4.1 - The emptiest patch yet.

[Rita1989]

So... all the OP's edit really does just boil down to their opinion it seems. The patch has PLENTY of content, just none of it appeals to his raid centric ego.

Can you at least change the title or something to "4.1 - The emptiest patch yet for me"? You know, something not entirely misleading and full of bait?

I dont think its incorrect though, this is going to be the most bare patch we are ever going to receive in the games existence so far its hard to deny that.

It really needed to have Eureka in this patch cycle without it most people will be checked out by November

[Lazaruz]

I dont think its incorrect though, this is going to be the most bare patch we are ever going to receive in the games existence so far its hard to deny that.

3.22 says hi: http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodest...9cc307c28477e3
(entirely focused around PVP changes. So if you dont do PVP good luck finding "new" stuff)

And 3.1 says hi http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodest...c91d884c6b6a84
(too early to properly tell but on a rough estimation it's deffinetely around the same mark as 4.1 in terms of content, if not beneath)


You might wanna rephrase what you said, or did you come here just to play doomsayer?
And yes, both of my examples are to tackle both the litteral, and subjective idea of 4.1 being content bare.

[Rita1989]

I mean this with no malice, or threat whatsoever. But I'm gonna give you the curteousy of either rephrasing those words, or taking them back before I slam the book on just how wrong you are with that statement (Atleast working by preliminary assumptions, as we do not know how far they extended things like the MSQ, and we wont know untill patch notes)

Go ahead and try and the MSQ takes 1-2 days to get through max its not what keeps people invested over an entire patch period

We just had a live letter that went over everything we are getting this patch there is no surprises coming before the patch notes come out.


eDIT:

3.22 is a partial patch , 3.2 is a main patch try again

3.1 had 2 dungeons, ex primal, 1 raid, diadam, beastquests, LoV and got relic in 3.15

4.1 has 1 dungeon. 1 raid, ex primal, ultimate, beastquest and pvp in 4.15(in 3.0 we got new pvp mode before 3.1)

3.1 failed because the content failed ultimately not that it was lacking

[Lazaruz]

Go ahead and try and the MSQ takes 1-2 days to get through max its not what keeps people invested over an entire patch period

You're right. It's not like they're also adding

• A 24man raid,
• Ultimate Savage (to satisfy the absolute 1% players),
• New dungeon.
• New Custom Deliveries (for crafters).
• Ability to use your Adventurer Squadron to better level jobs you might want but are bellow 50 (god knows I have atleast 1 that I'd be glad to finally get outof the way)
• New EX mode primal
• New Beast Tribe
• And a new housing district (techniqly only opening it up for plot purchase)

Totally just the MSQ being added, yup yup

3.1 failed because the content failed ultimately not that it was lacking

Tut tut. That's not the argument being made. Either stay on target, or know when to back down

4.1 has 1 dungeon. 1 raid, ex primal, ultimate, beastquest and pvp in 4.15(in 3.0 we got new pvp mode before 3.1)

And here we go. Hard proof that you're incapable of seeing beyond what might give you that oh so precious ilevel boost.
Or you wouldnt have omitted the....

• Hidlibrand sidequests,
• Shirogane being released to the public
• and new Stormblood tiered Custom Deliveries

3.22 is a partial patch

A patch is a patch.
Your entire point is 4.1 will add the least ammount of content to the game ever outof any patch, both past and present

You did not say major patch. You did not say partial patch excluded. You did not say story/raid/etc patch only.

Hence, 3.22 says hi to your rather blatant case of hyperbole.

This is why I gave you the opening to rephrase. And it's why I had two examples, to counter both the litteral, and non litteral meaning of what you said.
I'd advise you to next time not spit in peoples face when they're trying to be nice

And I have no idea why you even mention 3.2, to then go on and adress 3.1 due to it being the one I actually mentioned.
Slip of the tongue, or ill concieved attempt to divert from my counter argument?