Glamours will be needlessly annoying...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Versiroth

That's what I was hoping for as well. An appearance tab is the absolute best option. Why MMO makers try to overly complicate these things is beyond me.

---

Agreed. I've dealt with these item-based appearance systems in both WoW and GW2 and they're nothing but a royal pain in the tuckus. I really hope they throw this back and give us something like EQ2 or LotRO instead.

Yeah....we dont care about you... moving on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Djeserit

Either way, my point still stands. Everyone complains that the economy is broken and there's nothing to spend gil on, so they try to add consumable items to stimulate the economy. You then complain about the fact that it is too complicated.

---

Look, yes the economy needs some fixing and market stimulation - hardly anyone would argue otherwise. But there are good and bad ways to do it. I think in this case, tying the usage of the vanity system to consumables was one of these bad ways. What's wrong with wanting something done right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreamer

Agreed. I've dealt with these item-based appearance systems in both WoW and GW2 and they're nothing but a royal pain in the tuckus. I really hope they throw this back and give us something like EQ2 or LotRO instead.

---

They've already said it won't be separate slots. People keep saying it should be X or Y simply because they like that system better. They don't even bother to look at what issues there might be trying to implement said system. Like memory on the PS3. Yes, it really is limited.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ispano

They've already said it won't be separate slots. People keep saying it should be X or Y simply because they like that system better. They don't even bother to look at what issues there might be trying to implement said system. Like memory on the PS3. Yes, it really is limited.

---

Memory wouldn't be an issue. I fail to see why people blame the PS3 on things that the PC can just as easily fail at. DCUO is larger than FFXIV. It has a ton of content. It runs better than FFXIV for the most part and has more complicated systems installed. The PS3 is hardly worth the blame that is gets and I've seen PCs with worse schematics play FFXIV with hardly any hitches. I've also seen PCs that are supposed to be better quality than PS3's and FFXIV looks like crap on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Versiroth

Some people don't seem to care about actually making gil. I used to buy dyes from the vendor and then sell them on the MB for crazy amounts. I'd spend 200 on 5 Blood red, and then sell the set for 1-2K. And people bought them constantly. Why they bought them, I haven't a clue, as you can buy them cheap at the vendor, but the fact is, I made a few hundred K gil before people started putting the same 5 set on the MB for 220 gil. That's right, they're making a wopping 20 gil a sale! Honestly, at that point, why even do the work to buy and post the stuff? RMT maybe? I don't know, but it just goes to show that people will still sell stuff on the MB.. even if they're basically making no money by doing it.

---

That's extremely backwards. You sell more than the Sellback for NPCs, but if you are selling it more than an NPC, you've got some pretty stupid buyers. If the Mat is cheaper from an NPC you buy it from an NPC. You sell under the NPC's Price to sell bulk to players and if your sales price is lower than if you sell it to an NPC you sell it to the NPC because its not worth selling on the market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XanderOlivieri

Memory wouldn't be an issue. I fail to see why people blame the PS3 on things that the PC can just as easily fail at. DCUO is larger than FFXIV. It has a ton of content. It runs better than FFXIV for the most part and has more complicated systems installed. The PS3 is hardly worth the blame that is gets and I've seen PCs with worse schematics play FFXIV with hardly any hitches. I've also seen PCs that are supposed to be better quality than PS3's and FFXIV looks like crap on it.



That's extremely backwards. You sell more than the Sellback for NPCs, but if you are selling it more than an NPC, you've got some pretty stupid buyers. If the Mat is cheaper from an NPC you buy it from an NPC. You sell under the NPC's Price to sell bulk to players and if your sales price is lower than if you sell it to an NPC you sell it to the NPC because its not worth selling on the market.

---

Yes it would be, since it would have to keep track of TWO sets at a time instead of one. PS3 only has 256MB for the game and 256MB for Video. Yoshi and the devs have mentioned many times they have to be very careful about what they add since they are basically maxing out the memory on the PS3 already. If they add a ui Element, they have to remove or tone down another.

I'm not blaming the PS3 for anything, but those who ignore the real limitations, ie the ones that actually exist, not the ones in people's heads, are the ones who don't get it.

EDIT: Some more information. http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...=1#post1502985

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ispano

Yes it would be, since it would have to keep track of TWO sets at a time instead of one. PS3 only has 256MB for the game and 256MB for Video. Yoshi and the devs have mentioned many times they have to be very careful about what they add since they are basically maxing out the memory on the PS3 already. If they add a ui Element, they have to remove or tone down another.

I'm not blaming the PS3 for anything, but those who ignore the real limitations, ie the ones that actually exist, not the ones in people's heads, are the ones who don't get it.

EDIT: Some more information. http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...=1#post1502985

---

after reading that PS4 seems the way to go UI and all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ispano

Snip

---

Yes, there are (mostly non gameplay related that only effect ps3 users, such as the one you linked to)limitations related to the game being available on ps3, but the issue this topic is about simply isn't one of them. The glamour system they are using is obviously a (poor)design choice, not a memory limitation issue. Only a completely incompetent or shortsighted developer would keep the look of the armor you're wearing and the look of the armour being displayed in memory at the same time when only the stats of the first one matters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheMax1087

Yes, there are (mostly non gameplay related that only effect ps3 users, such as the one you linked to)limitations related to the game being available on ps3, but the issue this topic is about simply isn't one of them. The glamour system they are using is obviously a (poor)design choice, not a memory limitation issue. Only a completely incompetent or shortsighted developer would keep the look of the armor you're wearing and the look of the armour being displayed in memory at the same time when only the stats of the first one matters.

---

And yet it IS related to memory limitations. Only having to keep track of ONE set in memory, instead of two. And it has nothing to do with the look, it's not about the graphics. This is about system memory, not video memory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ispano

And yet it IS related to memory limitations. Only having to keep track of ONE set in memory, instead of two. And it has nothing to do with the look, it's not about the graphics. This is about system memory, not video memory.

---

Except you don't have to keep track of both sets, only parts of both, which would go with my "short sighted dev" comment. A memory issue like thie one you are saying caused them to use this poor system(at least the way it's been described, it could actually be good and just described poorly) would only happen if the devs originally had no plans for a vanity system and coded the armor pieces in such a way it would have to keep all of its information in memory while equipped.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheMax1087

Except you don't have to keep track of both sets, only parts of both, which would go with my "short sighted dev" comment. A memory issue like thie one you are saying caused them to use this poor system(at least the way it's been described, it could actually be good and just described poorly) would only happen if the devs originally had no plans for a vanity system and coded the armor pieces in such a way it would have to keep all of its information in memory while equipped.

---

Except you do. Having slots means the game needs to keep track of what's in every slot. Vanity and non Vanity. The way they're doing it, instead of the body piece you're wearing pointing to visual A, it points to visual B instead. With secondary slots, it has to keep track of those slots as well. Even if it's only a small amount of memory used to do so, when you're breaking yourself over 256MB as it is, anything helps.

I see no where in either interview that insinuates you will have to make a new crystal each time you get a new piece of gear and want its stats. It says that the glamour prism will mirror a chosen piece of armour onto your toon. I think this likely means that once the crystal is placed ( my prediction in a slot next your armoury slots) you will maintain that look regardless of what gear you place in the armoury slot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShiroSteve

I see no where in either interview that insinuates you will have to make a new crystal each time you get a new piece of gear and want its stats. It says that the glamour prism will mirror a chosen piece of armour onto your toon. I think this likely means that once the crystal is placed ( my prediction in a slot next your armoury slots) you will maintain that look regardless of what gear you place in the armoury slot.

---

In one of the letters or an interview a while back they said it wouldn't involve extra slots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ispano

In one of the letters or an interview a while back they said it wouldn't involve extra slots.

---

Maybe not in the same type of slot as our gear, but they will have to be placed somewhere, and it will likely get called a slot. Materia slots are still called slots. Shiro's prediction is a viable one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by L-D-Omlette

Maybe not in the same type of slot as our gear, but they will have to be placed somewhere, and it will likely get called a slot. Materia slots are still called slots. Shiro's prediction is a viable one.

---

Considering most everything they've said in the past was about modifying the look of the items themselves(They've hinted a few times that it would be similar to the way WoW/Aion does it) AND that the prisms are meant to be cheap, I doubt it. I see them making the prism getting used once you apply it to an item.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tannlore

Edit: I found a posting of it with a better translation: http://www.reddit.com/r/ffxiv/commen...naoki_yoshida/

---

Quote:

---

It should be easy to access for everyone and shouldn’t cost too much,

---

Yeah, of course crafters won't be price-gouging hugely .. and Santa exists as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KraggyKor

Yeah, of course crafters won't be price-gouging hugely .. and Santa exists as well.

---

Like with everything they'll only price-gouge at the start of things. Give it a couple of weeks and prices will fall to reasonable levels because everyone will have flooded the market attempting to take advantage of the price-gouging.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ispano

Except you do. Having slots means the game needs to keep track of what's in every slot. Vanity and non Vanity. The way they're doing it, instead of the body piece you're wearing pointing to visual A, it points to visual B instead. With secondary slots, it has to keep track of those slots as well. Even if it's only a small amount of memory used to do so, when you're breaking yourself over 256MB as it is, anything helps.

---

That's saved server-side. It has nothing to do with the client. The only thing that the client needs to keep track of are the slots when you open your character window, and I highly doubt that that would increase the amount of memory by a lot if at all (it would be the equivalent of 12 bag slots, and it can be ignored simply by making that the client only shows either the current equiped gear slots OR the vanity gear slots, instead of showing both at once). So no, PS3 memory limitations has nothing to do with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KraggyKor

Yeah, of course crafters won't be price-gouging hugely .. and Santa exists as well.

---

---------------------------

With the way the markets have been For Crafters Who Want To Work Their Craft and Earn Gil Selling --- You just may be right KraggyKor. With plenty of understandable reasoning.

"Shouldn't cost too much" Just like housing would be affordable....

I suppose if these Glamour Crystals are going to be by level, there goes my idea of using event equipment for it's look over armor. I doubt an ilevel10 crystal will allow for copying ilv90 armor.
Over complicating things seems to be the norm. I will remain cautiously optimistic that it won't be a pain to use when it's live in game. One can only hope.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michiko

I suppose if these Glamour Crystals are going to be by level, there goes my idea of using event equipment for it's look over armor. I doubt an ilevel10 crystal will allow for copying ilv90 armor.
Over complicating things seems to be the norm. I will remain cautiously optimistic that it won't be a pain to use when it's live in game. One can only hope.

---

I was under the impression, based on the interview, that if you want to copy a ilvl90 armor, you buy a ilvl90 crystal. THEN you use that wherever you want it.

Ofc leave it it SE to take a concept that should be simple and accessible and turn it into an overcomplicated mess...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yshnal

That's saved server-side. It has nothing to do with the client. The only thing that the client needs to keep track of are the slots when you open your character window, and I highly doubt that that would increase the amount of memory by a lot if at all (it would be the equivalent of 12 bag slots, and it can be ignored simply by making that the client only shows either the current equiped gear slots OR the vanity gear slots, instead of showing both at once). So no, PS3 memory limitations has nothing to do with it.

---

It's not about being able to see the items in the slots. It's about the client having to keep track of 2 items for each normal gear slot, instead of one.

EDIT: Also finally found where they talked about it not being slots. Not quite related to the memory issue, but they did indeed say something about it.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...=1#post1552811

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheMax1087

Except you don't have to keep track of both sets, only parts of both, which would go with my "short sighted dev" comment. A memory issue like thie one you are saying caused them to use this poor system(at least the way it's been described, it could actually be good and just described poorly) would only happen if the devs originally had no plans for a vanity system and coded the armor pieces in such a way it would have to keep all of its information in memory while equipped.

---

It actually makes sense. Its quite possibly a PS3 limitation thing. Theyve already admitted that they are topped off on memory with the PS3 as far as the interface goes. This is why PS3 doesnt (or didnt?) have focus target UI option. Adding another tab where you can add a whole set of new armor sounds like it'd take much more extra memory than using an item to change the appearance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kayo

It actually makes sense. Its quite possibly a PS3 limitation thing. Theyve already admitted that they are topped off on memory with the PS3 as far as the interface goes. This is why PS3 doesnt (or didnt?) have focus target UI option. Adding another tab where you can add a whole set of new armor sounds like it'd take much more extra memory than using an item to change the appearance.

---

It does, just need a keyboard to /focustarget.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Airikay

It does, just need a keyboard to /focustarget.

---

You don't need a keyboard

option 1: select a target -> press the quader button -> select Focus Target in the menu
option 2: use the macro /focustarget <t>

Turning on Focus Target turn off the exp bar on the PS3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ispano

It's not about being able to see the items in the slots. It's about the client having to keep track of 2 items for each normal gear slot, instead of one.

EDIT: Also finally found where they talked about it not being slots. Not quite related to the memory issue, but they did indeed say something about it.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...=1#post1552811

---

Yeah, server stress makes more sense than PS3 limitations, unless they simply changed how our equiped gear is stored in the database and added the appearance #ID to it. Then it would just need to transfer the same data as what it will have to with the glamour prisms (base item #ID + appearance #ID), unless they're simply going to give a new #ID to each and every one of the gear+appearance combinations possible (in which case it would still be possible to do a vanity tab by just storing that new #ID in the database as the current equiped set of gear+appearance). In both cases, the database wouldn't have more stress either.

Anyway, I'm speculating a bit, as we don't really know the specifics of the glamour system as to make proper deductions about how it might work code-wise. But from how it looks right now, it wouldn't really matter how they implemented it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kayo

It actually makes sense. Its quite possibly a PS3 limitation thing. Theyve already admitted that they are topped off on memory with the PS3 as far as the interface goes. This is why PS3 doesnt (or didnt?) have focus target UI option. Adding another tab where you can add a whole set of new armor sounds like it'd take much more extra memory than using an item to change the appearance.

---

The problem with the interface and the memory consumption is on the amount of things that it can show (load) at once, as seen in the focus target option. If the vanity tab was independent from the gear tab it would just have the same memory requirements as just opening the current gear tab or going through the different inventory bags.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Felis

You don't need a keyboard

option 1: select a target -> press the quader button -> select Focus Target in the menu
option 2: use the macro /focustarget <t>

Turning on Focus Target turn off the exp bar on the PS3.

---

I use macro, but you make the macro with a keyboard, whether virtual or hardware. My point was being their isn't a quick icon action for it like sprint or teleport. And I have no idea what quader is, but shuffling through menu isn't really usually a valid option in middle of battle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yshnal

Yeah, server stress makes more sense than PS3 limitations, unless they simply changed how our equiped gear is stored in the database and added the appearance #ID to it. Then it would just need to transfer the same data as what it will have to with the glamour prisms (base item #ID + appearance #ID), unless they're simply going to give a new #ID to each and every one of the gear+appearance combinations possible (in which case it would still be possible to do a vanity tab by just storing that new #ID in the database as the current equiped set of gear+appearance). In both cases, the database wouldn't have more stress either.

Anyway, I'm speculating a bit, as we don't really know the specifics of the glamour system as to make proper deductions about how it might work code-wise. But from how it looks right now, it wouldn't really matter how they implemented it.


The problem with the interface and the memory consumption is on the amount of things that it can show (load) at once, as seen in the focus target option. If the vanity tab was independent from the gear tab it would just have the same memory requirements as just opening the current gear tab or going through the different inventory bags.

---

Sorta sorta, you still have to load character datas. They are probably more worry about exceeding the character sever. Remember 2.0. Not only were servers crashing from massive people in the world, but from people going to and from duty finder(servers).

Unless you implement and thus code very carefully, both your client side, and server side are going to be quite a mess to debug. This doesn't include how much more space is required on the character server, because they have to hold another couple of variable per character (that can get significant when you multiply it by 2million+?)

We already know SE programers aren't the most elegant of coders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kukurumei

Sorta sorta, you still have to load character datas. They are probably more worry about exceeding the character sever. Remember 2.0. Not only were servers crashing from massive people in the world, but from people going to and from duty finder(servers).

Unless you implement and thus code very carefully, both your client side, and server side are going to be quite a mess to debug. This doesn't include how much more space is required on the character server, because they have to hold another couple of variable per character (that can get significant when you multiply it by 2million+?)

We already know SE programers aren't the most elegant of coders.

---

But they have to save&load that extra variable anyways to keep track of what appearance goes with what gear piece, similarly as how it's done with dyes (unless they give new #IDs to account for all the possible combinations, as I mentioned). So the only difference is where it would be saved and from where you would get said data with the query.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yshnal

But they have to save&load that extra variable anyways to keep track of what appearance goes with what gear piece, similarly as how it's done with dyes (unless they give new #IDs to account for all the possible combinations, as I mentioned). So the only difference is where it would be saved and from where you would get said data with the query.

---

Depends how it's coded and then recoded for the glamor system. Doing a straight forward query ID is not an effective means when you program MMOs there's probably a lot of tricks involved to front end that.

They can do something as complex as making another server just for the glamor system (which maybe cheaper then system maintenance every-time it blows up)

There is a lot of ways to re engineer this

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kukurumei

Depends how it's coded and then recoded for the glamor system. Doing a straight forward query ID is not an effective means when you program MMOs there's probably a lot of tricks involved to front end that.

They can do something as complex as making another server just for the glamor system (which maybe cheaper then system maintenance every-time it blows up)

There is a lot of ways to re engineer this

---

That's true, I'm just abstracting it. Like I said, in the end this is just speculation on the possibilities, specially as we don't even know yet the intricacies of the glamour system nor how is implemented everything else. But it's a good discussion :p