Area design between 2.0 and 3.0, and going into 4.0...

**Preypacer** · 09-20-2015 09:26 PM

Originally Posted by Riardon

The areas designed to be that huge in order to house and justify one of the key elements and one of the most advertised feature, Flying. That's the reason we got that huge areas. SE decided to go with the safe route in budget with FFXIV ARR after 1.0 huge flop. ... more stuff...

It seems like you're talking about 2.0 and changes made from 1.0. All good points/insights where 1.0 is concerned, but I'm not referring to 1.0 at all in my post. 1.0's pretty much a non-factor at this point.

I'm referring to the environment design in 3.0, and how it differs and is - in my opinion - a downgrade from that of 2.0's areas.

**Reinfeld** · 09-20-2015 10:00 PM

Originally Posted by Preypacer

It seems like you're talking about 2.0 and changes made from 1.0. All good points/insights where 1.0 is concerned, but I'm not referring to 1.0 at all in my post. 1.0's pretty much a non-factor at this point.

I'm referring to the environment design in 3.0, and how it differs and is - in my opinion - a downgrade from that of 2.0's areas.

1.0 does have some relevance to your complaint. Do you know why the maps were so boring and repetitve in 1.0? PS3 limitations. Part of the playerbase wanted one seamless world and were very vocal about it so the devs listened. Unfortunately they also promised a PS3 release, so to make a seamless world even remotely plausible for such a weak console they had to re-use assets over and over. 3.0 looks to me like Yoshi's attempt to find a good middle-ground between 1.0 with it's sprawling (if boring) landscapes and 2.0s gorgeous corridors. I'm going to take a wild guess and say that they re-used a good number of assets in the HW areas to make the new areas playable on PS3.

Yoshi said future expansions will continue to support flight, so I doubt we'll see such detailed maps as 2.0 had ever again.

**Colorful** · 09-20-2015 10:04 PM

Originally Posted by Reinfeld

snip

Uh, what?... The game was never released on PS3 because it couldn't handle it, that should give you a hint that it wasn't truly made with PS3 in mind. The problem is the development team was lazy in designing the areas, and that may be understandable on a large scale world, but not because it was large due to the copy and pasting. I honestly don't want "large" areas, I want connected areas without loading screens in between them. I want it to be a seamless world, I want to be able to hop into an airship and actually fly on it to the other areas similar to WoW.

**Reinfeld** · 09-20-2015 10:10 PM

Originally Posted by Colorful

Uh, what?... The game was never released on PS3 because it couldn't handle it, that should give you a hint that it wasn't truly made with PS3 in mind. The problem is the development team was lazy in designing the areas, and that may be understandable on a large scale world, but not because it was large due to the copy and pasting. I honestly don't want "large" areas, I want connected areas without loading screens in between them. I want it to be a seamless world, I want to be able to hop into an airship and actually fly on it to the other areas similar to WoW.

The game was never released on PS3 because 1.0 was a complete flop. Maybe you weren't watching the game at the time, but a PS3 release WAS promised and it WAS designed with PS3 limitation in mind. They decided to release it on PC first to start making $$$ off it, with PS3 following when it was ready. 1.0 never got the promised PS3 release because it got canceled for 2.0 work.

I'm not a developer so I can't really comment on what kind of strain a seamless world puts on systems, but I'm sure there's a reason I'm too lazy to look up (server stress? allows lower spec PCs to play?) as to why most games go with zones.

**Colorful** · 09-20-2015 11:49 PM

Originally Posted by Reinfeld

snip

It may have been planned, but there was no way it was going to happen. It struggled to run on mid to high-end PCs at the time? The PS3, the development team must have been dreaming. As for your pitfalls of a seamless world, I can't think of any that would stem from something other than early stage development problems (i.e they created the game with instanced areas in mind).

**Felis** · 09-20-2015 11:52 PM

Originally Posted by Colorful

It may have been planned, but there was no way it was going to happen. It struggled to run on mid to high-end PCs at the time? The PS3, the development team must have been dreaming. As for your pitfalls of a seamless world, I can't think of any that would stem from something other than early stage development problems (i.e they created the game with instanced areas in mind).

At 1.0 launch the PS3 version was announced for march 2011, but got delayed after SE changed the FF XIV team.

Regarding the PlayStation 3, it is not our wish to release a simple conversion of the Windows version in its current state, but rather an update that includes all the improvements we have planned. For that reason, we have made the difficult decision to delay the release of the PlayStation 3 version beyond the originally announced date of March 2011.

[Delay of the PlayStation 3 Version Release]
Although the release date for the PlayStation 3 version of the game was previously announced as late March of 2011, we regret to inform that this date has been changed.

The PlayStation 3 release will be delayed until we are confident that the game has reached the level of enjoyability and service befitting the FINAL FANTASY name for users on all supported platforms. We offer our sincerest apologies to any fans anticipating the PlayStation 3 release, and humbly ask for your continued patience and understanding as both the development team and Square Enix as a whole strive towards making FINAL FANTASY XIV a truly enjoyable and unforgettable adventure.

http://www.ffxionline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=78378

**Colorful** · 09-20-2015 11:53 PM

Originally Posted by Felis

At 1.0 launch the PS3 version was announced for march 2011, but got delayed after SE changed the FF XIV team.

I'm aware it was announced for it, saw it for preorder back in stores awhile back. Still, that doesn't explain how they'd manage to make it run and have it remain above 20 FPS without reducing it to 420p or whatever.

**Dererk** · 09-21-2015 01:53 AM

Originally Posted by Preypacer

It seems like you're talking about 2.0 and changes made from 1.0. All good points/insights where 1.0 is concerned, but I'm not referring to 1.0 at all in my post. 1.0's pretty much a non-factor at this point.

I'm referring to the environment design in 3.0, and how it differs and is - in my opinion - a downgrade from that of 2.0's areas.

I think that's just to fit the theme of the expansion. Its meant to look desalt and uninhabited because there's pretty much a war going on with people and dragons.

Thread: Area design between 2.0 and 3.0, and going into 4.0...

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

Hybrid View