SE, no one likes FATEs. Just stop.

[Kaethra]

You know, the funny thing about these fetch quests is even they know it's tedious and boring.

Never understood why developers cannot follow this simple rule:

Will the player interact with the feature without a reward?
If Yes, add in the feature.
If No, redesign the feature.

What this ensures is the feature (or the game itself) is fun on its own and doesn't require a reward to get the player to do it.

[Krokov]

I think more than 10% of the total population of players enjoys FATES or doesn't mind doing them. Doing them for the most part is a choice not a requirement.

[Ryel]

Doing them for the most part is a choice not a requirement.

Except that this is patently untrue.

Want to unlock the crystal tower series of raids?

FATEs required.

Want a Zodiac or Anima weapon?

FATEs required for multiple steps.

Want to do new Diadem?

FATEs required.

Want to level outside of dungeons prior to the introduction of Palace of the Dead?

Leves, Quests and oh you guessed it... FATEs required.

[Fernosaur]

People did Besieged because the Astral Candescence granted global player benefits. Increased xp in all Aht Urghan areas for everyone and you could buy 8 hours of constant Regen, Refresh or meal duration for a paltry sum as long as the player base controlled the Astral Candescence. It benefited everyone and encouraged entire servers to defend it.

This idea could work really well through the concept of the Grand Companies, tbh. Why not make it so we have Grand Company buffs on top of Free Company buffs? You could even make each GC give a different reward, but then again this might end up with certain jobs needing X GC and limiting player choice in lieu of min-maxing.

In any case, that's a wonderful concept, and I really wish FFXIV had something like that to make the world feel more alive. I can literally play most of the game from my FC house lmao.

[xJimmehx]

I like killing fate mobs for exp solo or with a preformed group of friends. I often find myself standing in town waiting for them to spawn again..We need fates that are infinite and provide good exp from monster kills, imo. Though i admit, i do think requiring FATEs in anything was bad. They should be optional for those of us who dont want queue times. Of course they fail to be useful currently even for those who dont want queues as they give so little exp and gil that its just better to suck it up and wait a few minutes for queue(especially in heavensward).. Tanks that do fates for exp are just punishing themselves..

[Headhunters]

besiged like in FF11 would be great (we also experienced it at 1.0 end, sort of)

[Radacci]

I really hate it when all these FATEs spawn, and the text is something like: Boss goes on rampage, please stop it before it destroys X camp....and nobody gives a shit, cause why would they? it's irrelevant, and has no impact; it's just pointless fluff.
As OP said, i wish it WOULD have an impact, so ppl actually have an incentive to do it, and make the world feel more alive.
But the reason they don't do it, is probably cause most ppl suck and, and it would be too difficult (please make it more casual) - people just want to be comfortable, and don't want anything to stand in their way, and only want to take the path of NO resistance.

[Zojha]

Never understood why developers cannot follow this simple rule:

In fairness: I can imagine that players were, in fact, at some point willing to interact with such features without a reward.

You know...once. Not over a thousand times and counting.

Repetition is the nature of MMOs and something you have to account for when making content for it - Hence why the low popularity of PvP in this game is almost tragic, as PvP has traditionally by far and wide the least fun falloff via repetition. Unfortunately, it seems that devs all too often don't account for it and instead pad it with rewards. Works, if people care about the reward - Until they get the reward. That the philosophy nevertheless fails becomes obvious when you take it from the singular content to the whole game level: You'd have to reward/pay people for playing instead of people paying 'you' to play it. It still "works" of course, but it's not sustainable.

An additional downside of the reward usage is: Now you have to balance the reward of one content with the "fun" of another content. It's a bit of an incentive whack a mole. Even if you would run a dungeon without a reward, if a FATE gives you a dragon's hoard worth of shinies and you actually care for said shinies, chances are you'll spend your time at the FATE rather than the dungeon. Next thing you know, dungeons get shinies on their own because nobody runs them anymore.

And that leads to another problem with rewards: They undermine intrinsic motivation - fun, in this case. So while you were previously running dungeons for fun, you now run them for the shinies and don't really care about the dungeon anymore. Zoom in a few months later and you hate dungeons now.
Plus, reward incentives are always literal: If you reward people for finishing a dungeon, they'll attempt to finish ASAP. If you reward them for fishing 10 fish, they will fish 10 fish, no more no less. If you reward people for queuing up for PvP, they'll queue up - they won't necessarily play however. If you reward people for winning in PvP, they'll try to optimize their wins - whether legitimate or not. You might not end up incentivizing the behavior you think you incentivize with your rewards.

Literature on the topic is quite fun to read, but it prooobably leads somewhat off-topic.

[Remedi]

Want to do new Diadem?

FATEs required.
.

You can get full evaluation by killing wildlife FATEs are not required

[TarynH]

I mean.... If you want to start pulling scemantic cards out, go for it. "Everyone" generally means "the vast majority".... There are always outlyers.

The issue honestly stems from people reading the first line in a thread and immediately start spitting chips.

Ah, but you see, you didn't say "everyone." You said "no one likes," which generally means not a single individual likes something. And it's hard to miss it, when you make it the title of the thread. So yes, everyone... *cough* I'm sorry... anyone who clicks on the thread will most likely see the title first.