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

[Theodric]

Theodric, I really want to agree with you but you seem to have a terrible taste in what's actually good character building. It seems to me that you want every character in this game to be dark, edgy, and brooding with the themes and story cater towards a dark tone when really FFXIV wasnt ever going to be a Game of Thrones. Nor do I want it to. Dark tones for the sake of dark tones doesnt create engaging stories alone.

I've never stated anywhere that I'd like every character to be dark, edgy or brooding. I simply enjoy consistency and for maybe one or two characters to go against the grain from time to time. You've brought up 'Game of Thrones' many times, yet that's not even something I have pushed for either. I simply liked that ARR wasn't WoW - at the time - and focused primarily on world building and a healthy combination of consequences for both the protagonists and antagonists alike.

MMO's by their very nature are also meant to appeal to a broad variety of tastes, so on that basis alone there's plenty of room for variety.

[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.

[Kyrj]

Between the whole place getting destroyed off screen, Regula getting shafted again and again, especially with us not even being able to mention him to Varis doing the alliance meeting and him not getting any sort of revels whatsoever in the weapons questline. Bozja being a cliffhanger that amounts to nothing and kills off its most prominent character off screen, to now the second legion being confirmed as destroyed so that whole Corvos plot line is gone, Nerva being built up all throughout ShB only to just end up as a blasphemy fodder without even his own model and used as a reskinned boss. To now the garleans just saying bye and going to the moon. Is this the superb writing everyone talks about? Building up plot points only for them to all be destroyed off screen or amounted to nothing more than fodder?

My guess is they bit off more than they could chew and rather than waiting to finish the stories in a later expac, they chose the easy way out. I was severely let down by how Garlemald was handled. The exact same god damn thing they did in SB, they did here.

[Atelier-Bagur]

I've never stated anywhere that I'd like every character to be dark, edgy or brooding. I simply enjoy consistency and for maybe one or two characters to go against the grain from time to time. You've brought up 'Game of Thrones' many times, yet that's not even something I have pushed for either. I simply liked that ARR wasn't WoW - at the time - and focused primarily on world building and a healthy combination of consequences for both the protagonists and antagonists alike.

MMO's by their very nature are also meant to appeal to a broad variety of tastes, so on that basis alone there's plenty of room for variety.

and thats true, but what pushes me back is when you started critiquing or at least gave the impression that people like Gaius shouldnt be allowed to be silly, when that wasnt even the case. He wasnt even doing out of his volition, he only dressed up for the festivities because his daughter wanted to have fun. And knowing what we know between Gaius and his love for his children, its very in his character to do stuff for the sake of his loved ones. However you seem to see that as "inconsistent". Thats what brought me to question your tastes.

[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.

[KizuyaKatogami]

Theodric, I really want to agree with you but you seem to have a terrible taste in what's actually good character building. It seems to me that you want every character in this game to be dark, edgy, and brooding with the themes and story cater towards a dark tone when really FFXIV wasnt ever going to be a Game of Thrones. Nor do I want it to. Dark tones for the sake of dark tones doesnt create engaging stories alone.

I don’t think he’s asking for the game to be 100% dark, (here we go with the thread derailment) but i can understand where he’s coming from. Especially lately, the game has been littered with constant fluff and anime slice of life moments that seem really out of place especially in the featured expansions(ShB and EW) where we’re in an apocalyptic atmosphere.


The final days is coming and we’re playing dress up with rabbits,having coffee and lunch dates, catboy hero worshipping hour, and then just this patch we had the weird thing with Yshtola’s baby voice etc. Not many games are 100% serious and past ff’s certainly haven’t been like that, but they had their “fluff” moments spread out and in places where they didn’t take away from the story. In terms of character building, most of the scions have had what, 8-10 years to have character building? And we’re still with them, with people still asking for them to complete their arcs because otherwise they’re incredibly bland and boring.In terms of someone commenting ff is typically known for its protagonists only. Correct me if i’m wrong please but 4 is typically well known for Golbez,6 with kefka,5 with gilgamesh or ex death, 7 with sephiroth,9 with kuja etc.

[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.

[aveyond-dreams]

Gaius is too busy walking around in a chicken suit these days, I'm afraid:





At least WoW didn't go so far as to have Tyrande or Jaina walk around in an animal costume even as their people were displaced and homelands burned.

I...do not know how to feel about this. I don't mind characters dressing up in costumes in one-off jokes, but I question whether it is really a good use of the character to have him be doing these things instead anything more interesting, such as in helping to bring stability and rebuild Garlemald. Instead all they get is a faceless senate. I suppose a moment like Gaius in a chicken suit may have been reasonably earned after spending a considerable amount of time with him as a party member, but this just feels so random.

I can say the same thing for Aymeric the Blue Elephant, why is he playing dressup when I want him in my party as a Paladin? Surely it cannot be too difficult to swap G'raha Tia's model with his and retain whatever code underlies their actions as trust members for Aymeric to function as a tank. Gaius would also have made for a Gunbreaker to replace Thancred, who thankfully did not grace us with the negative value of his presence this patch for more than 20 seconds.

[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.

[Slatersev]

I don't understand why seasonal events hijinks is being brought up in regards to like, any characters. Its nothing new at all. We had city state leaders run around talking about Cocks during the year of the Cock event years ago. Or pretending to be Santa, or going into a haunted house, etc.

This isnt some new babyfication or whatever. Its the same yucks they have always had during the occasional seasonal event. Literally since ARR.