Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

Letter from the Producer, XII (27/06/2011) Follow

#52 Jun 28 2011 at 1:40 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,449 posts
Llester wrote:
i always think its weird when people complain about solo content in MMOs. i mean, i get the argument (its a massively MULTIPLAYER rpg, yes yes we know), but why does it have to be one or the other? solo or group? answer is, it doesn't, and furthermore, it isn't.

I can't think of any well known MMOs that deliver solo content at the cost of group play. you solo if you want, or you group if you want, or you solo and happen to run into some people and maybe decide to group up.


As other people have said, players tend to go the route of less resistance (faster exp/SP) and so far games that I have known, not that many will usually benefit solo or party play and this will be the choice to the great majority of players. To me, WoW was a solo game when you only consider getting exp, people would just go from one area to the next getting their local quests and the only time they would consider proper grouping would be when they needed the gear obtainable from dungeons.

I the few years that I played WoW not once do I remember hearing anyone looking for exp/grind group.
____________________________


My FFXIV Blog



#53 Jun 28 2011 at 1:46 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,426 posts
Bleam wrote:
Using today's standards for MMOs, please define "Hardcore" game and get back to me.


see thats the thing. modern MMOs are generally what you make of them. Look at rift. when i play that game, i am a "casual". i run around for an hour or two closing rifts and pvping. when i played a lot of FFXI, i tended to be more "hardcore", spending hours and hours killing big stuff with my ls, or running salvage instances every night for a year and not getting that stupid 35 usukane body to drop.

if i wanted to, i could start raiding in rift like a hardcore, or i could start playing FFXI more casual (which i do. abyssea and GoV make it easy to just login and play for an hour or two).

An MMO that is balanced for hardcore and casual gamers is a win-win situation. more money for the company, more players who enjoy the game. i kind of don't see where the issue is, as long as all the content is implemented effectively.

and therein lies the rub i suppose. XIV originally billed itself as both casual and hardcore friendly. obviously that didn't work as intended. casuals who were willing to put up with the game's faults(mostly lack of content) were satisfied with doing their leves, and hardcores who were willing to put up with the games faults (mostly lack of content) just signed up for the grind and now have every class at rank 50.

Problem was, several hundred thousand potential players weren't willing to put up with the game's faults. Yoshi says he's going to fix that, but imo its going to take a lot more than "guildleve reform" and a couple instanced raids.

On the other hand, its good to see him address the issue head on.

____________________________
monk
dragoon

#54 Jun 28 2011 at 1:55 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,426 posts
Hugus wrote:
Llester wrote:
i always think its weird when people complain about solo content in MMOs. i mean, i get the argument (its a massively MULTIPLAYER rpg, yes yes we know), but why does it have to be one or the other? solo or group? answer is, it doesn't, and furthermore, it isn't.

I can't think of any well known MMOs that deliver solo content at the cost of group play. you solo if you want, or you group if you want, or you solo and happen to run into some people and maybe decide to group up.


As other people have said, players tend to go the route of less resistance (faster exp/SP) and so far games that I have known, not that many will usually benefit solo or party play and this will be the choice to the great majority of players. To me, WoW was a solo game when you only consider getting exp, people would just go from one area to the next getting their local quests and the only time they would consider proper grouping would be when they needed the gear obtainable from dungeons.

I the few years that I played WoW not once do I remember hearing anyone looking for exp/grind group.



its a good point, but come on, WoW sucks.

but seriously, i know of what you speak, and i'd just call that bad game design. why doesn't Rift (total WoW clone amirite?) suffer from this problem? because the devs made it extremely easy to switch gears from solo to group play at the click of a "join public group" tab. zone events and rifts draw solo players out of their local quest spamming to join up with groups and tackle different content. its smart game design.
____________________________
monk
dragoon

#55 Jun 28 2011 at 2:15 AM Rating: Excellent
****
4,150 posts
Bleam wrote:
Using today's standards for MMOs, please define "Hardcore" game and get back to me.

There really isn't a standard. In XIV that doesn't exist. With the level cap increase and no changes to mob levels outside of abyssea, it doesn't really exist for XI either. I'd say that before abyssea was released, it would have been the linkshells who were putting in time against AV. Until level cap increase, outside of using terrain hax or defeating it when it was broken, the number of linkshells who defeated AV straight up could be counted on one hand.

I haven't checked into Rift, but considering they just released a new raid I'd say there is at least room there for hardcore players. I think WoW's new raid content releases tomorrow and I'd consider people who progress through hardmode raids in WoW hardcore.

To answer your question, the best of my knowledge, hardcore has always been a term I used for players who play for the challenge of high end raid or boss content. I think the term is being misused here to mean people who can devote more time to playing than your average player. That was the case in XI, especially since AV and PW would have been considered top tier bosses. AV was unbeatable and PW was reserved for people who had 12 hours to defeat it.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#56 Jun 28 2011 at 2:45 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
931 posts
Almalexia wrote:
I don't know why anyone would put solo content in an MMO. Well, that's not true: I know why, but solo content seems wrongheaded for a principally multiplayer genre--not so much from a developer standpoint, since game companies will follow the money, but from a consumer standpoint.

Why don't casual players and "busy" people play single-player games, or match-oriented multiplayer games, or @#%^ around on Facebook, or whatever casuals and "busy" people do?

What is the rationale for buying an MMO


well multiplayer content isnt the only benefit of an mmorpg, just saying you make/name/customize your own character,pick their class and make them stronger etc.

plus, even if you like to solo level up, there's an "economy" part of the game... well, not in FFXIV, but in other mmorpgs.
____________________________
MUTED
#57 Jun 28 2011 at 2:51 AM Rating: Excellent
Sage
**
464 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Bleam wrote:
Using today's standards for MMOs, please define "Hardcore" game and get back to me.

FilthMcNasty wrote:
There really isn't a standard. In XIV that doesn't exist. With the level cap increase and no changes to mob levels outside of abyssea, it doesn't really exist for XI either. I'd say that before abyssea was released, it would have been the linkshells who were putting in time against AV. Until level cap increase, outside of using terrain hax or defeating it when it was broken, the number of linkshells who defeated AV straight up could be counted on one hand.
I 100% agree with this.
FilthMcNasty wrote:
I haven't checked into Rift, but considering they just released a new raid I'd say there is at least room there for hardcore players. I think WoW's new raid content releases tomorrow and I'd consider people who progress through hardmode raids in WoW hardcore.
Again, I'm in agreeance.
FilthMcNasty wrote:
To answer your question, the best of my knowledge, hardcore has always been a term I used for players who play for the challenge of high end raid or boss content. I think the term is being misused here to mean people who can devote more time to playing than your average player. That was the case in XI, especially since AV and PW would have been considered top tier bosses. AV was unbeatable and PW was reserved for people who had 12 hours to defeat it.
You pretty much hit exactly the way I feel about it. Obviously, FFXIV does not have any kind of content at the moment to even be remotely considered as "hardcore." Unless, as you say, people are using the word "Hardcore" for just time spent doing things in game. (eg: Leveling all classes to 50) Actually, the people who did spend that much time to do that, I would consider extremely addicted. Rate up for you, sir.
____________________________
Bleam FFXI (Retired) 75MNK/SAM/NIN/SMN/THF  
Bleam WoW (Retired) 80 Druid 
Golf WoW (Retired) 80 Death Knight 
Tewksberry WoW (Retired) 80 Hunter 
Rahana WoW (Retired) 80 Priest


TwiddleDee wrote:
Purchase and instal a bigger hard drive, at the moment my PS3 has 500GB memory which is plenty.
#58 Jun 28 2011 at 4:38 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
351 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
I think the term is being misused here to mean people who can devote more time to playing than your average player.


From my understanding, "hardcore player" applies to those who do play more than most, but with the important qualifier that they also use that time to their advantage over those who can't (or don't) play as much.

That said, it's hard to say only players who perform X, Y, or Z tasks are hardcore. Saying a linkshell who fights AV is hardcore glosses over the amount of work they must have put into their characters to even be able to attempt it. It's complicated by the fact that "hardcore" play isn't usually a constant thing. Someone might play "hardcore" for 3 months, but then ease into a normal schedule. Because of that, what's considered "hardcore" starts to get blurry, and I think that's why it can seem difficult to define.

Someone might be seriously devoted to farming their own ridiculous amounts of gil 16 hours a day in a manner that makes RMT jealous. That would also qualify as hardcore, even if it doesn't necessarily involve lots of people, difficult combat, or the very best gear, because they're using their play time to a substantial advantage over those who play less. Anyone doing that in FFXIV right now would be considered hardcore, in my book, because the moment anything worth buying turns up, they'll be the first to own it (probably some double-materia armor of doom +3).
#59 Jun 28 2011 at 5:20 AM Rating: Default
****
4,150 posts
ForceOfMeh wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
I think the term is being misused here to mean people who can devote more time to playing than your average player.

That said, it's hard to say only players who perform X, Y, or Z tasks are hardcore. Saying a linkshell who fights AV is hardcore glosses over the amount of work they must have put into their characters to even be able to attempt it.

Getting yourself to a point where you can attempt AV on a serious level would be the qualifier. Participation in(at that time) the highest level endgame content is what makes players 'hardcore'. The fact that it takes a lot of time, or relative to which game you're playing, more time than most people who play would spend; that's just byproduct.

By the definition of some here, it is simply an amount of time you spent trying to get currency, items or any other form of reward. This definition is widely used in the 'WoW sucks, it's easy and they just give away gear' arguments. Many XI players felt that XI was harder because regardless of the skill and effort required to defeat whatever mob for whatever loot, said loot was always protected by an invisible boss aptly named 'S#!tty drop rate'.

There were several problems exclusive to XI because of the job mechanics of the game. Much of the elite gear could be worn by 15+ jobs. Considering that people could change jobs at will in XI, that creates more of a need for items that are already hard to get. That alone is the reason why gear seemed so much more rare. It wasn't just that the drop rate sucked, but since everyone had [insert job here] that they could switch to at any time, everyone wanted [insert ridiculous armor here] to use.

I strayed a bit from my point, but the general definition of hardcore would be playing at the highest level of endgame content, no matter what game you play. XIV does not have endgame content and therefore doesn't qualify.

____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#60 Jun 28 2011 at 6:30 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
437 posts
I do understand catering to casual players and solo players, certainly from a business sense, but from a pure gaming sense if I want to solo or play for 15 mins I'll go play FIFA or something like that for some instant satisfaction of trouncing a team I loathe. I appreciate the acknowldement that people who play don't always have tons of time, we're no longer all students we have jobs and families and still want to game seriously. I do find myself soloing now and again and playing for 15mins now and again... on another game... I don't want that in an MMO, I dont want to pay £9 a month (for years) for a game I jump onto for 15mins or to solo. Yes I do want something to be doing while I get a party together and I hope the game does become something like XI where I could go do something with my seek flag up. XI changed the way I look at online gaming, unfortunately so many people have had WoW change the way they look at online gaming. XI was better.
____________________________

Metin - Phoenix - BLM75 WHM48 Retired

http://cojenova.enjin.com/ff14forum

#61 Jun 28 2011 at 8:50 AM Rating: Good
*
80 posts
Bakkasan wrote:
MerylStryfe wrote:
I'm excited for the changes, especially the SP rewarded at the completion of a leve. Sometimes doing leve's sucks because you don't know whether you're getting 1k sp or 5k depending on how fast you find and kill the mobs.


Or doing an 8 man link only to get 4 pages of that book in a row and only the last 2 mobs instead of having to fight your way through it for killer sp.

you are definitely doing it wrong...you shouldn't add more than 3 links as they provide 0 benefit.

Edited, Jun 28th 2011 10:50am by stripesonfire
#62Poubelle, Posted: Jun 28 2011 at 9:50 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) someones farming rate ups, poor SE fanboys wont know what hit them. good job
#63 Jun 28 2011 at 9:55 AM Rating: Good
****
6,898 posts
Poubelle wrote:
Metin wrote:
XI changed the way I look at online gaming, unfortunately so many people have had WoW change the way they look at online gaming. XI was better.


someones farming rate ups, poor SE fanboys wont know what hit them. good job


Right, because clearly someone couldn't like FFXI better than WoW. I played both games. I completely agree that FFXI was better, and for mostly the same reason. I have some really great friends from FFXI that I still talk to on a VERY regular basis, and we've also migrated to other games together, and guess what? Now we're back to FFXI, because that's what we like. I made ZERO close relationships in WoW, mainly because there really wasn't any point to group up for stuff until endgames (other than randoms... with randoms).

Go troll somewhere else.
____________________________
Bartel Hayward--- Ultros Server
The Kraken Club <ZAM>
50 WAR • 50 MNK • 50 MIN • 50 GSM • 50 ARM • 50 LTW • 50 CUL • 50 WVR
thekrakenclub.shivtr.com
#64 Jun 28 2011 at 11:03 AM Rating: Good
***
3,825 posts
People forget that there are different types of MMOs. Alot of the ones (WoW being the most popular) where XP is usually a solo event, are the type of games that almost might as well give you level cap. The leveling is generally something you do to learn you class, and the content opens up once you've reached it. I think WAR had the right idea even if they implimented it wrong... No matter what level group you were in, you had something meaningful to participate in. Solo levels weren't hard to come by, but if you were just grinding it could get a little old. However there was almost always the ability to be in a group or a part of one even if you didn't want to be with the public quests and the way the PVP works. Where they initially failed was that at a certain point everything but the end content was empty (remedied with alot of tweaking and the F2P for beginner content thingy)... sadly alot of people were soured by the experience and didn't return / (guilty).

DDO is a game where the leveling IS part of the whole deal, but after a certain point it's almost futile to solo... IMO it CAN (well pre-F2P haven't played in a long time) be even more assinine than XI was with your time if you don't have a dedicated group.

IMO, EVE is the one game that has everything almost nailed. Anyone can do almost anything, at any time, for any amount of time. There is some larger or more active stuff that more or less requires participation in a corp, but you could mine or craft or play the market all day long by yourself and never even know that mega battles are taking place.

XI was perfect for me EXCEPT on the occassions where I was LFG/P. The Story was the content, the leveling with people was the content. Getting to end game did open up a new playground, but you didn't feel like you HAD to be there to enjoy the game... **** it took me I think 2 years to cap THF and I still had certain weapons I hadn't capped, let alone Merits and such.

I like that XIV is making leves solo focused snacks for people like myself who's lives no longer allow massive chunks of MMO commitment time. I look forward to seing how thier plans affect population balance, and how the newer content stacks up to providing a meaningful group experience. The letter speaks to me, so maybe it doesn't speak to some of you, but to me I am that guy who logs in for a few hours during the week but expects a meaningful and entertaining group experience on the weekends or occassional holidays. I'm not scared an more with what they are planning. I'm not certain they will pull it off, but I've already got what I feel is my moneys worth (NA and EU CE editions). Everything else from now until it succeeds and charges, or flops and fails is just icing on the cake. (FWIW focus should be on 2 or more players having an advantage when it comes to XP and equipment, I just want to make meaningful progress during my few hours a week solo as well)
____________________________
FFXI:Sylph - Perrin 75 Hume THF; Retired (At least from my use any way)
EVE Online:ScraperX; Retired
WAR:IronClaw- Peryn SW;SkullThrone- Grymloc BO; Retired


#65 Jun 28 2011 at 11:22 AM Rating: Good
****
9,526 posts
yeah, I have to say I do like that they are continuing to try to have both solo and grouping content.

I just wonder if they can pull it off.
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.


#66 Jun 28 2011 at 11:38 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
**
351 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Getting yourself to a point where you can attempt AV on a serious level would be the qualifier. Participation in(at that time) the highest level endgame content is what makes players 'hardcore'.


It's funny you should say that because really, I think we agree a lot more than you realize. This was my definition here:

ForceOfMeh wrote:
From my understanding, "hardcore player" applies to those who do play more than most, but with the important qualifier that they also use that time to their advantage over those who can't (or don't) play as much.


And I suspect you would say that some half-naked bard who was invited to spam Ballads (way, way in the back) to keep the spent BLMs refreshed at the AV fight isn't really all that hardcore just because he or she participated in a difficult fight.

The ability to win derives from having players available who are considered "hardcore" because of their superior gear and skill thanks to all their playtime, not because just turning up to something difficult grants you the moniker "hardcore." It's possible not everyone in an AV fight plays all that much, but they rely heavily on those who have.

In other words, it's not the task itself that really defines who is hardcore, it's what was done prior to even attempt the task. As you said, "Getting yourself to a point where you can attempt AV on a serious level would be the qualifier," knowing that it's those who've used their substantial playtime to their advantage doing all the heavy lifting.
#67 Jun 28 2011 at 12:52 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
**
437 posts
I've been thinking today about what would my ideal MMO be if I was to start from scratch... I came up with XIV except for one or two main things. No solo. more endgame content (build the pyramid a bit more, we know its foundation is huge). I'll probably end up with sub-default on this in no time and no I dont care I'm not farming ratings, never have done, never will. But solo-ing an online game should be made illegal. International Law, crime against humanity, (well maybe im going overboard but hey you get my feelings on this.)

Party play to take up missions, proper crafting and gathering jobs. The key fundamentals are there ok theres a list of minor things too but in a perfect world what would your MMO look like? You want a Solo Online Game? well I'll take a poor MMO over a SOGgy game any day.
____________________________

Metin - Phoenix - BLM75 WHM48 Retired

http://cojenova.enjin.com/ff14forum

#68 Jun 28 2011 at 1:05 PM Rating: Excellent
****
9,526 posts
My ideal MMO would have all different kinds of rewarding content every step of the way. There would be content designed to be soloed, and content that requires groups. Content that takes a dedicated team 3 straight hours to complete - and content that is easy to do in the half hour I can spend during my lunch break, solo.

It would also have MINIMAL level grinding
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.


#69 Jun 28 2011 at 1:14 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
852 posts
Metin wrote:
I've been thinking today about what would my ideal MMO be if I was to start from scratch... I came up with XIV except for one or two main things. No solo. more endgame content (build the pyramid a bit more, we know its foundation is huge). I'll probably end up with sub-default on this in no time and no I dont care I'm not farming ratings, never have done, never will. But solo-ing an online game should be made illegal. International Law, crime against humanity, (well maybe im going overboard but hey you get my feelings on this.)

Party play to take up missions, proper crafting and gathering jobs. The key fundamentals are there ok theres a list of minor things too but in a perfect world what would your MMO look like? You want a Solo Online Game? well I'll take a poor MMO over a SOGgy game any day.


Then go play Everquest. :) Some of us work, have families, work out, volunteer. Even if I had the time, I wouldn't want to spent 10 hours a day at my computer. That doesn't mean I shouldn't have the opportunity to experience a game I see fit to pay for. If people are overwhelmingly choosing the solo options, then clearly, party play needs to be redesigned to make it more interesting, tactical and accessible and worth the effort. That is not a fault of solo play options.

____________________________
#70 Jun 28 2011 at 1:15 PM Rating: Decent
****
6,898 posts
The One and Only Olorinus wrote:
My ideal MMO would have all different kinds of rewarding content every step of the way. There would be content designed to be soloed, and content that requires groups. Content that takes a dedicated team 3 straight hours to complete - and content that is easy to do in the half hour I can spend during my lunch break, solo.

It would also have MINIMAL level grinding


Sooo, basically you want ffxi. =P

(now, not old ffxi)
____________________________
Bartel Hayward--- Ultros Server
The Kraken Club <ZAM>
50 WAR • 50 MNK • 50 MIN • 50 GSM • 50 ARM • 50 LTW • 50 CUL • 50 WVR
thekrakenclub.shivtr.com
#71 Jun 28 2011 at 1:18 PM Rating: Good
****
9,526 posts
well that's what I am playing right now, so I guess so.

I think XI sort of fails at having real content for ALL levels though. That said, since once you have a level capped job on a char you have it forever on that char so it sort of makes sense that the content would be more geared towards the upper tiers.
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.


#72 Jun 28 2011 at 1:32 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
437 posts
hexaemeron wrote:
Metin wrote:
I've been thinking today about what would my ideal MMO be if I was to start from scratch... I came up with XIV except for one or two main things. No solo. more endgame content (build the pyramid a bit more, we know its foundation is huge). I'll probably end up with sub-default on this in no time and no I dont care I'm not farming ratings, never have done, never will. But solo-ing an online game should be made illegal. International Law, crime against humanity, (well maybe im going overboard but hey you get my feelings on this.)

Party play to take up missions, proper crafting and gathering jobs. The key fundamentals are there ok theres a list of minor things too but in a perfect world what would your MMO look like? You want a Solo Online Game? well I'll take a poor MMO over a SOGgy game any day.


Then go play Everquest. :) Some of us work, have families, work out, volunteer. Even if I had the time, I wouldn't want to spent 10 hours a day at my computer. That doesn't mean I shouldn't have the opportunity to experience a game I see fit to pay for. If people are overwhelmingly choosing the solo options, then clearly, party play needs to be redesigned to make it more interesting, tactical and accessible and worth the effort. That is not a fault of solo play options.



You're wrong on every level.
a) I also actually do all those things you mention. Work, family, volunteer and work out.
b) I mentioned nothing about length of time to play a game. I dont ever have 10 hours either.
c) People choosing solo options has nothing to do with it. I'm not meaning from a business sense or making money but from an idealistic purist gaming sense.
d) adapting the game to suit solo play has in fact made the game not as good. Joining up for a mission (or leve) is actually what an Online Multiplayer RPG should be about. Having that, but solo... >.<

Edit:
e) Everquest? I want a new adventure not an old one.

Edited, Jun 28th 2011 3:39pm by Metin
____________________________

Metin - Phoenix - BLM75 WHM48 Retired

http://cojenova.enjin.com/ff14forum

#73 Jun 28 2011 at 1:40 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
**
437 posts
BartelX wrote:
The One and Only Olorinus wrote:
My ideal MMO would have all different kinds of rewarding content every step of the way. There would be content designed to be soloed, and content that requires groups. Content that takes a dedicated team 3 straight hours to complete - and content that is easy to do in the half hour I can spend during my lunch break, solo.

It would also have MINIMAL level grinding


Sooo, basically you want ffxi. =P

(now, not old ffxi)


I played XI from Zilart to ToAU. Is that old XI?
____________________________

Metin - Phoenix - BLM75 WHM48 Retired

http://cojenova.enjin.com/ff14forum

#74 Jun 28 2011 at 1:52 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
852 posts
Metin wrote:
hexaemeron wrote:
Metin wrote:
I've been thinking today about what would my ideal MMO be if I was to start from scratch... I came up with XIV except for one or two main things. No solo. more endgame content (build the pyramid a bit more, we know its foundation is huge). I'll probably end up with sub-default on this in no time and no I dont care I'm not farming ratings, never have done, never will. But solo-ing an online game should be made illegal. International Law, crime against humanity, (well maybe im going overboard but hey you get my feelings on this.)

Party play to take up missions, proper crafting and gathering jobs. The key fundamentals are there ok theres a list of minor things too but in a perfect world what would your MMO look like? You want a Solo Online Game? well I'll take a poor MMO over a SOGgy game any day.


Then go play Everquest. :) Some of us work, have families, work out, volunteer. Even if I had the time, I wouldn't want to spent 10 hours a day at my computer. That doesn't mean I shouldn't have the opportunity to experience a game I see fit to pay for. If people are overwhelmingly choosing the solo options, then clearly, party play needs to be redesigned to make it more interesting, tactical and accessible and worth the effort. That is not a fault of solo play options.



You're wrong on every level.
a) I also actually do all those things you mention. Work, family, volunteer and work out.
b) I mentioned nothing about length of time to play a game. I dont ever have 10 hours either.
c) People choosing solo options has nothing to do with it. I'm not meaning from a business sense or making money but from an idealistic purist gaming sense.
d) adapting the game to suit solo play has in fact made the game not as good. Joining up for a mission (or leve) is actually what an Online Multiplayer RPG should be about. Having that, but solo... >.<

Edit:
e) Everquest? I want a new adventure not an old one.

Edited, Jun 28th 2011 3:39pm by Metin



I'm glad to hear you're a fully functioning human being. That'll make the rest of this easier to communicate. There should be nothing wrong with style of play CHOICE in a persistent online gaming world. Solo play should be an option, and have an interesting, tactical sense about it that is organic to the experience. Party play should be an option, and have an interesting, tactical sense about it that is organic to the experience, and yet still different enough in style and reward from solo play to allow anyone the option to play and enjoy as they see fit.

By removing choice, you really don't want a new adventure. You want the old adventure with pretty new graphics.
____________________________
#75 Jun 28 2011 at 1:53 PM Rating: Decent
******
48,722 posts
hexaemeron wrote:
Some of us work, have families, work out, volunteer.
But enough time in your "busy" schedule to fit time consuming video games.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#76 Jun 28 2011 at 1:56 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
852 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
hexaemeron wrote:
Some of us work, have families, work out, volunteer.
But enough time in your "busy" schedule to fit time consuming video games.


I play about an hour every few days.
____________________________
#77 Jun 28 2011 at 1:59 PM Rating: Good
******
48,722 posts
hexaemeron wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
hexaemeron wrote:
Some of us work, have families, work out, volunteer.
But enough time in your "busy" schedule to fit time consuming video games.
I play about an hour every few days.
Logical train wreck that it is, why not just play an offline game? Eventually XIV is going to be Pay to Play, so you'd just end up wasting money.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#78 Jun 28 2011 at 2:03 PM Rating: Good
**
660 posts
Go ask a Dragoon from around 2006 how they feel about forced party play. I'm sure they'd tell you about all the good times they had LFG and how they felt the game was a good investment for their playstyle.

I have fond memories od waiting 4 hours on the weekends waiting for an invite on just about any job, knowing the weekend is my only time of the week to really make progress in the game because of my job on the weekends.

Honestly, why not be able to solo the menial tasks and require grouping for the really big and interesting content?

Why does this have to devolve into a 'hardcore vs casual' debate? FFS if you don't like it go play something else. It's not like you're married to the game. You won't hurt its feelings if you play something else that you find 'hardcore enough' or 'casual enough'. You don't own share in SE stock. You can't cheat on it and it won't take you to court for your kids and half of your possessions. It's a game, not a lifestyle. There is no debate here. Like it or leave it.

I personally wouldn't want to play a game that's been tailored to the playstyle of unemployed kids with asbergers or some other form of autism. I actually like a variety of content in my MMOs, both solo and group oriented.
____________________________


#79 Jun 28 2011 at 2:03 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
852 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
hexaemeron wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
hexaemeron wrote:
Some of us work, have families, work out, volunteer.
But enough time in your "busy" schedule to fit time consuming video games.
I play about an hour every few days.
Logical train wreck that it is, why not just play an offline game? Eventually XIV is going to be Pay to Play, so you'd just end up wasting money.


I'm not a fan of FFXIV in its current state, so I've gone back to FFXI after a several year absence. I level when I can, I craft when I can, I do missions when I can. And I still get to enjoy chatting with an awesome LS and get to know people better.

If and when FFXIV ever shapes up, I'll try the same thing there.
____________________________
#80 Jun 28 2011 at 2:05 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
852 posts
reptiletim wrote:
Go ask a Dragoon from around 2006 how they feel about forced party play. I'm sure they'd tell you about all the good times they had LFG and how they felt the game was a good investment for their playstyle.

I have fond memories od waiting 4 hours on the weekends waiting for an invite on just about any job, knowing the weekend is my only time of the week to really make progress in the game because of my job on the weekends.

Honestly, why not be able to solo the menial tasks and require grouping for the really big and interesting content?

Why does this have to devolve into a 'hardcore vs casual' debate? FFS if you don't like it go play something else. It's not like you're married to the game. You won't hurt its feelings if you play something else that you find 'hardcore enough' or 'casual enough'. You don't own share in SE stock. You can't cheat on it and it won't take you to court for your kids and half of your possessions. It's a game, not a lifestyle. There is no debate here. Like it or leave it.

I personally wouldn't want to play a game that's been tailored to the playstyle of unemployed kids with asbergers or some other form of autism. I actually like a variety of content in my MMOs, both solo and group oriented.


I agree with this, but I would like to point out that as someone with Asperger's, I don't want to end up in a gaming fugue either! :)
____________________________
#81 Jun 28 2011 at 2:06 PM Rating: Decent
******
48,722 posts
No one is saying abolish solo content, except the people that think I'm saying it because they think it strengthens their argument. However, it should never be on equal standing to the grouping aspect. That's why they're called MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER ONLINE games. If all you have time for is solo content to the point you want to complain about the group content, then MMOs aren't for you, because you'd be wasting money. Play an offline game. Better bang for your buck and you're doing basically the same thing.

Edit: No, seriously. What the **** is the point of playing a game who's selling feature is that you're playing with lots and lots of people if you're going to complain for solo content?

Edited, Jun 28th 2011 4:09pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#82 Jun 28 2011 at 2:10 PM Rating: Good
**
660 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
hexaemeron wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
hexaemeron wrote:
Some of us work, have families, work out, volunteer.
But enough time in your "busy" schedule to fit time consuming video games.
I play about an hour every few days.
Logical train wreck that it is, why not just play an offline game? Eventually XIV is going to be Pay to Play, so you'd just end up wasting money.


I have actual friends I like to group with- friends who if I drove up to their house they wouldn't be calling the cops and wondering how I found their address. We play a number of games online, and MMOs provide a great medium for us to do just that. In fact, in FFXIV I knew an entire linkshell composed of family members. MMOs aren't all about pick up groups.
During weekdays we might jump on FFXI for about an hour and we're done. Would we be wasting our money at an hour a day?
____________________________


#83 Jun 28 2011 at 2:13 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
852 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
No one is saying abolish solo content, except the people that think I'm saying it because they think it strengthens their argument. However, it should never be on equal standing to the grouping aspect. That's why they're called MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER ONLINE games. If all you have time for is solo content to the point you want to complain about the group content, then MMOs aren't for you, because you'd be wasting money. Play an offline game. Better bang for your buck and you're doing basically the same thing.

Edit: No, seriously. What the **** is the point of playing a game who's selling feature is that you're playing with lots and lots of people if you're going to complain for solo content?

Edited, Jun 28th 2011 4:09pm by lolgaxe


Quoting myself since this got missed:

Solo play should be an option, and have an interesting, tactical sense about it that is organic to the experience. Party play should be an option, and have an interesting, tactical sense about it that is organic to the experience, and yet still different enough in style and reward from solo play to allow anyone the option to play and enjoy as they see fit.

I don't think solo play should have parity with party play in terms of reward and experience. I just think it should be an option that allows a lower-time-commitment choice for play when necessary. If everyone's doing this, and ignoring party play, then party play must be broken/sucky/undeveloped or there's no reward worth going through it.

That's all I meant.
____________________________
#84 Jun 28 2011 at 2:13 PM Rating: Good
***
1,636 posts
multiplayer means playing in the same environment with other people, it does not imply grouping in any way.
____________________________


#85 Jun 28 2011 at 2:18 PM Rating: Good
**
660 posts
Hexa, I apologize if I offended. I'm just trying to point out how absurd it is to argue over how casual or hardcore a game SHOULD be when there are several other choices for games on the market right now that might cater more towards that person's interests.
____________________________


#86 Jun 28 2011 at 2:19 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
852 posts
reptiletim wrote:
Hexa, I apologize if I offended. I'm just trying to point out how absurd it is to argue over how casual or hardcore a game SHOULD be when there are several other choices for games on the market right now that might cater more towards that person's interests.



No no, I understand entirely. Just reppin' my people. Not all of us will fugue when given a chance. ;) You're all good, sir.
____________________________
#87 Jun 28 2011 at 2:20 PM Rating: Decent
******
48,722 posts
reptiletim wrote:
in FFXIV I knew an entire linkshell composed of family members
Ha ha that's so sad.

reptiletim wrote:
During weekdays we might jump on FFXI for about an hour and we're done. Would we be wasting our money at an hour a day?
I wouldn't pay $20 for the game itself, and a recurring $13 a month fee on top of it to play for maybe 20 hours of gameplay and not beat the game. That's $33 for the first month, then you're at $46 and 40 hours of gameplay the next. I get better Pay:Play ratio from Angry Birds. Really depends on what your real life expenses and schedule are, though.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#88 Jun 28 2011 at 2:25 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
437 posts
hexaemeron wrote:

There should be nothing wrong with style of play CHOICE in a persistent online gaming world.


Well right now, if I choose solo, I choose offline. May be I'm turning into a grumpy old man who just wants someone to talk to but I log on see if anyone wants to do anything, if noone does I log off again. I just don't want to solo grind to max level/rank, I've done the gathering till I'm rich beyond my wildest dreams, crafted while I can stand crafting. The gil
Homer Simpson wrote:
doesn't cheer me up, doesn't cuddle me when I get home at night, doesn't say "I love you".
I need the <3 ; ;
____________________________

Metin - Phoenix - BLM75 WHM48 Retired

http://cojenova.enjin.com/ff14forum

#89 Jun 28 2011 at 2:29 PM Rating: Good
**
660 posts
Can you please explain why you find that sad?
____________________________


#90 Jun 28 2011 at 2:36 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
626 posts
reptiletim wrote:
Can you please explain why you find that sad?

because disney should never be acted out in real life....
____________________________

#91 Jun 28 2011 at 2:43 PM Rating: Decent
******
48,722 posts
reptiletim wrote:
Can you please explain why you find that sad?
I'm old fashioned. I feel family time requires face to face interaction, and if the family is distant then a phone call/phone conference is much more personal way to interact. ****, web conferences are cheaper and still conveys (almost) the same message.

Its like saying "I can't be assed to spend real time or actually interact with you when there are goblins I could be smiting, so this is the best compromise I can offer you." Sad.

Edited, Jun 28th 2011 4:45pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#92 Jun 28 2011 at 2:43 PM Rating: Decent
**
660 posts
I forgot, school is out for the summer. Nevermind.
____________________________


#93 Jun 28 2011 at 2:50 PM Rating: Decent
**
660 posts
The family was separated and lived in different countries, liked final fantasy, and liked MMOs. It's quite possible they also kept in touch with Skype and whatever, but hey it's sad because they weren't face to face and couldn't be assed to spend real time with one another. Yep they should be ashamed for playing an MMO together. How sad.
____________________________


#94 Jun 28 2011 at 2:52 PM Rating: Decent
******
48,722 posts
I like how you read only like twelve words in my post and got angry.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#95 Jun 28 2011 at 3:07 PM Rating: Good
**
660 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
I like how you read only like twelve words in my post and got angry.


Your whole post makes the generalization that the family didn't spend time with each other besides being in a game together. That's the only problem I have with your post.

It seems to me that you base assumptions and your opinion on generalizations that often, when more facts are revealed, become false. The sarcasm in your posts don't help your credibility either, as the internet tough guy image is too often played out. Maybe it's because you're old fashioned that you feel MMOs should be played for long hours and with a group. Times are changing though and it's likely that mentality will be a minority in the MMO scene. A company can't really make a successful product catering to only a small niche of the market (at least I don't expect them to).

I personally like the changes planned, it might get me playing FFXIV more than the once or twice a month I do now.
____________________________


#96 Jun 28 2011 at 3:11 PM Rating: Good
*
178 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
hexaemeron wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
hexaemeron wrote:
Some of us work, have families, work out, volunteer.
But enough time in your "busy" schedule to fit time consuming video games.
I play about an hour every few days.
Logical train wreck that it is, why not just play an offline game? Eventually XIV is going to be Pay to Play, so you'd just end up wasting money.


At what point can you dictate what becomes a "waste of money". If the player who plays 10 hours a month and makes $60/hour then essentially all he has to do is work 15 mins to enjoy 10 hours of gameplay each month where he can come home from a stressful day of work and chill with his ls mates, enjoy a few leves with friends, meet some new ppl and maybe even go on a NM run with some of the more dedicated players in the ls. The alternative is to buy a solo game, play 30-60 hours of the game by YOURSELF where you interact with noone and probably end up losing a few good hours of sleep.

****, the latter sounds like a waste of money to me.


Edit: Realizing how off topic this thread has derailed, here's an effort to stay somewhat in context - I feel that having the leves become solo oriented will definitely bolster the interests for those players who do only play a couple hours a week, such as myself. But I am praying for some ground breaking end game content to cater to the more "hardcore" - and usually less patient - gamers (even if i won't get to experience much of that content myself) because if SE does not quickly recapture the interests of that particular demographic than this game will truly be on its last lifeline.




Edited, Jun 28th 2011 5:58pm by lightacadi
#97 Jun 28 2011 at 3:15 PM Rating: Decent
******
48,722 posts
reptiletim wrote:
It seems to me that you base assumptions and your opinion on generalizations that often, when more facts are revealed, become false.
That's cute. When your whole original argument withheld those "facts" and you force the person you're arguing with to work on assumptions and opinion alone just so you can use them later to show everyone just how much more right you are it just makes your point look weak. Not only that, but you focused on a side comment when your original argument was decidedly crushed into the ground was, without doubt, deliciously hilarious.

And yes, I absolutely agree. MMOs are going to stop being MMOs because of the majority. That, too, is sad.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#98 Jun 28 2011 at 3:15 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,825 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Logical train wreck that it is, why not just play an offline game? Eventually XIV is going to be Pay to Play, so you'd just end up wasting money.


While I almost always giggle (in a very manly way, mind you) at your comments, and almost always agree with them... This is not one of those comments. Value of a product is a very personal thing. Being in the Military there are often times where I'm subject to months without solid play time, yet I didn't cancel my XI, DDO, or WAR accounts because of a deployment. I cancelled XI and DDO because I no longer had the time to dedicate to have what I felt was the proper experience. In XI my major play time (the weekend) was consumed with pre-scheduled pop-item farming or god fights (which I enjoyed even though I didn't want or need whatever items), they just became old crackers. DDO was a nightmare because group drops meant you couldn't progress unlike XI where if you had enough people you could still atempt to rough it out... so I quit. WAR was because everything became so endgame focused and as much as I loved public quests, the PVP aspect became more important than RVR on my server and I no longer enjoyed it.

For me, even if XIV was a P2P system right now I'd pay. I don't have the time to dedicate to it, but I'm still slowly making progress. If it was an MMO with an established market maybe it wouldn't be as fun, but currently even with most things being undercut I have fun bouncing between cities and making profits as my own personal metagame. When there is content and such, hopefully my LS and others will rebound and I'll be able to spend my limited time progressing in the game in the typical sense. Either way I don't feel like I'm wasting my money, and wouldn't feel that way if the game cost per month.
____________________________
FFXI:Sylph - Perrin 75 Hume THF; Retired (At least from my use any way)
EVE Online:ScraperX; Retired
WAR:IronClaw- Peryn SW;SkullThrone- Grymloc BO; Retired


#99 Jun 28 2011 at 3:21 PM Rating: Decent
******
48,722 posts
I've got one person arguing that I'm wrong because I "base my opinions on only generalizations", and another two who are generalizing a point I made to a specific person and their specific circumstance. Smiley: oyvey

Edited, Jun 28th 2011 5:24pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#100 Jun 28 2011 at 3:28 PM Rating: Good
**
660 posts

lolgaxe wrote:
reptiletim wrote:
It seems to me that you base assumptions and your opinion on generalizations that often, when more facts are revealed, become false.
That's cute. When your whole original argument withheld those "facts" and you force the person you're arguing with to work on assumptions and opinion alone just so you can use them later to show everyone just how much more right you are it just makes your point look weak. Not only that, but you focused on a side comment when your original argument was decidedly crushed into the ground was, without doubt, deliciously hilarious.

And yes, I absolutely agree. MMOs are going to stop being MMOs because of the majority. That, too, is sad.


I don't feel like my argument was crushed at all. Spending an hour or so on weekdays to play an MMO with friends is hardly a waste of money. Angry birds isn't even multiplayer and isn't nearly as fun as FFXI.

You came up with your assumptions all on your own, so that's on you.
____________________________


#101 Jun 28 2011 at 3:32 PM Rating: Good
****
9,526 posts
lightacadi wrote:


At what point can you dictate what becomes a "waste of money". If the player who plays 10 hours a month and makes $60/hour then essentially all he has to do is work 15 mins to enjoy 10 hours of gameplay each month where he can come home from a stressful day of work and chill with his ls mates, enjoy a few leves with friends, meet some new ppl and maybe even go on a NM run with some of the more dedicated players in the ls. The alternative is to buy a solo game, play 30-60 hours of the game by YOURSELF where you interact with noone and probably end up losing a few good hours of sleep.




Yeah, one of the reasons I prefer MMOs to offline titles is cause they save me money. I get bored with (offline) games fast (have only ever "beat" like 1 or 2 games) and then want to buy a new one, so I spend WAY more money when I am playing offline titles. Having an MMO I am committed to saves me money because when I am tempted to buy an offline title I think ... "hmmm but when will I have time to play that?" because most of my gaming time is dedicated to my MMO.

Could be just me, but at 15 bucks a month I would only be able to buy 1 decent game every 3 months to spend the same or less on offline titles - that's not particularly likely to happen if I don't have an mmo. Case in point - when the tsunami happened I think I spent more than 100 bucks on games just while the mmmos were down.

Edited, Jun 28th 2011 2:33pm by Olorinus
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.


This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 20 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (20)