Add different type of monsters attacks

Hello

While I was playing Monster hunter stories 2 I found a really good concept that makes things fun for me

Which is attack type
Strength / speed / technique

What if we had similar concept for tank mitigation

If wrong type of mitigation it will loose 50% of its effectiveness

As a risk and reward thing

What do you think?

wouldnt work in modern XIV; would need to've been in from the start and not been a pain point (old slash/pierce/blunt resist down).

Additionally we already kind of have that in Dark Mind, Dark Missionary, and Heart of Light for DRK and GNB: only good for magic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhyAmIHere

wouldnt work in modern XIV; would need to've been in from the start and not been a pain point (old slash/pierce/blunt resist down).

Additionally we already kind of have that in Dark Mind, Dark Missionary, and Heart of Light for DRK and GNB: only good for magic.

---

It is kinda janky the current system

What I mean is like monsters auto attacks for example have 3 types.. currently we have one basic type auto attack

Tanks usually use 2 3 mitigation at once and I don't think this is a good way to approach tank gameplay

Dark Mind is good on paper but outside of that it feel janky and less important than others

Because there Is no use for monster attack types I can use TBN without giving another thought process

The reward is free Dark attack which is not that great imo
And that if it proc if not it will give nothing

That is the issue

So basically you're creating 3 buttons, maybe cutting 1 existing mitigation into 3 differents mitigations.
If the buster is a water attack you need to press your grass mitigation. If it's fire you need to press your water mitigation. If it's grass you need to press your fire mitigation.

Here's the problems:
-Button bloat, effectively creates 3 buttons to answer the same situation except you need to press the correctly colored one.
-Cutting prevemptive mitigation, currently tanks can take advantage of the long duration to predict a tank buster and prevemptively cast their mitigation earlier so it comes back earlier as well while also taking more hits.
-Creates a reactive gameplay instead of the planning gameplay we are used to, this would completely turns the mitigation design on its head.

In short, you'll trade a lot of skill expression related to mitigation for a reaction based gameplay where you just press the exact same buttons but with the correct color, similar to pokemon typing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

So basically you're creating 3 buttons, maybe cutting 1 existing mitigation into 3 differents mitigations.
If the buster is a water attack you need to press your grass mitigation. If it's fire you need to press your water mitigation. If it's grass you need to press your fire mitigation.

Here's the problems:
-Button bloat, effectively creates 3 buttons to answer the same situation except you need to press the correctly colored one.
-Cutting prevemptive mitigation, currently tanks can take advantage of the long duration to predict a tank buster and prevemptively cast their mitigation earlier so it comes back earlier as well while also taking more hits.
-Creates a reactive gameplay instead of the planning gameplay we are used to, this would completely turns the mitigation design on its head.

In short, you'll trade a lot of skill expression related to mitigation for a reaction based gameplay where you just press the exact same buttons but with the correct color, similar to pokemon typing.

---

I don't see skill expression of pressing 2 or 3 buttons to mitigate 1 attack

It is just more button to press for no reason

No use trying to speak reason top this guy.
I've legit never seen a good post from this guy, period, and I'm fairly certain he has to be baiting with how often he comes here with genuinely awful ideas while ignoring other peoples refutations (similar to how he ignored you pointing out that tanks already have skill expression in the form of preemptive mitigation use).

I mean, intent of the OP aside there might still be something in there to be discussed. Even a dumpster fire might have something valuable inside if you look hard enough lol.

We already have physical and magical damage so maybe they could something more with that? At this point the distinction barely exists anymore outside of the few remaining type-specific defensive abilities like Dark Mind, Fey Illumination or Magick Barrier.

Then again, the fact they’ve all but moved away from that distinction means at this point maybe it would be better if they just removed the distinction entirely? Though, that’s not as fun I’d say

We play a game where we cast fire-based spells on fire-based enemies for damage. I think we expect too much for anything else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connor

I mean, intent of the OP aside there might still be something in there to be discussed. Even a dumpster fire might have something valuable inside if you look hard enough lol.

---

The problem with the OP is they see a system in another game, think, I like that, put in FFXIV, but never think about how that affects FFXIV. Just slap a random system in there and hope it fits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connor

We already have physical and magical damage so maybe they could something more with that? At this point the distinction barely exists anymore outside of the few remaining type-specific defensive abilities like Dark Mind, Fey Illumination or Magick Barrier.

---

But it didn't really work in the past. If we go back to HW, DRK was the magic tank and PLD was the physical tank. With the majority of damage, especially raidwides and tank busters, being magical, it skewed the preferred tank to DRK (even before you take into account DRK's higher DPS).

Now, bringing things back to more recent times, if we were to adopt this idea, there are 2 ways it could be done.

1. Split the tanks and have 2 physical tanks and 2 magic tanks. This would, in theory, mean one set of tanks is better than another in a given fight, however, we also know that fights are designed so that all tanks can clear all content. This by necessity means the physical tanks can mitigate damage in the magic heavy fights and vice versa. This creates a potential...problem. If the extra mitigation power doesn't prevent someone from using a resource, then that extra mitigation is functionally useless, if it does, that is when it will tip the scales in favour of the 'right tank pair'. Then it is a case of how much it benefits the party.

This also creates a problem in the fact you have Split the tanks into 2 preferred parties, one physical based, one magic based. of course, there might be fights where they mix up the damage more, so you are better off having one magic and one physical.

2. The other way is giving all tanks a mixed suite of physical and magical mitigation. Without then massively bloating the mitigation kit, you would necessarily have to split it and have a physical and magical variant for each. Take PLD for example, rather than the 5 personal mitigations they currently have (Rampart, Guardian, Bulwark, Holy Sheltron and Hallowed Ground), you would half it and make some magic and some physical. Here is Physical Guardian and here is Magical Guardian.

Going onto raidwides, you would need 2 for every job, one for physical one for magical.

Then we have the problem of shields. Using Guardian again, it gives PLD a 1000 potency shield. Shields are damage independent, so they absorb both types. This would mean tanks that had shields would get more mitigation power over all damage types.

As you can tell, more and more balancing issues come into play when you start to dig deeper. This is especially true when people want DRK and GNB raidwide mitigations to have a physical damage mitigation component (or just reduce all damage) and Dark Mind to also have something for Physical damage (just as Camouflage has something small for magical attacks). Also, bear in mind, this is for 2 damage types, I don't even want to think about the mess that would be OPs suggestion.

People might disagree with things I have said, or they don't care about any differences, which is fine. I am just illustrating things that need to be thought about when you want to design a mitigation kit for the tanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connor

I mean, intent of the OP aside there might still be something in there to be discussed. Even a dumpster fire might have something valuable inside if you look hard enough lol.

We already have physical and magical damage so maybe they could something more with that? At this point the distinction barely exists anymore outside of the few remaining type-specific defensive abilities like Dark Mind, Fey Illumination or Magick Barrier.

Then again, the fact they’ve all but moved away from that distinction means at this point maybe it would be better if they just removed the distinction entirely? Though, that’s not as fun I’d say

---

People can't understand that this form is all about discussion but it feels like some people in this community take things too personal.. I wish I can play FFXIV with community like Monster Hunter.. they are more open about discussions and feedback..

regarding the point of that' why developers get rid of this system yeah they get rid of a lot of systems that isn't bad for the game but developer choose to remove it like:
- Dark knight stormblood: yeah it was OP but what about the current warrior? i don't think there is a difference between then and now.
- Mana management: it is black mage and dark knight duty in this game to keep using the second most important recourse in RPG games which all jobs should have done it.

a lot of other systems developer choose to remove it to simplify game even more.. now we reach to the point where FFXIV jobs are in a such bad state.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dspguy

We play a game where we cast fire-based spells on fire-based enemies for damage. I think we expect too much for anything else.

---

I understand your point but that isn't what I was talking about..

take it for example this:

as simple as auto attacks of mobs and monsters, there is no verity for it, playing as a tank I blindly use any mitigation I have after catching 2 groups of mobs, and still my HP almost full

you can simply have red Icon on monsters that means this monster type is Strength, as a tank how to mitigate their attacks? use speed type of mitigation

Speed > Strength
Strength > Technique
Technique > Speed

these type of systems will make players not blindly pressing 40% mitigation for next attack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikey_R

The problem with the OP is they see a system in another game, think, I like that, put in FFXIV, but never think about how that affects FFXIV. Just slap a random system in there and hope it fits.

---

As if FFXIV a standalone game?

love it or hate it FFXIV is WoW clone with almost 80% gameplay identicality.. If we apply your logic then we could have FF11 systems in FFXIV
and that's not bad.. it is important to take notes from other games.

FFXIV removed this system because developer can't figure out how to implement it.. like other system they get rid of it (mana management) as I said before.

for RPG game first and MMO second it is really bad not having verity of RPG system.

just to simplify my Idea

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikey_R

1. Split the tanks and have 2 physical tanks and 2 magic tanks. This would, in theory, mean one set of tanks is better than another in a given fight, however, we also know that fights are designed so that all tanks can clear all content. This by necessity means the physical tanks can mitigate damage in the magic heavy fights and vice versa. This creates a potential...problem. If the extra mitigation power doesn't prevent someone from using a resource, then that extra mitigation is functionally useless, if it does, that is when it will tip the scales in favour of the 'right tank pair'. Then it is a case of how much it benefits the party.

---

I can see this will not work in any game from miles away.. why there is a job that can mitigate 1 type of attack? it isn't reasonable

all tanks should mitigate all type of attacks.. and there should be a reward system for it.. if it done successfully it should feel good

Well considering they can't balance a physical/magical split right now I'd say hold off from that until they figure that out

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tunda

I don't see skill expression of pressing 2 or 3 buttons to mitigate 1 attack

It is just more button to press for no reason

---

And can you please tell me where the skill expression lies in your idea?
Pressing the corresponding color when I see one is something we'd play in kindergarten.

Let's be serious, do you honestly see someone going "oh no I pressed the wrong color!!"
Also, screw the colorblind I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tunda

Hello

While I was playing Monster hunter stories 2 I found a really good concept that makes things fun for me

Which is attack type
Strength / speed / technique

What if we had similar concept for tank mitigation

If wrong type of mitigation it will loose 50% of its effectiveness

As a risk and reward thing

What do you think?

---

Knowing what to save your categorical mit for isn't "risk and reward". It just reduces the net complexity of optimizing one's sustain, since so much of the finer details (and maximum permissible incoming damage relative to tank base eHP at the encounter's tuning point) will be next to nothing compared to the simple mitigation types, which would then determine which (likely singular) CD schedule is permissible.

Rather, you're simply replacing...

• mitigation that can play a part in most mechanics/attacks and with therefore greater net potential for cognitive load (especially, if damage were increased to make tank swaps worthwhile without necessitating vuln swap or move-the-AoE-out gimmicks)
  --with--
• mitigation that can meaningfully play a part only within certain attacks and frequency of action to see even the small degree of cognitive load already present.

By all means, see how much DRKs and GNBs enjoyed having their categorically-specific raid-mitigation button rendered useless to press in certain fights.

Chances are, tanks wouldn't get much more fun out of having their capacities arbitrarily reduced in a given fight if the portions of each mitigation type varied across tanks nor would they enjoy needing 3x the buttons to achieve the same agency they have now even if the tanks were homogenized to carry the same portions of each miti type (as to prevent certain tanks just being outright stronger/weaker in certain encounters).

No, I'd much prefer to keep mitigation mostly general and simply amp up our agency through increased frequency and interaction among mitigation tools (atop perhaps a fair bit more randomization and some added bankability). Simon Says provides far less overall engagement, let alone agency, than being more able to choose how much potential mitigation to invest over what windows of time.

Food for thought:

Try these categories (formalized/nominal types A, B, and C into one of which each attack must fall) from any other perspective.

Take basic elemental damage, for instance:

Maybe an enemy is vulnerable to Fire and Wind. Okay, then you're forced to run WHM, SMN, BLM, and maybe MNK and NIN.

You can try to fix this by then aspecting a variety of attacks to various elements, but then you still end up reducing full toolkits or degrading their reward structures to just those particular attacks. NIN now has to spam Gust Blade and Aeolian Edge, Monk's damage lives or dies by whether Reply of Fire and Reply of Wind direct crit, DRG spams the newly wind-aspected Chaos Thrust / Chaotic Spring, etc. Whatever the case, you take something of which you had 100% useful... and reduced it to being useful some 16.7% of the time.

That waste, and subsequent loss of gameplay of need for extreme button bloat to return what we already had... is essentially what the suggestion would do to mitigation tools.
_______________

Now, compare that to what can be achieved through what differences can exist even without any nominal categories dividing them (no magical vs. physical or STR vs. INT) -- namely via differences in duration, depth, scaling factors (and therefore synergies), frequency, and source of mitigation tools:

Enemies might have, for instance, a flurry of weak attacks with nonetheless high total damage, or singular strong attacks. Against the first, a duration of flat damage reduction is best, while against the latter, a single-hit high %DR is best.

But, they have additional potential synergies, too. For instance, one may pair the %DR with a flat reduction in order to take 0 damage, thereby preventing the attack from inflicting its debuff.

If you have an attack that steals Haste from an enemy, not only does that reduce their AA frequency or slow a flurry of attacks enough to be healed through, but it might also provide you enough hits to ready an extra active (gauge-sourced) mitigation/healing/suppression tool.

Etc., etc.

Such provides actual room for agency, rather than a mere color-matching pretense of complexity. Rather than playing Simon Says with a third each of a mitigation kit, you're rewarded for precise knowledge enough to minimize excess flexible mitigation spent in avoiding a debuff or in making an attack survivable if a latter one might not be without sufficient resources saved for it, for knowing not just what tools your cotank has available but also how they might synergize with, rather than merely supplement, your own..

As Shurrikhan said, we also have different attacks that fits the request.
Single Hit, multi hit, bleed...

Tank Cooldowns aren't equals against those, some might do better, PLD's Guardian will be very strong against single hit while WAR's damnation will be stronger against sustained damage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tunda

As if FFXIV a standalone game?

love it or hate it FFXIV is WoW clone with almost 80% gameplay identicality.. If we apply your logic then we could have FF11 systems in FFXIV
and that's not bad.. it is important to take notes from other games.

---

It's important to take notes only in a manner mindful of their sources' context, which you repeatedly fail to do.

Quote:

---

I can see this will not work in any game from miles away.. why there is a job that can mitigate 1 type of attack? it isn't reasonable

---

You've again taken out of its context a quote that specifically shows the problems of any such system while simply laying out what all is possible... to feign that another poster suggested only and exactly what they had just critiqued.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

And can you please tell me where the skill expression lies in your idea?
Pressing the corresponding color when I see one is something we'd play in kindergarten.

Let's be serious, do you honestly see someone going "oh no I pressed the wrong color!!"
Also, screw the colorblind I guess.

---

the risk could be done by use the right mitigation for the right attack instead of using any tank mitigation you have (I have seen some tanks use 3 mitigation skills for 1 TB)
rewards continuation to mitigation with hard hitting attack based on job identity that can vary based on job.

it can be anything really color/icon/text whatever.
the most important risk and rewards structure should be unique for all tanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

Knowing what to save your categorical mit for isn't "risk and reward". It just reduces the net complexity of optimizing one's sustain, since so much of the finer details (and maximum permissible incoming damage relative to tank base eHP at the encounter's tuning point) will be next to nothing compared to the simple mitigation types, which would then determine which (likely singular) CD schedule is permissible.

Rather, you're simply replacing...

• mitigation that can play a part in most mechanics/attacks and with therefore greater net potential for cognitive load (especially, if damage were increased to make tank swaps worthwhile without necessitating vuln swap or move-the-AoE-out gimmicks)
  --with--
• mitigation that can meaningfully play a part only within certain attacks and frequency of action to see even the small degree of cognitive load already present.

By all means, see how much DRKs and GNBs enjoyed having their categorically-specific raid-mitigation button rendered useless to press in certain fights.

Chances are, tanks wouldn't get much more fun out of having their capacities arbitrarily reduced in a given fight if the portions of each mitigation type varied across tanks nor would they enjoy needing 3x the buttons to achieve the same agency they have now even if the tanks were homogenized to carry the same portions of each miti type (as to prevent certain tanks just being outright stronger/weaker in certain encounters).

No, I'd much prefer to keep mitigation mostly general and simply amp up our agency through increased frequency and interaction among mitigation tools (atop perhaps a fair bit more randomization and some added bankability). Simon Says provides far less overall engagement, let alone agency, than being more able to choose how much potential mitigation to invest over what windows of time.

---

I disagree.. Tank gameplay is braindead because it is so simple to the point where you span any mitigation for next attack with no consciousness..

That create less complex gameplay system which reduce tanks thinking for what to do for next attack..
Thats why most people don't play or even skipping tanks,

people would rather play Job with complex rotation than 1 2 3 + any mitigation I have for next attack kind of gameplay..

Since shadowbringers people are skipping tanks because how they reach to the point of braindead jobs (TBF warrior is tank+healer at this point) I encourage you read other posts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKNovel

And can you please tell me where the skill expression lies in your idea?
Pressing the corresponding color when I see one is something we'd play in kindergarten.

Let's be serious, do you honestly see someone going "oh no I pressed the wrong color!!"
Also, screw the colorblind I guess.

---

Well you see, OP thinks Simon Says is a complex game with tons of room for player expression, clearly.

Also I feel it's important to point out that once upon a time, FFXIV had full elemental damage times. Ice/Wind/Fire/Earth, you name it, FFXIV had it.

It was ditched for a reason and it's because early raids would require you to meld elemental Materia on a fight-by-fight basis, it's stupid and everyone is almost universally glad it's been reduced to Phys/Magic/Unaspected damage types.

Speaking on where DRK and GNB currently fall in with their efficacy in raids that don't have a ton of magic damage to mitigate, yeah it feels shit. The solution is to make their magic mits work on phys damage with 50% efficacy and vice-versa for phys-only mitigations, as it allows the tanks to keep the flavour they currently have without the risk of completely undermining certain tanks based on encounter. Like in M1S where there's only one instance of magic damage for the whole encounter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tunda

I disagree.. Tank gameplay is braindead because it is so simple to the point where you span any mitigation for next attack with no consciousness..

---

Reads like you've never even dipped your toes into current-release Savage fights, let alone Ultimate encounters.
My team in TEA literally had to spreadsheet when they use what mitigation to ensure the correct mits come back up at the right time on a per-phase basis, in a fight that has 5 phases.

This is also present in current-tier Savage fights, boiling it down to "I press Shadow Wall every time" is disingenuous, that's what bad tanks do. Competent tank players actually think with some foresight to see if/when they'll need such a heavy mit available to them again. This also changes on a per-fight basis. Not taking into account tank-swapping in fights that don't explicitly require it for increased mitigation capacity on the main tank at all times.

Highly suggest you actually go play some of the harder content the game has to offer before you speak as if you are an expert on the subject.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SquigglySquigs95

Reads like you've never even dipped your toes into current-release Savage fights, let alone Ultimate encounters.
My team in TEA literally had to spreadsheet when they use what mitigation to ensure the correct mits come back up at the right time on a per-phase basis, in a fight that has 5 phases.

This is also present in current-tier Savage fights, boiling it down to "I press Shadow Wall every time" is disingenuous, that's what bad tanks do. Competent tank players actually think with some foresight to see if/when they'll need such a heavy mit available to them again. This also changes on a per-fight basis. Not taking into account tank-swapping in fights that don't explicitly require it for increased mitigation capacity on the main tank at all times.

Highly suggest you actually go play some of the harder content the game has to offer before you speak as if you are an expert on the subject.

---

I don't think you know what are you talking about.. let alone that you are talking like an "expert"

I suggest that you try to play games that make your think before doing action.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SquigglySquigs95

Well you see, OP thinks Simon Says is a complex game with tons of room for player expression, clearly.

---

it is clearly not path of exile kind of system.. complexity isn't "hard" it gives RPG games variety of gameplay,
it doesn't need to be hard thing to understand it needs to have quick action kind of style that I think it can be understandable for people who play casually and hardcode

if you play only FFXIV there are people are casual more than FFXIV casuals and play games like MHS2 and other RPGs and can understand + have fun with such system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SquigglySquigs95

Also I feel it's important to point out that once upon a time, FFXIV had full elemental damage times. Ice/Wind/Fire/Earth, you name it, FFXIV had it.

It was ditched for a reason and it's because early raids would require you to meld elemental Materia on a fight-by-fight basis, it's stupid and everyone is almost universally glad it's been reduced to Phys/Magic/Unaspected damage types.

Speaking on where DRK and GNB currently fall in with their efficacy in raids that don't have a ton of magic damage to mitigate, yeah it feels shit. The solution is to make their magic mits work on phys damage with 50% efficacy and vice-versa for phys-only mitigations, as it allows the tanks to keep the flavour they currently have without the risk of completely undermining certain tanks based on encounter. Like in M1S where there's only one instance of magic damage for the whole encounter.

---

the system was implemented badly and it is still implemented badly Idk why you try to defend it..

there is a difference between "bad system" and "bad implementation" I know it is hard to think about it if you only play 2 to 3 games.. educate yourself or you will look like someone thinks they are "expert" but not look even close to one

BTW welcome to the form this is your 6th post as I see it seems that my subjects interest you that you create another account to just participate.. you are welcome

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tunda

As if FFXIV a standalone game?

---

It is though, this is why you cannot just take a system from one game and place it into FFXIV. It might play similar to another game, but you still cannot just take systems as it is in the parts where they aren't similar that causes problems.

To be clear, you can take ideas from other games, however you necessarily need to adapt said system for FFXIV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tunda

I can see this will not work in any game from miles away.. why there is a job that can mitigate 1 type of attack? it isn't reasonable

---

So why did you not comment on my second point where I go though a design where they DO have all mitigation? Or is it that you didn't properly read the post and skipped over it?

To be clear, I have other comments past what I have already stated, which to me seems I have thought about this and potential impacts more than you currently have.

And, just to avoid any sort of doubt, currently comments revolve around dungeon pulls and boss fight design, which then leads into questions about the cooldown and strength of these mitigations and whether other mitigation exists. This is the surface, these do go deeper, just to be clear.

You can't really apply single player RPG system to an MMO. FF14 did have elemental resistances it just didn't work long term, same as WoW. A game where player power kept increasing every level cap makes this just so incredibly hard from a mathematical standpoint to do, it's not like OSRS or GW2 where you have a static max level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tunda

I don't think you know what are you talking about.. let alone that you are talking like an "expert"

I suggest that you try to play games that make your think before doing action.

---

You didn't actually disprove or address anything I said with this comment. It was a poor attempt at deflection to try and avoid coming up with an actual counter to the point I made, which is still correct btw. I also never claimed to be an expert.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tunda

it is clearly not path of exile kind of system.. complexity isn't "hard" it gives RPG games variety of gameplay,
it doesn't need to be hard thing to understand it needs to have quick action kind of style that I think it can be understandable for people who play casually and hardcode

if you play only FFXIV there are people are casual more than FFXIV casuals and play games like MHS2 and other RPGs and can understand + have fun with such system.

---

Okay but again, the game literally isn't designed for an alternate system, and I don't think the current system needs replacing. It's pretty good and has decent allowance for skill expression. There's also timed elements to like every tank-specific low-cooldown mitigation now, which if anything they should lean into that more than some fucked up triangle mitigation system like you suggested. Which we also did have a form of at some point previously. We had Pierce/Blunt/Slash damage types and the systems around that ALSO sucked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tunda

the system was implemented badly and it is still implemented badly Idk why you try to defend it..

there is a difference between "bad system" and "bad implementation" I know it is hard to think about it if you only play 2 to 3 games.. educate yourself or you will look like someone thinks they are "expert" but not look even close to one

BTW welcome to the form this is your 6th post as I see it seems that my subjects interest you that you create another account to just participate.. you are welcome

---

The system as it is currently, is like 95% fine. It could use with minor improvements but as it stands it's solid as is.
It's not a bad system or poorly implemented. The only thing that really needs to be addressed is having magic only mits have half efficacy on phys attacks and vice versa. I don't play 2-3 games, I'd argue I probably have more experience when it comes to MH alone than you do. I'm educated enough to understand that you can't just rip a system from one game and transplant it into another, entirely different game with little to no changes and think it's a bright idea.
I've been on the forums since 2019, longer than you. I've just been a longtime lurker is all. You didn't do anything to bring me here and bringing up my relative lack of posts is odd to be honest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikey_R

It is though, this is why you cannot just take a system from one game and place it into FFXIV. It might play similar to another game, but you still cannot just take systems as it is in the parts where they aren't similar that causes problems.

To be clear, you can take ideas from other games, however you necessarily need to adapt said system for FFXIV.[/HB]

---

FFXIV is not a standalone game it is a copy cat of WoW

if WoW didn't exist we would see FFXI part 2

this is a room for discussion people have the freedom to say what they want if you don't like other people opinion you shouldn't agree and you shouldn't be rude

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tunda

FFXIV is not a standalone game it is a copy cat of WoW

if WoW didn't exist we would see FFXI part 2

this is a room for discussion people have the freedom to say what they want if you don't like other people opinion you shouldn't agree and you shouldn't be rude

---

With differences.

Yup.

You can say what you want, I can say my opinion on what you say, that is how a discussion works. I didn't like your opinion, I shared my thoughts on your opinion, you don't seem to want to reciprocate.

As for the rude, the only thing I have said that could even be remotely considered rude is when I pointed out your common theme of taking ideas from other games, and just expecting them to fit into FFXIV without thought. Which, is just an observation more than anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tunda

FFXIV is not a standalone game it is a copy cat of WoW

if WoW didn't exist we would see FFXI part 2

this is a room for discussion people have the freedom to say what they want if you don't like other people opinion you shouldn't agree and you shouldn't be rude

---

It's neither a direct copy of WoW nor does standalone mean "wholly original" / "not identifiably derivative".

We already saw much of what your Final Fantasy XI Part 2: With Some Small Twists would look like (1.x), but it didn't take WoW alone nor specifically to get us out of it, nor was even that a carbon-copy of XI not a game XI systems could be dropped directly into. Heck, had they had more than 30% Yoshida's available team or budget to begin with, wed likely have seen greater difference from XI rather than all the more similarity to it.

Finally, just as you have the right to, however wrongly, make fallacious or nonsensical claims, others have the right to point out how and why they are wrong. Such is not an attack on your underlying opinions or values, but merely easy discussion away from misinformation, conflation, lack of foresight towards even obvious and immediate concerns, etc.

As for being rude, someone who so routinely misquotes anyone of opposing opinion to pretend they've held the exact opposite of their actual positions has no moral high ground and does not not inspire confidence that constructive discussion with them is even possible.