Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

Anyone else quitting if they NGE the game?Follow

#102 Jan 02 2011 at 6:29 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
KujaKoF wrote:
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
KujaKoF wrote:
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
KujaKoF wrote:
Quote:

Yes, I want a game that focuses on party play. Yes, I believe that a MULTIPLAYER ONLINE game should be a game where I play online with other players. I'm sorry, but I am not willing to accept "Get with the times" or "Catch on that everyone else wants to play by themselves" as counter argument.


Multiplayer doesn't imply grouping for every aspect of the game. Most people don't want to sit around waiting for groups to be able to participate in basic gameplay. Vanguard thought there were enough who did though to support a game, and they were kinda wrong.


Multiplayer should imply grouping as a major part of the game. I agree that sitting around waiting for groups isn't fun at all, so you need to be less stringent on group requirements. Design content that can be done with 2-3 people and other content that can be done with 5-6 people and more that can be done with 10+ and so on. The flaw of XI, IMO, was that it required a group of 6, and it required a SPECIFIC group of 6 (heal, tank, refresh, DD, DD, DD) and the waiting game was worsened by this.

Design a game where 2-3 DDs can group up and still accomplish something and you have a good system.


I agree that grouping should be needed for the bulk of the interesting content in a game. However, forced grouping as a leveling mechanic is done, you will not see that in a game again. People don't like to log into a game and find out they can't do what they want to because there aren't enough people available. Leave groups for the meat of the game.


Well the argument here is: "Should leveling be considered interesting content"? I think yes. If you think no, then we're going to disagree on that.

I think leveling should be a fun, important part of the game that does comprise part of the meat of the game; not that leveling should be a prelude to the "real" game which starts at level cap. If you disagree with that statement then I could see why you would disagree with the rest of what I've said.


I don't really think that you're wrong. I am ok with meaningful group leveling methods. Contrary to what a lot of people seem to be saying, it can exist along side solo options. I think the wow model is the best you're going to get though. What I'd like to see added (and sorry if this sounds like spanish to anyone who isn't familiar with wow), would be more open areas with elite mobs for this type of grinding experience. Ideally I'd like to see grouping SP/hour be equal to solo SP/hour, however grouping offer slightly better crystals/money rewards.

I would simply add in newer smaller areas, or corners of maps, with group mode mobs. they would be the same level, but require a 5-7 member group to kill. so say a level 20 solo mob gives a level 20 player 200SP, a level 20 group mob would give each member of the party 200SP, and have its drops increased.


While I didn't like the way that DDO overinstanced everything, I did like the way that the instances were all tunable to casual/normal/hard/elite/epic so that you could experience the content on the difficulty that you want and get rewards relative to the difficulty you did it on.

In an ideal world for me, there would be the possibility to level up in a group of 2 or more, whether just a small group of 2-3, a medium group of 5-7, or even if you want to take a group of 12-20 or more, you should always have some mobs you can XP on, just so long as groups of any size (even 2-3) get more XP than solo. I know some people would disagree with that, but that's just what -I'd- like anyway. That was anotehr gripe I had with WoW was that there was little gray area; either solo or do dungeons with a group of 5, and with FFXI, it was a group of 6 or bust... it's hard to find a niche for people who want to just have a group of 2-3 people and get a reasonable amount of xp. I think small groups need to be addressed in terms of content directed at them; there's all this emphasis on large group content and solo content with very little emphasis on small groups.

I think that if a 2-3 man group is a viable option that is notably more efficient and more fun than soloing, that more people would do this because it would hold the benefit of grouping without needing to feel like you're waiting around for a group whenever you are trying to get one, since 2-3 people is a cinch to throw together. Got yourself? Got someone else? You got a group. Go kill **** that is too tough to solo, but rewarding and fun for the two of you.

IMO two player co-op is where it's at.
____________________________
[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.
#103 Jan 02 2011 at 6:39 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
Aurelius wrote:
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:

One: I never said that people who like solo play ONLY like solo play.


Really? Sadly, when your only references to solo play are along the lines of:

Quote:
While I disagree with the "all my myself with everyone else" playstyle, I admit there is a market for it.


that's the impression that you lend. So maybe straighten up the words coming out of your mouth before they escape your mouth and be a little more succinct, k?


I'm not responsible for you inferring things I didn't say because you think I say them, and I feel no need to be more succinct if your tl;dr leads to you misunderstanding me.

You got a lot of rage built up there in that post, hon. You really should get that looked at. Seriously, I don't know if you had points in there, but all I'm reading from you is less and less coherence and more and more anger, resentment, and rage. Your posts are just getting longer and longer, angrier and angrier, all at the notion that I want to play a multiplayer game with multiple players in my group.

I'm having a good time playing FFXI with someone else from zam, camping an NM and just enjoying ourselves, tabbing back to here between PH pops to talk about how I enjoy playing a multiplayer game in a group and you're just flooding post after post with a wall of Smiley: mad and Smiley: motz over the notion that maybe one game, somewhere, somehow might actually be more accommodating towards people wanting to play the game TOGETHER.

Grow up and chill out, bro.

Edited, Jan 2nd 2011 7:41pm 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.
#104 Jan 02 2011 at 6:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
1,569 posts
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
So the question was asked:

"What exactly are you afraid of and what does that entitle?" regarding not wanting "A WoW clone". Here's what I -don't- want in an MMORPG:

- I don't want a game where someone can solo to cap.
- I don't want a "WoW-style" UI.
- I don't want a game where quests (or guildleves) are the PRIMARY form and focus of leveling.
- I don't want a game where PvP is a significant portion of game content, or where it is -ever- mandatory to do PvP.

...

I get that some people want to be able to play an online game all by themselves; I think it's silly and that there are plenty of SINGLE PLAYER games that accommodate that, but I admit that there is a market for such a game. What I don't care for is that it seems like EVERY MMORPG is going down that path. Where is the multiplayer game for people that WANT to play a multiplayer game? Not where multiplayer is an option and single player is also an option, but the game where multiplayer is the ONLY option (since it is, after all, a multiplayer game).
The multi-player play is still there. It's gone from "absolutely needing a group to progress or get anything done" to "grouping with others to get things done as an option". Believe me, sitting around on whitegate looking for a party as DRK was not fun, specially knowing that DRK was not part of the golden child club the way NIN, WAR, SAM and MNK were.

You already know this, but WoW's progression is not in the leveling, but in the gear climb that involves raids and dungeons. And to date, you can't solo the cutting edge raids. Is there story content you witness while soloing quests? Sure. A lot of it. Would I say it turns WoW or any game like it into a single player game? Not really. Not when raids and same-level dungeons are unsoloable and PvP is unsoloable.
____________________________
Products of boredom: 1 2 3 4 5
Besieged
Hopes for FFXIV: Fencer | Red Mage
#105 Jan 02 2011 at 6:46 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
Ruisu wrote:
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
So the question was asked:

"What exactly are you afraid of and what does that entitle?" regarding not wanting "A WoW clone". Here's what I -don't- want in an MMORPG:

- I don't want a game where someone can solo to cap.
- I don't want a "WoW-style" UI.
- I don't want a game where quests (or guildleves) are the PRIMARY form and focus of leveling.
- I don't want a game where PvP is a significant portion of game content, or where it is -ever- mandatory to do PvP.

...

I get that some people want to be able to play an online game all by themselves; I think it's silly and that there are plenty of SINGLE PLAYER games that accommodate that, but I admit that there is a market for such a game. What I don't care for is that it seems like EVERY MMORPG is going down that path. Where is the multiplayer game for people that WANT to play a multiplayer game? Not where multiplayer is an option and single player is also an option, but the game where multiplayer is the ONLY option (since it is, after all, a multiplayer game).
The multi-player play is still there. It's gone from "absolutely needing a group to progress or get anything done" to "grouping with others to get things done as an option". Believe me, sitting around on whitegate looking for a party as DRK was not fun, specially knowing that DRK was not part of the golden child club the way NIN, WAR, SAM and MNK were.

You already know this, but WoW's progression is not in the leveling, but in the gear climb that involves raids and dungeons. And to date, you can't solo the cutting edge raids. Is there story content you witness while soloing quests? Sure. A lot of it. Would I say it turns WoW or any game like it into a single player game? Not really. Not when raids and same-level dungeons are unsoloable and PvP is unsoloable.


Here's my FFXI character: http://www.ffxiah.com/player/Carbuncle/Mikhalia#home

I'm no stranger to long wait times. I've waited an hour, two, three, six, even more... One time I was logged in and flagged up (although not actively at the computer the whole time) for 20 hours before getting an invite. It sucks. It's no fun. This is not an effective system for a game.

I don't think soloing is the best answer though. I think a better answer is to introduce content that can be done with 2-3 people regardless of class and does not require 6 people with specific class breakdowns. That was always the biggest problem, not that you needed 6 people but that you needed 6 SPECIFIC people. WoW had a huge advantage over XI in that respect in that more classes could fill the same roles, whereas in XI, even if 20+ people were lfp, if there were no healers, no tanks, or no refreshers... even if just ONE of those three was missing, then NO ONE could get a group. That was terrible and should not be revisited.

However, if you can design content that 2-3 people of ANY class can tackle, then I think that's the best way to get people to group without having the giant waste of time trying to GET a group.

You don't -need- solo content or leveling if you can manage to implement content for small groups to do. If the same content and leveling that would otherwise have been "solo stuff" is tweaked to require 2-3 people, where soloing is impossible but a group of 2-3 is still doable, you'll end up with people who won't mind small groups or inability so solo since the actual forming of the group is no longer a chore like it is in many games, FFXI and WoW included.

That's the problem as I see it; people look at solo content as "something to do when you don't feel like getting a group" because getting a group is a chore. Once you make it no longer a chore, people won't mind.

Edited, Jan 2nd 2011 7:51pm 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.
#106 Jan 02 2011 at 6:56 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
**
278 posts
Wolfums wrote:
No, it'll bring me back. 2011 is a huge year for important gaming releases, FFXIV need to pull off something amazing if it wants to stay afloat.


No it isn't. the only big release is Star Wars which, with its budget has to be the second coming if it's going to succeed, the game has way overshot a normal mmo budget and from my own impressions seems to be slightly lackluster gameplay wise (great storytelling though!).

TERA is not a big release, although it looks extremely interesting, especially with its combat system, it will not garner enough attention to be considered a heavy hitter.

Single Player games are always being released and there is a couple big ones every year, generally single player games only pull from the MMO market for a month at a time so they are no big deal.

The only thing that will kill FFXIV in 2011 is FFXIV.

Finally do you think they can completely rebuild and overhaul the game in a year? Asking for a NGE like change is absolute suicide for the game, it will pull development from much needed content and devote it to what will probably amount to another miss. They definately didn't get it right the first time.

Again the only thing that will kill FFXIV in 2011 is FFXIV.
#107 Jan 02 2011 at 6:58 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
I'm having a good time playing FFXI with someone else from zam, camping an NM and just enjoying ourselves, tabbing back to here between PH pops to talk about how I enjoy playing a multiplayer game in a group and you're just flooding post after post with a wall of Smiley: mad and Smiley: motz over the notion that maybe one game, somewhere, somehow might actually be more accommodating towards people wanting to play the game TOGETHER.


A sad perception to have indeed that you can't see how diverse content to include solo play and groups of all sizes side by side is preferable to niche appeal. I new all kinds of people in WoW who would group with guildies and RL friends/spouses/whatever for generic quest grinding and have all kinds of fun. And you could, too. But you want the cake on the table and in your mouth at the same time. You want all things optimal and all things your way. And I used to share your point of view long ago before I learned that it wasn't necessary and that if optimal equated to misery I'd just as soon focus on fun and "best" be damned and you know what? I still made it to the level cap in three different MMOs. I still participated in endgame. I saw the realm first achievements for hitting level 80 and clearing the new raids as they came out long before I got to any of those milestones and I didn't care. I still participated in WoW endgame at a pretty high level and I could have probably held on to a spot in a top 100 guild if I could have tolerated the egos that went with it. FFXI beat the optimal out of me. It's like going fishing on a beautiful day and enjoying the sunshine and the fresh air and the peace and quiet and then allowing the whole experience to feel like less than it was because I didn't catch anything. What a horrible attitude to have.

I'm sorry you can't see the hypocrisy in your statements when you talk about playing together while at the same time volunteering to have those outside your circle of preference relegated to the back seat to try and bring them in line with the way you like to do things. You can't talk about your focus on multi-player and fun and all that if you're so willing to exclude people from your world because they don't share your point of view. I log in to a game as one of hundreds (ideally thousands) of people and if I'm entertained and they're entertained, life is good. But I'm the one with issues that I should have looked at. Right. Your head sore from banging it on the door to the era of dinosaurs yet? If not, I suspect it soon will be. And I suppose that will be the fault of everyone but you.
#108 Jan 02 2011 at 7:10 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,842 posts
Aurelius, knock it off. She has a point of view and you have a point of view. You need to grow up and learn not everyone has to think like you do.
____________________________
FFXIV Dyvid (Awaiting 2.0)
FFXI Dyvid ~ Pandemonium (Retired)
SWTOR Dy'vid Legacy - Canderous Ordo
#109 Jan 02 2011 at 7:13 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
Aurelius wrote:
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
I'm having a good time playing FFXI with someone else from zam, camping an NM and just enjoying ourselves, tabbing back to here between PH pops to talk about how I enjoy playing a multiplayer game in a group and you're just flooding post after post with a wall of Smiley: mad and Smiley: motz over the notion that maybe one game, somewhere, somehow might actually be more accommodating towards people wanting to play the game TOGETHER.


A sad perception to have indeed that you can't see how diverse content to include solo play and groups of all sizes side by side is preferable to niche appeal. I new all kinds of people in WoW who would group with guildies and RL friends/spouses/whatever for generic quest grinding and have all kinds of fun. And you could, too. But you want the cake on the table and in your mouth at the same time. You want all things optimal and all things your way. And I used to share your point of view long ago before I learned that it wasn't necessary and that if optimal equated to misery I'd just as soon focus on fun and "best" be damned and you know what? I still made it to the level cap in three different MMOs. I still participated in endgame. I saw the realm first achievements for hitting level 80 and clearing the new raids as they came out long before I got to any of those milestones and I didn't care. I still participated in WoW endgame at a pretty high level and I could have probably held on to a spot in a top 100 guild if I could have tolerated the egos that went with it. FFXI beat the optimal out of me. It's like going fishing on a beautiful day and enjoying the sunshine and the fresh air and the peace and quiet and then allowing the whole experience to feel like less than it was because I didn't catch anything. What a horrible attitude to have.

I'm sorry you can't see the hypocrisy in your statements when you talk about playing together while at the same time volunteering to have those outside your circle of preference relegated to the back seat to try and bring them in line with the way you like to do things. You can't talk about your focus on multi-player and fun and all that if you're so willing to exclude people from your world because they don't share your point of view. I log in to a game as one of hundreds (ideally thousands) of people and if I'm entertained and they're entertained, life is good. But I'm the one with issues that I should have looked at. Right. Your head sore from banging it on the door to the era of dinosaurs yet? If not, I suspect it soon will be. And I suppose that will be the fault of everyone but you.


Well let's not stop here then. Let's make first person shooters not penalize you for not wanting to use a gun, because some people might have fun that way. Let's make football games not penalize people for not scoring enough points because scoring points takes away from the fun.

I'm playing an online game because I want to play with other people. I'm playing with other people and I'm having fun. I'm sorry that, to you, you can only have fun if NO online games WHATSOEVER are fun for -me-. Because that's what it seems like. I've made the point that I don't even need or want it to be FFXIV that is the game that does this; that I would be happy if -ANY- game, any game at all offered this. And yet still you persist, insisting that EVERY SINGLE GAME on the market MUST appeal to EVERYONE or YOU aren't happy. You ask me why I should care about other people enjoying the game, why I should want other people to be unhappy... I submit to you: Why are YOU so angry at the idea that there might be a game that YOU DON'T EVEN PLAY that might not appeal to you?

I mean, I'd be happy if one game, just ONE game offered me the gameplay experience I wanted, even if NO OTHERS did.

You come back by saying that you don't want ANY GAMES AT ALL to offer me the experience I would want... and you accuse -ME- of wanting to keep others down and wanting other people to not have fun.

The most hypocritical part is that after not wanting any game to exist anywhere that I could possibly like because some people might not like that ONE game, you call ME a hypocrite.

You asked me earlier how it hurts me that other people would enjoy a game in a different way I do, I ask you this: How does it hurt YOU if there was a game, not even FFXIV, but some other game that I liked, that provided me with the experience I want? Does it REALLY bother you that much that ONE game might exist that you won't like? Do you really feel the need to spearhead the campaign against my enjoyment of even one game all in the name of your own enjoyment? Do you realize what you're saying here, or has this not occurred to you yet?

All I ask for is that one game, just ONE game, which doesn't even need to be FFXIV, offers me what I want. Is the existence of such a game that makes someone other than you happy really such an affront to you? Does that really bother you and infuriate you THAT much?
____________________________
[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.
#110 Jan 02 2011 at 7:14 PM Rating: Good
**
429 posts
Wloire wrote:
Wolfums wrote:
No, it'll bring me back. 2011 is a huge year for important gaming releases, FFXIV need to pull off something amazing if it wants to stay afloat.


No it isn't. the only big release is Star Wars which, with its budget has to be the second coming if it's going to succeed, the game has way overshot a normal mmo budget and from my own impressions seems to be slightly lackluster gameplay wise (great storytelling though!).

TERA is not a big release, although it looks extremely interesting, especially with its combat system, it will not garner enough attention to be considered a heavy hitter.

Single Player games are always being released and there is a couple big ones every year, generally single player games only pull from the MMO market for a month at a time so they are no big deal.


Haha, look at this guy.

SWG, Guild Wars 2, TERA, and Rift are all fairly well known in the MMO world and there's plenty of buzz for them. You've also got Diablo 3 with a possible release in 2011, and it's going to definitely be online capable and it's going to definitely suck away players from subscription based MMOs.

Quote:
Finally do you think they can completely rebuild and overhaul the game in a year? Asking for a NGE like change is absolute suicide for the game, it will pull development from much needed content and devote it to what will probably amount to another miss. They definately didn't get it right the first time.

Again the only thing that will kill FFXIV in 2011 is FFXIV.


Yes, they can, because they already have a lot of content created. They don't need to redo textures and art designs, they don't need to redo most class concepts or story concepts. The hardest, most expensive part of any game is not core mechanics.

This game is a mangled, ****** mess that's only missing the tombstone for its grave. An overhaul might pull it back.
#111 Jan 02 2011 at 7:15 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
dyvidd wrote:
Aurelius, knock it off. She has a point of view and you have a point of view. You need to grow up and learn not everyone has to think like you do.


Don't single ME out in this. There are two people involved in this little discussion.
#112 Jan 02 2011 at 7:17 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
dyvidd wrote:
Aurelius, knock it off. She has a point of view and you have a point of view. You need to grow up and learn not everyone has to think like you do.


For as much as he's trying to accuse me of it in his posts, accepting that someone else enjoys something other than what he does is not Aurelius' strong point.

He simply isn't capable of saying "Okay, I don't agree with that, but I understand that that works for you and I accept that". He just isn't. At least, not without following it up with some jib about how I'm a pitiful, pathetic human being because I disagree with him.

He'll go on and on and on like this until one of us gets sick of the argument or an admin steps in.
____________________________
[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.
#113 Jan 02 2011 at 7:18 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Aurelius wrote:
dyvidd wrote:
Aurelius, knock it off. She has a point of view and you have a point of view. You need to grow up and learn not everyone has to think like you do.


Don't single ME out in this. There are two people involved in this little discussion.


Yeah, and -I'm- willing to say what works for you, works for you. What works for me, should work for me. In fact, I -have- said that.

You just aren't willing to let me have what works for me in any capacity; you simply aren't satisfied unless I'm happy with what works for you, in all capacities.
____________________________
[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.
#114 Jan 02 2011 at 7:18 PM Rating: Excellent
6 posts
Aurelius wrote:
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
I'm having a good time playing FFXI with someone else from zam, camping an NM and just enjoying ourselves, tabbing back to here between PH pops to talk about how I enjoy playing a multiplayer game in a group and you're just flooding post after post with a wall of Smiley: mad and Smiley: motz over the notion that maybe one game, somewhere, somehow might actually be more accommodating towards people wanting to play the game TOGETHER.


A sad perception to have indeed that you can't see how diverse content to include solo play and groups of all sizes side by side is preferable to niche appeal. I new all kinds of people in WoW who would group with guildies and RL friends/spouses/whatever for generic quest grinding and have all kinds of fun. And you could, too. But you want the cake on the table and in your mouth at the same time. You want all things optimal and all things your way. And I used to share your point of view long ago before I learned that it wasn't necessary and that if optimal equated to misery I'd just as soon focus on fun and "best" be damned and you know what? I still made it to the level cap in three different MMOs. I still participated in endgame. I saw the realm first achievements for hitting level 80 and clearing the new raids as they came out long before I got to any of those milestones and I didn't care. I still participated in WoW endgame at a pretty high level and I could have probably held on to a spot in a top 100 guild if I could have tolerated the egos that went with it. FFXI beat the optimal out of me. It's like going fishing on a beautiful day and enjoying the sunshine and the fresh air and the peace and quiet and then allowing the whole experience to feel like less than it was because I didn't catch anything. What a horrible attitude to have.

I'm sorry you can't see the hypocrisy in your statements when you talk about playing together while at the same time volunteering to have those outside your circle of preference relegated to the back seat to try and bring them in line with the way you like to do things. You can't talk about your focus on multi-player and fun and all that if you're so willing to exclude people from your world because they don't share your point of view. I log in to a game as one of hundreds (ideally thousands) of people and if I'm entertained and they're entertained, life is good. But I'm the one with issues that I should have looked at. Right. Your head sore from banging it on the door to the era of dinosaurs yet? If not, I suspect it soon will be. And I suppose that will be the fault of everyone but you.


Okay... I've been reading this back and forth between the two of you and, honestly... I agree with the other person who suggested you need to let it go.

For one, Mikhalia is expressing an opinion, that they would like to see group play have more importance in a MMORPG, and be important enough that people will find it worthwhile, rather than saying "***** that, I'll just solo it instead".

That's really all they're saying.

They're not saying "down with soloing! There should be no soloing in MMOs!" But damned if you're not determined to spin it that way. I've had to double-check and make sure I was reading the same posts as you a few times, some of your remarks have been so out of context of what Mikhalia has said.

You, at every turn, have been twisting their words around, putting words in their mouth, making strawman arguments about things Mikhalia never said and, generally, becoming increasingly less and less reasonable and more and more belligerent with each post. Mikhailia makes one simple point that it would be nice - to them - to think that there's a MMORPG out there that would better suit their preferred playstyle, and you go off on this verbose, meandering rant ripping them limb from limb for it, as though somehow their personal preferences and opinions are somehow imposing on you personally.

I mean... "fascist"? Really?

Again... If there's a consensus, then I have to agree... I think you need to back away from this conversation, 'cause your posts are getting a bit out of hand. Maybe a learn a bit of respectful tolerance of differing points of view while you're at it, however much you disagree with them.



Edited, Jan 2nd 2011 8:20pm by Preypacer73

Edited, Jan 2nd 2011 8:24pm by Preypacer73
#115 Jan 02 2011 at 7:19 PM Rating: Excellent
*
137 posts
Wloire wrote:
Wolfums wrote:
No, it'll bring me back. 2011 is a huge year for important gaming releases, FFXIV need to pull off something amazing if it wants to stay afloat.


No it isn't. the only big release is Star Wars which, with its budget has to be the second coming if it's going to succeed, the game has way overshot a normal mmo budget and from my own impressions seems to be slightly lackluster gameplay wise (great storytelling though!).

TERA is not a big release, although it looks extremely interesting, especially with its combat system, it will not garner enough attention to be considered a heavy hitter.

Single Player games are always being released and there is a couple big ones every year, generally single player games only pull from the MMO market for a month at a time so they are no big deal.

The only thing that will kill FFXIV in 2011 is FFXIV.

Finally do you think they can completely rebuild and overhaul the game in a year? Asking for a NGE like change is absolute suicide for the game, it will pull development from much needed content and devote it to what will probably amount to another miss. They definately didn't get it right the first time.

Again the only thing that will kill FFXIV in 2011 is FFXIV.



I strongly disagree with your assesment that Guildwar, Rift, and SWTOR will not affect FFXIV. SE needs new PAYING players to survive. You are correct that ony SE can kill FFXIV cause it is up to them to do something about it.

You think this free bunch that is playing is enough to keep FFXIV going? If you think so you are naive, no crazzy. Potential MMO players are going to try something new, not a game that has been trashed by every gaming site there is. And if they don't like say SWTOR the will more then likely try the newer game then FFXIV. You know why? Cause it is free right now. Where are the people beating down the door of this free to play? **** if they can't get people in here when it is free, just imagine when they start charging.
#116 Jan 02 2011 at 7:28 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Yeah, one of the big obstacles to overcome, after the game is fixed, is for SE to get the word out and advertise to try to get people back. Once the game is improved, they need to do something to get the attention of reviewers and players to lay out the "Under New Management" sign and get the word out that the game is new and improved.

Fixing the game is the first order of business and they certainly shouldn't jump the gun on "getting the word out" until the house is clean, but once they're finished with the changed and happy with their product (and more importantly, the players are happy with their product), they need to go beyond word of mouth and put some money into making sure EVERYONE comes back to give the game a chance again.
____________________________
[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.
#117 Jan 02 2011 at 7:32 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:

Well let's not stop here then. Let's make first person shooters not penalize you for not wanting to use a gun, because some people might have fun that way. Let's make football games not penalize people for not scoring enough points because scoring points takes away from the fun.


Terrible analogy is terrible.

Quote:
I'm playing an online game because I want to play with other people. I'm playing with other people and I'm having fun. I'm sorry that, to you, you can only have fun if NO online games WHATSOEVER are fun for -me-. Because that's what it seems like. I've made the point that I don't even need or want it to be FFXIV that is the game that does this; that I would be happy if -ANY- game, any game at all offered this. And yet still you persist, insisting that EVERY SINGLE GAME on the market MUST appeal to EVERYONE or YOU aren't happy. You ask me why I should care about other people enjoying the game, why I should want other people to be unhappy... I submit to you: Why are YOU so angry at the idea that there might be a game that YOU DON'T EVEN PLAY that might not appeal to you?


You still don't get it? How can you not get it? I don't have any issue whatsoever with your preferences with regards to what you enjoy in an MMO. What I take issue with is how you propose a developer make a game that suits you. There's is absolutely nothing in any MMO I've ever played (outside of the Maat fights) that you can do solo but can't do in a group if that's your preference. But you're not talking about what you like to do. You're talking about the restrictions and penalties you want to see an MMO developer make in order to get others to do what you want them to do with you. And it's an attitude and a position that doesn't belong in an MMO that was marketed the way XIV was. That's all there is to it. But you come here and expect people to smile and nod when you advocate a complete 180 in SE's scope of appeal? Really?

Quote:
I mean, I'd be happy if one game, just ONE game offered me the gameplay experience I wanted, even if NO OTHERS did.


And I hope you find it but you need to look in the right place for it, and this ain't it.

Quote:
You come back by saying that you don't want ANY GAMES AT ALL to offer me the experience I would want... and you accuse -ME- of wanting to keep others down and wanting other people to not have fun.


No, I've come back and pointed out that you don't need to control what 5000 other people are doing in order for you to get the experience you're looking for. WTF is it about that that you're not grasping? WHAT DO YOU CARE WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE DOING AS LONG AS WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IS AN OPTION? Stop being so bloody selfish.

Quote:
The most hypocritical part is that after not wanting any game to exist anywhere that I could possibly like because some people might not like that ONE game, you call ME a hypocrite.


You are a hypocrite. Throughout every discussion we've ever had on this topic I've pointed out that I want to see something for everyone. For some reason you only want to see something for you and you can't fathom the idea of coexisting with people who don't see things your way, yet you talk about multiplayer and other people as though you actually give a **** what THEY want, and you clearly don't.

Quote:
You asked me earlier how it hurts me that other people would enjoy a game in a different way I do, I ask you this: How does it hurt YOU if there was a game, not even FFXIV, but some other game that I liked, that provided me with the experience I want? Does it REALLY bother you that much that ONE game might exist that you won't like? Do you really feel the need to spearhead the campaign against my enjoyment of even one game all in the name of your own enjoyment? Do you realize what you're saying here, or has this not occurred to you yet?


Why are you asking that in an FFXIV forum? And why are you pulling all of this garbage out of your *** about how an MMO developer HAS to make grouping "significantly" better and more rewarding or people won't do it when you KNOW that they don't? You KNOW it. You've ADMITTED it. But now you're backpeddling. You have no argument. You have only selfish preference. Why don't MMO developers make games for the group-onry niche anymore? Because MMOs already cost too much and represent too much risk. Five years ago we didn't think that would be possible. Now we know better. Now we've seen the plug pulled on MMOs and studios run out of money and pass the IP off to other studios to assume the risk. We know all these things, yet you ignore that. But you still can't connect the dots and come to your own conclusion that what you're asking for simply isn't viable outside of a teeny little indie studio that is willing to take that risk...and produce a game that reflects the resources of a teenie little indie studio.

Quote:
All I ask for is that one game, just ONE game, which doesn't even need to be FFXIV, offers me what I want. Is the existence of such a game that makes someone other than you happy really such an affront to you? Does that really bother you and infuriate you THAT much?


It bothers me when you pull arguments out of your *** about what a developer "has" to do in order to accommodate you. Because apparently you're not happy to be doing what you want to do but in order to be truly happy, you need to know everyone else is forced to do it your way, too. That's not what XIV was about when they announced it, that's not what XIV is going to be about under Yoshida. They're already in too deep to be doing an about face and sacrificing potential subscribers to suite a niche that they don't need to pander to. It doesn't bother me that you like to focus on grouping. It doesn't hurt me that you like to focus on grouping. It bothers me that you're so willing to have your way at the expense of so many others.
#118 Jan 02 2011 at 7:34 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
dyvidd wrote:
Aurelius, knock it off. She has a point of view and you have a point of view. You need to grow up and learn not everyone has to think like you do.


For as much as he's trying to accuse me of it in his posts, accepting that someone else enjoys something other than what he does is not Aurelius' strong point.


I'm not the one asking for "significant" bonuses and rewards for playing the way I like to play or severe restrictions on one group of people to satisfy the way I like to play. You are.
#119 Jan 02 2011 at 7:49 PM Rating: Good
**
437 posts
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:

I'm playing an online game because I want to play with other people. I'm playing with other people and I'm having fun. I'm sorry that, to you, you can only have fun if NO online games WHATSOEVER are fun for -me-. Because that's what it seems like. I've made the point that I don't even need or want it to be FFXIV that is the game that does this; that I would be happy if -ANY- game, any game at all offered this. And yet still you persist, insisting that EVERY SINGLE GAME on the market MUST appeal to EVERYONE or YOU aren't happy. You ask me why I should care about other people enjoying the game, why I should want other people to be unhappy... I submit to you: Why are YOU so angry at the idea that there might be a game that YOU DON'T EVEN PLAY that might not appeal to you?


Time out. Why do these two concepts always have to be mutually exclusive? You want to play in groups with other people? Okay, fine. Someone else wants to go soloing? Okay, that's fine too. Why does the game have to pick and choose which person it wants to cater to? Is it so bad that if I can solo 100 mobs in an hour and get X SP for it, that I can kill maybe... 70 higher level mobs in a small group in that same hour and still get roughly X SP for that hour? When soloers run out of mobs it might prompt them to group together to fight higher level mobs clearing out the solo area for a particular level range for someone else to solo... and if they don't want to group... all right, they only hurt themselves and you can get your friends and group and laugh at them together.

More options VS. Limited options. More is usually better, right? So why the need to bicker back and forth? Is there something I'm just not getting here? You're not really saying that a game has to be something that you and people who happen to think exactly like you enjoy in order to be a good game... are you?
____________________________
行く河の流れは絶えずしてしかも元の水にあらず。よどみに浮かぶ泡沫はかつ消えかつ結びて久しくとどまりたる例なし世の中にある人と住みかも全くのごとき。 -方丈記
#120 Jan 02 2011 at 7:51 PM Rating: Decent
**
429 posts
shinichoco wrote:
Time out. Why do these two concepts always have to be mutually exclusive? You want to play in groups with other people? Okay, fine. Someone else wants to go soloing? Okay, that's fine too. Why does the game have to pick and choose which person it wants to cater to? Is it so bad that if I can solo 100 mobs in an hour and get X SP for it, that I can kill maybe... 70 higher level mobs in a small group in that same hour and still get roughly X SP for that hour? When soloers run out of mobs it might prompt them to group together to fight higher level mobs clearing out the solo area for a particular level range for someone else to solo... and if they don't want to group... all right, they only hurt themselves and you can get your friends and group and laugh at them together.

More options VS. Limited options. More is usually better, right? So why the need to bicker back and forth? Is there something I'm just not getting here? You're not really saying that a game has to be something that you and people who happen to think exactly like you enjoy in order to be a good game... are you?


Because Mikhaila is still stuck in the mindset that if he's in a group, what someone does as a solo person detracts from his experience.
#121 Jan 02 2011 at 7:52 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
Aurelius wrote:
Quote:
I'm playing an online game because I want to play with other people. I'm playing with other people and I'm having fun. I'm sorry that, to you, you can only have fun if NO online games WHATSOEVER are fun for -me-. Because that's what it seems like. I've made the point that I don't even need or want it to be FFXIV that is the game that does this; that I would be happy if -ANY- game, any game at all offered this. And yet still you persist, insisting that EVERY SINGLE GAME on the market MUST appeal to EVERYONE or YOU aren't happy. You ask me why I should care about other people enjoying the game, why I should want other people to be unhappy... I submit to you: Why are YOU so angry at the idea that there might be a game that YOU DON'T EVEN PLAY that might not appeal to you?


You still don't get it? How can you not get it? I don't have any issue whatsoever with your preferences with regards to what you enjoy in an MMO. What I take issue with is how you propose a developer make a game that suits you. There's is absolutely nothing in any MMO I've ever played (outside of the Maat fights) that you can do solo but can't do in a group if that's your preference. But you're not talking about what you like to do. You're talking about the restrictions and penalties you want to see an MMO developer make in order to get others to do what you want them to do with you. And it's an attitude and a position that doesn't belong in an MMO that was marketed the way XIV was. That's all there is to it. But you come here and expect people to smile and nod when you advocate a complete 180 in SE's scope of appeal? Really?


Did you not catch the part where I said "It doesn't even have to be FFXIV"? What does it have to do with a 180 in SE's scope of appeal when I have said several times that I would even be fine with ANY game existing designed in such a way. There you go putting words in my mouth again, or in this case, ignoring something I've already said (that it doesn't need to apply to XIV or SE) because it no longer suits your argument if you consider that point.

Aurelius wrote:
Quote:
I mean, I'd be happy if one game, just ONE game offered me the gameplay experience I wanted, even if NO OTHERS did.


And I hope you find it but you need to look in the right place for it, and this ain't it.


Well I guess that smartass remark is the closest to acceptance of an alternative point of view that I'm going to get out of you, isn't it? You can't even accept another point of view existing without being rude about it, can you?

Aurelius wrote:
Quote:
You come back by saying that you don't want ANY GAMES AT ALL to offer me the experience I would want... and you accuse -ME- of wanting to keep others down and wanting other people to not have fun.


No, I've come back and pointed out that you don't need to control what 5000 other people are doing in order for you to get the experience you're looking for. WTF is it about that that you're not grasping? WHAT DO YOU CARE WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE DOING AS LONG AS WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IS AN OPTION? Stop being so bloody selfish.


Oh, the hypocrisy. I keep talking about wanting one game, just ONE GAME, to exist that is designed in a certain way, and you follow up bashing the idea by calling ME selfish. How DARE I want a game I would enjoy to exist? All games should exist to appease everyone but me. Wow, I'm such a selfish @#%^ for wanting ONE game to be designed in a certain way that would suit my playstyle. Never mind that anyone else can go play any other game, but unless EVERY GAME appeases EVERYONE, then I'm the selfish one.

Maybe if you'd get off that high horse and live and let live, you'd realize how silly that sounds.

Aurelius wrote:
Quote:
The most hypocritical part is that after not wanting any game to exist anywhere that I could possibly like because some people might not like that ONE game, you call ME a hypocrite.


You are a hypocrite. Throughout every discussion we've ever had on this topic I've pointed out that I want to see something for everyone. For some reason you only want to see something for you and you can't fathom the idea of coexisting with people who don't see things your way, yet you talk about multiplayer and other people as though you actually give a sh*t what THEY want, and you clearly don't.


That's the problem. You want to see something for everyone in every single game ever made, ever. I just want to see one game that appeals to a niche of players who want to group and is designed explicitly for that, but nooo... you can't have that, can you? You can't accept that someone might want something different. You can't see that your idealistic ideas that should appeal to everyone DO NOT appeal to everyone, and you really don't give a **** about anyone else.

That's life when arguing with you... you're not happy until no one is happy. You're just a giant control freak that needs to ensure that EVERY game appeals to you, even the games you aren't playing.

Aurelius wrote:
Why are you asking that in an FFXIV forum? And why are you pulling all of this garbage out of your *** about how an MMO developer HAS to make grouping "significantly" better and more rewarding or people won't do it when you KNOW that they don't? You KNOW it. You've ADMITTED it. But now you're backpeddling. You have no argument. You have only selfish preference. Why don't MMO developers make games for the group-onry niche anymore? Because MMOs already cost too much and represent too much risk. Five years ago we didn't think that would be possible. Now we know better. Now we've seen the plug pulled on MMOs and studios run out of money and pass the IP off to other studios to assume the risk. We know all these things, yet you ignore that. But you still can't connect the dots and come to your own conclusion that what you're asking for simply isn't viable outside of a teeny little indie studio that is willing to take that risk...and produce a game that reflects the resources of a teenie little indie studio.


I'm asking that in an FFXIV forum because that's what you have devolved this argument you started into. This started out as a discussion about FFXIV and then you decided to come in here and **** in my cheerios and waste my time arguing with me. I also never admitted what you claim I admitted. STOP PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH. It's not hard. Just stop.

You can argue that it isn't viable and that I can come to my own conclusion and blah blah blah all you want. All it leads to is the fact that you just aren't willing or able to accept the existence of something that you don't like.

Aurelius wrote:
It bothers me when you pull arguments out of your *** about what a developer "has" to do in order to accommodate you. Because apparently you're not happy to be doing what you want to do but in order to be truly happy, you need to know everyone else is forced to do it your way, too. That's not what XIV was about when they announced it, that's not what XIV is going to be about under Yoshida. They're already in too deep to be doing an about face and sacrificing potential subscribers to suite a niche that they don't need to pander to. It doesn't bother me that you like to focus on grouping. It doesn't hurt me that you like to focus on grouping. It bothers me that you're so willing to have your way at the expense of so many others.


I never said EVERYONE has to; I said I just wanted one game to be that way. I don't think everyone has to play it. Everyone can play every other game that caters to everyone. I'm fine with that. Why aren't you?

Aurelius wrote:
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
dyvidd wrote:
Aurelius, knock it off. She has a point of view and you have a point of view. You need to grow up and learn not everyone has to think like you do.


For as much as he's trying to accuse me of it in his posts, accepting that someone else enjoys something other than what he does is not Aurelius' strong point.


I'm not the one asking for "significant" bonuses and rewards for playing the way I like to play or severe restrictions on one group of people to satisfy the way I like to play. You are.


I'm asking for ONE game to exist that has that. For such a game to exist, you treat it like the apocalypse.

I mean, seriously. I don't get you, man. I really don't.

Edited, Jan 2nd 2011 8:54pm by Mikhalia

Edited, Jan 2nd 2011 8:55pm 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.
#122 Jan 02 2011 at 8:01 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
shinichoco wrote:
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:

I'm playing an online game because I want to play with other people. I'm playing with other people and I'm having fun. I'm sorry that, to you, you can only have fun if NO online games WHATSOEVER are fun for -me-. Because that's what it seems like. I've made the point that I don't even need or want it to be FFXIV that is the game that does this; that I would be happy if -ANY- game, any game at all offered this. And yet still you persist, insisting that EVERY SINGLE GAME on the market MUST appeal to EVERYONE or YOU aren't happy. You ask me why I should care about other people enjoying the game, why I should want other people to be unhappy... I submit to you: Why are YOU so angry at the idea that there might be a game that YOU DON'T EVEN PLAY that might not appeal to you?


Time out. Why do these two concepts always have to be mutually exclusive? You want to play in groups with other people? Okay, fine. Someone else wants to go soloing? Okay, that's fine too. Why does the game have to pick and choose which person it wants to cater to? Is it so bad that if I can solo 100 mobs in an hour and get X SP for it, that I can kill maybe... 70 higher level mobs in a small group in that same hour and still get roughly X SP for that hour? When soloers run out of mobs it might prompt them to group together to fight higher level mobs clearing out the solo area for a particular level range for someone else to solo... and if they don't want to group... all right, they only hurt themselves and you can get your friends and group and laugh at them together.

More options VS. Limited options. More is usually better, right? So why the need to bicker back and forth? Is there something I'm just not getting here? You're not really saying that a game has to be something that you and people who happen to think exactly like you enjoy in order to be a good game... are you?


My point is: Why does -every- game have to try to appeal to -every- person? Why can't -one- game just appeal to a certain group of people? I mean, after all, there ARE RPGs that apply to people who prefer to solo; they're called single player RPGs and they have been around since the 80s. So why is is that people who prefer to solo are so adverse to the idea that one game might not be solo friendly?

I mean, I prefer a fantasy setting to a space setting but you don't hear me complaining that SWG/STO/SWTOR don't have elves in them. I simply accept that that game isn't for me and move on.

I prefer PvE to PvP; you don't hear me complaining that Aion or Guild Wars or EVE need to add in the option that I can play without another player attacking me; that's part of the game and I accept that these games are not for me.

I don't get why some people are unwilling to accept that some games are just games you won't enjoy but other people will. Why does EVERY game -need- to apply to EVERYONE, even if you aren't even playing that game?

I'm flat out saying that I am fine with games existing that do not appeal to me; if they appeal to other people, that's fine with me, and I'm happy they're enjoying that game.

So is no one willing to say that they are also fine if a game appeals to me that doesn't necessarily appeal to others? Or are we really going to keep arguing the point that I'm not allowed to like something unless everyone else will also like it?

Otherwise, lets hear your argument for why SWTOR should have elves and orcs, and why EVE should let players flag on/off for PvP. After all, they don't have something for everyone. Shouldn't they?

Edited, Jan 2nd 2011 9:02pm 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.
#123 Jan 02 2011 at 8:03 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:

Did you not catch the part where I said "It doesn't even have to be FFXIV"? What does it have to do with a 180 in SE's scope of appeal when I have said several times that I would even be fine with ANY game existing designed in such a way. There you go putting words in my mouth again, or in this case, ignoring something I've already said (that it doesn't need to apply to XIV or SE) because it no longer suits your argument if you consider that point.


You're in an FFXIV forum, defending a ridiculous argument you made about how an MMO developer "has" to do things a certain way to encourage group play. You know that they don't have to do things the way you stipulated to encourage group play. You've admitted as much. When I brought up the dungeon finder the best you could throw back is the horrible QQ shenanigan of what happens when people queue for roles they aren't prepared to fill. Doesn't matter how many groups it might have matched you with that went fine. Doesn't matter how much time it saved you trying to put those groups together yourself, or how much time it saved you getting yourself an the rest of the group together in the dungeon to start. Because it's easier to now suddenly pull ANOTHER ridiculous argument out of your *** and complain that I'm not respecting your desire for an MMO...any MMO...to cater to a group-onry mindset...in an FFXIV forum...and maybe hopefully I'll forget about all the other ******** you put forward as fact and can no longer support.

Let's just do everyone a favor and summarize and be done with it, shall we?

- You want an MMO that focuses on group play.
- You pulled a bunch of garbage out of your *** trying to argue why an MMO that supports group and solo play "must" favor group play or group play won't happen.
- You were proven wrong.
- You argue poorly.
- FFXIV will not pander to the group-onry audience at the expense of solo players if they want to turn the game around.

- I would be happy to see you find an MMO that caters to the group-onry niche.
- I don't like people pulling false arguments out of their *** to suggest why they should get more than me because I don't fully share their point of view.
- I would still be happy to see you find an MMO that caters to the group-onry niche and we both know XIV won't be it.
- Neener, neener.
- ???
- Profit.
#124 Jan 02 2011 at 8:14 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
Aurelius wrote:
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:

Did you not catch the part where I said "It doesn't even have to be FFXIV"? What does it have to do with a 180 in SE's scope of appeal when I have said several times that I would even be fine with ANY game existing designed in such a way. There you go putting words in my mouth again, or in this case, ignoring something I've already said (that it doesn't need to apply to XIV or SE) because it no longer suits your argument if you consider that point.


You're in an FFXIV forum, defending a ridiculous argument you made about how an MMO developer "has" to do things a certain way to encourage group play. You know that they don't have to do things the way you stipulated to encourage group play. You've admitted as much. When I brought up the dungeon finder the best you could throw back is the horrible QQ shenanigan of what happens when people queue for roles they aren't prepared to fill. Doesn't matter how many groups it might have matched you with that went fine. Doesn't matter how much time it saved you trying to put those groups together yourself, or how much time it saved you getting yourself an the rest of the group together in the dungeon to start. Because it's easier to now suddenly pull ANOTHER ridiculous argument out of your *** and complain that I'm not respecting your desire for an MMO...any MMO...to cater to a group-onry mindset...in an FFXIV forum...and maybe hopefully I'll forget about all the other bullsh*t you put forward as fact and can no longer support.


I'm in this thread, which happens to be in the FFXIV forum, where I made a point and you started an argument over it, that ended up with me talking about an MMORPG that could encourage group play.

I never said the dungeon finder was a bad thing; I said it was a good thing. I pointed out one example of how it was misused and there you go putting words in my mouth again.

The only one pulling my arguments out of their *** is you. I do sound rather silly when my words are coming out of your mouth. Shame that that's the only way you can argue with me, because all you keep doing is putting more and more words into my mouth that I didn't say so that you have something to argue with. Pro tip: I am not obligated to support the things I never said, although I am in agreement with you that the words you've been putting into my mouth, much like your arguments themselves, are *********

Aurelius wrote:
Let's just do everyone a favor and summarize and be done with it, shall we?

- You want an MMO that focuses on group play.
- You pulled a bunch of garbage out of your *** trying to argue why an MMO that supports group and solo play "must" favor group play or group play won't happen.
- You were proven wrong.
- You argue poorly.
- FFXIV will not pander to the group-onry audience at the expense of solo players if they want to turn the game around.

- I would be happy to see you find an MMO that caters to the group-onry niche.
- I don't like people pulling false arguments out of their *** to suggest why they should get more than me because I don't fully share their point of view.
- I would still be happy to see you find an MMO that caters to the group-onry niche and we both know XIV won't be it.
- Neener, neener.
- ???
- Profit.


- Good. That's all I asked for.
- No, YOU pulled a bunch of garbage out of YOUR *** and passed it off as things I've said. Despite my REPEATED REQUESTS for you to not do that, it seems that not putting words in someone's mouth is an impossible task for you. Maybe that's why you always do it in every argument I see you in. Once you can't argue with what someone says, you argue with things they never said because you decided it was easy for you to infer them.
- You proved points I never made wrong. Good job. You must be so proud. I also never said that the ***** could fly, that Rhode Island is the largest state, or that I can spew fire. Would you like to also pretend I said those and argue with them? Go ahead, I won't stop you.
- I'm sorry, if I put words in your mouth, would that be arguing in a manner acceptable to you? If so, you should have said so sooner.
- Clearly you were trying to infer that I am a baby murderer with this. I mean, that's obviously what you meant. I have never murdered a baby and therefore I have proven you wrong. Wow, you're right, arguing this way is so much more fun. Now I understand why you do it.

From this point forward, I will now quote your posts, replace your wording with whatever I like, and then argue THAT instead. Seems to work for you.
____________________________
[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.
#125 Jan 02 2011 at 8:25 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
**
295 posts
If they filled the game with content, added an auction house and gave abilities or jobs more defined roles and places to use them, then rebalanced how experienced is gained, I think we'd be sitting on a good game.

Any other major change that does not help with the above issues will not help the game imo.
#126 Jan 02 2011 at 8:28 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,576 posts
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:

- No, YOU pulled a bunch of garbage out of YOUR *** and passed it off as things I've said. Despite my REPEATED REQUESTS for you to not do that, it seems that not putting words in someone's mouth is an impossible task for you. Maybe that's why you always do it in every argument I see you in. Once you can't argue with what someone says, you argue with things they never said because you decided it was easy for you to infer them.


Was this one of my statements, or one of yours:

Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
The only way for party play to be a worthwhile option is to make the benefits of partying significantly outweigh what soloing has to offer.


Hint: it was yours. It was your statement. Cut and paste with no editing whatsoever from me. YOUR statement. So how then am I putting words in your mouth when I tell you that you're making factual statements that you can't support? "The only way"? Really? And yet here Blizzard just strips out barriers and people group for dungeons while leveling all the time now. They didn't need to up the rewards. They didn't need to make a huge discrepancy between the rewards of solo play and the rewards of party play. They just had to strip away the barriers the were keeping people from grouping.

I really, really hate having to go back and find statements you claim to have not made just to counter arguments that I'm putting words in your mouth. It's irksome. You said it, I responded to it. Buck up, buttercup. You were wrong.
#127 Jan 02 2011 at 8:28 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
MetalSmith wrote:
If they filled the game with content, added an auction house and gave abilities or jobs more defined roles and places to use them, then rebalanced how experienced is gained, I think we'd be sitting on a good game.

Any other major change that does not help with the above issues will not help the game imo.


You forgot mailbox, airships, and chocobos :)
____________________________
[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.
#128 Jan 02 2011 at 8:30 PM Rating: Default
*****
11,539 posts
Aurelius wrote:
I'm watching the football game right now. I hope the Rams win.


Honestly, I'm not really rooting for either team, but I do find it funny that the last game of the season is a 7-8 team vs a 6-9 team, adn the outcome actually MATTERS.

Edited, Jan 2nd 2011 9:30pm 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.
#129 Jan 02 2011 at 8:32 PM Rating: Good
**
429 posts
Mikhaila doesn't know how to admit defeat. More at 11.
#130 Jan 02 2011 at 8:35 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
Wolfums wrote:
Mikhaila doesn't know how to admit defeat. More at 11.


I'm just doing what I said. I had one thing I wanted to hear. I heard it. Now I'm just going to have a little fun and waste time until one of us gets bored. I really didn't bother reading what he said.

I have accomplished what I wanted with the first point (his acknowledgment and acceptance that such a game could exist and his head would not explode) and beyond this I have nothing more to gain from arguing with him further.

Therefore I shall just continue replying to any other posts Aurelius makes in this thread nonsensically, for lulz, boredom, and +1age.

Edited, Jan 2nd 2011 9:36pm 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.
#131 Jan 02 2011 at 8:49 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
322 posts
Yeah see, to me Aurelius lost. Horribly. He lost as soon as the ad hominem attacks started. He lost as soon as he started saying there is no place for a niche game where people are rewarded for grouping over solo'ing. He lost as soon as he started twisting Mikhalia's comments so they were counter productive and lost their original meaning.

I'm not about to post page long essays with counter points in em to explain exactly why I feel this way, i'm just going to say I guess its all up to perception.

*cue comment from someone starting an argument or flame about how I am completely wrong and I should be burnt at the stake for it*
____________________________


#132 Jan 02 2011 at 8:51 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
tylerbee wrote:
Yeah see, to me Aurelius lost. Horribly. He lost as soon as the ad hominem attacks started. He lost as soon as he started saying there is no place for a niche game where people are rewarded for grouping over solo'ing. He lost as soon as he started twisting Mikhalia's comments so they were counter productive and lost their original meaning.

I'm not about to post page long essays with counter points in em to explain exactly why I feel this way, i'm just going to say I guess its all up to perception.

*cue comment from someone starting an argument or flame about how I am completely wrong and I should be burnt at the stake for it*


You are completely wrong and should be burnt at the stake for it.

>.>
____________________________
[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.
#133 Jan 02 2011 at 9:19 PM Rating: Decent
The thing that worries me the most after this poll, is the fear our community is showing towards change, either for good or bad.

Im not gonna take a stand as a "yes'er" or "no'er" but i must ask how it is that noone who took this poll accually took the time to analyze the content? to try to understand how the diffrent questions correlates with each other.

yes ofcourse the last question is the one with the most obvious disscussionfuel, although to me it is a rather irrelevant question unless you see the connection to the other questions, the reason for the poll to even exist, and to accually understand what the questions are underlining.

I think people are focusing alot of effort defending their principals and "honor" insted of focusing on what matters,in this context it beeing a game that is enjoyable for YOU.

What intrigued me the most about the poll, was the question involving an answer : The Final Fantasy name. Why u may ask? well. honestly i play a final fantasy game due to the fact that i like the final fantasy franchise and what it has previously had in content.
what many fail to look at is the series as a whole, and only look at ffxi, it is yes the only mmorp in the series but still shouldnt have any more value in this disscussion.

All i want from THIS game, is it to accually stay true to this franchise, i dont care if i hate the game, or if i love it. I dont care if it has an AH or if it has PVP.
ALL i care about is for this game to be Final Fantasy, and i think. that if you look at it, you would agree.


Sorry for the massive amounts of text, but im aching to see people arguing about whatnot! Peace and love from Lindbloom.
#134 Jan 02 2011 at 9:22 PM Rating: Good
**
608 posts
depends on if its gonna clone something else already out then yeah ill quit, if it clones ffxi ill play or if it something new ill play if i like it.

all they need to add is the ffxi search and party search "flags" then getting a party will be alot easier and the game will feel like a multiplayer game we all know the one in game right now is garbage. content will come.



SQUARE ENIX CLONE THE FFXI SEARCH to FFXIV PLEASE!!! :)


#135 Jan 02 2011 at 9:25 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
1,569 posts
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
I don't think soloing is the best answer though. I think a better answer is to introduce content that can be done with 2-3 people regardless of class and does not require 6 people with specific class breakdowns. That was always the biggest problem, not that you needed 6 people but that you needed 6 SPECIFIC people. WoW had a huge advantage over XI in that respect in that more classes could fill the same roles, whereas in XI, even if 20+ people were lfp, if there were no healers, no tanks, or no refreshers... even if just ONE of those three was missing, then NO ONE could get a group. That was terrible and should not be revisited.

However, if you can design content that 2-3 people of ANY class can tackle, then I think that's the best way to get people to group without having the giant waste of time trying to GET a group.

You don't -need- solo content or leveling if you can manage to implement content for small groups to do. If the same content and leveling that would otherwise have been "solo stuff" is tweaked to require 2-3 people, where soloing is impossible but a group of 2-3 is still doable, you'll end up with people who won't mind small groups or inability so solo since the actual forming of the group is no longer a chore like it is in many games, FFXI and WoW included.
Party-wise, FFXI's giant failure was the fact that classes were tossed in to compensate for not including basic game mechanics into the classes. The refresher garbage should have never happened in the first place.

The smaller group stuff is something SE tried to do, and failed spectacularly at it (read: signet bonuses for smaller parties). To me, it's a complete no-go unless you hybridize all 20 jobs to be able to take multiple roles. Even then, you'll have the red mage debacle repeating itself because people will still decide what job is best for what. To further complicate things, there's the issue that up until recently FFXI was very unforgiving to error. THAT is why people always went for the "best" strategies with the "best" jobs in the roster and required the "best" gear to get anything done. The idea as a whole is not very sound to me.
Quote:
That's the problem as I see it; people look at solo content as "something to do when you don't feel like getting a group" because getting a group is a chore. Once you make it no longer a chore, people won't mind.
LFG is not much of a chore in WoW. You log in and do a quest or six for 45 minutes or group and clear a dungeon or three for an hour or two.

If you're referring to the (probable) long wait times using the LFG tool in WoW, that's more a repercussion of tanks and healers becoming less tolerant of failure, which is a result of the devs being hellbent on making the game "harder" after the top 2% raiders across all servers whined that their raids had working dads and 60 year old grandmas instead of super-elite cheeto-eating, mountain dew-chugging dudes in them.
____________________________
Products of boredom: 1 2 3 4 5
Besieged
Hopes for FFXIV: Fencer | Red Mage
#136 Jan 02 2011 at 9:28 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
augustheureux wrote:
The thing that worries me the most after this poll, is the fear our community is showing towards change, either for good or bad.

Im not gonna take a stand as a "yes'er" or "no'er" but i must ask how it is that noone who took this poll accually took the time to analyze the content? to try to understand how the diffrent questions correlates with each other.

yes ofcourse the last question is the one with the most obvious disscussionfuel, although to me it is a rather irrelevant question unless you see the connection to the other questions, the reason for the poll to even exist, and to accually understand what the questions are underlining.

I think people are focusing alot of effort defending their principals and "honor" insted of focusing on what matters,in this context it beeing a game that is enjoyable for YOU.

What intrigued me the most about the poll, was the question involving an answer : The Final Fantasy name. Why u may ask? well. honestly i play a final fantasy game due to the fact that i like the final fantasy franchise and what it has previously had in content.
what many fail to look at is the series as a whole, and only look at ffxi, it is yes the only mmorp in the series but still shouldnt have any more value in this disscussion.

All i want from THIS game, is it to accually stay true to this franchise, i dont care if i hate the game, or if i love it. I dont care if it has an AH or if it has PVP.
ALL i care about is for this game to be Final Fantasy, and i think. that if you look at it, you would agree.


Sorry for the massive amounts of text, but im aching to see people arguing about whatnot! Peace and love from Lindbloom.


I've said before that I think SE should consider abandoning the FF franchise because too many people already have certain expectations in their mind just by seeing the Final Fantasy name. For many longtime FF fans, the name "Final Fantasy" already instills a certain set of expectations about what the game will and won't be; what it can and can't be, and the only two things these types of fans have in common is that none of them can agree what things those are, and that all of them will get fervently angry if they don't get them.

I think that if they had left the game named "Project Rapture", they wouldn't feel limited by the "Final Fantasy" name in terms of what to do with the game.

I mean, just as a base level, the game HAS to have crystals, chocobos, and airships because it has Final Fantasy in it. Depending on who you ask, this list can get larger.
____________________________
[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.
#137 Jan 02 2011 at 9:35 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Ruisu wrote:
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
I don't think soloing is the best answer though. I think a better answer is to introduce content that can be done with 2-3 people regardless of class and does not require 6 people with specific class breakdowns. That was always the biggest problem, not that you needed 6 people but that you needed 6 SPECIFIC people. WoW had a huge advantage over XI in that respect in that more classes could fill the same roles, whereas in XI, even if 20+ people were lfp, if there were no healers, no tanks, or no refreshers... even if just ONE of those three was missing, then NO ONE could get a group. That was terrible and should not be revisited.

However, if you can design content that 2-3 people of ANY class can tackle, then I think that's the best way to get people to group without having the giant waste of time trying to GET a group.

You don't -need- solo content or leveling if you can manage to implement content for small groups to do. If the same content and leveling that would otherwise have been "solo stuff" is tweaked to require 2-3 people, where soloing is impossible but a group of 2-3 is still doable, you'll end up with people who won't mind small groups or inability so solo since the actual forming of the group is no longer a chore like it is in many games, FFXI and WoW included.
Party-wise, FFXI's giant failure was the fact that classes were tossed in to compensate for not including basic game mechanics into the classes. The refresher garbage should have never happened in the first place.

The smaller group stuff is something SE tried to do, and failed spectacularly at it (read: signet bonuses for smaller parties). To me, it's a complete no-go unless you hybridize all 20 jobs to be able to take multiple roles. Even then, you'll have the red mage debacle repeating itself because people will still decide what job is best for what. To further complicate things, there's the issue that up until recently FFXI was very unforgiving to error. THAT is why people always went for the "best" strategies with the "best" jobs in the roster and required the "best" gear to get anything done. The idea as a whole is not very sound to me.
Quote:
That's the problem as I see it; people look at solo content as "something to do when you don't feel like getting a group" because getting a group is a chore. Once you make it no longer a chore, people won't mind.
LFG is not much of a chore in WoW. You log in and do a quest or six for 45 minutes or group and clear a dungeon or three for an hour or two.

If you're referring to the (probable) long wait times using the LFG tool in WoW, that's more a repercussion of tanks and healers becoming less tolerant of failure, which is a result of the devs being hellbent on making the game "harder" after the top 2% raiders across all servers whined that their raids had working dads and 60 year old grandmas instead of super-elite cheeto-eating, mountain dew-chugging dudes in them.


As for the signet thing; the additional drawback to that was that Sanction added a XP bonus regardless of party size, and ToAU had lolibri, which were easier than any non ToAU mob.

I also agree with the fact that the game was built in a way where being a hybrid was unlikely. There was a lot of potential for hybrid options like a SAM tank or a DNC healer, but most people preferred to stay with the most optimal options only; the hybrids weren't as feasible outside of a small group situation. Total agreement that the refresh aspect of the game through an unneeded complication into the party building.

The LFG tool made it much, much, much easier to get a group in WoW. XIV could benefit from it if it had instanced dungeons like WoW does. I've said befoer that I don't want "a WoW clone" but I think that stealing the instanced dungeons and LFG tool would be a welcome improvement to FFXIV.
____________________________
[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.
#138 Jan 02 2011 at 9:54 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,842 posts
LOUD NOISES!!!!!!
____________________________
FFXIV Dyvid (Awaiting 2.0)
FFXI Dyvid ~ Pandemonium (Retired)
SWTOR Dy'vid Legacy - Canderous Ordo
#139 Jan 02 2011 at 10:13 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
**
278 posts
Wolfums wrote:
Wloire wrote:
Wolfums wrote:
No, it'll bring me back. 2011 is a huge year for important gaming releases, FFXIV need to pull off something amazing if it wants to stay afloat.


No it isn't. the only big release is Star Wars which, with its budget has to be the second coming if it's going to succeed, the game has way overshot a normal mmo budget and from my own impressions seems to be slightly lackluster gameplay wise (great storytelling though!).

TERA is not a big release, although it looks extremely interesting, especially with its combat system, it will not garner enough attention to be considered a heavy hitter.

Single Player games are always being released and there is a couple big ones every year, generally single player games only pull from the MMO market for a month at a time so they are no big deal.


Haha, look at this guy.

SWG, Guild Wars 2, TERA, and Rift are all fairly well known in the MMO world and there's plenty of buzz for them. You've also got Diablo 3 with a possible release in 2011, and it's going to definitely be online capable and it's going to definitely suck away players from subscription based MMOs.

Quote:
Finally do you think they can completely rebuild and overhaul the game in a year? Asking for a NGE like change is absolute suicide for the game, it will pull development from much needed content and devote it to what will probably amount to another miss. They definately didn't get it right the first time.

Again the only thing that will kill FFXIV in 2011 is FFXIV.


Yes, they can, because they already have a lot of content created. They don't need to redo textures and art designs, they don't need to redo most class concepts or story concepts. The hardest, most expensive part of any game is not core mechanics.

This game is a mangled, sh*tty mess that's only missing the tombstone for its grave. An overhaul might pull it back.


You seemed to have missed my point entirely. My issue was with you saying 2011 is going to be a big year for games. TOR:O (not SWG, entirely different games), has been estimated to require over a million subscribers from launch to hope to break into profitability within a reasonable amount of time due to the sheer size of the budget. From what I've seen of the game, it's going to suffer all the same issues as any other AAA release in the past five years. It's lackluster to say the least.

Guild Wars looks beautiful, absolutely amazing, but thats looks, videos, all of which can be craftily edited. We have no idea what the game will actually be like, just like everyone thought FFXIV was going to be the second coming before open beta.

TERA, the one truly promising title suffers from a lack of marketing. How many people know about the game and will stay past the free month? Maybe a hundred thousand? A great number for TERA, but not a significant hit to the market.

Diablo 3, looks like absolute ****. Pure utter ********* But its a Blizzard game so it will sell tens of millions of copies. The online will only serve as a distraction for most though. A sideshow. It won't have a significant impact beyond month two.

No 2011 looks a lot like 2010, a lot of over hyped titles that will do just average and be decried as utter failures because they can't reach the same numbers as WoW. Which represents the true threat to FFXIV. WoW and its continued expansions will always be the biggest enemy to FFXIV's success. Not TOR, not GW, definitely not Diablo.

Quote:
I strongly disagree with your assesment that Guildwar, Rift, and SWTOR will not affect FFXIV. SE needs new PAYING players to survive. You are correct that ony SE can kill FFXIV cause it is up to them to do something about it.

You think this free bunch that is playing is enough to keep FFXIV going? If you think so you are naive, no crazzy. Potential MMO players are going to try something new, not a game that has been trashed by every gaming site there is. And if they don't like say SWTOR the will more then likely try the newer game then FFXIV. You know why? Cause it is free right now. Where are the people beating down the door of this free to play? **** if they can't get people in here when it is free, just imagine when they start charging.


Games have survived much worse population numbers and profited. Not that 500 players on each server is a success. SE has to start considering consolidating servers to save overhead for sure. These numbers of course won't kill the game unless SE decides it just isn't worth it.
#140 Jan 02 2011 at 10:18 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Even if SE does start merging servers, and I'm not saying they will or won't, they'd be foolish to do it before the PS3 release since they don't know how many changes they'll make by then and how many people they'll bring in. The only thing that would be worse than consolidating servers this early in the game's life is getting a bunch of PS3 players and have to open new servers again.
____________________________
[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.
#141 Jan 02 2011 at 10:54 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
278 posts
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
Even if SE does start merging servers, and I'm not saying they will or won't, they'd be foolish to do it before the PS3 release since they don't know how many changes they'll make by then and how many people they'll bring in. The only thing that would be worse than consolidating servers this early in the game's life is getting a bunch of PS3 players and have to open new servers again.


It's a damned if they do damned if they don't situation. Sparsely populated servers, will spread word of mouth that the game is dead. Merging the servers will spread word of mouth that the game is dieing.
#142 Jan 02 2011 at 11:49 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
***
2,426 posts
dear SE,

just make FFXI-2. all those PS2 players need to upgrade to a new system any **** way.


____________________________
monk
dragoon

#143 Jan 03 2011 at 12:12 AM Rating: Good
*
137 posts
Wloire wrote:
Wolfums wrote:
Wloire wrote:
Wolfums wrote:
No, it'll bring me back. 2011 is a huge year for important gaming releases, FFXIV need to pull off something amazing if it wants to stay afloat.


No it isn't. the only big release is Star Wars which, with its budget has to be the second coming if it's going to succeed, the game has way overshot a normal mmo budget and from my own impressions seems to be slightly lackluster gameplay wise (great storytelling though!).

TERA is not a big release, although it looks extremely interesting, especially with its combat system, it will not garner enough attention to be considered a heavy hitter.

Single Player games are always being released and there is a couple big ones every year, generally single player games only pull from the MMO market for a month at a time so they are no big deal.


Haha, look at this guy.

SWG, Guild Wars 2, TERA, and Rift are all fairly well known in the MMO world and there's plenty of buzz for them. You've also got Diablo 3 with a possible release in 2011, and it's going to definitely be online capable and it's going to definitely suck away players from subscription based MMOs.

Quote:
Finally do you think they can completely rebuild and overhaul the game in a year? Asking for a NGE like change is absolute suicide for the game, it will pull development from much needed content and devote it to what will probably amount to another miss. They definately didn't get it right the first time.

Again the only thing that will kill FFXIV in 2011 is FFXIV.


Yes, they can, because they already have a lot of content created. They don't need to redo textures and art designs, they don't need to redo most class concepts or story concepts. The hardest, most expensive part of any game is not core mechanics.

This game is a mangled, sh*tty mess that's only missing the tombstone for its grave. An overhaul might pull it back.


You seemed to have missed my point entirely. My issue was with you saying 2011 is going to be a big year for games. TOR:O (not SWG, entirely different games), has been estimated to require over a million subscribers from launch to hope to break into profitability within a reasonable amount of time due to the sheer size of the budget. From what I've seen of the game, it's going to suffer all the same issues as any other AAA release in the past five years. It's lackluster to say the least.

Guild Wars looks beautiful, absolutely amazing, but thats looks, videos, all of which can be craftily edited. We have no idea what the game will actually be like, just like everyone thought FFXIV was going to be the second coming before open beta.

TERA, the one truly promising title suffers from a lack of marketing. How many people know about the game and will stay past the free month? Maybe a hundred thousand? A great number for TERA, but not a significant hit to the market.

Diablo 3, looks like absolute sh*t. Pure utter bullsh*t. But its a Blizzard game so it will sell tens of millions of copies. The online will only serve as a distraction for most though. A sideshow. It won't have a significant impact beyond month two.

No 2011 looks a lot like 2010, a lot of over hyped titles that will do just average and be decried as utter failures because they can't reach the same numbers as WoW. Which represents the true threat to FFXIV. WoW and its continued expansions will always be the biggest enemy to FFXIV's success. Not TOR, not GW, definitely not Diablo.

Quote:
I strongly disagree with your assesment that Guildwar, Rift, and SWTOR will not affect FFXIV. SE needs new PAYING players to survive. You are correct that ony SE can kill FFXIV cause it is up to them to do something about it.

You think this free bunch that is playing is enough to keep FFXIV going? If you think so you are naive, no crazzy. Potential MMO players are going to try something new, not a game that has been trashed by every gaming site there is. And if they don't like say SWTOR the will more then likely try the newer game then FFXIV. You know why? Cause it is free right now. Where are the people beating down the door of this free to play? **** if they can't get people in here when it is free, just imagine when they start charging.


Games have survived much worse population numbers and profited. Not that 500 players on each server is a success. SE has to start considering consolidating servers to save overhead for sure. These numbers of course won't kill the game unless SE decides it just isn't worth it.



Wow is FFXIV only enemy? HAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!! You are getting way ahead of yourself. SE isn’t even brave enough to charge for playing and you’re already claiming it has just WOW to worry about.

You’re talking as if FFXIV has this huge player base that it is trying to keep when it is just the complete opposite. FFXIV has to have significant number of sub before it can even be mentioned in the same breath as WOW. So where does that leave FFXIV then? The same spot as all the other MMOs. Trying to compete for WOW’s leftover. When you start adding up all the numbers that will try other games instead of FFXIV it starts to become big real quick. FFXIV is, after months and months after release, still competing for players. FFXIV is not competing with WOW but with every other MMO aiming for WOW. Sad part is we don’t even know how bad the numbers will be if they started charging.

As far as surviving. I'm pretty sure it will survive. It will just be another game with 100k+ subs if they keep with their current design.
#144 Jan 03 2011 at 2:37 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quick, someone ask me what I think.
____________________________
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.
#145 Jan 03 2011 at 5:29 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
30 posts
Mikhalia the Picky wrote:

In watching my fiancee play Cataclysm, I saw someone ask for help with a quest in general chat and THREE people verbally berated the person, insisting that they didn't need help, that they should just skip that group quest, that unless you're in a dungeon or raid, grouping is a waste of time, etc... One person came to the original asker's defense with the "This is a multiplayer game; what's wrong with the guy wanting to play in a group?" and THAT GUY got flamed too.



This is exactly why I left WoW.. the gameplay is so much fun and rich with contents, but the people are.. uuh.. well.. like the above statement :/

As for this "NGE" thingy.. I like the way things are now.. and I'd really love it even more if they adjust it to a better state.. like some people said, "the base is there.. just needs tweaks here n there".. but if they decided to re-roll everything (including players -- back to lvl/rank 0), I'd definitely leave the game right now.. cuz I don't see the point in continuing.. I've spent countless hours leveling/ranking up most of DoW and DoH since launch (imagine the things I went through with all the dumb system that they implemented) and I don't want my efforts to go to waste..
____________________________


Mikhalia the Picky wrote:
It's well known that MMORPG stands for "Many Men Online Role-Playing as Girls"
#146 Jan 03 2011 at 7:05 AM Rating: Good
**
568 posts
Llester wrote:
dear SE,

just make FFXI-2. all those PS2 players need to upgrade to a new system any **** way.





Every time I hear this term used it brings to mind THIS:

http://media.photobucket.com/image/ff%20x-2%20girlpower/YoshiGirl/320px-Black_Mage_FFX-2.jpg

Let's NOT forget XIII director was responsible for that mess too.
(seriously SE he has messed up every game he has worked on, maybe it's time to send a pink letter to his desk?!)

Sorry totally O.T. and all that jazz...
#147 Jan 03 2011 at 7:25 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,449 posts
To be honest I am scared of change, as it is I am enjoying the game (although I know a lot of people aren't) but if they're gonna redically change it then there is really only two ways they will do it...

WoW clone for it's success - Try to get a better graphics WoWesque game and they might have the comercial success their looking for.

FFXI clone for the Fanbase - This might enable FFXIV to survive but the SE would have two games competing for the same customers and that just isn't good policy.

Personally I just hope the game stays as it is with tweeks done on needed areas...
____________________________


My FFXIV Blog



#148 Jan 03 2011 at 7:57 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
164 posts
i don't really see what they could change. when they changed how sp was gained i considered that NGE. ffxiv suddenly became every other mmo... which is fine for me. i mean before sp change, i didn't even DD and that was utterly dismal. but, seriously what's left to change?

cd's on leves or behest? change sp gain? other than that, there's nothing... cus they are certainly not going to change the content. they can only tweak what's there. i look forward to future content and enjoy putting around in the world of ff, but i see no reason for them not to change the rules despite any sort of nostalgia the playerbase may have. it isn't working so change it, plain and simple.
____________________________


#149 Jan 03 2011 at 9:18 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
812 posts
TempLoop wrote:
when they changed how sp was gained i considered that NGE. ffxiv suddenly became every other mmo... which is fine for me. i mean before sp change, i didn't even DD and that was utterly dismal. but, seriously what's left to change?


This. That question was just in the poll to test the waters. I doubt there will be any drastic changes.
____________________________
Abaddon Active Player Roster
- All your Fabul Sever are belong to us! -


#150 Jan 03 2011 at 9:39 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
45 posts
I for one hope for some radical changes ffxiv hasn't been out long so adjustment can and should be made now. We as a community should focus right now on the key issue with the game not spread them out were it's almost impossible to please everyone or accomplish anything right now. First two would be UI and the lag issue's technology wise it need's to be fixed for more smoother and responsive control aspect of the game itself. Once that is polished off better move on to content of the game begin with more coherent game play, quest ect.

Player's first impression of a game is based mostly at a beginning of game does it grab you as being fun or just plain annoying to you that's the key issue to grab a player at the beginning so they play more. For me the development team need to focus on more content and changes to the beginning side of the game with major content for new people and add small content for mid and high level people so they don't seem left out.

I'm sorry if that doesn't seem far to the high level people but seriously what you expect knowing the current state of the game to grind your way up to max and to find what no other content to do not a big surprise anyone could seen that coming a mile away. In the end ffxiv a young mmo still changes will need to be made some those changes will not be like by some and other will welcome them and ultimately you as an individual will have to come to the decision to either stay and play ffxiv or leave and move on with your life like it or not and find another mmo to enjoy. I believe the development team is doing there best but with the demand so great and so diverse in opinion of what direction they should take it will either make or break this game.
#151 Jan 03 2011 at 10:28 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,449 posts
Odentius wrote:
I for one hope for some radical changes ffxiv hasn't been out long so adjustment can and should be made now. We as a community should focus right now on the key issue with the game not spread them out were it's almost impossible to please everyone or accomplish anything right now. First two would be UI and the lag issue's technology wise it need's to be fixed for more smoother and responsive control aspect of the game itself. Once that is polished off better move on to content of the game begin with more coherent game play, quest ect.

Player's first impression of a game is based mostly at a beginning of game does it grab you as being fun or just plain annoying to you that's the key issue to grab a player at the beginning so they play more. For me the development team need to focus on more content and changes to the beginning side of the game with major content for new people and add small content for mid and high level people so they don't seem left out.

I'm sorry if that doesn't seem far to the high level people but seriously what you expect knowing the current state of the game to grind your way up to max and to find what no other content to do not a big surprise anyone could seen that coming a mile away. In the end ffxiv a young mmo still changes will need to be made some those changes will not be like by some and other will welcome them and ultimately you as an individual will have to come to the decision to either stay and play ffxiv or leave and move on with your life like it or not and find another mmo to enjoy. I believe the development team is doing there best but with the demand so great and so diverse in opinion of what direction they should take it will either make or break this game.


These are all very well and good but nothing like it is "a radical change", I think most of not all the player base agrees with you that these things need to be improved but they're not a change to the basic rules of the Game.
____________________________


My FFXIV Blog



This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 22 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (22)