The zones we have now are to small.

Why can't we have zones that were as large as they were in 1.0 but still be filled with things to do like the current areas?

ps3 limitation

Because despite the lies Yoshi P and SE will tell you, the PS3 holds the game back.

I don't think they are too small but I do think everything feels super segmented. It's a shame they couldn't use streaming tech to load in new areas as you got closer or give us real transport like boats and airships so it actually feels like you're on an adventure and not just a CS/loading screen.

I'll admit the game didn't run so well when it was released, but we have had about 4 or 5 generations of video cards since then.

Memory limitations aka PS3 limitations, as people already said.

It has been said before, that the zone size has nothing do do with the PS3, as it was going to be done before the PS3 version even came out. The original zones where so big, that there where a lot of copy and paste areas to help with RAM/CPU load. This ,made everything look boring, the zones where chopped up into sections, to help it look more filling and lively, and not kill the system it was running on.

It surprises me how many people think you can make and code an MMORPG the same way you do other games, simple fact is that you can't, and is also why the Crystal Engine was scrapped as the games base, as it was not suited for MMO use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kailea_Nagisa

It has been said before, that the zone size has nothing do do with the PS3, as it was going to be done before the PS3 version even came out. The original zones where so big, that there where a lot of copy and paste areas to help with RAM/CPU load. This ,made everything look boring, the zones where chopped up into sections, to help it look more filling and lively, and not kill the system it was running on.

It surprises me how many people think you can make and code an MMORPG the same way you do other games, simple fact is that you can't, and is also why the Crystal Engine was scrapped as the games base, as it was not suited for MMO use.

---

But we have the RAM/CPU/GPUs to handle it now.

People keep saying 'ps3 limitation ps3 limitation' must've never played 1.0
Totally seamless world. Guess what? It ran like crap even on decent pcs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adam92682

But we have the RAM/CPU/GPUs to handle it now.

---

no everyone has or can by a extreme gaming rig, that is what it would take to play a game like that comfortably. FFXIV 1.0 ran horrible, even on high end PCs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amyas

People keep saying 'ps3 limitation ps3 limitation' must've never played 1.0
Totally seamless world. Guess what? It ran like crap even on decent pcs.

---

Thats because the engine 1.0 actually ran on was complete and utter garbage though :p.

1.0 could be seamless, but do you remember how was bland ? The areas are now smaller, but are much more achitecturally rich. I like better the latter then huge areas full of nothing

1.0 also had zones, but it was built around a system called seamless zoning so you just didn't notice you were changing zones. It was also because of this that every zone in a region looked the same and people complained it was bland. For those that played 1.0, you probably noticed areas where a character would disappear and reappear a few secs later or if you were auto following, it would disengage at certain areas, these were zone lines.

You know, people are always going on about how 1.0 > 2.0 because PS3 limitations. But you do realize that 1.0 was designed with PS3 in mind as well, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shura

1.0 also had zones, but it was built around a system called seamless zoning so you just didn't notice you were changing zones. It was also because of this that every zone in a region looked the same and people complained it was bland. For those that played 1.0, you probably noticed areas where a character would disappear and reappear a few secs later or if you were auto following, it would disengage at certain areas, these were zone lines.

---

We'll they should have made a 64 bit version. With 32 GB of RAM you could probably load all the games environments and only have to stream in other players, monsters ect..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adam92682

We'll they should have made a 64 bit version. With 32 GB of RAM you could probably load all the games environments and only have to stream in other players, monsters ect..

---

Final Fantasy XIV: game only avaiable in 64 bit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amyas

People keep saying 'ps3 limitation ps3 limitation' must've never played 1.0
Totally seamless world. Guess what? It ran like crap even on decent pcs.

---

What's your point? All this demonstrates is that Crystal Tools was a steaming pile. Plenty of other MMOs have totally seamless worlds without performance issues.

(1) I'd rather have smaller zones that aren't just the same couple yards copy-pasted for hundreds of miles.

(2) I'd rather we get completely new zones added, rather than a patch/expansion to make the existing zones bigger.

Black Shroud 1.0:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...igong_maze.jpg

Black Shroud 2.0:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-fqMFQS-G1V...600/forest.jpg

After the mess that was 1.0, I'm actually fine with the size. However, I do have a problem with the lack of things to do in zones. They feel small to me because all there is to do are FATEs, leves, and gathering. Nothing to explore since the world is pretty much flat, nothing to discover, nothing fun to do....nada.

They are very small.. and not only that.. very linear and corridory. Rubbish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlueMage

(1) I'd rather have smaller zones that aren't just the same couple yards copy-pasted for hundreds of miles.

(2) I'd rather we get completely new zones added, rather than a patch/expansion to make the existing zones bigger.

---

All new zones should be the size of central shrouds or larger. I liked being able to explore in 1.0 without have to see other players every 5 minutes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KamikazeMan

After the mess that was 1.0, I'm actually fine with the size. However, I do have a problem with the lack of things to do in zones. They feel small to me because all there is to do are FATEs, leves, and gathering. Nothing to explore since the world is pretty much flat, nothing to discover, nothing fun to do....nada.

---

I agree there is next to no open world content in this game. The open world feels like a menu to me where you select dungeons while standing next to a giant crystal.

The teleport system is probably the biggest reason the game feels so small. They should have restricted it to mages like in FFXI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adam92682

Why can't we have zones that were as large as they were in 1.0 but still be filled with things to do like the current areas?

---

You're level fifty, there's nothing preventing you from exploring areas that are more dangerous now. The zones are much larger than they initially give out ,because you're exploring each zone in segments.

Walk from Sweetbloom Pier to Amarissiax's Spire, then curve north to Moonspore Grove, then to the Seedbed, then go back to start. This will give you a good idea as to the actual size of the zones. They're more than decent sized zones, as large if not larger than the ones in FFXI, and far more detailed and flushed out.

Are they as big as the copy/pasted regions with hidden zone-lines in FFXIV 1.0? No, but I could spend an hour writing the flaws in that system and how it would not work for this game, irrelevant of the PS3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hyrist

You're level fifty, there's nothing preventing you from exploring areas that are more dangerous now.

---

There is no such thing as a dangerous area in 2.0. Sure there is actually a good deal to explore but was absolutly zero reason to do so, hell there aren't even things like hidden lore objects to walk around and see. I'm all for better and grander zones but I'd rather them give them more of a purpose than being a staging area for fates and quests.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adam92682

But we have the RAM/CPU/GPUs to handle it now.

---

Essentially, the average base of PCs ontop of the PS3 meant that they decided it was best to section of zones and fill them detail than make larger zoned 'waste-lands'.

A sensible compromise.

Why go for the 20% when you can target the 80%.



Don't get me wrong, the zones do feel smaller, but they're generally nicer.
FFXI had some severe restrictions forcing large open areas with nothing in them, but as Yoshi has said many times this is a game built around convenience not time consumption.

I think zone sizes are fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jynx

There is no such thing as a dangerous area in 2.0. Sure there is actually a good deal to explore but was absolutly zero reason to do so, hell there aren't even things like hidden lore objects to walk around and see. I'm all for better and grander zones but I'd rather them give them more of a purpose than being a staging area for fates and quests.

---

*Stares at you funny*

Every map marker is a lore item, though finding the Lore behind it is a bit difficult, you'd actually have to do quests to figure out the lore. The Lore for the Beastmen areas, however, are likely to be revealed in the Beastmen Quests we're supposed to get in 2.1.

Exploration is it's own reason. I don't understand this concept that they have to be lead by the nose to explore something, then be given a tasty biskit for doing what they were told to do. I happen to have more self-motivation than a canine, thank you.

And yes, there are dangerous areas. Granted, running through an area or using a mount significantly reduces the danger, but it does not eliminate it. If you get disorientated alone in a Beast-man stronghold, you can die.

It's no level 72 Drake one-shotting you for taking the wrong turn in Southern Thanalan, but it does mean you can't just leisurely stroll everywhere and not expect to get engaged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jynx

There is no such thing as a dangerous area in 2.0.

---

Ever been to the Sylphlands? Can't wait for Ramuh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amyas

Ever been to the Sylphlands? Can't wait for Ramuh.

---

There are a lot of safe zones there, actually.

Both 1.0 and 2.0 maps have flaws, both for the same reason - PS3.

1.0 - copy paste so it can work on PS3.
2.0 - tiny zones so it can work on PS3.

Don't wanna start any console wars but the fact stands is that consoles do (or did during development) hold back the game at the end of the day...

They're small, sure. Think it would play out nicely though if they simply added a few side zones here and there that doesn't necessarily have to have a town, a teleporting crystal and 20 quests. Just areas with monsters and scenery that otherwise doesn't lead anywhere to flesh out all the corridors some.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KamikazeMan

There are a lot of safe zones there, actually.

---

Sure, but that's no fun. Go there around 45 or so to finish up your hunt log, that makes it extra fun :3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hyrist

*Stares at you funny*
Exploration is it's own reason. I don't understand this concept that they have to be lead by the nose to explore something, then be given a tasty biskit for doing what they were told to do. I happen to have more self-motivation than a canine, thank you.

And yes, there are dangerous areas.

---

Why thank you for being so condescending, always know I've struck a nerve when people lose the abillity to have civil conversation!

Exploration does not have it's own reason, it's not difficult to do, there is no reward (Slight lie exploring the realm achievments are nice), the developers take 0 effort to reward people who do explore I don't mean give us items or experience but reward us with more than a lifeless zone with a handfull of monsters floating around aimlessly. Quests or no quests much of the world is utterly devoid of lore leaving it up to you to just assume what's going on (Please don't try and school me on this if you look at my history you would know I am a extreme advent of open world content and ingame lore)

Once you hit level 50 unless you are utterly incapable of looking at your map provided to you for walking into a square you have 0 chance to die, engage 12 mobs that do minor damage to you even at their highest level? start walking(Or sprint if your motivated enough to avoid danger...) and you will more often than not be outside their short. short leashes within moments that's also indicating you have 0 abillity to fight back and survive outside walking away wich everyone does. Even the most fresh 50 character can take on up to 4 level 50 enemies with 0 consequence more if they are actually trying to fight.

While you continue to think of witty ways to insult me I'll be thinking of ways to make open world exploration more exciting than just having a yellow rock in a cave. Christ the community has a great sense of adventure I remember when they implemented the guardian symbols in 1.0 (Found out later to be part of a quest that lead you by the hand unfortunatly) it was a mad race to see who could find the location of all 12 stones, most of them existed in "Real" dangerous areas where your abillity to navigate the land while avoiding monsters making it something few could manage. It was great to have the community working together to find these stones try and puzzle what they were for, it was disheartening that when the quest to find them was implemented to find them for the story it was just (!) marks on your map.

Giving us reason to explore the world would have been a great idea, the big problem the game has is it rarely let's the community solve problems for itself it instead leads us by the hand or places walls infront of our progression. They work harder at getting us to do thing their way at their pace rather than finding ways to entertain us paying customers. It's what happens when you have a plan in mind and decide you have zero room for deviation to see what the players actually want.

I could go on but it would go beyond mere exploration purposes, I'll just restate my starting point.

"I'm all for bigger grander zones, but they need to be more than a staging point for quests and Fates"

I await your next condescending remark with bated breath.

1. The zones are small.
2. There are outposts you can either teleport to or run to with a chocobo every 20 meters (longest it could ever take you to run from one outpost to the next is 1 minute). This makes the zones feel even smaller.
3. There are invisible walls everywhere.
4. No areas/points of interest to explore that aren't pointed out to you with a big icon somewhere [ aside from a handful ].

I'm not crazy about it either and I do hope the next zones will be more wild! To be honest, the scale of the world just feels wrong right now. The Great Noble Houses of Ishgard... all standing 20 seconds one from the other... on foot. :( I would have expected an area as big as the current Coerthas for EACH of them. ><

I will continue to maintain that the size of the zones is not the problem, it's how each zone is made up of a series of areas connected by narrow choke points and hemmed in by an overabundance of invisible walls. I really, really don't like it. We could easily have the same zones we have now, just opened up, and the game would run perfectly fine. The zones should have borders like the yellow line:

http://i.imgur.com/ujZuzcC.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Naunet

I will continue to maintain that the size of the zones is not the problem, it's how each zone is made up of a series of areas connected by narrow choke points and hemmed in by an overabundance of invisible walls. I really, really don't like it. We could easily have the same zones we have now, just opened up, and the game would run perfectly fine. The zones should have borders like the yellow line:

http://i.imgur.com/ujZuzcC.jpg

---

I always thought it would have been cool if the Sagoli desert was an entire zone (instead of just a small section of a zone), and had no map. Would feel big, the kind of place you get lost in, like, you know, a desert.

I think it's more an issue of verticality than map size. You can make your maps as large as you please, but at the end of the day if it's overall design is flat, then you're not properly utilizing all of the space you have to work with. Coerthas Central Highlands does this better than any other map in the game, although it could certainly be expanded upon. The caves connecting the two fissures at Witchdrop is a perfect example of this, and the caves on the east side of the map, as well, since you can only enter from one side (if memory serves), and then drop down from the other end. Then you've got the climb at Snowcloak, the chasm at Whitebrim, and the crater at the Boulder Downs. Rather than make use of what's at eye level, you can actually move up and down at certain points on the map to either get a better vantage, fight different monsters, or fulfill a quest (although that last one is standard fare, no offense, devs!).

Could you imagine jumping into the pit outside of Buscaroon's Druthers to enter the Gelmorra ruins, running through a maze of tunnels and the ruins of a forgotten city, until you come out at the North Shroud? Or falling through a sandpit in the Sagolii Desert, entering a vast cavern filled with high level monsters and environmental hazards, and journeying through that until you come out at Northern Thanalan? I'd love to see implementation of areas like this in the game because it would really add to the exploration.

Silly people,

2.0 was scaled back to work on console, yes, but also on low end PC's.