FFXIV needs to stop accommodating Solo Players

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LianaThorne

Ishgard Restoration was also something that a lot of people didn't like because of what it entailed lol. It was basically just a competition for bots/early plugin users unless you dedicated extensive hours every day during the competitions to get a position (I was doing 14-16 hour days and only managed to get the final slot in the top 12 for LTW Saint without plugins). The collaborative nature of it was really only for buying and selling mats off gatherers to fuel the crafters lol. Otherwise it was just people focusing on crafting coupled with maybe a few random bards to try to provide entertainment.

I genuinely hope they never bring back Resto Rankings because it will be an entirely different story now with plugins that automatically solve crafts for you and ones that remove wait times with macros to pump them out even faster. Anyone who actually wants to try to participate as a vanilla player will literally have no chance. Those who do stand a chance will probably be getting even less sleep than last time.

The game should be competitive but absolutely not in that way with how loose they are with third-party now.

---

Bots are yet another problem. I wasn't a fan of the ranks system either; but I did like the fact that they forced us to pool our individual efforts, and that's the direction I'd like to see them take more often. Overall, this seems to me to be a direction that satisfies both the "multiplayer at all costs" community and those who want to play a completely single-player game (a community that may, incidentally, ignore this type of event).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Antharaes

As I already said in a previous reply, MMO only means, that there are more people online player the game. It's not a written law, that because of that, we need to interact with those people. So your argument is invalid.

---

And... Meh. Well, technically, you're right. But it sounds a bit like a player who buys a c-rpg and complains about the fact that there are dice rolls. Technically, he has the right to complain; but common sense says he should have expected it, because these are games inspired by tabletop role-playing... So dice rolls are implicit.

From the moment "multiplayer" is proclaimed in the game's name, it's implicitly expected to be a game mechanic in its own right. And that there should be some form of interaction with other players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Merrigan

And... Meh. Well, technically, you're right. But it sounds a bit like a player who buys a c-rpg and complains about the fact that there are dice rolls. Technically, he has the right to complain; but common sense says he should have expected it, because these are games inspired by tabletop role-playing... So dice rolls are implicit.

From the moment "multiplayer" is proclaimed in the game's name, it's implicitly expected to be a game mechanic in its own right. And that there should be some form of interaction with other players.

---

I can understand the expectation that there is a degree of interaction. I can also understand why there is disappointment if an expansion seems to contain contains less interactive content because new solo content was introduced.

However that is very different from eliminating solo content, or insisting upon on a specific amount of interaction. That can vary between specific MMOs - that is exactly the "some form" that we're discussing, and which can be different in FFXIV in comparison to another game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jessica_VS

I do wish there were more incentives to communicate, interact with, and work alongside other players. That's what I enjoy most about MMOs.

---

The incentive would be that you want to because it's enjoyable to you.

Others may find it enjoyable to be in a game that's filled with other players giving it a living feeling that NPCs can't provide but at the same time prefer to go about doing things mostly by themselves.

Some days I want to be interacting with other players so I do that. Other days I'm not feeling up to random socialization so I stick to doing things with my friends. And then there are the days when I'm not up to socializing at all and I do what can be done solo. But I'm still going out and about into the cities and open world zones so I add to the feeling of a living world even if I'm not directly interacting.

It depends on how people treat others. I have played MMO (Star Wars Galaxies and Wow being the first one) and the reason a lot of people are not interacting with people is that they are (1) Being yelled at because they are still learning (2) They are made to feel they are unwanted. Those are normally the ones I can understand why they don't want to interact and some are quiet and shy and it takes a bit for them to open up with others.

I play for the story. Once I'm done with the story, I put it down. Simple enough that taking steps to alienate that part of the playerbase will not bode well for the game. It's the ONLY reason I sub to play.

I use PF never because for some reason the interface boggles me beyond belief and my one attempt to get help with a Blue mage spell years ago was an unmitigated disaster.

I do use Duty finder but sometimes I do face hours long queues (hello Dynamis) so I have been known to use Duty support if I can in that case. If I can't use Duty support then I will DC travel to get something done (3 hour wait for crystal tower...yeah I travelled)

By nature I am a solo player and love the things I can do alone the most. Doesn't mean I am adverse to doing dungeons and such with people. Just that I don't want to deal with people for everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fantasiaaddict

title

/10chars

---

Why? Many solo players love MMOs because they are socially anxious, and MMOs allow them to play a game while being part of a bustling world. Why would SE - a for-profit business - takes steps to turn away such customers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mawlzy

Why? Many solo players love MMOs because they are socially anxious, and MMOs allow them to play a game while being part of a bustling world. Why would SE - a for-profit business - takes steps to turn away such customers?

---

Because MMO’s are designed around cooperation, not “we all exist independently in the same world”

If you don’t want to interact with other players (spamming emotes in limsa doesn’t count) then an MMO isn’t really for you, that’s what a social sim is for

Having an MMO feature solo-friendly content and story progression is a great thing as long as it doesn't come at the cost of multiplayer content. Because at the end of the day, the genre is literally called "Massively Multiplayer Online." Wanting an MMO to forgo multiplayer elements in favor of single player elements is literally nonsense.

Could you imagine if we applied this logic to any other genre? "Well a lot of turn-based RPG players love First Person Shooters because they like slower, strategic combat. That's why we need to stop making Call of Duty feature real-time combat, to appeal to the people who don't like First Person Shooters in our First Person Shooter."

Yeah, that would go over so well...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ty_taurus

Having an MMO feature solo-friendly content and story progression is a great thing as long as it doesn't come at the cost of multiplayer content. Because at the end of the day, the genre is literally called "Massively Multiplayer Online." Wanting an MMO to forgo multiplayer elements in favor of single player elements is literally nonsense.

Could you imagine if we applied this logic to any other genre? "Well a lot of turn-based RPG players love First Person Shooters because they like slower, strategic combat. That's why we need to stop making Call of Duty feature real-time combat, to appeal to the people who don't like First Person Shooters in our First Person Shooter."

Yeah, that would go over so well...

---

So since it would be nonsense, and it's so obviously not true, FFXIV must already cater to multiplayer content and this thread is moot. Right? Because if it doesn't, you've been playing an MMORPG for a decade that doesn't feature multiplayer content, and that simply isn't possible, because as you said, it's literally called Massive Multiplayer Online.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boblawblah

So since it would be nonsense, and it's so obviously not true, FFXIV must already cater to multiplayer content and this thread is moot. Right? Because if it doesn't, you've been playing an MMORPG for a decade that doesn't feature multiplayer content, and that simply isn't possible, because as you said, it's literally called Massive Multiplayer Online.

---

Could you highlight the part of my post where I state that FFXIV does not feature multiplayer content? I must apologize because I seemed to have missed that.

I do not understand this thread. Dailies are a large part of the game and you have two types. Dungeon roulette, where you need to work with a group of other players to tackle content and then beast tribe quests, which you largely do on your own. Want to get into more serious content? Well, you need to find a dedicated group for that. The main content of the game, or rather, the majority of your time, is spent doing group activities. Grinding fates used to be a thing to do in ARR but they nerfed the exp so horribly that no one does them unless they are farming old school relics or bicolor gemstones. The ideal way to level your alt jobs is to run the highest level dungeon you can or even Palace of the Dead which is again, group content.

There is plenty of multiplayer content in this MMO and it is amazing, especially for onboarding new players because of how they designed daily roulettes. But if a person has had a bad day and doesn't feel like grouping, there is also plenty of content that they can engage in. I don't think FFXIV should stop accommodating those who play the game solo. The more types of players you can cater to in the game, the more customers you attract, which means a bustling community and of course, more money in the pockets of the company, which ultimately benefits the game community as a whole. Many type of people play MMO's for a variety of different reasons. There is no denying that it is always more ENJOYABLE to experience a game with a group of friends, but for some others, they find enjoyment in farming materials and crafting, or other avenues.

I've played since ARR and the game has grown tremendously since then. They don't always get it right, *cough* *cough* Bow mage *cough* but I love how far the game has come since those old days and how vibrant and lively the community has become. This is all of course my opinion, but there is plenty for all types of players to enjoy and I do hope the game continues to attract players of all types because that can only lead to a better game for the rest of us.

Stop dictating what other players should do. Solo play is just fine, then hang with my friends after.:cool:

What is remotely “cooperative” about the daily roulettes

You can’t fail them if you tried, the tank doesn’t even need to care about the existence of the other players because they are functionally immortal, the raid bosses never have mechanics that require you to care about other players you all just collectively wail on the boss (myths is the worst for this)

If you swapped out 99% of players in this game with bots most people wouldn’t even notice

There is no cooperation in the daily roulettes, the only casual content that has any cooperation is field content and IR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

What is remotely “cooperative” about the daily roulettes

---

co·op·er·a·tive

"Involving mutual assistance in working toward a common goal".

Getting through the dungeon to get your tomes for completing the task is the goal of roulettes. Yes, it is as much of co op play as people running TEA. One you need significantly more COORDINATED play to complete, and I think that is the word you wanted to use, but that is the only difference. One is more simple to complete, the other more complex, but both types of content require you to co op to complete.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suniva

co·op·er·a·tive

"Involving mutual assistance in working toward a common goal".

Getting through the dungeon to get your tomes for completing the task is the goal of roulettes. Yes, it is as much of co op play as people running TEA. One you need significantly more COORDINATED play to complete, and I think that is the word you wanted to use, but that is the only difference. One is more simple to complete, the other more complex, but both types of content require you to co op to complete.

---

Is it cooperation if replacing people with bots achieves literally the same thing (hell the tanks can just solo the dungeon if they could be bothered with how long it takes)

Cooperation should involve more than just 4/8/24 unrelated people vaguely working towards the same thing independent of each other

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

Is it cooperation if replacing people with bots achieves literally the same thing (hell the tanks can just solo the dungeon if they could be bothered with how long it takes)

---

Of course not, but we are not talking about that are we? We are talking about roulettes, which require other players. You CANNOT do roulettes with bots and that will never be the case because, again, the way roulettes are designed greatly assists with new players coming into the game. Square wants veterans to intermingle with new players, so this isn't going to change and is not worth worrying about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

Cooperation should involve more than just 4/8/24 unrelated people vaguely working towards the same thing independent of each other

---

That is an issue you will have to take with dictionary.com. Cooperative means what cooperative means. I think (not trying to be condescending here) you are trying to say that the more challenging the content, the more cooperation you need, and that is honestly a very fair and valid stance, but it won't change the fact that roulettes are also cooperative content as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suniva

Of course not, but we are not talking about that are we? We are talking about roulettes, which require other players. You CANNOT do roulettes with bots and that will never be the case because, again, the way roulettes are designed greatly assists with new players coming into the game. Square wants veterans to intermingle with new players, so this isn't going to change and is not worth worrying about.

That is an issue you will have to take with dictionary.com. Cooperative means what cooperative means. I think (not trying to be condescending here) you are trying to say that the more challenging the content, the more cooperation you need, and that is honestly a very fair and valid stance, but it won't change the fact that roulettes are also cooperative content as well.

---

Yea and the level of engagement roulettes necessitate means that they can literally be done with bots, there is no cooperation, there is just 4 solo players in the same instance as each other, the modern job kits are explicitly designed around being able to ignore the other players, it’s just disguised solo play

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

Yea and the level of engagement roulettes necessitate means that they can literally be done with bots, there is no cooperation, there is just 4 solo players in the same instance as each other, the modern job kits aren’t explicitly designed around being able to ignore the other players, it’s just disguised solo play

---

With all due respect, but if tanks do not tank, then mobs run amok killing the dps and healer. If the healer doesn't heal the tank, the same things happen with mobs running amok. If dps don't dps, then mobs do not die fast enough straining the tank and healer both. I feel like you take for granted the fact that the reason why roulettes for the most part run so smoothly is because people are aware of their roles and fulfil their respective roles while also striving toward their common objective, which is completing the dungeon. This is my last response to you because there is a limit to how many responses one can do in a day, and I find that I will just be repeating my points which will go nowhere, and you will do more or less the same. We can agree to disagree! I did enjoy having the discussion and wish you the best.

If the healer doesn’t heal the mobs run amok; actually if the healer doesn’t heal the tank just does it for them, if the tank doesn’t tank most of the melee DPS can handle the garbage damage output the dungeons put out; hell modern tankbusters can be handled by a melee personal mit and a mitigation from the healer, if the DPS don’t do DPS the tank and the healer put out DPS level DPS in AOE anyway

This is my entire point, you are unable to fail and as such you aren’t cooperating with each other, you are all just independently wailing on the enemies because no jobs individual role matters anymore. There is no refresh or mages Ballard, there is no goad or ewer anymore

What cooperation is there in literally not having to care about how the rest of the group plays because you are literally unable to fail unless you actively try

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

Because MMO’s are designed around cooperation, not “we all exist independently in the same world”

If you don’t want to interact with other players (spamming emotes in limsa doesn’t count) then an MMO isn’t really for you, that’s what a social sim is for

---

I've been playing MMOs for 20 years and you're not the first idiot to tell me my style of play should be banned. Never has been, never will be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ty_taurus

Could you imagine if we applied this logic to any other genre? "Well a lot of turn-based RPG players love First Person Shooters because they like slower, strategic combat. That's why we need to stop making Call of Duty feature real-time combat, to appeal to the people who don't like First Person Shooters in our First Person Shooter."

---

That's more of an issue with how you set up your categories. FPS, RTS, and TBS all categorize games in terms of gameplay mechanics. MMO does not. An equivalent categorization in this case would be to refer to FFXIV as a tab-targeting game, which can then be contrasted with action-targeting games.

At this point in time, every big budget game aims to tell a story and have large numbers of concurrent players, and many games try to incorporate variety game modes to cater to diverse player populations. Trying to stratify game design on the basis of player count or story immersion is meaningless, as these are effects rather than causes.

I don't think that there are many things in this game that are exclusively 'single-player' by design, setting aside oddities like the Toy Box minigames or some of the Gold Saucer minigames. The vast majority of instanced content in this game is designed and balanced around groups of 4-8 people.

'Multiplayer,' as referred to in the DT slides, is community-building content where you have lots of players interacting and collaborating in the same zone. So it's not really about 'single-player' vs. 'multiplayer', but rather 'small group' vs. 'large group' content. This game tends to specifically cater to 'small group' players, but large group content is necessary as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

That's more of an issue with how you set up your categories. FPS, RTS, and TBS all categorize games in terms of gameplay mechanics. MMO does not. An equivalent categorization in this case would be to refer to FFXIV as a tab-targeting game, which can then be contrasted with action-targeting games.

At this point in time, every big budget game aims to tell a story and have large numbers of concurrent players, and many games try to incorporate variety game modes to cater to diverse player populations. Trying to stratify game design on the basis of player count or story immersion is meaningless, as these are effects rather than causes.

I don't think that there are many things in this game that are exclusively 'single-player' by design, setting aside oddities like the Toy Box minigames or some of the Gold Saucer minigames. The vast majority of instanced content in this game is designed and balanced around groups of 4-8 people.

'Multiplayer,' as referred to in the DT slides, is community-building content where you have lots of players interacting and collaborating in the same zone. So it's not really about 'single-player' vs. 'multiplayer', but rather 'small group' vs. 'large group' content. This game tends to specifically cater to 'small group' players, but large group content is necessary as well.

---

Which circles back to the other problem that changes in ShB and EW have explicitly been designed to remove interaction and friction so the game is excessively focused on small group content which is basically solo content with a bunch of ~~not~~ bots

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

If the healer doesn’t heal the mobs run amok; actually if the healer doesn’t heal the tank just does it for them, if the tank doesn’t tank most of the melee DPS can handle the garbage damage output the dungeons put out; hell modern tankbusters can be handled by a melee personal mit and a mitigation from the healer, if the DPS don’t do DPS the tank and the healer put out DPS level DPS in AOE anyway

This is my entire point, you are unable to fail and as such you aren’t cooperating with each other, you are all just independently wailing on the enemies because no jobs individual role matters anymore. There is no refresh or mages Ballard, there is no goad or ewer anymore

What cooperation is there in literally not having to care about how the rest of the group plays because you are literally unable to fail unless you actively try

---

Dude, your messages are nonsense. You're superimposing two problems: the fact that dungeon difficulty doesn't suit you, and the notion of cooperation.

Cooperation = working towards a common goal. The fact that you can do someone else's task, or that there is a programmed failure if one of the roles is absent, simply doesn't enter into the definition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Merrigan

Dude, your messages are nonsense. You're superimposing two problems: the fact that dungeon difficulty doesn't suit you, and the notion of cooperation.

Cooperation = working towards a common goal. The fact that you can do someone else's task, or that there is a programmed failure if one of the roles is absent, simply doesn't enter into the definition.

---

I think you’ll find if you go into a task then do everything yourself the other people aren’t going to say you are cooperating with them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Merrigan

Dude, your messages are nonsense. You're superimposing two problems: the fact that dungeon difficulty doesn't suit you, and the notion of cooperation.

Cooperation = working towards a common goal. The fact that you can do someone else's task, or that there is a programmed failure if one of the roles is absent, simply doesn't enter into the definition.

---

Do you count cheering someone on from the sidelines as they watch you solo the boss as cooperation? Honestly curious. I've been in parties where the healer died early, and the two dps immediately died from failing the mechanic in quick succession from full hp. They all raised outside the dungeon and they told me to keep going because WAR is broken instead of just wiping directly and resetting... It took me well over 10 minutes alone on taking the boss down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

I think you’ll find if you go into a task then do everything yourself the other people aren’t going to say you are cooperating with them

---

So if you hard carry a team, that's not cooperating? That's a new one. Usually people just say thank you and move on.

Either way, what you're pointing to is a flaw of the trinity model and the difficulty in distributing responsibilities in an equal and fair way. This has nothing to do with the concept of solo play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

So if you hard carry a team, that's not cooperating? That's a new one. Usually people just say thank you and move on.

Either way, what you're pointing to is a flaw of the trinity model and the difficulty in distributing responsibilities in an equal and fair way. This has nothing to do with the concept of solo play.

---

Yes if you as a tank can just solo the boss from 85% because the healer died to the first mechanic then I genuinely don’t see that as cooperation, you are just doing your own thing that’s vaguely aligned with someone else, the roles should rely on each other and coordinate with each other to achieve a goal, the tank mitigates, the healer heals the DPS provide support and do damage

On the current modern design you are functionally playing with bots

I totally agree. I'm also a solo player by nature. I don't mind doing the roulettes to gain tomes, gear for gc seals but I basically play solo. I'm glad for the squadrons, trusts, & duty support. I do many of the fates solo. Alot of the gold saucers content I do solo. etc.

Silva - that was well argued & I totally agree with you. Even though I am a solo player, I like doing the roulettes & the goal is to through the dungeons/trials/raids is to get to the finish & get to the end. Basically, there no need to conversate with anyone besides saying HI at the beginning of the game & GG when the duty is completed. Roulettes are done groups cooperating to get to the finished, nothing more, nothing less, its still group content. Trust me if I could do Roulettes with squadrons/trusts/duty supports, I WOULD!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

...

---

The reason why self-healing tanks and raises on DPS exist is because they don't want everything to grind to a halt if a healer consistently dies in casual content. That's artificial value.

Again, this has nothing to do with solo vs. small group vs. large group gameplay, and we don't need to make everything into a healer thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

I think you’ll find if you go into a task then do everything yourself the other people aren’t going to say you are cooperating with them

---

It's not by taking a specific case (here, assuming that the other players are dead) that your argument will be better. In fact, it tends to prove that your initial argument wasn't very good...

Just: I agree that cooperative systems could be better, but putting the difficulty = cooperation equation is wrong. It's factual and in the dictionary definition.

Quote:

---

Do you count cheering someone on from the sidelines as they watch you solo the boss as cooperation?

---

& Same answer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Merrigan

It's not by taking a specific case (here, assuming that the other players are dead) that your argument will be better. In fact, it tends to prove that your initial argument wasn't very good...

Just: I agree that cooperative systems could be better, but putting the difficulty = cooperation equation is wrong. It's factual and in the dictionary definition.



& Same answer.

---

You don’t need the other players to be dead to functionally just not need to care about other players

I’m not trying to link difficulty to cooperation here, dungeons are too easy but that isn’t my point, my point is if you have the tools; and the game encourages you; to outright ignore the other players because what they are doing is functionally irrelevant to what you are doing are you really cooperating because you are vaguely working towards the same goal of clearing the dungeon

In my eyes you aren’t and that contributes to why 14 feels way too solo focused. If I’m a tank I can ignore the healer, if I’m a healer I can ignore the DPS, if I’m a DPS I can ignore everyone but myself, there is no refresh, or tank stance, or goad or ewer. Why am I playing with other people if their actions have literally no bearing on me at all other than slightly changing the clear time of the content

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

The reason why self-healing tanks and raises on DPS exist is because they don't want everything to grind to a halt if a healer consistently dies in casual content. That's artificial value.

Again, this has nothing to do with solo vs. small group vs. large group gameplay, and we don't need to make everything into a healer thread.

---

And I’m not, this affects healers worse than other roles but all 3 suffer from it, I’m just most experienced with healers, I could argue from any of the three roles perspective.

An excessive focus on small group content that you then make other players you are playing irrelevant to yourself is basically just playing solo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersnow845

If I’m a tank I can ignore the healer, if I’m a healer I can ignore the DPS, if I’m a DPS I can ignore everyone but myself, there is no refresh, or tank stance, or goad or ewer. Why am I playing with other people if their actions have literally no bearing on me at all other than slightly changing the clear time of the content

---

I feel like this is a yes and no, depending on the circumstances.

DRK's can't really survive without a healer, at least in my experience of healing DRKs. Maybe I've just had a track record of running into DRK's that have no clue what they're doing but they feel incredibly paper thin compared to GNB, PLD and WAR. Otherwise yeah, I don't think the other 3 tanks really need to care about the healer since they can do it themselves.

If you want to run a dungeon with all of your DPS dead then I mean.... more power to you. I just feel that would be incredibly tedious and dull and question the point of it since tanks & healers have minimal DPS compared to someone in the actual role. But I'm not gonna question how someone gets their kicks.

The DPS case is valid because ultimately (unless you're a SMN or RDM) you don't need to really care past your own rotation and trying not to step in anything.

I wonder if there's a godwin's law but for healers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boblawblah

I wonder if there's a godwin's law but for healers.

---

The longer the discussion goes, the more likely it will become about healing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jessica_VS

ALL I PUSH IS STONE STONE STONE STONE STONE STONE

---

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD LILLIES!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TBerry

The longer the discussion goes, the more likely it will become about healing?

---

To be honest, if this trend continues, then yeah, healers are at risk of being obsolete.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyth

The reason why self-healing tanks and raises on DPS exist is because they don't want everything to grind to a halt if a healer consistently dies in casual content. That's artificial value.

Again, this has nothing to do with solo vs. small group vs. large group gameplay, and we don't need to make everything into a healer thread.

---

I have genuinely never seen the phrase "artificial value" before and have no idea of what you mean.

The thread has to do with not accommodating solo players, however if I look at the specific case of a tank/DPS finishing a boss without a healer I would rather that the healer gets kicked if they've wiped after several tries than they continue.

If everyone dies except the tank at the boss is still at some high percentage- no, it shouldn't be possible for the tank to solo it. If a few percentage are left, no problem, and everyone will likely thank the tank for doing so.

All of this is based upon the basis of this being a trilogy -based design.

I also don't know who the "they" is that wants this degree of self-healing combined with DPS mitigation and raises- however that's already been a topic for multiple other threads.