"Elite Marks" or "Hoping for Change"

[Jakeson]

How about the reward based on how many people fight. A group of 4 people fighting an S-rank would get like 150 seals. The horde only gain 5 seals. This incentivizes(sp.) not joining the horde because then you get very little seals. This however opens the door for abuse. You and your little group are doing fine and then the horde joins and nerfs your seals. I dunno.

I still stay make them force spawns like treasure maps. We can't handle open world mobs.

This would probably lead to even more hoarding of marks. My FC has gotten quieter and quieter as it is about calling marks and I sure as hell can't get a hunt LS this late in the game.

[SendohJin]

How about the reward based on how many people fight.

that's also very difficult to program.

[Souljacker]

that's also very difficult to program.

So what you are saying is that professional programmers who are working on a game that has a monthly subscription should only fix something if it's "easily programmed"? Of COURSE programming an mmo system isn't freaking easy. If it was, EVERY game would be a smashing success.

As long as SE charges a monthly subscription, I feel they should make every effort to remove access barriers to content for the people playing the game. I'm not saying lower skill-based difficulty, I'm saying lower access barriers so that people can actually participate if they want to without getting permission from their whole server.

[Mcshiggs]

So what you are saying is that professional programmers who are working on a game that has a monthly subscription should only fix something if it's "easily programmed"? Of COURSE programming an mmo system isn't freaking easy. If it was, EVERY game would be a smashing success.

As long as SE charges a monthly subscription, I feel they should make every effort to remove access barriers to content for the people playing the game. I'm not saying lower skill-based difficulty, I'm saying lower access barriers so that people can actually participate if they want to without getting permission from their whole server.

I agree they should be able to handle the programming hurdles they have, but if you look back, they have used programming difficulty to not let you be able to que with your chocobo out, not being able to be able to que as an alliance for Crystal Tower and Frontlines. In fact the whole chocobo system was scrapped and we were given the barebones system we have now because the programmers weren't going to be able to have it ready by release.

[Souljacker]

Whose fault is that, though? It's not like they are doing anything brand new and revolutionary. 99% of this stuff has been around for well over a decade in multiple other games. If SE was on the bleeding edge of design they would have an excuse, but they aren't. They are half-assing systems that other companies already went through the growing pains for. SE just needed to take to heart the lessons. People making excuses for poor planning is disappointing. It's like they LIKE paying for SE to give us broken systems as they try to reinvent the wheel.

[Mcshiggs]

Whose fault is that, though?

Like I said, I agree, we get unfinished pushed back content every 3 months. It seems like other games when they are planning new content someone comes up with a cool idea, and the producer likes it and tells them to get it done, in XIV they have a good idea, and Yoshi splits them up, you half try to figure it out, the rest of you throw something together incase it doesn't work.

[Lucke]

Whose fault is that, though? It's not like they are doing anything brand new and revolutionary. 99% of this stuff has been around for well over a decade in multiple other games. If SE was on the bleeding edge of design they would have an excuse, but they aren't. They are half-assing systems that other companies already went through the growing pains for. SE just needed to take to heart the lessons. People making excuses for poor planning is disappointing. It's like they LIKE paying for SE to give us broken systems as they try to reinvent the wheel.

What's worse is this isn't their first MMO. I just don't get it. They've been in the game making business for like, what? 20-25 years? They should have learned how to program MMOs from XI.

[SendohJin]

So what you are saying is that professional programmers who are working on a game that has a monthly subscription should only fix something if it's "easily programmed"?

no, i'm saying there are much simpler solutions to the same problem. don't suggest a more difficult solution that would take away from development time of new content.

[Baneus]

It boils down to the same issue we had with fate grinding - everyone wants to be in a party, but very few people are willing to create a new party. For example; whenever a S or A rank spawns there are enough "Invite" requests to create at least 4 new parties and yet most of those same people are the ones complaining they didn't get any credit after the mark is dead.

[Mjytresz]

Whose fault is that, though? It's not like they are doing anything brand new and revolutionary. 99% of this stuff has been around for well over a decade in multiple other games. If SE was on the bleeding edge of design they would have an excuse, but they aren't. They are half-assing systems that other companies already went through the growing pains for. SE just needed to take to heart the lessons. People making excuses for poor planning is disappointing. It's like they LIKE paying for SE to give us broken systems as they try to reinvent the wheel.

As a programmer, I have to chime in on this.
Just because one game has a system or design out doesn't mean that everyone who touches a C++ book is an instant pro with it. Deciphering code can be time consuming and confusing. Oftentimes it's better to just decompile it or build on top of it. Even then, you have a platform built underneath your game with a plethora of other features that can break with one simple change.
Not only do you have to deal with how to integrate this new concept into your original design, now you have to work through general bug testing, refactors, regression testing, then a lot of other different types of testing (unit testing, user testing, performance, etc) to even show it off to your front-end: The players.

This is one of those cases where you need to shut up about something you obviously know nothing about. The IT field is already flooded with a bunch of idiots who pick up phones and answer to other idiots. Software Design doesn't have to be like that.

On topic, the correct approach isn't to just nerf something because people think it's too good. The reason people flock to it is because it's vastly more efficient than everything else. The problem isn't that it's too good, it's that it doesn't have any competition. Instead of nerfing x, threaten it by making z a comparable, or at least viable, option.
This is all assuming SE isn't going to go the route of "Is it popular? Nerf it" that every other host/dev team seems to rely on. When you force a meta, you defeat the purpose of itself.