Can we get an idea on what to expect from the open world in version 2? (A bit long)

[Hyrist]

Hyrist, I believe that people that came to hate the delay systems, reacted that way basically out of impatience. They wanted immediate returns, ergo hated the wait; they consolidated in a segment of our population that at some point decided these systems were bad; however that assessment was just based on their impatient emotional reaction, not a scientific analysis. Thus was born the urban legend that goes along the lines that the luck-based, RGN-mechanics were superseded and obsolete. This was helped by the proliferation of low-challenge, almost-immediate-satisfaction games where this population segment was further incubated.

That's an interesting theory, but it's only one perspective, not actual fact. The divide between the playerbase runs far deeper than simply being tired of being strung along by the nose by random luck or overly long grinds. By creating such barriers of artificial difficulty it became a matter of 'who has the most free time', and issue so profound, that Tanaka overcompensated for it by creating the fatigue system, and thus alienated those with more time.

The key here is to create a balance between progression and luck. Even if it takes an individual a long time to accomplish something, if they can visibly see their progress they'll usually continue along. We're effectively mixing age-old mechanics together. The Donkey and the Carrot, and the Skinner Box. Between the two, you should be able to get what you wan't with the proper helping of determination.

But this is a game, not a lifestyle, nor a political system*. And luck has a place in it. A complete, strict meritocracy, one based on skill, would end up either making the game grueling, unforgiving and hardcore, or overrun with elite gear.

I agree. But Balance must be struck between blind luck and steady determination. Keeping issues about 'elite gear' flooding the game at bay is done easily by things already in progress like the Relic Weapons. Those are things that require both a bit of luck and a good helping of determination. It's a long term goal that players can work towards and if it's not pleasing to others there are alternatives that, while not the best in slot, will be more than serviceable and are not to far behind to be looked at as a determent.

The obsession of many with discarding time-proven mechanics, just because they are what they perceive as "old" is misguided, in my opinion. Backgammon, Parcheesi, Mahjong, Bridge, are games based on age-old mechanics, all of them rely heavily on luck and are still fervidly played and considered by millions every bit as challenging as they were when they were played for the first time, in at least two of those cases, almost a millennium ago.

R

There's a logical flaw there, however, comparing a game that is simplistic in its nature to one as encompassing as a Massive multiplayer game.

In Backgammon, Parchizi, etc, you saw the roll, you knew the game, and there was little else to the game besides an enjoyable time spent. And no matter how many times you played, or how long you played it, you only payed for the game out of the box.

Here, time is quite literally money. You pay every month to be here, you not allowed to see the dice for many events, melding being the exception (And oddly, I find it more thrilling to blow up gear than it is go to do a raid. At least then I'm seeing the gamble in front of my eyes, instead of the wool.)

Given the fact that money is invested, time is invested. Some manner of progress for the work return should be alloted. I'm not talking instant gratification. That actualy is a falacy. People would LIKE instant gratification, but what they truely want or need is the sense of steady progress. They want to see that the time and money spent is responded to by a sense of forward momentum. Once that stalls out, due to exhaustion of content or exhaustion of paitence, then you see subscriptions lost.

Keeping people engaged for the long term is the goal here. Doing it with only a lottery system is going to exhaust the people with bad luck. So, you merge the luck and progress thing together, giving two courses to take to reach your goal. Doing so will keep a wider variety of players engaged. Will it speed progress compared to blind luck? Only for those of the worst kind of luck.

And when gear is all said and done, there will be other distractions, such as PvP, and the Golden Saucer(tentative name). Plenty of other distractions to keep you entertained while you wait for new goals, or just when you need a break from your current goal.

We'll have to keep an eye on how it all plays out together in the long run. I for one am vary intrigued about the future of FFXIV, and am not all that concerned that the mechanics won't pan out properly. Most of my conversation here is academic, and I have good faith that Yoshi-P will get the job done right. It might take a few bumps along the road but I'm willing to accept that, especially given all we have gone through already.

The main thing that concerns me is the tone this community will take for the course of its life. I hope it to be a more upbeat one than Final Fantasy XI was in many circumstances, and some of the mechanics I suggested can insure that.

But if the player-base adapts a more friendly nature due to other things implemented in the game, then they won't be needed.

[Rutelor]

By creating such barriers of artificial difficulty it became a matter of 'who has the most free time' [...snip...]

This is a game, Hyrst; praytell what aspect of difficulty in it is not artificial.

The key here is to create a balance between progression and luck. Even if it takes an individual a long time to accomplish something, if they can visibly see their progress they'll usually continue along. We're effectively mixing age-old mechanics together. The Donkey and the Carrot, and the Skinner Box. Between the two, you should be able to get what you wan't with the proper helping of determination.

That sounds more like a pitch for the American Dream than a game. I think, and many in the game design sector agree, that randomly generated numbers are an effective equalizer, as long as the probability is kept at a healthy range. I don't want a game that is mainly hard luck. What's "healthy," of course, is what's at stake here.

I agree. But Balance must be struck between blind luck and steady determination. Keeping issues about 'elite gear' flooding the game at bay is done easily by things already in progress like the Relic Weapons. Those are things that require both a bit of luck and a good helping of determination. It's a long term goal that players can work towards and if it's not pleasing to others there are alternatives that, while not the best in slot, will be more than serviceable and are not to far behind to be looked at as a determent.

Total agreement here. And for the most, we agree on most everything down below. Except for the fact that I don't really think any MMO player plays the game with the hope of beating it, finishing it and getting out of subscription charges. I do agree that for the investment a considerable amount of interesting and challenging new content should be constantly forthcoming.

Also, you and I must have had radically different experiences in FFXI. To me the community in the server I played most of those years was a model of civility and niceness.

Ah, yes, also I don't see the logical flaw that you attempt to pinpoint in the starting paragraph immediately below. My point was that you could have strategically and intellectually challenging games that included luck as an ingredient, that it's not some sort of obsolete mechanic we have outgrown.

There's a logical flaw there, however, comparing a game that is simplistic in its nature to one as encompassing as a Massive multiplayer game.

In Backgammon, Parchizi, etc, you saw the roll, you knew the game, and there was little else to the game besides an enjoyable time spent. And no matter how many times you played, or how long you played it, you only payed for the game out of the box.

Here, time is quite literally money. You pay every month to be here, you not allowed to see the dice for many events, melding being the exception (And oddly, I find it more thrilling to blow up gear than it is go to do a raid. At least then I'm seeing the gamble in front of my eyes, instead of the wool.)

Given the fact that money is invested, time is invested. Some manner of progress for the work return should be alloted. I'm not talking instant gratification. That actualy is a falacy. People would LIKE instant gratification, but what they truely want or need is the sense of steady progress. They want to see that the time and money spent is responded to by a sense of forward momentum. Once that stalls out, due to exhaustion of content or exhaustion of paitence, then you see subscriptions lost.

Keeping people engaged for the long term is the goal here. Doing it with only a lottery system is going to exhaust the people with bad luck. So, you merge the luck and progress thing together, giving two courses to take to reach your goal. Doing so will keep a wider variety of players engaged. Will it speed progress compared to blind luck? Only for those of the worst kind of luck.

And when gear is all said and done, there will be other distractions, such as PvP, and the Golden Saucer(tentative name). Plenty of other distractions to keep you entertained while you wait for new goals, or just when you need a break from your current goal.

We'll have to keep an eye on how it all plays out together in the long run. I for one am vary intrigued about the future of FFXIV, and am not all that concerned that the mechanics won't pan out properly. Most of my conversation here is academic, and I have good faith that Yoshi-P will get the job done right. It might take a few bumps along the road but I'm willing to accept that, especially given all we have gone through already.

The main thing that concerns me is the tone this community will take for the course of its life. I hope it to be a more upbeat one than Final Fantasy XI was in many circumstances, and some of the mechanics I suggested can insure that.

But if the player-base adapts a more friendly nature due to other things implemented in the game, then they won't be needed.

All around, however, I've come to realize that you and I are mostly on the same side. I just don't think the need for developers to provide a constant stream of content is new, or modern. I also don't believe in the underlining implication of your writing, that somehow what made FFXI compelling (for me, evidently not for you) is something obsolete or superseded. And I don't think luck was a capital part of it.

R

[Hyrist]

All around, however, I've come to realize that you and I are mostly on the same side. I just don't think the need for developers to provide a constant stream of content is new, or modern. I also don't believe in the underlining implication of your writing, that somehow what made FFXI compelling (for me, evidently not for you) is something obsolete or superseded. And I don't think luck was a capital part of it.

R

I think perhaps you've got a differing opinion on what made FFXI compelling.

I'll be blunt. For me, the answer was commiseration. The game was grueling by many standards, FFXI players insulted WoW as casuals, even though it was a more successful game.

It wasn't any mechanic that made FFXI good, though I'll give compliments to the Job/Subjob system, and the capasity to level multiple jobs on a single character, something that was good to carry over to XIV. But put bluntly, many of the mechanics were really bad - people complained about them for the duration and SE was slow to fix anything. Expansions were strung along with empty filler (You must wait till JP midnight to start the next quest!) And even when you could go through content, it wasn't there until the next patch three months down the line.

And while there were some things that are just plain fun to do in the game, we're not touching on the more notorious issues here. Absolute Virtue, Pandemonium Warden, the Salvage Dupe scandal? Players weren't playing the game honestly and that speaks bad of the game mechanics. Too much was just drawn out in the wrong ways for the wrong reasons.

So it wasn't the nuts and bolts of the game that made it worthwhile, in my opinion. It was the people, it was the lore, it was the story. Players grunted through all the miserable parts of the game because they loved the world head and shoulders above its mechanics. And they enjoyed the company they kept. There are people still outside that Game that hold pride in their home nation (And for you other scrubs, it's Winfirst! Remember that!) I know my previous nation choice affected my decision in XIV.

That sort of attraction can be achieved regardless of the mechanics. And for many of us witnessing the fall of Meteor, that attachment to the world is already blooming.

So no, I don't believe luck was a capital part of FFXI's success either, but neither do I believe it's mechanics were without crippling flaws, flaws this game is most defiantly going to have to shed off if it wants a larger subscription base.