Are the developers of XIV out of touch?

[KaldeaSahaline]

The reason why we need grinding back is because there is a intense lack of long term goals, also I'd rather ppl stop using fun as a way to judge content since it's a very subjective choice, some find fun Eureka others don't, just as some like testing themselves in ultimate while others prefer 24 man raids.
Since MMOs targets a wide audience it's impossible to use fun as a metric at all.
I'd rather gut myself than play PvP, but I don't think that Pvpers shouldn't get content at all because of that for example or that they shouldn't receive what they ask of the devs

You're showing a severe lack of critical thinking here. Everyone knows that different people find fun in different ways. No one will argue otherwise.

That however does not remove the concept of fun as an important and viable metric in content design no matter how much you wish it so.

For instance you probably found Eureka fun, and I found it to be one of the worst developed pieces of content I've ever seen across a decade of MMO gaming.

But here's the thing. It didn't have to be that way. I could have had fun too, if they actually designed something in the zone for a player like me to do, but they didn't...

FF14's needs to stop designing content for specific skill levels in an isolated fashion. It's an incredibly inefficient process and equally as juvenile. Grinds only artificially boost a given content's lifespan. When designing content they should be aiming to make each endeavor as robust as possible to offer multiple viable avenues of play.

If Chocobo Racing was Mario Kart/Crash Team Racing on Chocobos with summons and magic, it'd be really solid; fun for a lot of people. If it came with PVP and PVE matchmaking and a time attack mode even more would like it. If it had a level editor and shareable designs, you'd find even more people like it. THEN you throw in some cool rewards (speaking personally if I was the dev in charge, I would have put the entire chocobo coloring scheme and a ton of bardings behind this system, but alas they decided menu content was a better idea).

In the first sentence you get some people who like it. Adding matchmaking gets even more (without affecting the others), then you add a time attack mode to grab people who want to just race themselves, and then you add a level editor for people with a lot of free time and creativity, then you put some decent rewards in there to get the rest.

Do you get my point yet? You can design content for the bare minimum common denominator or you can design robust content.

[Remedi]

First of all no I don't find eureka fun since killing mobs zone can only keep my interest for not that long since I've done many of those in the past.
Second of all This zone was designed to be a mobs killing zone as such grindy as such if you didn't imagine that it would become that boring by it's very inception I don't know what to say to you.
You say that chocobo racing would be better if it was like mario kart, Nope would still be annoying to me.

Realize that ppl interests are different as such there won't be anything that will be the be all end all. If I don't like the premise of something coating it with sugar won't make me like it, maybe make it more tolerable but not like it.
The concpet of fun will always be a buzzword used to conceal real problems of implementations.
Fun is not the main problem in eureka, wasn't in diadem ans isn't in any other part of the game, it's the implementation of the features that matters and everytime someone says that fun is the problem is just scapegoating.

So no I will disagree on this fun argument because how much it hides real problems

Many ppl keep buying COD or battelfield does that means that the franchise is excellent btw? Mayority doesn't always mean good

[Ayer2015]

Frankly I find the devs stretch themselves too thin creating so many forms of content which provide minimal depth or sense of individual progression. Also we get far too much non-combat related content in this game.

[Alleo]

In the first sentence you get some people who like it. Adding matchmaking gets even more (without affecting the others), then you add a time attack mode to grab people who want to just race themselves, and then you add a level editor for people with a lot of free time and creativity, then you put some decent rewards in there to get the rest.

I 100% agree with this. We know that FF14 is a themepark but imo you should not just add more "rides" that are for certain groups because that 1. will make it not likeable by the rest and 2. if the intented group also does not like it you will have death content. There should be some content that are for a certain group and we do have that with raids and PVP. IMO the rest should be something that the majority can enjoy. Eureka is a good example of how its not good. This is just content for a group of people that like mindless grinding monsters (and there is nothing wrong with that btw) but since this was meant to be THE content for SB this is not good. I would dare and say that Eureka would be as death as diadem if it did not have the relic weapons and sets and certain other items behind it. Which means that for quite some content only the prices keep it alive. Diadem 2.0 had a price (the RNG weapon) that was just not worth it for most so it was even faster death than the first version. If they had made Eureka into something that could be enjoyed in different ways it would have probably became very successful and liked. (Like having something for gatherers, crafters and maybe getting to the relic on a different way than just doing fates and killing monsters)

The same with LoV. This again was designed for a certain part of the playerbase...but at the same time even for those that like this kind of thing it was bad if you are playing it on console..thus even those seems to not play it that much..had they done it more like Pokemon I would say that it would have been much more liked.

So they use their limited time and money and create way too many things that are only interesting for a certain part of the playerbase..and try to keep it alive with prices..but at soon as those prices are done (and in some cases even the prices wont keep it alive) and no new ones are coming later, it will be death.

Realize that ppl interests are different as such there won't be anything that will be the be all end all. If I don't like the premise of something coating it with sugar won't make me like it, maybe make it more tolerable but not like it.
The concpet of fun will always be a buzzword used to conceal real problems of implementations.
Fun is not the main problem in eureka, wasn't in diadem ans isn't in any other part of the game, it's the implementation of the features that matters and everytime someone says that fun is the problem is just scapegoating.

So no I will disagree on this fun argument because how much it hides real problems

Yes it would be unrealistic to have something that is fun for everyone but if they have something that can tickle the itch for many then it mostly will be a success. Like she said, if you have something that is only for a specific kind of group then you will only have that group playing it. (And maybe some others for the reward) But if you manage to greate something that can be interesting for a couple of groups you will increase the amount it is used.

I am also not really sure how we cant measure something with the word fun? How are you measuring content then for yourself? I play something longer if its fun. I might play it a bit if there is something as a reward that I really like but in the long run this content wont see me again. Because for me I play games for fun. For me, the missing fun was the problem for Eurkea or Diadem. I did not have fun playing it and found it boring and annoying. So I am not sure how this is not the problem? Because in the end those that found it fun are those that enjoy this kind of content, so again it was because they enjoyed it that they liked it.

In the end how can you say if something matters if you dont take fun into account? How does it then matter? What are points that you would use to say that something is good content? Maybe it would be nice to write more about this if you are seeing fun as something that should not define content and thus the discussion about it?

[Remedi]

I'd rather focus on things that are not subjective you know? Like horrible designs that are broken and not really related to fun? And what you know ? that might actually be the problem with the fun.
Point is you find hunts fun? I sure don't yet some do. Do I need to say out loud remove hunts because they are not fun? Do we really need yet another POINTLESS thread were ppl are just arguing about what's fun and forget about terrible game designs?

That's why you should stop you fun as a metric. fun is subjective what's broken IS BROKEN and it's a fact.

Also starting to judge content base on one own sense of fun will inevitability makes your argument vitriolic against those who find it fun, as such Inculusivity is perhaps the best way to handle things

[Vhailor]

FF14's needs to stop designing content for specific skill levels in an isolated fashion. It's an incredibly inefficient process and equally as juvenile. Grinds only artificially boost a given content's lifespan. When designing content they should be aiming to make each endeavor as robust as possible to offer multiple viable avenues of play.

I agree with the first part, not the grind comment here. Or rather, I think grinds, when well-designed, can organically boost content lifespan.

For example, let's consider the leveling process in FFXI, which was incredibly grind-y. The time investment came from three areas: (a) slow XP accumulation rates; (b) lengthy party-forming / party-finding process; (c) transit to party camps. That latter one, (c), is an example of an 'organic' grind that is quite healthy for MMOs. It's also one XIV has eliminated entirely: I can arrive at any point in Eorzea within three minutes, for a pittance of Gil. That's a problematically convenient feature.

Or, let's consider the gearing process in FFXI: this was also an 'organic' grind. By not showering you with gear for free, the game forced you to seek out different avenues of gearing, each of which had its own internal process. You could buy everything, which meant farming Gil; you could level Crafting to try to make your own (admittedly only really useful for second, third jobs, up to around the 40s); you could hunt specific NMs to get key pieces and alleviate any deficiencies elsewhere. There were options. Again, this is something XIV has eliminated entirely prior to level 70 for primary characters: the gearing is entirely automatic now until you're leveling an alternate job or aiming for end-game stuff.

----------

The way I view longer-term, grind-y content is that it's fulfilling. Throwaway content like XIV offers is the MMO equivalent of a can of soda, or a chocolate bar: they provide a hit of sugar and fun no matter what mood you're in, how hungry you are, etc. But in no way does it provide the fulfillment of tackling longer-term goals and challenges, the MMO equivalent of more difficult tasks like dieting or exercising. The payoff isn't even in the same league. XIV needs to offer more of this long-term, steadier, delayed - but deeper - satisfaction. The key to making it appealing, and not an artificial extension of the time required, is to remove some of the convenience associated with simply existing within the game world. Leveling should have more organic time sinks; transport should have a lot more organic time sinks; market participation should not be nigh unnecessary for people. There's a reason why I love when new Gathering / Crafting gear sets are released: it occupies me for weeks to self-craft them. I have to farm timed nodes, I need to snag Yellow scrip, there's some regular gathering and killing to do, I need to do some Aetherial Reduction. There's significant incidental grind to craft the materials. And, finally, a long-term payoff: BiS DoH / DoL gear that stays BiS for about six months. That's what is missing from other areas of the game, to me.

FF14's needs to stop designing content for specific skill levels in an isolated fashion. It's an incredibly inefficient process and equally as juvenile. Grinds only artificially boost a given content's lifespan. When designing content they should be aiming to make each endeavor as robust as possible to offer multiple viable avenues of play.

This is a good observation, and I agree wholeheartedly. But, I'd point out that 'robust' content for a large variety of players is going to necessitate long-term rewards that feature various levels of grind.

I know some players who loved aiming for the Centurio Tiger mount (the 3000 A-rank and 2000 S-rank Hunt Achievement reward). They need content that appeals to them, too, and they shouldn't have to invent it by leveling all the jobs the game has to offer. Myself, I don't want THAT level of grind, but I personally miss the grinds that XI offered, from leveling to Fishing to the Magian weapons that Abyssea introduced.

The one thing this will necessitate, of course, is horizontal itemization. Grinds are made worthwhile by the durable reward at the end: if you get your jollies from Glamours, fine, that's not so hard, but many people won't. I chased the Magian weapons in Abyssea because they were BiS for my BLM and WHM, and I knew they would be for the foreseeable future. I would never spend four months grinding for items that I knew would be nigh-invalidated two months later, bettered by something I could get on the cheap with Tomestones. So, SE needs to branch out more.

I'd rather focus on things that are not subjective you know? Like horrible designs that are broken and not really related to fun? And what you know ? that might actually be the problem with the fun.
Point is you find hunts fun? I sure don't yet some do. Do I need to say out loud remove hunts because they are not fun? Do we really need yet another POINTLESS thread were ppl are just arguing about what's fun and forget about terrible game designs?

That's why you should stop you fun as a metric. fun is subjective what's broken IS BROKEN and it's a fact.

Also starting to judge content base on one own sense of fun will inevitability makes your argument vitriolic against those who find it fun, as such Inculusivity is perhaps the best way to handle things

I think you have a good point here, too, Remedi. The problem I have with using 'fun' as a metric is that it biases an individual in two key ways: (a) they're inclined toward shallow, sugar-high type content, and (b) they're inclined to overlook serious implementation problems because they happen to find it fun on a personal level. It's akin to using public opinion to dictate (rather than inform) governmental policy: people will be biased by what 'feels good' rather than what works or what is fiscally responsible.

It's fine to use 'fun' as a design goal. In fact, developers always should: this is a piece of entertainment, after all. It's a necessary, but insufficient condition for success, and too many people don't remember the second half of that statement. So it's worth taking with a grain of salt. A certain percentage of the population will think almost anything is fun. There are other metrics that must be used as well to help sort out the wheat from the chaff: whether content is long-lasting; whether it appeals to a large group of the player base, rather than just some of the players (this is distinct from whether people are participating in the content); whether it's efficient to create for the development team; whether it fits within the game world; whether its implementation is smooth and unhindered by UI elements or some such. I too often see SE apparently ignoring these metrics, along with many on the forums, and I suspect that's part of why SE can appear to be so out of touch.

[Remedi]

Yes that's precisely my point

[Alleo]

That's why you should stop you fun as a metric. fun is subjective what's broken IS BROKEN and it's a fact.

Also starting to judge content base on one own sense of fun will inevitability makes your argument vitriolic against those who find it fun, as such Inculusivity is perhaps the best way to handle things

The problem is that every opinion about a content is subjective. Maybe not if there are bugs involved but what exactly counts as broken otherwise? If the content function, can it really be broken in a objective way? For me that is not the case. Eureka for example is not broken imo. Its just content that probably a lot of people find boring but you can still do it. Thus why the fun part comes into this. I mean we are not even saying that fun should be the only reasonable way to judge something but its a very good indicator if you have successful content or not. Because if its death by arrival it seems to not have been fun for a lot of people thus there is something wrong with this kind of content.

I dont find Eureka fun thus I go "I dislike it because x reasons" but these reasons are created by my own definition of fun. Thus other might find it fun and see nothing wrong with it and since its functioning then its also not broken. So how then would you argue against such content if you dont like it? Also nobody is saying that just because something is not fun for someone that it should be put out of the game. But there is a problem if a big part of the playerbase does not like new content or that they create something that does not live long enough. Thats two very different points. And at least for me this game just lacks content that can be enjoyed by a great majority of the playerbase for a longer time. If its fun or not is individually, my problem is that there does not exist much of them ingame at all and too much specific content for smaller groups.

Also it feels like you want to try and use a lot of objective views in a discussion but as soon as we go beyond simple numbers which can count as facts, we are going into the subjective part of it.

[Remedi]

Honestly Vhailor has shown the point I'm making in a much better way that I can do.

The fact that Eureka leaves a bad impression to a newcomer is not subjective, because if that wasn't the case we wouldn't have had ppl complaining about it and the problem is the complete lack of momentum it gives you when you get inside.
Compare it to Potd. The first 10 floor of Potd are a joke even though you are in a depowered state just like eureka.
See what am I going for? The moment you enter Euereka you are meet with a giant wall that doesn't really presents you the content correctly, meanwhile the first floor of Potd really eases you in, even though you are back at your origin you are still the alpha male of the zone it empowers you and makes you want to go, while in Eureka you are weak as shit and then after 20 kills or so you get you protean and you see you need mh I think 2k or so to get what you want from there.

See the problem? if you are neutral to both content the fact that potd empowers you while eureka makes you feel like you are against a wall will make you gravitate towards potd more than eureka.

Problems in game designs are rarely subjective because they have impacts on how they work.
Let's take a laughing stock, lord of verminion. I can tell you that if games of verminion took let's say 30 secs to 1 min, the reception would've been better, what's the problem with verminion? Overxtending, SE went too much deep into a minigame and made it too much complex for it's own good. Gold Saucer is just a side activity zone for optional rewards as such content within it should never overstay it's welcome.
Another example could be the greed only rule for 24 man raids, I mean......yeah.....

[Vhailor]

The problem is that every opinion about a content is subjective. Maybe not if there are bugs involved but what exactly counts as broken otherwise? If the content function, can it really be broken in a objective way? For me that is not the case. Eureka for example is not broken imo. Its just content that probably a lot of people find boring but you can still do it. Thus why the fun part comes into this. I mean we are not even saying that fun should be the only reasonable way to judge something but its a very good indicator if you have successful content or not. Because if its death by arrival it seems to not have been fun for a lot of people thus there is something wrong with this kind of content.

I dont find Eureka fun thus I go "I dislike it because x reasons" but these reasons are created by my own definition of fun. Thus other might find it fun and see nothing wrong with it and since its functioning then its also not broken. So how then would you argue against such content if you dont like it? Also nobody is saying that just because something is not fun for someone that it should be put out of the game. But there is a problem if a big part of the playerbase does not like new content or that they create something that does not live long enough. Thats two very different points. And at least for me this game just lacks content that can be enjoyed by a great majority of the playerbase for a longer time. If its fun or not is individually, my problem is that there does not exist much of them ingame at all and too much specific content for smaller groups.

Also it feels like you want to try and use a lot of objective views in a discussion but as soon as we go beyond simple numbers which can count as facts, we are going into the subjective part of it.

I think it's a fine line between subjective and objective, obviously. One thing I'd point out, though, is that there's a difference between one's opinion regarding some piece of content, and what I'll term one's more objective analysis of the same piece of content.

I find movies to be quite illustrative here. There are plenty of movies out there that are awful, truly terrible movies - but which are nonetheless fun to watch. One of my personal favourite examples is the original Mortal Kombat movie. Awful film. The acting was wooden, the special effects were painful, the plot was bad. But I very much consider it to be a guilty pleasure, and it's something of a ritual of mine to watch it at least once every few years. My opinion of the movie is that it's a great time. My more objective side admits that it's bad. The two can coexist, and indeed frequently do.

To tag Eureka here, since we're on the topic: there are things that are objectively broken about it. The most glaring example, in my mind, is the reward imbalance that gave rise to the FATE trains. It's quite clear based on the structure of Eureka that SE didn't envision players taking this approach: it's difficult to navigate at lower levels, monsters are arrayed out in such a way as to support camps, XP chains pointed toward killing multiple monsters in succession. In fact, given some of the more technical issues present - characters disappearing from view in crowded situations and lockbox turn-ins taking forever - it's fair to say that SE likely was so oblivious to the eventual Eureka meta, that they didn't even test the content around it.

That is an objectively bad job on SE's part. Regardless of whether or not it's still fun, regardless of whether or not there are accidental gains, regardless of whether or not an individual noticed these issues themselves, once presented with the evidence, it's obvious that any positive result amounted from luck as much as SE's content design chops, and therefore the content deserves some level of criticism.

----------

Drawing back to the original topic, I think this side discussion is a great example of not just how SE is out of touch, but why they might be out of touch. Players have a lot of diverse opinions. It can be difficult to sort through the forums, and even harder to determine if suggestions are worth taking to heart or not. This is why SE needs to start actively soliciting feedback, so that they can guide discussion to an extent, and gain information that is perhaps more useful to them. If SE isn't immersed in their own community, if they aren't immersed in what other MMOs are doing, they're doomed to eventually repeat the failure that was XIV 1.0. They've got this whole 'see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil' sort of thing going on, which is a huge powder keg just waiting to explode. They're letting luck determine the future of XIV to a large extent: luck in terms of whether they can add new players as quickly as old ones get bored; luck in terms of whether or not people continue to come back with each expansion; luck in terms of whether or not new MMOs steal their thunder (and their customers).

They need to take control of this situation, start devoting time toward reading the tea leaves, so to speak. Being out of touch is as good as being out of business: it's just a question of when.