Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 Next »
Reply To Thread

I think ARR will fail.Follow

#102 Feb 28 2013 at 11:06 AM Rating: Good
*
88 posts
I do not think I'm communicating my thoughts very well.

I'm not concerned with Legacy status, or anything like that. I just want SE to actualy start communicating a bit better so we aren't left guessing or dealing with wild rumors.

The whole back tracking on the Alpha testers with no explanation makes SE look like what they say and what they mean are two different things.
I don't think they are actualy lying or being deceptive, but it realy behooves a company to make sure they are explaining their actions to the public so that things don't get misconstrued. You can just never underestimate just how dumb the average joe is. Most people are not going to think about the possibility that they invited the Alpha testers because there wasn't enough Legacy members who accepted the beta invite. Most are going to jump to the conclusion that 'OMG!! SE is playing favorites" Like you pointed out with the Whole Legacy/Non-legacy thing.

SE needs to step up for positive press, because it's not like the fan base can say anything about the positive changes in the Beta without breaking NDA. Right now all we have is some rather limited videos and still pictures, and a whole mess of outdated info on the Lodestone. SE needs to crush the rumors with hard facts so as to keep the public's opinion of the game high.
#103 Feb 28 2013 at 11:08 AM Rating: Excellent
***
2,010 posts
It's too soon, frankly. I don't think YoshiP was even planning to go to Beta so quickly, but players were asking for it and so he moved ahead. When the open Beta starts, that's when information will start to pour out because the NDA will be lifted and players can discuss their experiences here. You are just like two months too early.
#104 Feb 28 2013 at 12:48 PM Rating: Excellent
2 posts
Wyldkat wrote:
Hello all, new to the forum.

I'm also new to FFXIV. I never played 1.0, the game just turned me off when I first saw it. I had no idea it was even still around or had been re-booted til I caught an article on Kotaku. Now I've been devouring all the videos and info I can find on the game.


Welcome to FFXIV! I share your enthusiasm in the search for more information about FFXIV ARR.
Please allow me to assist you with some more information that might have escaped your notice.

Wyldkat wrote:
Right now, the videos make the new version look great. But There's very little in the way of actual game play info, just teasers from Yoshi-P. Would be nice if they would actualy communicate more with us outside of the PR blurbs.


The following links has more information and videos if you have not already visited them.
http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/
http://www.youtube.com/user/FINALFANTASYXIV?feature=watch <official FFXIV youtube channel>

Might I suggest visiting FFXIV lodestone forum as well for latest information.

Mr. Wint from this esteemed website has also linked the latest information in his article.

If you have viewed all these information before, you would know as much as we do, with the exception of information not yet ready for released, such as Beta content. As things might and can change during Beta, it would be prudent to release finalised information so as to reduce chances of confusion.


Wyldkat wrote:
I think ARR has a good chance of doing well, but I have to say that what I have seen community wise and communication wise from SE makes me nervous. The Offical forums are a mess, atleast as bad as the WoW forums. There's lots of nastyness and the fact that a small group went all 4chan on PA for a bad review just dose not speak well or give a good impression of the community.


Let me put forward my point of view on the official forums and the folks that frequent there. There are naysayers as well even on Lodestone (official forums), not everyone is a whiteknight. However, I would like to think that Lodestone forum is more civilised than others you might find.

In regards to the article by PA, if the actions of a few casts a bad light on the rest of us, it is a sad day indeed. I do want to put forward that if you do actually read the comments, most if not all, presented their critique of the article in a civil manner. Readers of an article is allowed to critique an article as much as the author has the right to an opnion. (article)

All in all, all this will be behind us when the time to play ARR comes. Of this, I am sure.

Wyldkat wrote:
The way the BETA is being handled is another thing I think reflects badly on SE. They put up the Beta recruitment with no info other than that you would be selected based on how you filled out the survey. We later find out from someone with a big mouth that the E-mail states that only the Legacy members would get into Phase 1 and 2, we had no info of this from SE at all.


Unfortunately, your statement regarding no information about legacy on Beta recruitment is incorrect. I genuinely hope that you have made a simple mistake of not reading the information, instead of venting your frustrations.

Beta application announced 7th Jan 2013.
Announcement clearly states Legacy player starts in Phase 1 & 2 and need not apply. I am not a Legacy player.
http://lodestone.finalfantasyxiv.com/pl/index.html

On the Beta application page as well, it states this information again with more details provided.
https://secure.square-enix.com/enqt/s/run?sq=b0b2026ccf19abb7ea581aac20b6a20a9dfacdb6a13ab1514cb72060cacd21b34cef9c2cfcb690fec12a2bb5c310fead0ab32bef5c2cfcb546212e6009d0

Even on Zams FFXIV report, it is stated.
http://ffxiv.zam.com/story.html?story=31517

It is quite hard to miss the information that Legacy players will get in first. Which is fine, I feel those people deserve to see Beta first seeing as they actually paid money to support SE during the tough period of transition.

Wyldkat wrote:
While this wouldn't be a big deal since we wouldn't have even known about it had someone not broken NDA, there's also the fact that they put out a tweet stating that all Alpha testers would get a beta invite, this is after they had already posted in the offical forums that Alpha testers would not be automaticaly selected and would have to wait to be selected from the general pool.
All in all this give the impression that SE is not all that interrested in new players or the opinions of those who are just now learning of the game.

Speaking of the NDA, something that has confused me is that SE granted all Legacy Members access to the BETA, the problem is FFXIV is a Teen rated game. How are they handling the fact that any legacy member under 18 cannot agree to the NDA? If answering this deals with breaking the NDA, then don't answer. I'll just have to keep wondering til after phase 4.


Please forgive my ignorance and link the information where they posted in official forums that Alpha testers would not be automatically selected. I am interested to see this.

Whether you like this game or hate this game, it is your choice. Everyone has differing preferences and tastes. There is no satisfying everyone.

You can bash on the aspects of the game you do not like, bash on the community on Lodestone which I am a part of, bash on our fanboyism or Whiteknighting(?) but I implore you to not bash on the staff of FFXIV including YoshiP. They are working hard and least we could do is to recognise their effort even if the result does not interest you.

Should you have any questions, I will do my best to help.

Drewe
Masamune
#105 Feb 28 2013 at 1:26 PM Rating: Decent
3 posts
Looks amazing to me from what I Have seen, looks like the majority of people are saying its a much better game now. and like it or not everyone is looking foward to launch.
#106 Feb 28 2013 at 1:27 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
Avatar
**
412 posts
Thank you good sir. There is a sudden influx of people who are unable to find any information about this game for some reason. Yet, they are brimming with predictions and opinions (based on 1.0 I assume) of future outcomes that will befall SE and 2.0. They also seem to hold all the answers for how things should really be handled, and what is most needed.
#107 Feb 28 2013 at 3:57 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
4,773 posts
Admiral Niknar wrote:
Ostia wrote:
Hyrist wrote:
Ostia wrote:
Jesus you guys are harsh Smiley: laugh Sure he is trolling and biting but damm Smiley: glare I tho you guys where all cool and calm :(


You strike me as familiar....

Curious question. Do you know Hyrist's last name?


Is this some sort of trick question ?? I am really bad at those :( :(

Btw: Googling hyrist brings a lot of material from FFXI, is that you ?

Trick question indeed! We are in the same linkshell and I don't even remember your Surname. Smiley: lol

As for the topic at hand, no one here is in position to say if it's good or not due to NDA, plus something that may seem good to one person may not seem good for another. Why not just sit tight and wait til open beta, try it and THEN decide, because until then there cannot be an open and knowledgeable discussion on the changes because of NDA.

Edited, Feb 28th 2013 4:50am by Niknar



Well, Niknar, that could be the issue because the primary character I played in Old Timers Guild was Lin Celistine.

Hyrist's Surname is Midgard in FFXIV. In FFXI it was Winstar.

So yes, it was a very tricky question.
#108 Feb 28 2013 at 11:30 PM Rating: Decent
*
88 posts
I definately am either not communicating my points well, or I'm writing well above the reading level of some people here.


I have found all the videos on the FFXIV channel, as well as most of the various other 1.0 and 2.0 videos available. Thank you.

The lodestone is almost pointless atm due to the outdated info on it. the only use is for the Beta sign up, the RSS and the Twitter feed. for actual info you are better off just going to the FFXIV site. Obviously they will update it for 2.0 eventualy, but right now it gives bad info to those who know nothing about the game and might not be as good at finding info out on their own.

I have seen worse forums, but I've also seen alot better. The thing is, the Fans are near fanatical, the critics are trolls, and the reasonable people get shouted down. Not exactly a shining example of intelligent discussion about something we all share an interrest in. It dosen't help eaither that the forums are locked to anyone who didn't register a 1.0 copy. Althought I'm not certain how much letting everyone post at the offical forums would help, it could actualy make it worse I guess.

No where in any of the beta info pages dose it say that phase 1 and 2 would be limited to only certain groups.

It was stated that Legacy would get in from the start, that was announce with the Legacy campaign I belive as part of the perks for being legacy.

The beta page it's self actualy states that the Alpha testers would not get automatical selected under
"Users who applied for the Alpha test" [link= http://entry.ffxiv.com/beta/detail_na.html] http://entry.ffxiv.com/beta/detail_na.html[/link]

I have no desire to bash anything, I've not seen or heard anything that makes me think the game is bad, I don't have a problem with Fanboys people are often pasionate about their interrests. Whiteknitghts annoy me. It implies that you don't have enough faith in Yoshi-P and the Devs to be able to stand on their own merrits and abilities.

What I have seen from watching the letters from the producers shows me that Yoshi-P dose not need defenders, he has shown that he is pouring his heart into the game, it shows in his face everytime he speaks about the game.
Honestly it amazes me how many people think I am bashing Yoshi-P for pointing out that the way they are handling communications with this beta is giving bad impressions that could easily be delt with by just keeping people informed. The fact that so many even in this thread have missed or misunderstood things posted on the Offical site shows that they are not communicating as well as they could be.

I want to see this game do well, this is why I keep harping on things I belive are giving the game a more negative impression than it deserves.
#109 Mar 01 2013 at 3:05 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
Avatar
**
412 posts
Lol, I'll agree with the fanatical fans. The critics are fanatical too. There is indeed a distinct polarization.The objective ones never really speak up. I mean what's the point right?

I have to say though, if a new person was interested in ARR. They might have to dig to find information. I mean, you'd think that it'd be easy as just going to the official site. At least that's what I think you're trying to say.

When I see people say there isn't enough information, I see it as untrue. However, the information needs to be consolidated.
#110 Mar 01 2013 at 3:51 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
The thing is, there really isn't enough information about the gameplay, which is the main thing that most seasoned gamers are looking for. Gameplay, especially regarding the combat, is the thing most of us would be doing for hundreds of hours. Until we see what it looks like and understand how it works, there isn't enough information. It doesn't matter how much information you share about every other detail of the game. Without this information, a large portion of the potential playerbase will remain unconvinced.

So far, the only gameplay/combat videos we have seen have been incredibly underwhelming.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#111 Mar 01 2013 at 4:00 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,416 posts
Kachi, do you think FF gameplay in general is any good?

Especially in 1-10 and Lost Odyssey.
#112 Mar 01 2013 at 4:20 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Well yeah, or I wouldn't consider myself a fan of the series. 6, 7, and 9 were some of my favorite games of all time.

Having said that, would I enjoy them for a thousand hours plus? Probably not. But will FF XIV be borrowing gameplay mechanics from those games? Not at all.

I'll put it this way, because it's a very apt example of the gameplay that we might expect to see, and can commonly see in MMOs in general (not just Final Fantasy): Will I enjoy playing as a party of interchangeable units, each possessing unique skills, taking turns to strategically defeat an enemy... for about 100 hours? Sure, sounds like a great time.

Would I enjoy having a few friends over, and we each play as only ONE character in the party, and we do this for over a thousand hours? Very unlikely. It has to be treated as something other than an RPG altogether at that point, because it plays nothing like an RPG on the player's end.

This is one of the key differences between the RPG and MMO genre. In an RPG, you control a party. In an MMO you control a single unit. The gameplay dynamics are totally different. It's often the difference between checkers and chess.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#113 Mar 01 2013 at 8:50 AM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
I think the issue is that "information" about gameplay doesn't tell you anything. Opinions are wide and varied as to what is good and what is not, but no one has been able to distill the "good" into anything more concrete than adjectives such as "fun" and "engaging." Yeah, that really tells me a lot.

Playing the game is the only real judge of gameplay. And can't have the court of public opinion give their opinions on that until open beta.
____________________________
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
#114 Mar 01 2013 at 8:50 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
Kachi wrote:
Well yeah, or I wouldn't consider myself a fan of the series. 6, 7, and 9 were some of my favorite games of all time.

Having said that, would I enjoy them for a thousand hours plus? Probably not. But will FF XIV be borrowing gameplay mechanics from those games? Not at all.

I'll put it this way, because it's a very apt example of the gameplay that we might expect to see, and can commonly see in MMOs in general (not just Final Fantasy): Will I enjoy playing as a party of interchangeable units, each possessing unique skills, taking turns to strategically defeat an enemy... for about 100 hours? Sure, sounds like a great time.

Would I enjoy having a few friends over, and we each play as only ONE character in the party, and we do this for over a thousand hours? Very unlikely. It has to be treated as something other than an RPG altogether at that point, because it plays nothing like an RPG on the player's end.

This is one of the key differences between the RPG and MMO genre. In an RPG, you control a party. In an MMO you control a single unit. The gameplay dynamics are totally different. It's often the difference between checkers and chess.


I can think of a million examples of this being untrue. (Mass Effect, The Elder Scrolls, Dark/Demon Souls, Radiata Stories, 'Tales Of' Series, Persona although you can change to control the party, Phantasy Star, Every D&D or table top rpg, Contact, etc)

Quote:
Would I enjoy having a few friends over, and we each play as only ONE character in the party, and we do this for over a thousand hours?


This is the basis for the origination of RPGs, the table-top rpg.

Even rpgs that place you in a party don't always allow you to control the entire party. The entire concept of a role-playing game is based on playign the role of 1 character. I would argue that party control rpgs are LESS like rpgs and more like rts/strategy games.

Edited, Mar 1st 2013 9:54am by Louiscool

Edited, Mar 1st 2013 9:54am by Louiscool
____________________________


#115 Mar 01 2013 at 9:09 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
catwho wrote:
I think the issue is that "information" about gameplay doesn't tell you anything. Opinions are wide and varied as to what is good and what is not, but no one has been able to distill the "good" into anything more concrete than adjectives such as "fun" and "engaging." Yeah, that really tells me a lot.

Playing the game is the only real judge of gameplay. And can't have the court of public opinion give their opinions on that until open beta.


To an extent, that's true, and is what I've been saying. There are certain elements of the gameplay which are not visible; they are subjective (based more on ability level than opinion, however). But it's not -entirely- true. I'm able to look at certain games and tell that the gameplay is fun, particularly with good footage and an explanation. One definitely does not need to actually play a game to assess the quality of the gameplay. And if nothing else, while judging from a distance may be difficult in assessing a good game, it's not at all difficult to identify bad gameplay that way.

Quote:
I can think of a million examples of this being untrue. (Mass Effect, The Elder Scrolls, Dark/Demon Souls, Radiata Stories, 'Tales Of' Series, Persona although you can change to control the party, Phantasy Star, Every D&D or table top rpg, Contact, etc)


Right, but my point was that enjoying Final Fantasy gameplay does not extend to enjoying MMO gameplay. Most of the games you're noting are action RPGs, not traditional Japanese RPGs like the Final Fantasy series. I inferred the point of asking was to draw some correlation between enjoying Final Fantasy gameplay and enjoying FFXIV/MMO gameplay, and I was just laying that to rest.

Quote:
This is the basis for the origination of RPGs, the table-top rpg.

Even rpgs that place you in a party don't always allow you to control the entire party. The entire concept of a role-playing game is based on playign the role of 1 character. I would argue that party control rpgs are LESS like rpgs and more like rts/strategy games.


And yet those qualities do not apply to the Final Fantasy series (even though Final Fantasy was also originally inspired by D&D). Traditionally, JRPGs allow you to control the entire party. Those which don't are usually reclassified as some type of Action RPG. The reason for this is very simple: the challenge of the game will usually either come from strategy, or physical skill (reflexes/twitch). It's very difficult to have an engaging strategy game with only one character, because strategy is ultimately a challenge of resource management. If you mainly have just the one resource, there's not much of a challenge. The strategy in classic JRPGs (however much is arguably there) comes from the fact that you have multiple characters, each with their own set of resources.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#116 Mar 01 2013 at 9:17 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
Kachi wrote:

And yet those qualities do not apply to the Final Fantasy series (even though Final Fantasy was also originally inspired by D&D). Traditionally, JRPGs allow you to control the entire party. Those which don't are usually reclassified as some type of Action RPG. The reason for this is very simple: the challenge of the game will usually either come from strategy, or physical skill (reflexes/twitch). It's very difficult to have an engaging strategy game with only one character, because strategy is ultimately a challenge of resource management. If you mainly have just the one resource, there's not much of a challenge. The strategy in classic JRPGs (however much is arguably there) comes from the fact that you have multiple characters, each with their own set of resources.


Which is why you form a party, and work together to pool those resources.

This is also why there is no Dark Souls MMO, and why The Elder Scolls mmo makes no sense.

Maybe I'm missing your point, but IMO, the FF experience translates very well to an mmo, or even a multiplayer FF. Did you play Crystal Chronicles? Aside from carrying a bucket, it was some of the best times I've had with friends on the couch.
____________________________


#117 Mar 01 2013 at 11:33 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
Which is why you form a party, and work together to pool those resources.

This is also why there is no Dark Souls MMO, and why The Elder Scolls mmo makes no sense.

Maybe I'm missing your point, but IMO, the FF experience translates very well to an mmo, or even a multiplayer FF. Did you play Crystal Chronicles? Aside from carrying a bucket, it was some of the best times I've had with friends on the couch.


I'm not sure how to be much more clear, other than to reiterate that there are vast differences between the gameplay of the standard FF series and the gameplay of MMOs from the player's perspective. That was my only point, and it was in response to a question that Hyanmen asked.

It's not about the "FF experience" translating to an MMO. It's a question of whether the FF style of gameplay transfers directly to an MMO, and the answer is no, obviously, not at all. Single-player JRPG gameplay and MMORPG gameplay are totally different, both on the whole and in regard to Final Fantasy in particular.

And yes, I played Crystal Chronicles. Can't say that I really cared for it, but if it were indicative of the FF series in general, then we would be having a different discussion.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#118 Mar 01 2013 at 11:42 AM Rating: Excellent
Guru
***
1,673 posts
Kachi wrote:
It's a question of whether the FF style of gameplay transfers directly to an MMO, and the answer is no, obviously, not at all. Single-player JRPG gameplay and MMORPG gameplay are totally different, both on the whole and in regard to Final Fantasy in particular.



Can you elaborate on this a little more, or if you have already, post a link. I'm curious as to what you have to say. This is just my thought and why I want to see what your stance is. FF is a party based game. And from my experience, most MMOs have been party based. Or is that not the part you are referring to?

Edit: Trying to read through the previous posts for more detail but feel free to answer anyways.


Edited, Mar 1st 2013 12:46pm by Geffe
#119Poubelle, Posted: Mar 01 2013 at 11:48 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) if it really needs to be explained to you how FF11/FF14 are different from single player FF games, I suggest you go play one because you obviously havent.
#120 Mar 01 2013 at 11:51 AM Rating: Excellent
Guru
***
1,673 posts
Poubelle wrote:
if it really needs to be explained to you how FF11/FF14 are different from single player FF games, I suggest you go play one because you obviously havent.

its also better than having Kachi explain it to you.

Edited, Mar 1st 2013 12:49pm by Poubelle



Thank you for that response that had absolutely nothing to do with what I said.
#121 Mar 01 2013 at 12:00 PM Rating: Good
***
2,010 posts
Kachi wrote:
It's a question of whether the FF style of gameplay transfers directly to an MMO, and the answer is no, obviously, not at all. Single-player JRPG gameplay and MMORPG gameplay are totally different, both on the whole and in regard to Final Fantasy in particular.


But it does, though. When I first picked up XI year and years ago, the first thing I was struck by was how much the party experience reminded me of map grinding. But instead of me controlling all the characters and getting tossed into random fights, there were other living a breathing fans of Final Fantasy playing by my side! It was freaking epic.

SE had group dynamics down before most other studios even knew what they wanted to do with groups. Even back as far as FF1 they were setting up how to make a game with multiple players of different skills work. Every aspect of FF translates well into mmos, from questing to grouping to exploring.

#122 Mar 01 2013 at 12:03 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
Can you elaborate on this a little more, or if you have already, post a link. I'm curious as to what you have to say. This is just my thought and why I want to see what your stance is. FF is a party based game. And from my experience, most MMOs have been party based. Or is that not the part you are referring to?

Edit: Trying to read through the previous posts for more detail but feel free to answer anyways.


Sure, if you've played many JRPGs before, you know that you typically have a party, each member having their own skills, stats, equipment, attack turns (sometimes affected by speed), and sometimes inventories or other things. Basically, every unit represents a pool of resources, and you as the player are controlling several pools at once to respond to the enemy. Strategy games are all a matter of managing your resources better than your opponent. Because these pools are all separated, but working together, you are not only managing the units independently, but you are responsible for their "social" behaviors. In an MMO, that's not the case. You don't manage any of the other units. You get one unit. It takes a -lot- of the strategy out of your hands, and frankly, most JRPGs are not even that strategically challenging to begin with.

Here's an example for you. It's like playing chess, where you have 16 pieces. Now, if you were to take a chess-lover and tell him that you're going to only let him control one piece, and 15 other people would be controlling the other pieces, he'd probably slap the **** out of you until you were dead.

Hyperbole of course, but the point being, the game is completely different from the player's perspective. Even though to someone who's only watching the board, it looks like the same kind of game, the gameplay has changed completely.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#123 Mar 01 2013 at 12:04 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
But it does, though. When I first picked up XI year and years ago, the first thing I was struck by was how much the party experience reminded me of map grinding. But instead of me controlling all the characters and getting tossed into random fights, there were other living a breathing fans of Final Fantasy playing by my side! It was freaking epic.

SE had group dynamics down before most other studios even knew what they wanted to do with groups. Even back as far as FF1 they were setting up how to make a game with multiple players of different skills work. Every aspect of FF translates well into mmos, from questing to grouping to exploring.


See above; player experience and observer experience are totally different things. It'd be like me telling you that watching football and playing football are basically the same experience.

Edited, Mar 1st 2013 10:05am by Kachi
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#124 Mar 01 2013 at 12:06 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
***
1,673 posts
Kachi wrote:
Sure, if you've played many JRPGs before, you know that you typically have a party, each member having their own skills, stats, equipment, attack turns (sometimes affected by speed), and sometimes inventories or other things. Basically, every unit represents a pool of resources, and you as the player are controlling several pools at once to respond to the enemy. Strategy games are all a matter of managing your resources better than your opponent. Because these pools are all separated, but working together, you are not only managing the units independently, but you are responsible for their "social" behaviors. In an MMO, that's not the case. You don't manage any of the other units. You get one unit. It takes a -lot- of the strategy out of your hands, and frankly, most JRPGs are not even that strategically challenging to begin with.

Here's an example for you. It's like playing chess, where you have 16 pieces. Now, if you were to take a chess-lover and tell him that you're going to only let him control one piece, and 15 other people would be controlling the other pieces, he'd probably slap the sh*t out of you until you were dead.

Hyperbole of course, but the point being, the game is completely different from the player's perspective. Even though to someone who's only watching the board, it looks like the same kind of game, the gameplay has changed completely.


Thank you. I see what you are saying now.
#125 Mar 01 2013 at 2:41 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,416 posts
Kachi wrote:
Well yeah, or I wouldn't consider myself a fan of the series. 6, 7, and 9 were some of my favorite games of all time.

Having said that, would I enjoy them for a thousand hours plus? Probably not. But will FF XIV be borrowing gameplay mechanics from those games? Not at all.

I'll put it this way, because it's a very apt example of the gameplay that we might expect to see, and can commonly see in MMOs in general (not just Final Fantasy): Will I enjoy playing as a party of interchangeable units, each possessing unique skills, taking turns to strategically defeat an enemy... for about 100 hours? Sure, sounds like a great time.

Would I enjoy having a few friends over, and we each play as only ONE character in the party, and we do this for over a thousand hours? Very unlikely. It has to be treated as something other than an RPG altogether at that point, because it plays nothing like an RPG on the player's end.

This is one of the key differences between the RPG and MMO genre. In an RPG, you control a party. In an MMO you control a single unit. The gameplay dynamics are totally different. It's often the difference between checkers and chess.


Thanks for the reply. Now I know to weigh your future opinions accordingly.
1 2 3 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 96 All times are in CST
Callinon, Lyrailis, Theonehio, Anonymous Guests (93)