The Current Status of FFXIV Patch 3.1 and How to Address it Moving Forward

[Kaurie]

While on the other side of things you have a game like Wildstar, designed specifically to have "over the top difficulty to keep your hardcore players engaged" falling flat it on its face shortly after release.

To be fair to Wildstar, there are players (such as myself) who quit shortly after leveling to max level and it had nothing to do with difficulty or it being too hardcore.

Which goes back to the argument that the two he chose was in expense of the audience the content was designed for.

Unfortunately, I haven't made it to A3S and A4S quite yet , but based on A1S and A2S, I don't see how he couldn't make more difficulties. I mean A1S changes from A1N are -these attacks do more damage, this buff lasts longer and now there are twice as many adds! Like I'm sure they just needed to copy paste some code, adjust a few numbers and duplicate a couple lines of code. A2S seems pretty much A2N with higher damage output.

They keep on throwing out content that is seemingly copy pasted and then going on to talk about how they can't add more due to resources. Look, either give us quantity or quality, but don't hold back on both.

[Ibi]

To be fair to Wildstar, there are players (such as myself) who quit shortly after leveling to max level and it had nothing to do with difficulty or it being too hardcore.

Yeah. It's not that it failed because it focused on that, so much as that it didn't succeed despite focusing on that.

Velhart claims that it's "common sense" that an MMO "needs" to provide over the top difficulty for hardcore players, but it's clear from Wildstar that doing so isn't a guarantee that an MMO will succeed.

[Kaurie]

Absolutely, correlation is not necessarily causation.

But the game did heavily sell itself as focusing on the crowd that Velhart claims it's "common sense" that an MMO "needs" to provide for, and was a failure in spite of that.

I just think that there are so many factors to the success of an MMO. One of those factors is providing appropriate hardcore content. I would say that generally speaking hardcore content has a trickle down effect on two types of players. Casual/crafting type players make gear/food/potions etc which then sell for more via markets from hardcore player demand. Midcore raiders tend to look up to hardcore and aspire to be on that skill level - I know there is one guy in my raid who during coil would post these Lucrezia speed clears on turns that we were working on clearing.

That said, if you solely focus on raids and nothing else then you're out of luck.

I think Wildstar did right:
-Crafting
-Raiding
-Lore
-Humor
-Build customization
-Housing

Wildstar did wrong
-Poor UI
-Client optimization
-Semi-action combat sucked for non melee classes
-Class balancing (when I played, I'd do 2-3x DPS on my Warrior as other classes and I'd put in 1/3 the effort)
-Interrupt Meta - after playing for a short while you realized the ONLY combat mechanic in the entire game was using interrupts

[Alahra]

I would say that generally speaking hardcore content has a trickle down effect on two types of players. Casual/crafting type players make gear/food/potions etc which then sell for more via markets from hardcore player demand. Midcore raiders tend to look up to hardcore and aspire to be on that skill level

That's pretty true, and not something I'd thought of specifically before. That "trickle down" effect is something that was muted quite a bit in Heavensward because of the lower participation in Savage and the massive changes to crafting (which largely removed their interaction with the raiding scene except for food and potions—something only two of the DoH classes make, which has further effects on DoL classes). Hardcore content is definitely an important part of an MMO, but making the content and focus too hardcore can have repercussions that undermine the positive effects that content has on the rest of the game.

[Ibi]

I would say that generally speaking hardcore content has a trickle down effect on two types of players. Casual/crafting type players make gear/food/potions etc which then sell for more via markets from hardcore player demand. Midcore raiders tend to look up to hardcore and aspire to be on that skill level - I know there is one guy in my raid who during coil would post these Lucrezia speed clears on turns that we were working on clearing.

It's probably impossible to quantify how much of an effect this "trickle down" has, if it even has one.

What's the actual economic impact of hardcore raiders on the non-raiding population? Could a similar economic impact be generated simply by having a larger pool of less-hardcore raiders?

How many of the people who "look up to" or "aspire to be" raiders like the top groups:
- keep playing based on that, when they might otherwise have quit?
- continue to raid based on that, when they would otherwise have given up?
- actually change anything they do in the game, based on that?

Would the person in your raid group who watches videos of Lucrezia speed clears have stopped raiding if those videos didn't exist?

Should ask the people who are able to clear raids before the next horizontal patch hits.

That would fall squarely into the category of anecdotal comments that I mentioned, rather than actual evidence.

Besides which I've been a part of that group at various times, both in XIV and other games, and I think that at best it's an unproven premise that you absolutely need to have ridiculously difficult content that only the upper echelon of players will even see in order for an MMO to be successful.

[Kaurie]

It's probably impossible to quantify how much of an effect this "trickle down" has, if it even has one.

It is virtually impossible without removing it. As an environmental scientist, I view this as an ecosystem where every aspect is interconnected whether it's immediately apparent or not. If you remove one aspect of it, it has trickle effects that would be impossible to predict. If there is one thing I think human's (should have) learned by now with all of the environmental degradation we have done is to not mess with ecosystems. Here is an interesting story of unexpected consequences:

“In the early 1950s, there was an outbreak of a serious disease called malaria amongst the Dayak people in Borneo. The World Health Organization tried to solve the problem. They sprayed large amounts of a chemical called DDT to kill the mosquitoes that carried the malaria. The mosquitoes died and there was less malaria. That was good. However, there were side effects. One of the first effects was that the roofs of people's houses began to fall down on their heads. It turned out that the DDT was also killing a parasitic wasp that ate thatch-eating caterpillars. Without the wasps to eat them, there were more and more thatch-eating caterpillars. Worse than that, the insects that died from being poisoned by DDT were eaten by gecko lizards, which were then eaten by cats. The cats started to die, the rats flourished, and the people were threatened by outbreaks of two new serious diseases carried by the rats, sylvatic plague and typhus. To cope with these problems, which it had itself created, the World Health Organization had to parachute live cats into Borneo.”

[Ibi]

It is virtually impossible without removing it.

Which it sounds like SE are going to do in 3.2, and it'll be interesting to see the results.

My suspicion is that even if every single person that's cleared A4S to this point clears A8S in the first two weeks and quits because they have absolutely nothing else to do (which would say as much about the non-raiding content available, or lack thereof), the impact on the economy will be negligible and you'll actually end up with a higher percentage of the players tackling and succeeding in Savage that you have now.

But that's just my feeling, and I have no data to back it up, so I'm not going to try and claim that it's "common sense" (or anything similar) that that will be the outcome.

However, a lot of the damage that's been done may be irreversible. There are likely players who quit based on the difficulty of Savage (who would have stayed around if it had instead been at Coil difficulty and they'd been more able to make progress) who won't come back regardless of how difficult Midas is.

On top of that, you likely will lose some hardcore players due to it being too easy. If Gordias had been at Coil-level difficulty, you might still have lost those players, but now they're going to lose them in addition to the group they already lost by alienating them with Gordias' difficulty, rather than losing them instead of that group.

[Alahra]

On top of that, you likely will lose some hardcore players due to it being too easy.

I'm not so sure of that. It's not as though the hardcore players didn't do Coil of Bahamut in ARR even though it was midcore. Hardcore players will engage with content that's below their preferred difficulty if there are significant incentives for doing so, the content is challenging enough, or if they like other aspects of the game, which still allows for some of that "trickle down" effect to occur.

On the flip side, midcore players won't "step up" to content that's too challenging (which is what we've seen with Savage) the same way that hardcore ones will "step down" to content that's less challenging than they would like (as long as, again, it's still challenging enough).

I don't know how significant the loss of players was when it came to FCOB being "too easy," and Midas is going to be somewhere in between SCOB and FCOB (at least, that's what they're telling us). Given that a lot of the raiding community saw SCOB as the pinnacle of the game's raiding content, I think aiming for somewhere in between Second and Final is likely to be the best compromise the developers can make between midcore and hardcore focus.

[Kaurie]

Which it sounds like SE are going to do in 3.2, and it'll be interesting to see the results.

Yes it will be interesting. I think that we need to not over-simplify things. As you say down below:

However, a lot of the damage that's been done may be irreversible. There are likely players who quit based on the difficulty of Savage (who would have stayed around if it had instead been at Coil difficulty and they'd been more able to make progress) who won't come back regardless of how difficult Midas is.

Further, there are things coming out this year that may take people away from the game. It's quite possible that the tuned down raid will be more widely enjoyed, but may receive fewer clear numbers due to already lost players and/or losing players to other games. I know that I am leaning more and more towards moving to WoW for Legion's launch with each live letter/interview that I read.

My suspicion is that even if every single person that's cleared A4S to this point clears A8S in the first two weeks and quits because they have absolutely nothing else to do (which would say as much about the non-raiding content available, or lack thereof), the impact on the economy will be negligible and you'll actually end up with a higher percentage of the players tackling and succeeding in Savage that you have now.

But that's just my feeling, and I have no data to back it up, so I'm not going to try and claim that it's "common sense" (or anything similar) that that will be the outcome.

Unfortunately, we have a severe lack of data. Further, the data we do have is prone to being misinterpreted, due to the lack of other data. I think you make an alright argument, but I'd say that the higher end raiders make a pretty significant impact on the economy. I know that raiding food and potions are quite expensive, but are rarely used outside of progression. At least, I've never known anyone to eat HQ foods or use HQ pots in dungeons/expert roulette (or even Void Ark), but I've almost never seen someone not use these in Alexander Savage (or coil). If the prices are as high as they are, the demand must be pretty high or the supply pretty short - I'm honestly unsure of which - but would guess it's demand. If the hardcore raiders left, that is a significant chunk of players who want to be on the 'bleeding edge' of progression. Once mid-core groups get there, they can get away with not having food/pots, as they are generally geared well enough to make the DPS checks without them. This is my reasoning for believing that Hardcore Raiders have a significant crafting impact.

On top of that, you likely will lose some hardcore players due to it being too easy. If Gordias had been at Coil-level difficulty, you might still have lost those players, but now they're going to lose them in addition to the group they already lost by alienating them with Gordias' difficulty, rather than losing them instead of that group.

That said, i don't think that lowering Midas difficulty will all of a sudden remove hardcore raiders from the game. I think uninspired, recycled content and lackluster responses to consumer feedback are what will.

Based on the WoW numbers, where they have the two intermediate difficulties and see similar levels of player engagement, I suspect it might not have made a huge difference. That's something I'd like to be wrong about though.

Unfortunately, I don't think it's practical even with a much larger development team (if it's even possible) to get small enough gradients to get people from where Alexander Normal is to where Alexander Savage is. Even more so if you're doing it by repeating the same fights multiple times at slightly higher difficulty each time.

I don't think they needed to make more encounters, but simply tune the encounters they have.

A4 should be much harder than it is
A3 should be harder than it is
A2 should be slightly harder than it is
A1 should be as is

A1S should be as is
A2S should be harder than it is
A3S should be easier than it is
A4S should be as is

This would have a more natural progression of difficulty

It'd be interesting to know how many people who couldn't beat A3S prior to having weapons from Thordan extreme obtained them and went on to beat A3S.

I doubt this made much of a difference. If all of my SMN stats were made to INT equivalents using stat weights - I had with my 200 eso weapon 3404 INT. With my Relic, I am at 3445. Thordan EX would have been about half way in between. That 40 INT gain to my relic is roughly a 1% increase in INT, and has indeed given me about a 1% increase in DPS - from 1333 to 1343 on my dummy parse. The issue is that all stats, including weapon damage and main stat, are becoming less important with each gear step (diminishing returns and all).

[Velhart]

That would fall squarely into the category of anecdotal comments that I mentioned, rather than actual evidence.

Besides which I've been a part of that group at various times, both in XIV and other games, and I think that at best it's an unproven premise that you absolutely need to have ridiculously difficult content that only the upper echelon of players will even see in order for an MMO to be successful.

You shouldn't take what I say as a fact. It is my opinion on how I believe proper structure works in MMO's. It ultimately lies on the developers to create quality in terms of all three branches of players. I am not going to throw documents and statistics around, or make you believe what I say is absolute. I will argue however based on personal experience being on all three levels of players in the many years I have played MMO's. When one branch suffers in quality/quantity, the other will be affected also.

As for my common sense quote you like to throw around. Yes, I do believe adding challenge to video games (the thing it sets itself upon on since it's conception), is a common sense practice in the industry.