why are people so resistant to constructive criticism about the game?

[Skivvy]

This comment is what I mean. The game has a lot of problems stemming from having a fool in 1.0 but the talk that many have had here refers to this sort of thing.

https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...=1#post5413464

I really, really wish I could remember what thread this was in, but awhile back I had read a couple of posts that had actually claimed ARR was built entirely independent of 1.0's coding. I've only seen it mentioned that one time, but at least one of the comments came from a more regular-poster here who generally has well-thought out posts, so it wasn't something I'd normally discredit right off the bat........................but that's all I can remember.

Super helpful, I know! BUT MAYBE someone with some insight will come along and be like "oh yes, here's the info!" or "nahhhh, that was proven to not be true". Maybe it was an April Fool's joke..who knows! I'd be really curious to find that thread again, but I wouldn't even know where to start my search.

[Valkyrie_Lenneth]

I really, really wish I could remember what thread this was in, but awhile back I had read a couple of posts that had actually claimed ARR was built entirely independent of 1.0's coding. I've only seen it mentioned that one time, but at least one of the comments came from a more regular-poster here who generally has well-thought out posts, so it wasn't something I'd normally discredit right off the bat........................but that's all I can remember.

Super helpful, I know! BUT MAYBE someone with some insight will come along and be like "oh yes, here's the info!" or "nahhhh, that was proven to not be true". Maybe it was an April Fool's joke..who knows! I'd be really curious to find that thread again, but I wouldn't even know where to start my search.

There was an interview a long time ago where they talk about how 2.0 was rebuilt "from the ground up" (I just search for 2.0 rebuild ground up and got a couple hits referencing the old lodestone which no longer exists so I can't link the direct source)

However, they had to make sure 1.0 character data was compatible, so I'm sure there was some messy translation layers in there, making doing certain things more difficult that would otherwise not be.


They pretty much can't do anything that would break that 10 compatibility layer, or legacy characters might have tons of issues., if I had to guess. This is likely where the "spaghetti code" reference comes from. Not the engine or coding of arr+ itself, but the layer that translates 1.x data to 2.x

[Skivvy]

There was an interview a long time ago where they talk about how 2.0 was rebuilt "from the ground up"

However, they had to make sure 1.0 character data was compatible, so I'm sure there was some messy translation layers in there, making doing certain things more difficult that would otherwise not be.


They pretty much can't do anything that would break that 1 0 compatibility layer, or legacy characters might have tons of issues., if I had to guess.

Let me preface this by saying I have absolutely no coding/programming knowledge of any sort, and it will be evident in my next sentence. lol. But is what you're saying is that it would be possible to actually build ARR completely 'fresh' so to speak with new coding, but have to tweak things in a weird way to make it compatible with/transfer legacy characters properly?

The 1.0 coding gets blamed for many, many things by this community - but to my simple mind it doesn't seem like making legacy characters work in a new game, if that was their main hurdle, could have THAT far of a reach. But again, I know nothing in this field so I could be incredibly off-base here.


Just saw your edit, so if that's the case, I'm thinking there's a strong chance that's probably what the other thread had been talking about.

[Valkyrie_Lenneth]

Let me preface this by saying I have absolutely no coding/programming knowledge of any sort, and it will be evident in my next sentence. lol. But is what you're saying is that it would be possible to actually build ARR completely 'fresh' so to speak with new coding, but have to tweak things in a weird way to make it compatible with/transfer legacy characters properly?

The 1.0 coding gets blamed for many, many things by this community - but to my simple mind it doesn't seem like making legacy characters work in a new game, if that was their main hurdle, could have THAT far of a reach. But again, I know nothing in this field so I could be incredibly off-base here.


Just saw your edit, so if that's the case, I'm thinking there's a strong chance that's probably what the other thread had been talking about.

Its a lot like how bad the Mac client runs right? It's a translation of the windows client, and directx, into something Mac can run. And it's bad. Real bad. A Mac client built from the ground up would run way better.

[Melichoir]

Let me preface this by saying I have absolutely no coding/programming knowledge of any sort, and it will be evident in my next sentence. lol. But is what you're saying is that it would be possible to actually build ARR completely 'fresh' so to speak with new coding, but have to tweak things in a weird way to make it compatible with/transfer legacy characters properly?

The 1.0 coding gets blamed for many, many things by this community - but to my simple mind it doesn't seem like making legacy characters work in a new game, if that was their main hurdle, could have THAT far of a reach. But again, I know nothing in this field so I could be incredibly off-base here.


Just saw your edit, so if that's the case, I'm thinking there's a strong chance that's probably what the other thread had been talking about.

A lot of what's in the game is built on top of 1.0 coding. They didnt recode the entire game and engine from scratch, just added on top of it and modified it for their uses to get 2.0 off the ground. This approach has some knock on effects. So some of the things we have been complaining about are a result of how 1.0 was set up. In layman's terms, think of it this way: 1.0 is the foundation of a house, and 2.0 and on is the house and all it's addons. You can do quite a bit to add onto and modify the house itself, but it is still reliant on how strong the foundation is. If you arent careful, the foundation breaks and the hwole thing falls apart. So one thing it could limit how 'high' a house could be as a result.

From what Ive read, If you want to understand this in practical terms of the game, the character creation engine is a hold over from 1.0. Specifically the fact that it literally needs an exact number of fields to work. It's why fem lalafells have a breast slider even if nothing comes of it - the engine needed a set number of fields to be filled with something for it to work.

[Valkyrie_Lenneth]

A lot of what's in the game is built on top of 1.0 coding. They didnt recode the entire game and engine from scratch, just added on top of it and modified it for their uses to get 2.0 off the ground. This approach has some knock on effects. So some of the things we have been complaining about are a result of how 1.0 was set up. In layman's terms, think of it this way: 1.0 is the foundation of a house, and 2.0 and on is the house and all it's addons. You can do quite a bit to add onto and modify the house itself, but it is still reliant on how strong the foundation is. If you arent careful, the foundation breaks and the hwole thing falls apart. So one thing it could limit how 'high' a house could be as a result.

From what Ive read, If you want to understand this in practical terms of the game, the character creation engine is a hold over from 1.0. Specifically the fact that it literally needs an exact number of fields to work. It's why fem lalafells have a breast slider even if nothing comes of it - the engine needed a set number of fields to be filled with something for it to work.

Some of this is true, but not all.

The games engine is completely different. 1.0 used crystal tools, while 2.0 and beyond uses a modified luminous engine.


The 1.0 foundation is there, but only as a compatibility thing. The game was rebuilt from scratch, but they had to make it compatible for character transfers from 1.0, so a lot of the character creation restrictions stem from that, as do retainers. This is also likely why the class system still exists, and they simply make new jobs have no classes.


This would also explain why they don't want to mess with a lot of those systems and why we have so many limitations. People cite the spaghetti code thing a lot, but I don't think they really understand the meaning behind it.

It is not referencing the 1.0 code, or 2.0 code itself, but the compatibility coding that makes the 2 talk to each other. And since it was put together in a hurry and possibly by people who no longer work there, they don't want to go messing with it because it's something that may truly break the game.