The Ifrit Fight is Dangerous to the Community.

[SilvertearRen]

What a stance to take for a "suggestion"


We UNDERSTAND what you want.

We dont AGREE with your opinion.

And I accept the fact that you disagree with me. Though what I do question is the idea of disagreeing with something that does not infringe in any way with your preferences. To me, that just smacks of obstructionism.


ob·struc·tion·ist
noun
1. One who systematically blocks or interrupts a process, especially one who attempts to impede passage of legislation by the use of delaying tactics, such as a filibuster.

[DoctorMog]

I think that all of what you needed to say has been said.

let it die.

I'm sure SE isn't hard of reading.

[Answa]

And I accept the fact that you disagree with me. Though what I do question is the idea of disagreeing with something that does not infringe in any way with your preferences. To me, that just smacks of obstructionism.


ob·struc·tion·ist
noun
1. One who systematically blocks or interrupts a process, especially one who attempts to impede passage of legislation by the use of delaying tactics, such as a filibuster.

Game
noun
Is not politics.

[DoctorMog]

lol

Doctor Mog stops legislation.

Mog for president!

[SilvertearRen]

I think that all of what you needed to say has been said.

let it die.

I'm sure SE isn't hard of reading.

Then, can we agree on this one thing?

If Square implements the scaling difficulty option, without infringing on the rewards, prestige and value of the hardcore mode, can you respect that gameplay design decision?

(People who complain about the hardcore option are fair game for heckling, though!)

[DoctorMog]

No because it is a waste of resources better spent on MORE content.

[Sol_Aureus]

ANOTHER COMPROMISE FROM ME!!

Seriously, offer me one reasonable compromise on your part, and I'll respect you as a "gamer" and as a fellow human being.

Jesus F*ck. I am sick of seeing people refusing to compromise, left and right. It's enough to make me want to choke kittens.

Even more so when it's idiot quacks running my country and the world.

P. F*cking S. I've already repeated several reasons why.

1. Learning Curve. TRAINING FOR THE FIGHT, MAYBE?
2. For the sake of COMPLETIONISTS. Some of us don't give a flying flip about the Ifrit drops!
3. We probably also don't give a flying flip about achievements, either.
4. For the sake of FLEXIBILITY. There are people out there who might be able to handle a slightly scaled-down version of Ifrit, but not the original fight.

Read. The. F*cking. Lines.

2. For the sake of COMPLETIONISTS. Some of us don't give a flying flip about the Ifrit drops!
3. We probably also don't give a flying flip about achievements, either.

COMPLETIONISTS.
don't give a flying flip about the Ifrit drops!
don't give a flying flip about achievements, either.

Wut.

/10chars

[SilvertearRen]

Game
noun
Is not politics.

What I was referring to when I used the dictionary definition, was generally the social aspect of being an obstructionist. Basically, "Saying No for the Sake of No."

You know, like the scrubs in every country's legislature that likes to stomp all over the other side's toes just because they hate their guts regardless of the content of the bill that's on the floor.

(Analogy: Gamers say no because they wanna say no to a proposal suggesting that a pre-existing feature be altered, or because they hate the type of player the proposer is.)

Answa, quit being a troll. Keep your snark outta my thread, will ya?

Wut.

/10chars

I probably should have phrased it differently. Certain kinds of completionists. Some want to collect items, others just wanna experience the fights without any care for the drops.

[SilvertearRen]

No because it is a waste of resources better spent on MORE content.

I believe I already described the general idea of the programming side of things...it's not a major undertaking. Just a few adjustments to the loot tables, stats, and adding a dialog box offering the options. Push it through QA testing for a few weeks.

This isn't a painstakingly-accurate 3D model simulation of the R.M.S. Titanic being coded into the game, people.

[KyrsIsley]

And I accept the fact that you disagree with me. Though what I do question is the idea of disagreeing with something that does not infringe in any way with your preferences. To me, that just smacks of obstructionism.

Actually, how about I put it this way. You already have your "experience" or "encounter" with Ifrit. Based on the storyline, you later found out that you didn't really defeat Ifrit (R30).

Thus the R50 "Hyper" encounter was designed for "harcores" who are willing to put it the time and effort and really vanquish Ifrit once and for all. Thus your "wants" and "needs" do in fact infringes on my preferences of not having an alternative dumbed down/adjusted Ifrit for those who aren't willing to put in the same amount of work.

Because that wouldn't do Ifrit justice, the "real defeat" of Ifrit should be hard (if you can call it hard) and challenging. If you do not posses the same skill level and perseverance, you are not fit to defeat the real Ifrit at its full strength, meaning you SHOULD be squashed over and over until you learn how to not stand in fire.

Then, can we agree on this one thing?

If Square implements the scaling difficulty option, without infringing on the rewards, prestige and value of the hardcore mode, can you respect that gameplay design decision?

(People who complain about the hardcore option are fair game for heckling, though!)

No, because Ifrit does not deserve to have a dumbed down alternative lore wise, just so you can experience his demise.