To: Mr Akihiko Matsui

[Eyeballed]

You argue against Abyssea(afk progression), which is a form of end game. A simple way to say it is I agree, leveling while doing nothing is bad, if your leveling you should be doing something. But thats the extent Ill agree, keying is ok, GoV is ok, rest is fine, just not getting something for nothing. Now on the other hand I make 1 exception to that, which is FCs and their sort. You work for the money you have every reason to level a job while not playing because you did play for the time you had to obtain said money and thus earned it.

Also while you may not argue against Endgame directly let me remind you much of endgame would be even more impossible to do without everyone being so high of level so fast because it would limit job options and available players. VW is starting to die again on my server already, and I think if leveling wasn't how it is now, it would be even worse for it, not to mention Legion, Nyzul, and all of the like. The game is admittedly not for midgame anymore, endgame is all it is, and all it should probably be after 10 years.

Maybe your definition of Endgame differs from mine, but the way I define it is "What you do after you hit level cap".

[Eyeballed]

And by the by, just browsing ffxiclopedia doing some of my own NIN scroll quests, I happened on upon this:

Ninja: Doing it Right.

Which pretty much re-affirms everything I've said about the job.

[Demon6324236]

Maybe your definition of Endgame differs from mine, but the way I define it is "What you do after you hit level cap".

Yes much of Abyssea is done after cap. As I said as well, the game is now focused on endgame not midgame, which is leveling. Midgame is mostly dead, which is what bothers you. I understand that, but the game has been going 10 years, I think this is the reason endgame has been put on focus. Rather than trying to make new players go through from the start to end slowly they allow a fast progression to the end now so that you may begin endgame with the other players not to long after starting. By that I mean only a 1~3 months, not 8~12 months as before.

[Eyeballed]

Yes much of Abyssea is done after cap. As I said as well, the game is now focused on endgame not midgame, which is leveling. Midgame is mostly dead, which is what bothers you. I understand that, but the game has been going 10 years, I think this is the reason endgame has been put on focus. Rather than trying to make new players go through from the start to end slowly they allow a fast progression to the end now so that you may begin endgame with the other players not to long after starting. By that I mean only a 1~3 months, not 8~12 months as before.

Mid-game should not be dead. Level cap gear should not be the apex of progression. MMO developers seem to be moving in this direction, and that's fine if they want to take that developmental stance in order to appease these kinds of players for the sake of (potentially) fattening their wallets. If this is to be the case, then I only ask they stop misleading the rest of us and remove the acronym of "RPG" from the game's title.

And if anything, they should not have changed this game so drastically mid-run and let it die an honorable death.

[Demon6324236]

remove the acronym of "RPG" from the game's title.

In an effort to prove a point I used Bing search(my commmon search engine)to look up what the definition of an RPG is, as you wish this not to be called a RPG due to the leveling being cut down. I will be listing the 1st 3 results, and their idea of what makes a game, a RPG.

In my 1st result I got this page. Now myself I saw it discribe not just RPGs, but many genres of games. But if you get to the main part of speaking about RPGs you find this paragraph...

What is a Role Playing Game? Personally, I like to define a Role Playing Game as a game that MUST, ABSOLUTELY have three elements. One is a statistical setup for characters that describe certain skills/aspects of that character. Two, it must have some method of increasing and strengthening those statistics (usually but not necessarily by way of the experience/level system). Three, it must have a menu-driven combat system that utilizes the skills/aspects of the characters. Given there are other elements of RPGs that I'll leave out because of their obvious nature, these are the elements that are required for a game to be labeled RPG.

Now lets look at this list. We have the 1st thing that is required, "a statistical setup for characters that describe certain skills/aspects of that character" sounds alot like the races & job selection, so we have that. Next up is "it must have some method of increasing and strengthening those statistics" we have alot of gear, and endgame is mostly about us getting said gear, so we seem to have that as well. Last is "It must have a menu-driven combat system that utilizes the skills/aspects of the characters" we have this, the interface that defines the game as a RPG. So the 1st of my 3 pages I will list/talk about, says this is in fact a RPG.

My 2nd result is none other than Wikipedia. Now while there is no clean cut guide lines that it gives, most of what is said implies that the main thing that makes a game a RPG, is a story, and that the player be a part of said story, and affecting it as a plot point. Spoilers inside of the quote box!

In FFXI we are the main character through all story lines, we are there for the battle against the Zilart, in Tu'Lia, we fight by Prishe's side against Promathia, we stand up against the powers of Odin & Alexander, and we even fight for our worlds right to exist against Lady Lilith. Not to mention Shantotto's crazy incident, the Kupo d'Etat, and the Crystalline Prophecy, and we took up arms to fight a hoard in an alternate version of our own world, where we lost the battle of Promathia.

We are very involved in the happenings in the story, and while we do not make choices that effect said story, we are still a part of it. Being a part of the story in such a way, I believe, qualifies FFXI as a RPG, by Wikipedia's definition.

The last result was very short, nothing as detailed as the others, but is a very clean and cut definition of RPG. Now the 1st is unrelated to FFXI, its related to PC terms, however the 2nd is...

Short for role-playing game, it is a game genre where one or more players adopt a role and act it out in a virtual reality. Usually in an RPG game, you will set out on an adventure or quest, and multiplayer RPG games allows gamers to complete these quests with other gamers as allies over the Internet or as a LAN game.

Now we have quests, and missions. We have adventures through these, and so this seems to also qualify FFXI, as a genuine RPG.

I state all of this because, FFXI is a RPG game, and a MMO, thus a MMORPG, and nothing should change that, or its title as one.

[Eyeballed]

In an effort to prove a point I used Bing search(my commmon search engine)to look up what the definition of an RPG is, as you wish this not to be called a RPG due to the leveling being cut down. I will be listing the 1st 3 results, and their idea of what makes a game, a RPG.

In my 1st result I got this page. Now myself I saw it discribe not just RPGs, but many genres of games. But if you get to the main part of speaking about RPGs you find this paragraph...Now lets look at this list. We have the 1st thing that is required, "a statistical setup for characters that describe certain skills/aspects of that character" sounds alot like the races & job selection, so we have that. Next up is "it must have some method of increasing and strengthening those statistics" we have alot of gear, and endgame is mostly about us getting said gear, so we seem to have that as well. Last is "It must have a menu-driven combat system that utilizes the skills/aspects of the characters" we have this, the interface that defines the game as a RPG. So the 1st of my 3 pages I will list/talk about, says this is in fact a RPG.

My 2nd result is none other than Wikipedia. Now while there is no clean cut guide lines that it gives, most of what is said implies that the main thing that makes a game a RPG, is a story, and that the player be a part of said story, and affecting it as a plot point. Spoilers inside of the quote box! We are very involved in the happenings in the story, and while we do not make choices that effect said story, we are still a part of it. Being a part of the story in such a way, I believe, qualifies FFXI as a RPG, by Wikipedia's definition.

The last result was very short, nothing as detailed as the others, but is a very clean and cut definition of RPG. Now the 1st is unrelated to FFXI, its related to PC terms, however the 2nd is...Now we have quests, and missions. We have adventures through these, and so this seems to also qualify FFXI, as a genuine RPG.

I state all of this because, FFXI is a RPG game, and a MMO, thus a MMORPG, and nothing should change that, or its title as one.

So essentially, you're saying they could remove experience points completely and begin the game at cap (remove level-based progression)? The first example seemed out-right a personal opinion, but I'll let it slide. Actually found the site you're referring to in my own search, btw.

Your second point sounds a lot like this: See First Paragraph.

While EXP and level-based progression might not define the genre exclusively, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find such a thing in a game that didn't claim to be an RPG.

Other links regarding the debate over the "true definition":

Inventory Management
Fantasy Character/World Interaction
Self-improvement by Proxy

"Commercial interest in Japanese role playing games steadily declined throughout the latter half of the 2000s, and critics generally considered newer entries in established franchises, such as Final Fantasy XIII and its sequel, to be inferior to their predecessors. Japanese game developer Hideo Kojima, the director of the Metal Gear Solid series of games, claimed that Japanese developers lacked the global outlook and modern technological feats to survive the industry and needed to catch up with Western developers."[270] (Quote pulled from this Wikipedia.)

[Slaxx]

Castlevania II had experience points and a leveling system. I would be hard pressed to call that an RPG. I'm sure if I cared I could remember other examples.

Oh, and The Legend of Zelda II had those same elements. It's a bit closer but I've never personally considered the Zelda games to be RPGs (I know many people will disagree, this is only a personal opinion).

[Demon6324236]

After reading much of what you gave me (admittedly I have a memory problem, so my eyes may have gazed over things I do not recall) I did not see anything saying a RPG had to have leveling or exp at all in the game, for it to be a RPG. I will give you credit, most RPGs do feature it, so it is a very common trait. However these also list off many traits games hold so often they become a defining piece of the genre such as items, combat statistics, and story. However in none of these pages did I see it say that leveling itself was a defining factor in RPGs, rather stat progression is, and as I (and many others) have pointed out, endgame does fill this role very well. In fact I would actually say endgame is almost similar in a way because content does change in terms of difficulty, and thus you normally must complete one and attain gear to make another more likely or better your odds. Much the same as with leveling you can fight things at a lower level, but the higher level you are the better your chances of success. But this is simply my opinion on it.

"Commercial interest in Japanese role playing games steadily declined throughout the latter half of the 2000s, and critics generally considered newer entries in established franchises, such as Final Fantasy XIII and its sequel, to be inferior to their predecessors. Japanese game developer Hideo Kojima, the director of the Metal Gear Solid series of games, claimed that Japanese developers lacked the global outlook and modern technological feats to survive the industry and needed to catch up with Western developers."[270] (Quote pulled from this Wikipedia.)

I find this quote to be interesting. Final Fantasy XIII was complained about for the reason that it was to linear of a game, and while this is the case, it was mostly solved in the sequel, but not to the normal extent of a Final Fantasy game. But both of these gave leveling and experience point systems. While they may be seen as inferior to most fans when compared to other FF titles, I can not see leveling as much to do with it, as it featured the same type of progression, with little change.

It says that they need to catch up with western developers, which includes Blizzard, the makers of WoW. Now seeing as this is the case, I can understand why people make comparisons between the 2 in terms of leveling, however maybe this is an example of Japanese game devs making changes in how their games are to fit what apparently is considered "modern." Now this change is what you do not like, which is why I wonder why you gave this quote. It seems to show just why they would change the game's progression ideals so vastly, and would look to actually counter your argument on why to do this in my opinion as it shows just why they would, because they are doing it to be more modern with their game.

This is simply how I have seen it myself, I could be misinterpreting some parts, but this is my general ideal on it myself. But in the end I think it comes down to 1 thing, it seems many people have different ideas of what a RPG may be or contain. As such, we can not be sure of what SE's views on it are, or even if they are the ones who chose for it to be seen as a MMORPG. For this reason I think it is somewhat unreasonable to ask them to change which genre it is seen as, being their opinion on it may greatly differ, and they may not even be the ones who gave it such a title in the 1st place.

[Demon6324236]

Castlevania II had experience points and a leveling system. I would be hard pressed to call that an RPG. I'm sure if I cared I could remember other examples.

Oh, and The Legend of Zelda II had those same elements. It's a bit closer but I've never personally considered the Zelda games to be RPGs (I know many people will disagree, this is only a personal opinion).

Hmm~ not sure if Ratchet & Clank was ever claimed to be a RPG or not, but I know it also featured an experience point system. Not as traditional as leveling your character, but it leveled your HP & weapons through a similar method.

[Eyeballed]

It says that they need to catch up with western developers, which includes Blizzard, the makers of WoW. Now seeing as this is the case, I can understand why people make comparisons between the 2 in terms of leveling, however maybe this is an example of Japanese game devs making changes in how their games are to fit what apparently is considered "modern." Now this change is what you do not like, which is why I wonder why you gave this quote. It seems to show just why they would change the game's progression ideals so vastly, and would look to actually counter your argument on why to do this in my opinion as it shows just why they would, because they are doing it to be more modern with their game.

Simply because it seems SE is following this trend of Western development because, for some reason, Japanese RPG's that I grew up with are falling out of favor. And to me, it's because the common western gamer is, or has become, only interested in bigger/better/faster/more. They're selling out and actually collaborating with Blizzard on FFXIV (request the source if you want, I don't have it to hand). Some things I used to know and love in the gaming world are apparently becoming extinct and I don't like that one bit.