Thank you for inviting Asmongold to the media tour!!

[Sotaris]

I don't get the negative of it. If people don't want to do them, they can just not do them. Like Ultimates and Raids - no one is forcing anyone to do that content.

I like dungeon and so adding a new layer and reward for running harder versions would be perfect for me personally. I'd play wow if I liked it but I tried it a few times and it's just not my cuppa tea.

I think it's more of a majority don't want the dev teams to put lot of hours and resources into something only a small minority is looking to clear/interested in - vs adding more content to the game.

[Shurrikhan]

I think it's more of a majority don't want the dev teams to put lot of hours and resources into something only a small minority is looking to clear/interested in

Only a "small minority" would desire for any difficulty options above "faceroll" in dungeons?

- vs adding more content to the game.

You realize nearly the entirety of a dungeon's development hours will be spent on assets, not, say, on simply allowing players to multiply enemy stats by 1.5x?

You're effectively suggesting we continue to save less than a 1% of the resources required to allow for multiple levels of difficulty... only to then have that dungeon actually engage people for less than 10% of the time.

That is a far less efficient use of development hours than spending faintly longer for more lasting and engaging content at player-chosen difficulty levels.

[Larirawiel]

That is a far less efficient use of development hours than spending faintly longer for more lasting and engaging content at player-chosen difficulty levels.

Difficulty levels are a huge immersion breaker. IMHO they should be removed from the game entirely. But i know, it is cheaper to recycle content with difficulty levels than create new content.

Cheers

[Shurrikhan]

But I know, it is cheaper to recycle content with difficulty levels than create new content.

Loaded language aside, yes, yes it is.

The costs required to allow accessibility and longevity for a given piece of content is utterly miniscule compared to its initial development costs.

While that increased efficiency may sour our opinions if we see none of the gains (only the reduced development costs, rather than what they could thereby afford), having multiple difficulty levels allow both for a greater portion of content to be accessible (thus removing the need for the actual gameplay of any genre of content to be gutted) and for content to last, a greater time before it fails to be engaging, both of which extend the portion of the game's lifecycle seemingly filled with relatively fresh, intrinsically rewarding, or relevant content, which in turn aids player morale and improves, on average, how content additions are perceived.

Grüße

[RicaRuin]

Difficulty levels are a huge immersion breaker. IMHO they should be removed from the game entirely. But i know, it is cheaper to recycle content with difficulty levels than create new content.

Cheers

No, no and no. This would result in everything being dumbed down even more just to be accessible to everyone, and I don't want that. At the same time, I don't want to exclude people from the game - different difficulties would make it accessible while keeping a challenge for other players.

[Sotaris]

Only a "small minority" would desire for any difficulty options above "faceroll" in dungeons?


You realize nearly the entirety of a dungeon's development hours will be spent on assets, not, say, on simply allowing players to multiply enemy stats by 1.5x?

You're effectively suggesting we continue to save less than a 1% of the resources required to allow for multiple levels of difficulty... only to then have that dungeon actually engage people for less than 10% of the time.

That is a far less efficient use of development hours than spending faintly longer for more lasting and engaging content at player-chosen difficulty levels.

Don't get me wrong, I'd be very much into getting harder dungeons keen to Mythic+. I'm just saying what the general consensus is. Most players don't want higher difficulty.

A minority wants, i.e people here, reddit etc. The bigger subscription base don't care/have interest in it, as much they don't care much for ultimates or harder endgame content period.

Final Casual 14

Raids ? Ultimates ? Hard Dungeons ? playing the game ? No I prefer watching CS, building my house, playing GS mini games or even go afk in Limsa

You could argue being logged in, doing all those things you tried to insult a certain type of playing is playing the game in their ways.

But also, you just now noticed this game is "casual fantasy xiv"? It been like this since the start.

[Dawn_FF14]

You realize nearly the entirety of a dungeon's development hours will be spent on assets, not, say, on simply allowing players to multiply enemy stats by 1.5x?

You're effectively suggesting we continue to save less than a 1% of the resources required to allow for multiple levels of difficulty... only to then have that dungeon actually engage people for less than 10% of the time.

That is a far less efficient use of development hours than spending faintly longer for more lasting and engaging content at player-chosen difficulty levels.

I think the “cost saving” approach in Mythic and M+ dungeons is where WoW went down the slippery slope. It was good for money, but destroyed their progression and reward structure, and hurt the game in the long run.

If FF14 wants to add harder dungeons, I’d rather them be the ARR Hard versions, and be optional in MSQ. But then, there are still the decisions to make for reward structure and what to do when next expansion or patch comes. And, the greatest question to answer from your boss, “Is it worth the money spent?”

[Shurrikhan]

I think the “cost saving” approach in Mythic and M+ dungeons is where WoW went down the slippery slope. It was good for money, but destroyed their progression and reward structure, and hurt the game in the long run.

You're conflating two very, very different things, though.

"Savage" difficulty is not, itself, a reward structure. (Look at the original Savage rewards, for instance: a mere title.)

"Extreme" difficulty is not, itself, a reward structure.

"Mythic+" difficulities are not, themselves, a reward structure. They amount to, solely, the ability to (A) finely control mob stats to something that hits the "sweet spot" of challenge for you and your party and (B) a way to add bonus dungeon mechanics, if you want them.

Nothing about allowing players to set their dungeon runs to a finely-set challenge they can enjoy enforces any particular reward structure.

(You know what does prevent dungeons from, say, being unique, though? A flat daily reward that skews efficiency towards the quickest possible means of attaining it, since the actual content (beyond its mere type) done to get that reward is irrelevant. That's a reward structure that badly constrains content creativity and engagement, and you've been lapping it right up.)

ARR Hard versions

Sorry to have to break this to you, but ARR "Hard" dungeons (which, btw, were also in HW) were not any harder than regular dungeons. They were merely "v2" dungeons -- a way of recopying a few assets into an otherwise new dungeon. They constrained available settings to save on some mob assets, ground and wall textures, and the occasional doodad. I liked them well enough, in that it was interesting to revisit old settings after time had passed, but they are absolutely irrelevant to having multiple difficulties.

and be optional in MSQ

Almost no one here has asked otherwise for any mainstay content with a minimum difficulty level exceeding what we already see across those content types. That said, having additional difficult choices does not increase the minimum difficulty of a place (i.e., what would actually go into a standard roulette). The default remains the same; you'd just have more options now.

And, the greatest question to answer from your boss, “Is it worth the money spent?”

Minisculely increased cost for at least some dozen times the longevity and available engagement? Yes, it would be worth the money spent.