Bring back crowd control. Bring back branching dungeons. Bring back ADVENTURE.

Make the raids like this and you solve the problem. Like Destiny they have loot hidden around. So if they do that it solve the problem. BA kinda did that and it was the best raid experience so far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrWho2010

tether was useless and nobody used it other than you so they said we're getting rid of it.

---

Her, Jim from Eureka, Janet from PotD, James from FATEs...

Seriously, though, why did they remove that, yet leave the more costly niche tools like Shield Bash?

This really is a tough one. Going back to some of the earlier dungeons for Itinerant Moogle really made it even more clear that dungeon design philosophy in FF14 has changed dramatically. Qarn, amongst others, was pretty cool in it's design with a pretty straightforward path but optional puzzles/rooms for treasure if you cared. It also had pretty interesting bosses for that level range and mobs that were legitimately dangerous if not taken care of properly. A large part of me absolutely does want more dungeons like that. But, yeah, we all know that even if they did bring design like that back no one would actually do it outside of the first few runs where they used the bonus rooms to get geared for the level. So I can understand why the devs don't bother with that sort of design any more (and I'm just as guilty as everyone else of just wanting to burn through ASAP once you've done it two or three times).

So would I like to see more adventurous and interesting dungeons again? Yes, but I recognize it's unlikely we'll get them and we really probably shouldn't unless the devs can come up with some new interesting way to make running them "properly" actually appealing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhus

Brain input required. Too difficult, please nerf. Msq content should not be difficult to complete. Stop shutting me out the game with savage quality dungeons. What do you mean I need to use cooldowns? Heal? For real?

Hmm think that’s about it?

---

Brilliant lol. Same could be said about people using the same excuse for wanting to spam macros during endgame crafting instead of using their brains. :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

The thing is.... It's only an adventure the first time. After that, its already known.

Adventure is great and all, but you can only experience something for the first time once.

---

That's only true for a static dungeon. There are a lot of ways to get around problems like this, though how easy they are to add into the game is another question.

I think too many people are focusing on what has been done and not what could be. While I'm not exactly sure what Dinah is asking for, the old dungeons aren't the only ways to feature exploration or differing design. I'd like to see more variety myself, but as I said before I don't see the low level dungeons as examples of super interesting content.

I've been wanting more dungeons that aren't just run from point A to point B and do X mechanics for 4 minutes until boss dies so you can repeat that algorithm 2 more times but with an additional "epic ending boss cutscene". I've been saying we need less linear dungeons in general with things that focus on strategy and cooperation. Maybe dungeons that aren't just one big line but instead have a giant open area where the party has to go together to different objectives similar to the first ARR 24 man(minus the lockout of content until "X" boss is defeated). Or dungeons where all 4 have to split into different sections to handle separate mechanics that need to be completed within a time frame. things that require the team to assign responsibilities, roles, duties, and etc to adventure and defeat the dungeon... Not just "have the dps and do the things so your dps isn't 0". I wish there were ideas taken out of Satasha's first mechanic of reading the book to know how to proceed through the first door without traps but on a grander scale that forces the party to delegate responsibilities to specific jobs.

Or even have dungeons that aren't just dungeons, but instead instances similar to the ones we have to queue for alone. Such as this section of the area needs a defender to stall the enemies until blank is ready, meanwhile this section needs a healer to assist the other side's defense. Meanwhile this side has no reinforcements and needs damage on the field sent out.... Etc. Like adding NPC's in place of roles and duties but still lacking certain abilities that will require YOUR party to understand who needs to do what and where. All the while it needs to be done with coordination or wipe.


I feel like I've seen games do this, but for some reason FFXIV is afraid to give up this formula because it's the standard for an mmo that people are comfy with and everyone seems to hate change. Or when they do execute ideas like this, people more vocally say they dislike the content... A great example being the dragon walking across the bridge that the party has to use cannons and etc for...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PyurBlue

That's only true for a static dungeon. There are a lot of ways to get around problems like this, though how easy they are to add into the game is another question.

---

I mean, just like the satasha example I used above... could use that alone for several ideas andin different manners. We have treasure hunts with a format that almost complicates things but still keeps a set "formula" of things such as "this floor will randomly spawn this big mob, or 3 smaller mobs, or the 5 mobs in order to kill, along with the standard 3 sets of enemies to clear the floor".

The problem is FFXIV keeps using a standard formula, without changing up the base design. What if they designed a dungeon that all 3 paths of it had different segments that interchange. The first time around would be new, the 2nd and third time around would be varying degrees of familiarity and party members could discuss "oh I've seen this path in my last run here, you have to do blank". Part of this is laziness/time/resources... Personally I think they could get away with a lot more if they experimented more with RNG in dungeons, and not just a "1 of 3 possibilities" idea. That's usually why I like mechanics that don't specifically mark tanks/healers or specific dps, and instead mark all party members with randomness. Like the 24man in SB that does the prime numbers mechanic, or the boss in the monk temple that assigns you a sun or moon coin that determines where you need to move. If they could turn mechanics like that into things more corresponding to whole dungeon layouts and how the party traverses them... It'd be a lot more interesting. Even better if they made it so many enemies aren't always the same pack or in the same exact spots or 100% always the same exact boss or the same 1 in 3 bosses... Heck, how about a dungeon where depending on how fast or slow you get through bosses determines what bosses you fight at the end or what path opens up in the dungeon.

Or how about one that actually requires a person to throw a body off the side as a sacrifice like we all meme about to open a pathway and then the healer is required to res the person.

Or how about something that isn't conveyed as just one form of progression and isn't even told directly to the player? Like maybe reading the notes in a dungeon tells you if you do X emote at X spot, you open a secret pathway to X. Or dying to X boss at least once causes X to activate a certain thing at X.... there's so much potential I feel like but..... screw it all, the formula of dungeons work... and why would they change something that people are used to and know works?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vaunhause

I think a dungeon where there's multiple paths, which includes multiple ways to clear the dungeon would be cool. And depending on decisions through out the dungeon, it could change which path you have to take. Maybe a bit much for a normal dungeon, though. Maybe some sort of side content?

---

That'd be neat, but I imagine that before long you'd have people complaining about you taking the "longer route" or choosing to deal with the "harder boss".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Berteaux_Braumegain

That'd be neat, but I imagine that before long you'd have people complaining about you taking the "longer route" or choosing to deal with the "harder boss".

---

Doesn't even have to be that simple. Could make it so that maybe your party has more ranged dealers than melee and the decisions you make in the dungeon can influence you to get a boss that's particularly easier to deal with as a caster or ranged job than a melee one. Using hints given through the dungeon or experience with it. Or create different trap patterns on the floor that the party has to look at the notes ahead of time to memorize where is safe to actually run through without dying. Instead of just "every run I've been here, this rile and this tile are always safe to run to, and it always will be" type deals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vaunhause

I think a dungeon where there's multiple paths, which includes multiple ways to clear the dungeon would be cool. And depending on decisions through out the dungeon, it could change which path you have to take. Maybe a bit much for a normal dungeon, though. Maybe some sort of side content?

---

People would just always choose the quickest/easiest path and stick to it, regardless of the rewards. If people meet a disagreement, then someone is probably gonna get kicked.
So instead of multiple pathways leading to a different boss/reward, why not instead be different linear pathways per run. One run you go left, another run you go right. Clear times will always be the same (player skill excluded), but at least you'll be seeing more of a dungeon (maybe different bosses, too).

Kinda like Left 4 Dead 2, where the AI Director would close up some pathways and have you go down a different pathway (though the safe room would always be the same).

ARR Dungeons was more open, with opcional rooms with chests and stuff like that, but it's "useless" since people even back in that time always ignored those side stuff, they always go straight to the main/quickest point and that's it. Those Dungeons design was fun but a waste of resources and effort since people makes it trivial :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valic

Doesn't even have to be that simple. Could make it so that maybe your party has more ranged dealers than melee and the decisions you make in the dungeon can influence you to get a boss that's particularly easier to deal with as a caster or ranged job than a melee one. Using hints given through the dungeon or experience with it. Or create different trap patterns on the floor that the party has to look at the notes ahead of time to memorize where is safe to actually run through without dying. Instead of just "every run I've been here, this rile and this tile are always safe to run to, and it always will be" type deals.

---

That wouldn't work as duties (with some notable exceptions) are meant to be trivialized over time with gear and level increase. Sooner or later those kinds of mechanics would just be ignored.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nestama

People would just always choose the quickest/easiest path and stick to it, regardless of the rewards. If people meet a disagreement, then someone is probably gonna get kicked.
So instead of multiple pathways leading to a different boss/reward, why not instead be different linear pathways per run. One run you go left, another run you go right. Clear times will always be the same (player skill excluded), but at least you'll be seeing more of a dungeon (maybe different bosses, too).

Kinda like Left 4 Dead 2, where the AI Director would close up some pathways and have you go down a different pathway (though the safe room would always be the same).

---

That would be the only way I agree to multiple branches in a dungeon, where the dungeon chooses the path for you each run and closes the other paths.

I'd rather have high quality procedurally generated dungeons more akin to something you'd expect out of Diablo. PotD may "try" this, but anyone who has played an ARPG with randomized dungeons would know that it is comparatively lacking.

From there, you randomize mobs from a relative pool per tileset, their placement, don't lock bosses to sterile arena rooms, have meaningful treasure to be found, insert the occasional random event, and basically just not be the same every single time. Offer bonuses for exploration and total mobs cleared with the expectation these should take about 30-45m to do. Those in a rush could stick more the MSQ sort of dungeons where you'll eventually know anything and everything about the area.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by linay

That wouldn't work as duties (with some notable exceptions) are meant to be trivialized over time with gear and level increase. Sooner or later those kinds of mechanics would just be ignored.

---

Even with gear and level, you can't ignore mechanics that can literally define you to die otherwise. The only point where mechanics should go ignored is when the content is dead/gone, meaning when it's able to be unsync'd. In my example, you could make a dungeon where the boss has a circular aoe around him in a large length that puts doom on the players that stand in it. However at a range, anyone can be outside of it and still deal damage, putting ranged/casters at more of an advantage rather than melee's having to dip in to dps then dip out just to avoid doom or rely fully on a healer ressing them until they're brink of death ridden. The other option being a boss that puts debuffs on players who out of range with doom, and a consistent debuff applied that causes heavy damage down and high vulnerability up, forcing most casters and ranged dealers to not be able to hold still or deal anywhere near as much damage as they normally do. Only removed when the player deals a melee based attack (kinda like how leviathan denies ranged or caster depending on the target). That way melee is preferred in the later half and ranged in the former... ultimately the party would decide which path would be more optimal and faster. As an example, say the party has a white mage, a dragoon, a black mage, and a paladin. 2 melee, 2 casters in a party of 4. Well, the white mage has some pretty nice gear and WHM's have really nice damage, the BLM is also really well geared and BLM's are known hard hitters. PLD's also have a lil bit more ranged than some tanks to boot and dragoons while not many still can range a bit more often than other melee jobs. So in that scenario, the ranged boss would be more optimal to face and more up-time to be faster.

Now let's say you have a party of a dark knight, a monk, a scholar, and a red mage. Well, this is obvious at this point... MNK and DRK don't have much ranged, SCH and RED do but RDM also offers some melee abilities/support and SCH has more shields than heals to cover any aoe's the boss does up close to melees. So perhaps the melee boss would be more optimal than the boss that would most of the group at bay. This type of mechanic would cause parties to actually communicate and discuss a strategy in how they would handle the boss, and actually give players a reason to ask why they should do what they should do. Not just mindless repeat of rotation or beat the boss by dodging the things like a simon says layout always does. This gives players a reason to understand their abilities functionality and make a plan together..... ALMOST LIKE A REAL ADVENTURE???? HRRRRM

After it's unsyncable, of course people will be able to do whatever and ignore it all, but as being a current dungeon for a whole year or two that can show up in roulettes too... It'd be a neat idea to force players to understand how to learn other roles than their own and decide as a group what would be the best way to deal with what they're given. Duties don't HAVE to be trivial grinds every single time.

Keep in mind, my example is a mild and a bit extremist idea of one way a dungeon's "pathing" could change so that the dungeon you run isn't just a straight line. Where your group can actually have a choice that impacts how quick the run is and what casualties you'll be able to afford in clearing certain portions of the dungeon. It's not a perfect idea for a set of mechanics and way to create differing paths/mechanics for a dungeon, but it is an idea of how it can be done. Personally, I'd prefer more dungeon content that actually requires you to read, put puzzles together, understand hints, and decipher meanings found in our lore. That's what creates an immersive experience and an interesting dungeon, something that isn't the common. It's partially why so many people loved the 2nd boss of Bardam's Mettle. Finally a boss fight that isn't just "burn it", but instead forces the players to understand how aoe's work and what patterns to take in order to survive and thus beat the boss. Not to mention while the mechanics are the same every time you run that boss, the positioning of some aoe's and how the players move won't always be the same... This makes a GOOD boss fight that depends on the coordination and different types of players/parties that have to also learn how to adapt on the fly based on the visual/audio cues given to them by the boss's mechanics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valic

Duties don't HAVE to be trivial grinds every single time.

---

Unless we're talking about bosses, which we're not as we're talking about dungeon layouts, they will never get too difficult that they wouldn't be trivialized even within the same expansion. (And even dungeon bosses are not immune, see the final boss of The Burn even during Stormblood.)

And I doubt they would make dungeons that much more difficult considering dungeons are required content in this game and dungeon roulettes are a central part of the day-to-day gameplay. They even provide easier modes for solo instances now, so think about that philosophy first when considering new ideas for dungeons.

Instead of branching dungeons, I'd prefer randomized dungeons. Basically, you'll still be funneled through, but the experience will change with each run.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by linay

Unless we're talking about bosses, which we're not as we're talking about dungeon layouts, they will never get too difficult that they wouldn't be trivialized even within the same expansion. (And even dungeon bosses are not immune, see the final boss of The Burn even during Stormblood.)

And I doubt they would make dungeons that much more difficult considering dungeons are required content in this game and dungeon roulettes are a central part of the day-to-day gameplay. They even provide easier modes for solo instances now, so think about that philosophy first when considering new ideas for dungeons.

---

Keep in mind this is a progressively skyward mmo... If it doesn't get harder, ur just doing everything you're already doing from previous expansions. Personally I've felt mechanics and parts of this game get progressively more difficult... It should be that way. I agree the idea to make solo instances have optional easier modes is pretty bad as those were good tests of you having to know your damn job. Those aside, if you read more than just the bold in my post... you can do more to a dungeon than just change the bosses to affect the layout of it. In my example, I offered the idea of hints that provide the party with information regarding 2 bosses in the instance that have mechanics that cater to specific roles and the players can decide which boss they fight next say... as the 2nd boss. One of two choices based on the party's composition/decision.

All this said, it is indeed possible to make bosses and dungeons not trivial through gear/level/stats. They just need to be more creative in how they do it. Like another earlier example, a map marking what tiles/roadway in the dungeon causes instant death when stood on, or where players need to stand in order to deactivate a trap and open the door. Otherwise you're wasting time or having your healer ress everyone constantly, leading into a pull with no MP or everyone with death debuffs. Well geared or not, having debuffs that make your dps go down, makes a slower run overall, and the decisions made can impact the overall effort. These are the kinda choices dungeons need more of to actually be adventurous and enjoyable imo.

This thread is basically the same as the other thread a while back that was asking for more endgame content. That whole thread was them trying to show that there are players that want more engaging content but hilarious enough it got bombarded by people who somehow felt attacked. I honestly think it's too late for them to even attempt to make dungeons more interesting without being raged on by someone having too much life in the way and that we all need to get dumbed down for them and their cause.

I mean just look at normal Coil Raids. They refuse to add those to Raid roulette because people got traumatized over meteors and mechanics that actually required your full attention. Even with the power creep of being at level 80, I'm pretty sure people would nope out of there faster than the Duty even showing them what raid they got dropped into. This is most likely why we don't have roulette for Extreme trials either.

And even if we focus on dungeons, ARR is a prime example of why we can't have nice things. I started this game when we were mid-way through Heavensward and the number of times people would tell me how insane Pharos originally was made me really feel like I missed this game when they actually tried to challenge us outside of raids.

SE would have to literally, from this point onwards, to just stop listening to people who always have a life story of excuses as to why they want 2-second dungeons and just create dungeons that cant be completed in less than fifteen minutes. Dungeons that make people think or engage you enough to where you don't even notice how long you were in there could become their focus. But this is all easier said than done. From dungeons to raids, they would have to completely rework the way they think and how they respond to the player base.

Just my thoughts on this topic.

I've been thinking about it and there's a few pieces of content where I think the exploration/branching dungeon could work. One of these is a treasure dungeon from treasure map. It removes the "clear for exp bonus" and the "chests give bad rewards" problems since people want to get as many chests as possible. While the current dungeons(left/right) are fun, it's also something we've seen several times already.

Instead, picture something like Toto-Rak with branching path and optional tunnels/rooms. You enter with your group through the portal, the enemies are randomized in both groups and placements while the boss is fixed. The special thing is that the dungeon is made up of 3 sets, from start to the first boss is set 1, up to second boss is set 2 and up to last boss is set 3. Furthermore, set 1 has 3 different layouts, same with set 2 and 3. Some when you enter, you might get set 1 layut 2, set 2 layout 3 and set 3 layout 3. They would have to make 9 different sets, but combining them gives 27 different dungeon layouts. Then add in randomized monster placements and chests and it would be different each time.
The chests would also be randomly plazed, including some behind locked doors so you first have to find a key to open it.
The final chest at the end will hold the best loot, but you can improve it by finding all the other chests in the dungeon. And to encourage killing monsters, they might drop lesser rewards such as materia.

Quote:

---

Bring back crowd control.

---

Sure.

Quote:

---

Bring back branching dungeons.

---

No. Tedious dungeons with numerous paths are not exciting. They are tedious. They needlessly draw things out while adding little. I used to play WoW, way back in the day. Dungeons like Wailing Caverns, BRD, BRS, and Razorfen Downs were abysmal. They were not fun. They actively pushed me *away* from running dungeons. I despised them then, and I despise them now. The dungeons in ARR weren't/aren't as bad as those in WoW, but they're still a bit tedious. The only reason I run them is for leveling roulette, or maybe to help someone else out. I'm not married. I don't have kids to neglect. I just don't like them.

Quote:

---

Bring back ADVENTURE.

---

What? You do realize that within a week people will have plotted out the 'optimal' route, right? And then all those little side-paths will just sit unused by everyone except newbies. Not much ADVENTURE there. Not much ADVENTURE in being stuck in an hour long dungeon, either, for that matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valic

Keep in mind this is a progressively skyward mmo... If it doesn't get harder, ur just doing everything you're already doing from previous expansions. Personally I've felt mechanics and parts of this game get progressively more difficult... It should be that way. I agree the idea to make solo instances have optional easier modes is pretty bad as those were good tests of you having to know your damn job. Those aside, if you read more than just the bold in my post... you can do more to a dungeon than just change the bosses to affect the layout of it. In my example, I offered the idea of hints that provide the party with information regarding 2 bosses in the instance that have mechanics that cater to specific roles and the players can decide which boss they fight next say... as the 2nd boss. One of two choices based on the party's composition/decision.

All this said, it is indeed possible to make bosses and dungeons not trivial through gear/level/stats. They just need to be more creative in how they do it. Like another earlier example, a map marking what tiles/roadway in the dungeon causes instant death when stood on, or where players need to stand in order to deactivate a trap and open the door. Otherwise you're wasting time or having your healer ress everyone constantly, leading into a pull with no MP or everyone with death debuffs. Well geared or not, having debuffs that make your dps go down, makes a slower run overall, and the decisions made can impact the overall effort. These are the kinda choices dungeons need more of to actually be adventurous and enjoyable imo.

---

It's not that they can't do it, but I just doubt whether there is any desire on the dev's part regarding normal dungeon designs, although maybe it could work for certain optional dungeons. Then again, maybe not if those dungeons are meant to be included in expert roulette.

As others have already said, branching dungeons and puzzle are a terrible idea for dungeons. Maybe as a new type of content like Palace of the Dead.

People will always take the easy/fast route and puzzles arent fun after you solve it the first time or two.

CC like the sleep spell would be fine. I think tanks should get a draw-in or knock-back to help position adds like landtraps. Theyre annoying. Sleep was also fun to use as a blm.

Since Trusts became a thing in 5.0, SqE could experiment with more explorable dungeons with options, and it would be possible to use Trusts, either specifically made for that dungeon (e.g. if dungeon isn't msq, but optional), or the normal Trusts (if msq).

Another thing they could do, could be that the dungeon could have different NPCs you meet throughout that may help you like with the Ghimlyt Dark, or slightly hinder you (not-quite-Trust escort mission? Probably not a popular idea).

There's a way to make that kind of dungeonn by adding secondary objective to them. I'll take Dungeons & Dragons Online as an example. If you kill all ennemies, open all coffers, destroy all crates, etc...you get a reward multiplier at the end of the dungeon. You might argue that the additionnal time it would take to complete these objectives might not make it worthwhile, like "you could do the dungeon normally two times in that time", but, if that multiplier would also apply to the rewards from the roulette (Xp, Tomestones, gils, etc...), you couldn't really do that "two times", so it would still be better to do it.

Also, outside of doing dungeons for farming Xp, you could also have branching paths that leads to different loot (and, of course, finally have meaningful dungeon rewards), so that you wouldn't always do the same. In v1, Toto-Rak worked that way, with a different boss and drops depending on the path you took and the force field you opened.

Another solution would be to randomize the dungeon layout so that you can't really plan your path before hand.

i actually like that navigating the dungeon is not super important for the tank.

one thing that turned me off to tanking in WoW was if you didn't know the "optimal" path for the dungeon you got flamed out of the group.

even in the low level dungeons here with the branching pathways ... most experienced tanks always take the same path with no deviation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DinahDemiurge

Please, SE. PLEASE...next xpac please get away from this linear zero-thought required gameplay. Please give us dungeons that are exciting and dangerous again. I have been leveling a new job recently and going through the 1-50 dungeons you can tell how much better designed they are compared to 3.x+ stuff...they have themes and unique objectives. Sure, they are super easy but later-levels you could make them more challenging and rewarding. Why not focus on this? Add another dose of challenge, and make crowd control useful again...The path that FFXIV is on cannot be sustained like this. We need DEPTH. "Expert" dungeons are a joke...4 man content needs re-evaluated ASAP.

---

You're aiming your pleas in the wrong direction. The community you're trying to speak for is exactly why the typical challenge levels of dungeons are the way they are. Multiple paths in dungeons? Players will choose the one of least resistance. Crowd control? What is this 2009? Depth? You're basically asking for an updated Toto Rak, and everyone HATES that dungeon.

The state of the game is sustainable because it's what players want. Believe it or not those wanting challenge, dept, and a thought process to be involved in casual content are in the extreme minority. Veteran players lack the patience to teach newer players. Vote kick feature is abused. Players abandoning duties at the start. Mentor program has been a joke. You're going to have to weed these players out while simultaneously replacing the funds they provide. Devs have bills to pay too.

This is an mmo in 2019. If you want progressive content where accessibility is gated by thought provoking challenges then you might want to look into single player games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

There's a way to make that kind of dungeonn by adding secondary objective to them. I'll take Dungeons & Dragons Online as an example. If you kill all ennemies, open all coffers, destroy all crates, etc...you get a reward multiplier at the end of the dungeon. You might argue that the additionnal time it would take to complete these objectives might not make it worthwhile, like "you could do the dungeon normally two times in that time", but, if that multiplier would also apply to the rewards from the roulette (Xp, Tomestones, gils, etc...), you couldn't really do that "two times", so it would still be better to do it.

Also, outside of doing dungeons for farming Xp, you could also have branching paths that leads to different loot (and, of course, finally have meaningful dungeon rewards), so that you wouldn't always do the same. In v1, Toto-Rak worked that way, with a different boss and drops depending on the path you took and the force field you opened.

Another solution would be to randomize the dungeon layout so that you can't really plan your path before hand.

---

Doesn't that face the exact same issue as branching paths, but now adding different player priorities into the mix? Actually, it seems to me that it would be even worse. It's similar to the conflicts you'd get from PotD runners who want to farm silver boxes at lower floors.

If we're going to have something that will necessarily cause different opinions, shouldn't it at least be within a single path of things to optimize, such as fight strategies, rather than merely, say, how many extra caverns to loot to the net gain of some players and the net loss of others based on their time, gear, and wealth?

I'm all for increasing replayability of dungeons, be it by investing a bit more time initially to better milk the art assets developed such as through different paths (ideally, imo, with either no player choice or with obvious influencers) to take through the dungeon or even by just offering longer encounters that can be dealt with in a greater variety of ways.

Honestly, I'd love a system like you're suggesting for content of either a premade variety or something more like exploratory missions, but I just don't see it meshing well with a standard DF experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vulcann

i actually like that navigating the dungeon is not super important for the tank.

one thing that turned me off to tanking in WoW was if you didn't know the "optimal" path for the dungeon you got flamed out of the group.

even in the low level dungeons here with the branching pathways ... most experienced tanks always take the same path with no deviation.

---

Honestly it is why when I got into FFXIV I was looking forward to playing as a tank but immediately found out going into a duty as a tank the first time was a terrible idea because it was disorienting and people behind me were clearly eager to get onto the next roulette. Later on the dungeons become basically a big tube which for the sake of social engineering I think is the better choice. It's the kind of thing where I think dungeons being more labyrinthine and mysterious better suits single player experiences than a multiplayer game.

As much as I like the idea of non-linear dungeons, it will take a whole day before the power freaks announce THIS is how it must be done, end of discussion. They did it back in ARR, complaining if someone wanted to take the sideways/deadends for chests, or the route that was 30 seconds slower. The exact thing would happen again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by linay

It's not that they can't do it, but I just doubt whether there is any desire on the dev's part regarding normal dungeon designs, although maybe it could work for certain optional dungeons. Then again, maybe not if those dungeons are meant to be included in expert roulette.

---

Even if they're not, there's still 50/60/70/80 roulette content. There's desire in the community so there should be desire from the devs but it's always gonna be just "we don't have the time, money, or manpower to implement these types of changes, 1.0 coding" or etc excuses like that when really it'll be fear of changing the format up and wasting creative ideas and effort on that type of content. Reality is, they have a plan they've stuck to and they're not gonna move from it because its how they have their workflow setup, scheduled, and works as far as players care. Even if it will never be what players would like to see, they know what they do players will still like and be enough for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Doesn't that face the exact same issue as branching paths, but now adding different player priorities into the mix? Actually, it seems to me that it would be even worse. It's similar to the conflicts you'd get from PotD runners who want to farm silver boxes at lower floors.

---

That's because progression and Aetherpool farming are not the same. The extreme majority of people do dungeons for the end rewards, and probably in roulettes, so you just create a system when "fully" doing the dungeon will give more rewards.

For the unusual situation where your goal is not simply to get the reward, it's just basic etiquette to talk about it as soon as possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Honestly, I'd love a system like you're suggesting for content of either a premade variety or something more like exploratory missions, but I just don't see it meshing well with a standard DF experience.

---

In my opinion, I think the game should move away from the Duty Finder monopoly. It's a very good thing if you need a quick run and you don't have time to create a party, but right now, even if you have that time, there's really no benefit of doing so (let's be honest, it's fairly unlikely you will end with a group that lacks the skills to clear any dungeon smoothly).

Premades should have additionnal perks, like min ilvl giving you additionnal rewards, or, like I suggested in several BLU topics, each job having limited features like traits or special item bonuses that wouldn't be available in matchmaking, making your job more powerful and/or more interesting to play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XiXiQ

As much as I like the idea of non-linear dungeons, it will take a whole day before the power freaks announce THIS is how it must be done, end of discussion. They did it back in ARR, complaining if someone wanted to take the sideways/deadends for chests, or the route that was 30 seconds slower. The exact thing would happen again.

---

If you have a random layout, you can't have that issue since no power freak will preemptively know where to go optimally. And again, if opening all chests or killing all mobs increases the reward (roulette included) by 25% (each), people will take the extra time to do it. (You should probably slightly reduce the basic reward compared to now, though)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

Multiple paths in dungeons? Players will choose the one of least resistance.

---

Not if they don't know where that path is. Since you talked about Toto-Rak, imagine if cells were placed randomly, you wouldn't have any choice but to look everywhere for them until you got enough of them. And on that topic, my guess is that people hate Toto-Rak not because of the branching path, but because of the sticky floor during the last third that adds absolutely nothing gameplaywise and only makes you lose time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malzian

"Give us back branching dungeons so people will find the most expedient route through them and berate you if you want to go explore the other way!" >.>

---

Do it for MSQ dungeons and then people can run it with trusts. So a fast route with randoms and at the same time being able to go as we want to with trusts.

I'm sure it would get tedious after so many runs of the same dungeon. A lot of you don't have patience to let new players stumble and learn in the existing linear dungeons; this community will implode if it has to try to work together more than it already does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goji1639

I'm sure it would get tedious after so many runs of the same dungeon.

---

Personally, I think it's more tedious to run the exact same dungeon the exact same way everytime. Now, if a branching path needs someone being able to use a Fire spell to lit a brazier, or someone to jump over a gap to activate a drawbridge...runs would have some kind of unpredictability that would keep the dungeon more fresh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goji1639

A lot of you don't have patience to let new players stumble and learn in the existing linear dungeons; this community will implode if it has to try to work together more than it already does.

---

Well, if you ragequit your dungeons because you can't do it in a straight line for less than 10 minutes, the one you hinder the most is yourself ;)
That's the interesting things about jerks...they are jerks even towards other jerks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

Not if they don't know where that path is. Since you talked about Toto-Rak, imagine if cells were placed randomly, you wouldn't have any choice but to look everywhere for them until you got enough of them. And on that topic, my guess is that people hate Toto-Rak not because of the branching path, but because of the sticky floor during the last third that adds absolutely nothing gameplaywise and only makes you lose time.

---

If the path is randomized, you take away the element of choice. You give players the choice, they choose the path of least resistance. If you take the time to digest this you'll see the exact same problem the devs face, and that's trying to make everyone happy, which just isn't possible. So you appeal to the masses.

The goo is just one of several reasons why players don't like Toto rak. It's really low level, the proto cell objective, last boss is a step up for those new to the game, takes forever to get through. Most of all though, it's not linear. You have to back track a bit to get all the proto cells. Speed parties also tend to forget one leaving someone to go all the way back for it because the boss won't spawn.

Believe me, I would love a dungeon with puzzles, and traps, a threat level by erasing progress if you don't make it past a check point, cool bosses and random pathways each time.... Wait. We have that don't we?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

If the path is randomized, you take away the element of choice.

---

Three paths, you don't know which one leads to the exit, what do you do ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

You have to back track a bit to get all the proto cells. Speed parties also tend to forget one leaving someone to go all the way back for it because the boss won't spawn.

---

You have one cell that's not directly into your path, and it roughly the same time to get than read the hint in Sastasha. It's not a big deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

Believe me, I would love a dungeon with puzzles, and traps, a threat level by erasing progress if you don't make it past a check point, cool bosses and random pathways each time.... Wait. We have that don't we?

---

Oh, great, we have two...and over 50 linear dungeons...who are we to ask for a different balance between the two ? But I wonder what you have in mind when you mention "puzzles"...

You can't bring back things that have never existed.

So ...

No on crowd control. Crowd control doesn't add any difficulty to the player, it just makes it easier for bad players to troll their group. Hard pass.

No to branching dungeons. Look, I absolutely love open-ended RPGs where you have these dungeons with sprawling paths. It's so much fun and excitement, but it's a horrible match for the current psyche of MMO players. You may get some good times in these dungeons for a couple weeks, but once an optimal path has been determined, players will berate and ridicule any tank that does not take the optimal path. It's an added level of toxicity that we can do without.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reynhart

Three paths, you don't know which one leads to the exit, what do you do ?

---

Choose one and go with it. However, you do understand that multiple layouts are essentially a different dungeon that would have to be designed and tested. That is not likely to happen with the game's restrictions. Unless we want less dungeons overall.

Quote:

---

You have one cell that's not directly into your path, and it roughly the same time to get than read the hint in Sastasha. It's not a big deal.

---

I never said it was. That doesn't change that it makes players divert from the linear path and that's the point.

Quote:

---

h, great, we have two...and over 50 linear dungeons...who are we to ask for a different balance between the two ? But I wonder what you have in mind when you mention "puzzles"...

---

Yes, two. With 300 floors to get through between them and incentives to run multiple times. There's also a good amount of strategy involved to clear these guys. Expecting anything like that to progress the MSQ just isn't going to happen ever.

It would be cool if Square tried something new but that isn't going to happen because the majority of the people are happy with the same formula over and over and over...

i feel like the Original poster doesn't have a lot of experience with MMOs in general OR just plays in a pre-made. Because if you play with the randos in this and other games you would know this is a terrible idea. i mean its great on paper (or pen and paper) but as others and I have said once people find the "optimal" path if anyone deviates from that path or doesn't know that path they will be berated and kicked from groups.

i mean hell i have seen groups kick a tank because they aren't wall to wall pulling because "reeeeeee it might take me 5 extra minutes to complete a dungeon!"