The Formula won't change

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kohashi

So if you are unsubbed why are you terminally online in this forum? Gotta fill your time with something I guess.

---

Because I have nothing better to do while being sick or Stockholm syndrome I guess.
Have a nice day troll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kohashi

So if you are unsubbed why are you terminally online in this forum? Gotta fill your time with something I guess.

---

Says the person replying to post after post after having unsubbed.

This is either classic projection, or the unfunny troll is running out of material.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katish

Very persuasive, astute even, argument. If this weren't an MMO and if there didn't exist examples that you could pull from to make a comparative counter-example. You can have varying levels of difficulty when it comes to new dungeons, in fact an MMO named Mabinogi (a 16 maybe more years old mmo) has beginner dungeons, normal dungeons, basic dungeons, intermediate dungeons, advanced dungeons, hard mode normal dungeons, hard mode basic dungeons, hard mode advanced dungeons, shadow missions (which are effectively non-floor related monster environments), theater missions (Same as prior), and a whole lot of other monster related content all varying levels of difficulty and execution depending on how they are named (beginner, normal, basic, intermediate, advanced, and phantasmal (more modernly added now))

Now it doesn't have to be that crazy but a lot of folks seem to be asking for more varying levels of difficulty combined with better execution. I am not sure how that is hard to understand, there doesn't just have to exist the easiest/hardest end of the spectrum of content and it doesn't all have to be made in the same format.

I don't care one way or the other, I am more concerned on why people are against more content being added, that surely wasn't on my bingo card of FFXIV players, especially with the lack of newer added content and the spacing issue on how long that content is supposed to last.

---

Im not even sure what post of mine exactly you are referring to here, but in regards to the other person i was commenting: They wanted savage dungeons, yet they don't even do criterion which is literally savage dungeons. Ok.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arlythe

Where did I say I want criterion dungeons, exactely?
I said I want savage versions of the REGULAR 4-player dungeons, the one's we got 13 of in ShB and EW, 18 in HW and 15 in SB, not the 3 criterion dungeons.
If your only response to this is parroting "Hurr you didn't play it" then please, save us both the time and don't even bother typing.

---

This isn't rocket science. Your argument for why criterion doesn't work for you as opposed to your exact ask makes 0 sense. Criterion and Criterion(Savage) are the exact type of content you are asking for. Yet you don't even do those. You want me to believe you want that content for every dungeon in the game post-ARR? You aren't even doing the savage dungeons in the game now. This is comical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomsYoungerBro

Criterion and Criterion(Savage) are the exact type of content you are asking for. Yet you don't even do those. You want me to believe you want that content for every dungeon in the game post-ARR? You aren't even doing the savage dungeons in the game now. This is comical.

---

Not really. I guess if we take modern XIV's dismal normal dungeons as the standard then yes, technically they qualify as dungeons, but they're really just boss gauntlets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kohashi

So if you are unsubbed why are you terminally online in this forum? Gotta fill your time with something I guess.

---

Well, that applies to me and that is 50% of the reason in my case.
the other 50% is that (no exaggeration whatsoever, whatsoever) that I have only within the last couple of weeks unsubbed, and for a long time before that I had only been logging in for the qualities that the game shares with the indentation in the seat of my old office chair:- namely that is was familiar. However, like my old office chair it was becoming rather uncomfortable.
However, having spent so much time in the game I do still find it 'of interest' (even if not the game play), unlike logging into the game, I am enjoying logging in here.
There are also... 'far' more people chatting. And that's a Fact.

...
Oh.. and like my old office chair, looking at people who had left, it had become a source of embarrassment to myself.

Put another way (I am enjoying riffing on this theme) that while I hope the game improves, yes, I am saying that at present the game has all the appeal of a sweaty arse crack. (no doubt there is a mod for the subculture that enjoys that kind of thing, somewhere.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Absurdity

Not really. I guess if we take modern XIV's dismal normal dungeons as the standard then yes, technically they qualify as dungeons, but they're really just boss gauntlets.

---

Which era of dungeon design do you like the most and what do you think modern ones are lacking? Sincere question, I always thought dungeons are pretty even all across the board.
I don't remember which patch it was but they modernized a lot of the older dungeons from ARR by removing some things that were confusing or drawing out the length of it, did you like those changes?

Dungeon design is great already for content that's meant to be repeated at nauseam. There just isn't enough variety and they're too easy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moqi

Dungeon design is great already for content that's meant to be repeated at nauseam. There just isn't enough variety and they're too easy.

---

The problem is that they're designed as obligatory MSQ gameplay segments first and foremost, and they want the MSQ's difficulty to be tuned for the lowest common denominator. The only optional dungeon is slightly harder, and Yoshida made sure to promise that its difficulty won't be the norm.

That's why we need more than one dungeon per patch so they can shove all the story dungeon into leveling (aka MSQ) and have proper, optional midcore content for expert roulette.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moqi

That's why we need more than one dungeon per patch so they can shove all the story dungeon into leveling (aka MSQ) and have proper, optional midcore content for expert roulette.

---

That's where I'd put in my envisioned savage dungeons. So you can qeue them if you like, you also have more variety and more of a challenge if that is what you seek.

I don't know what the point is to change dungeons when the itemization and stats are lacking as a system. There is no gear to chase, no stats to chase nor test variations with. Even in the glam front a lot of the new dungeon gear tends to be recolors of old gear, or some just blatantly give you only accessories.

Tomestone cap, woooo? Thats the only thing we're chasing really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hallarem

I don't know what the point is to change dungeons when the itemization and stats are lacking as a system. There is no gear to chase, no stats to chase nor test variations with. Even in the glam front a lot of the new dungeon gear tends to be recolors of old gear, or some just blatantly give you only accessories.

Tomestone cap, woooo? Thats the only thing we're chasing really.

---

you sir take my thumb. everytime i bring that point you've got a bunch of white knights coming to defend that lazy gamedesign. so take care they'll come with their forks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arlythe

If anything, I feel like there should be more challenging content for small groups of 4.
Like a savage version of 4-player dungeons you can do with your close friends instead of relying to statics that can have a less reliable longevity.

---

We had these last expansion and almost no one did them. Lmfao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hallarem

Tomestone cap, woooo? Thats the only thing we're chasing really.

---

I mean, yes. Which is why they need to be as streamlined as possible while still having more interesting fight and mobs than now, but very much keep the straight hallway into boss arena design.

More original glamour wouldn't hurt either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JRosa

We had these last expansion and almost no one did them. Lmfao

---

No we didn't, we had criterion dungeons.
But it is a concept that can be improved and worked upon so people actually run it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arlythe

Which era of dungeon design do you like the most and what do you think modern ones are lacking? Sincere question, I always thought dungeons are pretty even all across the board.
I don't remember which patch it was but they modernized a lot of the older dungeons from ARR by removing some things that were confusing or drawing out the length of it, did you like those changes?

---

The dungeon design in XIV was never amazing, but for the last 3 expansions it has been the exact same copy+pasted formula of 2 trash packs -> wall -> 2 trash packs -> boss -> repeat, with nothing but linear corridors connecting you to the next boss arena.
They're all essentially the same dungeon with the background scenery swapped out. Just look at Grand Cosmos with the big open garden area, but you're somehow still shoehorned into a bunch of corridors by invisible walls.

As clunky as a lot of the ARR dungeons ended up being, at least they were experimenting with different ideas and gimmicks. Boss mechanics have slightly improved in Dawntrail from the tired old "spread/stack, chariot/dynamo, dodge cleaves" song and dance while you whack the boss, but the actual layout between bosses has stayed exactly the same.

If it were up to me I would open the dungeons up a lot more, design the layout like a place people might actually live in, with open areas, alternate paths and optional bosses.
Give those a chance to dop housing items, minions and maybe even rare mounts to incentivize doing the optional ones, but allow people to just rush to the end if all they want is the quick roulette bonus.

For context I still consider Blackrock Depths in vanilla WoW to be the best dungeon ever made, something Blizzard themselves have never quite managed to repeat, but that's partially because they shackled themselves to the mythic+ system so all dungeons need to work with it.

XIV doesn't really have that restriction and if one dungeon takes longer than the others in the pool (for expert as an example) just increase the rewards you get from it, they were already able to do it with Praetorium/Castrum before the rework.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JRosa

We had these last expansion and almost no one did them. Lmfao

---

The problems with Criterion are myriad. The extreme jump in difficulty compared to the normal variant version, the arbitrary restrictions on raise, the lack of enticing rewards and, at least for me, the fact that it wasn't really a harder dungeon but a bunch of extreme trial/savage bosses strung together.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daralii

The problem is that they're designed as obligatory MSQ gameplay segments first and foremost, and they want the MSQ's difficulty to be tuned for the lowest common denominator. The only optional dungeon is slightly harder, and Yoshida made sure to promise that its difficulty won't be the norm.

---

But this wasn't always the case was it? Some of those earlier dungeon designs could be challenging. The original aurum was wonderful in it's way.
It just wasn't always like it is now.

Now if they've done it for accessibility reasons I would absolutely adore that. I would happily say if it's a choice between keeping me subbed and keeping MSQ MMO open for accessibility needs, forget about me. But if you want to keep me I'll need more than 3 dungeons every 2 years or whatever it is.
If it's not for accessibility reasons then they have severely underestimated the lowest denominator.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gurgeh

If it's not for accessibility reasons then they have severely underestimated the lowest denominator.

---

Given the complaints about the difficulty of Dawntrail's dungeons and solo duties, unfortunately I doubt that's true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kohashi

There is absolutely no reason for the tome cap even to exist in the first place. So what I want to farm 24/7 and gear all of my roles with BiS that has actually no 'real' value beyond fun and doing the fights using different roles.

How is it different from logging in 1 day/ week vs being active and not logging in after for a time? I would very much like the developer not to treat me like a child who needs their hand constantly being held and told what I am and not allowed to do with my own damn time and money.

---

Tome cap is ok. However the cap should be raised every week rather than the fomo you have to get x each week.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrizzlyTank

Tome cap is ok. However the cap should be raised every week rather than the fomo you have to get x each week.

---

Yeah that's a good point. It was effectively the 450 cap that stopped me trying Savage. When I had a chance to join a group and try it, my main job was already taken.
Why they bother with the cap at all given that only applys to people who already are the only people who actually also have content to keep them there anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrizzlyTank

Tome cap is ok. However the cap should be raised every week rather than the fomo you have to get x each week.

---

imho tome gear should be an unlock feature.
Pay 825 tomes, you can grab the tome chest item for every class similar to how you can pick up the AF gear since ShB. Keeps the cap working, allows you to gear your alt classes.

I'll die on this hill.
Sharlayan is where the world building died / will die.

Why bother adventuring, finding out information, talking to locals, talking to people, when:

Sharlayan has all the top tech in the world
Sharlayan has a LISTENING POST INTO THE AFTERLIFE
Sharlayan can invent any mcguffin the writer wants it to invent (Example, teleporter that doesnt need aether manipulation, because Thancred couldn't teleport, CONVENIENT)
Sharlayan has a scholar for every possible thing you can think of
Sharlayan can send gleaners to get anything in the world
Sharlayan HAS EXPOSITION FOR DAYS FOR YOU BECAUSE THEY KNOW EVERYTHING or someone wrote a book on something
Sharlayan built a spaceship, to get into outer space and are planning on using it for further planetary exploration. Yes, that is a sentence

Dude, why bother with any notion of discovery, let alone any fantasy aspect in the worldbuilding anymore when these nerds got us covered in every front.

Maintenance mode literally means the game's only maintenance is server upkeep. The game is physically maintained, but no longer actively developed or built on ONLY maintained.
The team absolutely has the resources, but theyre using them poorly and arent incentivized to do better while the higher ups are pulling Yoshi-P's ear to focus on anything but the sole reason SQE isn't being sold off

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hallarem

I'll die on this hill.
Sharlayan is where the world building died / will die.

Why bother adventuring, finding out information, talking to locals, talking to people, when:

Sharlayan has all the top tech in the world
Sharlayan has a LISTENING POST INTO THE AFTERLIFE
Sharlayan can invent any mcguffin the writer wants it to invent (Example, teleporter that doesnt need aether manipulation, because Thancred couldn't teleport, CONVENIENT)
Sharlayan has a scholar for every possible thing you can think of
Sharlayan can send gleaners to get anything in the world
Sharlayan HAS EXPOSITION FOR DAYS FOR YOU BECAUSE THEY KNOW EVERYTHING or someone wrote a book on something
Sharlayan built a spaceship, to get into outer space and are planning on using it for further planetary exploration. Yes, that is a sentence

Dude, why bother with any notion of discovery, let alone any fantasy aspect in the worldbuilding anymore when these nerds got us covered in every front.

---

You need to replace Sharlayan with Cid Garlond. Didn't you follow? The guy just waltzed in and claimed ownership of the spaceship immediately. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turtledeluxe

This logic doesn't hold up. Just because a game is releasing content == it isn't in maintenance mode? Perhaps you would care to clarify your definition of maintenance mode. I think people use the term differently. I don't think OP is arguing the game is to the point where it doesn't receive updates, they're just saying the team likely doesn't have the resources, desire or incentive to do more than the bare minimum, which they've done for years already.

Like you literally responded to them with the formula
.

---

Umm...the logic holds up entirely. Yes, a game that is releasing new content is by definition not in "maintenance mode." It's not a "what I want to call it" vs. "what you want to call it." It's what the phrase means for MMO's - a game in "maintenance mode" has reached its final/finished state. No new content is being developed for it, no remaining bugs are being fixed, etc.. All that's happening is the servers remain up for people to play, and repeatable events (e.g. annual/seasonal events) may continue to run. But no new events or content of any sort is being created. The fact that the formula is still being followed with dozens of hours of new content being produced objectively means the game is nowhere near "maintenance mode" (and calling a complete new expansion with a full agenda of patch content over the next several years the "bare minimum" is rather insulting toward the developers, no?).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Striker44

All that's happening is the servers remain up for people to play, and repeatable events (e.g. annual/seasonal events) may continue to run..

---

I agree with you about the hyperbole about the game being in "maintenance mode" when it isn't actually. But I think a lot of that sentiment comes from Yoshi & Co sticking to the set formula so stubbornly that much of the new content being release feels very similar to old content. Similar to the degree that it feels like its just the same repeatable/annual events, thus the "maintenance mode" hyperbole.

The game isn’t in maintenance mode. The greatest overarching problem with the game that ties pretty much all our criticisms about content cadence, job design, balance and thematic direction of the MSQ is that simply the devs are too slow to pivot on anything and the slow cadence that seems out of line with the feedback offered makes people tired and frustrated because content coming out that doesn’t align with what people want to paying customers that feels the same as getting no content

Think

There was a subset who complained about eureka. By that point Bozja was already locked in but due to that feedback they dumped a field content in EW. However when people early on in EW realised a lack of field content was boring EW was already doomed and field content’s replacement (IS) couldn’t pivot fast enough and we basically just got 4 more updates to the same boring content nobody liked because they couldn’t change it

Everyone hates wuk lamat but she will be there in 7.1 7.2 and likely 7.3 because they can’t pivot fast enough to dump her out of the story even though she wasn’t popular

The ShB job overhaul was delayed feedback to the fiasco in HW even though most people who played all expansions would likely say the jobs balance was best in SB. Now it’s going to take to 8.0 to fix the fact that people got tired of EW doubling down on ShB design and in the meantime we got DT as a stopgap that makes the problems worse


Every single one of this games problems can be traced back to square responding (or overresponding) to feedback but taking far too long to do it and holding on to a path longer than the playerbase wants them to. People were tired of ShB job design by early EW it shouldn’t take till 8.0 to overhaul it. They need to work faster because while the game isn’t in maintenance mode getting a very slow stream of content that relates to feedback people offered two expansions ago certainly makes it feel that way

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Striker44

Umm...the logic holds up entirely. Yes, a game that is releasing new content is by definition not in "maintenance mode." It's not a "what I want to call it" vs. "what you want to call it." It's what the phrase means for MMO's - a game in "maintenance mode" has reached its final/finished state. No new content is being developed for it, no remaining bugs are being fixed, etc.. All that's happening is the servers remain up for people to play, and repeatable events (e.g. annual/seasonal events) may continue to run. But no new events or content of any sort is being created. The fact that the formula is still being followed with dozens of hours of new content being produced objectively means the game is nowhere near "maintenance mode" (and calling a complete new expansion with a full agenda of patch content over the next several years the "bare minimum" is rather insulting toward the developers, no?).

---

Yes, that is the traditional use of the word. Hence why I am pointing out, I don't think that is what OP is actually arguing despite invoking the term. The statement you quoted flatly says the game has up to 3 expansions to live. Essentially what I'm saying is you're telling them their thoughts don't matter because of semantics. Which isn't useful imo because the post itself is about the formula not changing, on which you and OP seemingly agree.

As far as the MSQ being the bare minimum, yes I do think about that DT. I was moreso talking ahout the patch cycle there and the way they stagger updates, but the MSQ didn't exactly light the world on fire with story or gameplay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

The game isn’t in maintenance mode. The greatest overarching problem with the game that ties pretty much all our criticisms about content cadence, job design, balance and thematic direction of the MSQ is that simply the devs are too slow to pivot on anything and the slow cadence that seems out of line with the feedback offered makes people tired and frustrated because content coming out that doesn’t align with what people want to paying customers that feels the same as getting no content

---

True. I think it all goes in a circle ultimately where players can only speculate SE is not re investing back into the game. As far as pivoting based on feedback, there's a lack of transparency as to where the feedback is even coming from or what it's based on. Instead of throwing players under the bus, I'd rather know how many players interacted with Eureka and got their relic etc. I'd like to see it updated to smooth out well agreed upon friction is the content. As far as jobs, it's a long and entangled issue, but it's precisely the same. The devs sort of blamed players for VPR updates but then came around and said it was their plan regardless. So is it really players changing jobs?

Honestly, I did a speed read of the posts just to check if what was stated is the same thing that has appeared between multiple other posts involving FFXIV and basically, it is. They sort of got into this thing during Shadowbringers Era where the game became increasingly focused on very specific activities while taking resources and effort away in other activities that would educate or show the true value of these other activities. The game also ended up becoming a bit more fractured in terms of community ever since Shadowbringers as they put more focus on savage and ultimate, as those activities proved to retain players better than other less hardcore activities. In a nutshell, they want to turn as many casual players as possible into raiders to retain player pops.

In real life, we don't expect to play the same game forever and intend there to be an end. A service game having a massive player drop is bad if a company has to depend on that service game to survive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turtledeluxe

True. I think it all goes in a circle ultimately where players can only speculate SE is not re investing back into the game. As far as pivoting based on feedback, there's a lack of transparency as to where the feedback is even coming from or what it's based on. Instead of throwing players under the bus, I'd rather know how many players interacted with Eureka and got their relic etc. I'd like to see it updated to smooth out well agreed upon friction is the content. As far as jobs, it's a long and entangled issue, but it's precisely the same. The devs sort of blamed players for VPR updates but then came around and said it was their plan regardless. So is it really players changing jobs?

---

Small tangent on Eureka, I played through the whole and experienced most of what it had to bring, specifically at release. I hated the content (to a point where I had to make it bearable by listening to most of the history of rome podcast... stellar podcast btw, but it should tell you the amount of hours involved just grinding out), but I still did it, precisely because I had no idea what was ahead. When Anemos came out, I had no idea what it would be inside, so I went in. I kept going because I had no idea how the next area would be, and the next. I had no idea how the relic steps would be or evolve. I had no idea on how much story i'd miss out or not. I had no idea that BA was waiting for us in the last area as well until it released. I farmed my relic, farmed my armors, my relic was actually BiS in Pyros already because SE couldn't balance MCH savage itemization for shit. Same for Bozja, and I'm glad I went through its slightly less egregious but equally if not more boring grind because there was CLL and Dalriada on the way at their endgames, and more story to feed on.

All of this to say, I'd be actually counted as a player that went to interact with 99% of Eureka and 90% of Bozja (I didn't do DRS, sue me), in spite of my overall dissatisfaction with the content. I think the numbers would be deceiving for that reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valence

All of this to say, I'd be actually counted as a player that went to interact with 99% of Eureka and 90% of Bozja (I didn't do DRS, sue me), in spite of my overall dissatisfaction with the content. I think the numbers would be deceiving for that reason.

---

Yes, that's why I said I'd be curious to know of those that actually did it (not just haters of new content), what were the points of friction? Instead of revising, they just made a 2nd attempt with Bozja, and then came to the conclusion it just isn't worth doing at all. I don't think either field operation is perfect, and I've completed all steps excerpt DRS. I still see huge potential in the idea, especially since this game's weakest point is casual widescale content players can do together. I wasn't around for the marketing, but if they were pushing story and relics, those are just side components imo. The main thing about the field operations is making combat content everyone can do together in an open setting.

And maybe it's anecdotal but I feel like all I ever see is people asking for this (give us casual combat content), and it's like they don't even know it's already kinda in the game. Maybe it's the difficulty or the grind, I'm unsure. Maybe the game doesn't push it hard enough. I'm optimistic about the upcoming zone.

Ideally in an MMO you would not need segmented off MMO play. It would just be in the world. But here we are. And although I am aware both zones are fate centric like the base game, they do have other components and systems that make them slightly more interesting than generic open world play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turtledeluxe

Ideally in an MMO you would not need segmented off MMO play. It would just be in the world. But here we are. And although I am aware both zones are fate centric like the base game, they do have other components and systems that make them slightly more interesting than generic open world play.

---

This is a huge part of the problem for me! Imo all map zones should function more like Eureka/Bozja as a baseline. I enjoyed both iterations of the idea and was hoping, as with all things, that exploratory content would have been continually refined instead of just shelved for a whole expac. Bozja content was great but I found the subject matter and story delivery very dry - a personal problem I have with Matsuno's work although I love the pomp and weight of the dialogue in the ivalice 24 mans] - it also didn't help that the whole map was a desolate, craggy warzone. The sequestering off of these cool open world systems into their own separate content really kills any incentive to commit to them in any meaningful way even though they provide a far more structured and integrated experience than the baseline overworld. Bit of a waste tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valence

Small tangent on Eureka, I played through the whole and experienced most of what it had to bring, specifically at release. I hated the content (to a point where I had to make it bearable by listening to most of the history of rome podcast... stellar podcast btw, but it should tell you the amount of hours involved just grinding out), but I still did it, precisely because I had no idea what was ahead. When Anemos came out, I had no idea what it would be inside, so I went in. I kept going because I had no idea how the next area would be, and the next. I had no idea how the relic steps would be or evolve. I had no idea on how much story i'd miss out or not. I had no idea that BA was waiting for us in the last area as well until it released. I farmed my relic, farmed my armors, my relic was actually BiS in Pyros already because SE couldn't balance MCH savage itemization for shit. Same for Bozja, and I'm glad I went through its slightly less egregious but equally if not more boring grind because there was CLL and Dalriada on the way at their endgames, and more story to feed on.

All of this to say, I'd be actually counted as a player that went to interact with 99% of Eureka and 90% of Bozja (I didn't do DRS, sue me), in spite of my overall dissatisfaction with the content. I think the numbers would be deceiving for that reason.

---

However think of it from square enix’s perspective oh this one. The game doesn’t have a lot of content that 100% isn’t required and most of it has pretty poor retention (variant or EO for example). Why would field content be an anomaly that’s basically “hate played” when no other optional content shows this sort of retention. And let’s say the answer to that question is the relic……..okay isn’t that the purpose of the relics, to draw people to content, it’s not like EW’s tomestone relics did anything to incentivise anything considering you physically cannot incentivise roulettes in this game any more

If field content was say “60% liked it, 40% hate played it” it’s still a successful anomaly because no other optional content gets hate played, they just die on launch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OgruMogru

This is a huge part of the problem for me! Imo all map zones should function more like Eureka/Bozja as a baseline.

---

The problem for me is that they precisely function like Eureka/Bozja (CEs excepted). They're fates that you move between constantly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valence

The problem for me is that they precisely function like Eureka/Bozja (CEs excepted). They're fates that you move between constantly.

---

I disagree. Eureka has more interesting map design than base game that better uses verticality and secret areas. It feels more like you're truly discovering a new area. Mobs (at least when you're starting out) can actually be threatening. It a has a basic iteration of an elemental weakness and armor system. There is a built in bunny mini game with secret chests. There's probably things I'm forgetting, but I remember wishing the actual game was more like Eureka. Bozja also has the duels, overall I rememeber Bozja being less impressive outside encounter design. They both have cooperative "dungeons" and, in Eureka's case, it requires player setup/coordination. XIV open world has story dungeons but they're just your routine thing with 4 players.

I also believe I heard Eureka and Bozja were staggered releases and that imo, would have made my experience worse. I was able to just go through Eureka at my own pace. With both zones it felt nice to go into unexplored maps and not really know what I was going to find.

Base game has...aether currents? :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turtledeluxe

I disagree. Eureka has more interesting map design than base game that better uses verticality and secret areas. It feels more like you're truly discovering a new area. Mobs (at least when you're starting out) can actually be threatening. It a has a basic iteration of an elemental weakness and armor system. There is a built in bunny mini game with secret chests. There's probably things I'm forgetting, but I remember wishing the actual game was more like Eureka. Bozja also has the duels, overall I rememeber Bozja being less impressive outside encounter design. They both have cooperative "dungeons" and, in Eureka's case, it requires player setup/coordination. XIV open world has story dungeons but they're just your routine thing with 4 players.

I also believe I heard Eureka and Bozja were staggered releases and that imo, would have made my experience worse. I was able to just go through Eureka at my own pace. With both zones it felt nice to go into unexplored maps and not really know what I was going to find.

Base game has...aether currents? :/

---

Eureka started with Anemos in 4.25 and then the other areas in subsequent 4.X5 or 4.X6 patches. Bozja technically started with Gangos/the solo duty/Memoria Misera in 5.25, but the Southern Front was 5.35, Delubrum was 5.45, and Zadnor was 5.55.