Why not change course?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kolsykol

Are we just going to ignore how fundamentally different FFXIV is today than in ARR and how much has actually changed?

---

Yeah, classes actually felt unique and content was pretty challenging and the content was coming at a much steadier pace. T-Thanks endwalker...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kolsykol

Are we just going to ignore how fundamentally different FFXIV is today than in ARR and how much has actually changed?
Not to mention that people are also complaining about too much change lol.

Plz, Shadowbringers and Endwalker have had an immensely positive reception.
Lets not pretend that the game is falling apart ala 1.0 because the glam and housing have issues.



You were clearly implying that the game is heading towards a 1.0 disaster which is why I said that you're talking about it like it's '' falling apart ala 1.0 ''.
I didn't say that you were saying that the game is currently in the state it was in 1.0, maybe you should read and post a bit more carefully next time.

---

Again, you have failed to read the post carefully. I said it would take a 1.0 disaster for the company to deal with matters by seeking outside help. I did not say that the game was actually heading into 1.0 territory. Dear lord, do people not bother to actually read what is written, anymore?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ath192

I just feel like they are committed to this neighborhood idea and HAVE to make it work somehow. But maybe they dont have to be so stubborn. Like its okay to take a step back and try a different approach if the current one isnt working. It may be way more efficient.

---

Once something is implemented, it's easier to maintain it than to try and do something completely new since it's already generating "value" as long as it exists. That's why when something is a controversial or bad feature, the best idea is to just keep it alive and work on other things. What is kind of a haunting problem is that they had a huge population explosion and felt that adding wards would help somehow when there's going to be far more demand than what is available from the effort.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colt47

Once something is implemented, it's easier to maintain it than to try and do something completely new since it's already generating "value" as long as it exists. That's why when something is a controversial or bad feature, the best idea is to just keep it alive and work on other things. What is kind of a haunting problem is that they had a huge population explosion and felt that adding wards would help somehow when there's going to be far more demand than what is available from the effort.

---

I can see that but that’s where the fault lies. The perception that it is generating value for the game when it is actually degrading the value of the game and causing bad PR.

To what extent this is occurring is debatable, however, if anything can be drawn from this is that this is decreasing the games value and not enhancing it. It is a sunk cost fallacy.

sunk-cost fallacy
noun
the phenomenon whereby a person is reluctant to abandon a strategy or course of action because they have invested heavily in it, even when it is clear that abandonment would be more beneficial.
"the sunk-cost fallacy creeps into a lot of major financial decisions"