Glamours will be needlessly annoying...

[Michiko]

I suppose if these Glamour Crystals are going to be by level, there goes my idea of using event equipment for it's look over armor. I doubt an ilevel10 crystal will allow for copying ilv90 armor.
Over complicating things seems to be the norm. I will remain cautiously optimistic that it won't be a pain to use when it's live in game. One can only hope.

[TheUltimate3]

I suppose if these Glamour Crystals are going to be by level, there goes my idea of using event equipment for it's look over armor. I doubt an ilevel10 crystal will allow for copying ilv90 armor.
Over complicating things seems to be the norm. I will remain cautiously optimistic that it won't be a pain to use when it's live in game. One can only hope.

I was under the impression, based on the interview, that if you want to copy a ilvl90 armor, you buy a ilvl90 crystal. THEN you use that wherever you want it.

[Nahaara]

Ofc leave it it SE to take a concept that should be simple and accessible and turn it into an overcomplicated mess...

[ispano]

That's saved server-side. It has nothing to do with the client. The only thing that the client needs to keep track of are the slots when you open your character window, and I highly doubt that that would increase the amount of memory by a lot if at all (it would be the equivalent of 12 bag slots, and it can be ignored simply by making that the client only shows either the current equiped gear slots OR the vanity gear slots, instead of showing both at once). So no, PS3 memory limitations has nothing to do with it.

It's not about being able to see the items in the slots. It's about the client having to keep track of 2 items for each normal gear slot, instead of one.

EDIT: Also finally found where they talked about it not being slots. Not quite related to the memory issue, but they did indeed say something about it.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...=1#post1552811

[Kayo]

Except you don't have to keep track of both sets, only parts of both, which would go with my "short sighted dev" comment. A memory issue like thie one you are saying caused them to use this poor system(at least the way it's been described, it could actually be good and just described poorly) would only happen if the devs originally had no plans for a vanity system and coded the armor pieces in such a way it would have to keep all of its information in memory while equipped.

It actually makes sense. Its quite possibly a PS3 limitation thing. Theyve already admitted that they are topped off on memory with the PS3 as far as the interface goes. This is why PS3 doesnt (or didnt?) have focus target UI option. Adding another tab where you can add a whole set of new armor sounds like it'd take much more extra memory than using an item to change the appearance.

[Airikay]

It actually makes sense. Its quite possibly a PS3 limitation thing. Theyve already admitted that they are topped off on memory with the PS3 as far as the interface goes. This is why PS3 doesnt (or didnt?) have focus target UI option. Adding another tab where you can add a whole set of new armor sounds like it'd take much more extra memory than using an item to change the appearance.

It does, just need a keyboard to /focustarget.

[Felis]

It does, just need a keyboard to /focustarget.

You don't need a keyboard

option 1: select a target -> press the quader button -> select Focus Target in the menu
option 2: use the macro /focustarget <t>

Turning on Focus Target turn off the exp bar on the PS3.

[Yshnal]

It's not about being able to see the items in the slots. It's about the client having to keep track of 2 items for each normal gear slot, instead of one.

EDIT: Also finally found where they talked about it not being slots. Not quite related to the memory issue, but they did indeed say something about it.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...=1#post1552811

Yeah, server stress makes more sense than PS3 limitations, unless they simply changed how our equiped gear is stored in the database and added the appearance #ID to it. Then it would just need to transfer the same data as what it will have to with the glamour prisms (base item #ID + appearance #ID), unless they're simply going to give a new #ID to each and every one of the gear+appearance combinations possible (in which case it would still be possible to do a vanity tab by just storing that new #ID in the database as the current equiped set of gear+appearance). In both cases, the database wouldn't have more stress either.

Anyway, I'm speculating a bit, as we don't really know the specifics of the glamour system as to make proper deductions about how it might work code-wise. But from how it looks right now, it wouldn't really matter how they implemented it.

It actually makes sense. Its quite possibly a PS3 limitation thing. Theyve already admitted that they are topped off on memory with the PS3 as far as the interface goes. This is why PS3 doesnt (or didnt?) have focus target UI option. Adding another tab where you can add a whole set of new armor sounds like it'd take much more extra memory than using an item to change the appearance.

The problem with the interface and the memory consumption is on the amount of things that it can show (load) at once, as seen in the focus target option. If the vanity tab was independent from the gear tab it would just have the same memory requirements as just opening the current gear tab or going through the different inventory bags.

[Airikay]

You don't need a keyboard

option 1: select a target -> press the quader button -> select Focus Target in the menu
option 2: use the macro /focustarget <t>

Turning on Focus Target turn off the exp bar on the PS3.

I use macro, but you make the macro with a keyboard, whether virtual or hardware. My point was being their isn't a quick icon action for it like sprint or teleport. And I have no idea what quader is, but shuffling through menu isn't really usually a valid option in middle of battle.

[kukurumei]

Yeah, server stress makes more sense than PS3 limitations, unless they simply changed how our equiped gear is stored in the database and added the appearance #ID to it. Then it would just need to transfer the same data as what it will have to with the glamour prisms (base item #ID + appearance #ID), unless they're simply going to give a new #ID to each and every one of the gear+appearance combinations possible (in which case it would still be possible to do a vanity tab by just storing that new #ID in the database as the current equiped set of gear+appearance). In both cases, the database wouldn't have more stress either.

Anyway, I'm speculating a bit, as we don't really know the specifics of the glamour system as to make proper deductions about how it might work code-wise. But from how it looks right now, it wouldn't really matter how they implemented it.


The problem with the interface and the memory consumption is on the amount of things that it can show (load) at once, as seen in the focus target option. If the vanity tab was independent from the gear tab it would just have the same memory requirements as just opening the current gear tab or going through the different inventory bags.

Sorta sorta, you still have to load character datas. They are probably more worry about exceeding the character sever. Remember 2.0. Not only were servers crashing from massive people in the world, but from people going to and from duty finder(servers).

Unless you implement and thus code very carefully, both your client side, and server side are going to be quite a mess to debug. This doesn't include how much more space is required on the character server, because they have to hold another couple of variable per character (that can get significant when you multiply it by 2million+?)

We already know SE programers aren't the most elegant of coders.