Please remove main scenario dungeon restriction when doing it undersized

[Hestzhyen]

By all means let this be a choice, but would you be willing to wait for other content for this to be a choice? Delay Eureka for another patch? I agree that , if possible, the choice to do the quick run or a full run when queuing for a pre-built party should be entirely up to the makers of the party and SHOULD have been part of the change, but it was likely a choice of resource management or even if it wasn't it would have to be a consideration going forward. Do you think production time would have been better spent on making this extra option and would you be ok with delaying actual current content for this to be implemented?

Why does this being implemented mean Eureka gets delayed again? They've already said Eureka's coming out in the mid-patch cycle "tide-over" patch. It's 99% of the way there, only a catastrophic event would cause it to be pushed back since it finally has an announced date after many push-backs.

If they were even planning for improvements to the MSQ dungeons that's all it'd be right now probably: planning, researching specifications and resource requirements, risk/reward ratios, etc. Do you even SDLC? Saying "SE can't fix a thing because a different thing will be pushed back!" is dumb. Especially when the different thing in question is already set to go live a few weeks from now. A company this large knows how to plan and schedule resources effectively.

SE can certainly start looking at a more nuanced solution to the problem. You don't have to commit to the results of the research- someone looking into the issue does not mean you suddenly have to divert ALL of your resources -even the guy who sleeps in the corner with his eyes open- to work on a resolution. For all we know they've already had a team research the problem and possible solutions and this is the best form of remediation we can expect. But if we ask for more, and make a compelling case for it, SE can slot it in for Dev time (assuming there is a prayer in hell they can finagle the spaghetti code to behave). Doesn't mean it'll ever go live. Doesn't mean we'll ever even hear about it. But asking for a better implementation of a dull story segment does not suddenly mean all the fun stuff gets pushed back indefinitely.

[Krotoan]

Why does this being implemented mean Eureka gets delayed again? They've already said Eureka's coming out in the mid-patch cycle "tide-over" patch. It's 99% of the way there, only a catastrophic event would cause it to be pushed back since it finally has an announced date after many push-backs.

If they were even planning for improvements to the MSQ dungeons that's all it'd be right now probably: planning, researching specifications and resource requirements, risk/reward ratios, etc. Do you even SDLC? Saying "SE can't fix a thing because a different thing will be pushed back!" is dumb. Especially when the different thing in question is already set to go live a few weeks from now. A company this large knows how to plan and schedule resources effectively.

SE can certainly start looking at a more nuanced solution to the problem. You don't have to commit to the results of the research- someone looking into the issue does not mean you suddenly have to divert ALL of your resources -even the guy who sleeps in the corner with his eyes open- to work on a resolution. For all we know they've already had a team research the problem and possible solutions and this is the best form of remediation we can expect. But if we ask for more, and make a compelling case for it, SE can slot it in for Dev time. Doesn't mean it'll ever go live. Doesn't mean we'll ever even hear about it. But asking for a better implementation of a dull story segment does not suddenly mean all the fun stuff gets pushed back indefinitely.

I didn't say any of that. I asked would you be OK with it? I'm just using Eureka as an example because it's something a lot of people are looking forward to. I'm asking if something you WANTED needed to be pushed back or delayed (not forever, maybe just one patch cycle) for this to happen would you be OK with that? Even something you didn't know if you wanted but was planned for the future. I'm pointing out that resources being limited as they are, it's possible a choice was made and this was what could be done with the current allocation, AND if this was their proposed final decision then further resources would have to be moved to accommodate this future change.

Once again, I'm all for making them separate, but there will be a price and is it worth that price (likely sight unseen) to you for this to happen? Or will you, as many have, just ignore MSQ from this point forward?

It's extremely possible there's their, as you put it, "guy sleeping with his eyes open" on this and we'll get the results soon. That would be great. People would be made happy and the forums could move on to things that are much more relevant. SE making some announcement to this effect would alleviate a great burden on many minds, but they haven't. So for now we have to assume they are flying by results currently and will adjust as necessary.

[Vstarstruck]

I didn't say any of that. I asked would you be OK with it? I'm just using Eureka as an example because it's something a lot of people are looking forward to. I'm asking if something you WANTED needed to be pushed back or delayed (not forever, maybe just one patch cycle) for this to happen would you be OK with that? Even something you didn't know if you wanted but was planned for the future. I'm pointing out that resources being limited as they are, it's possible a choice was made and this was what could be done with the current allocation, AND if this was their proposed final decision then further resources would have to be moved to accommodate this future change.

Once again, I'm all for making them separate, but there will be a price and is it worth that price (likely sight unseen) to you for this to happen? Or will you, as many have, just ignore MSQ from this point forward?

It's extremely possible there's their, as you put it, "guy sleeping with his eyes open" on this and we'll get the results soon. That would be great. People would be made happy and the forums could move on to things that are much more relevant. SE making some announcement to this effect would alleviate a great burden on many minds, but they haven't. So for now we have to assume they are flying by results currently and will adjust as necessary.

This is not a thing and a starman, again if the team can't work on changing on MSQ while doing the other things on time, then the MSQ (including the 4.2 change) shouldn't have happened.

I am one of the newbie that enjoyed the change and explained why in another post before.

I don't understand why people call us ''white knights'' for defending this.

Because it is defending a huge nonsense and unneeded change. Defending a clear flaw with over the top statements = white knighting, like Krotoan. See their last post in basically asking "would you rather have more changes to MSQ or have something you are about pushed back"? if this is the situation then 4.2's change should never have happened as it is pleasing a very tiny minority. It only helps a select few once, you shouldn't be making a change with that limited effect to begin with. Because now I need to question, if they can please such a small group of people, where is QoL changes for those with disabilities? like this thread:
http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...Sensory-Issues
It is really frustrating to be observing such a double standard.

All they had to do was teach people how to use the PF better, you do not force people to watch CS in a public setting, if you want a fast matchmaking, you get behind the fast clear too. You give grown adults choices and they decide how to conduct themselves, this is unneeded over the top babying that a player may only enjoy once (do realize not all new players wants to view them.)

For alts and noobs that want to skip unsync ( dont't think it is a majority really ....),

It is a bigger majority then people caring about these cutscenes. Proof? the queues got longer with less people in them. There are plenty of new players and alts that do not want to watch them over and over, thus you have people greatly disagreeing of forced cut scene speed EVERYWHERE (inn/ premade/ roulette) I do agree they should inform new players better about how to use PF and take their own group of friends if they want to take their time, but the roulette was made to give experienced people rewards in the rare event there is a new player that can't complete them though any other means. You could of watched the CS and go at your own speed before the change, just get a few friends to go with you that do not mind. But now they make everyone watch the CS everywhere? bad hasty change.

You are acting like there was not any other option to run then but speed running, and that was not the case. Before everyone got options, now no one has option, so bad change.

[Sida]

To me it seems that making the cutscenes unskibbaple was a knee jerk reaction to a year's long debate/complain about how new players are unable to watch them. If it's that, they can find tune it later and what would be reasonable would be to allow the skipping for preformed parties (be it unsynced or not). After all premade parties already have some leeway on how to perform content, such as no item level restrictions or class restrictions. Want to try savage in party of 8 bards in swimsuits, go for it (it might not be awfully practical though). In such party, the cutscene skipping debate should be social question, not technical one, since it's reasonable to assume everyone taking part into it can be on the same page about which way to go before entering the duty.

The roulette limitation aside, what people ask here is the skipping being possible for premade parties where, again, people can agree between themselves how fast to run.

[Altena]

I don't understand why they didn't just put barricades up for the boss fights and open them once everyone has finished the cutscenes.

That way you could skip if you want, but you can't run ahead and kill the final boss before poor newbie gets out of their 2nd cutscene.

Alternatively just steal the AI that's used for squadrons and toss in some random GC soldiers in there that fill the roles.

[Wintersandman]

I don't get why people are so upset about this change unless they are doing it for experience or poetics. That was the only time I queued up for MSQ. I dreaded it everytime. CM and Prae aren't that fun and people have been skipping the story since 2.0 and people have been complaining about it since then. If you don't like the change then don't do it as previously someone else said. There is no reason to do this except for the first time unless you are there for the exp or poetics. I would watch a newbie almost every night get locked out in cutscenes. I would watch some newbies get caught in perma cutscenes. I actually agree with this change.

[Hestzhyen]

ITT: "I didn't read the OP but I want to let everyone know that skipping long cutscenes is terrible and you should feel bad for doing the MSQ roulette with motives other than helping newbies."

I don't get why people are so upset about this change unless they are doing it for experience or poetics. That was the only time I queued up for MSQ. I dreaded it everytime. CM and Prae aren't that fun and people have been skipping the story since 2.0 and people have been complaining about it since then. If you don't like the change then don't do it as previously someone else said. There is no reason to do this except for the first time unless you are there for the exp or poetics. I would watch a newbie almost every night get locked out in cutscenes. I would watch some newbies get caught in perma cutscenes. I actually agree with this change.

This is about letting people who go into the instance unsynced (read: with a pre-made group, likely with some level 50+ help) skip the cutscenes if they want to. There are like a dozen other threads to complain in about the merits of the change itself. Though it's been so far derailed already that I guess it doesn't matter any more.

SE needs to do some serious work on their back-end and the supporting infrastructure. They can probably make do for another few years with what they have but all these highly visible limitations will become bad press sooner or later. Forced CS played at a nonadjustable rate (even in inns!), regardless of party type or composition, is not good design. If people deliberately go in as undersized let them do what they want regarding the story scenes.

[Wintersandman]

This is about letting people who go into the instance unsynced (read: with a pre-made group, likely with some level 50+ help) skip the cutscenes if they want to. There are like a dozen other threads to complain in about the merits of the change itself.

Ok 2 dungeons with an unskippable cutscene you run through once each. 90 minutes of your life versus 35 is worth 6 pages of discussion. When we had years of prae complaints. People have spent more time complaining about the change then doing the one run each.

Here complaints started at least 3 years ago and have been going on longer. I also did read and it doesn't change my stance.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...g-the-cutscene

Here is another post from less than a month ago. The people who were forced to skip or got told "Watch them in the inn" didn't have a choice in not doing these dungeons.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...Fix-Praetorium

If it truly bugs people that much then don't do them.

[Hestzhyen]

Ok 2 dungeons with an unskippable cutscene you run through once each. 90 minutes of your life versus 35 is worth 6 pages of discussion. When we had years of prae complaints. People have spent more time complaining about the change then doing the one run each.

Here complaints started at least 3 years ago and have been going on longer. I also did read and it doesn't change my stance.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...g-the-cutscene

Again, this thread is about letting people who go in with a pre-made group skip them if they want to. Now that the MSQ roulette is enforcing the "intended" experience on everyone, why not let the people who have already seen the story or don't care to sit through all the CSes skip them if they don't go in via the roulette? I also ran those dungeons back in '14 and was forced to skip the cutscenes when i70 was hot stuff, but that doesn't have any bearing on asking for unsynced options in 2018. Flip-flopping who has the poor experience isn't a good answer. SE can do better.

Believe it or not, there are new players who just want to bum-rush their way to the current end-game. There are players with alts. There are people who cannot devote the time to watch them all in one sitting, people who can read faster than the text crawls, people who need more time than the auto-play allows... If someone goes through the trouble of gathering some friends to do it as an undersized/unsynced party, let them control how they experience it. Especially if they don't want to watch the story at all.

[BillyKaplan]

If it truly bugs people that much then don't do them.

Kind of impossible to do if I'm bringing an alt up through story and can't afford to shell the gil for a story-skip per alt, isn't it? Also no one is saying how things were was ok. But basically every person in favor of the change has an all or nothing approach where if you don't like this change you must've been ok with how things were before and that's just stupid. None of the posts you linked matter because two wrongs don't make a right. This isn't how they should've fixed it.