Why All the One-Button Mechanics?

[DrWho2010]

having that button though makes up for other people not going along with the "plan", or doing their job "properly" or other jobs that just simply don't have the luxury. there's no accounting for player skill level either.

what if jump isn't up? shields weren't put up in time? manipulation is on cd cuz i fat fingered it?

mistakes happen and this allows everyone a "get out of jail free" card?

[Shurrikhan]

what if jump isn't up? shields weren't put up in time? manipulation is on cd cuz i fat fingered it?

Every single one of those things apply also to Arm's Length and Surecast. Those skills that are already parts of our kit just don't also require an extra button of (arguably) bloat.

mistakes happen and this allows everyone a "get out of jail free" card?

But, again, is that a good thing? Is a "your mistake doesn't matter (as long as you use this otherwise useless thing)" good design?

[DrWho2010]

But, again, is that a good thing? Is a "your mistake doesn't matter (as long as you use this otherwise useless thing)" good design?

I'd say it avoids ticking some people off, so yes.

[Shurrikhan]

Every single one of those things apply also to Arm's Length and Surecast. Those skills that are already parts of our kit just don't also require an extra button of (arguably) bloat.


But, again, is that a good thing? Is a "your mistake doesn't matter (as long as you use this otherwise useless thing)" good design?

I'd say it avoids ticking some people off, so yes.

Wait, how is that a decent reason, though?

Having to follow a rotation doubtless ticks some people off. Yet we don't give it a nullification button. Nor, if an ability had been given by which to prevent the need to optimize one's sequence of weaponskills or spells for a time, would we protect it absolutely just as to "avoid ticking some people off."

A fight mechanic bugged and was therefore far easier than it should be, even if only part of the time or under rarely-known conditions? Nope, can't fix that; it might tick some people off.

[DrWho2010]

Wait, how is that a decent reason, though?

Having to follow a rotation doubtless ticks some people off. Yet we don't give it a nullification button. Nor, if an ability had been given by which to prevent the need to optimize one's sequence of weaponskills or spells for a time, would we protect it absolutely just as to "avoid ticking some people off."

A fight mechanic bugged and was therefore far easier than it should be, even if only part of the time or under rarely-known conditions? Nope, can't fix that; it might tick some people off.

Does it have to be a "decent" reason?

[Shurrikhan]

Does it have to be a "decent" reason?

Generally, yes.

• X has opportunity costs (limiting the complexity available to job kits and the timings available to certain mechanics and, indirectly, thereby the cohesion available to said kits and the designs available to boss fights.
• X diminishes the value of previous opportunity costs (the mechanics in the given fight designs and their relevance to job kits themselves).
• X obfuscates issues of quality to the detriment of said quality (greatly reducing incentive to make job kits more cohesive, unique, impactful, or the like and, indirectly, likely costing us a degree of cohesion, impactfulness, or diversity in job kits).

Should X not require at least a decent reason for its presence?