Why did they changed this from version 1.0 ?

**Ildur** · 01-07-2014 12:56 AM

Originally Posted by Axidrain

if i want to travel for hours on end ill play eve online

"Bigger areas" does not directly translate to "travel for hours". This is like saying that someone asking for a bigger car is asking for their car to be 1km long. This makes no sense and is needlesly blowing a perfectly legitimate complain out of proportion. You do not need THAT much more distance to make ARRs areas be reasonably bigger. In fact, I'd say zones are fine in size, but most of their area (understood as bidimensional space) in underutilized by placing cliffs, roadblocks and invisible walls. Some of this cliffs might make sense if they are used to 'hide' objects from your view and so allow your computer to not load them, avoiding memory problems. However, places like Drybone, the Sagolii Desert, Coerthas and Little Ala Mhigo show us that the game is perfectly capable of rendering large tracts of land without the game chocking your computer. The problem is not the size then, but the large ammounts of road blocks, invisible walls and senseless cliffs that only exist to funnel the players from one place to the next.

**Kantide** · 01-07-2014 01:50 AM

I think what the OP is getting at is that by having zones you loose the feeling of "Wow I have this huge world to explore". And TBH, he is right. If this were a perfect world, and 1.0 didn't have copy pasta, then the world would feel far superior to ARRs world not just in size but in scope. (not counting content availability)

In 1.0, I felt that the world itself (for all its shortcomings) was a much larger place and me a smaller part in that world. There was danger (level 93 peistes) and I had to be more careful in traveling. It gave you a similar feel as your first trip to Jeuno in XI.

However in ARR I am the top of the foodchain, can teleport anywhere and can ride my chocobo from say, Ul'dah to Gridania in about 1/3 the time it took in 1.23.

Now, if you made it so that Behemoth spawned in random zone and started killing people... we could talk.

**Dhex** · 01-07-2014 02:38 AM

FFXIV ARR you can at least run somewhere without it being a majority of your gameplay.

I remember thinking how great running around to all the cutscenes for the story would be - then after running through the same copy-paste hallway multiple times through the same copy-paste scenery over and over just to reach another area full of copy-paste same hallways and copy-paste scenery to reach the NPC I was looking for - to be given a few lines of dialog and told to turn around and go back. All the quests had you running from nation to nation over and over and over and over just for a 5 minute cutscene to tell you to turn around and run back. You'd have spent days just running to complete a single quest that consisted of talking to about 5 NPCs (Ul'dah->Grid->Ul'dah->Limsa->Grid) and your reward was maybe one or two 5 minute cutscenes a little gil and more running! The "adventure" died off when you realized that if you just rotated the map in your head 90 degrees it was the same area you'd already explored 2 minutes ago, or two hours ago, or two days ago.

You never - ever - wasted a teleport because it was on a timer and consumed a resource (I can't remember the name anymore) that would refill so very slowly - you had to beat Ifrit or Garuda or otherwise take part in monotonous escort missions that were almost always being farmed and full just to use teleportation regularly!

**am0n** · 01-07-2014 03:21 AM

Because they wanted more people to be able to play the game. Version 1.0 was extremely rough on people's machines.

Also, Copy Pasta'd:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CA7GGnyNwEs

**Naunet** · 01-07-2014 03:29 AM

Wish people would stop acting like copy-pasted tunnel terrain is the only alternative to the... tunnel terrain we already have. >_> Even TERA's zones were more open and interactable than XIV's, and that game is utter crap; Rift's zones as well provide tons of places to wander around in. In XIV, there is literally nothing beyond the areas you are sent to quest in, and everything is tiny pockets connected by narrow bridges. It may be pretty, but it sure as hell is frustrating and claustrophobic.

Originally Posted by Gilraen

We voted for this, we asked for this, we got it. And you're complaining? There's way too much complaining over something we wanted.

Your "we" does not describe anyone who did not play in 1.0, so kindly don't speak for me when saying that "we" wanted this.

**Gilraen** · 01-07-2014 03:31 AM

Yeah, I have a gaming laptop that only a bit more than a year old, couldn't play 1.0 on anything higher the Medium settings. But that's not the point here. The zones were changed because we asked for it. Before the end of 1.0 Yoshida put up a poll over whether we wanted to keep the large, bland zones or go with smaller, more vibrant zones. It was practically unanimous for the latter. We voted for this, we asked for this, we got it. And you're complaining? There's way too much complaining over something we wanted.

**Dannythm** · 01-07-2014 04:10 AM

Originally Posted by Gilraen

Yeah, I have a gaming laptop that only a bit more than a year old, couldn't play 1.0 on anything higher the Medium settings. But that's not the point here. The zones were changed because we asked for it. Before the end of 1.0 Yoshida put up a poll over whether we wanted to keep the large, bland zones or go with smaller, more vibrant zones. It was practically unanimous for the latter. We voted for this, we asked for this, we got it. And you're complaining? There's way too much complaining over something we wanted.

Maybe the people complaining didn't vote in favor of the change? I didn't vote for smaller zones, that's for sure. Or maybe they didn't play version 1.0 and just come up with this feel by themselves, but back then they couldn't vote.

**Felis** · 01-07-2014 10:10 PM

Originally Posted by Dannythm

Maybe the people complaining didn't vote in favor of the change? I didn't vote for smaller zones, that's for sure. Or maybe they didn't play version 1.0 and just come up with this feel by themselves, but back then they couldn't vote.

Maybe this is the problem.
If they would have played 1.0, they would know that the zones in ARR are much better and full with variety than a whole region in 1.0 where everything looked the same. You could have been somewhere around camp skull valley or wineport and would not know until you opened the map.

Sure, the zones could be bigger, but they are still much better than the regions we had.

**Naunet** · 01-08-2014 06:39 AM

Originally Posted by Felis

Sure, the zones could be bigger, but they are still much better than the regions we had.

I'm not saying the zones aren't "better" than 1.0. They are. I'm saying they need additional improvements.

**Ildur** · 01-07-2014 07:25 AM

Originally Posted by Gilraen

-snip-

If I take your word for it, then it was a false dichotomy made by the developer, by asking the players to choose between a terrible choice and a somewhat okay choice. Of course everyone would pick the somewhat okay choice over the obviously poor one. That poll was meaningless, its only purpose to give the developers an excuse for what they did. "Oh, but we ASKED you and you CHOSE this!" No, we did not you poisonous fool. You gave "us" two false choices and "we" choose the least bad. That does NOT mean this is how things should have been made or that it was the right choice. It only means the developer felt like those were the only two options.

Thread: Why did they changed this from version 1.0 ?

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

Hybrid View