FFXIV is in a Prime Position to Make Some Drastic Changes

[Terribad]

Snip

I admit retention rate on MMOs isn't all that great but 5 million accounts made with an estimate of 750k active subscribers? That's extremely low by anyone's standards. Blizzard released their sub numbers for Q2 of 2015, as with majority of subscription based MMOs it lets people know how well the game is doing and the amount of people playing.

Complexity can be very offputing.

No one is asking for complex, people are asking for a variety which can be achieved without being complex. I get it that most of this playerbase can barely think and chew gum at the same time so we don't have to go the extreme route. Again, everything doesn't have to be at the extreme opposite end, there can be a happy medium.

[Galibier]

I think that estimate of 750k is definitely low. Here is the logic. First a registered account must have subscribed independently, post free with box, for 30 days. At the end of 2014 the game had 2.5 Million such accounts, beginning of 2015 4 million, August 5 million. I would argue based on that, that 1- 1.5 million would not be out of the question. This would be good because today there are a lot more MMOs than when WoW started nd many of them are f2p. If I remember right the 750 number came froman estimate from the 2014 earnings call when they said 1 million between this and FFXI. Thing is that earnings call was before China and Ps4 launch. a well thought out estimate imo.. Another good Reddit elsewhere noted the average loss of BAD games...28% remaining. They crunched some nunbers and came up, based on SE statements of a 35% retention overall here, which would be 1.7 million, which would be consistent with the link I posted.

[BlatantPyre]

Ya know, after hearing a lot from both sides of the horizontal progression argument...I don't even know what to think anymore. I was for it, somewhat avidly, but now I just want to enjoy the game. Which I do even now, to get that out of the way...

I realized last night while reading this thread that the very job system itself might have been an attempt at not horizontal *character* progression, but horizontal *player* progression. This probably helps nothing, and I agree that having play style customization to a class/job is what we expect, but does no one realize that the current system allows player *skill* to be the defining trait to a PC? If you don't agree, how many times have you gone "this is a good healer" or "wow, buddy...maybe no tanking for you"... In other MMOs we saw character-specs, but now...

I would like a little more definition to my character builds, but honestly I realized I'm kind of already doing that, it's just not where we expect, in the stats (I have several characters, each with specific jobs. I'm nuts, I know...). I realize this does not address the current end-game hum-drum, but I gotta ask...did most of you power-lvl to get there? Maybe slowing down, just enjoying the game and all of the content through-out might help solve that dilemma...the game might be built to savor, not to scarf.

Please realize I'm not saying the game's perfect, this is only in regards to the current debate.

[Nektulos-Tuor]

I like how people are saying: "Cookie Cutter" when comparing no brain choices like Parry and Critical Modifier.

[Galibier]

Part 2

As for the Relic thing. it all depends on what you see the purpose as. It seems clear that SE sees the Relics as serving these two purposes.

1. Give non-raiders a way to get psuedo raid quality weapon by replacing raid with time sink. To minimize the time sink, and to give them unique traits would then create an already bigger debate as to the balance between them and raid weapons.

2. The second purpose is, because of how one optains them, high level characters have to go into old/ lower level zones. A perennial problem in MMORPGs is the "old world" and/or lower level zones feeling like ghost towns to new players and the Relic weapons help alleviate that.

So in the context of SE's purpose for the gear the current set up makes perfect sense.

[Valkyrie-Amber]

Well to start off with are all theses mmos mentioned in original post compatible with ps3?

I think that's the main issue with the engine being outdated and it has to stay compatible with ps3 so really
it will be hard to compete with other mmos due to console limitations of ps3 preventing the game from
moving forward.

Sad fact they can't drop ps3 support so really only way is to end this game after this end of hw story and make a new FFXIV-2 4.0 onwards that will be a new game non expansion that would copy all account data to a new game that will be PS4 and PC only. cause unless its a new game they cannot lawfully drop ps3 support.

[IndigoHawk]

Competition, whether PvE or PvP, is one of the least fun things about MMOs and won't improve anything in FFXIV. MMO competition is grinding, which is why it's not fun and can't be fixed.
The way to win competitions in MMOs is outfarm your opponents.
For PvE, run more dungeons, farm more materials, craft more stuff, or spend more time grinding than anyone else.
For PvP, grind gear to farm players who have grinded less and have little chance to win.
Farming competitions people will not create a sense of community.
Giving relics horizontal progression is also a terrible idea. If it's BiS, then raiders will have to farm it in order to raid. If it's not, then everyone will ignore it.

[BlatantPyre]

... MMO competition is grinding .... <and pretty much everything else she said.>

You do realize *everything* in MMOs, especially FFXIV, is grinding, right? Also, in games, competition does NOT necessitate grinding, unless it is developed that way, and that can be said about anything and everything in the medium. As far as competition goes...

I gotta get this off my chest...it saddens me the younger generation is being so heavily deceived on stuff like this, I've run into it elsewhere. Most seem to be confusing greed with competition, and while the two aren't mutually exclusive, neither are they intrinsically linked. Someone said something about it causing death earlier - but what she described had nothing to do with competition, it was greed.

Competition in its purest form is not only healthy, it is *essential* to life. Greed wields many aspects of things we need to survive in order to feed itself and essentially destroy, but that doesn't mean we should then hate that which was used. Would you stop eating food because it's possible to poison it? I hope not...

Competition does not beget death, it does not rely on loss, and it does not have to be unbalanced. Greed and avarice do, and they will employ whatever they can - peoples needs, empathy, and yes, even competition, to meet their ends. Please try not to be so easily deceived on such things...no matter who it comes from, no matter the reported intentions. You'll find you will cause that which you are trying to avoid...

And with that out of the way...as far as our suggestion of expanded PvP goes, I believe it was even suggested that grinding be left out in one of the posts, give us some even ground to stand on so it could be about skill. I think in the end we're just asking for more options as far as play styles go, so that both casual and hardcore players have things they can enjoy.

[Zojha]

Competition in its purest form is not only healthy, it is *essential* to life.

Competition in its purest form is survival of the fittest.

It is a sad fact resulting from the scarcity of ressources on our planet. It does rely on loss because the sole purpose of competition is to decide who eats and who has to go hungry. Who lives and who dies. Who gets the title and who doesn't. Who becomes rich and who becomes poor. Who wins and who loses.

If everyone can win, everyone can eat and everyone can live, there is no need for competition and nobody sane engages in such. I'm most certain you too do not compete over your food, health or anything that matters if you don't have to. Feel free to correct me if you actually are. I, for one, don't know a single person who would. Everyone I know would rather that everyone can go home sated and happy, if somehow possible.

[BlatantPyre]

Competition in its purest form is survival of the fittest.

It is a sad fact resulting from the scarcity of ressources on our planet. It does rely on loss because the sole purpose of competition is to decide who eats and who has to go hungry. Who lives and who dies. Who gets the title and who doesn't. Who becomes rich and who becomes poor. Who wins and who loses.

If everyone can win, everyone can eat and everyone can live, there is no need for competition and nobody sane engages in such. I'm most certain you too do not compete over your food, health or anything that matters if you don't have to. Feel free to correct me if you actually are. I, for one, don't know a single person who would. Everyone I know would rather that everyone can go home sated and happy, if somehow possible.

Again, you are redefining competition to something it's not. Who has told you to think this way? You are taking something messed up and grafting it on something that has nothing to do with what's messed up. Competition isn't about victory over others, it's about challenging each other. It's about improvement, about learning, as a *people*. And sure, it can *come into play* in survival; but it isn't survival itself, it's an ingredient that comprises it, not the other way around. In your example of competing for food, such an instance exists only when there's a *shortage*...the competition isn't the problem, something else is. And in current reality, it's because people have either become lazy or corrupt that's the problem, not competition. And besides, even in such a setting, if *no one* worked to eat, ALL would die. If the problem of scarcity were solved, no one would have to compete to survive...but competition would remain, because it's necessary for life. Stop being fooled into focusing on red herrings and straw-men - look at the REAL problems.

This is going to be my last post on this, feel free to continue, but...this isn't the place for it.