Duo-Tone Dyeing

I think he's saying it's not the extra data per instance of the equipment that's the problem (because seriously, that's trivial to get around), but he's saying that the equipment themselves would need twice as much data to mark the parts of it as shadeable and to determine the color weights and so on for the actual equipment model. This would mean that for every piece of equipment the game goes to render, it's twice as big, increasing load times.

While there are definitely ways around this problem too, it would take much more work than it sounds to alter and convert their data to accommodate it.

However, this is a feature I would really, really love to have. Too much equipment either barely gets dyed due to the dye being on the accents and not the main piece (Spring Dress, Light Steel equips, sailor top, etc), or dying them only dyes half of it causing the other half to seriously clash, or the accents are brightly colored and undyable, causing them to really clash (Sailor bottoms), or the whole thing dyes the same color when you only want to dye some of it (Shaded Spectacles are the biggest culprit here, where dying them dyes both the shades (default: black) AND the rims (default: silver), causing them to look dumb when dyed even if you wanted colored shades).

Can't we like, have this via an option in our system config, where if it's off, it uses the current models and shows only the primary dye, and if it's on, it uses new two-toned models and shows both primary and secondary dyes? That would make me extremely happy, even happier than having new content released or hunts fixed...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nyalia

I think he's saying it's not the extra data per instance of the equipment that's the problem (because seriously, that's trivial to get around), but he's saying that the equipment themselves would need twice as much data to mark the parts of it as shadeable and to determine the color weights and so on for the actual equipment model. This would mean that for every piece of equipment the game goes to render, it's twice as big, increasing load times.hunts fixed...

---

This is definitely the case, considering the actual dyes are preselected, it would be a single byte of information to hold the dye information of a piece of gear. Double the data would have to mean something like what you said instead.

The results of this thread is why I think they were foolish to have this game on the PS3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheRogueX

(emphasis mine)

So? Who cares how much it would increase the data for a piece of equipment? What does this matter in the modern day?

Is this a "PS3 Limitation" again? Maybe you shouldn't have wasted your time and resources in releasing the game for PS3 when the PS4 was so close to being released.

---

Dont let the PS3 players see this since most think the Ps3 player-base is what keeping FF14 afloat

Why not make it that X type of or X grade of armor can have more then one color dyed to it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Camate

Greetings,

After speaking with the development team, we were informed that allowing gear to be dyed more than one color would double the data for a single piece of equipment. This would also require changes to the equipment system itself, so we do not have any plans at the moment to make it possible to dye gear two different colors.

---

Is hard disk space or bandwith that expensive really? Every single person playing your game pays a monthly subscription, does that not cover the costs involved? In Guild Wars 2 for example you can dye 2 colours per gear piece, no need to use any glamour prisms or anything, you just choose your colours from the list. They have much much more pigments on the list too. And their black looks like real black. Oh, and they're free to play.
Be inspired by better than yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zileth

Dont let the PS3 players see this since most think the Ps3 player-base is what keeping FF14 afloat

---

...lol

That's the best joke I've heard all week.

I'm starting to feel they need to set a firm date to cut off PS3 Support... it is hindering the game way too hard.

I think Q1 2015 is a reasonable timeframe.

But that makes no sense. The PS3's limitations by themselves can't be hindering the game in this way. SE could use it as an excuse, but the fact remains that some of us are playing on the PC and our computers have wildly varying specs. They could code things like this that double the memory requirements for loading the models, but then lock them behind a configuration parameter that defaults to off.

The biggest problem with this argument though is that it would be a fair amount of modeling/coding and it would only benefit a portion of the playerbase (those on the PS3 or low-end computers).

To be honest, the entire 'PS3 Limitations' excuse is patently false. The client is just a client. The PC client could be completely different and have completely different lighting, graphics, animations, etc. The PS3 client could be stick figures on a plain white background. Hell, there could be a TEXT client with some work. The entire excuse 'PS3 Limitations' is based on consumer ignorance to how MMOs work.

Basically, there are two parts to the MMO: Client and Server. It is a little more complicated than that due to things like the lobby server, authentication server, etc. but these are the brass tacks. The Client and Server communicate between each other via pretty simple packets of data. When you hit a button, a data packet containing that button's command is sent to the server, it processes it and sends back a response packet, which the client then translates and renders for you. That's it. The entire game is little data packets being sent back and forth.

Theoretically, we could have a hundred different clients that all looked vastly different, but so long as they sent and received the data packets properly, it would still work. Hell, in theory you could make a completely different game by having your client translate the packets differently (so long as everything was still timed the same - it would be very, very hard, but is not impossible).