What was they thinking when they did variant dungeons and criterion

[Midareyukki]

Do people forget we actively pay a sub with these weird talking points? Or that there are massive time gated systems that mean we need to stay subbed, or to keep our housing?
People get excited for new systems coming out to help pad the in-between, but when it's a big let down we're often told "You're not actually supposed to play the game, Yoshi even said so."

The most rewarding thing for me to do right now is to sit at a Summoning Bell to AFK do Ventures and craft, because over the years I just see us culling things down even further until there's nothing left to do other than a 2 day gimmick released every 6 months, and MSQ once every few years.

FFXIV doesn't need to be a main game, I just want it to at least be a game.

I think people misquote what he said. He said you weren't supposed to binge the game and poop-sock it, just log in when you want to, log out when you don't, without FOMO or feeling like you had to log on every day.

Otherwise, you have to log on at least once a week for weekly clears and resets, not to mention remain subbed to not lose your house like you said. And that's a bare minimum. So the game IS meant to be played, and has content if you decide to remain logged on and subbed.

I disagree with Macchiato saying that FFXIV is a side game. Any game is a side game. If the distinction mattered that much, then we'd be paying monthly for something actually inferior.

imo the real issue doesn't lie in there being stuff to do daily\weekly\monthly. The choice to log out and go AFK is there in any game, be it side/main, be it FF14, WoW, GW2 or whatever. You don't have to remain in-game like a match of League that you absolutely cannot pause. The real issue is in the quantity and quality of content, and whether they translate into proper longevity and if they're fun or not.

It's why as much as I agree with Yoshida and think people rushed Island Sanctuary and similar content that wasn't meant to be rushed, I also have to point out that the devs didn't have the foresight to prepare for the way the community handled it. They didn't prepare for it to have longevity, they went through it relying on good player behaviour. Meaning that while I see the people who rushed it as not having read the room, I realize I shouldn't use what the devs said as an answer to those people because the devs' design is flawed.

Christ that reminds me of Meteion. "Hermes wouldn't have failed had he had better forethought and prepared Meteion for her purpose rather than allowing logic errors to form"...

Longevity needs to be assured as much as fun has to be. Not for every content, not everything needs to last, and fun is subjective. But if we're going to be waiting this long and remaining subscribed all throughout, then content needs to be relevant and last a little longer. And one thing that helps older content remain relevant despite its age is keeping it fun and provide rewards.