Is there a reason that everything I quote is getting quoted twice in my reply?
I like a lot of what I'm seeing, and yet, I still expect the game won't do very well based on it. ... FATEs are going to be over-crowded, unbalanced messes unless they cap the number of people who can participate. Period.
Back where I come from, an event that's too popular is a good problem to have...
An event that is too popular gets overcrowded, and NO ONE gets to enjoy it. Remember when Besieged first hit FFXI? It was a super successful concept! And it was horribly implemented; the lag alone prevented most people from getting to attack a single enemy.
These FATE events are no different from the Dynamic Events in GW2. And most of them are horribly boring because there are too many people. Your contribution is mostly meaningless to the outcome, and you can barely even see what's going on.
Have we learned nothing from the past? A game can do many things masterfully, but if it doesn't deliver on gameplay, it launches on life support. The gameplay does look a bit improved as I see it in the gamepad video in terms of engagement, but there are still valid concerns about the level of challenge and the incentive structure. Those are the things that matter most. Without them, doing everything else right just isn't enough. The game failed miserably once; you'd have to be dreaming to believe it can't go the same way as SWTOR and every other recent major MMO release at this point.
I agree with you about the challenge. From the look of the video the fights still look way over simplified. They added jump so why don't I see people avoiding frontal cone attacks and such? Everyone is still just standing there and getting whomped on hitting 1,2,3, 1,2,3.
I would like more active boss mechanics the way fights are in wow,rift,and tor at least. I don't need the Tera model, I didn't really like it much tbh.
He mentioned in gamepad video that he was chaining 3 skills together. If they have some features like that, maintain some semblance of positioning and direction being meaningful, balance abilities well, and include some cooperative party mechanics (NOT including trinity-like dynamics), I could see the gameplay being kind of mediocre, but good enough to survive, maybe even thrive, based on the game's other strengths. However, there's really no reason that they can't make the gameplay amazing other than a lack of knowing how to.
I'm not saying it can't fail, but I was just thinking earlier "I wonder when Kachi will come in and crap all over everyone's excitement".
However you did comment favorably on other aspects so apparently FATE is the Achilles heel of this game.
I was getting excited about it too, honestly, but then I remembered the bigger picture. I'm seeing some things that are being done very well. That gives me faith in the competence of the design team. That gets me excited for the game's potential. That allows me to see myself enjoying this game. But then when I take a step back and look at the evidence in front of me regarding the most important design elements, my excitement becomes tempered. I want to believe that the designers recognize the importance of balancing a series of novel challenges to match player ability, and that they understand how essential a solid feedback system is to maintaining player incentive. But the reality is that game designers on the whole don't understand that -even a little bit-. They're operating on personal theory and feedback from testers. Sometimes they get lucky and stumble onto something good, and other times their intuition leads them down the right path. But relying on game designers to know what they're doing is a recipe for disappointment.
So while I would like to believe that Yoshi-P's design team is responsible for these good decisions because they are really talented and insightful designers, and they can be trusted to continually deliver work that is worthy of high expectations... the evidence just doesn't bear that out, historically. Not in the industry, not at SE, and not for this team (yet). So yes, I'm a skeptic, through and through. It very rarely leads me astray.
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...
Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.
Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.