Limitations

[Zafrei]

Probably. My question as of now after the new founded "Server Limitations" restraint has taken PS3 limitations place, what will removing the PS3 help in regards to in-game content. To me, I'm thinking jack-s@!# other than relieving some load times from duties and such. And according to that last person I responded to, the code for these servers are outdated than others, so either someone is making s@$# up as the game goes or just looking for an excuse to remove PS3 for graphic overhauls....or spite of PS3's inability to look how SE wants it.

It does sound like you're just generally angry with the game at the moment.

There does need to be a level of acceptance that sometimes 'limitations' is as it sounds. It may even be that in some circumstances, those limitations can be broken through, however if the costs in development far outweigh any possible benefits (which given some player demands might actually be the case), then can people really expect them to do it?

I guess what I'm saying is that they'll do everything they can to make a decent game with the engine they have - but that engine was built at a certain time and with certain parameters in mind. Yes they may be able to tweak it from time to time, but don't expect anything revolutionary as the costs likely outweigh any possible benefit, and that's okay.

[Kurogaea]

...

I'm actually annoyed by the decisions as to why they removed PS3, as its still not clear why, and on the border of bored and anticipation with 14, just heavily supported with friends keeping me from finally saying "BYE B#!$%es! " but that's beside the point.

Your basically saying I should except everything the way it is when they're removing a service that won't change much that I may or may not have spent 60$ and 2 years and a half of subcription just to get my platform S%$# canned. As far as accepting limitations goes, I think its pretty justified to think in such a way.

On to development costs, time and resources are always a thing as well. I'd rather have them take their time and gather the resources for something worth while instead of...this. If they know some of their content will be somewhat Lack luster/crap (airships) then they should focus their time to make something more generally enjoyable, like actually driving them and exploring islands.

I'm not asking (me personally) for anything revolutionary, but the normally expected instead of the absolute minimum, which is what they've been giving out as of late. Some say the patch cycle in this game are the best in any MMO. I for one, wouldn't know a thing about that since this is the only MMO I took the time to even pay attention to patch notes, but I'm pretty sure the saying goes like "Quality over quantity." I don't think any amount development costs will change that unless it went in with recruiting members for the dev team. I think that was a problem too at some point, but yeah. (also, graphics don't mean much to me)

Short version:
Annoyed, not angry.
Dev Costs (not really any of our business BUT), don't mean anything if the plans for content is already a bit crappy.
Not looking for groundbreaking content, just not as bland as it is now.

Actually most of these requests aren't even that crazy sounding, aside from the primal summoning but we already have parmours so that excuse it out the window. Capes, maybe, and hoodies, we literally have parts of our hair that vanish depending on what we wear on our heads. They can just make the back disappear and keep the front hair wthout the butt ugly bald caps? Ok, rant done.

[Zafrei]

...

Thanks for the summary, well thought out and I can empathise with where you're coming from. That said though, I don't agree on some points. Having played a few mmos, I can safely say that for me personally, this is one of the only ones left that seems to put out consistently high quality. It's certainly the only one I can think of that I've played (never played WoW) that still does the decent thing in charging a sub and delivering the goods - rather than spending all of its dev resources on squeezing every last cent of the playerbase. For that it gets my utmost respect.

In terms of PS3, from a technical standpoint I'm sure you can agree that had they continued to support it, it would've stifled growth if it hasn't already. Graphical and memory capabilities are far below modern PCs or gaming systems, so if they do want to try to squeeze more out of their engine, then it PS3 support would have had to go eventually anyway. Also it shouldn't come as a surprise, it's been hinted at for a while and largely known by the playerbase. Still I know that sucks if you're still using one, so sorry about that, but I'm glad as a player who wants to see what more they can do with the engine and the game world.

[Kurogaea]

...

Should've noted, I don't use a PS3 anymore, thought it was clear when I said 2 years and a half when the games been out for i believe about 4 or 3 years....I think. But yeah I have a PS4. Moving over only thing that changed was graphics, definition of shadows, textures, load times (like bam, but not too impressive) and more player's visual on the screen without fps drops (most of the time). Saying what is or whats not actually decent content is debatable as I should also of pointed out, because I do believe that there is content that is complete and utter S#%@ and definately was a factor in my theory that whoever came up with some of these ideas doesn't know what they're doing, limits (in specifics. ex: memory), or flat out tossed concepts for simplicity.

I'm not using Diadem as an example because I'm just tired of mentioning it at this point, so lets talk newer content. Squadrons. They're crap. Frontlines Slaughter, wasn't a good idea back then, Isn't one now. They had concept art showing more things would be going on, cannons, destructible terrain, but nope. That could've been just concept art being changed or a change of heart for the mode that it was too engaging. I dunno. Secure is still alot of people's favorite, but they removed special nodes that made the mode more than it was, but I guess that was bad, or limitations. Shatter is Sieze with crystals you destroy instead of standing in one spot to take them. Yay?

Anyways PvP talk isn't fair, because not everyone likes PvP, so lets talk PvE. If I told you dungeons are engaging I'd be lying to myself. They feel like glorified Rollercoasters with pit stops that shoot enemies at you. On occasion they'd give you something to go "oooh" and "aaah" with boss fights that are so easy I can manage with my 20sec lag spikes because Comcast is a piece o-- oops, got sidetracked. Anyways running them more than once doesn't help, also doesn't help that there is no replay value, other than tomes in which case make it more of a chore than actual "high quality" content. Not to sound like a raging customer but I refuse to lie about what I think of most of these design decisions, but to say they release High Quality content consistently sounds like fan/girl talk (no offense). I mean its cool you like it but..ugh, housing is terribad! XD Dungeons are hallways, the English dub in 2.x sounded so bad because most of what everyone said sounded like a tribute to shakespear if he was a pompous a@%hole (though near the end of 2.x they started using more modern terms, cool beans), Hunting Grounds is barren because we all know why, Airships through everyone for a loop, don't tell me anyone suspected that we'd send mammets to drive our ship that we built, colored, named, and most likely planned adventures with our FCs with. Geez, I rant alot. Srry, and thnx for reading.

Short version:
This game definitely (to me) does not have consistent quality content. ex: housing and diadem (yeah yeah I know)

On the memory thing. I'm pretty sure your talking server memory, which goes to my other statement from a while back. PS3 handles memory and its graphical limitations as follows:

Lowered Frame Rate

Lowered Textures

Decreased Shadow Quality

Removed Specific Physics (boobs, clothes, etc)

Lowered Viewing Distance (PS3 players see less far away objects and beings than PS4)

Lowered Resolution

Less player clutter in populated areas (reducing memory usage and prioritizing things like monsters and bosses)

These are the systems limitations that make the game playable on that system. By cutting that support I still won't see how it was that much of a hindrance. If the server memory space clears up a bit (which I'm guessing your saying) by removing it, then how exactly does it do that? Its not as if the PS3's run on seperate servers. Not to mention the PC has the options to play in the same way with low textures and such so I still don't see it.

Short version:
FFXIV Content - PS3 support = ? (how)

Terribly srry for the long response X(