Why have more than one server?

[Kogasan]

I agree I like moogle server as well. Mostly nice and helpful people and not to crowded. Fits me very well. I would hate to be on an overpopulated server.

[Cakekizy]

I wouldn't want a crowded server.

[KarmaCha]

Who is everyone? I certainly wouldn't want to be on a server I had to wait in queue to log into. I'm on Ultros. It's medium, and lovely. The server is very active and I have never had a queue time.

While I'm playing Heavensward Friday morning leveling with friends, I await the dozens of "THIS ISN'T FAIR! LET ME LOG INTO GILGA/BALMUNG!" threads here.

[ChillbroSwaggins]

I'm on Behemoth which is a fairly populated server, and I've had no issues whatsoever. Logging in or running content. I agree that some of the smaller servers should be absorbed and we should expand the existing servers some. However, one server by itself wouldn't be possible. There's no way the existing framework could handle such a load, nor do I see them creating the infrastructure to support such a machination.

[KaedrianLiang]

RIP everyone with a bad PC or bad internet connection

Also RIP PS3.

I support the idea of getting that last nail in PS3's coffin. This would be great in many ways for game development. Some of my greatest peeves about this game is related to PS3 limitations.

example. Debuff limit on a target, the "sorry batteries died (on ps3 controller) scenario" i imagine thats a ps4 problem as well but trying to kill off as many karakuls as we can, lack of TP bars for party members, can't display both eorzea time and IRL time at the same time, duty inprogress UI attached to questlog UI. More hotbars? more UI features and functions?

[Gunspec]

They should have done a lot of things differently with servers in the very beginning.

They should have made our characters share a cross-server account name, allowing people to identify the player by account instead of character name (thereby preventing one RMT account from spamming with a hundred different characters).

They should have created a framework for cross-server play, like many western mmos have been experimenting with. Consider that we can group with random players from other servers during dungeons, but we can never meet or speak to those players in-game again. Meet someone new online or in real life that you want to play with? Pay $ to change server and say goodbye to all of your old in-game friends.

They should have experimented with different types of servers for different activities. Imagine if housing was on an entirely different server from your home world, and each housing server was shared among the general population. Access to housing would no longer be impossible on overpopulated servers and there wouldn't be dozens of empty housing wards on the lower population servers. Or how about a GLAMOUR server, where your character could temporarily migrate to access a glamour catalog for all of the armor designs you have unlocked? The glamour server would only load your current inventory and a massive wardrobe native to the server, ignoring all data for achievements and quests, thereby allowing the separate storage of data currently unmanageable by the native servers.

It's sad that Dragon Quest X was actually a lot more bold about how it handled server shards, and that was just a Wii game. Once they locked FFXIV into the same type of server system that traditional mmos had, they made it really hard to improve on how players are able to interact together.

[CYoung187]

Way to completely over-exaggerate. Lower population servers are hardly a wasteland.

[DevilsDontFly]

You know the Fate trains at Coerthas and Thanalan? Imagine that with all servers as one.

No, thank you.

[Orspeth]

I like my server just fine as it is. Some days I can't stand to be in town to do my crafting because I think it's too busy and crowded, so I go to the house. I would never want to be on a hi pop server, did that in another game, and I hated it.

[Kinseykinz]

First off, the way the Duty finder and 'Data Center' system works, makes it so being on a low pop. server really, overall, isn't that big of an issue. Since the Duty Finder randomly matches you with people linked in your Data Center...and since each Data center has a mix of High/Mid/Low pop servers, your wait times aren't super long etc just because less people live on your server.

Sure, if you're a hard-core 'world first' raider type, you might have trouble finding others for cutting edge content on a low pop server, but that is actually a fairly unique situation (overall) for most people...and even then, finding 7 other people isn't that hard...as even a 'low pop' server in this game (unless it's brand new) actually doesn't mean 'ghost town.

Furthermore, there are perks to being on a lower population server (I left a high pop for a mid sized so I have some reference on the matter).

1. You likely can buy a house...AND it's likely to be cheaper than the same house/plot on a larger pop server.
2. Hunts aren't a complete zerg/disappear from my screen/scream at each other fest.
3. People tend to be more helpful to strangers (because 1. you need to help eachother and 2. lower pop means it's easier to remember names and if you develop a bad rep it'll cost you.
4. At least in my case, your gil is worth more, buying power is more and the markets are more stable on a lower pop. server. This might just be my experience...and likely best on Mid-sized servers (which I believe I am on). As low pop might not have enough ebb/flow on the MB's but High pop has too much.
5. Some people like 'quieter'. Not all mind you, but some people find it nice to be out gathering and maybe only see a couple people in passing...others would find that maddening. Depends on who you are.
6. On Launch Days/Patch days... you stand a shot of logging in even if you didn't attempt to get online the moment the servers go live. It's nice to be able to sleep, and log in at your leisure.

Boils down to something as simple really as 'why do some people like living in the city vs. some in the country' Both have pros and cons.