Why is "It's something to do" apparently a valid defense?

[Alahra]

Eithercase, it's definitely not the case now since people are straight up getting alt weapons from law tomestones or even primal tokens.

Right, it's not the case now, and part of the reason it *is* that way is because of some of the initial dissatisfaction with how the Relic quest was set up originally.

This is more on itemization for the item drops rather than an issue with relic specifically (at the very least, it's a far stretch to blame the relic as the source of the problem, versus the raid giving lower leveled rewards).

The relic *itself* wasn't the problem, no, but one of the ways the developers chose to address the problem, in addition to the increased item level for the weapons themselves, was to make future non-raid weapon options either have a significant time investment (future Relic stages), require at least some Raiding (Unidentified/Encrypted Tomestones for Tomestone weapons), or other content with raid-like difficulty (the original, non-echo EX primals).

The point in general though was that there was a lot of dissatisfaction with the original Relic implementation, coming from a lot of different directions. Some players didn't like the difficulty of the fights (well, Titan). Others felt the reward given for the time investment was too great, and still others wanted Relics to be a sign of dedication and/or to last for a significant amount of time. All of that feedback played into the design of the resulting Zodiac Weapon Saga.

The fact that it even exists at all was because of player feedback, as the developers originally didn't have any plans for the Relics to grow in power. So it's not so simple as the developers getting rid of the things players liked: the questline as a whole was in fact an attempt to address a number of things the players weren't satisfied with. It has, by and large, actually satisfied its original goals, for what it's worth, even if the forums explode with complaints each time a new step is released.

[WinterLuna]

You been going on about this slight against people that aren't even accusing you of white knighting for about 3 days. There have been numerous threads and posts here and in the quests forum discussing the relic quests' shortcomings in detailed fashion. All fully available for even you to discuss in. Self appointing yourself as mod and attempting to regulate behavior(in a biased fashion, at that) is not necessary.

Methinks thou doth protest too much.

Did I refer to anyone specifically? No. So unless you've read every single thread I've posted in and everyone's comments to me, don't assume nobody has said anything to me involving defending SE. I can quote people, if you like, so "people aren't even accusing you" is clearly a biased statement.

I also said "most." Yes, some are discussing constructively, others aren't. I also said that it works both ways, so calling me biased is also something you've made up. I'm not "appointing myself as mod" but defending myself and others who can't even make a statement without having others try to belittle them.

I say this because I've tried to have an intelligent debate with people and all I've got back is "how can you even defend SE?" " ^ look a white knight" "SE are insulting our intelligence" instead of debating back in the fashion you claim everyone to be doing.

[RiceisNice]

Right, it's not the case now, and part of the reason it *is* that way is because of some of the initial dissatisfaction with how the Relic quest was set up originally.

...


The fact that it even exists at all was because of player feedback, as the developers originally didn't have any plans for the Relics to grow in power. So it's not so simple as the developers getting rid of the things players liked: the questline as a whole was in fact an attempt to address a number of things the players weren't satisfied with. It has, by and large, actually satisfied its original goals, for what it's worth, even if the forums explode with complaints each time a new step is released.

Even then, a good handful of the steps (with the exception of 1 in regards to atma being done on any job) in animus do not reflect any of the feedback though other than requiring "hard content". Being able to progress on jobs aside from your main has been there since zodiac as well, so at the very least when it came to doing previous content, they carried that over.

Not to mention I've hardly ever seen anyone talk about how dissatisfied they were with the intial relic quest, other than the fact that titan HM was required (and a good amount of it was attributed more on latency, compared to the fight being a legitimate skill check). And they still left out other niches like the weapons being an individual entity rather than using a broad-sweeping brush to funnel it into all the same plot.

Pardon me when I'm implying I don't believe you, but to me it doesn't seem that the initial problem with the relic was how the quests were, nor have I seen any input on making it a main-job investment from the start versus a starting weapon for a capped job. Beyond the first quest, the other 2 steps don't seem to reflect the player feedback by requiring you to go back to old dungeons (which the option of unsync being available) and going even further into 2.x hunts and beast tribes. Zodiac was able to accomplish players pacing themselves with the dungeon drops, high tome cost for the spring water, and GC costs for the cores. There's the tools available to make you do 3.x content at your own pace for the anima items...like the centaruo seals, diadem or even esotaric tomes if they had wanted you to focus on one character.

Edit : I'd also like a confirmation that the developers did indeed to intend for relics to not grow in power (and I mean just that, different from being stronger/as strong as raid weapons mind you). From my perspective of FF games, similiar equipment were always a case of "the weapon evolves with you" sort of deal, as was the case for pretty much any other mmo that has a unique/named weapon as a reward.

[Critical-Limit]

Let's keep the constructive posts going I find people's ideas interesting. If the other side has a problem with an idea it can be addressed. I think there is a possibility for a happy medium where we could** all have enjoyed the quest or at worse, find the grind worthwhile even if getting there is not fun, but knowing fun could come later.

I like the idea of unique stats. They could even test it out. Like what if one gave you a 2% chance to double attack? Or once in a while the monk one can proc a buffed version of haymaker that you can use in place of fracture during rotation. Could make a complete play style change which could be fun.

[RiceisNice]

..
I like the idea of unique stats. They could even test it out. Like what if one gave you a 2% chance to double attack? Or once in a while the monk one can proc a buffed version of haymaker that you can use in place of fracture during rotation. Could make a complete play style change which could be fun.

There's already a topic for making weapon stats more interesting, a lot of the discussion here is more oriented on making the quest itself more interesting and the design philosophy (or lack of) behind the anima.

That being said though, relic should not be the only weapons that have secondary effect.

[Catwho]

I've been chewing on this thread for a few days, and I wanted to say that "It's something to do" isn't the way I feel about it at all.

It's more like, "A goal to strive for." That's what was missing since 3.0 came out - the only goals I had were all oriented around getting my classes to 60 and getting my titles for doing so. This is the first longer term, serious effort goal I've had in 3.x, and for that, I see nothing wrong with making it take as much time as I'm willing to not put effort into getting it. Slow and steady is fine. Goals don't have to be immediate to be worthwhile.

[Alahra]

Not to mention I've hardly ever seen anyone talk about how dissatisfied they were with the intial relic quest, other than the fact that titan HM was required (and a good amount of it was attributed more on latency, compared to the fight being a legitimate skill check). And they still left out other niches like the weapons being an individual entity rather than using a broad-sweeping brush to funnel it into all the same plot.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you started around 2.3 or so, right? That's probably why you didn't hear much about it, as it was ancient history by then. But early on in the first few months, there were people talking about how different the Relics felt compared to their FFXI counterparts and how they wished they were more "meaningful" they were.

the other 2 steps don't seem to reflect the player feedback

Several posts back I talked about ways the Anima saga incorporates some player feedback, in response to someone else. Is the whole thing a response to feedback? No. But some of that feedback has been contrary to part of the very purpose of the questline, which so far as we're aware, was one of the more successful aspects of ARR's design. Lots of people built and completed Zodiac weapons, so it's more than likely that SE considers the core design of the quest to be fundamentally sound, which is why Anima generally follows the same model as the Atma-onward Relic/Zodiac questline, but has various tweaks.

In regards to the "one character" thing, that was a shorthand way of trying to say that, in FFXI, most people didn't build Relics for every job--the time investment would have been ludicrous, and that contributed in a way to the feeling of "dedication" required to build one. You didn't just do one for every job you had capped, not like it was for the 2.0 relics, where you got it for pretty much any job you got to level 50 (though once Primal Focus was added, there was another avenue for weapons). The developers aren't necessarily trying to force us to focus on one job for the quest, but it's a side effect of the fact that the grind is longer, which is something freedback specifically asked for back during the early days of 2.0/2.1. Feedback at the time suggested that players didn't want Relics to be something for an alt job but rather something for a main job. Does that clarify a bit what I'm referring to?

Edit : I'd also like a confirmation that the developers did indeed to intend for relics to not grow in power (and I mean just that, different from being stronger/as strong as raid weapons mind you). From my perspective of FF games, similiar equipment were always a case of "the weapon evolves with you" sort of deal, as was the case for pretty much any other mmo that has a unique/named weapon as a reward.

I'd have to dig around and see if I couldn't turn up interviews and the like from like 2 years ago to really get you confirmation on this, but if it's really important to you I can try to. I'm horrible at Google, though. There might be some information in older Live Letters, but the addition of the Relic questline was also discussed in various media interviews, and I honestly have no idea which of the countless ones conducted around that time have the bits from Yoshi-P that I'm thinking of.

Edit: This interview talks a bit about why they created the Zodiac questline: https://www.playerattack.com/news/20...-realm-reborn/

The relevant bit from Yoshi-P is this:

Up to patch 2.1, there were two ways of getting high-end gear. One was collecting tomestone, that may take time, but you could always regularly gain tomestones which made it a more secure route, or a higher level skillset is required, but fighting against very tough battle contents and trying to aim for those drops.

We received much feedback from all over the world because with tomestomes there was a limitation to how many you could obtain every week, and also when it comes to battle content some was too difficult for some players and they were not necessarily able to complete it in order to receive the item. We received feedback from players that “We would like another way of getting these items, even if it takes time, but something we could obtain in a different way.” So that’s why we decided to include this third option which is the Zodiac weapons.

While he doesn't specifically say that they weren't going to increase the power of the relics over time here originally (it's possible, after all, that they had plans to upgrade them through something more like the original 2.0 stage--but if they did, we never heard anything about it), this confirms that they essentially created the Zodiac line in response to player feedback rather than as something they had been planning to do all along. There's another quote from somewhere in which Yoshi mentions needing time to implement the questline because it wasn't part of their original design plans, but I'm having more trouble turning that one up so far.

[RiceisNice]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you started around 2.3 or so, right? That's probably why you didn't hear much about it, as it was ancient history by then. But early on in the first few months, there were people talking about how different the Relics felt compared to their FFXI counterparts and how they wished they were more "meaningful" they were.

Near the end of 2.1. And I was directly referring more to why people disliked the initial step (and thus in response to the feedback, it was taken out)

Several posts back I talked about ways the Anima saga incorporates some player feedback, in response to someone else. Is the whole thing a response to feedback? No. But some of that feedback has been contrary to part of the very purpose of the questline, which so far as we're aware, was one of the more successful aspects of ARR's design. Lots of people built and completed Zodiac weapons, so it's more than likely that SE considers the core design of the quest to be fundamentally sound, which is why Anima generally follows the same model as the Atma-onward Relic/Zodiac questline, but has various tweaks.

While it follows the same model, it's also trying to follow the footsteps where if zodiac required 2.0 content, so too does anima, a 3.0 quest, requiring 2.0 content (versus revisiting 2.0 content) But again, beyond the first step, none of it seems reflective it, and especially so since it all came out at the same time rather than step by step. It also doesn't help that even though they're following the model with tweaks, it doesn't necessarily follow why it's done that way. For example they want you to redo dungeons with your main job. What is the point of that when you're also given the option to unsync? For Step 3, it follows similiar to zodiac that you need to have a large sum of tomestone currency which can be gained in numerous manners. Because it' a universal currency, it can be done on any other job, and you have the option to express it through Alexander clears for tokens. However, why put beast tribes and 2.x hunts as options as well? honestly, I'm right here now typing this message because I'm waiting for a beast tribe FATE to spawn for the last 25 minutes, except Southern Thanalan is dead for FATEs so I'm due to wait for a while because the FATEs won't cycle. This also directly goes back to the immeasurable amount of negative feedback with animus FATEs which seemed to have a much longer respawn rate than any other FATEs in the region, despite said region being a popular area (giant seps and CCH specifically).

I'm lumping all the relic quests together, because this is how it was represented to us.

but it's a side effect of the fact that the grind is longer, which is something freedback specifically asked for back during the early days of 2.0/2.1. Feedback at the time suggested that players didn't want Relics to be something for an alt job but rather something for a main job. Does that clarify a bit what I'm referring to?

It does explain that, though at the same time this doesn't appear to be that big of an issue. Despite that they've accomplished just that beyond the initial relic by making it require much more time investment. And hell, they've essentially done the same right now with eso (weekly lock for an AF weapon, it even shares model with the relic weapon), so it feels like backwards thinking. Or at the very least, I have trouble grasping their thought process because every other design works toward the idea of relic being special/for the main job.

I'd have to dig around and see if I couldn't turn up interviews and the like from like 2 years ago to really get you confirmation on this, but if it's really important to you I can try to. I'm horrible at Google, though. There might be some information in older Live Letters, but the addition of the Relic questline was also discussed in various media interviews, and I honestly have no idea which of the countless ones conducted around that time have the bits from Yoshi-P that I'm thinking of..

It's really not too important, because at this point Yoshi going back on his words isn't unusual to me anymore, considering that he's done that on multiple occasions. One thing to note though is that the relic weapons in 2.0 have always been referred to as "Zodiac weapons", but not even the questline itself never refers to it until the animus stage (with the zodiac braves). That at the least has implications that they intended this to be a questline that would be added on down thee road past the zenith stage.

[Alahra]

One thing to note though is that the relic weapons in 2.0 have always bee nreferred to as "Zodiac weapons", but not even the ques tline itself ever refers to it until the animus stage (with the zodiac braves). That at the least has implications that they intended this to be a questline that would be added on down thee road past the zenith stage.

They weren't referred to as Zodiac weapons originally--the first mention of them as Zodiac weapons wasn't until 2.2, when they added the Atma/Animus stages. Up until 2.2, they were referred to as Relics (the quest title was A Relic Reborn).

And I did find one of the interviews I was thinking of, but it looks like I edited it in while you were writing your post. The gist is that Yoshi says they added the Zodiac weapon questline specifically to address player feedback desiring another way to acquire weapons. He doesn't say that they're changing their future plans regarding Zodiac weapons--he says that's why they added them in the first place.

[RiceisNice]

They weren't referred to as Zodiac weapons originally--the first mention of them as Zodiac weapons wasn't until 2.2, when they added the Atma/Animus stages. Up until 2.2, they were referred to as Relics (the quest title was A Relic Reborn).

And I did find one of the interviews I was thinking of, but it looks like I edited it in while you were writing your post. The gist is that Yoshi says they added the Zodiac weapon questline specifically to address player feedback desiring another way to acquire weapons. He doesn't say that they're changing their future plans regarding Zodiac weapons--he says that's why they added them in the first place.

Your quest log categorized it as Zodiac Quests as a subcatagory in side quests after it was completed. Unless it was changed going into 2.2 (which isn't documented, and if [in]consistency is their thing, it might as well [not] have.