What is with the constant mistreatment of the Garlean story?(6.1 Patch spoilers)

[Theodric]

I wouldn't suggest that Garlemald was unpopular. It just so happens that quite a few committed FFXIV players have spent a lot of time actively stalking and harassing anyone who dared to like the 'wrong' characters. Stormblood was also controversial due to Ala Mhigo being seen as rather bland and undeserving of three (technically four) entire zones instead of allowing Othard more room to breathe.

It's not like the writers couldn't have mixed things up more and had us get a glimpse at some of the more stable Garlean provinces, or have someone similar to Regula van Hydrus enter the story.

Or someone similar to Rufus Shinra or the Turks show up. The company can't be unaware that the antagonists alone attract a lot of interest in their games, surely?

[Atelier-Bagur]

I wouldn't suggest that Garlemald was unpopular. It just so happens that quite a few committed FFXIV players have spent a lot of time actively stalking and harassing anyone who dared to like the 'wrong' characters. Stormblood was also controversial due to Ala Mhigo being seen as rather bland and undeserving of three (technically four) entire zones instead of allowing Othard more room to breathe.

It's not like the writers couldn't have mixed things up more and had us get a glimpse at some of the more stable Garlean provinces, or have someone similar to Regula van Hydrus enter the story.

Or someone similar to Rufus Shinra or the Turks show up. The company can't be unaware that the antagonists alone attract a lot of interest in their games, surely?

uh...I big to differ with that statement my friend. I dont think FFVII was popular because of Rufus or the Turks. Ok granted Sephiroth is a major contender but so was Cloud and Tifa and Aeris etc. I dont think people raved FFX because of antagonists like Seymour being impactful. In the series, the attraction is almost always the protagonists than the antagonists. And in the case of FFXIV, the fact that the protag is a customizable avatar that is the center stage to the story carries a lot more attraction than most of the characters in this story. Heck the fact that your personal character has close relations to many of the other characters says how much thats the case.

[Theodric]

uh...I big to differ with that statement my friend. I dont think FFVII was popular because of Rufus or the Turks. Ok granted Sephiroth is a major contender but so was Cloud and Tifa and Aeris etc. I dont think people raved FFX because of antagonists like Seymour being impactful. In the series, the attraction is almost always the protagonists. And in the case of FFXIV, the fact that the protag is a customizable avatar that is the center stage to the story carries a lot more than most of the characters in this story.

Rufus proved to be so popular that he was brought back from the dead and given an expanded role in the various sequels and prequels to FFVII. The Turks, too, have proven to be very popular...and FFVII's recent remake expanded the roles of both the protagonists and antagonists alike because it recognised that a lot of people enjoy both...

[aveyond-dreams]

uh...I big to differ with that statement my friend. I dont think FFVII was popular because of Rufus or the Turks. Ok granted Sephiroth is a major contender but so was Cloud and Tifa and Aeris etc. I dont think people raved FFX because of antagonists like Seymour being impactful. In the series, the attraction is almost always the protagonists. And in the case of FFXIV, the fact that the protag is a customizable avatar that is the center stage to the story carries a lot more than most of the characters in this story.

FFX is a game with a strong main cast which compensates for having people like Seymour.

FFXIV is a game with a weak main cast which is compensated for by the antagonist factions, or at least that was the case until recently.

I am grateful for the fact that the void is being made a focus early on and that I took a liking to what I saw almost instantly, because in absence of Garlemald and the Ancients there is very little left in FFXIV's world to keep my main interest.

[tokinokanatae]

I wouldn't suggest that Garlemald was unpopular. It just so happens that quite a few committed FFXIV players have spent a lot of time actively stalking and harassing anyone who dared to like the 'wrong' characters. Stormblood was also controversial due to Ala Mhigo being seen as rather bland and undeserving of three (technically four) entire zones instead of allowing Othard more room to breathe.

How FFXIV players feel about Garlean fans is a completely separate issue from how they feel about Garlemald as a story element. It's pretty obvious that after the end of Stormblood, they identified that a large enough portion of their player base didn't like the "war story" aspect of Stormblood. The zones and allied NPCs may have had a part to play in this as well, but Stormblood was also heavily criticized for its story. (The writers and Yoshi-P are also obviously not interested in portraying a fascist military state as a force for good--individual minor characters overcoming their fascist brainwashing is as far as they're willing to go--so a tour of the provinces that "love the taste of imperial boot" was probably never, ever remotely on the table.)

After Stormblood, the expansions with the most fantasy elements have proven to be the most popular, so they're going to continue doing what works for as many people as possible. Even trying to work on Garlean content in side content--like Bozja and Werlyt--had mixed reviews at best. You can say Stormblood is a fluke, but when return trips to the well keep on getting disinterested responses, it's best to find another place for water.

[Lauront]

How FFXIV players feel about Garlean fans is a completely separate issue from how they feel about Garlemald as a story element. It's pretty obvious that after the end of Stormblood, they identified that a large enough portion of their player base didn't like the "war story" aspect of Stormblood. The zones and allied NPCs may have had a part to play in this as well, but Stormblood was also heavily criticized for its story. (The writers and Yoshi-P are also obviously not interested in portraying a fascist military state as a force for good--individual minor characters overcoming their fascist brainwashing is as far as they're willing to go--so a tour of the provinces that "love the taste of imperial boot" was probably never, ever remotely on the table.)

After Stormblood, the expansions with the most fantasy elements have proven to be the most popular, so they're going to continue doing what works for as many people as possible. Even trying to work on Garlean content in side content--like Bozja and Werlyt--had mixed reviews at best. You can say Stormblood is a fluke, but when return trips to the well keep on getting disinterested responses, it's best to find another place for water.

But mixed reviews for what reason? I wasn't too fond of Werlyt, but that was specifically due to the story they were pursuing with the orphans and some reasons relating to the fights - nonetheless, I found Valens amusing. Bozja I enjoyed for the story and instances, but I found the zones rather depressing and the structuring of the whole affair pretty poor. They also didn't do the best job in representing the 4th Legion in a way that was consistent with what the story was pushing. I don't think a similar storyline in some of the provinces of Ilsabard, especially given a bit more visual flair, would've had the same poor reception.

[tokinokanatae]

But mixed reviews for what reason? I wasn't too fond of Werlyt, but that was specifically due to the story they were pursuing with the orphans and some reasons relating to the fights - nonetheless, I found Valens amusing. Bozja I enjoyed for the story and instances, but I found the zones rather depressing and the structuring of the whole affair pretty poor. They also didn't do the best job in representing the 4th Legion in a way that was consistent with what the story was pushing. I don't think a similar storyline in some of the provinces of Ilsabard, especially given a bit more visual flair, would've had the same poor reception.

I think we're getting into "Garlemald as a plot element cannot fail, it can only BE failed" here, unfortunately. I don't think an expansionist Imperial Empire that regularly engages in human experimentation is a good fit for a game that has been increasingly moving towards a more abstract, escapist fantasy POV. I think Yoshi-P on a personal level prefers gritty fantasy war drama--which is why Garlemald got as many chances as it did--but A) he's going to defer to the majority of the playerbase, and B) his perspective on Garlemald obviously doesn't match what their dedicated fanbase would want anyway, so even if he was inclined to make content based on his personal preference, it's not going to appeal to Garlean fans.

[Lauront]

I think we're getting into "Garlemald as a plot element cannot fail, it can only BE failed" here, unfortunately. I don't think an expansionist Imperial Empire that regularly engages in human experimentation is a good fit for a game that has been increasingly moving towards a more abstract, escapist fantasy POV. I think Yoshi-P on a personal level prefers gritty fantasy war drama--which is why Garlemald got as many chances as it did--but A) he's going to defer to the majority of the playerbase, and B) his perspective on Garlemald obviously doesn't match what their dedicated fanbase would want anyway, so even if he was inclined to make content based on his personal preference, it's not going to appeal to Garlean fans.

I'm merely asking if they gave the reasons for it, because there's plenty of reasons one can dislike Bozja, not all of which relate specifically to the nature of the story they're pushing. A lot of people enjoyed Matsuno's writing on it. So I'm curious if they gave any specifics.

[tokinokanatae]

I'm merely asking if they gave the reasons for it, because there's plenty of reasons one can dislike Bozja, not all of which relate specifically to the nature of the story they're pushing. A lot of people enjoyed Matsuno's writing on it. So I'm curious if they gave any specifics.

Matsuno said it was deliberately cut short (and at the time had no chance of being revisited) specifically because the story proved to be so unpopular. Matsuno himself was also on record as saying he wanted the zones to look prettier (which was another common complaint) but I don't think that would have been enough if the Japanese fanbase had such a strong negative reaction to the plot and the NA and EU fanbase didn't have a correspondingly incredibly positive response to the plot.

EDIT, found his tweet:



There is a language barrier, so it's possible that the response was more mixed, but using "the worst" seems to indicate people that hated it absolutely hated it.