Like I said.no one say or think this what so ever.
its simple really if you can think that is.
we stay on yoshi and we have 10 more years of the SAME 1000% thing. more solo content , the same old and boring to death loop and on top of it GOOD msq that they cut short each time to jump to the next thing. like lets take the current msq. by 6.x they wasted all the interesting bosses and we left on one that is again an "evil being that is just misunderstood and really doing good thing for his people". like he can be an asian for all we care and nothing will change. then there the problem of the scions , we F disbanded stop use this characters for each story. get new one. hell at last helf the races if not more in the game are not even characters in the story . the scions by now are extremely bland and boring . they kill the story's they are part of.
now if we get some one new WE MAY GET NEW THING .
The FUNEE thing is unrealistically believing that the replacement would answer all of their prayers.
Ok how about this quote then. If it aint broke dont fix it?
We like to meme at the devs a lot for sure but asking for new blood when the current game is doing fine whether you like it or not is a stupid business move.
Its like firing somebody for being successful.
(Actually in hindsight, a lot of people make stupid business decisions anyway. But that still doesnt make it any less stupid)
how about fix it before it brakes as it to late when it is.Ok how about this quote then. If it aint broke dont fix it?
We like to meme at the devs a lot for sure but asking for new blood when the current game is doing fine whether you like it or not is a stupid business move.
Its like firing somebody for being successful.
(Actually in hindsight, a lot of people make stupid business decisions anyway. But that still doesnt make it any less stupid)
now at last being an argaman to the table like people here that like yoshi to stay did.
I think the things you're pointing out as broken are moreso related to personal taste than actually things that are breaking the game.
Yeah the OP asks for risks and when the risks are on things they didn't already enjoy or it didn't quite scratch the itch they were looking for they complain about the Devs not taking risks. Like V&C dungeons. They didn't hit the right with a lot, but it was a risk. Or people thought it would be exactly like something else from a different game so when it wasn't they saw it as a failure. Now we know we are supposed to be getting additional ones. So, they can build up on it. Though with how much hate it's getting why would the devs want to continue with it if your playerbase is going to treat it as DoA? Same thing with Island Sanctuary. Yoshida more than once told us to curtail our expectations and to not you know bum rush it like every other content out there. Yet look again at what happened.
It's the same thing with some of the things we got. People kept on asking to be able to play as NPCs and when we got the 1st one people asked for more. A lot asked to be able to haul around npcs in towns. To be able to explore a dungeon without the need to fight through it first. And now you have people who complain about these things and asked why do we have some of this stuff. It's there cause enough people asked for it.
People really have taken the notion that either the community is the reason why the game still exists..,(false, even if thirdparty additions died, the game would live on, as the original reason would still have people come and support it in gaps..,)
They've also taken the notion, that if something new shows up and it seems to replace what they want despite many logical alternatives as to why it was such, they'll bash it despite the fact its no less than decent.(like said in other threads with so called "Trolls", there is no story reason to have said content, or game reason atm.)
if switching out a person, who not only runs two ROLES, at the same time, who not only is in charge of managing a games development, and also has had blank checks in the past/is part of the board.
is a better option at all?
who would you replace them with, we all know they mess up at times, but people largely value someone who has a potential to listen beforehand(or if you wish to look at it that way, control) vs one who only does so when the company demands it, which is exactly what we would get I'd he was switched out.(we only need to look at other Companies who all had the same boat of Higher ups)
As I've said in many topics..,
We need to Push/Demand on the things that need fixing. Request QoL that improves the systems of the past and today. and Suggest additions that we want, that may not be as imperative or serious, but would overall enhance personal/subjective experiences.
But you can't ask for QoLs cause when we get them people complain that we didn't get content and ask why was this patch or as in Stormblood's case so much in the way of QoL? Only to complain about QoLs being needed for the content we got or they didn't like. All the while the same group asks the question of who the heck asked for this? Or how did this get like this? And all I want to do is groan and let out an exasperated sigh cause a lot act as though some of the changes and new things put into the game or on hold came out of the blue. And that no one asked for any of it.People really have taken the notion that either the community is the reason why the game still exists..,(false, even if thirdparty additions died, the game would live on, as the original reason would still have people come and support it in gaps..,)
They've also taken the notion, that if something new shows up and it seems to replace what they want despite many logical alternatives as to why it was such, they'll bash it despite the fact its no less than decent.(like said in other threads with so called "Trolls", there is no story reason to have said content, or game reason atm.)
if switching out a person, who not only runs two ROLES, at the same time, who not only is in charge of managing a games development, and also has had blank checks in the past/is part of the board.
is a better option at all?
who would you replace them with, we all know they mess up at times, but people largely value someone who has a potential to listen beforehand(or if you wish to look at it that way, control) vs one who only does so when the company demands it, which is exactly what we would get I'd he was switched out.(we only need to look at other Companies who all had the same boat of Higher ups)
As I've said in many topics..,
We need to Push/Demand on the things that need fixing. Request QoL that improves the systems of the past and today. and Suggest additions that we want, that may not be as imperative or serious, but would overall enhance personal/subjective experiences.
A new director won't necessarily equate to a better situation, in all honestly. He could arguably be replaced by someone far, far worse. Arguably, we've not really had a major success story within Square Enix for a long while, so thinking it would result in a more optimal situation is the equivalent of a pipedream.
Something else to consider is that regardless, he will always have someone to answer to, as would practically everyone else that you elect to put in his shoes. If the more senior/higher-ups in a game want to treat the game as a cash cow, by god there's not much anyone would be able to do about it.
More than anything, I would argue they just need a larger team, really. You know, so that getting B doesn't come at the expense of having less of A.
Last edited by Kaurhz; 02-25-2023 at 12:01 AM.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Cookie Policy
This website uses cookies. If you do not wish us to set cookies on your device, please do not use the website. Please read the Square Enix cookies policy for more information. Your use of the website is also subject to the terms in the Square Enix website terms of use and privacy policy and by using the website you are accepting those terms. The Square Enix terms of use, privacy policy and cookies policy can also be found through links at the bottom of the page.