Simplicity over complexity, time to change.

[Tupsi]

There's an area, I think it's in the N Shroud, that has an NPC posted outside that says "Don't go in there! It's too dangerous!" I was under level 30 I think when I went in and I died, promptly. XD
So... what exactly are you wanting that isn't in the game?

Well yeah, that's called level correction and you more than likely died because of Heavy. Dangerous areas even for capped off players, not just because you're 9720 levels under the monster.

Is yall's issue that at level 50 you aren't killed so easily? Personally, I'm okay with that.

Yeah, which is sad because in the FF series unless you insanely overgrind (item and level wise) you can still die pretty swiftly even in normal encounters, sometimes because bosses become regular encounters.

The current lore of the game, unlike every other FF

Our power derives from the Mother Crystal. Now what FF games does it sound familiar to be "special" because of the crystals?

[Sadana]

Well yeah, that's called level correction and you more than likely died because of Heavy. Dangerous areas even for capped off players, not just because you're 9720 levels under the monster.

Actually, no, I wasn't on a mount. I have also died (mountless) in Sorrel Haven when I was low level. Heavy is irritating, not necessarily deadly. I can only guess that folks who never died in the open world either didn't explore at all while they were leveling or power leveled their way to 50 in a very short amount of time. ^^

[Archulak]

Yeah, which is sad because in the FF series unless you insanely overgrind (item and level wise) you can still die pretty swiftly even in normal encounters, sometimes because bosses become regular encounters.

So which final fantasy game can you die at max level in a normal encounter because I'm having a hard time thinking of one.

[Velhart]

Hmm, complexity is almost never a good thing.

The best way to design a game is to have simplicity with depth. Making things complex for the sake of being complex only makes it unappealing and hard to approach (yes even for "hardcore players"). If you are a game designer, if you go off the idea of wanting to be complex, you are already asking for trouble in many areas.

Look at Super Mario Bros. if you need an idea of simplicity with a lot of depth. Or even most very popular/critically acclaimed titles across all genres both offline and online. One thing that most of them have in common is they learned to be simple in design, but in depth of what you use those simple mechanics for around you.

So which final fantasy game can you die at max level in a normal encounter because I'm having a hard time thinking of one.

Technically FF8, the monsters level alongside you. Assuming you don't have your junction tab set up well.

[Taruranto]

We don't need another FF11, much less 15 years old outdated design practices.
And honestly nothing you mentioned will be implemented. The world belongs to people, and people in this case is a casual crowd. Those that doesn't really likes being locked out of some zones, run half an hour to a point (nobody but rare minority actually likes this) or having 20 sets for each class where only math guru really can understand what is better and when.
The game kept simple to be more accessible for everyone. And for hardcore there are things like coil, ex and now "professional" hunting.


FF11 combat have nothing to do with quality. It's just boring oldschool, very outdated, design. FF14 combat on other hand are quite tactical and technical, this is why such MMO called "theme park". You don't really need a complexity to make something really difficult to master and board games like chess and go prove it.
People en masse likes concepts that wow popularized, like easy travelling, full access to zones, straightforward and easily understandable stat mechanics.

Yes, FFXIV, with his one stat gears, zero personalization, no elemental weakness, almost zero party member cooperation, scripted fight is very tactical and technical. Alright.

[Zantetsuken]

So which final fantasy game can you die at max level in a normal encounter because I'm having a hard time thinking of one.

FFXI of course...

But nearly every FF's endgame encounters can result in wipes if you haven't spent time grinding levels. FFI and FFIV were especially difficult if you tried speeding through them.

[Tupsi]

FFXI of course...

But nearly every FF's endgame encounters can result in wipes if you haven't spent time grinding levels. FFI and FFIV were especially difficult if you tried speeding through them.

^ Even in X-2 (not that many played, since they're too busy bashing it for being "girl power" like.) You actually made it harder on yourself if you tried to overpower rather than strategize/setup properly.

[Velhart]

Yes, FFXIV, with his one stat gears, zero personalization, no elemental weakness, almost zero party member cooperation, scripted fight is very tactical and technical. Alright.

I rather carry 10 different elemental rods with me to cast one spell for them each *eyes roll*. While you might focus on one primary stat, you have multiple secondary stats to consider, hence all the BiS guides. Already explained that elemental weaknesses make jobs like BLM OP or useless, already creating situations where said jobs won't be wanted in content (look at both FFXI and FFXIV 1.xx as proof). I am almost always communicating with my team to get the harder content down. In Ramuh EX himself we communicate with each other to know when it is safe to grab the buffs and know who has a shock available for people with terror.

[Tupsi]

I rather carry 10 different elemental rods

Hasn't been the case for XI for an extremely long time now.

[Redemption]

Hmm, complexity is almost never a good thing.

The best way to design a game is to have simplicity with depth. Making things complex for the sake of being complex only makes it unappealing and hard to approach (yes even for "hardcore players"). If you are a game designer, if you go off the idea of wanting to be complex, you are already asking for trouble in many areas.

Look at Super Mario Bros. if you need an idea of simplicity with a lot of depth. Or even most very popular/critically acclaimed titles across all genres both offline and online. One thing that most of them have in common is they learned to be simple in design, but in depth of what you use those simple mechanics for around you.

What? I am quite sorry but that is an insane statement. Complexity 'adds' depth where done tastefully, even your Mario example the depth (I don't agree that mario is a game with a lot of depth) comes from situations that make your interactions more complex such as complicated jumping segments or enemies with complex mechanics) comes from complexity despite the game not being super complex. Simplification always results in 'limited' depth, the complexity of a system determines how much depth can be had from it. IGNORING THAT, if complexity was never a good thing then we would be playing games where we have no characters but would just be represented with a square instead because character art and 3d worlds is unnecessary complexity right? How about needing to move in combat? Don't need it, its another layer of complexity right? Don't have gear, levels, don't make people do anything because complex mechanics in any way are bad right?

Again, I am sorry but that is simply wrong.