2010 3:11pm by Mikhalia


It's human nature to want to be right, so when someone comes around and says "why is this wrong?" the answer is "because you're wrong and I'm right"

Yay psychological observations
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#60 Aug 21 2010 at 1:18 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
I think this thread is best summed up by two opinions.

1) This affects me and I don't like it.
2) This doesn't affect me and I don't care who it affects, I'm fine with it and/or support it because it punishes people who don't play my way.

Why does it seem like whenever a game punishes a player for playing the way THEY want, the typical community response is the second type saying "Well you shouldn't be able to play the way -YOU- want anyway, you should play the way -I- prefer to play, which is _____. You won't get penalized that way. Your way is wrong."

Edited, Aug 21st 2010 3:11pm by Mikhalia


It's human nature to want to be right, so when someone comes around and says "why is this wrong?" the answer is "because you're wrong and I'm right"

Yay psychological observations


You're right (See what I did there?), I was just trying to step back and point out the flawed line of thinking in that a person will decide that there is a "right way" and a "wrong way" to play an open-ended game, and that if you aren't playing it THEIR way, you deserve some sort of punishment for it, when if the shoe were on the other foot and THEY were the ones inconvenienced, they would be just as annoyed as the person they're deriding.

I mean, let's look at this from the opposite perspective.

To all the people who feel that surplus XP is a GOOD thing (because ****, you don't plan on focusing on one job anyway, so it doesn't affect you), let's pretend the opposite.

Let's pretend that you get -20% XP whenever you change classes. Change again and you get -40, again and you get -60, etc. You must remain on one class for 48 hours to get back to full XP. Furthermore, for each level you get as a class, you get a 15% XP bonus towards the next level. Two levels in a row and you get +30%. Three in a row and you get +45%...

How would you feel if you HAD to stick with one class or be severely penalized, and people were telling YOU that you shouldn't be able to switch classes that much anyway? Would you be fine with "just playing the game a different way"?

Edited, Aug 21st 2010 3:21pm 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.
#61 Aug 21 2010 at 1:25 PM Rating: Decent
**
845 posts
Stay possitive guys, wait all the beta keys have been given out right? never mind say what you really feel i guess.
____________________________

#62 Aug 21 2010 at 1:27 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,450 posts
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:

You're right (See what I did there?), I was just trying to step back and point out the flawed line of thinking in that a person will decide that there is a "right way" and a "wrong way" to play an open-ended game, and that if you aren't playing it THEIR way, you deserve some sort of punishment for it, when if the shoe were on the other foot and THEY were the ones inconvenienced, they would be just as annoyed as the person they're deriding.

I mean, let's look at this from the opposite perspective.

To all the people who feel that surplus XP is a GOOD thing (because ****, you don't plan on focusing on one job anyway, so it doesn't affect you), let's pretend the opposite.

Let's pretend that you get -20% XP whenever you change classes. Change again and you get -40, again and you get -60, etc. You must remain on one class for 48 hours to get back to full XP. Furthermore, for each level you get as a class, you get a 15% XP bonus towards the next level. Two levels in a row and you get +30%. Three in a row and you get +45%...

How would you feel if you HAD to stick with one class or be severely penalized, and people were telling YOU that you shouldn't be able to switch classes that much anyway? Would you be fine with "just playing the game a different way"?

Edited, Aug 21st 2010 3:21pm by Mikhalia


Yeah see this is why I don't support systems that punish people for doing something contrary to the way you've envisioned them doing it. I prefer to reward people for doing it my way.

SE's apparent goal is to limit how far ahead a hardcore player, focusing on a single class, can get from a more casual player with less time to play. The proper way to do this would be to assist the casual player by providing exp bonuses (bonii?) for playing less, rather than punishing the hardcore player for playing more.

It may just be an effort on their part to be "different" and try "something new" but frankly, there's a reason this is usually done the way it's done and that's because people like rewards better than punishments
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#63 Aug 21 2010 at 1:32 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
11,539 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:

You're right (See what I did there?), I was just trying to step back and point out the flawed line of thinking in that a person will decide that there is a "right way" and a "wrong way" to play an open-ended game, and that if you aren't playing it THEIR way, you deserve some sort of punishment for it, when if the shoe were on the other foot and THEY were the ones inconvenienced, they would be just as annoyed as the person they're deriding.

I mean, let's look at this from the opposite perspective.

To all the people who feel that surplus XP is a GOOD thing (because ****, you don't plan on focusing on one job anyway, so it doesn't affect you), let's pretend the opposite.

Let's pretend that you get -20% XP whenever you change classes. Change again and you get -40, again and you get -60, etc. You must remain on one class for 48 hours to get back to full XP. Furthermore, for each level you get as a class, you get a 15% XP bonus towards the next level. Two levels in a row and you get +30%. Three in a row and you get +45%...

How would you feel if you HAD to stick with one class or be severely penalized, and people were telling YOU that you shouldn't be able to switch classes that much anyway? Would you be fine with "just playing the game a different way"?

Edited, Aug 21st 2010 3:21pm by Mikhalia


Yeah see this is why I don't support systems that punish people for doing something contrary to the way you've envisioned them doing it. I prefer to reward people for doing it my way.

SE's apparent goal is to limit how far ahead a hardcore player, focusing on a single class, can get from a more casual player with less time to play. The proper way to do this would be to assist the casual player by providing exp bonuses (bonii?) for playing less, rather than punishing the hardcore player for playing more.

It may just be an effort on their part to be "different" and try "something new" but frankly, there's a reason this is usually done the way it's done and that's because people like rewards better than punishments


Yeah, If the dev wants to provide bonuses for certain things, then that's totally cool. I don't like the idea of having penalties though. It is possible to do one and not the other. I just don't get the community mindset that "the people who play the game 'wrong' -deserve- to be punished", or the more naieve wording of "It's not punishment, they're just encouraging you to do new things!"

Speeding tickets aren't punishment; they're just encouraging you to slow down.
Getting fired isn't a punishment, your boss is just trying to encourage you not to tell customers to @#%^ off.

Punishments are punishments. Just call them what they are and try REWARDING people instead. "Safe driver discounts". Raises. Etc.

Provide bonuses like rested XP, or maybe even some sort of "diversity bonus" or something.

Also, a curiosity: Does surplus XP affect DoL and DoH too? What if you don't want to fight anything? Are you punished for not wanting to fight things as well?

Edited, Aug 21st 2010 3:34pm 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.
#64 Aug 21 2010 at 5:55 PM Rating: Decent
Thief's Knife
*****
15,053 posts
Grand Master Scribe Olorinus wrote:
Lobivopis wrote:
Montsegurnephcreep wrote:
It's become pretty idiot proof over the years, even the audio + power wires for the on button and such can only go one way.


Yes those LGA sockets that are destroyed by the slightest contact with anything with the cover removed are idiot proof.

Not.

I would not let anyone who didn't have experience with LGA sockets anywhere near one of those MBs lest they end up with an expensive doorstop. Even an errant piece of lint can ***** them up*




Huh, I'm not even sure what an LGA socket is and I built a computer last week. Sounds idiot proof to me.


Land Grid Array, the socket type used by Core 2 Duos and Core i7's. The slightest contact with basically anything will bend the pins in the socket and ruin it.
____________________________
Final Fantasy XI 12-14-11 Update wrote:
Adjust the resolution of menus.
The main screen resolution for "FINAL FANTASY XI" is dependent on the "Overlay Graphics Resolution" setting.
If the Overlay Graphics Resolution is set higher than the Menu Resolution, menus will be automatically resized.


I thought of it first:

http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=10&mid=130073657654872218#20
#65 Aug 21 2010 at 6:05 PM Rating: Default
Thief's Knife
*****
15,053 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:


SE's apparent goal is to limit how far ahead a hardcore player, focusing on a single class, can get from a more casual player with less time to play. The proper way to do this would be to assist the casual player by providing exp bonuses (bonii?) for playing less, rather than punishing the hardcore player for playing more.


Maybe it's simpler than that.

By limiting the amount people can play you lower server traffic. Less server traffic = less $$$ spend on high bandwidth internet connections, server capacity, maintenance and support personnel. And that means a higher profit margin on each $12.99/mo subscription.

Edited, Aug 21st 2010 9:05pm by Lobivopis
____________________________
Final Fantasy XI 12-14-11 Update wrote:
Adjust the resolution of menus.
The main screen resolution for "FINAL FANTASY XI" is dependent on the "Overlay Graphics Resolution" setting.
If the Overlay Graphics Resolution is set higher than the Menu Resolution, menus will be automatically resized.


I thought of it first:

http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=10&mid=130073657654872218#20
#66 Aug 21 2010 at 7:03 PM Rating: Good
***
3,450 posts
Lobivopis wrote:
Archmage Callinon wrote:


SE's apparent goal is to limit how far ahead a hardcore player, focusing on a single class, can get from a more casual player with less time to play. The proper way to do this would be to assist the casual player by providing exp bonuses (bonii?) for playing less, rather than punishing the hardcore player for playing more.


Maybe it's simpler than that.

By limiting the amount people can play you lower server traffic. Less server traffic = less $$$ spend on high bandwidth internet connections, server capacity, maintenance and support personnel. And that means a higher profit margin on each $12.99/mo subscription.

Edited, Aug 21st 2010 9:05pm by Lobivopis


I would never discount that as a possibility, it might be interesting to see some statistics on this type of system vs user adaptation or user abandonment
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#67 Aug 21 2010 at 7:57 PM Rating: Good
***
2,535 posts
dyvidd wrote:
I think SE just doesn't want to get sued, http://kotaku.com/5618153/addicted-gamer-sues-lineage-wants-20000-hours-of-his-life-back

Sorry for the derail >.>


There's a bit more to that story, I'm afraid.

Turns out last year, after NCSoft banned his Lineage II account for RMT, he sued NCSoft for $12 million, alleging fraud, unfair trade practices, defamation, and emotional distress. In short, he claimed they committed fraud by banning him without cause.

The suit was dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction. He later amended the suit to establish jurisdiction, and added allegations of gross negligence; it is this amended suit that accuses NCSoft of, basically, peddling addictive product without proper warning, and shutting down Lineage II accounts to encourage players to shift to Aion.

The charges of fraud, unfair trade practices, and intentional infliction of emotional distress have been dismissed, leaving only the claims of negligence and defamation.



I certainly doubt he'll have much luck proving the claim of defamation, since that charge is based on NCSoft calling him RMT; in the US, truth is an absolute defense against charges of defamation. Add in a few other facts, like:
1) Reading through the suit and doing some simple math, it turns out the "account" in question is actually three accounts, and
2) He claims 20,000 hours of accumulated play time over a span of 5 years. Just for reference, 5 years is 43,830 hours, of which the average person spends 14,610 hours asleep. Nevertheless he somehow found the time over that same five-year span to sue the City and County of Honolulu, the US Army Corps of Engineers, and a private developer claiming they had improper permits for the construction of a marina,
and it's looking less and less like a simple "disgruntled gamer wants payback for wasting his life".
#68 Aug 22 2010 at 7:04 AM Rating: Decent
*
111 posts
this is going to affect partying, if you start to decrease in xp because you have been in one party too long surely it will cause you to disband, which leaves the rest of the party to look for a new member, which in some cased causes the party to fold?. Im going to be happy what ever SE throws at me. a new challenge is always exciting.
#69 Aug 22 2010 at 7:46 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
*****
12,709 posts
widnes wrote:
this is going to affect partying, if you start to decrease in xp because you have been in one party too long surely it will cause you to disband, which leaves the rest of the party to look for a new member, which in some cased causes the party to fold?. Im going to be happy what ever SE throws at me. a new challenge is always exciting.


Not really because for one thing we don't know if retail will have bonus exp for partying (like in XI basically).

Secondly, you'll be killing harder things in a party which means more base exp to begin with.

____________________________

#70 Aug 22 2010 at 10:42 AM Rating: Decent
*
91 posts
Maybe I'm just dense, but I do not understand this "surplus" thing. From what I'm reading, it seems like a way to encourage people to play more classes and gain more abilities. It kind of reminds me of Dragon Quest IX. Vocational abilities from all classes carry over. So the best character is one who has learned all of the skills from every class. Additionally, once a weapon is mastered on one class, it can be used on any class. So you can make an Axe wielding, strength maxed Priest if you want.

I’m guessing this is kind of what SE is going for, but I could be way off base. It's not like I played the beta; I'm just going by what everyone else has said.

As to how I feel about this system if that is indeed how it works, I'm not too sure. I like it in Dragon Quest, but I'm not sure how it would pan out in an MMORPG, and I guess I won't know until I try it. All I can say is now I'm kind of glad I'm a PS3 player and will have time to see how this plays out.
#71 Aug 22 2010 at 11:04 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
35 posts
I really don't mind the surplus EXP. In FFXI, you had to spend a lot of your time leveling subs; this is about the same.
Whenever you get surplus EXP, use the chance to level other classes to get handy abilities for your main class.
You can also try crafting jobs to gear your main class.

In my humble opinion, there are MANY things to do in-game. You're just being melodramatic.
Feel free to rate me down.
#72 Aug 22 2010 at 11:11 AM Rating: Good
*
54 posts
Quote:
In my humble opinion, there are MANY things to do in-game. You're just being melodramatic.
Feel free to rate me down.


It just doesn't make sense that the Dev needs to tell us how to play the game based on a penalization system. Really, restrictive gaming is not something I expect from an open ended MMO. Yes you need to switch to another class at some point to balance out your abilities but don't tell me when to do that by diminishing the experience I'm currently enjoying.

I still hope that the cooldown timers are balanced and that they're just absurdly high because of beta but it's not looking like that based on the recent interviews, at least for the leve system.
#73 Aug 22 2010 at 11:12 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
*****
12,709 posts
I still don't understand being "restricted" it didn't stop me from leveling multiple classes...
____________________________

#74 Aug 22 2010 at 11:18 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
35 posts
Quote:
It just doesn't make sense that the Dev needs to tell us how to play the game based on a penalization system. Really, restrictive gaming is not something I expect from an open ended MMO. Yes you need to switch to another class at some point to balance out your abilities but don't tell me when to do that by diminishing the experience I'm currently enjoying.


If SE doesn't intervenes the game, the community will.
At some point in the game, you will be expected to have certain armor or certain ability.
Take FFXI as an example (could be any game): If you are a Lv. 30 tank wearing a Lv. 10 armor, people won't really want you in their party.

I do agree that you should be able to play the game at your own pace, doing whatever you feel like doing at that moment.
However, knowing SE, things won't change. You should use the surplus as an "advantage", improving your character in any way you can.


Edited, Aug 22nd 2010 1:45pm by Skibit
#75 Aug 22 2010 at 11:20 AM Rating: Good
*
54 posts
Quote:
I still don't understand being "restricted" it didn't stop me from leveling multiple classes...


But you wanted to switch. I personally haven't run into surplus problems yet, but I see this as a philosophical problem with the systems they're implementing. Rewarding casual gamers over hardcore gamers makes absolutely Zero sense to me. If someone can explain to me why someone who doesn't blow their time on the game should be given training wheels while everyone else who invests time into their character has to ride a unicycle then I'll be satisfied. I have yet to hear things other than "well you should be changing classes anyway."

Edited, Aug 22nd 2010 1:21pm by KingOfTheBongo
#76 Aug 22 2010 at 11:29 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
*****
12,709 posts
KingOfTheBongo wrote:
Quote:
I still don't understand being "restricted" it didn't stop me from leveling multiple classes...


But you wanted to switch. I personally haven't run into surplus problems yet, but I see this as a philosophical problem with the systems they're implementing. Rewarding casual gamers over hardcore gamers makes absolutely Zero sense to me. If someone can explain to me why someone who doesn't blow their time on the game should be given training wheels while everyone else who invests time into their character has to ride a unicycle then I'll be satisfied. I have yet to hear things other than "well you should be changing classes anyway."

Edited, Aug 22nd 2010 1:21pm by KingOfTheBongo


For one thing they already confirmed there will be no end-game content on vanilla release, so it can been seen as a way to keep players from hitting cap within days if not hours of release then leave the game because all they wanted to do was rush to cap and start doing end-game content.

Secondly it could also be seen as a way to force people into experiencing every class in-game because realistically why -wouldn't- you want to level a craft or gathering class to support yourself?

Thirdly the surplus isn't that bad, it's just a -cut- of exp gained, in beta it's bad because there's no balancing of anything yet which is why it seems like this god awful restrictive system. Look at the fact you sometimes don't gain class exp when you kill enemies or do leves and kill a monster or craft and not get class exp. It's still bugged which means this is in no way the final build of the system, I haven't hit surplus but my friend hit randomly once and she given only 8 less exp out of what she would have gotten. If you want to play 15 hours a day and play only one class more power to you, but you're going to take an exp hit if that's what the surplus system is, because realistically you have the options to do whatever you want, but the way the game is designed you can't just stick to one class forever, it's not like FFXI where I can hop onto WAR and play to 75, but before that I have to level the right subjobs then I can stick to WAR for the rest of my playtime if I so chosen, as SE marketed FFXIV, the focus is "Growth" and you can't fully grow by sticking to one thing ya know? If I'm to grow up as a human being I can't spam junk food from birth because I can promise you I would not be alive today if I never touched a fruit/veggie/exercise a day of my life.

Lastly, it will no doubt be fine tuned by retail, this is why it's not that big of an issue because it's not a refined system yet. If they threw it at us AFTER release yeah it would be a problem.
____________________________

#77 Aug 22 2010 at 11:41 AM Rating: Decent
*
54 posts
I understand what you're saying Theonehio, but you don't really address my question. I asked what the reasoning is to reward casual players over the hardcore players?
#78 Aug 22 2010 at 11:45 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
*****
12,709 posts
KingOfTheBongo wrote:
I understand what you're saying Theonehio, but you don't really address my question. I asked what the reasoning is to reward casual players over the hardcore players?


Because no one can say other than SE. They wanted the game to be more accessible to the casual player base which they (casuals) been complaining about with XI, so aside that no one can say without being biased either way (casual vs hardcore).
____________________________

#79 Aug 22 2010 at 11:53 AM Rating: Good
*
54 posts
Quote:
Because no one can say other than SE. They wanted the game to be more accessible to the casual player base which they (casuals) been complaining about with XI, so aside that no one can say without being biased either way (casual vs hardcore).


Isn't that why the solo experience was expanded?
#80 Aug 22 2010 at 11:58 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,842 posts
Then why not just add a resting bonus instead of a XP penalty?
____________________________
FFXIV Dyvid (Awaiting 2.0)
FFXI Dyvid ~ Pandemonium (Retired)
SWTOR Dy'vid Legacy - Canderous Ordo
#81 Aug 22 2010 at 12:02 PM Rating: Good
*
54 posts
I don't think there need to be any incentives, positive or negative. Frankly the reason FFXI was so inaccessible to casual gamers was the fact that you'd have to search for a pt to get anything done and that often took an hour or more to just get set up, let alone actually do the Xping/questing you wanted to. Soloability of the game fixes that issue so otherwise SE shouldn't be influencing how we play, except maybe with economy management to prevent absurd inflation.

EDIT: if anything the bonuses should only come from playing in a pt to encourage the social experience over the newly accessible solo game.

Edited, Aug 22nd 2010 2:04pm by KingOfTheBongo

Edited, Aug 22nd 2010 2:04pm by KingOfTheBongo
#82 Aug 23 2010 at 1:16 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
3,211 posts
dyvidd wrote:
Then why not just add a resting bonus instead of a XP penalty?


That would make the most sense. The thing is, we know SE actually looks around and sees what's out there. We know they are aware of the various systems in place in MMOs. This isn't just a "Oh hey, that had a decent idea that went awry." They want to penalize players for doing 1 thing for too long.

What they don't seem to get is this penalizes casual players just as much, if not more than hardcore players. Hardcore players will find other things to do (level other classes probably). The casual player, who probably just logged in for a day or 2 out of the weekend and wants to level his Thaumaturge for 8 or so hours hits a brick wall. Is this player, who plays 1 maybe 2 days a week more or less likely to want to find something else to do? IMO he's gonna log off after he hits the point of diminishing returns out of sheer boredom.

THAT'S how you lose players.

ETA: Most of that post wasn't really directed at you, I just spring-boarded off what you had to say.

Edited, Aug 23rd 2010 2:17pm by Ranzera
____________________________
I be Ranz... the Melee White Mage. Arrrr.(As seen on Phoenix)
The friendliest Dynamis linkshell on Phoenix
My FFXI AH Info
1 2 Next »
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 22 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (22)