A thought on solving the content gating issue. Long read, pls bare with me.

[odie]

But he wasn't saying to remove the leveling process entirely. No one I've seen is advocating being able to start a new character at level 50.

I think you are arguing for the sake of arguing. You know full well what he implied with i90.

[TinyMonster]

Snip

Even if this is an MMO it is very much like tv series because it's your character that has to get through the story. Now stop de whinning it's useless, they won't change it because "some" are against it and until I see facts that they actually really do lose a lot of players which is ironic since I keep recruiting new players in my Free Company I will take it as a grain of salt.

[Atrayl]

Even if this is an MMO it is very much like tv series because it's your character that has to get through the story. Now stop de whinning it's useless, they won't change it because "some" are against it and until I see facts that they actually really do lose a lot of players which is ironic since I keep recruiting new players in my Free Company I will take it as a grain of salt.

Do you actually have an argument or are you just going to continue to ignore any point I make and ramble in run-on sentences?

[Atrayl]

I think you are arguing for the sake of arguing. You know full well what he implied with i90.

No, I don't think that's what he meant at all. But if it is, then I disagree with him.

[Whiteroom]

If it would take a lot of work to remove the MSQ requirements from dungeons and raids, then the game was designed horribly. Most likely it's a single flag or perhaps even a flag on each individual dungeon...

Really, you think it's as simple as Yoshi walking in with his cup of coffee and clicking a few mouse buttons?

No, they would have to decide what to change, how to change it, how it would effect the player base as well as many other things we don't know about since we didn't design the game. I like how your first comment was about people being in denial. But as stated by people since you replied to me, you seem to be arguing for the sake of arguing, claiming that no one stated that you should start at level 50 even though that's what starting at i90 means. What happened to your points on being able to use logic to draw conclusions. Consistency is a good thing, and you are doing it poorly.

[Catwho]

the new classes are useless if you don't first level the old classes to get your cross class abilities. stop whining and get to work.

I think this is the most important thing that gets overlooked with "but I only want to be a DRK tank."

Guess what, the best tanks in this game have both PLD and WAR already at 50 for a reason. At the very minimum both at 26 already. Someone who took PLD to 50 played with DRK within the first scenario, went "oh okay got it" and had no issues. Someone who had never leveled PLD would get that jumbled mess of a hotbar and got "WTF" and have to waste a whole day dying to the first DRK scenario - that fight was pretty rough even for the veterans.

The new jobs are very technical. We already have enough bad ASTs running around - the last thing we needed was someone who never leveled WHM getting AST at 30 and train wrecking everything past Haukke.

[Reinha]

There are no credible sources for either of us to cite. Not every topic has a foundation of research on hand to be used in debate, and yet we can still discuss these things. Hiding behind the tired XKCD "[citation needed]" non-argument in unquantifiable matters is such an intellectual dishonesty that I'm surprised it's not considered a fallacy yet.

It's absurd to doubt that people have quit the game over the gated content. I really hope . . . <a belief-based and poor attempt to attack my point of view, and some examples about quitting players>

Citing your claims is debate basics and is not limited to scientific debates. Challenging an unproven claim is not a fallacy. It's a valid way to find out whether you are announcing your personal beliefs instead of facts, or if you are actually contributing something meaningful. I was just wondering if you had a way to prove you were actually right, no need to get defensive. People quitting because of story requirements is a fact, but what is not a proven fact is that SE is losing money over it. (<- That's your original claim if I understand correctly. I hope you are not moving goalposts now. If you were just stating that some amount of individuals quit over it and were not commenting on the total sub numbers, well, that doesn't really add anything of value and no one who has followed this discussion is in denial about it.) The story structure could be attracting in people who like working through attunements and/or being guided through the game via a single questline (like me for example). The story could also be a compelling reason for long term subscription as opposed to subbing for a month just to try DRK. You calling people delusional for not sharing your beliefs is equally as insignificant as a religious person calling non-believers delusional.

My second statement is projection, and really can't be cited by definition. It must be supported logically. With this, I again turn to the question from the previous threads that no one has still been able to answer: "if the story content is made optional, how does it affect you?". The answer is "it doesn't," unless someone can finally provide a better one.

People wouldn't quit if the story is made optional because it wouldn't affect them. The game wouldn't change for them. They could still do the story themselves. It would contain all the same content. You don't remove something you truly enjoy from your life when it changes in a way that you'll never see or be affected by.

I answered this in the long thread, several times in fact. Last time I used myself as an example but now I'm citing an article about reward structures in games. This is to prove that making the story optional is not as minor a thing as you attempt to make it sound. I'm very curious if you're going to dodge the response again (or imply I'm sadist hahaha).

Gaining access to content is a reward, and rewards are designed to make the player feel like they are advancing in the game. Making the story optional is removing the access-gaining reward from the story. This would reduce the rewards for doing the story and therefore the MSQ experience would be less fun for some of those who would do it anyway (including me). Story gating is the same reward mechanism as gaining levels, as it gives players a sense of progress and a feeling of anticipation of the soon-to-be-accessed content. The following article points out that gating mechanisms indeed do have a psychological effect on players. Making the story optional would affect everyone, not just story haters.

http://www.digra.org/wp-content/uplo...1310.20247.pdf

In the following sections,
we analyze how reward systems provide pleasure and satisfying experiences by
classifying rewards and playing activities, and relate reward mechanics to psychological
theories.
. . .
Unlocking mechanisms give players access to game content (e.g., new levels, access to
special virtual environments, and mini-games) once certain requirements are met. This
kind of reward is best classified as access (Hallford & Hallford, 2001). When discussing
ways to arouse curiosity, Malone (1981) suggests that one of the most important features
of intrinsically motivating environments is providing incomplete information about a
subject. Rather than show all possibilities and choices at the beginning of games, these
mechanisms reward players as games progress by gradually exposing hidden parts of
gameworlds. For example, World of Warcraft avatars must achieve certain levels before
gaining access to higher-level environments. Unlocking mechanisms are thought to
maintain player curiosity about what might be made available for future play, and to
make players feel as though there is always something new to look forward to. This form
of reward is strongly associated with Gee’s (2007) ideas regarding the correspondence
between learning and game playing. The reward system serves not only as reinforcement
for good performance, but also as an environment in support of an “ongoing learning
principle.”
. . .
Reward mechanisms in video games can enhance feelings of fun long before rewards are
actually given—that is, rewards can create a sense of anticipation among players who
know what is specifically required to earn them.

TLDR: bolded

[odie]

i'm so happy AST was similar to WHM. I picked it up pretty quick. but the jumbled hotbar was crazy for a minute. I wouldn't know what to do on MCH

[Hypie]

why would square enix make you pay less? you know not everyone can power lvl every day. "normal" ppl usually need a month for 1-50 and then a week for clearing the arr story 2.55. why would se throw away that monthly sub?

so no....no skipping for you.

[OccamX]

Here's my issue. Remember how many people hated FF13 because you were basically stuck in a tunnel-shaped game experience for 20 hours?

FF14 is soo much worse right now. At least FF13 had gameplay along the way and an interesting story.

If you have been playing FF14 ever since 2.0 came out, you do NOT understand how much story there is, and how little gameplay, before the game opens up. The game is 90% dialog boxes for the first 50 hours, before reaching the actual MMO part of the game. The story is mildly interesting, but the way MMOs work is that the relevant MMO content is always at the end of the road. And the older the game gets, the longer that road gets.

How long until new players have to click through 80 hours of dialog boxes to reach the actual game? 100 hours? 200 hours? S-E needs a better long-term plan if they want to continue to attract new players.