Dungeons are becoming style over substance.

[Hyrist]

I think you both overestimate player retention and underestimate just how dull the pull-to-gate-AoE-pull-to-gate-AoE-boss-pull-to-gate-AoE-pull-to-gate-AoE-boss-pull-to-gate-AoE-pull-to-gate-AoE-boss hallway sprint simulator can be even to new players...

Please forgive me, but I'm not going to reply to a lot of that. In the end, some of it is flat misinterpreting intentions ('adjustable' was referring to dev typically toning down on what the proposed dififculty is, barring ultimates) , or just plain reaching toward content on a completely different ballpark of complaint (PVP is an entire genre of content, not a single 'type' like Dungeons or Beastribe Quests, which are designed to be interchangeable with each generation, like as not.)

In the end I'm not meaning to demean your stance or argument, but as the years have gone on, they sound more and more hollow. This debate hasn't changed in years, and while I'm in support of the idea that's come out of this discussion, I've never agreed with its tone nor its insulations behind it. Be critical if you wish - but bluntly, it doesn't seem to be aiding you.

What I would like to do is turn the course of the conversation to something more constructive. Looking at features or items that could be reused or incentivized in said content. Drumming up excitement for a new feature, rather then continuing to drag down the old feature, which truly isn't likely to change all that much. As you said: "Why would you limit fun?" Many people enjoy the fact that Roulette Dungeons are easy to process and digest.

Hating on Roulettes isn't going to make Exploration Dungeons more likely, in my view. At the very least, it hasn't been effective in all these years. If anything, I think a fair critique of other side content, like DA and BA, would likely be the better target for this - as that seems where they are wanting to experiment. I want to support the goal - I'm INTERESTED in having dungeons that are in depth and have complex mechanics. But I don't think you're going to incentivize the development by trying to bring down something else that has withstood the test of time in spite of your protestations.

However, I will say that I heavily disagree that I underestimate retention and engagement. I think you have a skewed perception on how the staff is measuring that particular success point. Remember, this is the game that Yoshida said years go he's okay with having players lapse on as content drought sets in. And, even before the massive spike in popularity due to certain streamers and WoW's failings, we were still net-growing. Perhaps its time to admit that this game, while not perfect by any measure, is a success? Remember all I'm asking is a bit of perspective adjustment here - and perhaps a tonal shift. Adding to the game is absolutely fine - but don't go alienating what already has proved to be successful.


Now, to contribute to the conversation of productiveness. I really want to see what they could do with dungeons. People were discussing issues of difficulty, but honestly, I'd like to see more along the lines of depth of mechanics. The Lost Actions system is really nice, but it's a sham it's limited to that branch of content. I'd like to see it in things smaller scale and more focused.

To be honest I've had a long held unrequited desire to see more team-based attacks in this game rather than singular performance as well, but I don't think it's going to occur - could live in content like this though - where they wouldn't be ashamed of going a bit wild.

[Ath192]

This is what happens every time right? When content gets harder people complain its too hard and when it's too easy people complain it's too easy. And its not like the game has a winning formula either. They keep nerfing fights and dungeons for a reason. The approach they have taken is to eliminate the middle ground and make content either very hard or braindead. What this does is increase segregation between the players who want to play well and those who don't want to learn anything and still win.

As a consequence casuals feel things like ultimates are taking dev time away from things more people would enjoy and hard core players get bored of the base game because they only have some instanced content they really enjoy.

Here is the thing though, neither side can live without the other. You stop producing difficult content and you will see a mass exodus from this game that will kill it. You pander only the hardcore side and the same thing will happen. Let's not pretend the vast majority of the streamers that are incredibly popular and flooding this game with subs aren't hard core raiders themselves. So you have them to thank partially for the success of the game.

So either way this will be forever a back and forth argument between to sides who love this game. This thread is about those who believe the game skewed a bit to the too easy side at the moment. Perhaps it skews a bit harder next time. The Nier alliance raid has been heavily criticized because the majority of people do not find it challenging and it is not widely perceived to have a good story either. Perhaps some introspection is in order.

[Hyrist]

This is what happens every time right? When content gets harder people complain its too hard and when it's too easy people complain it's too easy. And its not like the game has a winning formula either. They keep nerfing fights and dungeons for a reason. The approach they have taken is to eliminate the middle ground and make content either very hard or braindead. What this does is increase segregation between the players who want to play well and those who don't want to learn anything and still win.

Yet in my opinion I think both camps should still exist. This is a game to pretty much live in. And there's been a pretty good separation between what is harder content for more dedicated players and what is more easily consumed for the general audience. That line is typically drawn at Extremes and higher. But - here's the thing. The argument isn't that casual players don't want hardcore experiences to exist - it's that casual players don't want their content taken away from them, where more hardcoreplayers want enforced difficulty on the casual base, because they're above the line and want to feel more engaged.

And so the tug of war is made. But it's made most often by the vocal minority. The difficult trends downward to get more people to try out the content, sort of like a gateway drug. It doesn't harm players trying to clear current content if old content is reduced in difficulty. Someone might try a raid unsynced and get tempted to try it a normal, and go further. That's the general idea - to try to direct new blood upwards on the difficulty/performance scale. There will always be a large amount of people who don't care enough to (goodness knows there are some that don't even do base mechanics right.) but to get someone from that average player, to a raider, you need to set those breadcrumbs.

At least, that's what the philosophy seems to be over at SE.

What I would love to see this "Exploration Dungeon" content to be - something similar along those lines - something to gateway people towards more difficult content, by creating something more engaging than more difficulty. The idea of it being "M +" (I'm presuming that's at Savage or above in FFXIV terms) in term of difficulty might not meet that criteria, but hell, if they can scale the difficulty of the content they produce, maybe they can do both. Issue being there is the pitfall of artificial difficulty - which to be honest, I'm rather glad SE avoids for the most part here.

There's a lot to consider, and I think if people would stop the tug of war and think of this as something new to add to the temptation chain upwards, we could really come out with a great suggestion.

[Nefiiria]

What I would like to see them spend the time away from making these dungeons to create true exploration content. I think we'd be well served by another Deep Dungeon that rewards exploration at a higher level than what we currently have accessible. Because when I see the descriptions of what people want - Deep Dungeon is the first and strongest example of something we already have that fits those desires. So I feel that's the route to go here for satisfying that itch. So, instead of complaining about roulette fodder, I'd like to see them revisit and improve upon Deep Dungeon based content so that those who want to enjoy diving into branching environments have a place to go that's recent.

I'd love to see a Deep Dungeon that is based on the Crystal Tower.

I know we've visited the place twice now, but with G'raha Tia back and joining our group, I think he could possibly open it up for us to explore and weed out. The place is supposed to be several hundred floors, at least in Final Fantasy III it was given that feel. Higher floors could even expand upon our small exploration into the Void, maybe we actually get in there and start fixing the place!

If not Crystal Tower, there are several other places that have been affected by the Calamity.

[Skiros]

As I have read through the rest of this thread, it is obvious there are many here who would likely enjoy more difficult end game content in another popular MMORPG that is more tailored to that.

One of the main reasons you are seeing such an exodus *from* that other gam right now, is because that other game stopped catering to it's casual player base offering less and less in the way of meaningful rewards in less and less casual content, overemphasizing difficult 1% player base content.

Please don't make this game WoW. It's why so many of us came here recently. WoW has no equivalent to "hanging out in Limsa" with Bards, and dancers, a robust emote system, beautiful glamours etc.

The easy PvE content is the very reason for this games explosion in popularity as of late. I will take style over speed runs any day.

I have never understood how anyone can find braindead content enjoyable.

[Shurrikhan]

...

Please forgive me, but I'm not going to reply to a lot of that. In the end, some of it is flat misinterpreting intentions ('adjustable' was referring to dev typically toning down on what the proposed dififculty is, barring ultimates)

I responded to that possible meaning in the very same sentence.

However, I will say that I heavily disagree that I underestimate retention and engagement.

The obvious inversion -- I said you overestimate player retention consequent to the weekly grind loops -- aside, you've conveniently left out the parameters again, despite having quoted them right at the head of your post: "I think you... underestimate just how dull the pull-to-gate-AoE-pull-to-gate-AoE-boss... hallway sprint simulator can be even to new players."

Drumming up excitement for a new feature, rather then continuing to drag down the old feature, which truly isn't likely to change all that much.

Such would perhaps be novel... if any attempt to offer new features wasn't met with "No, that'd conflict with the tried and true designs optimized for (hallway sprint simulator) roulettes," as you've done.

And let's be clear here; I haven't tried to "tear" or otherwise "bring down" expert roulettes as they stand. I've merely butted heads with the insistence that they are all that dungeons could ever be designed to be, or that there is no place in 4-man content for further designs, and have pointed out how the current roulette reward system unnecessarily constrains creativity in dungeon design by offering the same bonus at completion regardless of dungeon length.

My 'grand revolutionizing', as you seem to take it, has been only to ask that Expert Roulette's rewards more more properly scale -- or, at worst, be less overwhelmingly more efficient than other means of weekly tome-farming, so as to be less obligatory among our weekly activities.

People were discussing issues of difficulty, but honestly, I'd like to see more along the lines of depth of mechanics.

Those discussions inevitably meet. The majority of times increased difficulty has been suggested across the various dungeon design threads since ARR, that difficulty has been suggested in the form of deeper, more impactful, and/or more integral mechanics.
The problem is that those discussions have inevitably been tugged astray or bludgeoned with the reductive hammers of "but players can't handle that" or "it wouldn't be tome/minute efficient enough to compete", to the point that any concrete discussion gets bottlenecked by the larger warrants of whether the game can even allow "dungeon" and "depth" to exist in the same sentence without negation. That's why you see so much jaded discussion. That's why you see so many broad strokes. That's why you see discussion of the surrounding systems, so that a context for more than the most basic, uninspired, copy-pasta dungeon designs would be actually viable.

But, by all means, have at it. Mechanics are certainly more interesting to discuss than fighting the same policy-centric fights.

The idea of it being "M +".

Just a quick note: M+ is merely a system of granular difficulty.

We have one dungeon difficulty level and two raid difficulty levels. WoW dungeons have, practically speaking, ~30 difficulty levels (technically infinite, but 30 would mark current progress). All but three of those are "M+".

That M stands for "Mythic", which is generally the closest analog for Savage (or, for raids, bordering on our Ultimates, but with less DDR and more potential for PKs or the like across its 20 members). Mythic dungeons are, tuning-wise, no more difficult than our own Expert Roulette at min ilvl or so, but with the full slew of the dungeon's mechanics unlocked. Such would be, mechanically, "at Savage" difficulty, save that those mechanics tend to be a whole lot less "gotcha!" in their design. They include fewer one-shots are are typically more intuitive. Penalties for failure tend to wrack up instead. Granted, they can start one-shotting, especially when undergeared relative to difficulty level, as you start moving farther up the "+" difficulties. That's the gist of it. The "+" system amounts to nothing more than very fine difficulty scaling with an infinitely high ceiling, atop which some random additions have been added to vary up the dungeons on a weekly basis.

____________________________

On the broader topic:

I'll toss in some ideas I've included before:

• I'd like to see some mobs with unique mechanics, worth kiting, focusing, or even keeping alive.
  
  
• I'd like to see some longer, more involved boss fights. Soft enrage environmental mechanics especially appeal to me.
  
  
• I'd like to see multiple paths a dungeon can take to give it some variety, so long as that path is not left to the players.

  Otherwise, it'd merely source an irritating gap in knowledge as everyone is eventually herded towards the equally linear, but more convoluted, "optimal" path.

• I'd like to see more environmental dangers, including some that are dangerous to enemies.

  That said, I'd ideally like such to take an element of forethought, rather than merely stacking on enemies as in Keeper of the Lake or bringing them to tentacles as in AK-HM or Halatali-HM. I could spitball some more concrete samples if there's any interest.

And, yes, I'd happily see the Expert Roulette reward system revised as necessary (i.e., to properly scale with the content done) to better situate dungeons that are more than mere copy-pasted hallway sprint simulators.

[not_ya_wify]

I'm the opposite. I just want a dungeon that is visually stunning where I don't have to fight. Maybe do a jumping puzzle or something instead. Not like leap of faith though. More like something where you have to figure out riddles etc.

[not_ya_wify]

I have never understood how anyone can find braindead content enjoyable.

Because most people play games for fun and aren't required to like the same stuff as you?

[TaleraRistain]

The argument isn't that casual players don't want hardcore experiences to exist - it's that casual players don't want their content taken away from them, where more hardcoreplayers want enforced difficulty on the casual base, because they're above the line and want to feel more engaged.

We saw this in play with Shinryu when it released. Shinryu was a very steep curve up from where the MSQ had been. It was a bottleneck for a lot of people who only did the MSQ. But when people came to the forums asking for it to be adjusted, those who thought it was easy raised hell against them. And they constantly try to claim that MSQ needs to be harder and harder because it's "preparing" everyone for the endgame content. While ignoring that a large amount of people in this game do their MSQ and don't go any further. The only thing MSQ is preparing anyone for is the next step of the MSQ.

If people want to make an argument that there should be optional content that scales up toward the harder stuff, I don't think anyone would argue with that. But it's like you said, it's when that mindset tries to claim *all* content and wants even casual content designed around what they need or want that there's an issue.

[ForteNightshade]

Even if those dungeons were literally optional, they would not feel that way. At the very least keep them off of any sort of progression path to keep them from feeling so mandatory. Even then, I don't want it, because it would take away resources from development of other things.

The thought of XIV players not realizing just how good they've got it and wanting to WoWify the game is horrifying.

You may have it good, however there are plenty of us bored with the current trend of content. I literally don't touch Expert Roulette because I'm just... tired of the same linear corridor with fodder that can't possibly hurt me. That and I absolutely despise Matoya's Relict. I'd love something akin to Mythic+ or genuinely challenging dungeons because it gives me more content to do. None of that is to say I dislike casual stuff. Quite the contrary, in fact. But I also like content that will actually threatening. Unfortunately, said content is quite limited.