So how about them new dungeons? (Layout and difficulty)

[jazo]

The problem with multiple path and more open dungeons is that eventually there will be a "fastest/easiest/simpler path" and boom, nobody but those weird people running dungeons at min ilvl, or a new tank that does not know "the path" will ever take the other routes.

Sure, the solution here would be making the paths at random, a random path dungeon between some sets and order would be nice, say, you have 3 paths to reach boss 1, other 3 paths o boss 2 and othe 3 to reach boss 3, permutate the paths when dungeon start and even switch the boss order, that al leas will give you... 3x3x3x3 ways a dungeon could be ran, randomize trash mobs too and there, variety. Sure there are not player choices tho, but if players could chose they will go for the fastest way.

[TouchandFeel]

Sure, the solution here would be making the paths at random, a random path dungeon between some sets and order would be nice, say, you have 3 paths to reach boss 1, other 3 paths o boss 2 and othe 3 to reach boss 3

The problem with doing that, and any other implementation of branching paths in an instance, is that it does either one of these two things.

One, it would increase resources and time necessary to build those instances. Those branching paths don't just build themselves and then populate themselves with mobs, an artist has to build the area and a designer has to go in and setup all the mob encounters, event triggers and other hookups to make things happen in them. These extra resources would then take away from what else can be done since how much can be created by a certain group on the dev team is a finite and already defined number. So if they were to then dump more time and resources into creating a more "complex" dungeon with branching paths, they would probably only be able to release one dungeon per patch instead of two completely different dungeons. Me personally, I prefer the latter as I find there to be more variance and replayability with two, albeit more simple, dungeons compared to one dungeon with a few alternate paths.

Second scenario would be that the devs allot the same amount of resources to each dungeon but then spread it out between the branching paths which would result in either each branch being approx. 1/3 the length of the singular path design, resulting in a dungeon that is way shorter or they keep each path the same length but decrease the effort put into each one so they are of a lower quality. Again, as with the first scenario I prefer the way things are being done now compared to these alternatives.


Basically when creating content for a game, X number of devs can create Y amount of content to Z quality within N amount of time. If you change any of those variable, such as Y in the case of more areas in a dungeon, then adjustments to the other variables must happen to compensate.

Really the only way that such things could be implemented without either a decrease in quality or quantity would be if the were able to hire on more devs for that group so that more work could be done, but I get the feeling that trying to get more resources for his team is something Yoshi P has been working at for a long time.

Honestly though, if they got more resources for the dungeon team I would prefer that the quality of the stuff between the bosses be made more interesting with more interesting encounter setups, environmental mechanics, etc. instead of the fairly simplistic mob setup we have now. To me that would bring much greater enjoyment of the dungeons over branching paths.

In the end, I will always prefer going down one really cool hallway over deciding which boring and empty hallway to go down.

[Kaurie]

The problem with multiple path and more open dungeons is that eventually there will be a "fastest/easiest/simpler path" and boom, nobody but those weird people running dungeons at min ilvl, or a new tank that does not know "the path" will ever take the other routes.

Sure, the solution here would be making the paths at random, a random path dungeon between some sets and order would be nice, say, you have 3 paths to reach boss 1, other 3 paths o boss 2 and othe 3 to reach boss 3, permutate the paths when dungeon start and even switch the boss order, that al leas will give you... 3x3x3x3 ways a dungeon could be ran, randomize trash mobs too and there, variety. Sure there are not player choices tho, but if players could chose they will go for the fastest way.

(edited oops quoted the wrong person)

Dungeon variation doesn't have to equal three path options. Here are some ways to spice it up:

1. Create a gauntlet where you fend off waves of enemies
2. Have your team split up, perhaps tank/heals get put in a poisonous room with an add that they have to survive in while the 2 DPS get put in a room where they need to avoid damage and destroy something to break out the healer/tank
3. Create a maze that is randomly generated every time you enter that requires puzzle solving to get through
4. Have mobs that do more than just the basic attacks and final sting - i.e. mobs that heal or mobs that interrupt, mobs that do more damage the more minions there are around them etc.
5. Have a dungeon where you are escaping, work your way in and then run your way out (Indiana Jones style)

Alternatively, you could have paths and they could work like:

1. 3 path options, where one is the fastest with the hardest mobs and one is the slowest with weakest mobs and one is in between - have the game inform you of this as you approach your choice (Bravely Default style)
2. 3 path options, where one is the 'path of the day' that generates extra reward in the roulette
3. 3 path options, where none are necessarily faster than the other, but favour certain compositions - 1 may be AoE friendly (got SMN?), 1 may be physical damage heavy (got PLD?), 1 may be single target focused (got melee or blm?) [this is a bit like T2 where left was better for physical damage and right for magical damage]

The problem with doing that, and any other implementation of branching paths in an instance, is that it does either one of these two things.

One, it would increase resources and time necessary to build those instances. Those branching paths don't just build themselves and then populate themselves with mobs, an artist has to build the area and a designer has to go in and setup all the mob encounters, event triggers and other hookups to make things happen in them. These extra resources would then take away from what else can be done since how much can be created by a certain group on the dev team is a finite and already defined number. So if they were to then dump more time and resources into creating a more "complex" dungeon with branching paths, they would probably only be able to release one dungeon per patch instead of two completely different dungeons. Me personally, I prefer the latter as I find there to be more variance and replayability with two, albeit more simple, dungeons compared to one dungeon with a few alternate paths.

Second scenario would be that the devs allot the same amount of resources to each dungeon but then spread it out between the branching paths which would result in either each branch being approx. 1/3 the length of the singular path design, resulting in a dungeon that is way shorter or they keep each path the same length but decrease the effort put into each one so they are of a lower quality. Again, as with the first scenario I prefer the way things are being done now compared to these alternatives.


Basically when creating content for a game, X number of devs can create Y amount of content to Z quality within N amount of time. If you change any of those variable, such as Y in the case of more areas in a dungeon, then adjustments to the other variables must happen to compensate.

Really the only way that such things could be implemented without either a decrease in quality or quantity would be if the were able to hire on more devs for that group so that more work could be done, but I get the feeling that trying to get more resources for his team is something Yoshi P has been working at for a long time.

Honestly though, if they got more resources for the dungeon team I would prefer that the quality of the stuff between the bosses be made more interesting with more interesting encounter setups, environmental mechanics, etc. instead of the fairly simplistic mob setup we have now. To me that would bring much greater enjoyment of the dungeons over branching paths.

In the end, I will always prefer going down one really cool hallway over deciding which boring and empty hallway to go down.

I feel like you are looking at the dev resources a little bit too simplistically. Part of the problem is not the amount of resources, but the inherent design of the game. FFXIV has shown that they have no problem pouring resources into making overly convoluted systems which would otherwise be a simple thing in other games (hall of the novice, SSS, Diadem, LoV etc.) They have the resources and the time, the issue is they have the design choice that their players will ultimately lower everything down to the lowest common demonstrator, so why create a more interesting/complex system that they'll tear apart anyway? In other words, the community will make it boring, so we'll just make it boring on release instead of wasting our time. It's a similar stance they have on anything that offers an "illusion of choice". Some people prefer it that way, I certainly don't, but that is the purposeful design that Square is taking. It has been successful, so why stop?

[MilesSaintboroguh]

words

The main issue here is time spent in the dungeons and how quickly the novelty wears off. Make trash mobs have more gimmicks and people will complain that the runs will drag out. Having things like randomized mazes or forced puzzles will also garner similar results. Why? Because the only reason people want to run dungeons is either EXP or tomestones and forcing the player to slow down with random gimmicks that could vary how much time they spend inside will create friction between those that just want the nth run over with and those that want to see everything (sorta like what happened with the Castrum runs, eh?)

Now don't assume that I DON'T want more designed dungeons. I do want something like the single player Final Fantasy dungeons, but seeing the nature of this game and the players, I don't expect anything more and neither should anyone else. In fact, it seems the gimmicky fights/trials are being used in the MSQ, which I did happen to enjoy. With dungeons and trials that you have to run over and over for drops or tomes, things are going to be streamlined for the sake of making it simple to do when you need to obtain something.

[Kurogaea]

The main issue here is time spent in the dungeons and how quickly the novelty wears off. Make trash mobs have more gimmicks and people will complain that the runs will drag out. Having things like randomized mazes or forced puzzles will also garner similar results. Why? Because the only reason people want to run dungeons is either EXP or tomestones and forcing the player to slow down with random gimmicks that could vary how much time they spend inside will create friction between those that just want the nth run over with and those that want to see everything (sorta like what happened with the Castrum runs, eh?)

Now don't assume that I DON'T want more designed dungeons. I do want something like the single player Final Fantasy dungeons, but seeing the nature of this game and the players, I don't expect anything more and neither should anyone else. In fact, it seems the gimmicky fights/trials are being used in the MSQ, which I did happen to enjoy. With dungeons and trials that you have to run over and over for drops or tomes, things are going to be streamlined for the sake of making it simple to do when you need to obtain something.

3. The dungeons are made for clearing quickly like for relic quests and constant replays, complex dungeons would only make that more difficult.

Well yeah it would, because the game would then be adding something great to some god awful system like tomes, though it could be fixed obviously. Increase the tomes achieved by a greater number than normal dungeons. As for roulletes and special quests like relic, just have them on a different topic of their own. They get their own roulettes, own special quests and the ones crunching for time everyday can just run the smaller dungeons.

Players wanting things simplified is related to this pretty much. These larger dungeons should have special additional quests (Not side quests like diadem, actually outside quests you accept and enter the dungeon after) as well as greater tome and exp rewards to balance the time and effort spent in them. Background items and scenery should play better roles in these dungeons, involving item seeking, hidden creatures, traps and plenty other stuff that would scream diversity. At least one dungeon (if not all) should be like this every patch, so those who want to ride the same straight line roller coaster then they can do just that and others can enjoy something more engaging.

[Erys]

Alternatively, you could have paths and they could work like:

1. 3 path options, where one is the fastest with the hardest mobs and one is the slowest with weakest mobs and one is in between - have the game inform you of this as you approach your choice (Bravely Default style)
2. 3 path options, where one is the 'path of the day' that generates extra reward in the roulette
3. 3 path options, where none are necessarily faster than the other, but favour certain compositions - 1 may be AoE friendly (got SMN?), 1 may be physical damage heavy (got PLD?), 1 may be single target focused (got melee or blm?) [this is a bit like T2 where left was better for physical damage and right for magical damage]

Wouldn't the marked defeat the purpose of exploring a dungeon? Adventure is not adventure without mistery.

[AeraLure]

I feel like you are looking at the dev resources a little bit too simplistically. Part of the problem is not the amount of resources, but the inherent design of the game. FFXIV has shown that they have no problem pouring resources into making overly convoluted systems which would otherwise be a simple thing in other games (hall of the novice, SSS, Diadem, LoV etc.) They have the resources and the time, the issue is they have the design choice that their players will ultimately lower everything down to the lowest common demonstrator, so why create a more interesting/complex system that they'll tear apart anyway? In other words, the community will make it boring, so we'll just make it boring on release instead of wasting our time. It's a similar stance they have on anything that offers an "illusion of choice". Some people prefer it that way, I certainly don't, but that is the purposeful design that Square is taking. It has been successful, so why stop?

This, but I feel it's not just the players. Or rather, that it isn't the players at all. The players are adapting to playing the game as designed, and the use of tokens and tomes with nothing of actual use or interest in a dungeon makes for speed running and tunnel vision to be ideal. There is literally no reason to explore branched paths or do optional objectives. Waste of time. So yes, players will dumb down content, but that's because the game design is a bit dumbed down as well. Unfortunately.

[RiceisNice]

This, but I feel it's not just the players. Or rather, that it isn't the players at all. The players are adapting to playing the game as designed, and the use of tokens and tomes with nothing of actual use or interest in a dungeon makes for speed running and tunnel vision to be ideal. There is literally no reason to explore branched paths or do optional objectives. Waste of time. So yes, players will dumb down content, but that's because the game design is a bit dumbed down as well. Unfortunately.

There is also the side where not all players will go for that approach. I have no qualms doing my expert a day for 6 days (provided it's actually a roulette and not a goddamn coinflip, otherwise it just gets incredibly tedious) compared to capping my lore from farming EX primals for the pigeons or midas for token drops. The current design is incredibly bare bones and limited that you can't build upon it if you wanted to. Just having expert dungeons be level synced to the gear that it drops would already make the boss mechanics in general seem more meaningful because to this day, I do not know how you would remove the stacking debuff on the final boss of PS(HM)...if you can/need to remove it because the damage it gains from each stack is already dwarfed by the gear you have by the time you enter it.

[Shurrikhan]

Absolutely correct stuff.

And yet...

Some designs really do pay off more than others--often by what seems to be coincidence, often by principle, and often just because they give something conceptually new to their base (even if not necessarily great or new in itself). Movement towards more interesting dungeon designs might cover all those points, and may well end up with a better payoff. Given this particular team, I doubt it, but with another that's probably where I'd lay my bets.

If my choices were several dull options vs. one more entertaining one, I too would take the singular but superior path, I just don't believe the development balance is necessarily quite so simple or rigid. Hell, if we'd built up more interesting mechanics across our railway dungeons as is, at least we'd have a whole lot more to throw in later if we ever did take a different design path.