Viper would of been better if it had a different name

[Mayhemmer]

-And even then, to call an extremely narrow, unidimensional job concept like "viper", where the only thing it seems to have going for it is two swords and a snake motif, "truly original", is I think deluding oneself. This is, by far, the shallowest, non-design we have seen in a job to date. Despite what people are saying, it really isn't *creative* on the same level of prior job designs. It is amateurish.

Some of you sure do take yourselves awfully seriously.

[Shurrikhan]

FFXIV is not WoW. Can we aggree on that?

Mate, you were saying people wouldn't be able to tell whether a reference to vipers would be to the job/people or to animals.

There are Ninja NPCs featured prominently in XIV, yet that has never caused confusion as to whether one means a plauer or NPC. There are also NPC dragoons, marauders, summoners, and nearly every other job, usually with some sort of presumably attachment to a particular order/organization.

Similarly, there are both NPC bears (pets) involved even in player combat in WoW, yet that has never caused them to be confused with Bears (Guardian Druids).

[BRVV]

Mate, you were saying people wouldn't be able to tell whether a reference to vipers would be to the job/people or to animals.

If you think i said that, read again. I am done with painstakingly trying to have mmo junkies understand a basic argument.

[ForsakenRoe]

And even then, to call an extremely narrow, unidimensional job concept like "viper", where the only thing it seems to have going for it is two swords and a snake motif, "truly original", is I think deluding oneself. This is, by far, the shallowest, non-design we have seen in a job to date. Despite what people are saying, it really isn't *creative* on the same level of prior job designs. It is amateurish.

Sir you have seen five skill animations (from multiple angles) and one promo art, can you please at least wait until the media tour gives us the tooltips for the skills before you go about claiming people are 'deluding oneself' or whatever, it seems very pretentious and if there is any possibility that the job turns out to be very thematically linked to the name 'Viper', it would be a shame for someone to end up with an entire box of eggs on their face after all of... whatever this is. There is the chance that it won't, and it'll just be 'fast man job #4', but until we see the full action list I do not see the point in getting so worked up over the name. Or after we see the action list, to be honest

Also, Hunter and Ranger both imply bows, or some sort of ranged weapon (Hunter in the past FFs I've played used Greatbows, for example), to most people. I can't imagine a melee range Hunter going any better than WOW's melee range Hunter (one of the least played specs in the whole game, constantly complained about for taking away the gameplay of old Surv), and I don't see how it makes much sense to have a class called Ranger have no range. Also, if Thief and Pirate have 'negative connotations', I'd expect Raider to be even worse for it, given the pillaging and raping that usually occurred on raids in history. The 'Tomb Raider' angle also is like... you raid a tomb, you're stealing from it. If there's a Thief in a tomb, they're gonna be stealing from it, the terms are synonymous

If you would prefer a different name instead of Viper, more power to you. But I would bet real money that if the word 'Ranger' had appeared on that screen instead of Viper, the audience would have been unimaginably whelmed. Whelmed, and confused as to why it's got a dual-thingy blade instead of something that can hit from more than 6y ingame distance away, like a crossbow

If you think i said that, read again. I am done with painstakingly trying to have mmo junkies understand a basic argument.

Okay so

All the defenders ignore that viper is still the name of an animal. "We have 5 vipers with us". The job or actual snakes?

The wondering was meant for NPCs but of course they are never going to be written like that even though it would be realistic.

You said it could be an issue for NPCs being unable to discern, in-character during a conversation, whether they are in the midst of a group of Vipers (the job), vipers (the animal), or perhaps vipers (disparaging insult towards someone, often a traitor). For the player, we can tell based on context, and because the job name is capitalized as it is a proper noun. For the NPCs, as mentioned by others, this has yet to cause an issue when discerning between warriors (people who fight) and Warriors (berserking job with big axe), or scholars (learned people) or Scholars (healer discipline from Nym, which makes use of a Fairy and maths).

Maybe your 'basic argument' just sucks

[BRVV]

Maybe your 'basic argument' just sucks

In universe but you can always write it they way you want it. That's also why the "warrior" thing was never a problem With the same arguments every character could have the same name. If the writers decide everyone understands it perfectly no problem right? Just not realistic. But hey you all defend a new job because it MIGHT have a reason for the name. Copium must be nice.

Added: with all of the "wait until X" i don't get why there are topics about DT content at all. DT isn't even close to being out. All this could be totally useless, which is fitting for this forum

[fulminating]

I don't like it because viper just looks weird when listed with the other jobs. I tried articulating why earlier, but it's hard to determine exactly what makes it seem off beyond it not being an instantly identifiable "people job". Bounty/Treasure/Just Hunter would probably have supplied the morally dubious tone while sounding more correct. Don't know if it has ranged options yet or turns into a giant snake, but if not then scout/assassin or something in the anglosphere zeitgeist associated with dexterity and big knives - reiver's probably not it, but there's surely at least a few more before resorting to animals. Guerrilla for instance.

It's nice to have a argument about something other than how it will end up playing into raid buffs. Maybe it's just a 2d chess move to act as a lightningrod for criticism.

[ForsakenRoe]

but there's surely at least a few more before resorting to animals. Guerrilla for instance.

Could you do me a favour and reread what you wrote here? Out loud a couple of times too

[fulminating]

Could you do me a favour and reread what you wrote here? Out loud a couple of times too

Oh good, I was worried it wouldn't work in text.

[jameseoakes]

If it were truly original, I would agree with this line of thinking.

But it's not. It is a job based, at least in some part, on Zidane, and to some extent terribly underutilizing the source material.

And even then, to call an extremely narrow, unidimensional job concept like "viper", where the only thing it seems to have going for it is two swords and a snake motif, "truly original", is I think deluding oneself. This is, by far, the shallowest, non-design we have seen in a job to date. Despite what people are saying, it really isn't *creative* on the same level of prior job designs. It is amateurish.

I think people absolutely would have accepted a more Corsair-leaning job with two swords, if it were flavored correctly to still emphasize (1) Zidane traits, and (2) swashbuckling. I am glad we agree that "Hunter", and leaning into both animal hunting and treasure hunting, would have communicated both Corsair and Thief reasonably well. I also like your idea of Raider.

The job seems to have no actual inspiration from Zidane, particularly from his actual game appearance as the weapons have pretty much no relation to anything he does outside of having a twobladed weapon. The job seems to pull more from Gabranth than anything to do with Zidane

[Tsiron]

Maybe not FFIX Zidane, but I've seen people point out similarities to his crossover appearances (e.g. Dissidia)