Please remove main scenario dungeon restriction when doing it undersized

[Jijifli]

When I ran castrum for the first time I was kicked from around 10 groups for watching the CS. People are impatient and rude even after stating if you are new and want to watch the CS. Having to watch the CS by force is SE saying “stop being aholes”.

I've never seen anyone kicked for watching cutscenes.

The only time it's even brought up in my experience is people acting high and mighty for the newbie like they'll get some action tonight over doing it.

[Vstarstruck]

Two wrongs don't make a right. No one's saying the way things were was fine, but this is stupid. And two weeks in, SE is already upping the awards, so that should tell everyone everything there is to know.

+1

I've never seen anyone kicked for watching cutscenes.

The only time it's even brought up in my experience is people acting high and mighty for the newbie like they'll get some action tonight over doing it.

Same here, the only other situation i seen where it might of been a possibility of them simply watching CS is that they are standing at the entrance or taking too long. Then someone asks are you there or afk? about 5 mins later without a reply a vote is thrown.

[Hestzhyen]

Do people see "MSQ Roulette" and "cutscenes" and ignore everything else to complain about how evil veteran players are to newbies now?

Absolutely get rid of the must-watch restriction when people go in as undersized. If someone wants a guaranteed "as intended" experience, they now have the MSQ Roulette. If someone just wants to get through the dungeons without the hassle of being forced to watch the story, then by God let them do it. Not all new players are interested in the story and there are plenty of people with alts that have been through the story on their main already.

[Vstarstruck]

Do people see "MSQ Roulette" and "cutscenes" and ignore everything else to complain about how evil veteran players are to newbies now?

Absolutely get rid of the must-watch restriction when people go in as undersized. If someone wants a guaranteed "as intended" experience, they now have the MSQ Roulette. If someone just wants to get through the dungeons without the hassle of being forced to watch the story, then by God let them do it. Not all new players are interested in the story and there are plenty of people with alts that have been through the story on their main already.

They need to revert to how it used to be at least in undersized/ preform min ilevel options, and inn. If they can't split the different styles and need go with one, it should be the way it was before 4.2. I see no reason at all to change something this old so late outside making them solo.

[Krotoan]

Do people see "MSQ Roulette" and "cutscenes" and ignore everything else to complain about how evil veteran players are to newbies now?

Absolutely get rid of the must-watch restriction when people go in as undersized. If someone wants a guaranteed "as intended" experience, they now have the MSQ Roulette. If someone just wants to get through the dungeons without the hassle of being forced to watch the story, then by God let them do it. Not all new players are interested in the story and there are plenty of people with alts that have been through the story on their main already.

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?

[Vstarstruck]

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?

then they shouldn't of changed it at all, why are you defending this? If forcing people to view cutscenes is the reason Eureka is delayed, it makes it an even bigger joke

[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.

[JaakRoot]

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. To be white knight, you need to defend a cause that it is obliviously opposite of what you are personally thinking and just defend for the lulz or because everything SE do is blessed by god. I liked the change very much and some other people too. We are defending another side of how to play this game which should be heard as well as yours.

However, I totally agree that they did a mistake putting cutscenes in the first place during a duty. I am not trying to defend that and I would be called white knight if. They probably did not foresee this problem back then. Now they need to correct their mistakes and choose which side the please: Newbies or Vets. They also need to think about technical and resources constraints. I am defending their choice to try to make it right for the side of new players.

I mean I can see clearly their thinking: These duties are for Newbies only, let please the noobs first so they can at least experience, somewhat,a real Final Fantasy ENDING which is our brand signature with a change that do not take us too much time to do (I am guessing) as it does not concerns the majority of the playerbase anyway. We will probably have some complaints and it will make MSQ roulette queue longer, we will increase the rewards and see how it goes. Let focus on pleasing vets with end game contents (Eureka seems the talk on forum, dunno what it is lol ) instead of 2 hours of CSs MSQ .....

For alts and noobs that want to skip unsync ( dont't think it is a majority really ....), well too bad, but we will decide to make them loose 2 hours of their life watching our cutscenes (because it is too long to change ? if it is an easy fix, then they would have done it wouldn't they ?)... If they loose subscription because of this which represent less than 1% of the game life duration, this subscription would not last long anyway. They won mine for sure.

My 2 cents

[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.