Bit of a selfish ask, Do you think 6.0 zones will return to the high fantasy of HW's?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Remish

I would love a giant castle to explore. Large rooms, lots of hallways. You can fly in and out of the windows. There are towers and spiraling stair cases. A giant courtyard. Rooms all over the place, multiple mess halls. Prison cells in the basement, and maybe even a dockyard below.

---

Yeah, but what would you do in there? The overworld is just lifeless, which is a big problem in XIV. I hope they at least switch it up with interesting FATEs. These are usually also quite boring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mimilu

Are ShB's zones not high fantasy? :-o
I mean, the two weakest for me were Amh Araeng and Kholusia but the rest felt very high fantasy to me.

I am kind of worried about 6.0's zones and aesthetic though...
It's been heavily implied we're going into Garlean territory and seeing their aesthetic and how they leave most areas they've taken over, I don't know what to think... >x>

---

Yeah I also found a lot of the shadowbringer zones to be quite beautiful especially Ill Mheg. And like you I am afraid how the Garlemald expansion will be. Their style is just nothing I like and as you said, its kinda telling how they left some of the zones behind..just thinking about that one lake where they pumped in all the stuff they did not need. A whole zone in that style is not something I am looking forward to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by linayar

The amount of space might be the same, but the zones are usually explored via the MSQ, so there would be less MSQ per zone on average to get through all of the zones, unless they increase the MSQ.

---

Respectfully, I think you're misunderstanding.

He's saying if you cut the size to 1/2, and also the story in each zone by about 1/2, you still get the same total land size with the same total main story time.

He's figuratively saying cut the pizza into, say, 12 slices, instead of 6. Same amount of pizza, just in smaller chunks, and with the option for each of the 12 slices to have individual toppings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alleo

Yeah I also found a lot of the shadowbringer zones to be quite beautiful especially Ill Mheg. And like you I am afraid how the Garlemald expansion will be. Their style is just nothing I like and as you said, its kinda telling how they left some of the zones behind..just thinking about that one lake where they pumped in all the stuff they did not need. A whole zone in that style is not something I am looking forward to.

---

I have a feeling that while yes the main area will be Islabard the primary hub city will be Sharlyan, also for a zone ide Ternclyft looks visually appealing, also they might wow us with some garlean structures i mean if you look at most real world empires including some of the ones Garlemald seems to take inspiration from like Rome or European empires like Brtiain or France the heart or homeland proper is usually where you see the most advanced architecture where as the colonies and provinces are usalyy either just trying to bring some of the comforts of home or are simply utilitarian in use, for example look at places like the early American colonies compared to England, France, or Spain proper, although at the same token sometimes large swathes of the capitol cities suffered from overpopulation and other issues, look at London during the Victorian Era with it's smog and high poverty rate. I seriously hope since it is Islabard though that each zone has it's own culture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kaynide

Respectfully, I think you're misunderstanding.

He's saying if you cut the size to 1/2, and also the story in each zone by about 1/2, you still get the same total land size with the same total main story time.

He's figuratively saying cut the pizza into, say, 12 slices, instead of 6. Same amount of pizza, just in smaller chunks, and with the option for each of the 12 slices to have individual toppings.

---

No, I understood that.

The part in bold is what I'm saying. In other words, there would be less MSQ per zone, so you'll be moving faster through a zone unless they compensate for it by adding more MSQ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by linayar

The amount of space might be the same, but the zones are usually explored via the MSQ, so there would be less MSQ per zone on average to get through all of the zones, unless they increase the MSQ.

---

I don't think you understand the concept I'm trying to paint.

Of course there would be less MSQ "per zone" since there are twice as many zones. However, the total amount of MSQ would still be exactly the same as before, because you'd literally just be taking the story and splitting it equally in parts. Sure, individually two smaller zones would have "less" MSQ in them per zone when compared to one big zone, but what does it even matter if the total amount of MSQ remains exactly the same?

Please tell me I don't have to keep explaining this further.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wind-Krysvein

I don't think you understand the concept I'm trying to paint.

Of course there would be less MSQ "per zone" since there are twice as many zones. However, the total amount of MSQ would still be exactly the same as before, because you'd literally just be taking the story and splitting it equally in parts. Sure, individually two smaller zones would have "less" MSQ in them per zone when compared to one big zone, but what does it even matter if the total amount of MSQ remains exactly the same?

Please tell me I don't have to keep explaining this further.

---

You are actually the one who doesn't understand.

Same actual time spent in a zone is not the same as perceived time in zone. 12 zones means an increase in time spent on transitional story (story focused around arriving at, introducing to and leaving from a zone) between zones a the cost of a decrease in time spent on story set in zones. You either need to increase the total story or you end up with 12 zone each having less than half the story of 6 zones even if the 12 zones and 6 zones have an equally long msq.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wind-Krysvein

I don't think you understand the concept I'm trying to paint.

Of course there would be less MSQ "per zone" since there are twice as many zones. However, the total amount of MSQ would still be exactly the same as before, because you'd literally just be taking the story and splitting it equally in parts. Sure, individually two smaller zones would have "less" MSQ in them per zone when compared to one big zone, but what does it even matter if the total amount of MSQ remains exactly the same?

Please tell me I don't have to keep explaining this further.

---

It's what Ultimatecalibur said. The total amount of MSQ is irrelevant when you have less MSQ per zone. The more important factor is what you do in each zone, otherwise there is no reason to have that extra zone and even having to have a load screen to get there when you have less to do there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ultimatecalibur

You are actually the one who doesn't understand.

---

As a matter of fact, I do. I had already begun to wonder if the argument you present in your message really was the one being made and, unfortunately, it was. This verifies yet again that neither of you have yet understood what I'm trying to say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ultimatecalibur

Same actual time spent in a zone is not the same as perceived time in zone. 12 zones means an increase in time spent on transitional story (story focused around arriving at, introducing to and leaving from a zone) between zones a the cost of a decrease in time spent on story set in zones. You either need to increase the total story or you end up with 12 zone each having less than half the story of 6 zones even if the 12 zones and 6 zones have an equally long msq.

---

Yes, here it is. The fundamental roadblock that prevents you from getting my point. Let me spell this out for you in a way that you cannot in any way misinterpret:

Imagine the Tempest and the underground caverns leading to Memory Amaurot. When you approach/enter the first Amaurotian building (the one with the elevator) the zone changes.

Memory Amaurot is now its own zone. All the cutscenes remain exactly the same, so no MSQ is added. Would this cause problems for the flow of the story? Of course not, because for all intents and purposes, Memory Amaurot is already its own area.

So what are the benefits of this, you may ask? Why the loading screen?

The devs can now take advantage of the fact that the areas have been separated: they proceed to add more small details and tweaks to Memory Amaurot, making it more in line with ARR in terms of map design, all made possible by the loading screen. (Whether Amaurot actually needs said extra details is not relevant to the point so do not bring it up. The area used is just an example.)

This is, in essence, what I am getting at. Whether even this explanation could finally manage to get across to you or not, I don't care, for I am done cluttering this thread. Present any further arguments directly ingame, because I won't be reading any here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wind-Krysvein

The devs can now take advantage of the fact that the areas have been separated: they proceed to add more small details and tweaks to Memory Amaurot, making it more in line with ARR in terms of map design, all made possible by the loading screen. (Whether Amaurot actually needs said extra details is not relevant to the point so do not bring it up. The area used is just an example.)

---

It may not be relevant to your point, but it is relevant to my point. I have no problem with loading screens, but they're definitely not worth having just to add "small details" to what is essentially the same area. Loading screens are better as shortcuts between two separate zones, not to divide the same zone into smaller zones.

The exception being if they are planning to add a lot of content to a zone that would require separating the zones.

Personally, as long as the new zones in 6.0 are unique and interesting, then I don't care what we get... though honestly I'm not too crazy about anymore zones like Rak'tika Greatwood, cause that zone is just a mess, like digging up a tree stump, flipping it upside down, and washing the roots off haha. That, and Ronka was supposed to have a floating city, but oh well.

Kinda really hoping for a hybrid float islands with lots of ocean below them sort of zone. Think like... Azys Lla but mixed with the Ruby Sea. Take the verticality of the zone to the max!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wind-Krysvein

The devs can now take advantage of the fact that the areas have been separated: they proceed to add more small details and tweaks to Memory Amaurot, making it more in line with ARR in terms of map design, all made possible by the loading screen. (Whether Amaurot actually needs said extra details is not relevant to the point so do not bring it up. The area used is just an example.)

---

Would they want to do that, though? Would they put more work into each zone or would we just get the same thing in two halves without the ability to fly between them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vyrerus

Personally, as long as the new zones in 6.0 are unique and interesting, then I don't care what we get... though honestly I'm not too crazy about anymore zones like Rak'tika Greatwood, cause that zone is just a mess, like digging up a tree stump, flipping it upside down, and washing the roots off haha. That, and Ronka was supposed to have a floating city, but oh well.

Kinda really hoping for a hybrid float islands with lots of ocean below them sort of zone. Think like... Azys Lla but mixed with the Ruby Sea. Take the verticality of the zone to the max!

---

Very much agree on the first part. While I've some bias honestly I've consistently been pretty happy just to exploring whatever, just keep something interesting about it and we're good lol.

I didn't really find as many issues with the tree area as you did, but I would say I was a little sad that they didn't play with the verticality for it. They did in Khousia which is cool, but I feel it would have made a lot of sense in the forest area lol. Like the background potential and exploration was still fun for me, so not saying I found anything wrong with the general vibe (though I did get a good chuckle out of your upside down tree analogy). Still hoping to get a sort of Clerya / Lifa tree experience in FFXIV (which would definitely require the verticality).

Floating Islands that have ground would be amazing. I know you said ocean, which would be neat too, but just the idea that you're on the ground looking up at floating Islands above that you later then get to be on would be pretty neat. So a super massive verticality lol. Sea of Clouds was a fun zone but I would love to get a Zeal like inspired zone with it being a bit more lush / fantasy- little bit of a wistful background track, such sort of experience. On your comment of floating Island on top of the ocean I get the vibe of Laputa from Castle in the Sky... and that would be epic :D.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wind-Krysvein

So what are the benefits of this, you may ask? Why the loading screen?

The devs can now take advantage of the fact that the areas have been separated: they proceed to add more small details and tweaks to Memory Amaurot, making it more in line with ARR in terms of map design, all made possible by the loading screen. (Whether Amaurot actually needs said extra details is not relevant to the point so do not bring it up. The area used is just an example.)

---

And you completely misunderstand how development works. Time is what allowed the ARR zones to be so detailed. Splitting the existing zones in half would not suddenly allow them to have ARR levels of detail. You would only get that level of detail if you either halved the total number of zones in each expansion or made all the zones half the size they currently are with no additional zones added.