One dungeon per patch!?

They've done it before. A few times, in fact.

2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1, 4.2 and 4.3 I think? Dungeons in those patches weren't a part of the MSQ.

With the new focus on Trusts and wanting to include the Scions, that's obviously not the direction they're going or wanting to go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lambdafish

A theme park MMO is one that caters for all types of players. I have done Grand Cosmos once. Just because I CAN access it, doesn't mean that it is worthwhile content to me, everyone I have spoken to is not bothered about this change because dungeons as a piece of content are stale and bland. I would say that overexposing players to content that they don't enjoy is more stupid than implementing extremely difficult (yet extremely enjoyable) content.

---

Stale and bland > Unaccesible.

Good night.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsalmaveth

With the new focus on Trusts and wanting to include the Scions, that's obviously not the direction they're going or wanting to go.

---

Well, dungeons and MSQ content is too hard for the average FFXIV player. They need to cater to their majority. Easy mode, and the like.

The game got bigger audience, we passed million subscribers, but SE still need "sacrifice" one content for another, omegalul. Why design whole dungeon, when you can make a circle with background, it's simple as that.

I don't mind them dropping the second second dungeon since I don't value them much, but even so, I'm not sure I see the added value they traded the first second dungeon for.

Sure, I see where the work went, and they probably took more than the creation of a second dungeon every other patch, but the end products are of somewhat questionable quality (Eureka) or does not apply to many people (Ultimate).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bright-Flower

In SB, you 'lost' three dungeons. (4.1, 4.3 and 4.5 only having one dungeon as opposed to the 2 per patch in HW.)

You 'gained' the Arsenal, two Ultimate fights, and four zones for Eureka. With quests, several Notorius Monster fights per zones, and the logos system in the later two zones.

---

Let's not pretend dungeons alone bought us all that; any fair accounting would demand we also throw Diadem, Diadem Revamped, Wonderous Tails, and perhaps Aquapolis into the costs section.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tdb

I'm sure ultimates are beneath a WoW Mythic+ veteran like you, but please try to understand that us casuals need something to do as well.

---

Of all things that might appeal to a casual audience... you pick Ultimates as your bastion?

Even tho I wasn't a big fan of Eureka when they first released it, I did enjoy it later on (after some nerfs tbf) in the expansion when there wasn't much else to do ingame. Dungeons are nice and neat and all, but they're not the type of thrilling/grinding/challenging content that keeps you playing over a period of months where there is nothing new added.

Ultimates were necessary imo, since they kept making EX-primals and savages easier to make it more accessible for the casual-ish crowd, which was an ok move for me personally. You might want to keep in mind that savage/ultimate releases, world races and streams in general are really good advertisement and probably get a good chunk of ppl interested and play the game. :)

So in the end idm getting less dungeons, but other types of content instead. Which is definetly not just Eureka/Citadel and Ultimates, but also Ishgard restoration, fishing boats, performance, advanced gpose and so on. All of this takes a lot of time and work and I would argue that ultimates take the least bc, well, most of the mechanics, boss-models and fights are already in the game and just need to be kinda re-worked.
Just because the new types of content aren't for one personally, doesn't make them magically unimportant in the greater scheme of the whole game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omymy

Introducing "content" that even 80% of players don't try is a very smart decision. Who would doubt that.

https://media2.giphy.com/media/3o751...4Oly/giphy.gif

---

I'd like to point out that content garnered the highest viewership this game has ever seen in its six year history. Considering they added new animations to TEA despite saying they wouldn't suggests the profits and attention Ultimate gained for the game was worthwhile.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omymy

Stale and bland > Unaccesible.

Good night.

---

Have to vehemently disagree. I may not be the biggest Blue Mage fan but at least that's different. If the whole game grew continuously stale, I wouldn't bother playing. So it'd be no different than adding no content whatsoever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Of all things that might appeal to a casual audience... you pick Ultimates as your bastion?

---

They were being sarcastic, I’m fairly sure...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omymy

Stale and bland > Unaccesible.

Good night.

---

Hard disagree. I’d rather have no content than content that puts me to sleep. “Good night”, indeed.

It would be different if the dungeons in this game were engaging—but they really aren’t. They’re all the same with a different coat of paint: two pulls > boss > two pulls > boss > two pulls > final boss. Very little variance from that pattern. There’s nothing challenging about them. There’s nothing engaging about them. So I don’t see this as a loss. Maybe they can actually pool more resources into the single dungeon we’re getting and make it not mind-numbing. But I’m probably being too optimistic.