Roadmap question ~ What does "radical changes to the in game world" mean

[Elexia]

No elexia just no.

I'm very curious to hear how a map, usually done in a modeling software that even you can download for free, wouldn't be compatible between 2 clients of the same game.

[NefarioCall]

i guess a lot depends on 'what' the story is.
My two favorite theories so far.
#1) Alternate dimension. I got the feeling that the Yoshi-P minstrel was eluding to this with 'a world not quite our own'.
#2) Time travel.

[Jinko]

I'm very curious to hear how a map, usually done in a modeling software that even you can download for free, wouldn't be compatible between 2 clients of the same game.

Because 1.xx is using a different game engine to 2.0. (not just a new graphics engine)

The maps in 1.xx are huge seamless zones and the very reason why we have boring copy pasted zones because otherwise they would cause too much strain on memory.

It's the very reason why we are getting new maps because people wanted more variety and the very reason why Yoshi-p asked us if we wanted smaller zones with more variety.

This has nothing to do with modelling its an issue of memory usage.

Right now the black shroud for example is 5 seamless zones ? in 2.0 it will probably (and I'm guessing here) be more like 2-3 broken up zones like 11 has.

I'm not going into any more detail on this because obviously you don't seem to understand.

[Chinook]

i guess a lot depends on 'what' the story is.
My two favorite theories so far.
#1) Alternate dimension. I got the feeling that the Yoshi-P minstrel was eluding to this with 'a world not quite our own'.
#2) Time travel.

I thought about some kind of time travel too as it would help give sense to some of the radical changes and it is possible considering Echo powers, but the fact that they placed current Grand Company leaders on the tentative 2.0 maps tells me it might not be the case (or a very short time travel).

[NefarioCall]

Right now the black shroud for example is 5 seamless zones ? in 2.0 it will probably (and I'm guessing here) be more like 2-3 broken up zones like 11 has.

I'm 100% sure of this, but i have no idea where it is and can't pull it up for this post,
but there's something like 50+ new zones total in 2.0,
so it's much more than 2-3 out of the shroud.

[Antanias]

I'm 100% sure of this, but i have no idea where it is and can't pull it up for this post,
but there's something like 50+ new zones total in 2.0,
so it's much more than 2-3 out of the shroud.

I wanna say there will still be 5 parts of the Black Shroud, just sectioned off into their own zones with Gridania being wherever-the-hell-they-wanna-put-it.

[Jinko]

I'm 100% sure of this, but i have no idea where it is and can't pull it up for this post,
but there's something like 50+ new zones total in 2.0,
so it's much more than 2-3 out of the shroud.

Sounds about right to me

I really hope they go all out and make every zone unique.

[Wicka]

I'm very curious to hear how a map, usually done in a modeling software that even you can download for free, wouldn't be compatible between 2 clients of the same game.

I doubt that a company with as much dough as Squeenix is using freeware 3D Programs to produce assets. Also, different engines are more compatible with certain object file types. For example, Unity is very friendly with Maya files, but also works well with the universal .fbx files.

Regardless, I think you are missing the point. Nobody is saying that the geometry is incompatible. What is being said is that the engine being used for 2.0 is (most likely, and I do hope so for the sake of good game design) being optimized for smaller zones, which tends to be a more efficient way to include more detail. More flavor in smaller bites.

Now I don't really know anything about either engine, aside from the obvious fact that the current one is a clunky, un-optimized mess. But I don't think it would be a stretch to say that the current engine is /airquotes "optimized" for these larger, seamless zones. Which means that in order to have these nicer zones retro-ported into the current engine would require code ripping as well as geometry. And the 2 engines might not even use the same programming language (I know if I was rebuilding FFXIV, I would start from the ground up and that might mean a different language. Not to mention that to put the same maps into 2 different locations when 1 location is going to be scrapped soon after is such a waste of time.

Basically, bringing 2.0 maps into 1.whatever would be; (a) a hassle, (b) an inefficient use of time and man power, and (c) pointless because we get them in 2.0 anyway.

[Elexia]

I doubt that a company with as much dough as Squeenix is using freeware 3D Programs to produce assets. Also, different engines are more compatible with certain object file types. For example, Unity is very friendly with Maya files, but also works well with the universal .fbx files.

Indeed, though a lot of companies will use 3rd party tools due to it not costing as much as producing your own tools, i.e Crystal Tools likely cost SE a lot more to make than if they just stuck with using Cinema 4D.

Basically, bringing 2.0 maps into 1.whatever would be; (a) a hassle, (b) an inefficient use of time and man power, and (c) pointless because we get them in 2.0 anyway.

This is the point I was making. They can bring the maps over if they want to, there's no reason to when they're doing it specifically for the game's relaunch. The main draw of 2.0 is having new servers so we can actually get things that are missing due to shoddy servers, which doesn't necessarily prevent them from making smaller maps because in order to have maps that we have now (large maps) you'd logically have to be able to support smaller maps.

[Wicka]

Indeed, though a lot of companies will use 3rd party tools due to it not costing as much as producing your own tools, i.e Crystal Tools likely cost SE a lot more to make than if they just stuck with using Cinema 4D.



This is the point I was making. They can bring the maps over if they want to, there's no reason to when they're doing it specifically for the game's relaunch. The main draw of 2.0 is having new servers so we can actually get things that are missing due to shoddy servers, which doesn't necessarily prevent them from making smaller maps because in order to have maps that we have now (large maps) you'd logically have to be able to support smaller maps.

I think you may be confused. Crystal Tools is a game engine, while Cinema 4D is a 3D creation suite(modelling, animation, etc.). Ergo you need both to make a game. Also, I am pretty sure that Cinema 4D is NOT free. Whatever software they are using to create assets has a licensing cost for every machine it is installed on (very expensive for even a group of just 10 people).

I think every company uses 3rd party software for content creation. Eg: Maya, 3DSMax, Cinema 4D, Photoshop, Illustrator, etc. Some companies even use 3rd party engines like Unreal or Source. And I don't think I can think of any current company that would take the time to create asset production software on par with the leading developers like Autodesk or Adobe (outside of maybe proprietary motion capture software, I think Quantic Dream might have made some of that...). So your first little paragraph is both confusing and fallacious.


As for the second paragraph, I am not getting your logic here either. It does prevent them from making smaller maps for 1.whatever. Squeenix is a business. At the end of the day, they are doing what they are doing to feed their families (that does not mean they don't have a passion for what they are doing). To spend the man hours it would take to retro-fit the new maps into the current (and soon to be dead) engine and server structure would take away from valuable time they could be spending on future content. Saying that they can if they want to is a poor argument. If they wanted to, they could completely scrap everything they've done for 2.0 and buy the rights to Hello Kitty Online (I'm sure Squeenix has the money and muscle to do so). Then re-release that in a month or so without changing anything except the title to Final Kitty II Online.

My point is that they probably could put 2.0 maps in 1.whatever. But because we live in the real world, they can't. Waste of time, waste of resources, bad business plan, etc. Just because we have big maps now, doesn't mean that replacing them with a bunch of small ones is easy or even worth it. I mean, they already have these long, narrow, minimalist areas in between zones that obstruct the view of both zones (probably to hide loading and such), to give the illusion of a large and cohesive map. And that thing takes place practically everywhere. You would probably have to completely restructure some code in the current engine in order to just change that from (kill everything except skybox and tiny bit of inter-zone hallway -> begin loading next zone without loading screen) to (enter loading screen -> Kill zone -> Load zone -> leave loading screen and enter new zone). And then you would have to go in and throw all these zoning triggers everywhere, and then test them all to ensure stability, etc.

So. No. They can't.