Forum Settings
       
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

Blog Post: This is not a testFollow

#27 Feb 09 2013 at 9:01 AM Rating: Good
***
1,004 posts
I love Fernehalwes style! Great screenshots and glad to hear they are pushing the beta testing into the office. Sounds like it's 'about that time'!
#28 Feb 09 2013 at 9:44 AM Rating: Default
**
972 posts
FATE is something I've always wanted from this game and what I hoped the 30 something guildleve cards were initially. They comment on variety and the name FATE makes me think of a timeline where events take place. Also GW2 didn't do this first, XI did. GW2 just took it and made events cascade or chain.

FATE existed in XI if you take every public event it had and place a banner which every public event fell under. Expect the same difficulty threshold you experienced in XI public events since this team contains people who worked in XI. Whether that's good or bad depends on your perception. It won't be super difficult though, that is resigned to the real endgame content. Expect more and you're pretty much relegating yourself to potential dissatisfaction.

I look at the potential this system holds if it gets constant development. Think of every FF game known to draw active events from, make it multiplayer, make it recurring repeatable content. Place the timeline where events recur at a frequency besieged occured daily. And you have a recipe for fun. The perception with low recurring rates will be"They don't happen often enough". But stick to that rate continually adding more events overtime and the perception will change to"This is a fun break from the grind, they are paced well".

I hope the rewards are perishable and that xp, gil, or currency aren't the only rewards. By perishable I mean that the loot dropped requires consistent participation in FATE or the bonus is depleted.
#29 Feb 09 2013 at 9:53 AM Rating: Good
***
1,163 posts
KaneKitty wrote:
Onionthiefx wrote:
WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!! Those are amazing screenshots. If those aren't touched up and the game actually looks that pretty cranked, incoming $1000 of upgrades lol.


While the game does look nice, you shouldn't judge graphical quality on a handful of thumbnails, haha.


I would agree but I hope you can get into the beta to see for yourself. I don't know if you would need $1000 (I'm sure you were just excited with that number) worth of upgrades but I think it would help make your life better if you decide to live in that world.

#30 Feb 09 2013 at 3:19 PM Rating: Excellent
scorleone wrote:
Pontipy wrote:
FATE's look like they are going to be awesome! Looks like thats some form of an adamantoise possibly.

edit: or maybe not.. didn't notice it was floating till staring at it longer.

Edited, Feb 8th 2013 10:51am by Pontipy

I had never heard of the FATE system until a few weeks ago when it was mentioned along with random treasure chests being found while exploring. Is anyone able to shed some light on this for me or able to link me some details about it? Is it supposed to be similar to GW2 open world events that everyone can team up for?

And if that's the same as our Beta version, why do they get paladins and we don't!? >.> <.<


http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/60225-Simply-question-about-Beta-phase-1?p=957161#post957161

Bayohne wrote:
Greetings everyone,

I've updated the original post in this thread to clarify my original statement. While normally you would only be able to play as the classes available in Gridania, please note that as a special exception during Beta Test phase 1 & 2, players will be able to complete specific objectives to unlock the gladiator class. Tanks will be very much needed for content like instanced raids (the level 25 dungeon in particular) and as such the dev. team has made them available for usage!

Eagle-eyed posters already spotted some gladiators in our most recent blog post, too.
#31 Feb 09 2013 at 3:27 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,163 posts
Nice!
#32 Feb 10 2013 at 10:41 AM Rating: Decent
**
374 posts
ReshepKasadu wrote:
Kachi-
Quote:
...because there's either nothing to do (because everyone has already done it), or there's too much of a grind...


So you mean you'll be unhappy whether there is stuff to do or not? There is no pleasing you, sir.


Have to love someone making his 3rd post making broad, all-encompassing criticisms of someone who has made 9,000+ posts.
#33 Feb 10 2013 at 2:04 PM Rating: Decent
*
181 posts
Wint wrote:


http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/60225-Simply-question-about-Beta-phase-1?p=957161#post957161

Bayohne wrote:
Greetings everyone,

I've updated the original post in this thread to clarify my original statement. While normally you would only be able to play as the classes available in Gridania, please note that as a special exception during Beta Test phase 1 & 2, players will be able to complete specific objectives to unlock the gladiator class. Tanks will be very much needed for content like instanced raids (the level 25 dungeon in particular) and as such the dev. team has made them available for usage!

Eagle-eyed posters already spotted some gladiators in our most recent blog post, too.
This changes everything! Finally we'll get to see exactly how this new combat system works in some REAL battles. There's so much we're going to learn now during Phase 1, the excitement level has just doubled for me (if that's even possible!)!

EDIT: I'm also extremely happy they chose Paladin/Gladiator as the tank to add instead of Warrior. Hopefully this means they consider it to be the best tank for ARR's future content. ( ' . ' )b

Edited, Feb 10th 2013 3:15pm by scorleone
#34 Feb 10 2013 at 2:52 PM Rating: Decent
**
863 posts
scorleone wrote:

EDIT: I'm also extremely happy they chose Paladin/Gladiator as the tank to add instead of Warrior. Hopefully this means they consider it to be the best tank for ARR's future content. ( ' . ' )b
Edited, Feb 10th 2013 3:15pm by scorleone


I saw this discussion in the official forums as well and for the life of me I just cannot in any way understand why people think it would be a good idea to have one class that is superior to other classes of the same role instead of just different, but equal in terms of viability.

In that thread so many people even went so far as to say they thought there should only be one tank (was another thread saying the same thing about healers) and again... I am just stumped. WHY would you not want there to be several equally viable options for each role?

Argh it is just SO frustrating to see this mentality!
#35 Feb 10 2013 at 3:12 PM Rating: Decent
*
181 posts
Belcrono wrote:
scorleone wrote:

EDIT: I'm also extremely happy they chose Paladin/Gladiator as the tank to add instead of Warrior. Hopefully this means they consider it to be the best tank for ARR's future content. ( ' . ' )b
Edited, Feb 10th 2013 3:15pm by scorleone


I saw this discussion in the official forums as well and for the life of me I just cannot in any way understand why people think it would be a good idea to have one class that is superior to other classes of the same role instead of just different, but equal in terms of viability.

In that thread so many people even went so far as to say they thought there should only be one tank (was another thread saying the same thing about healers) and again... I am just stumped. WHY would you not want there to be several equally viable options for each role?

Argh it is just SO frustrating to see this mentality!
I haven't read that thread you speak of, though I'm sure I've read plenty of similar ones that have been done over the last couple years. Warrior can stay awesome like it was, I'm just hoping my old favorite class (gladiator/paladin) is made even better for ARR! As a matter of fact, I agree with you 110% on wanting several jobs to be viable for each role - would make my day to hear that they were going to bring back Pugilist evasion tanks like we were able to use in early 1.0!
#36 Feb 10 2013 at 3:48 PM Rating: Good
**
863 posts
I didn't really mean that you think there should only be one tank class. That was just me venting pent up frustration from not being able to post in the threads I mentioned, since the subject was somewhat raised here. However it sounds like you want paladin/gladiator to be the best choice (correct me if I am wrong, but to me that is what it sounded like from what I quoted) and I think that is almost as bad, and like I mentioned I don't understand the reason for it.

Edited, Feb 10th 2013 4:49pm by Belcrono

Edited, Feb 10th 2013 4:50pm by Belcrono
#37 Feb 10 2013 at 5:06 PM Rating: Decent
*
181 posts
Belcrono wrote:
However it sounds like you want paladin/gladiator to be the best choice (correct me if I am wrong, but to me that is what it sounded like from what I quoted) and I think that is almost as bad, and like I mentioned I don't understand the reason for it.

Edited, Feb 10th 2013 4:49pm by Belcrono

Edited, Feb 10th 2013 4:50pm by Belcrono
What you're missing though, is that I also agree all tanks should be created equal. The harsh truth is (in most cases), even if devs intend for them to be equal more often than not one will be considered the best. I don't know how they figure it out (the gaming community), but they always do (through parsing or whatever else you computer geniuses use).

So, all I'm saying is when/if this inequality is discovered, I hope my Pally comes out on top! If SE somehow figures out a way to make them all equally awesome I will be just as thrilled (or more maybe) as if my Pally ends up OP. I would bet all my gil though that within a few months after launch the community will have already labeled the consensus "Best DPS Class" and "Best Tank" in the game - and this always results in class discrimination when using LFG shouts and pick up groups (hence my wishes to be considered the job of choice ^^).


EDIT: added just a little more details at the end there.
Edited, Feb 10th 2013 6:08pm by scorleone

Edited, Feb 10th 2013 6:12pm by scorleone
#38 Feb 10 2013 at 5:10 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
4,780 posts
The issue is the false concept that Warrior was the superior tank. It never was. Poorly geared Paladins were responsible for the trend of thinking on that. But it was clear to any high end group that Paladin actually had the best tanking potential.

Thats not to say that Warrior couldn't tank, mind you, but sword and board were the go-to for all the top LSes, to the point where they were laughing at the forums for claiming otherwise while they posted videos of their runs with Paladin tanks.

Warriors could tank, they just needed more assistance to do so successfully.
#39 Feb 10 2013 at 5:12 PM Rating: Decent
****
9,997 posts
That's usually to some degree due to the tendency for designers to create a system where encounters rely on one tank. If the intention is for only one or two players to fill a role, then which one is best becomes rather important.
#40 Feb 10 2013 at 5:16 PM Rating: Decent
*
181 posts
Hyrist wrote:
The issue is the false concept that Warrior was the superior tank. It never was. Poorly geared Paladins were responsible for the trend of thinking on that. But it was clear to any high end group that Paladin actually had the best tanking potential.

Thats not to say that Warrior couldn't tank, mind you, but sword and board were the go-to for all the top LSes, to the point where they were laughing at the forums for claiming otherwise while they posted videos of their runs with Paladin tanks.

Warriors could tank, they just needed more assistance to do so successfully.
I always thought the main reason Warriors were considered to have an unfair advantage was because of their superior DPS to Paladin. That and being able to take larger hits than a Paladin with its higher HP - namely in Coincounter.
#41 Feb 10 2013 at 7:45 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
925 posts
scorleone wrote:
Hyrist wrote:
The issue is the false concept that Warrior was the superior tank. It never was. Poorly geared Paladins were responsible for the trend of thinking on that. But it was clear to any high end group that Paladin actually had the best tanking potential.

Thats not to say that Warrior couldn't tank, mind you, but sword and board were the go-to for all the top LSes, to the point where they were laughing at the forums for claiming otherwise while they posted videos of their runs with Paladin tanks.

Warriors could tank, they just needed more assistance to do so successfully.
I always thought the main reason Warriors were considered to have an unfair advantage was because of their superior DPS to Paladin. That and being able to take larger hits than a Paladin with its higher HP - namely in Coincounter.


^^ I always loved PLD as did Angeal ;) Mr. Corleone hehehe, Narisa /cough/ shall join you soon.

It also depended on the person as well; I never questioned certain players. Such as yourself, Angeal and a select small group. Whatever you guys played on was fine with me :P

I still miss taking on Ifrit on paladin :(

Edited, Feb 10th 2013 5:46pm by Elionara
____________________________
http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/story.html?story=18309
Quote:
Like Final Fantasy XI, the game specs will be extremely high for the time, but in about 5 years, an average machine can run it on max settings with little to no issues. Tanaka also expressed interest in making a benchmark program available.

FilthMcNasty wrote:
I endorse this thread.
#42 Feb 10 2013 at 9:43 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
4,780 posts
scorleone wrote:
I always thought the main reason Warriors were considered to have an unfair advantage was because of their superior DPS to Paladin. That and being able to take larger hits than a Paladin with its higher HP - namely in Coincounter.


Both of which were symptoms of a poorly geared Paladin.

Paladin did the higher DPS on single targets when geared properly. Additionally, their higher hate threshold point allows them to hold hate with higher DPS on the team as a whole. This was even before the nerfs to Warrior's damage and hate tools.

Warrior had advantage in AoE dps and yes, a higher HP pool. But this comes as a larger MP burden to the White Mages as Warrior had next to no sustain. Then there was the hate-loss issue.

The issue was brought to light when the trend among endgame pushed the primary stats instead of the 'ignore your stats, build defense' fad that was giving Paladins the bad name.

I do hope they differ the concept of tanking between the two. Having Paladin being the optimal "I'm tanking the big guy." tank, while Warrior becomes the type to tank adds and serve as dps/secondary tank.

Right now, we have 8 jobs and 8 slots. There's no real reason why we would not have a purpose for each class in a fight.
#43 Feb 11 2013 at 3:41 AM Rating: Good
**
863 posts
scorleone wrote:
Belcrono wrote:
However it sounds like you want paladin/gladiator to be the best choice (correct me if I am wrong, but to me that is what it sounded like from what I quoted) and I think that is almost as bad, and like I mentioned I don't understand the reason for it.

Edited, Feb 10th 2013 4:49pm by Belcrono

Edited, Feb 10th 2013 4:50pm by Belcrono
What you're missing though, is that I also agree all tanks should be created equal. The harsh truth is (in most cases), even if devs intend for them to be equal more often than not one will be considered the best. I don't know how they figure it out (the gaming community), but they always do (through parsing or whatever else you computer geniuses use).

So, all I'm saying is when/if this inequality is discovered, I hope my Pally comes out on top! If SE somehow figures out a way to make them all equally awesome I will be just as thrilled (or more maybe) as if my Pally ends up OP. I would bet all my gil though that within a few months after launch the community will have already labeled the consensus "Best DPS Class" and "Best Tank" in the game - and this always results in class discrimination when using LFG shouts and pick up groups (hence my wishes to be considered the job of choice ^^).


EDIT: added just a little more details at the end there.
Edited, Feb 10th 2013 6:08pm by scorleone

Edited, Feb 10th 2013 6:12pm by scorleone


Well I can understand wanting to be the class that is the prefferred one because of its power compared to ending up on the other side of the fence, everyone wants to feel wanted after all. I think what confused me was just your way of saying it because in the initial part I quoted you say you hope this means they (which I interpereted as the developers) consider it the best tank for the future of ARR. What you say about some classes being different in power does exist for sure, but it should always only be a matter of problem with balancing NEVER a design decision.

Like you said, more often than not there will be a disconnect between reality and the developers' vision, and that is ok, but the vision needs to be a sound one to begin with and should always be the ultimate goal that they strive for. With the way you frased it I thought you think it should be designed so paladins were inherently the best tank, but I guess I misunderstood. English isn't my native language, I apologize for the misunderstading.
#44 Feb 11 2013 at 11:01 AM Rating: Excellent
*
181 posts
Elionara wrote:


^^ I always loved PLD as did Angeal ;) Mr. Corleone hehehe, Narisa /cough/ shall join you soon.

It also depended on the person as well; I never questioned certain players. Such as yourself, Angeal and a select small group. Whatever you guys played on was fine with me :P

I still miss taking on Ifrit on paladin :(

Edited, Feb 10th 2013 5:46pm by Elionara
Hey Narisa! Its been so long since I was active here on Zam that I didn't recognize your name :P. How dare you put me in the same company as Angeal, I am so not worthy of such a status! You are absolutely right, it did depend on the person (entirely). Give a job to any player with a good amount of skill and it can be viewed as OP. Give a job to any player with no skill and it will look like its weak.

I can't wait to see you all again in ARR - I miss every single one of you guys!

Can I get a "mew mew" for old times sake? =)

Hyrist wrote:
Warrior had advantage in AoE dps and yes, a higher HP pool. But this comes as a larger MP burden to the White Mages as Warrior had next to no sustain. Then there was the hate-loss issue.
I agree with some of your post (I wont requote it all so I can keep mine as small as I can). I will say though that I never noticed a problem with hate while using either job and I never had a White Mage complain about running out of MP because I was using a Warrior. I completely agree they were both equal for the most part in dps on single mob battles - the AOE difference was major though (since Paladin had ZERO AOEs =( ).

I don't doubt that you ran into a lot of poorly geared Paladins that helped give them a bad name on your server, in my case I think the majority of the bad Paladins I saw just didn't understand how to play the class. Unfortunately, a lot of players decided to become a tank for the status of being "the guy" but they never spent the time to master the class *facepalm*. I always thought Paladin got its bad name after CC/AV were released. To me, it felt like "the general public" saw everyone using Warriors for speed runs and just assumed Paladins weren't as good - which eventually also turned into, "We don't want a Paladin for any endgame content" *facepalm again*. This happens all the time though with every role in the game. People used to say you couldn't beat the Darkhold unless you brought all archer DPS, they said Ifrit couldn't be won without all Lancer DPS (and some time later that also morphed into "no melee, only ranged.") and the worst of them all - Moogle parties that seemed to change every month. That's not to say I was never guilty of following the crowd though, you could find me sitting in the front seat on most of the bandwagons that rolled through 1.0.

The truth is, every piece of content in 1.0 could be beaten with any setup if the group you were playing with knew how to play the game well. I never meant for my comment about the Paladin to spark such an in depth discussion about this, lol. In the most basic form, I only wanted to express my love for the class and my hopes that it becomes epic in ARR - nothing more.

Belcrono wrote:
With the way you frased it I thought you think it should be designed so paladins were inherently the best tank, but I guess I misunderstood. English isn't my native language, I apologize for the misunderstading.
No, you're right I should have worded that differently - its my English that's lacking, not yours :P. Sometimes I forget just how careful you have to be when posting in forums because of all the heated debates going on everywhere about the game. I did say "I hope they consider it to be the best". I meant to say "they", but I didn't mean to imply that I am a supporter of unbalanced classes. I was just trying to express my love for the Paladin class, nothing deeper than that lol.

To all: Sorry for the wall of text!

TLDR = Scorleone loves Paladin and hopes its epic in ARR, but also is a supporter of having balanced classes and multiple jobs able to perform each role in the game. He didn't mean to start another debate over the 2 jobs (next time I will just yell, "Yay I love Paladin") and he also misses playing with Narisa (Elionara)!

Edit for grammar and tldr...

Edited, Feb 11th 2013 12:47pm by scorleone
#45 Feb 11 2013 at 11:46 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
925 posts
mew mew~! lol;

I miss all you as well; just pre-ordered 2 copies of the ps3, well... I ordered them 3 years ago lol

I'm still a little miffed wife can't play beta because its 1 beta per seid, not per legacy ffxiv account, but meh When I get back in; count on some destruction of things. PLD was always my favorite and BRD as well.

I still have to update APP to support the plethora of chat changes and such; that's going to be NOT FUN. I'll count on you to test things hehehe

Back on topic however, I notice from the screens the graphics are different than alpha a bit; more refined but that could be just the sizing, can't wait to see how this goes.
____________________________
http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/story.html?story=18309
Quote:
Like Final Fantasy XI, the game specs will be extremely high for the time, but in about 5 years, an average machine can run it on max settings with little to no issues. Tanaka also expressed interest in making a benchmark program available.

FilthMcNasty wrote:
I endorse this thread.
#46 Feb 11 2013 at 11:52 AM Rating: Excellent
Elionara wrote:
I'm still a little miffed wife can't play beta because its 1 beta per seid, not per legacy ffxiv account



You should make this your sig Smiley: tongue
#47 Feb 11 2013 at 4:48 PM Rating: Good
*
181 posts
Belcrono wrote:
...
By the way, I usually don't do much rating on here (up or down), but +1s for being able to have a real discussion about something and come to an understanding of what someone was trying to say without getting defensive or upset. (whether you agree with anything I said or not) :D

Elionara wrote:
mew mew~! lol;

I miss all you as well; just pre-ordered 2 copies of the ps3, well... I ordered them 3 years ago lol

I'm still a little miffed wife can't play beta because its 1 beta per seid, not per legacy ffxiv account, but meh When I get back in; count on some destruction of things. PLD was always my favorite and BRD as well.

I still have to update APP to support the plethora of chat changes and such; that's going to be NOT FUN. I'll count on you to test things hehehe

Back on topic however, I notice from the screens the graphics are different than alpha a bit; more refined but that could be just the sizing, can't wait to see how this goes.
I didn't know your wife played 14??? Was she in Divinity? Too bad on the Beta, I guess you'll just have to take turns!
#48 Feb 11 2013 at 6:15 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
925 posts
scorleone wrote:
Belcrono wrote:
...
By the way, I usually don't do much rating on here (up or down), but +1s for being able to have a real discussion about something and come to an understanding of what someone was trying to say without getting defensive or upset. (whether you agree with anything I said or not) :D

Elionara wrote:
mew mew~! lol;

I miss all you as well; just pre-ordered 2 copies of the ps3, well... I ordered them 3 years ago lol

I'm still a little miffed wife can't play beta because its 1 beta per seid, not per legacy ffxiv account, but meh When I get back in; count on some destruction of things. PLD was always my favorite and BRD as well.

I still have to update APP to support the plethora of chat changes and such; that's going to be NOT FUN. I'll count on you to test things hehehe

Back on topic however, I notice from the screens the graphics are different than alpha a bit; more refined but that could be just the sizing, can't wait to see how this goes.
I didn't know your wife played 14??? Was she in Divinity? Too bad on the Beta, I guess you'll just have to take turns!


She played for about 3000 experience points and dam near killed the monitor/controller. This was back at the actual launch, I since made sure to get 99% of the r/e items on special occasions and PL her up on some jobs but I'm hoping she likes 2.0 ^^

When we got xiv you couldn't order extra tokens so a rep said the only thing we could do to ensure the accounts were "protected" was put both ffxiv accounts under one SEID. If I would have known down the road we would be limited on things like forums, contests and what not; I wouldn't have done that :(

Hopefully when I visit El Segundo later this year maybe some baked goods would help, or perhaps i could weld and mold a special ring to put on yoshi's other hand whereby it would be customized to commemorate his avatars/pics in game lol
____________________________
http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/story.html?story=18309
Quote:
Like Final Fantasy XI, the game specs will be extremely high for the time, but in about 5 years, an average machine can run it on max settings with little to no issues. Tanaka also expressed interest in making a benchmark program available.

FilthMcNasty wrote:
I endorse this thread.
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 200 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (200)