To Square Enix, these are the reasons why I am currently unsubbed from the FF14.

[Talraen]

So, based on what you're saying it's "fun", but lacks the well designed/scalability marks.

I won't argue against your definition of fun, but what I think Chocobo racing should have been is basically FF14's iteration of Mario Kart or Crash Team Racing. A side activity that is simply fun to play with friends during downtime. It didn't need all the progression systems and stuff that drove it further to a solo adventure.

In order to be well designed it'd need good modes for solo matching, team matching, as well as allowing people to grab people out of PF/FC/LS's to to go up against. Allow people to spectate and bet and set up their own prizes. As far as rewards go, this REALLY should have been the system where you unlocked new colors, some bardings, etc, rather than the menu content it was placed in.

Lastly, scalability is important. I would have liked to have seen a crisply made level editor UI so people could craft their own tracks and a means to share them among the community. Not only that, but time trials or battles could work.

I can't agree with you here. I don't think it's fair to expect a side activity to be on par with the best kart racing series of all time, or the best kart racing game outside of that series. (Side note, I appreciate the CTR love! Great game.) What you're describing sounds pretty awesome, but it also sounds like a completely different game they should sell on its own. Particularly the level editor part.

For an MMO side activity, I expect something which is fun to do, doesn't demand constant attention, and can be played for a very long time. (Note that I wish MMO stuff wasn't all designed to last forever, because who has time for that? But it is what I've come to expect and it seems like everyone else wants it.) I think chocobo racing hits all of those notes.

Based on your response, I don't see "fun" mentioned, it's definitely not scalable, and well designed is up for debate.

For me, LoV could have gone 2 different routes. The route I care significantly less about would have been a pokemon styled approach.

The better approach I would have liked to have seen is SE to leverage some of their existing IPs. Namely FFT. I envisioned a system that was basically like editing FFT teams and battling out in scenarios and against other players, almost like a really neat version of FF chess.

I have some of the same arguments here, especially since you're literally comparing Verminion to a different game the same company made (FF Tactics). I would love to see a Tactics-style side game in FFXIV, and I don't think the existence of Lords of Verminion prevents that. It's a totally different thing. They were looking for something relatively quick and action-oriented, and they did an OK job. Not great by any means, but not terrible. I do think the game lacks any compelling reason to play it, though I think that's largely a symptom of its unpopularity. Why invest in something most people don't care about? I hope they try more stuff like this in the future, hopefully with better results.

Like many mentioned, the only reason it's "fun" is because it's an activity that is so trivial it allows downtime to socialize. So does AFKing in town, but that's hardly what I would considered well designed fun content.

The Magia board being nothing but a binary if/then statement doesn't lend well to it being well designed either, and it certainly isn't scalable as we've seen now that people have moved past the content.

That's a fair analysis, but so what? If there's one thing I learned from Eureka, it's how much difference the downtime in a game like FFXI actually made to its enjoyment. FFXI was extremely obtuse and anti-player, yet people still loved it, and Eureka taps into a lot of the reason why that was the case. Why is that a bad thing? If it's designed to be fun, and it is fun, doesn't that make it well-designed?

The Magia board is a bit extraneous, but I don't know what design for that sort of thing would have actually worked well. The only thing I can think of would be to more heavily restrict how often you can change it, and I think that would have just made people mad. It doesn't really add anything to the content (except justifying a few quests), but I don't think it detracts either.

So you are saying that the process of overmelding is fun? The ridiculously prohibitive cost and tedium and low % success rates on binary/boring stats was fun to you?

It definitely isn't well designed with how many clicks it takes to get through the process, and with how basic materia itself is, it's certainly not fun putting in bland +stats that do absolutely nothing to your gameplay either.

In terms of crafting, I do enjoy the materia system. I generally don't do a lot of penta-melding because I craft for fun and not to make money, and I can't afford it. But I'll do a lot of +1 melding or +2 on accessories to gain some slight advantage. The fact that it has a prohibitive cost is what makes it interesting. If it was trivial to max-meld everything, you'd just do that and move on. On the other hand, while I was crafting my two-star crafting gear, I had to decide how much to rely on grade 5 materia (which has a chance of loss upon removal), how much to overmeld, and which pieces were better off as yellow scrip gear compared to the previous crafted set. That's interesting because it requires real choice and there are real risks. Because I craft fairly conservatively, I waited a long time to do this and spent very little (probably lost a few dozen grade IV materia and little else). But if you wanted to be on the bleeding edge of crafting, that was an option as well. That's the epitome of good design to me.

For all other purposes than crafting, I can take or leave materia melding. I find the requirements a bit annoying for gathering, and I don't do any combat content that's hard enough for it to matter whether I melded my gear or not, honestly.

I just kind of gave up after the first few. It's clear you didn't understand the exercise. You label these things as "cool", but the gameplay forms you list are either zerg content (i.e. not engaging) or menu content (aka click this, get that), and that getting stuff for minimal effort makes you feel efficient, even when you're not really doing anything.

I appreciate the time you took to respond though regardless, as I suspect the person I originally did won't.

I'm sure it's coincidental that the four you skipped were the ones I unabashedly loved.

If the "exercise" was to justify content you don't like in terms you've defined, then I would say I "understood" it but made no attempt to actually do it, because that's silly. My point is just that content you find terrible is enjoyed by other people. This game is well-designed for me, perhaps it is not so well-designed for you. And perhaps if they changed the design to your tastes, people like me would like it less. Would that be better or worse? That's a complicated question and I have no idea. But it's not as simple as "this is not engaging, therefore it is bad" because both halves of that premise are in question.

I do appreciate your response as well though, because it's always good to see things from multiple perspectives. And your original question helped me appreciate the game more by thinking about it in the first place. And because now I want a chocobo-based Mario Kart clone really bad!

[MomomiMomi]

In terms of crafting, I do enjoy the materia system. I generally don't do a lot of penta-melding because I craft for fun and not to make money, and I can't afford it. But I'll do a lot of +1 melding or +2 on accessories to gain some slight advantage. The fact that it has a prohibitive cost is what makes it interesting. If it was trivial to max-meld everything, you'd just do that and move on. On the other hand, while I was crafting my two-star crafting gear, I had to decide how much to rely on grade 5 materia (which has a chance of loss upon removal), how much to overmeld, and which pieces were better off as yellow scrip gear compared to the previous crafted set. That's interesting because it requires real choice and there are real risks. Because I craft fairly conservatively, I waited a long time to do this and spent very little (probably lost a few dozen grade IV materia and little else). But if you wanted to be on the bleeding edge of crafting, that was an option as well. That's the epitome of good design to me.

For all other purposes than crafting, I can take or leave materia melding. I find the requirements a bit annoying for gathering, and I don't do any combat content that's hard enough for it to matter whether I melded my gear or not, honestly.

You wrote quite a lot here to basically say "you either do it or you don't." I don't see how that's an interesting decision to make. Good design should assume that the players will want to choose to do it, and make the process of doing it fun and interesting.

The interesting decisions should come in the form of which materia to meld, not if you will meld or not.

[Talraen]

You wrote quite a lot here to basically say "you either do it or you don't." I don't see how that's an interesting decision to make. Good design should assume that the players will want to choose to do it, and make the process of doing it fun and interesting.

The interesting decisions should come in the form of which materia to meld, not if you will meld or not.

It does. If you're not overmelding, you have to mostly focus on Craftsmanship and Control in order to hit minimum requirements for crafts. But if you are overmelding, your main focus is probably going to be CP, because CP makes the biggest difference. The order in which you meld also matters quite a bit in terms of how much it's going to cost. No matter how you do it (and there are many options), getting to the highest crafting tiers is difficult.

[MomomiMomi]

Ah, irony. How you tickle me. Someone doesn't meld and thinks it's a good system, while I do meld and think it's a terrible system.

[KaldeaSahaline]

I can't agree with you here. I don't think it's fair to expect a side activity to be on par with the best kart racing series of all time, or the best kart racing game outside of that series. (Side note, I appreciate the CTR love! Great game.) What you're describing sounds pretty awesome, but it also sounds like a completely different game they should sell on its own. Particularly the level editor part.

For an MMO side activity, I expect something which is fun to do, doesn't demand constant attention, and can be played for a very long time. (Note that I wish MMO stuff wasn't all designed to last forever, because who has time for that? But it is what I've come to expect and it seems like everyone else wants it.) I think chocobo racing hits all of those notes.

Here we can agree to disagree. I see absolutely no reason that they can't do something like this. In fact, it's almost NEGLIGENT to design something in the same space, but NOT use the benchmark as inspiration.

I.e I would NEVER ever think to create a "party kart" game and not look at Mario Kart/CTR for some ideas of good/bad.

For me, side content needs to be fun enough to stand on its own, if it isn't it failed as "side content".

That's a fair analysis, but so what? If there's one thing I learned from Eureka, it's how much difference the downtime in a game like FFXI actually made to its enjoyment. FFXI was extremely obtuse and anti-player, yet people still loved it, and Eureka taps into a lot of the reason why that was the case. Why is that a bad thing? If it's designed to be fun, and it is fun, doesn't that make it well-designed?

The Magia board is a bit extraneous, but I don't know what design for that sort of thing would have actually worked well. The only thing I can think of would be to more heavily restrict how often you can change it, and I think that would have just made people mad. It doesn't really add anything to the content (except justifying a few quests), but I don't think it detracts either.

The magia board detracts because of opportunity cost (much like most other content forms I discussed above). The fact that something SIGNIFICANTLY better COULD have existed is why it's awful. In my opinion, Eureka had a few opportunities to really push the envelope and they dropped the ball. It's literally nothing I (and a lot of others) wanted. I didn't want more FATEs. I didn't want mindless mob grinds. I didn't want an illusion of choice less pitiful than the old level up stats we used to have. I wanted weather to matter. Mob AI to react to weather and have interactions with elements. I can go into examples, but I've done that in other threads.

I even built my own concept of Eureka a while ago (long before it came out) and posted it on these forums. To me, it had a significantly more engaging core design, but like all development had some issues. Fortunately, I have the luxury of sharing the concept with players to get feedback rather than pushing it live and hoping its well tuned/received.

As far as fun goes, Eureka itself isn't fun (again IMO). Killing nameless/mindless mobs and spamming one move over and over isn't fun. It's only fun because of the social aspect, Eureka can't get credit for that. Maybe it isn't fair to be that way, but I just cannot justify it.

I'm sure it's coincidental that the four you skipped were the ones I unabashedly loved.

I honestly didn't read them. I'm sorry for that, I got busy at work. I will put some effort into it tomorrow though if i get time (busy day tomorrow sadly).

If the "exercise" was to justify content you don't like in terms you've defined, then I would say I "understood" it but made no attempt to actually do it, because that's silly. My point is just that content you find terrible is enjoyed by other people. This game is well-designed for me, perhaps it is not so well-designed for you. And perhaps if they changed the design to your tastes, people like me would like it less. Would that be better or worse? That's a complicated question and I have no idea. But it's not as simple as "this is not engaging, therefore it is bad" because both halves of that premise are in question.

I do appreciate your response as well though, because it's always good to see things from multiple perspectives. And your original question helped me appreciate the game more by thinking about it in the first place. And because now I want a chocobo-based Mario Kart clone really bad!

The exercise I was hoping for was a more structed approach to my criteria. I.e. going itno specific details/examples as to how something is fun, well designed, and scalable. While your response very briefly touched on "fun" (subjectively speaking of course), you ignored the other aspects.

[KisaiTenshi]

Here we can agree to disagree. I see absolutely no reason that they can't do something like this. In fact, it's almost NEGLIGENT to design something in the same space, but NOT use the benchmark as inspiration.

I.e I would NEVER ever think to create a "party kart" game and not look at Mario Kart/CTR for some ideas of good/bad.

Here's the thing though, SE could conceivably design a PvP Chocobo-racing like the Mario Cart PvP mode. Almost everything is there for it. We have PvP maps, we have Chocobos, we have debuff "items". All that is needed is a way to allow the players to target each other on a PvP map and not be knocked off their mount. Heck... go one further and allow other mounts to be used as well, give every (non-cash shop) land mount their own specs for racing/pvp.

[KaldeaSahaline]

Here's the thing though, SE could conceivably design a PvP Chocobo-racing like the Mario Cart PvP mode. Almost everything is there for it. We have PvP maps, we have Chocobos, we have debuff "items". All that is needed is a way to allow the players to target each other on a PvP map and not be knocked off their mount. Heck... go one further and allow other mounts to be used as well, give every (non-cash shop) land mount their own specs for racing/pvp.

Oh I know they COULD. That's why I'm so frustrated. I'd be open to exploring other mounts in there, but keep specs as a choice not tied to the mount IMO. This way you can pick the one you want (aesthetically) without being beholden to specific kart style.

[Bourne_Endeavor]

That's a fair analysis, but so what? If there's one thing I learned from Eureka, it's how much difference the downtime in a game like FFXI actually made to its enjoyment. FFXI was extremely obtuse and anti-player, yet people still loved it, and Eureka taps into a lot of the reason why that was the case. Why is that a bad thing? If it's designed to be fun, and it is fun, doesn't that make it well-designed?

The Magia board is a bit extraneous, but I don't know what design for that sort of thing would have actually worked well. The only thing I can think of would be to more heavily restrict how often you can change it, and I think that would have just made people mad. It doesn't really add anything to the content (except justifying a few quests), but I don't think it detracts either.

Considering the sheer number of players who AFK, I am hard pressed to call Eureka well-designed. Even should I choose to contribute, things die at some a breakneck pace, I often spam the same 3-5 buttons endlessly. What fun I have in Eureka comes from jumping into Discord chats or 'trolling' shout. The content itself is absolutely mindless.

I generally don't do a lot of penta-melding

How can you have an opinion on a system you do not actively participate in? As someone who does overmeld on crafters, gathers and combat jobs, I assure you, it feels absolutely dreadful. You have as little as a 5% chance to meld a single piece, thus you can spend over thirty minutes literally watching your gil blow out only to get nothing out of it. This says nothing of the sheer grind required to obtain higher level Craft and Gather materia—nevermind the abysmal Spiritbonding system. Good design does not have players screaming profusely at how unfair their luck is after blowing up 65 materia on a supposed 17% chance. There is no skill or effort involved. You click through menus, sacrifice a Lalafell and hope RNJesus doesn't hate you.

[Talraen]

How can you have an opinion on a system you do not actively participate in? As someone who does overmeld on crafters, gathers and combat jobs, I assure you, it feels absolutely dreadful...

Simple answer: I used to keep up with the bleeding edge of crafting in ARR, penta-melding and all. It was a lot harder (and more expensive) to get materia back then, too.

You're basically saying that the way you use the system - which you describe as feeling "dreadful" - is the only way to use the system. It isn't. Have you considered not using the system in a way that makes you miserable? I don't, and I quite like it.

[MomomiMomi]

Simple answer: I used to keep up with the bleeding edge of crafting in ARR, penta-melding and all. It was a lot harder (and more expensive) to get materia back then, too.

You're basically saying that the way you use the system - which you describe as feeling "dreadful" - is the only way to use the system. It isn't. Have you considered not using the system in a way that makes you miserable? I don't, and I quite like it.

There isn't another way to use the system if you want to get to the end result of being able to actually make use of the system: being able to craft or gather the top tier of items.

Again, what you're basically saying is "don't use the system." Which, to most people, generally translates to "thus, it's a bad system." That anyone would consciously and willingly choose not to do it is plenty evidence that it's bad.