You can bring back 2 features from 1.0 what would it be?

I would like to bring back the ability to request repairs from a friend. I’d not want the required material like it used to have in 1.0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wyakin

I would like to bring back the ability to request repairs from a friend.

---

As an omnicrafter who gets frustrated when my static has to drop the instance so non-crafters can repair at a vendor, then queue back in... yes, this. Let me repair their gear in the instance between pulls and save us time. Please.

(1) Nail of the Heavens

thats it...
but if i MUST have a #2, I guess some of the removed locations as additional zones to the 2.0 areas.

1: Springtime Coerthas. That was the most beautiful zone in the game and they completely destroyed it just to have an ice zone. They made the other areas looks so wonderful and dropped a big poo on Coerthas.

2: Overworld content that was more than fates. Like the original relics. They were complicated, they were difficult, they were not just handed out like Halloween candy. I am fine with making the questline a little easier, but everything in the overworld is just fates and it's frankly boring. Bozja and Eureka both had so much potential but they were reduced to just fate grinds. I would loved Bozja to be more like hamlet defense or the ffxi campaign that they were made out to be like. But nope, just fates with a different name and arbitrary rules like participant limits. They innovated so much during the course of version 1, but since relaunch its been corridor dungeons, arena mega bosses and fates. I mean, I know they want to cater to the casual crowd, but they can still be innovative while keeping things simple. /rantover

3: Path companions, the OG trusts.

4: buffs and debuffs, just dps and heals with strict rotations gets super boring

5: Notorious Monsters with decent respawns in general areas that dropped actually good loot

6: Shards and Crystals dropping from mobs.

7: Having to collect items to fight primals instead of just queueing at random.

8: The need to make friends because the world was dangerous and the content was easier (and a ton more fun) with friends.

9: Darker themes. Not every story needs a happy ending.

10: I would love the original zones to be expanded with new maps so we get more of what we lost back. We are missing at least 2/3 of mor dhona for instance. All zones are a fraction of what they were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MicahZerrshia

They innovated so much during the course of version 1, but since relaunch its been corridor dungeons, arena mega bosses and fates. I mean, I know they want to cater to the casual crowd, but they can still be innovative while keeping things simple. /rantover

---

To be fair, I don't think this one is entirely on SquareEnix, or even on 'casual' players. ARR had some dungeons where they were experimenting with multiple paths and whatnot, and in ARR (and even Heavensward), raids had more than just a single boss fight in a big arena. They were clearly willing to follow that path!

But people started optimizing. Why take the side paths in Haukke Manor, when you can just blow through to the end? Why go into the treasure rooms in Qarn? Why even bother to get the pieces to solve the puzzle? Forget about particular mob mechanics, just gather everything and pull it as far as you can, burn it all down at once.

Even now, when the devs do branch out to try something different—like the Great Hunt (Extreme), or the mechanics challenge in Bardam's Mettle—a vocal portion of the playerbase groans about it being weird or different or just plain inefficient to run compared to other content.

I mean, the playerbase demonstrated that if given dungeons that had multiple side areas to wander into, puzzles to solve, and whatnot... well, we'd treat it as a corridor dungeon and pull until a wall stopped us, ignoring every puzzle possible to ignore. So SquareEnix started giving us corridor dungeons where you pull until a wall stops you. I kinda feel like we as players bear some of the blame there.

(I do agree with all your points otherwise, though.)

Every race (and both genders of those races) (if they had their opposite gender.) having different death animations. A wipe would look more realistic (and less weird) if everyone didn’t collapse the exact same way.

Only 2?!

1.} Absolutely Auto-Hide chat log. It makes the screen so much more clean and you really get to immerse yourself into the game when its doing its own thing when people are quiet.
2.} Quality cutscenes. If 1.0 did anything right, it was their cutscenes. The 1.0 development team clearly loved their game. Unfinished, and a mess, yes, but loved very dearly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Packetdancer

snip

---

The reason it's like this is because, like you said, the rewards do not match the effort. When it comes to innovating they also need to be a little more aware of the reward system. People treat things like corridor dungeons simply because there is no need not to. If SE tackled that issue and made effort more equal to reward, they could do a lot more in a variety of places. Dynamis in FFXI is the perfect example. You could go in there and skip packs as you go straight to the bosses and be in and out or you could farm the entire zone. And people farmed the entire zone because it was worthwhile, even fodder hidden across the map could potentially drop something valuable, which made running across the map to an area you would never go otherwise to kill those 2 enemies, the norm. The fact that fodder enemies and alternative paths have no purpose outside of making something longer is the issue.

That goes for the groaners too. If SE would innovate a little more often and work on their effort vs rewards system, they could do a lot with likely less pushback. There will always be pushback but there is also going to be the group that eagerly awaits what they have up their sleeve next. It would also make innovation more palatable to the groaners who are so used to corridors and arenas that refuse to give something new a shot.

I wasn't here for 1.0 but I did start during the ARR beta. From that era, I'd bring back 8-man feast.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Packetdancer

To be fair, I don't think this one is entirely on SquareEnix, or even on 'casual' players. ARR had some dungeons where they were experimenting with multiple paths and whatnot, and in ARR (and even Heavensward), raids had more than just a single boss fight in a big arena. They were clearly willing to follow that path!

But people started optimizing. Why take the side paths in Haukke Manor, when you can just blow through to the end? Why go into the treasure rooms in Qarn? Why even bother to get the pieces to solve the puzzle? Forget about particular mob mechanics, just gather everything and pull it as far as you can, burn it all down at once.

Even now, when the devs do branch out to try something different—like the Great Hunt (Extreme), or the mechanics challenge in Bardam's Mettle—a vocal portion of the playerbase groans about it being weird or different or just plain inefficient to run compared to other content.

I mean, the playerbase demonstrated that if given dungeons that had multiple side areas to wander into, puzzles to solve, and whatnot... well, we'd treat it as a corridor dungeon and pull until a wall stopped us, ignoring every puzzle possible to ignore. So SquareEnix started giving us corridor dungeons where you pull until a wall stops you. I kinda feel like we as players bear some of the blame there.

(I do agree with all your points otherwise, though.)

---

The only way you'll get players to interact with the dungeons more is reinventing the dungeons themselves.

There is many ways for dungeons to be more open rather than linear, but the way the Developers have done so far that is not going to happen at this point.

I wouldn't be surprised if FFXIV is ending soon (if this is the last expansion coming up) because of the inherent issues with this game that they can't simply redo.


Actually maybe it will give them a excuse to make a new final fantasy MMO and learn what worked and what did not.