Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

1up YoshiP InterviewFollow

#1 Jun 09 2012 at 4:16 AM Rating: Excellent
***
3,825 posts
It's a good read, though a few times things aren't put in context (When it goes from 1st person to 3rd person responses, I'm assuming more than one person talking but they only cite Yoshi) so it makes it kinda confusing in spots. But, overall I really like the tone of this interview.

http://www.1up.com/features/ffxiv-interview-phoenix-fallen-mmo
____________________________
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


#2 Jun 09 2012 at 5:38 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
588 posts
Thank you for this. This interview by far is one of the best I have read. It answers more questions people have asked, myself included, than any others I read. It has been a long road with plenty more to travel but this article seems to reaffirm in my mind SE will not give up until the game meets the expectations of the Final Fantasy brand regardless of the number of players which return.

Edited, Jun 9th 2012 10:47am by kainsilv
____________________________



#3 Jun 09 2012 at 8:42 AM Rating: Good
***
2,232 posts
Great interview. Thanks for the link!
____________________________
Character: Urzol Thrush
Server: Ultros
FC: The Kraken Club

Outshined

Teneleven wrote:
We secretly replaced your tank wemelchor with Foldgers Crystal's. Let's see what happens.

#4 Jun 09 2012 at 10:06 AM Rating: Excellent
***
3,530 posts
I think that these are the most exciting parts of the interview, the ones that actually evoke some excitement from me for the approaching 2.0:

Yoshida (1-up) wrote:
First off, personally we believe that there still aren't enough buffs or debuffs or crowd-control types of abilities and spells. The first thing was adding more of these.

Yoshida (1-up) wrote:
That Final Fantasy XI Skillchain / Magic Burst feel to it: big damage, big effects. We're totally revamping the Battle Regimen system to be something great for 2.0.

Yoshida (1-up) wrote:
we have a lot of changes in place for both Disciples of the Land and Disciples of the Hand. To make their jobs more interesting.

Yoshida (1-up) wrote:
[For drops we want] a token type of system, where if you do it enough times, you're going to get rewarded for doing it that many times. We also have something else prepared as well that's going to address [low/randomized drop rates]...

Yoshida (1-up) wrote:
As for Parley... [Yoshida] hates it as well.


Adding enhancing and enfeebling spells? Fixing skillchains and magic bursts? Changing DoL/DoH? Drops based upon tokens instead of randomness? And removal of parley?

(| You can have this. |) (| Subscription Fee. |) Smiley: grin
____________________________
"... 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."
#5 Jun 09 2012 at 11:57 AM Rating: Decent
****
4,153 posts
Yoshida (1-up) wrote:
First off, personally we believe that there still aren't enough buffs or debuffs or crowd-control types of abilities and spells. The first thing was adding more of these.

Yoshida (1-up) wrote:
That Final Fantasy XI Skillchain / Magic Burst feel to it: big damage, big effects. We're totally revamping the Battle Regimen system to be something great for 2.0.

Good signs. A step in the right direction for the battle system improving.
Yoshida (1-up) wrote:
[For drops we want] a token type of system, where if you do it enough times, you're going to get rewarded for doing it that many times. We also have something else prepared as well that's going to address [low/randomized drop rates]...

Moar like WoW. Like it or not, this is also something to look forward to if nothing else, to see if it can be implemented well. Still, they need to address the repetitive content and making that less grindy and more of something you don't mind doing a bazillion times.
Yoshida wrote:
Yeah, we really aren't thinking of restricting the roles of each of the classes or jobs, just because we believe that while, in the previous generation of MMOs it used to be, yes, this particular type of class or job would have only this role and couldn't do anything else. The current generation of MMOs and MMO players expect more.

No, actually we don't. We want clearly defined roles and less crossover. I'd rather have a class that is good at something specific and mediocre at the rest. More reason to tighten up encounter design when you aren't aiming for generic groups where nearly any class can cover your needs. I want to have to rely on people who have mastered their class and not just being a generic [insert role here]. Thought you'd learned your lesson with this SE, but if you haven't then I hope you surprise me and show me that you can actually pull it off this time. I'm still doubtful.
____________________________
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.
#6 Jun 09 2012 at 1:01 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
970 posts
Yoshida (1-up) wrote:
First off, personally we believe that there still aren't enough buffs or debuffs or crowd-control types of abilities and spells. The first thing was adding more of these.

Amen, looking forward to this in pvp & pve.
Yoshida (1-up) wrote:
That Final Fantasy XI Skillchain / Magic Burst feel to it: big damage, big effects. We're totally revamping the Battle Regimen system to be something great for 2.0.

Good signs. A step in the right direction for the battle system improving. A good start but fruitless unless they adjust mobs resistances globally. Make skillchains, incapacitations not only viable but required in party situations. Don't make all mobs weak to thunder, spread the characteristics out.
Yoshida (1-up) wrote:
[For drops we want] a token type of system, where if you do it enough times, you're going to get rewarded for doing it that many times. We also have something else prepared as well that's going to address [low/randomized drop rates]...

Combine the rare drop system of XI, the option to pass, & a token system so the unlucky make progress.
Yoshida wrote:
Yeah, we really aren't thinking of restricting the roles of each of the classes or jobs, just because we believe that while, in the previous generation of MMOs it used to be, yes, this particular type of class or job would have only this role and couldn't do anything else. The current generation of MMOs and MMO players expect more.

No, actually we don't. We want clearly defined roles and no crossover on jobs. I'd rather have a job that is good at something specific and unable at the rest. More reason to tighten up encounter design when you aren't aiming for generic party groups where nearly any job can cover your needs. I want to have to rely on people who have mastered their job and not just being a generic [insert role here]. Thought you'd learned your lesson with this SE, but if you haven't then I hope you surprise me and show me that you can actually pull it off this time. I'm still doubtful.

Classes need the freedom of FFT. But never perform better than or close to a job in terms of potency. Stop trivializing the job & class system.

Jobs= full party, no self survival efficiency if they are not a tank or healer, you're suppose to rely on the party to sustain you.
Classes= solo or low man, good survival & self efficiency, can't parse with jobs in a particular single role, they must sacrifice in some areas to strengthen the role they build for to excel, you can make a light party but excluding difficult endgame, you don't need a party to sustain you.
#7 Jun 09 2012 at 1:37 PM Rating: Good
Sage
Avatar
**
325 posts
I liked the possibility of having the game on a Next gen console.
____________________________
FFXIV
Name: Z'veagan Brolz
Server: Ultros
Linkshell/FC: Lootwhorindramafest
#8 Jun 09 2012 at 2:06 PM Rating: Default
****
4,153 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Yoshida (1-up) wrote:
That Final Fantasy XI Skillchain / Magic Burst feel to it: big damage, big effects. We're totally revamping the Battle Regimen system to be something great for 2.0.

Good signs. A step in the right direction for the battle system improving.


sandpark wrote:
Yoshida (1-up) wrote:
That Final Fantasy XI Skillchain / Magic Burst feel to it: big damage, big effects. We're totally revamping the Battle Regimen system to be something great for 2.0.

Good signs. A step in the right direction for the battle system improving.


Jinx. You owe me a pamama drink.

Were you trying to quote me here or did you read my mind an hour late?

Veagan wrote:
I liked the possibility of having the game on a Next gen console.


Pump the brakes and slow your roll! They should probably work on making it successful on the platform they have now before they try to take it into next gen.
____________________________
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.
#9 Jun 09 2012 at 2:12 PM Rating: Good
Sage
Avatar
**
325 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:


Veagan wrote:
I liked the possibility of having the game on a Next gen console.


Pump the brakes and slow your roll! They should probably work on making it successful on the platform they have now before they try to take it into next gen.


I totally agree and I think in the interview he did try to make it clear that that is priority. But it is nice to know that it could be possible. They are pretty much making it clear the game won't look as good on the PS3 than on the PC so having it on next gen console will fix that issue.
____________________________
FFXIV
Name: Z'veagan Brolz
Server: Ultros
Linkshell/FC: Lootwhorindramafest
#10 Jun 09 2012 at 2:28 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
970 posts
A bit of both Filth, a bit of both.
#11 Jun 09 2012 at 3:55 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
4,773 posts
Quote:
No, actually we don't. We want clearly defined roles and less crossover. I'd rather have a class that is good at something specific and mediocre at the rest. More reason to tighten up encounter design when you aren't aiming for generic groups where nearly any class can cover your needs.


And how exactly are you going to create adequate desire for the upteen million DD classes that are going to come down the pipeline, on top of the ones we have that are already suffering imbalance issues?

Please speak for yourself. I for one do not want pin-holed segements Damage Dealers to the point where an entire segment of the role gets outclassed by another. Nor do I want a return of the era of Prima-donna bards dominating party and alliance compositions. And we're already showing signs of both.

Jobs and tactics need to be interchangeable if content is to remain entertaining for any lenght of time. Doing a run as the same job and the same composition over and over again because it's so far above and beyond other tactics is draining as much fun out of repeating specific content as repeating the content itself. If they truely want a successful game, then they need to address both problems, not just one.

I'd hate to say it, but what they did with Archer > Bard was a great idea, going off the principle of Classes having multiple jobs to stem into. It would be interesting if they create role variance through these different jobs to branch through.

For example, say Lancer can also branch into Templar and assume a more tanky or support role. This makes the root class flexiable without removing the most defining trait of the class, which is the use of the spear. And Templar and Dragoon are clearly defined away from each other by both their unique abilities and their different support jo structure.

This of course assumes that Archer finally get Ranger as requested as well as an assortment of other requested jobs.

It could work out really well and both sides of the argument would technically be met.
#12 Jun 09 2012 at 5:10 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,530 posts
Specialized or not, I just don't see how adding jobs makes for a sustainable game. After you level your favourite class(es) to cap (which takes a couple weeks, really), raising a job is just a matter of completing a handful of quests. Even if each class could change into five jobs, that vast array itself would only add in a few weeks of content for each class as people scooped up the token five abilities from 30-50 in one day, the artifact in the following day, and much of the necessary gear over the following days.

I've never liked the job system; I think it's clunky and unnecessary. A more expanded sub-job system would have been better in my opinion - that, or the removal of classes altogether but the retention of cross-class abilities. This latter case would allow for people to not feel as pigeonholed while also lending some amount of significance to jobs. The way jobs are now, they are just a few unique abilities and a set of armour (which may or may not even be worn), they are the remnant of a bandage over the broken 1.0 class system. It shows, and I think that's just underwhelming.
____________________________
"... 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."
#13 Jun 09 2012 at 7:08 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
**
970 posts
Hyrist wrote:
And how exactly are you going to create adequate desire for the upteen million DD classes that are going to come down the pipeline, on top of the ones we have that are already suffering imbalance issues?

Give each job a unique weapon effect such as piercing, slashing, blunt. Balance enemies globally with different various weaknesses, and don't let damage that doesn't counter that weakness do significant damage. Design enemies that have varying tactics.Not just stand out of the fire and your safe. Design fewer amounts of well designed unique jobs, versus many redundant ones.

Hyrist wrote:
Please speak for yourself. I for one do not want pin-holed segements Damage Dealers to the point where an entire segment of the role gets outclassed by another. Nor do I want a return of the era of Prima-donna bards dominating party and alliance compositions. And we're already showing signs of both.

Pigeonhole was imminent with a job system coming. With every unique trait a job gets, the more likely that job will excel at certain content. It happened with XI, it will happen here. Move away from uniqueness & everyone gets to do content but homogenization takes shape. Unique enemy AI & characteristics is the balance of the scales.

Hyrist wrote:
Jobs and tactics need to be interchangeable if content is to remain entertaining for any lenght of time. Doing a run as the same job and the same composition over and over again because it's so far above and beyond other tactics is draining as much fun out of repeating specific content as repeating the content itself. If they truely want a successful game, then they need to address both problems, not just one.

I'd hate to say it, but what they did with Archer > Bard was a great idea, going off the principle of Classes having multiple jobs to stem into. It would be interesting if they create role variance through these different jobs to branch through.

For example, say Lancer can also branch into Templar and assume a more tanky or support role. This makes the root class flexiable without removing the most defining trait of the class, which is the use of the spear. And Templar and Dragoon are clearly defined away from each other by both their unique abilities and their different support jo structure.

Or they could design a standalone job system with it's own 100% unique skills or stronger potency over what skills classes share. Why not a Templar job which uses a hammer and assumes a tanky support role? This would alleviate the frustrations of players who don't like horizontal progression & only want to play what job they like. No one would tell them they can't join because they don't have X skill from another class. If that non crossover job doesn't get invited to alot of content. Slightly buff it and re-examine enemy characteristics, alter it's AI & whatever it takes a tad.
#14 Jun 09 2012 at 8:40 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
4,773 posts
sandpark wrote:

Give each job a unique weapon effect such as piercing, slashing, blunt. Balance enemies globally with different various weaknesses, and don't let damage that doesn't counter that weakness do significant damage. Design enemies that have varying tactics.Not just stand out of the fire and your safe. Design fewer amounts of well designed unique jobs, versus many redundant ones.


Two critical flaws.

1. Any event with enemies of specific kinds of weaknesses will be dominated ONLY by classes who capitalize on those weaknesses, rulling out any who would prefer one class over the dominant class as a matter of personal playstyle. We see this problem exist NOW with the dominance of ranged jobs in specific fights, such as bringing Dragoon to Moogle. (By the way, damage 'types' and 'weaknesses' already exist but their impact is negligible, as well it should be.)

2. Redundancy already exists. Your philosophy basically reduces the damage dealers to their own damage type, but in its essence you're saying we can only have one of each damage dealing type for fear of taking steam away from any others. This is a serious issue- and a flaw in design logic. We've got 1 Pure damage mage, 1 Healer (who can deal some magical damage) 1 Ranged Class, Two tanks (one defensive, one offensive) and 2 melee damage dealers. (One Hybrid Magical/Physical damage, one Critical damage based.) Your policy would say we could ONLY at a pet job to that list and nothing else. That's a quick way to stagnate the game who's well beyond known for it's wide and versitile Job types.

I dare say that role redundancy is part of the reason why Final Fantasy's Job system is so loved. Each person could tailor their own method of achieving a goal.

Quote:
Pigeonhole was imminent with a job system coming. With every unique trait a job gets, the more likely that job will excel at certain content. It happened with XI, it will happen here. Move away from uniqueness & everyone gets to do content but homogenization takes shape. Unique enemy AI & characteristics is the balance of the scales.


I cannot stress this enough, mechanics that duplicate FFXI mechanics are flawed at it's base. FFXI's own mechanics, the basis of the game that was built upon, was and still is FUNDAMENTALLY flawed to the point of broken. You do not take a rotten foundation as the blueprint for making a new one.

The basics of any good game game is a matter of producing problems and creating multiple unique solutions to those problems. In MMO's most people beleive that the base solution involves a tanks, healers, damage dealers, and support usually filled in while still doing one of the main three categories. You can achieve these three basic functions through MANY means and many jobs, and still keep each job with enough unique flair to keep the game engaging.

Your proposal however would provide each situation with only one optimal solution ,and ***** the rest out of the run - that is completely improper. And staunchly against the stance Yoshi P clearly outlined (and patched both Garuda and Chimera to enforce.)


Quote:
Or they could design a standalone job system with it's own 100% unique skills or stronger potency over what skills classes share. Why not a Templar job which uses a hammer and assumes a tanky support role? This would alleviate the frustrations of players who don't like horizontal progression & only want to play what job they like. No one would tell them they can't join because they don't have X skill from another class. If that non crossover job doesn't get invited to alot of content. Slightly buff it and re-examine enemy characteristics, alter it's AI & whatever it takes a tad.


Not going to happen.

It's already announced and pretty much confirmed that Classes will branch into multiple jobs. This is going to happen. If there was any doubt when it was first announced, you can now consider it confirmed.

Many people strongly identify with one class. And rather then forcing them to switch to the optimal Class/Job for each PART of a dungeon, or each individual fight. Creating multiple Jobs that serve differing roles within a Class allows the person to maintain an identity without sacrificing the needs of a group. Doing so also will make it easier for SE to Class-lock dungeons to prevent exploiting the job swap system - which is doing FAR more to homogenize the player base than the ideals of the Class/Job system ever could. But in turn, Class Locking instead of Job Locking will allow groups to still adapt for changing situations in dungeons within the Class's limits.

With the current system, instead of working together to run a dungeon, you're simply required to have multiple jobs leveled so you can switch to the 'optimum' job for that part. There is no uniqueness there. No matter how much you create 'clearly defined stand alone Jobs' you will always be mired by that system. And no, it is not going away as a different image for it has already been created and worked upon. We are not writing the game's combat system form scratch a third time.

What Yoshi is doing is a very fair compromise, and in fact does better to reach your goals of creating unique jobs than you own concept would.

Will there be more Classes down the pipeline? Yes, this has already been confirmed. But expect multiple jobs for those new classes as well. At this point it's fair to say that XIV will wind up with more Jobs than XI, but thanks to the template created when they gave Archer the Bard Job class, the game actually benefit from the design.


Personally, I am very interested in how they're going to do the branching system - there are interesting hurtles to overcome like the issue with Classes primarily being tied to weapons, and player prefrences to specific Job types to certain weapons. Like Ninja and Samurai.

My guess of what is our best guide likely will be Final Fantasy Tactics Advance, as well as Final Fantasy III and V. That would pretty much encompass the majority of what our job pool has.
#15 Jun 10 2012 at 2:25 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,153 posts
Quote:
Give each job a unique weapon effect such as piercing, slashing, blunt. Balance enemies globally with different various weaknesses, and don't let damage that doesn't counter that weakness do significant damage.

"Sorry, BLNT dmg onry."
#16 Jun 10 2012 at 8:08 AM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
Ugh. Just had bad memories of kiting around Ix'Zdei or whatever it was up in the Grand Palace. "It's blunt!" "All the monks are weak.." "White mages, break out the hammers!" "Nevermind, it's back to slashing again. "All the SAMs are weak too." "So, who ISN'T weak?" "The black mage..." "Why is one even here???"
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#17 Jun 10 2012 at 11:50 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
970 posts
catwho wrote:
Ugh. Just had bad memories of kiting around Ix'Zdei or whatever it was up in the Grand Palace. "It's blunt!" "All the monks are weak.." "White mages, break out the hammers!" "Nevermind, it's back to slashing again. "All the SAMs are weak too." "So, who ISN'T weak?" "The black mage..." "Why is one even here???"

I loved that fight. They should have added more weakness changes so the blm wouldn't stand around. People say they dislike being ignored over another job. There you go, you couldn't class stack there and do optimal damage. It should have been tuned further. I remember Kirin in non zerg without bards when cap was 75. Everyone come samarui, smn & blm dd! I'm excluding zergs.
#18 Jun 10 2012 at 12:45 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,122 posts
KaneKitty wrote:
Specialized or not, I just don't see how adding jobs makes for a sustainable game. After you level your favourite class(es) to cap (which takes a couple weeks, really), raising a job is just a matter of completing a handful of quests. Even if each class could change into five jobs, that vast array itself would only add in a few weeks of content for each class as people scooped up the token five abilities from 30-50 in one day, the artifact in the following day, and much of the necessary gear over the following days.

I've never liked the job system; I think it's clunky and unnecessary. A more expanded sub-job system would have been better in my opinion - that, or the removal of classes altogether but the retention of cross-class abilities. This latter case would allow for people to not feel as pigeonholed while also lending some amount of significance to jobs. The way jobs are now, they are just a few unique abilities and a set of armour (which may or may not even be worn), they are the remnant of a bandage over the broken 1.0 class system. It shows, and I think that's just underwhelming.

The armory system is really a massive problem I feel. They have to make it much more attractive for 2.0 otherwise people won't want to play.

When I was a white mage in FFXI I had almost 100 spells and lots of different mage-y gear to dress up. In FFXIV, It seems (correct me if I'm wrong, I actually only played archer in XIV) like I either have to wear a burlap sack until endgame then settle for the single white-magey looking set of armour, with my only real white magic spells being:

Cure
Protect
Raise
Stoneskin
Cura
Curaga
Repose
Regen
Holy
Esuna
Benediction

That's 11 spells. Similar story for every other class/job when it comes to gear anyway. It's so depressing.

Does anyone actually like the current system and believe that it's attractive when compared to XI and other MMOs? Doesn't everyone want to just be a red mage or a monk or whatever from day one?

Edited, Jun 10th 2012 3:05pm by Dizmo
#19 Jun 10 2012 at 5:01 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
**
970 posts
Hyrist wrote:
Two critical flaws.

1. Any event with enemies of specific kinds of weaknesses will be dominated ONLY by classes who capitalize on those weaknesses, rulling out any who would prefer one class over the dominant class as a matter of personal playstyle. We see this problem exist NOW with the dominance of ranged jobs in specific fights, such as bringing Dragoon to Moogle. (By the way, damage 'types' and 'weaknesses' already exist but their impact is negligible, as well it should be.)

2. Redundancy already exists. Your philosophy basically reduces the damage dealers to their own damage type, but in its essence you're saying we can only have one of each damage dealing type for fear of taking steam away from any others. This is a serious issue- and a flaw in design logic. We've got 1 Pure damage mage, 1 Healer (who can deal some magical damage) 1 Ranged Class, Two tanks (one defensive, one offensive) and 2 melee damage dealers. (One Hybrid Magical/Physical damage, one Critical damage based.) Your policy would say we could ONLY at a pet job to that list and nothing else. That's a quick way to stagnate the game who's well beyond known for it's wide and versitile Job types.


1.That is why you don't make monsters one dimensional or unchanging during the fight, unique enemy characteristics and AI. Make it weak to fire at points, make it strong to unbursted skillchains, make it require different unique weapon properties during certain phases, make it have a phase where long range gets nullified or increases hate significantly.

2.There are different variations on the spectrum of the jobs roles you speak of. There could be a regenetive type healer, different schools of magic with alternate methods of healing, a rapid fire type ranged job, a spike damage ranged job, a magical ranged job, a ninjitsu ranged job, a trap laying ranged job, a defensive tank, an offensive tank, a physical tank, a magical tank, a hate transfer/absorb tank job, a spear user, a greathammer user, a great sword user, a great axe user, basically many possibilities of unique jobs depending on their weapon. The same method applies to pets. FFXI had beastmaster, puppetmaster, & summoner. Why is it in this version they can only come up with one?

Hyrist wrote:
I dare say that role redundancy is part of the reason why Final Fantasy's Job system is so loved. Each person could tailor their own method of achieving a goal.

I cannot stress this enough, mechanics that duplicate FFXI mechanics are flawed at it's base. FFXI's own mechanics, the basis of the game that was built upon, was and still is FUNDAMENTALLY flawed to the point of broken. You do not take a rotten foundation as the blueprint for making a new one.

The basics of any good game game is a matter of producing problems and creating multiple unique solutions to those problems. In MMO's most people beleive that the base solution involves a tanks, healers, damage dealers, and support usually filled in while still doing one of the main three categories. You can achieve these three basic functions through MANY means and many jobs, and still keep each job with enough unique flair to keep the game engaging.

No role redundancy is not the reason why FF fans love FF. Hence the implementation of jobs, the whole purpose of jobs was to add identity and uniqueness! People I know love FF, because there are many jobs to choose from versus 1-8 like most western rpgs. Some like the classics like IV more because there was less crossover. And some like the newer generation ones where you can mix and match. Final Fantasy Tactics is one of the all time favorite mix and matchers, but hey we can do that with classes, so why do jobs need crossover too?

#20 Jun 10 2012 at 5:43 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,530 posts
I think we need to better define what we mean by "redundancy," for it seems that many people would agree were it not for differing perceptions of the term. From a reductionist perspective most jobs are redundant, since they are in essence matters of tanking, damaging, healing, and supporting. In FFXI, for example, Dancer, Scholar, White Mage, Red Mage, and even Summoner were "main healers" in many situations. The question we must ask is whether that makes these five jobs redundant.

I think what Hyrist means by redundancy is that we should be allowed to have one role filled by many different jobs, but also that each of these "redundant" jobs accomplish that task in a unique way. In this sense, the term redundant should probably not have been used, then, because it seems that the argument is for a "many solutions, many paths" philosophy, and not actually what comes to mind when using the somewhat pejorative term "redundant."
____________________________
"... 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."
#21 Jun 10 2012 at 8:50 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
4,773 posts
KaneKitty wrote:
I think we need to better define what we mean by "redundancy," for it seems that many people would agree were it not for differing perceptions of the term. From a reductionist perspective most jobs are redundant, since they are in essence matters of tanking, damaging, healing, and supporting. In FFXI, for example, Dancer, Scholar, White Mage, Red Mage, and even Summoner were "main healers" in many situations. The question we must ask is whether that makes these five jobs redundant.

I think what Hyrist means by redundancy is that we should be allowed to have one role filled by many different jobs, but also that each of these "redundant" jobs accomplish that task in a unique way. In this sense, the term redundant should probably not have been used, then, because it seems that the argument is for a "many solutions, many paths" philosophy, and not actually what comes to mind when using the somewhat pejorative term "redundant."



Kane is right, but redundancy is actually tech lingo for 'well covered/backed up'.

Anyways, one of FFXI's many critical flaws was the lack of substantial options for specific roles, while others were horrendously flooded. Namely - tanking and damage dealing, respectively.

And while I place the blame of this problem primarily on Utsusemi not being flat out removed from the game or revamped to be properly balanced instead of re-writing the entire game around it (thus ruling out all possible alternatives for tanking except for Paladin, who still struggled in many areas.)... the situation snowballed.

Healing was a main issue primarily because there was one sole healer and nobody wanted to distribute the task between multiple jobs. Which pinned Red Mage, Summoner, and Dancer to all compete against a White Mage's slot in many situations. (The lack of alternative functionality on behalf of the Summoner and Red Mage was also contributes here.) But as I said, that game was a wreck.

Thankfully the design of this game has already anticipated several of those issues. Our main healer class can now do some damage to keep it interesting(Cleric's Stance). One of our damage dealer classes now has support functions (Archer > Bard.) and the role coverage is beginning to take shape in how the class system is forming.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let me give you an example of what I see to be the ideal blooming from the mechanics now set into place.

My main character, Lin Celistine, is a Lancer. I identify primarily with Lancer above all other classes. I want to level classes that only support me making lancer better, and have issues with playing other classes simply as it pulls harshly away from that 'image' I amour myself to that character for.

But as it stands, the only real role Lancer fills is under Dragoon as a Damage Dealer. And if my party is saturate with damage dealing, or Dragoon's Damage isn't optimal for that. I have no options but to break my own desires and play something else, or wait for my 'turn' to come around.

But let's say further down the line they add "Templar" to the list of jobs under Lancer, and have it fill the Tank role (much like Final Fantasy Tactics Advance.) I'll digress on the details on how that would happen, but let's just say that I've crunched the numbers and it's more than possible to fashion Lancer into a tank role with the right support classes(Marauder, Conjurer) and the right 'Job abilities' as support for that.

Now the class I identify with can fill two roles in two unique ways. Sure, a good number of move sets are the same or borrowed from other jobs, but the way they are utilized are very different. Additionally, its unique method of meeting that role can be further defined within the individual "Job" skills. More importantly, the needs of the many and the rights are the few are finally met in a fair compromise. Not only that, but now party roles are aptly covered from multiple angles through the use of the Class and Job system.

- This is the direction I see Yoshi P going with all of this, and I'm fairly excited for it.

It works on many levels to create a deep and variable system for the players to explore, while allowing themselves to grow into an identity they enjoy.


I mean, yes, in order for someone to have all the skills for all their jobs, they're going to need to level all the classes at least somewhat. However I don't feel as if that's a bad mechanic at all, because it gives players a bit of the experience for each class. Which will give them both a better understanding of some of the basics of that class and a preview of that class should they decide they like it after all and add it into their play. And if even if not, the speed of leveling at the current pace is just right so that the person isn't agonizing too long over a class they're leveling just for the shared abilities.

Overall I believe it's a intuitive and positive system, if it turns out the way I think it will (and I tend to have a good track record with predictions). And will be overall more healthy for the game than simply reducing the amount of classes that can fit a set role, and over-defining them as that set role.

That's not healthy game structure in my opinion, and more importantly that's not what Final Fantasy is about.

Yoshi said it best: This game may be an MMORPG, but it is also an RPG, and more important than both of those - it is a Final Fantasy game.


Edited, Jun 10th 2012 11:11pm by Hyrist
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 21 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (21)