FFXI Remaster - Remake

[Dihlyte]

I'm only going to do this one time, just for you, and that is it.

You say that, but you make arguments. And I don't mean the fighting kind, I mean the making a case for something kind. If you make a case for something and I feel it's not well supported, well, I'm going to challenge it. It's not a matter of hostility, it's just good and proper discussion.

You didn't understand what I meant yet again. What I mean, is i'm not going to sit and debate you. I'm not going to segment your comments, like you do mine, and try to make points to the segmented comments to argue the little points, when we're completely ignoring the overarching theme of the thread, or have any real productive discussion. This right here is 100% unproductive in terms of feedback for Square-Enix. They aren't going to read these types of comments, because they are not even on the topic of FFXI at all. This is literally "you just arguing" which is what I mean. These comments have no value. The only reason i'm doing this is to show you what I mean as to why people don't like to engage you, and the only time they do, its to do this, and it goes on for far too long, and it completely derails any discussion being had. I really don't know why you can't see this, and why you insist and persist in these types of responses.

As for my statement, it is very well supported. If you need information, which you likely don't you will read the rest of my statement that will be directed at Square-Enix at you. Because honestly the only thing I learned from your comments so far, is that the person at SE has a chance of not understanding me, so after I'm done responding to you, i'm going to restate my comment to further cement my statement in a more understandable way for the Square-Enix representative.

It doesn't automatically make it flawed, but I can certainly give reasons why I think it does make it flawed. There's a difference, and I'm not sure if you're just being obtuse or actually don't see the difference.

Except you didn't give reasoning as to why you felt the way you did. At least not in response to my statement. Because again, you completely disregarded the other very important other half. Of which I stressed numerous times in my previous comment, and you again completely choose not to respond to or acknowledge. If you want to make a counter statement, it must be in line with the original comment. You're responding to a phantom comment. The fact that this behavior is so common really baffles me. Like there is no internet trophy, you aren't winning anything. Anyone who actually grasps the concepts being discussed won't appreciate these types of comments. The problem is so many people just choose a side on a topic, and know little to nothing of either side.

I'll quote someone else here, that is the best quote, but I'm not sure its going to help at this point because you're showing me you're not really here to learn but to just do whatever this is here. But regardless, here is the quote.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion...

-John Stuart Mill

I always consider what people say, and I always respond with reasoning and civility. I'm sorry if you've ever felt otherwise, but I never enter any discussion without considering the other point of view. But you have to understand that one can respect other's points of view without agreeing with them. Me disagreeing with you on something or finding flaws in the cases you make for something doesn't mean I didn't consider your point of view.

Except you did not consider what I said, because I clearly said "RPG's should not be simple and easy." and you completely disregarded the simple aspect of the statement 100%. You didn't even make a hint of it. In this comment right here, you also 100% completely disregarded the other half of my statement, that I prefer to respond to people who give replies that are not only civil but also reasonable and comprehensive. You're really not giving anything reasonable or comprehensive. I can appreciate that you remain civil, but you're not actually replying with anything that has real value. You're just saying "You're making statements and I'm refuting them" but that in itself is not a refute. You're just basically saying you're typing words.

I can honestly give a much better reponse than you did, and I will do that now for you, so you can hopefully better understand what I mean.

Me: RPG"s should not be simple and easy.

Response: While I understand your sentiment that RPG's should not be simple and easy, so that it sets them apart from other genres, and other forms of entertainment such as TV shows and movies, which are actual perfect examples of something that is simple and easy to enjoy, I do not agree that RPG's should be more challenging and complex. RPG's that are more challenging and complex alienates a group of individuals that have disabilities, as well as people who may have limited play time, or cannot devote their entire attention and focus onto a game, as they may have restricted free time, and that free time could become segmented. An example of this is a parent. Perhaps they have 3 hours to game every night, but during that time, they might have to pause during their session to prepare dinner, or perhaps one of their children need attention during their session, which causes the individual to take their focus away from the game for a time. When RPG's are designed to require intense focus and attention, these types of gamers will likely not find such RPG's as you indicate to be enjoyable.

(Which is a far better response than what you gave. I'm sorry.)

Now, if I saw that comment I could respond with a proper reasoning and sound reply as to why I would like to stand on my ground.

Me: While I appreciate your concern with RPG"s not appealing to a specific audience, I do not feel RPG's are the type of game that should be targeting such an audience. I can very well see that in doing so, there is the potential of a loss of profits, but that is the very nature of the design of RPG's at its core. Going back to my previous statement about Pinapple and Anchovy pizza. The point of the pizza example was to show that when you create something that has a very high potential that the "majority" of people might not like you incur a situation where the people who do enjoy your "Pinapple and anchovy pizza" a whole lot, and are willing to pay a higher price to in a sense, "make up" for the lack of funds, but those very same individuals become much more loyal and devoted to your product. So while you're creating what is considered a "niche" product for a smaller group of people, you're creating something far more precious, interesting and appreciated by that group of individuals. When you build a company on this foundation, then turn arond and remove what makes your product unique and interesting to appeal to more people, then you are literally destorying what you created, losing your initial audience, and creating something eniterly different. This causes a stain on your reputation, and removes the product that many have come to love, from existence.


Now to me, that is proper discussion. What you're doing is "just arguing for the sake of arguing" because you didn't even take into account what I was saying in the first place. You completely changed it to something entirely different, and effectively were "arguing" with a phantom comment. I cannot even respond to your comment properly even if I wanted to, because it wasnt a response to mine at all in the first place. I very much would appreciate a real and proper disagreement, because that gives me the oppourtunity to learn from you, but right now all I feel like I'm learning is that responding to you is going to be entirely unproductive.

The whole point of a forum is do discuss and debate. If you won't participate in "arguments" (you used quotation marks), then you're in the wrong place. And again, when I use the word "arguments" I don't mean "fights," but rather making cases for positions. If you make a good case for something, I will back it. If you don't, I will certainly say why I think so.

I'm sorry to inform you, but the focus of the forums, is to leave feedback to Square-Enix. It is not a debate forum for people to argue. In fact, if you look at the forums, the English NA team doesnt even respond to us because this is all we do. Go look at the JP or even sometimes the French/Dutch forums. You can see their teams responding to the players much more frequently than the NA/English posters, because we are doing what you think is what should be happening here. Unproductive debating. This right here, what we're doing is not productive, and nothing something SE can respond to. If I'm telling you that I'm not even really able to or wanting to respond to this, then why do you think, when SE is literally avoiding the NA/English forums, that it's what SE wants? This is something that is completely beyond me. There is literal proof on the FFXI and FFXIV forums both, that this behavior is common, and SE wants no part of it.

Then on top of that proof, people are telling you that your responses are not productive, as well as frustrating to the point they are willing to risk getting banned, and you feel the need to report them.

How long do you expect people to sit and respond to you to the point they become frustrated, then you report them. I really don't see that as productive. People with varying opinions is very useful for not only the discussion, but also to Square-Enix. I personally appreciate a difference of opinion, but only when its presented as the example I gave above. Proper, sound, and on-topic, taking the original comment into account and responding based off that very comment.

I don't feel that I've ever been uncivil toward you in this thread. If you feel otherwise, I'd really appreciate you identifying what you felt was uncivil.

I never said or implied you did. I just was saying, it is what I expect from you or anyone else.

If you come on to a forum and post opinions about things, other people are going to respond with theirs, and why they agree or don't agree with yours. I'm not sure why this seems out of the ordinary to you.

It doesn't seem out of the ordinary. What I said was that its unproductive. This is unproductive, which is why I'm only going to do it once.

I focused on the entire statement- there wasn't much to it. you said RPGs should not be easy and simple. And while I realize that it is a blanket statement, it's still an opinion and I can still dispute it. It depends on the target audience. There are RPGs with difficulty and depth, and there are those that aren't. There's nothing wrong with either one- you are asserting that "easy and simple" is wrong and something else is right. I disputed it because it is an opinion, not an indisputable fact. You then proceeded to cite various games by SE and others, and pointed out how the deep, difficult games sold better. I disputed this as well, because there was a lot more to the success of those games than simply them being tough. The whole reason I took issue with what you said is because you took an opinion and framed it as a fact.

Except you didn't dispute it. You said RPG's are "role playing games' and while that might be the actual definition, it does not in anyway define the genre in terms of gameplay.

Most games today have more RPG gameplay elements than FF16 or FFXIV. Games like Halo, Fortnite, and Minecraft have more options and exploration and creativity than the two aforementioned SE games.

So based on just your comment, that in no way is reflective off my comment, what sets FFXIV and FF16 apart from any other game, and aligns them with the RPG genre with games like Baulders Gate 3 or any other proper RPG?

If RPG's are as you say, "just role playing games" then why isnt Tomb Raider considered a Role playing game? Why isn't Mortal Kombat a Role playing game? What sets a game apart from another in the modern world where so many games have a character and a story you follow with said character?

If gameplay is insignificant within the RPG genre, then effectively you're saying all games, and no games are now RPG's. I'm sorry, there is no real reasoning there at all.

going back to the quote, you said I "only focused on the 'easy' part of your statement." Well, there is only one other part to the statement, and that is "simple." And frankly, that has a largely similar meaning to "easy." So I'm not sure what else there is to "focus on" here.

Simple and easy are two very different things in the gaming world.

Super Mario bros on the nintendo is simple, but defeating the entire game in 4-5 minutes is not easy (the world record).

The beginning battles of Final Fantasy Tactics are easy but certainly not simple.



RPG's in design should not be simple *and* easy.

RPG's are a genre, in their nature in terms of gameplay are much more expansive, and integrated than typical entertainment.







To further outline:

TV shows are simple, short forms of entertainment.

Movies are simple, and longer forms of entertainment.

Side-Scrolling games are slightly more engaging forms of entertainment and can vary based on player intent in terms of time invested.

Fighting games are more complex in nature, but can offer a different style of entertainment and levels of engagement not found in side-scrolling games, due to their more competitive nature of design.

Action games offer an even more deeper level of game design over the previously mentioned games, and offer another level of time investment over more simple games.

RPG"s are the highest of both complexity and time investment, and people who would naturally gravitate to this genre expect a deeper and more time investing style of gameplay.

Turning RPG"s into simpler action games, or low time-investment games, takes away from the very aspect RPG gamers are seeking in a form of entertainment.

Final Fantasy I through FFXI all had a very formulatic nature in their design, and FFXII, or more specifically FFXIII and beyond has greatly deviated from this style which each new entry straying further and further from what defines Final Fantasy as a franchise.

Saying "Final Fantasy can be anything SE wants it to be" is not a wrong statement, but if Square-Enix wants to retain their current fans, and add new fans to that already established playerbase, then naturally they would seek to adhere to what built their company to where it is today.

If SE no longer wishes to make RPG games, and instead wants to try to "Make more money" and make "more popular games" such as action games, or other game genres they find more profitable, then they risk losing their entire fanbase, in hopes of establishing a new one, but this is a double risk, as the older fans will no longer support the company and will spread bad news about the company. So not only will SE have to re-establish their fan base with a brand new subset, they will have to grow within a community of gamers that have been left with a foul taste in their mouth warning new gamers of the said company/franchise is not loyal to their fanbase and willing to abandon them at any time for something entirely different than what they have come to expect from them.