MSQ Difficulty and Exclusion

[Seera1024]

Eraden, your post could easily be interpreted the way Mosha read it. Maybe next time when someone misinterprets what you said instead of assuming malice/bad logic on their part, rephrase what you said.

In the case of this post:

"I didn't mean to come off as talking for all disabled players. I apologize. I meant that some disabled players may not be able to complete the MSQ if difficulty is increased."


As for the OP, given the intent of the MSQ is for people to have an easy time getting through it, it's a fine line between making things interesting for those players who prefer savage tier difficulty and keeping things easy enough to keep a vast majority of the player base from having issues progressing. I wouldn't mind things getting a little more difficult, but I don't know if we're at the point where any more difficult would cross the line or not.

[Eraden]

Eraden, your post could easily be interpreted the way Mosha read it. Maybe next time when someone misinterprets what you said instead of assuming malice/bad logic on their part, rephrase what you said.

In the case of this post:

"I didn't mean to come off as talking for all disabled players. I apologize. I meant that some disabled players may not be able to complete the MSQ if difficulty is increased."


As for the OP, given the intent of the MSQ is for people to have an easy time getting through it, it's a fine line between making things interesting for those players who prefer savage tier difficulty and keeping things easy enough to keep a vast majority of the player base from having issues progressing. I wouldn't mind things getting a little more difficult, but I don't know if we're at the point where any more difficult would cross the line or not.

If that is the case then yes, I could have worded the original post better. I did however in subsequent posts made it clear that I was not speaking for all elderly and disabled persons and yet those two particular posters kept doubling down on their initial assumptions. I can only assume at that point that malice was involved. It was especially troubling when one of them decided that maybe I should not be playing these games. I thought games like this were meant to be inclusive.

[Striker44]

If that is the case then yes, I could have worded the original post better. I did however in subsequent posts made it clear that I was not speaking for all elderly and disabled persons and yet those two particular posters kept doubling down on their initial assumptions. I can only assume at that point that malice was involved. It was especially troubling when one of them decided that maybe I should not be playing these games. I thought games like this were meant to be inclusive.

It's also telling that they tried using that to divert the course of the entire discussion after realizing how many people pointed out the flaws and selfishness of their approach. They turned it into an attack on you instead of actually keeping it on topic, because they knew that topic was a losing battle.

[Eraden]

It's also telling that they tried using that to divert the course of the entire discussion after realizing how many people pointed out the flaws and selfishness of their approach. They turned it into an attack on you instead of actually keeping it on topic, because they knew that topic was a losing battle.

I mean, there is tough content in this game (savage tier) that I will never be able to participate in and that's ok. It gives something challenging for the better players to handle and I am happy for them. I just wish they (and by they I mean those who have been asking for things to be made harder) wouldn't keep trying to get the core MSQs made harder with no alternatives for those of us who already struggle from time to time.

[Kamatsu]

It's also telling that they tried using that to divert the course of the entire discussion after realizing how many people pointed out the flaws and selfishness of their approach. They turned it into an attack on you instead of actually keeping it on topic, because they knew that topic was a losing battle.

I've seen this tactic used elsewhere by some in the "Make the game harder for everyone!" crowd (not all do this, but some do) - try and redirect and turn discussions into attacks on ppl opposed to forced harder difficulty, especially when the majority of response to the calls for forced difficulty rises has been negative.

What I see getting the most positive response to is something I mentioned before - ways of adding in optional / opt-in difficulty for those who want it, while leaving the easier content there for those who want it. This has always garnered more support where I've seen it, but you still get ppl pushing for forced difficulty rises, insults tossed at anyone who disagrees with them, calls for ppl to leave if they are against forced difficulty hikes, etc. Although to be fair, I've also seen a fair share of hate being spewed at those who want harder content (including those pushing for opt-in / optional harder as well) by ppl as well. Though that is usually less of the case.

I'll say it again - I think that there should be optional harder options for those who want it. SE has shown that it is possible, even with XIV's scambled-egg coding.

- Add in an option for MSQ solo duties to be scaled up as well as down.

Right now there is scaling in place so that if someone fails a solo duty, the game will offer to let you tone the fight down to 'Easy' or 'Very Easy', adjusting the fight's hp, dmg, mechanics to various level's (although the mechanics part might only be for 1 specific EW duty, I'm not certain). Why not have another 1-2 options which scale the fights the other way? Add more dmg, hp, mechanics (if possible) to MSQ solo duties... but have it as an 'opt in' option in the player options menu, or offered to players when they start the duty.

- For dungeons / trials / etc add another Duty Roulette where everything is done at forced min ilvl & level.

There is a fairly big difference in being scaled down and min ilvl in dungeons. So having forced min ilvl would mean even high level players coming in would find it harder / more challenging than if they were just scaled down as usual. Make them equivalant of the lowest level allowed in the dungeon, with the lowest ilvl. Biggest downside to this is going to the be queue times - as many, many games have shown... p[layers interested in harder content are a small(er) portion of a player-base, so would have few players using this DR. Yet if they are willing to put up with the longer wait times, they will get their harder dungeons/trials/raids.

Or if min-ilvl doesn't work, have a separate DR for a buffed dungeon/trial/raid. Buff the hp, dmg, etc of mobs... but make ppl queue for it via a different queue (but obviously still count for MSQ/quests). Same issue as forced min ilvl - longer queue times as fewer will use this queue... but it gives you the harder fdungeon/trial/raid you want.

- Petition SE to spend money opening a World designed purely for the hardcore.

Make the world much harder, give open world mobs more hp, dmg, better skills, etc. Make it a choice for players who want everything to take longer, be harder, etc. If they want it, they can roll / transfer to this server where everything is harder... and clearly mark the world as HARD so no complaints about it being too hard. Completely optional, and won't effect those not interested in harder content (unless they foolishly go there).

Although considering how stingy SE is for XIV, I'd realistically give this 2 chances of happening: Buckley's and None.

- Add in 'debuff' food.

This is another option for ppl who want things harder. Add in food that can be bought from NPC's, that's clearly labelled as debuff food, that will lower your stats. Same as changing gear to lower gear really, but lets you meet dungeon/raid/trial ilvl requirements, while lowering your hp, dmg, healing, etc respectively. This way you can make things harder for yourself... although this will effect others because if your doing less dmg/healing and the only 1 with the debuff, then your group wil suffer. So maybe make it only active when solo, when in a solo msq duty, or if everyone in the group has the debuff on them.

Just some thoughts from me. Optional is the best way to go IMO, and likely the only thing that the XIV's team will likely work with anyways. they have shown that as soon as the common player hits a roadblock and starts complaining... they lower the roadblock (ie lower the difficulty: see The Steps of Faith for clear example of this). So why not push for optional / opt-in changes that won't put roadblocks in the way of others, while giving you the harder experience you want? Seems win-win to me.

[Eraden]

I've seen this tactic used elsewhere by some in the "Make the game harder for everyone!" crowd (not all do this, but some do) - try and redirect and turn discussions into attacks on ppl opposed to forced harder difficulty, especially when the majority of response to the calls for forced difficulty rises has been negative.

What I see getting the most positive response to is something I mentioned before - ways of adding in optional / opt-in difficulty for those who want it, while leaving the easier content there for those who want it.

I like your approach to this issue, Kamatsu. I certainly would have no problems with SE adding an optional harder level for the better players.