Linear, linear, linear

[Ghost_of_Ebina]

It seems the overall direction to make sure every "required" dungeon needs to be possible to beat with NPC parties, they had to dumb-down everything.
However, even then it seems even the non-required dungeons are largely linear these days.

[TheMightyMollusk]

It seems the overall direction to make sure every "required" dungeon needs to be possible to beat with NPC parties, they had to dumb-down everything.
However, even then it seems even the non-required dungeons are largely linear these days.

It started long before squads and trusts. Way back in ARR, Snowcloak and Keeper of the Lake were very linear. Probably some earlier, too, but I have a headache.

[Absurdity]

It started long before squads and trusts. Way back in ARR, Snowcloak and Keeper of the Lake were very linear. Probably some earlier, too, but I have a headache.

While the linear dungeon design started relatively early it is undeniable that the introduction of Trusts and Duty support has made it even worse. We just need to look at the old dungeon redesigns that suck even the last shred of variety out of them so the bots can complete it.

[TheMightyMollusk]

While the linear dungeon design started relatively early it is undeniable that the introduction of Trusts and Duty support has made it even worse. We just need to look at the old dungeon redesigns that suck even the last shred of variety out of them so the bots can complete it.

Honestly, I've found a lot of them to be improvements anyway. Does anyone actually miss waiting forever for the first two bosses in Copperbell to actually do anything?

[Absurdity]

Honestly, I've found a lot of them to be improvements anyway. Does anyone actually miss waiting forever for the first two bosses in Copperbell to actually do anything?

Copperbell is probably one of the few examples where I would agree that the changes, at least to bosses, are justified. I personally dislike the removal of the already limited interactions with the environment however.

It still falls under baby's first dungeon and while I never had an issue with the add fights (I still remember when they didn't die in a single hit) it is understandable that they were replaced with an introduction to what boss mechanics are going to look like.

The fact that modern fights can be boiled down to stack, spread, dodge the cleave, is a different discussion entirely.

[AmiableApkallu]

Honestly, I've found a lot of them to be improvements anyway. Does anyone actually miss waiting forever for the first two bosses in Copperbell to actually do anything?

I actually do think the changes to Copperbell removed a fair bit of the dungeon's character. Two "bosses" that weren't simply the now-standard tank-and-spank.

[Kazhar]

Remember, SE has engagement metrics that we don't have. If they continue designing and expanding on things like Variant Dungeons, it's because they didn't fumble them, and people by and large are enjoying and playing them.

No, this isn't as cut and dry.
Variant Dungeons were already announced for 6.4 and 6.5 before the first one was even released, so having more isn't indicative of their success. It was part of their original planning after all, not exactly something you can cancel in the middle of the expac unless this was a complete disaster which made them lose tons of money.
Also, you could very well imagine a scenario where, despite its poor reception, SE could believe that the system still have potential and only need slight changes. After all, you can't judge an entire new gameplay system with only just one sample (maybe the reception could be better with different rewards, or different lore, or different bosses, etc.)
And lastly, I don't believe it's applicable here, but some features could stay despite their relative unpopularity because they require basically no cost to maintain (like unreal trials).
So no, more variant/criterion this expac doesn't necessarily mean it was well received.
We'll see when they announce the 7.0 features.

[Striker44]

No, this isn't as cut and dry.
Variant Dungeons were already announced for 6.4 and 6.5 before the first one was even released, so having more isn't indicative of their success. It was part of their original planning after all, not exactly something you can cancel in the middle of the expac unless this was a complete disaster which made them lose tons of money.
Also, you could very well imagine a scenario where, despite its poor reception, SE could believe that the system still have potential and only need slight changes. After all, you can't judge an entire new gameplay system with only just one sample (maybe the reception could be better with different rewards, or different lore, or different bosses, etc.)
And lastly, I don't believe it's applicable here, but some features could stay despite their relative unpopularity because they require basically no cost to maintain (like unreal trials).
So no, more variant/criterion this expac doesn't necessarily mean it was well received.
We'll see when they announce the 7.0 features.

I'm curious if you realize the contradictions within that post. You're simultaneously claiming that they would continue making them regardless of how they were received, but also acknowledging they could cancel them even mid-expansion if they really didn't work...which necessarily implies that they're doing fine since they're continuing with the plan to make more of them...

[Kazhar]

I'm curious if you realize the contradictions within that post. You're simultaneously claiming that they would continue making them regardless of how they were received, but also acknowledging they could cancel them even mid-expansion if they really didn't work...which necessarily implies that they're doing fine since they're continuing with the plan to make more of them...

huh... is this an attempt at a gotcha?
I just acknowledged that they could possibly cancel content if it's a big disaster. There's a huge scale between "massive success the silent majority loves it" and "so bad it needs to be cancelled or Square Enix will lose money". Just clearing that later condition doesn't make a content successful.

[Post]

They're better received than HW Diadem was. Maybe Diadem was also a case of the team still being smaller and more responsive, given they had a shorter production schedule, or the feedback was more keenly heard because written letters and live letters were more common and YoshiP wasn't producing another major game at the time, but they also didn't wholesale trash Diadem even though players almost entirely disliked it.

Players asked for more interesting small group content for a long time, and that's why they even tried variant dungeons. Even if they weren't as venerable as deep dungeons or exploratory zones, those things weren't in their first outings, either. They did say they planned to release multiple variant dungeons this expansion, and they're usually good about keeping their promises barring pandemics or industry-wide sales milestones. I think it's reasonable to expect they'll be more given their plan and that most players enjoyed them for at least a little while, and if it didn't meet their goals, I expect they'll try things slightly differently and improve it.

I would be satisfied even if they if just came away from variants discovering some way to breathe life into all dungeons. The miniboss doing different stuff on different versions is awesome imo and keeps things fresher longer on repeats.

I'm sure the poster realizes the contradictions because we're not talking about some kind of rigid ruleset, we're talking about a team of human developers with priorities, schedules and even families. Having a plan is a good plan, but plans aren't written in stone.