Forum Settings
       
1 2 Next »
This Forum is Read Only

Crystal Tower ☆ FFXIV's First True RaidFollow

#52 Nov 02 2011 at 10:52 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,962 posts
Calling them raids is not convoluted. Refusing to call them raids, is equivalent to making a platformer and insisting that people call your core mechanic "leaping" not "jumping" it's different because you press the A button instead of the B button!

See how ludicrous that sounds?

Having a broad category is not useless. Raids encompass the higher level categories you seem to have a major hard-on for (Salvage, Limbus, 10-Man, 25-Man, etc. All of these are sub-categories of raids for specific games.) Think about it in terms of animal kingdoms, genus, phylum, etc. A cape lobster is Arthropoda Crustacea Malacostraca Decapoda Nephropidae. Go tell a biologist its useless to classify a Lobster as an Arthropod, because insects also fall into that Phylum.

Having a broad, widely accepted term for a specific type of thing isn't a new idea, nor is it a bad one, nor does it detract from your specific terminology. How can you not wrap your head around this? Classifying things is a natural human tendency, and it's useful to help other people understand.

If I tell you an animal is an arthropod, you can make some assumptions about it. You don't need to assume that because I said Arthropod, I meant a Cape Lobster.

In WoW raid means one thing, and in Lineage, raid means another thing, and in Everquest, raid means another thing, and yet they share some commonality.

If the Crystal Tower is a multi-party, loot driven event that requires a pre-formed party (i.e. is not a public event) IT'S A RAID. And you can make a very small number of appropriate assumptions about it, all of which are things the development team have stated. (It's end game alliance based content.)

Edited, Nov 2nd 2011 10:01pm by RamseySylph
#53 Nov 02 2011 at 11:05 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,416 posts
Quote:
Having a broad, widely accepted term for a specific type of thing isn't a @#%^ing new idea, nor is it a bad one, nor does it detract from your god **** specific terminology. How the **** can you not wrap your head around this? Classifying things is a natural human tendency, and it's useful to help other people understand.


What you still fail to understand is that calling them "events" is a broader, better definition because anything can be an "event", but "raid" is more restrictive term. The game will have activities that can be considered raids and activities that can not. Thus "event" is a much, much better and ultimately superior term to be used.

Your analogues, though, keep getting less and less accurate to apply to this situation.

Quote:
If the Crystal Tower is a god damned multi-party, loot driven event that requires a pre-formed party (i.e. is not a public event) IT'S A RAID.


I have never disagreed with you there, which makes it pretty apparent that you have a hard time understanding what the topic at hand is. This game already has a single-party, loot driven event called a raid so your definition goes out of the window immediately. Event is much better, because it can encompass both.

When everything can be classified under one banner called "event" and then specified further by naming the event in question, why make things convoluted and introduce yet another subcategory called "raid" that applies to some, but not all, events in the game? It makes zero sense.
____________________________
SE:
Quote:
We really want to compete against World of Warcraft and for example the new Star Wars MMO.

#54 Nov 03 2011 at 12:42 AM Rating: Default
***
3,962 posts
Event encompasses anything from a raid to an Easter egg hunt.

The taxonomy of specific events can be broken down by varying categories, for varying games...

Event>Raid>Limbus>Apollyon>NE (FFXI)
Event>Raid>25Man>Hardmode>ToC (WoW)

The terms "event" and "raid" are both broad, widely accepted (both in the design world, as well as among MMO players) that are applicable in any MMORPG. Once you go beyond this point, it's going to vary by game.

The absolutely indescribably backwards part of your argument is telling me that because Totorak and Darkhold are considered "raids" by developers, that calling the Crystal Tower a raid is assuming too much.

The very fact that they consider a 4 man instance a raid, indicates that they are playing fast and loose with the term and using it as an even broader way to define a larger set of events, under which the Crystal Tower would most definitely fall given our information about it.

The only way in which your argument can hold any water is if the development team is absolutely idiotic and considers single party instanced content raids, but explicitly states that multi-party instanced content is not a raid. At which point the credibility that Yoshi-P has attempted to build up as an avid MMORPG player is basically thrown out the window.

You are obviously familiar with a limited set of games that use the terminology "raid" and afraid to use the word, because you feel like it will draw too many similar comparisons. It won't. Game design is just like any other creative field, techniques and in this case mechanics and events have specific, generalized classifications, these terms are useful to use to quickly convey a set of ideas.

If you're familiar with film in the slightest, I don't need to tell you that the shot in a movie moved from left to right across the screen and the view of the subject became closer. I tell you the camera panned and zoomed. In the same way, I don't need to tell a person familiar with MMORPGs that something is a "Pre-form group focused, multi-party, loot-driven event." I tell you it's a raid.

#55 Nov 03 2011 at 12:58 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,416 posts
Quote:
The very fact that they consider a 4 man instance a raid, indicates that they are playing fast and loose with the term and using it as an even broader way to define a larger set of events


It most certainly does not necessarily indicate that. It can indicate that they are using the term to apply to far more specific instances. No conclusions can be drawn from any of it, only that the general definition does not apply here.

Quote:
The only way in which your argument can hold any water is if the development team is absolutely idiotic and considers single party instanced content raids, but explicitly states that multi-party instanced content is not a raid.


Yet that's still not the point I was making. If they create events that both do and do not apply to the definition of raid, but do invariably apply to the definition of an event, there is no good reason to call them raids. It provides no benefit to the discussion; it is a step you can move past completely. It is important that the game does not have irrelevant categorizations.

You already provided the correct answer:

Quote:
Event encompasses anything from a raid to an Easter egg hunt.


So why do you call them raids then? Call them events and then specify which event. It is far better.
____________________________
SE:
Quote:
We really want to compete against World of Warcraft and for example the new Star Wars MMO.

#56 Nov 03 2011 at 1:12 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,962 posts
The good reason to call them raids is the same good reason it is to call "jumping" jumping in a platformer, regardless of whether or not the developer calls it leaping. If you were to actually look up the definition for raid, in all likelihood it wouldn't be too specific about the amount of players required in order for an event to be considered a raid.

So in that sense, the dev team using the word "raid" to describe toto-rak and darkhold isn't totally out of line.

Either way, given that definition, Crystal Tower will most certainly be a raid.

I'm calling it a raid because it's a raid. That's more specific than event, and currently we have nothing to compare it to, and little information, so as far as being more specific than "raid" there is nothing. You can't be more specific without saying "Crystal Tower" at which point you need to explain anyways.

In terms of the title of this thread "FFXIV's First True Raid" it's a completely valid statement. To most people, the Crystal Tower is going to be the first thing that they will consider a true raid. If you are having such a hard time getting over that for whatever personal reason, you should simply refrain from further participation in the thread. Because no amount of ******* or stroking is going to result in the thread title being changed.
#57 Nov 03 2011 at 1:20 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,416 posts
Quote:
In terms of the title of this thread "FFXIV's First True Raid" it's a completely valid statement. To most people, the Crystal Tower is going to be the first thing that they will consider a true raid.


And so is calling Job system "speccing" or Materia system "Gemming", yet it doesn't make it any less stupid to do so.

Whatever people "consider" it to be is a problem of their own if it's not defined the way they want it to be. People need to get used to the fact that there are no "specs" or "gemming" in this game.

It's certainly not my problem, but it will be your problem if you think you can just force a definition where it doesn't belong.
____________________________
SE:
Quote:
We really want to compete against World of Warcraft and for example the new Star Wars MMO.

#58 Nov 03 2011 at 2:32 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,962 posts
Those are not even remotely equivalent comparisons. I knew you were just afraid of drawing comparisons to other popular MMOs.

Some terms are genre-specific, some are game specific. Spec, Gem and Raid are all genre specific. They can't all be applied to every game though. I could make an MMO about farming that had speccing and gemming but not raiding, etc.

Either way gemming and speccing are higher level (read: more specific) terms.

Raid is EXTREMELY broad. It applies given the context, and is 100% applicable to FFXIV. It's not a term that was born out of Blizzard's loins so deflate that anti-WoW *****, or whatever you have going on over there.
#59 Nov 03 2011 at 2:50 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,416 posts
Quote:
Some terms are genre-specific, some are game specific. Spec, Gem and Raid are all genre specific.


That doesn't mean they all make sense in the context used.

I already explained you why XI didn't use these terms. Either way it is you trying to fit these genre specific terms into a game they don't fit by calling this event a "True Raid" just to differentiate from the current "Raid" (which isn't a True Raid? Yes it is because genre definitions DON'T MATTER HERE). "True Raid" is not even a genre-specific term, it is a made-up term that stems from your imagination.

If Raid applies given the context, why use a made-up definition then? Oh yes, because it doesn't apply to the context.

Instead of applying incredibly silly subcategories like Raid and True Raid it is far better to use the Event definition. That's a fact.
____________________________
SE:
Quote:
We really want to compete against World of Warcraft and for example the new Star Wars MMO.

#60 Nov 03 2011 at 12:15 PM Rating: Good
***
3,530 posts
I'm gonna spec my toon for group gemming in the raids, br0.
____________________________
"... he called to himself a wizard, named Gallery, hoping by this means to escape the paying of the fifteen hundred crowns..." (Machen 15)

"Thus opium is pleasing... on account of the agreeable delirium it produces." (Burke para.6)

"I could only read so much for this paper and the syphilis poem had to go."
#61 Nov 08 2011 at 8:47 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
970 posts
Olorinus wrote:
Old school invisible enemy encounter system
Let's make this real final fantasy

YAY I MADE IT FIVE STEPS
..RANDOM BATTLE...

can only log out at camping spots
(well can log anywhere but you will be reset to your last camping spot)
only get out of dungeon by tracing steps or using a specific spell (escape/teleport)

A climb that takes days and days
So you log out and you either fight your way to a group heading towards you - or wait at camp when you log back in - or if you are strong - fight your way forward alone

- multiple parties
- shared instanced zone,
with all content (enemies) instanced
No penalties for grouping up
individual loot system with group pool enabled
(basically like voidwatch - with the ability to pool R/E items)
(can be open world instanced too like levequest mobs,
but they pop in wave like old school FF)




Edited, Oct 22nd 2011 6:42pm by Olorinus

I hope the Crystal Tower isn't raid only, or it wouldn't feel very Final Fantasy. I would rather it be a journey to the top floors. The lowest floors are solo only, and as you make the climb you naturally group up with people to advance to the top. I guess the best word used to describe how I would like it is Dynamic Dungeon? There should be a story mode your first climb up the tower. With the very top floors requiring raidesque numbers.

Here is an old post from me on another forum that could be cool applied to the Crystal Tower and not guidlleves.(They turned out alot different from my hopes.
http://ffxiv.gamerescape.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1450

The campfires or aeythreal nodes for saves spots would be awesome. These sites could also have building schematics to plan routes of acension or rest in between legs of the trek.
Another recent game does this and I love it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LprcfycPT5c
#62 Nov 08 2011 at 10:47 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,962 posts
How would the Crystal Tower being a raid not feel very Final Fantasy? Raid = End Game, Crystal Tower = End Game. A big tower full of enemies to challenge you at your highest level is exactly what the Crystal Tower should be, no?

If you're worried about players possibly not getting to witness it if they're not involved in raiding I can see your point. Perhaps having the first 50 floors ( If it were 100 floors ) be for a normal party size, then have the landing area I described, and then the next 50 floors be designed for an alliance sized party would work.

As for using it for the storyline... I loved the separation of raid events from story in FFXI, and so if they wanted to do this, I just hope they would use instancing to make story content in the tower a totally separate event (that we do once.)
#63 Nov 09 2011 at 8:53 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
970 posts
RamseySylph wrote:
How would the Crystal Tower being a raid not feel very Final Fantasy? Raid = End Game, Crystal Tower = End Game. A big tower full of enemies to challenge you at your highest level is exactly what the Crystal Tower should be, no?

If you're worried about players possibly not getting to witness it if they're not involved in raiding I can see your point. Perhaps having the first 50 floors ( If it were 100 floors ) be for a normal party size, then have the landing area I described, and then the next 50 floors be designed for an alliance sized party would work.

As for using it for the storyline... I loved the separation of raid events from story in FFXI, and so if they wanted to do this, I just hope they would use instancing to make story content in the tower a totally separate event (that we do once.)

Well the Crystal Tower should be an explorable content, just like any other content. By making it raid only(Pre-mades and 8+ member requirements)alot of the development potential could be wasted.(Let me iterate what I mean by the last sentence.)

Not everyone plays mmos or games in general to raid. Everyone has their own play preferences. So in that regard, designing an area to focus solely on one gameplay style will leave the other styles in the cold.

Every final fantasy I can think of off the top of my mind. Has story content while traversing dungeons or dangerous areas. It is usually only the first time through. It wouldn't make sense or be fun to see the same story arc, everytime you revisited the area just to farm or whatever. So I would be content with story only being prevalent the first time exploring an area like Crystal Tower. The story doesn't have to neccessarily be a whole seperate entity or event though.

Say for instance Crystal Tower gets implemented. When you first learn how to access this area and it's intricacies. Reading text box, fulfilling a simple quest of running back and forth is not my idea of fun. They should include some cinematics and special events on locating and reaching the area. Like the concept art shows it perched on a cliff. They should actually design a story on the journey of your primary climb and some obstacle you must overcome.

Then in the tower at different intervals there will be personal story arcs and lore giving npcs littered around various floors. They gossip or spread folklore about previous deaths or mistrials of earlier adventurers ascending the Crystal Tower. These types of things build up tension, when we are trying to envision.

As for content in the lower floors they could make some mining nodes for special crystals, unique hides and bone fragments for gathers to farm, a special holy spring fed lake for fishing, maybe some random rare NM that spawn and drop items for learning job/class skills traits, etc. There is alot of things they could do with the towers to make them more used by the majority.
#64 Nov 09 2011 at 10:40 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
17 posts
I would like to see magimaster on the top haha
#65 Nov 09 2011 at 11:36 AM Rating: Decent
sandpark wrote:
RamseySylph wrote:
-snipped for space-

Well the Crystal Tower should be an explorable content, just like any other content. By making it raid only(Pre-mades and 8+ member requirements)alot of the development potential could be wasted.(Let me iterate what I mean by the last sentence.)

Not everyone plays mmos or games in general to raid. Everyone has their own play preferences. So in that regard, designing an area to focus solely on one gameplay style will leave the other styles in the cold.

Every final fantasy I can think of off the top of my mind. Has story content while traversing dungeons or dangerous areas. It is usually only the first time through. It wouldn't make sense or be fun to see the same story arc, everytime you revisited the area just to farm or whatever. So I would be content with story only being prevalent the first time exploring an area like Crystal Tower. The story doesn't have to neccessarily be a whole seperate entity or event though.

Say for instance Crystal Tower gets implemented. When you first learn how to access this area and it's intricacies. Reading text box, fulfilling a simple quest of running back and forth is not my idea of fun. They should include some cinematics and special events on locating and reaching the area. Like the concept art shows it perched on a cliff. They should actually design a story on the journey of your primary climb and some obstacle you must overcome.

Then in the tower at different intervals there will be personal story arcs and lore giving npcs littered around various floors. They gossip or spread folklore about previous deaths or mistrials of earlier adventurers ascending the Crystal Tower. These types of things build up tension, when we are trying to envision.

As for content in the lower floors they could make some mining nodes for special crystals, unique hides and bone fragments for gathers to farm, a special holy spring fed lake for fishing, maybe some random rare NM that spawn and drop items for learning job/class skills traits, etc. There is alot of things they could do with the towers to make them more used by the majority.


While I agree that the tower should be readily accessible, I do not think that making it an open area with only quest requirements to access it is in keeping with the FF model. The very idea of a tower in a FF game is synonymous with danger and challenging adventure. I totally understand the need for raid content for high-level characters. There comes a time when exploration is no longer enough to keep ones attention, and if they made the content of the tower a challenge to these well geared / experienced players on a soloable level then the new 50s can kiss their chances of enjoying the content good-bye.

I would propose a system whereby the entry area and first few levels would be soloable, but then the path deviates. Two entrances, enjoy the remaining tower content as a full alliance with content / encounters designed around the "raid" concept, or take on the tower with a group of 7 other friends in a "dungeon" setting where content / encounters cater to the more casual approach. Drops would be drastically different, but both avenues allow players to enjoy the story-line at a pace that respects their individual goals within the game.

Granted this is all conjecture, until SE makes an official announcement regarding the Crystal Tower's content and design structure we are merely left with hyperboles like we have seen throughout this thread.
____________________________
Success is a journey, not a destination - Failure is a destination achieved by ending the journey.
#66 Nov 09 2011 at 5:54 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,962 posts
sandpark wrote:
...designing an area to focus solely on one gameplay style will leave the other styles in the cold.


But designing an area to try to appeal to all the sensibilities of your entire audience is significantly more misguided. You'll just end up creating something that's not fun for anyone. With MMO design the "appeal to everyone" approach is a very dangerous route. I'd argue that in most cases, it would be better to divide your effort and try to recycle some assets, but create unique content for each type of experience. You can create something solid and more focused.

Which is why I mention not having story be a part of the actual raid and/or instance content. In FFXI you might pass through an area for the first time, experiencing story, with a very specific goal of completing that story. You'll be doing this with a party of other players, never an alliance (raid) sized group.

When you return later to that area to experience raid sized content, you'll have already cleared the story related content. So you'll have a good idea of what the setting is, and maybe there was some minor exposition that set off this event, for instance the cutscenes you view before starting Dynamis in FFXI for the first time. The cutscenes mostly happen on your own time, and only happen once.

So with that in mind, if there was some sort of story content that unlocked the Crystal Tower, and some story took place there, I'd be perfectly okay with that. But it should be a totally separate experience from any raid and/or dungeon.

They can use instancing to recycle the same areas, populate them with enemies appropriate for what is happening in the story, and balanced for a small group. You would progress and view cutscenes and scripted events in this mode.

When it comes to the raids and dungeons later, it would be mostly devoid of all but the most benign and non-narrative driven scripted events. (Like an enemy crashing through a door to attack you, and not an enemy giving a soliloquy.) It's essentially the "challenge" mode which takes an area you may have experienced to some degree, changes it up a bit, adds in new enemies and new routes, new bosses etc. But doesn't try to tell you a scripted narrative.

If the scripted narrative occurred in the same version of the dungeon or raid as the actual repeatable content, you have a lot of issues. You can't really make the storyline content as scripted and gameplay driven as you could otherwise. You can't make scripted events or cutscenes too long or your group may leave you behind as you watch them, or you have to skip through them quickly, etc. It's better to simply separate the content.

The amusement park style raids/instances that many games implement, where the same scripted events and scenes play out every run, really ***** the pooch. Players who want the narrative may never see it due to it being a raid, and players who raid may not even care about the narrative. Beyond that, no one wants to watch the same scenes play out week after week, and people watching it the first time don't want to have to rush.
#67 Nov 13 2011 at 11:42 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
970 posts
RamseySylph wrote:

But designing an area to try to appeal to all the sensibilities of your entire audience is significantly more misguided. You'll just end up creating something that's not fun for anyone. With MMO design the "appeal to everyone" approach is a very dangerous route. I'd argue that in most cases, it would be better to divide your effort and try to recycle some assets, but create unique content for each type of experience. You can create something solid and more focused.

Exactly, create unique content for each type of experience is key. That doesn't translate into an area being relegated to one style of play. Think of it from the other side of the spectrum. Should there be areas only traversable by crafting class? I say no, over- instancing makes the game feel like a lobby based game. What I was proposing was various levels of the tower unique and built towards seperate playstyles.

RamseySylph wrote:
Which is why I mention not having story be a part of the actual raid and/or instance content. In FFXI you might pass through an area for the first time, experiencing story, with a very specific goal of completing that story. You'll be doing this with a party of other players, never an alliance (raid) sized group.

When you return later to that area to experience raid sized content, you'll have already cleared the story related content. So you'll have a good idea of what the setting is, and maybe there was some minor exposition that set off this event, for instance the cutscenes you view before starting Dynamis in FFXI for the first time. The cutscenes mostly happen on your own time, and only happen once.

So with that in mind, if there was some sort of story content that unlocked the Crystal Tower, and some story took place there, I'd be perfectly okay with that. But it should be a totally separate experience from any raid and/or dungeon.

I agree there shouldn't be allianced or dungeon cs every playthrough. Dynamis pre 2011 is one of the most boring repetitive contents in XI. When I propose story, I don't mean a cutscene or textbox you read everytime you run a dungeon or whatever. I mean branching paths, branching group intervals, very short real time npc interactions, etc. Pulling to camp gameplay does work. But hopefully, that is not the only form of defeating endgame contents.

SylphRamsey wrote:
When it comes to the raids and dungeons later, it would be mostly devoid of all but the most benign and non-narrative driven scripted events. (Like an enemy crashing through a door to attack you, and not an enemy giving a soliloquy.) It's essentially the "challenge" mode which takes an area you may have experienced to some degree, changes it up a bit, adds in new enemies and new routes, new bosses etc. But doesn't try to tell you a scripted narrative.

If the scripted narrative occurred in the same version of the dungeon or raid as the actual repeatable content, you have a lot of issues. You can't really make the storyline content as scripted and gameplay driven as you could otherwise. You can't make scripted events or cutscenes too long or your group may leave you behind as you watch them, or you have to skip through them quickly, etc. It's better to simply separate the content.
I think this clarifies you and I both agree on no overly huge scripted narrative.
Basically we agree on alot in this discussion. Except for creating zones for one playstyle. Imo no zone should be restricted completely to different disciplines. Rather, there should be seperate contents developed exclusively for certain disciplines in the same zones. But not neccesarily the same bcnm or what not.

I think climbing the tower shouldn't be non interactive either. By that I mean, click on X to advance to next floor. They could design the tower with stages of attrition at each interval. Campfires or campsites could be used to form battle strategies/recover between stages of ascension.
1 2 Next »
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 18 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (18)