Petition: Keep the Animation!~

gameplay > graphics

it's pretty easy to understand really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Molly_Millions

gameplay > graphics

it's pretty easy to understand really.

---

Effort > Lazy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbygunz

Effort > Lazy

---

so you're saying that SE isn't putting effort? lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbygunz

Effort > Lazy

---

Yeah because remaking the game from the root is Lazy .
Or maybe not ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HiirNoivl

The stop motion may have been unique, but don't forget that what people complained about at launch was like how non-Final Fantasy-like FFXIV was. Sure it was the prettiest most animated MMO at the time, but there were no airships no chocobos, no real moogles (except in the FF quests) that would make you even aware you were playing a FFXIV game.

In FFXIV: ARR there will be no question that this is a Final Fantasy MMO. Not only is the aesthetics gorgeous and detailed, using a top of the line game graphics engine, there are all the components and parts that are being borrowed from the decades long Final Fantasy lore.

Saying that taking out the stop motion and other minor animations will make it just like every other MMO, that FFXIV will no longer be unique is also not taking into account the big picture.

And that's what's going on here. The removal of this single tree has made people blind to the bigger trees that are coming and staying.

Edit: Nemy, you need to click on the links provided by Gramul, the review of the animations are glowing. Really, it llooks like a Korean MMO if you agree that Korean MMOs look awesome.

---

FIRST OF ALL

What does chocobos, and everything else you just said has to do with animation, PEOPLE LIKED THE ANIMATION. NOBODY, I DON'T KNOW ANYONE, who wanted the animations taken out. The only reason why animation lock is bad is because the server lag, yet, people are beating every content with animation lock. So, that is not a big deal, just take out the lag, which 2.0 will fix!

I'm sorry I don't want my game to FEEL(notice I didn't say look, the graphics are amazing) cheap, I'm paying for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Molly_Millions

gameplay > graphics

it's pretty easy to understand really.

---

Good thing animation is tottaly graphics.... -.- give me a break. Animation is aesthetics, and AESTHETICS IS IMPORTANT TO MAKING A GREAT GAME. It's the little things that the devs do that can make a crappy game to an amazing game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rokien

FIRST OF ALL

What does chocobos, and everything else you just said has to do with animation, PEOPLE LIKED THE ANIMATION. NOBODY, I DON'T KNOW ANYONE, who wanted the animations taken out. The only reason why animation lock is bad is because the server lag, yet, people are beating every content with animation lock. So, that is not a big deal, just take out the lag, which 2.0 will fix!

I'm sorry I don't want my game to FEEL(notice I didn't say look, the graphics are amazing) cheap, I'm paying for it.

---

Maybe if you READ all the POSTS you would KNOW what I was REFERRING to.

People were SAYING that the ANIMATIONS were what made the game UNIQUE. When in TRUTH unless you had the BOX sitting there in FRONT of you, you would have NEVER known what GAME you were PLAYING.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Molly_Millions

gameplay > graphics

it's pretty easy to understand really.

---

Because the movement animations affect gameplay O so much...

I don't want my character to move around like something out of an Elders Scrolls game. :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rokien

FIRST OF ALL

What does chocobos, and everything else you just said has to do with animation, PEOPLE LIKED THE ANIMATION. NOBODY, I DON'T KNOW ANYONE, who wanted the animations taken out. The only reason why animation lock is bad is because the server lag, yet, people are beating every content with animation lock. So, that is not a big deal, just take out the lag, which 2.0 will fix!

I'm sorry I don't want my game to FEEL(notice I didn't say look, the graphics are amazing) cheap, I'm paying for it.

---

I know plenty of people who don't want animation lock. If the animations are the cause of animation lock, I'd rather see them gone. Like I said, it's not hard to understand. If removing the animations improves gameplay, then I'm all for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Klefth

Because the movement animations affect gameplay O so much...

I don't want my character to move around like something out of an Elders Scrolls game. :/

---

two words: Animation Lock

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HiirNoivl

Maybe if you READ all the POSTS you would KNOW what I was REFERRING to.

People were SAYING that the ANIMATIONS were what made the game UNIQUE. When in TRUTH unless you had the BOX sitting there in FRONT of you, you would have NEVER known what GAME you were PLAYING.

---

What are you even, what? That's the worst argument ever.

Say what again!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HiirNoivl

Say what again!!!

---

I said what what~

See, I was trying to be nice before when the other thread came about, I didn't post in it, because I was giving it the "alpha benefit" They kept on saying, this is pre alpha blah blah blah it will get better blah blah balh. So, I for once didn't jump the gun and kept quiet. Though, that quiet can no longer be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HiirNoivl

I meant aesthetics. ARR is head and shoulders above 1.0 in this respect.

Your character won't look "real". Give me a break.

---

So then you'd be ok with it if SE made a fan-freaking-tastic game with all the bells and whistles of modern MMOs, all the neato gameplay factors, and all the UI upgrades but it looked like FFVII polygons? That's a game I'd like to see. And then not play.

You're still confusing graphics and aesthetics.
Dan, from that video that you still haven't watched: "Graphics are simply the technical rendering techniques that allow us to display a particular image on screen.....Simply put, graphics are all for more fidelity....basically it [fidelity] means more detail."
"Loosely put, aesthetics is the style of the game. Aesthetics are the emotional context of the experiences. They encompass every aspect of the game from sound, to mechanics, to music..."

SE is even mentioned in the video.

"If Final Fantasy and Gears of War have taught us anything, it's that you can create semi-realistic humans with a stylized theme if you put your mind to it."

(This alone is the speaker saying that they [SE] have had beautiful aesthetics AND amazing graphics without sacrificing gameplay.)

From dictionary.com: Aesthetic--pertaining to, involving, or concerned with pure emotion and sensation as opposed to pure intellectuality.

Graphic--depicted in a realistic or vivid manner.

Do you see how these are not the same? Do you see how you are interchanging them? We have beautiful graphics in ARR; no one disputes that. We have done away with aesthetics as far as our character goes. You cannot tell me this isn't true. We have dev. interviews that say so. We have community reps saying so.

Like I said earlier. ARR isn't one step forward and two steps back. It's a genuine improvement. I'll still play it, at least for a little while to try it out. However, it did take two steps in a weird, awkward, bilateral, non-planar direction and they're going to be sore when they realize it was likely a bad move.

no one noticed the moogles hat kinda floats when the moogle jumps then fall down over his head. I thought that was cute.

Wolf, get off your video and symantics.

I said aesthetics, I meant aesthetics.

Quote:

---

We have done away with aesthetics as far as our character goes.

---

Epic nonsense. Once again, taking away a few simple animations will not do away with aesthetics. In my other post I illustrated how the animations in 1.0 are total garbage. Half the time, you can't even see them. Sometimes characters will slide or skip or freeze because of improper processing or just because the amount of activity causes the PC to cut corners while delegating resources.

I would rather SE make strategic decisions to cut a few animations so that my computer can spend it's resources displaying the animations that are left.

I think we're losing very little of what we could have lost in this endeavor. I think asking SE to preserve every graphical aspect of the game that we thought was pretty is just being demanding and silly. They're taking it out, they may add it back in later... but who knows.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HiirNoivl

Wolf, get off your video and symantics.

I said aesthetics, I meant aesthetics.

---

Pretty sure, you meant graphics, I looked back and saw, I will have to agree.

Pretty sure, you didn't read it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rokien

There is no reason for them to take out animation, NO REASON AT ALLL

---

When you redo do All the Coding in FFXIV: ARR the code itself has to be compatible with the game. the Original Coding for FFXIV 1.0 is gone wiped out like it never existed, FFXIV 1.0 coding will not work in FFXIV: ARR. If the Coding was transferable and wouldn't cause errors, then They could keep animations without worrying about time. In a 2 year span you have to think which has to take Priority.

Gameplay? Animations? Content? Maps? You can't fit everything you want in a MMO in a 2 year span. While I agree they should keep the Animations, you have to look at it as.. which would be best for FFXIV:ARR as a whole. I'm sure you can make 1,000 things that would be considered worthy of being in an MMO, but when you have 2 years to do it in.. you have to choose what goes in .. and what does not.

I hit like for 1 reason only, because in the long run I do expect animations to evolve and get better.

Also another person has said in the other thread, why can't mages cast while moving, why do they have to stay still and not the front lines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rokien

Also another person has said in the other thread, why can't mages cast while moving, why do they have to stay still and not the front lines.

---

Rokien, you've been ok in this thread so far. Don't screw this up! ;)

That's the trade-off for casting. You have to stand still or you screw up your channeling. I mean, by your logic, my GLA should be able to shoot Zelda sword beams from 20 yalms away. In other words, I have to be close to do what my job is designed for. Mages have to stand still to do what they are designed for. That's the trade-off.

ok alot of you dont know what your talking about, taking out these added animations are not aesthetics or graphics, its polish. the aesthetics were created when they chose the art style and the characters/environments that would inhabit the world, the graphics were decided when they created the graphics engine that renders the bounce lighting, the crepuscular rays( also know as god rays, i saw some people amazed by that in other threads), and all the functionality that would back the game.

these additional animations dont fall in aesthetics or gameplay, thats polish, because the animation engine is done, the style is done, but there choosing to take out that extra polish that makes the animations look beautiful. and that seems like a very tech programmer decision >.>
not to sound stereotypical, im just going my my experience working with programmers, usually the general theme is that if its functioning and its not bad then its good. which as a 3D artist is really upsetting, since that extra polish is what makes everything beautiful.
oh and im hearing some people say that animation lock is caused by these animations they took out, thats not at all true.
if you understand game development you would know that the animation is just a visual that does nothing until the functionality is created for it.

if i need to spell it out its the code that kept your character from moving to finish an animation not the animation itself. in the old engine that was unchangeable because thats the engine they decided on making. if they fixed the engine correctly then you would be able to play all the animations as normal and cancel them at any point during playback to start another animation which eliminates animation lock, which again is a tech, programming, coding thing, not a visual, polish, animation thing.

tl;dr taking out animations that was extra polish to the game was a stupid thing to do and actually serves no purpose except maybe to give some more time elsewhere

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfandre

Rokien, you've been ok in this thread so far. Don't screw this up! ;)

That's the trade-off for casting. You have to stand still or you screw up your channeling. I mean, by your logic, my GLA should be able to shoot Zelda sword beams from 20 yalms away. In other words, I have to be close to do what my job is designed for. Mages have to stand still to do what they are designed for. That's the trade-off.

---

Don't listen to Rokien he only troll .
But having a gameplay with mages casting spells while moving is possible but then they would have less defensive spells because they would gain a lot throught moving .
And others stuff such as lower range to balance all this .

The problem is that animation lock Lock ( obviously ) your character but casting a spell don't .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starlord

If the Coding was transferable and wouldn't cause errors, then They could keep animations without worrying about time. In a 2 year span you have to think which has to take Priority.

---

thats not really true, it would be if you were copying game assets as a whole, but the animation exists in a file seperate from the game engine. the animation itself was created in another program which they undoubtedly have the file to. and that can be transfered to either the old game engine or new game engine no problem. the code is what cant be, and thats the only thing that would need to be changed/ updated/ worked on at all, to get the old animations being used in the new game engine. so your about half right

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IveraIvalice

ok alot of you dont know what your talking about, taking out these added animations are not aesthetics or graphics, its polish. the aesthetics were created when they chose the art style and the characters/environments that would inhabit the world, the graphics were decided when they created the graphics engine that renders the bounce lighting, the crepuscular rays( also know as god rays, i saw some people amazed by that in other threads), and all the functionality that would back the game.

these additional animations dont fall in aesthetics or gameplay, thats polish, because the animation engine is done, the style is done, but there choosing to take out that extra polish that makes the animations look beautiful. and that seems like a very tech programmer decision >.>
not to sound stereotypical, im just going my my experience working with programmers, usually the general theme is that if its functioning and its not bad then its good. which as a 3D artist is really upsetting, since that extra polish is what makes everything beautiful.
oh and im hearing some people say that animation lock is caused by these animations they took out, thats not at all true.
if you understand game development you would know that the animation is just a visual that does nothing until the functionality is created for it.

if i need to spell it out its the code that kept your character from moving to finish an animation not the animation itself. in the old engine that was unchangeable because thats the engine they decided on making. if they fixed the engine correctly then you would be able to play all the animations as normal and cancel them at any point during playback to start another animation which eliminates animation lock, which again is a tech, programming, coding thing, not a visual, polish, animation thing.

tl;dr taking out animations that was extra polish to the game was a stupid thing to do and actually serves no purpose except maybe to give some more time elsewhere

---

That's like you going to a dealership and buying a new car and them not bothering to wash it. Last time I bought a car I had to wait 2-3 hours for them to finish washing it. guess what? totally worth it. I got a shiny new car to drive home.

If it takes another 8 weeks to finish the animations I say take it. We have to wait for relaunch anyway. we can wait a little longer.

Seriously, who cares?

2.0 is going to be like a moon bounce with people non-stop bunny hopping. Only animation that matters is jump.

/truth

people would seriously rather have jiggles and wiggles delay their actions than have more immediate response?

People are weird....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Molly_Millions

gameplay > graphics

it's pretty easy to understand really.

---

Molly your talking to a large group of people that can't understand simple things.

1.0 used motion capture to create its animations. Motion capture uses live actors to assist in creating the animation effects. This in turn eats up a great deal of time, money, and resources. When rebuilding a failed game from the ground up, time and money are not on your side. If one of the major complaints about the first game was that it took a high-end computer just to run it, they would have to fix this problem in some way to make their game more accessable. Since they didnt have a great deal of time to recreate the game from scratch, they 86'd the motion capture and replaced it with normal animation.

OP, what is it your suggesting they do? I hear you saying time and again they should fix this but I don't see you propposing a reasonable way to do so that solves both sides problems. You want them to hold on the release for another year, jack up the requirments to run the game, and reintroduce motion capture? Going to pass thanks. None of what your saying is reasonable. People that call for this sort of thing are shortsighted whiners that have no real idea what resource management is. Grow up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alhanelem

people would seriously rather have jiggles and wiggles delay their actions than have more immediate response?

---

i can tell you didnt read my recent posts.
there is no reason that these jiggles and wiggles should be delaying any actions. they chose not to spend time making it right.
in the old engine it was a limitation, in the new engine it shouldnt be more then a task that needs to be completed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IveraIvalice

i can tell you didnt read my recent posts.
there is no reason that these jiggles and wiggles should be delaying any actions. they chose not to spend time making it right.
in the old engine it was a limitation, in the new engine it shouldnt be more then a task that needs to be completed.

---

See post above yours. You dont know what your talking about. Its not at all as simple as you seem to think it is. They are the largest and one of the most successful gaming companies in the world. There is a reason they do the things they do, its not just to piss off whiney gamers that like to cry over animations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggs

Since they didnt have a great deal of time to recreate the game from scratch, they 86'd the motion capture and replaced it with normal animation.

---

wow no

i have worked with both motion capture and hand animation. I do 3D animation all the time since i dont have access to a mocap studio right now, motion capture is definitely faster.
im curious as to where you heard that they did away with mocap and used traditional animation to save time?

Quote:

---

there is no reason that these jiggles and wiggles should be delaying any actions. they chose not to spend time making it right.

---

There absolutely is a reason. Unless you want the action to take place before the action's animation even plays, then yes, we do need to wait for the jiggles and wiggles.

You know, if they had explained their decision a little more we wouldn't have to guess. Maybe they will in the live letter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alhanelem

There absolutely is a reason. Unless you want the action to take place before the action's animation even plays, then yes, we do need to wait for the jiggles and wiggles.

---

im saying that i dont want the action to be preformed before my animation even plays, it sounds like thats what your wanting, because the little extra animations can and should be able to be canceled, which eliminates animation lock.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggs

They are the largest and one of the most successful gaming companies in the world. There is a reason they do the things they do, its not just to piss off whiney gamers that like to cry over animations.

---

i didnt say that they are just trying to piss people off, what they did was a smart choice, IF they had to choose between polish and gameplay. gameplay wins, theres no doubt. but there is no i repeat NO technical reason why both shouldnt be possible, polish and gameplay can be achieved. they chose gameplay because of time constraints.
they dont have time to do polish and gameplay. thats why they chose what they did.
from a technical standpoint its good, from an overall standpoint, meaning the overall finished game, its not good, it makes the game look unfinished

EDIT: some people are fine with that because there used to it from other games and are more focused on gameplay, which is cool.
but im a 3D artist, i make my living off of those jiggles and wiggles, and its why i got into this industry, for the visuals, and it sucks to see it go, i would really prefer it not to lose that polish. i know im not the only one

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IveraIvalice

im saying that i dont want the action to be preformed before my animation even plays, it sounds like thats what your wanting, because the little extra animations can and should be able to be canceled, which eliminates animation lock.


i didnt say that they are just trying to piss people off, what they did was a smart choice, IF they had to choose between polish and gameplay. gameplay wins, theres no doubt. but there is no i repeat NO technical reason why both shouldnt be possible, polish and gameplay can be achieved. they chose gameplay because of time constraints.
they dont have time to do polish and gameplay. thats why they chose what they did.
from a technical standpoint its good, from an overall standpoint, meaning the overall finished game, its not good, it makes the game look unfinished

---

I agree with everything your saying if this was a normal situation in which they had 5 years to work on the game. Given the ridiculious amount of time they recreated this game in from the ground up, I would say that, from what I have seen so far, they did a pretty smokin job in the short time they had to work with. That being said, the developers even stated in the hour long video that they didnt even want to show what they had developed at gamescon because it doesnt accuratly portray what the game will look like a few months from now. Never have I heard a developer say anything close to that during a press conference. I think everyone needs to just relax on the whole issue until AT LEAST the beta begins and we get a better idea what we are looking at as far as a finished product goes. Gamescon was barely a month ago, and it looks like they have a few more months of development before we see a beta.

Quote:

---

which eliminates animation lock.

---

This isn't about animation lock, it's about having actions take place at a time that makes sense (e.g. coincides with the attack animation taking place). Having unnecessary animations play before the attack animation absolutely will slow things down, even without animation lock. It wouldn't block the action from taking place like the game currently does, but it would still result in a delay in response.

I don't think we are asking the right questions here.

Why do we even have to choose between 2 bad choices. Hell I'll say it. Plenty of action games nail the balance between good animations and controls. XIV isn't even an action game and they present this as an either/or choice. I call BS. make it play well and look good and (SE) stop making excuses until both goals are achieved.

Every game I've worked on during the past 6 years has had the same challenges of getting these 2 to meet. I've never heard an animator nor game designers say "AH SCREW IT LET'S NOT HAVE YOU DO YOUR PART ON THE GAME!!! Too much trouble/money/skill required!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggs

I agree with everything your saying if this was a normal situation in which they had 5 years to work on the game. Given the ridiculious amount of time they recreated this game in from the ground up, I would say that, from what I have seen so far, they did a pretty smokin job in the short time they had to work with. That being said, the developers even stated in the hour long video that they didnt even want to show what they had developed at gamescon because it doesnt accuratly portray what the game will look like a few months from now. Never have I heard a developer say anything close to that during a press conference. I think everyone needs to just relax on the whole issue until AT LEAST the beta begins and we get a better idea what we are looking at as far as a finished product goes. Gamescon was barely a month ago, and it looks like they have a few more months of development before we see a beta.

---

they did do a great job and im excited for ARR, and i respect the dev team greatly for all they've done, i wish i could have been a part of it myself lol.
but it sounds like it was a confimed decision to take out these animations, which sounds like its not in there list of things to do and it wont come back. im hoping that they will see that people do want these animations and choose to allot some extra time to put these back on their task list.
your right that its unfinished and there is still more to be done, but if we wait till beta with no sign of these getting implemented then at that time its most likely too late. best to let them know now so plans can be made in a timely manner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seif

I don't think we are asking the right questions here.

Why do we even have to choose between 2 bad choices. Hell I'll say it. Plenty of action games nail the balance between good animations and controls. XIV isn't even an action game and they present this as an either/or choice. I call BS. make it play well and look good and (SE) stop making excuses until both goals are achieved.

Every game I've worked on during the past 6 years has had the same challenges of getting these 2 to meet. I've never heard an animator nor game designers say "AH SCREW IT LET'S NOT HAVE YOU DO YOUR PART ON THE GAME!!! Too much trouble/money/skill required!"

---

Because SE don't give them enough time / money

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alhanelem

This isn't about animation lock, it's about having actions take place at a time that makes sense (e.g. coincides with the attack animation taking place). Having unnecessary animations play before the attack animation absolutely will slow things down, even without animation lock. It wouldn't block the action from taking place like the game currently does, but it would still result in a delay in response.

---

i see what your saying but again, its fixed with the exact same thing that eliminates animation lock. if animation can be canceled, you can cut that polish animation anywhere to execute your action without lag or delay. there arent many polish or unnecessary animations in battle anyway, its all just movement and actions, so thats not actually what im hoping comes back, what i really wanted is that out of combat animation polish to be there. battle should be quick and responsive, but out of combat shouldnt have to suffer because of that.