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

[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.