Thread: 4.25 and beyond

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

Not necessarily. Something can be bad, without the other part being good.

And again, WHY do people hate fates? I understand that they do, but WHY. I don't think I've ever seen someone actually say why. I find them fine personally.

Partly because fates are nothing more than braindead zerg fests just throw bodies at them till you win and fly to the next one.

The other issue is something that goes way back to even before beta. Fates were meant to be these dynamic active time events that impacted the world. Yet they dont have any impact at all.

There's a fate where hyrstmil gets attacked for example. Yet nothing changes whether that fate is won or lost. Hyrstmil is exactly the same either way thus the fate has no impact and is pointless. Every other fate is the same. They have zero impact on the game world and that makes them all pointles

Going back to the hyrstmil one and taking a reference from besieged in xi. If eorzea was a living dynamic world where things had impact. A group of players back in the day might have gone to hyrstmil to speak to Jez and do some relic only to find he's be abducted. Because the last attack on hyrstmil was a success. Now players have to go and rescue him and any other missing people in order to progress relic..

They could have even expanded on it as well by allowing crafters and gathers to repair buildings / fortify the defences. So that next time that fate popped and hyrstmil was attacked there might be more npcs to help or something. Could have made a nice alternative to levels and stuff for crafters and gatherers to level up. And it would have made the game world so much more alive and interesting