The Problem with Yoshi-P | An Honest Critique by Ember's Arcade

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mawlzy

That's interesting. From a plot point of view I didn't think it made any sense at all, and seemed very much grafted in to the MSQ as an afterthought.

---

Zenos in Endwalker makes no sense at all in general. His whole arc is that of a tantrum throwing toddler who pushes toy trucks and castles made of sand (In this case Garlemald offscreen oooof) to the ground, because the WoL won't play with him accompanied by his sidekick, the mental clown who pretends to the end that he's "deep". I still to this day believe that he was just a tack on, because they wanted to keep him alive for whatever reason and they just ran out of runway for him to actually do anything meaningful than being our cool dragon taxi and have a cool fight with a cool backround. He was there for the cool, very anime SE, very anime.

It was a COOL quest though! Gameplay-wise.

I never said the actual storytelling was actually good it’s just that’s about the only solo duty that attempts to actually do something interesting on terms of fusing the story with the gameplay

Even if the story is something straight out of harvester (1996) the fusion is still done far better in IFTC than any other solo duty

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

I never said the actual storytelling was actually good it’s just that’s about the only solo duty that attempts to actually do something interesting on terms of fusing the story with the gameplay

Even if the story is something straight out of harvester (1996) the fusion is still done far better in IFTC than any other solo duty

---

Should not a major plot device have subsequent consequences? Like I agree the whole concept was really bold, since it centered on the most brutal bodily violation imaginable. But the aftermath is basically a couple of the Scions asking "you feeling better now, honey?" then we all go off to fix another problem and it's never mentioned again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mawlzy

Should not a major plot device have subsequent consequences? Like I agree the whole concept was really bold, since it centered on the most brutal bodily violation imaginable. But the aftermath is basically a couple of the Scions asking "you feeling better now, honey?" then we all go off to fix another problem and it's never mentioned again.

---

That's the unfortunate outcome of the MSQ having no consequences in general.

Ultima Thule later shows that problem once again.
The Scions all sacrifice themselve to allow you to reach the top. It's supposed to tug at your heartstrings (in a very cheap way imo) but fails to do so because they are immediately revived afterwards, in the exact same state they were before, once again no consequences and the entire section falls flat because it might as well not have happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Absurdity

That's the unfortunate outcome of the MSQ having no consequences in general.

Ultima Thule later shows that problem once again.
The Scions all sacrifice themselve to allow you to reach the top. It's supposed to tug at your heartstrings (in a very cheap way imo) but fails to do so because they are immediately revived afterwards, in the exact same state they were before, once again no consequences and the entire section falls flat because it might as well not have happened.

---

Personally I think it would've been much better if at least half of the Scions perished then.
That the crystal didn't have enough power to bring all of them back.
It was the Endwalker expansion after all, the end of a story that's been going on for many many years.

It would've also made the next expansion feel more like a new adventure if not all the previous characters were still tagging along.
That the players ventures forth while remembering those that were lost.
Would've made it much more impactful imo.

"Everyone likes a happy ending" as they say.
But bittersweet endings are the ones that people remember.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Torashiki

I literally dont care about MSQ duties difficulty. I dont really get why anyone would, if I wanted challenge I would go prog an ultimate or criterion savage. The compartmentalization of content is a good design, as a midcore savage raider.

...

This weird nonsense about ''Yoshi-p hiding away difficulty'' seems to me to be some weird at attempt at finding something to complain for FFXIV not being something it never has been, more than anything.

Not everyone wants to play Elden Ring to ''earn'' a game's story, as someone that loves Elden Ring. I am not that person, but that doesnt mean I cant coexist with those people.

---

This is not about difficulty though, nor is it advocating for Elden Ring style difficulty during MSQ. There are nuances in gameplay requirements, and right now, that requirement for FFXIV MSQ is pretty close to "none".
Why, pray tell, could we, the player, not play as Wuk Lamat capturing an Alpaca? Why weren't we allowed to control the float of the Hanu festival and make sure it goes the right way? Why could we not craft the xibruq pibil? Why was the train scene a cutscene and not a fight on the train, or a goldsaucer-esque shooting minigame, or maybe even both of those things? Why is our own input in the fight for Solution 9 so inconsequential that you can press no buttons at all, sit in a corner during the Otis fight, and win?

The answer to that is still twofold. One, CS3 are deadly afraid of people quitting their beloved game because they were confronted with a gameplay requirement (requirement! not difficulty) of any kind (i keep repeating those examples but - Steps of Faith, or In from the Cold, anyone?). And two, the outcriers that yap about not being able to instantly progress the story because of something in the game asking them to actually play the game. And for those that still struggle, solo instances do advertise their easy mode should the player fail, so its not like they would be completely barred from progressing if they were to struggle with something.

Without a shred of difficulty you can’t have any engagement

If you never want to interact with the game as a game you can’t also be annoyed the game is basically a visual novel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ovIm

This is not about difficulty though, nor is it advocating for Elden Ring style difficulty during MSQ.

---

Difficulty can be a storytelling tool they refuse to use, and the dark souls comparison always seem to be there when they add any possible friction to the content, remember people angrily comparing the DT dungeons to Elden Ring because they wiped a couple of times on new content they've never seen before?

I definitely agree that lack of player agency and emergent gameplay are serious issues for the game right now. I rolled an alt on a random server and ended up on one that seemed fairly normie-RP heavy, and the lengths people go to to make their own fun, working with almost nothing, is pretty impressive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Volgia

Difficulty can be a storytelling tool they refuse to use, and the dark souls comparison always seem to be there when they add any possible friction to the content, remember people angrily comparing the DT dungeons to Elden Ring because they wiped a couple of times on new content they've never seen before?

---

I'd suggest the only way to make required content appeal to the wide demographic SE wants is to dual-track the difficulty. Otherwise we're left with this pantomime where the left side of the audience shouts "It's too hard," and the right replies "It's too easy." And both sides are pissed off.