Small QoL Improvements

[Rongway]

If your argument stems from the notion that "I had to suffer through this, and so should everyone" or "this has never been a problem before" or anything similar (which it definitely seems to), I highly recommend you look up the logical fallacy "Appeal to Tradition."

If my argument is unclear from

That's a fair expectation but if you want to do that then you have to learn the zone's footpath boundaries and aethercurrent unavailability the hard way. Making the compass detect only aethercurrents on the lower level portion of a map would require an extra complication of the compass system that just isn't necessary. They want you to explore the zone and discover where you can and can't go, and that's a fair expectation too.

ask me what I mean instead of leaping directly to character assassination, thanks.

As it stands, Thavnair only has four of the ten exploration aether currents available in the first part, but while you're trying to find them, the compass keeps trying to take you to areas you can't get to--and there's no way to know if the current you're tracking is accessible or not, which can cause you to waste a lot of time on an impossible task. My suggestion would fix that.

That's exactly how it's supposed to be, and it's not something to fix. Rather, your suggestion would spoil at least the zone reachability timeline and discourage exploration. If only the reachable currents are tracked by the compass, then you would know with quite a bit of certainty how much of the zone you can and can't reach. You would stop exploring after the compass stops detecting currents instead of continuing to explore for the sake of exploring.

Obviously we're all expecting some zones to be split by MSQ walls, so it's no spoiler that some zones won't be completely explorable until later in the story. But you're meant to figure out how they're divided and by what story events on your own, not have the reachability limits fed to you by the compass. The exploration currents are near MSQ objectives, so just don't detour for anything over some short range threshhold--150y or 200y maybe--and you won't spend a lot of time searching for currents you can't reach except for maybe one or two that you'll realize are on the other side of a crevasse or cliff. If you can't find a way to the current, just wait until the MSQ has you return later. You will still be able to find them before the final MSQ , and you'll spend less time backtracking when you return than by trying to reach impossible-to-reach currents the first time through.

We're not actually arguing about interface here, because what you perceive as a flaw in the interface (the detection and reporting of currents you cannot actually reach) is a purposeful implementation of a game exploration mechanic, and it's fine for such a game mechanic to include frustrating or misleading information because it's just part of the game. And I'm posting so that the devs can see that even if some people think there's a problem, there are some people who understand that it's just part of the game and that there's nothing to fix.

Sometimes "it's just part of the game" isn't an absurd argument, and when we're talking about a literal game it's a much better argument than ad hominem attacks.

[Jpec07]

That's exactly how it's supposed to be,

No it isn't.

and it's not something to fix.

Yes it is.

Rather, your suggestion would spoil at least the zone reachability timeline and discourage exploration. If only the reachable currents are tracked by the compass, then you would know with quite a bit of certainty how much of the zone you can and can't reach. You would stop exploring after the compass stops detecting currents instead of continuing to explore for the sake of exploring.

Let's suppose this is their goal; forcing players to encounter frustrating circumstances in order to...what, know where a boundary is that they can find on a map? One that they can fly over once they get all the aether currents? Your supposition that the frustration is intentional makes no sense, especially when these oh-so-important boundaries you love so much become trivial the moment flying is unlocked. They want the game to be fun--why would they force people to encounter difficulty just to allow them to fly?

Furthermore, let's say you were to wait until you unlocked both parts of a zone before going to pick up all the aether currents. You would encounter the exact same difficulty of being led to aether currents you can't access. The only difference being that you could, at that point, teleport to an aetheryte on the other side--but then you have to navigate back, and the whole ordeal just becomes a huge pain in the ass.

Obviously we're all expecting some zones to be split by MSQ walls, so it's no spoiler that some zones won't be completely explorable until later in the story. But you're meant to figure out how they're divided and by what story events on your own, not have the reachability limits fed to you by the compass. The exploration currents are near MSQ objectives, so just don't detour for anything over some short range threshhold--150y or 200y maybe--and you won't spend a lot of time searching for currents you can't reach except for maybe one or two that you'll realize are on the other side of a crevasse or cliff. If you can't find a way to the current, just wait until the MSQ has you return later. You will still be able to find them before the final MSQ , and you'll spend less time backtracking when you return than by trying to reach impossible-to-reach currents the first time through.

This is an appeal to tradition. Just because there is a way to do it now that involves slightly less frustration does not mean that this is not a problem worth fixing. Again, why do you care? If this system were implemented, you could continue to play the game your way, but those of us who try to do our mandatory exploration as soon as we can would be able to play the game our way. "Just play the game this way" is not an answer to what feels an awful lot like a bug in the design of the system.

We're not actually arguing about interface here,

Yes we are, because this would be an interface fix.

...because what you perceive as a flaw in the interface (the detection and reporting of currents you cannot actually reach) is a purposeful implementation of a game exploration mechanic,

Unless you have not introduced yourself, you are not one of the game's developers or designers. You cannot know this. There is no possible way that you can make this assertion with any certainty. They have said exploration is a goal of the aether current system, but they have never once ever said anything about making a system that is intentionally frustrating. That is absolutely counter to the way that the developers of this game think. They want things to be painless, so that we can enjoy ourselves, and they want to respect our time (which is so often limited). Just because you have perceived a way to operate within the system with low frustration does not mean that the frustration from not operating that way is somehow intentional, and I find that assertion to be absurd.

and it's fine for such a game mechanic to include frustrating or misleading information because it's just part of the game.

Name any other system in FFXIV where misinformation and misleading and tricking the players in such a way creates a fun and engaging experience. Besides hunting aether currents, name a single instance where, in your estimation, the devs have created a drawn-out systematic deception. I think you'll find that there are precisely none.

And I'm posting so that the devs can see that even if some people think there's a problem, there are some people who understand that it's just part of the game and that there's nothing to fix.

Sometimes "it's just part of the game" isn't an absurd argument, and when we're talking about a literal game it's a much better argument than ad hominem attacks.

"It's just part of the game" is exactly the same as "it's just how things are," which is the literal definition of an appeal to tradition.

Also, what ad hominem? I can see no motive to your arguments or your zeal for this cause outside of contrarian belligerence, so I called it as such.

EDIT: I'm done arguing this point. It's clear that we've both stated our cases as well as we can, and while I am somewhat frustrated that we could not reach an accord, I'd rather not spend more energy on this, and will trust SE to make their own decisions about what's good or bad for the game, quietly hoping they agree with me.