Concerns about Content Patch 2.1

Quote:

---

sure people will cheat, they always do, they are doing it now XD. BUT its a system that worked for "YEARS" in 11

---

It only crashed the economy, nothing bad. In the first NA year, too.

I find it sad that SE has to even explained how it makes content. That in and of its self goes to show just how many people are complaining about content or lag etc. I'm fine with the content side atm but the lag!?!? Why does those feel like its 2001 and I just got into mmos? I'm eager to see how ESO and Wildstar start off.

Its always easy, as the consumer, to say what's necessary and what's needed. Being over opinionated, complaining, having too much thought on what you would do and how you believe things should be ran. . . That does nothing more than muster up arguments because its sure as hell not getting anything done whether the developers read it or not.

The customer will never be satisfied no matter which way you request content to be released. No matter what ideas you have for the situation there's no end to the complaints. As someone said, once everything gets settled and content is released, it'll blow over for a certain amount of time being people begin to gripe and put their views on what's wrong, again. Its understandable to have an opinon but 90% of the people that comment here act as if they've been put in the very same position that the developers are in. As if its their job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Camate

Hello,

We’ve been seeing comments asking why we cannot make certain changes or fixes quicker as opposed to waiting for 2.1.

When it comes to bug fixes that have been reported and replicated by the QA team as well as changes and adjustments that are requested, the development team makes these change or fixes which are then tested by QA for stability. For each change and bug fix that is made, the team confirms that the rest of the game is unaffected and that server crashes or other issues do not take place.

FFXIV is being developed by a branch-development method, where there is a group working on patch 2.1 while 2.0 is running. Critical bugs that severely affect play, which have been confirmed and replicated, are addressed in the shortest amount of time as possible. Changes designed off of feedback, that also have large effects on the entire game, are ultimately implemented on a schedule decided by the Producer/Director Yoshi-P.

Additionally, the QA team checks and ensures all fixes and changes are stable on both the Windows and PS3 versions. These checks are consolidated and performed when major updates are scheduled.

To thoroughly address each concern, we are unable to perform fixes and changes for everything immediately, and as a result some changes are addressed with major patches and updates. We appreciate your understanding in regards to this.

---

no wonder yoshi has no idea whats going on with the community their mods dont even read the posts completely

At the end of the day, everyone will make a fuss about how things are ran but its as simple as finding something else to do while you impatiently wait for new content to come out or just stop playing in general if its overly not satisfying and doesn't meet your standards of how you perceive things should be ran. Its as if you'll never be satisfied. Obviousl, haven't gotten to end-game due to certain situations I've got going on but I guess its too realistic to shut up and be patient these days or find something else to cure your boredom rather than do what we as people do best, complain or throw our own views on how thins should be ran without having any true knowledge or know how of how things are ran, how things need to be ran, and what's possible for the developers to manage while the game still isn't complete in its entirety, as is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xanj

no wonder yoshi has no idea whats going on with the community their mods dont even read the posts completely

---

Are you positive that the post wasn't read completely off the strength of the moderator only replying to what he felt was necessary? Or. . . Are you just so unhappy with what was the contents consisted of to make you assume that the entire post wasn't read?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mezolitik

With respect to the OP, you only have one crafting class (at level 5) and one gathering class (at level 17). You've made a thread about a lack of content when you've ignored more than half of the game's existing features.

And your character isn't wearing any pants.

---

I can't necessarily understand the logic behind this at all other than to either A; Troll or B; Complain and show how ungrateful you can be just because something isn't as you expected or as you feel it should be ran or should be in general.

A few remarks.

• The branch development model is just that, a conceptual and organisational methodology; it doesn't imply that said branches are big or small. Many people are simply asking for smaller but more frequent chunks of new content (many small branches rather than too few big ones). Which has nothing to do with them being broken —less content means less testing; bigger content updates means extensive testing due to higher risks of breaking the existing. It's a matter of choice. It's actually a general trend in the software industry to aim at smaller, more frequent updates (see: Operating Systems, Web browsers, creation suites, etc.) It's actually often considered easier to maintain quality, since you can address tuning, fixes and customers needs on a much more frequent basis, it makes a developer seem (and indeed be) more "involved".
• The WoW model of rolling out new content seems to be —unsurprisingly if the rest of the game is any indication— the one having been chosen for ARR (every 3-5 months, ~3 times a year). However, that game is old and, though it did set the norm a while ago, since then other development teams have addressed the matter of what is essentially perceived as too long wait times between updates. For instance, people have praised GW2 and STO for their frequent updates; a model that is not without bearing some resemblance with other engaging media such as series: new episodes every week, new features every months, major thresholds every quarter.
• Further considering the WoW model, even they did move from linear patches to more asymmetrical updates: (roughly) X.1 is a smaller update, X.2 a bigger one, X.3 a smaller one, and so on. They actually have 3 teams at work: one maintains the mainline, one works of the next patch, a third one on the patch after that (giving each team not 3 but 6 months to produce content, making updates more substantial). That seems to please players more than the old, linear way.
• The QA process of FF XIV is, curiously, quite different from the norm in MMORPG. Most use a public test server (PTS) so as to make sure that content is not only bug-free (as much as possible) but above all well-tuned prior to release. Many veteran MMO players will testify to the fact that there's pretty much no way to ensure tuning and debugging without the participation of thousands of beta testers, something which a company simply cannot perform internally.
• Therefore, somehow "crowd-sourcing" the testing on a PTS, using the 1% of the player base that constantly seeks for new content (usually a much hardcore subset) is a very valid way of raising QA and feedback to a whole new level. Even Blizzard, who's not the worst studio out there, regularly emphasised the invaluable contribution that PTS feedback brings to the fine-tuning of content. These live testers essentially "work" for the rest of the player base, for free (well, they actually pay for it…), and in the meantime they're happy because they get to experience new content on a much more regular basis (in exclusivity on a PTS, then for real on release).
  Not having a PTS for such a large project was many times brought up by veteran gamers as odd, not to say worrying —and indeed, way too many bugs and mistakes in tuning show up on release servers, being fixed way too late after the content was rolled out. This will not change, no in-house QA team has the means to outperform live beta testing by thousands of players (who are keen on theory crafting the hell out of new content, as well as trying to push features to their limits). Meet the power of the crowd!
  There is an argument against PTS: that it breaks the "surprise" of new content. This "spoiler argument" may seem relevant to traditionally secretive companies such as SE, but it doesn't hold much water compared to the benefits provided by PTS (see: Blizzard also being quite the secretive type with their future games and expansions), and frankly players don't care that much that new content is known before it comes. Typically, a few "surprising" features can be kept secret (not rolled on PTS, solely tested by the QA team); and new expansions, not patches, are the real deal when it comes to surprising players.

So, there you have it.
1. PTS should be used to speed up and improve QA, which is not bad but at the same time not particularly great in ARR.
2. Smaller content updates are a new trend much appreciated by players because they can "live with" their game, rather than "wait for" new content too often: it's much more engaging, and favours a much higher retention on a month-to-month basis, according to my sources —it's harder to make them come back if they're used to leaving between every patch, and WoW does suffer of that as subscribing numbers are on a general downward trend during each expansion cycle.

Just my 2 cts on the matter. I think my sig actually sums that up quite well, it actually goes true for players as well as developers.

the games only 3 months old have some patience ppl

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mosis

the games only 3 months old have some patience ppl

---

Patience doesn't increase the subscriber count.