Simplicity over complexity, time to change.

[Velhart]

What? I am quite sorry but that is an insane statement. Complexity 'adds' depth where done tastefully, even your Mario example the depth (I don't agree that mario is a game with a lot of depth) comes from situations that make your interactions more complex such as complicated jumping segments or enemies with complex mechanics) comes from complexity despite the game not being super complex. Simplification always results in 'limited' depth, the complexity of a system determines how much depth can be had from it. IGNORING THAT, if complexity was never a good thing then we would be playing games where we have no characters but would just be represented with a square instead because character art and 3d worlds is unnecessary complexity right? How about needing to move in combat? Don't need it, its another layer of complexity right? Don't have gear, levels, don't make people do anything because complex mechanics in any way are bad right?

Again, I am sorry but that is simply wrong.

We were talking about simplicity in the mechanics itself, not the entire game as a whole. Should read more carefully.

Can use this as a reference if you don't get it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVfzWpmyXXk

Being simple in the mechanics alone allows you more freedom to make what is around you more or less difficult. Relying on difficulty more through the mechanics itself is not proper balancing and not good game design if you are trying to appeal to a wider audience.

[Zantetsuken]

What?I am quite sorry but that is an insane statement. Complexity 'adds' depth where done tastefully, even your Mario example the depth (I don't agree that mario is a game with a lot of depth) comes from situations that make your interactions more complex such as complicated jumping segments or enemies with complex mechanics) comes from complexity despite the game not being super complex. Simplification always results in 'limited' depth, the complexity of a system determines how much depth can be had from it. IGNORING THAT, if complexity was never a good thing then we would be playing games where we have no characters but would just be represented with a square instead because character art and 3d worlds is unnecessary complexity right? How about needing to move in combat? Don't need it, its another layer of complexity right? Don't have gear, levels, don't make people do anything because complex mechanics in any way are bad right?

Again, I am sorry but that is simply wrong.

Extra Credits put it rather well when they said that "Depth is bought with Complexity, but Complexity also restricts Depth"

Or, think of Complexity as Spices, and Depth as Flavor. The proper type and amount of the former is can give a solid boost to the latter.

But careless, or excessive use of either Complexity or Spice can completely ruin an experience rather than enhance it.

[Felessan]

Can I have some of what you're smoking please?

We have 2 million already. Chinese release will adds 2 more. A successful MMO that is not suddenly dropped (i doubt SE will drop it) peak at around 5-6 years than steady decline to about 50% and than stagnation/slow drop until game becomes really outdated and closed.

I redirect to you again to Argumentum ad populum, something popular doesn't mean something good (and most usually it's right the opposite), also, it doesn't mean that something not popular must be good, so it's always fallacious in both directions to argue the quality of something based on it's popularity.

The only reasonable criteria for good - is that people like it. And only measurable criteria for this is number of people that likes it and a period of stay. We have already 2 million people at 1 year timeframe, that is already a long period to attribute it to marketing push.
Otherwise we will be stuck with *definition of good*. Basically I think that FF14 is good as it is and you have no objective meaning to prove it otherwise. And my "good" is that people like it (play it) as it's now.

Any human activity can lead to elitism, I don't see how you intend to have a point there.

You can provoke it, like lockout zones do, or you can try to hamper it like it's done in FF14, where many elitist concepts are explicitly made invalid (like "buy to win" from FF11 where a lot of gear were purchased thus segregating crowd for those who have money and whose who haven't).

And on the design perspective, dangerous don't mean inaccessible, just not a walk in the park like it is now, even if areas pose a challenge, everyone, including casuals, could access eventually to all content.

You think it in a wrong mentality. Dangerous lockout some people, as some people just don't have enough will/dedication to go through several death to pass through. More dangerous zone becomes, more people will be locked out.
The general trend for modern MMO, starts with WoW is that - content for everyone. And unlike Coil where you can add Echo when next turn comes out, it's work rather bad with zones. You either keep them locked out (that is bad) or get excessive stress to adding new zones that costs much more than raid dungeon.

because I've never said that ARR should be exactly like 1.0 or XI were, jsut that it could take ideas and concepts from them and include them in the game to add depth to it

But they do add some elements, like NM hunting was returned to FF14. They just adapt it to the whole concept framework, that all content should be eventually scaled down to be accessible to everyone.

ARR's combat may be technical, but it is anything but tactical. ARR battles are nothing more than: Perform pre-scripted skill rotation + avoid pre-scripted boss gimmicks.

Although I would like as well less fixed rotation, some tactics still in place. You need to adjust known tactics to your own party formation as they not always work as prescribed and sometimes some tweaks required for more comfortable play for your party.

People en masse like Dark Souls as well, which has virtually none of those features.

DarkSouls sold 2 million copies and GTA sold 20 million copies. Got the point?

He carefully limited the amount of flashiness at the launch of the game, and would drip-feed it to players over the expected life of the game in order to always have something new to show.

Flashiness sells much better. And having *actual* content helps keep people in game. You know, a lot of people treat it as a *game*, especially those from casual crowd, and not "a gateway to fantasy world". Currently it's a nice looking fantasy game with some flashy thing going around and some hardcore stuff in which nobody really cares about "world and stuff". And I am fine with that, I don't want to be in the land of elves, I want a high quality theme park MMO with cute Mi'qotes.

This approached can't be sustained without venturing into complete absurdity and obliterating all sense of legitimacy in the world.

I do not care. I like story, I like people, I generally like endgame. I don't like overrealistic "place to escape" and I don't want to be in the crowd that likes to play Tolkien games in the forest.

Yes, FFXIV, with his one stat gears, zero personalization, no elemental weakness, almost zero party member cooperation, scripted fight is very tactical and technical. Alright.

Yes, it is. Pulling out 400+ dps for a bard is not an easy achievement even though bards generally described as "one button" dps class.
General approach is very easy and gives a good result. Yes, it is how it should be. But when you want a little more from a class - you suddenly discovers that secondary stats are not equally useless, that alignment of timing becomes important and that you need to actually watch for a different things to do not a "mediocre" but good dps.

[Sygmaelle]

read all the thread before answering a post please, i never asked for difficulty, i think the game is well tunned releasing both easy and hard content.

You re askin for more complexity in the design and its somethnig we won't have, they ll simply make hard content

[Redemption]

We were talking about simplicity in the mechanics itself, not the entire game as a whole. Should read more carefully.

Can use this as a reference if you don't get it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVfzWpmyXXk

Being simple in the mechanics alone allows you more freedom to make what is around you more or less difficult. Relying on difficulty more through the mechanics itself is not proper balancing and not good game design if you are trying to appeal to a wider audience.

I get the idea and disagree. Heck the entire RPG genre works counter to your argument where complex stat systems and tatctical synergies are definitely part of the fun and are part of the mechanics of the games core function. I also do not care about wider audience appeal, so long as your game can make a good enough profit I think it better to focus your game rather than attempt to fit it to everyone (I am aware this runs counter to business thought but as a consumer I really do not care at all about other peoples profit margins and I am sure they do not count on me for that. Instead I prefer the approach of pursuing what I want and letting the people running the business figure out how to work that financially.) as that tends to result in mediocrity.

Extra Credits put it rather well when they said that "Depth is bought with Complexity, but Complexity also restricts Depth"

Or, think of Complexity as Spices, and Depth as Flavor. The proper type and amount of the former is can give a solid boost to the latter.

But careless, or excessive use of either Complexity or Spice can completely ruin an experience rather than enhance it.

Perhaps, but I don't think anyone here is asking for things to be complex without reason or rather I don't think people want complexity that does nothing. Suffice to say, the people supporting this thread do not think the complexity level is right yet.

We have 2 million already. Chinese release will adds 2 more. A successful MMO that is not suddenly dropped (i doubt SE will drop it) peak at around 5-6 years than steady decline to about 50% and than stagnation/slow drop until game becomes really outdated and closed.

The game does not have 2 million active subscribers -.- ... thats intentionally miss worded marketing stuff. The game has sold over 2 million copies but as far as active subscribers go it is somewhere over 500k and somewhere under 2 million.

[Angelfish51]

In such a small community, it is hard to separate complex and simple contents, they just cannot coexist! They tried, by introducing unhinted quest, and scob with random mechanics, but I just don't see ppl allured to these. Ppl rather play mindless but high reward elite hunt!
I don't want to see them bringing the FFXI system here, that a single wipe may ruin the whole party/alliance several hours of grind and most endgame content takes about 3 hours!

[Zantetsuken]

Flashiness sells much better. And having *actual* content helps keep people in game. You know, a lot of people treat it as a *game*, especially those from casual crowd, and not "a gateway to fantasy world". Currently it's a nice looking fantasy game with some flashy thing going around and some hardcore stuff in which nobody really cares about "world and stuff". And I am fine with that, I don't want to be in the land of elves, I want a high quality theme park MMO with cute Mi'qotes.

You have a world of MMO games that cater to your tastes: TERA, BLADE AND SOUL, AION, ATLANTICA, WoW, WildStar, etc. etc. etc.

I'm surprised you are so passionate about defending ARR as generic WoW-clone when you have plethora of other options to migrate to if it ever changed.

But for FF MMO fans ( FFXI, and FFIXV 1.23), this is really the last bastion.

[Tupsi]

I don't want to see them bringing the FFXI system here, that a single wipe may ruin the whole party/alliance several hours of grind and most endgame content takes about 3 hours!

Except in XI you can actually recover nicely from a wipe - It takes a hell of a good team to recover from a partial wipe in XIV because of how unforgiving and poorly done some mechanics are. Both your healers are dead? Too bad, the PLD can't hold the boss long enough because of only having 1 tier of cure and the monster out paces you, sure would be nice if someone else could keep them up so you can recover your healers.

The only time a wipe 'ruined a run' in XI is if its on a ground king because some other group would claim it or on certain content like Provenance Watcher, Pandemonium Warden or Absolute Virtue where they instantly despawn.

but I just don't see ppl allured to these

Because Savage is tied to the same cooldown as regular, that's a big part of it. Also 'no hint quests' doesn't offer a reward really and people want rewards..usually "good ones".

[Redemption]

In such a small community, it is hard to separate complex and simple contents, they just cannot coexist! They tried, by introducing unhinted quest, and scob with random mechanics, but I just don't see ppl allured to these. Ppl rather play mindless but high reward elite hunt!
I don't want to see them bringing the FFXI system here, that a single wipe may ruin the whole party/alliance several hours of grind and most endgame content takes about 3 hours!

Gonna address this really quick, one wipe in FFXI would not set you back an hours worth of exp... it would be more like 15 mins worth. Also the endgame content time varied widely from events that took 30 mins (nyzul island climb, or even normal assaults) to your long 3 hr example (dynamis).

[Azurak]

The best way to make our point across, is to stop playing XIV. As long as subscriptions are adequate, they wont change anything. But I think it is too late to change the core game anyhow. They can add more jobs and gear and more dodging mechanics but the game still sucks because the battle system is fluffy and the game is instanced too much.

This game will have a shorter lifespan than XI did.

Since MMOs take many years to make, for us who liked XI, I think it is time to say goodbye to MMORPGs and get on with our lives while the casuals have fun playing a game that is built on redundancy.