The problem with Tripling Down on Shadowbringers Job Design

[Mikey_R]

You yourself said you were offered a sarcastic answer. I assumed you were discussing SCH because it was a multiple dot job, I didn’t provide input on that you are the one who said you were provided a sarcastic answer

It was actually a jab at the one person who responded to my initial post who said 'Having more than 2 buttons to press'. Which was clearly not said in good faith and yet has 16 likes (as of this post).

And when I said reverse I didn’t mean reverse statement I meant the reverse argument. The idea that complexity exists on a balance between all in the job and all in the encounter. You are arguing that complexity comes from the encounter as the job becomes instinct, I said your own logic of instinct taking over can be applied to the reverse argument that instinct can take over on the encounter once you have done it as well. Therefore the statement “once you get good things become easier” becomes a totally moot statement because it can be used to argue both sides of a diametrically opposed argument

They aren't diametrically opposed, they are 2 sides of the same coin. They both need to function together to make something fun.

Difficulty has to come from both sides or you wind up on the healer situation. If every job pressed 11111111111 then you could make most savages as hard mechanically as TOP because there is no job difficulty. Encounters should facilitate differences in job complexity to lead to differing results. The best example of this is T7 (if anyone even remembers T8 at this point). The fight isn’t excessively mechanically challenging but it does challenge your kit and force you to solve it different ways which plays into what each job offered at the time. Your rotation wasn’t static and played into each other

I never said otherwise. In this case it is encounter design enabling the strengths and weaknesses of each job. You also have to remember this was in a time that jobs were much simpler and less emphasis was placed on pure damage. But more bosses with ways to change their behaviour, or more RNG mechanics. One thing I noticed throughout EW, if an extreme encounter has a mechanic that is either, say a donut or point blank AoE, the first time might be random between the 2, the next will always be the other. Why not make that second on RNG as well. Things like that. I've talked in the past about changing stuns/interrupts to change damage profiles of attacks rather than straight up stopping them etc.

There is also the question of casual content that must be included in the discussion as pushing encounter difficulty above all else makes casual content beige as hell for any job

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Job complexity and encounter complexity go hand in hand. Yes, you need fights that are easier so that people can get through the story, but no amount of perceived job complexity is going to make that encounter more exciting to do, especially if you are used to doing extreme/savage/ultimate fights.

As for job complexity, no, I'm not looking for something that's eternally complex, because that's not feasible. What I'm looking for is something complex to master that is also consistently engaging. A small example of an engaging mechanic would be RDM, the engagement comes from watching your Fleche/Contre Sixte timers and deciding whether or not you have to use Acceleration to prevent cooldown drifting at that moment. Reacting to RNG is also something consistently engaging.

As a RDM player who only plays it casually, I took this as a bit of an easy thing to look at. Assuming you do not have time for both Fleche and Acceleration in the dual cast window, surely, there would be one that is better and so that one would be prioritised.

Now, I didn't get an answer to that question directly, I literally spent 5-10 minutes on the balance discord, I did find something else out that I hadn't considered and that is the parity RDM has between hard casts and insta casts and the fact it flips every time you do a melee combo. This might not seem like much but it is important if you want to maximise your 2 minute windows. You would assume you need to enter the 2 minute window on a certain parity, so coming out of 1 melee combo and having the parity flipped means you would need to flip it again. Acceleration and Swiftcast can both do this. This could also be a case of lining up your oGCDs, if you know they line up with one parity and not the other, swapping to a certain parity before hand could mean less drift in the oGCDs. Then there is also movement to consider etc.

Now, again, I am by no means a RDM expert, I only play it casually so I have no idea how much this impacts someone, however, assuming it is relevant, would this class as complexity? It would also be nice to know if this is something high level RDMs actually consider.

Obviously there's a 'puzzle' aspect about jobs. You need to figure out mechanics, which are superficially complex even nowadays. Most jobs seems unintuitive because the game does a really bad job with its tooltips, but with a few days of practice one might get it. Beyond that is what we don't have, which is engagement as job complexity.

I do agree with most of your post and it highlights what I have been trying to get at. Just increasing job complexity won't solve anything.

However, I will disagree with your point on jobs being unintuitive. I would say most jobs are intuitive if you go about learning them the right way. Most jobs just build on what came before, so, learning the level 50 rotation is a good baseline, learn up to 60, shouldn't be too hard, they just build up on the 50 rotation, up to level 70, again just builds on top of it, then 80, 90 and soon 100. That is really all there is to building a basic rotation that will get you through all pieces of casual content. The good thing is, once you have this knowledge, and you plan to go into Extreme/Savage/Ultimate, since you already have the baseline knowledge, it will be easier to parse the recommended rotations.

[HappyHubris]

Since the only response I've had to my question on what actually would make a job complex is a sarcastic response, I think it is safe to say noone really knows what complexity is. The closest response I have got was in another topic, where the question I asked was slightly different. That question was on job difficulty and the only response I got was having multiple DoTs with different timings. Whilst this might seem 'difficult' at first, you will soon get used to when you refresh your DoTs based on instinct and also where you are in your rotation.

Which brings home the point. You cannot make something complex that stays complex once you master it. You can make a system where the resources you have form a web in how they interact, but there will still be one way that it seems to flow the best. Once you have this, after some practice, the underlying web becomes a non issue and intuition takes over. The complexity has now seemingly been taken out of the job.

This is why I ask, what actually counts as complexity, what makes a job complex and most importantly, why would your 'complexity' stay complex even after mastery?

Complexity is easy to explain by comparing classes.

PLD is more complex than Warrior. Warrior has one gauge that you fill up with 1-2-3 (and 1-2-5 every 30s to keep a buff up). You spend the gauge for damage. When the burst phase comes you click the "free fell cleave" button, spend your gauge and free charges, and then click your other free charges button twice to get more spenders off. In PLD, you have to manage both mana and blocky block gauges, you deploy two buffs in your burst phase, you have an additional mitigation spender, and your static rotation involves not just 1-2-3 but a free spender and mana recharge swings. Your burst rotation also involves a multi-part finisher series. Oh, and you have two oGCDs instead of one.

BRD is more complex than summoner. You're maintaining DoTs, watching for procs, and managing songs. Etc.

[Mikey_R]

Complexity is easy to explain by comparing classes.

To an extent, I can agree with that sentiment. However, it also doesn't address the question. I can compare 2 jobs and come to a conclusion that one is more complex than the other. Fine, what if someone else comes along and says, I don't agree. Who is right?

Therein lies the issue. That grey area in the middle that noone really knows what it means. This is why it is important to define such terms and, if they cannot be defined, then a better explanation should be added. I think Job A needs more complexity and in my opinion, they could do that by doing something along the lines of X. That way at least people have an understanding of what what someone means via an explanation. As you have done, by comparing 2 Jobs, you compare the before and after for the job and analyse it to see what potentially comes of it.

Definitely a difficult thing to pin down.

I'm still searching for other ways of describing what I feel SMN is lacking, though I probably don't think it lacks as much as others do. I'm currently starting from a concept of input depth -- the sequence of memorization required to process the rotation. I do think they have some interesting input variance at least at 90. The fast-paced A,b,A,b,A,b,A,b for Titan compared to A,A,A,A, long B for Garuda and long A, long A, B, B for Ifrit. Mostly I think it needs help in other areas because A,A,A,A,A for Astral Impulse and Fountain of Fire if given an oGCD will just make it feel like the Titan input sequence.

I think Summoner is missing an overarching mechanic (After typing everything I am adding this in. I want to say it is missing some sort of build up. That ramp up to the burst). Something that takes summoning the primals to do and helps to break up the monotony of pressing the same button. One thing I notice is that Demi Summons do not use the Gemshine button and the Lego summons do not use Enkindle. Starting with the Lego Summons, there is no reason you couldn't have it activate and on use, it summons Shiva/Levi/Ramuh for an attack. Could be an oGCD, could be a GCD, let's have fun with it. We can then say, by using Enkindle here, you build up another resource, call it Zantetsuken gauge. Then, once you have your Demis out, gemshine turns into Zantetsuken and you effectively have a combo, on the oGCD, that is weaved between the Demi attacks.

What people think of that idea, who knows. Just spit balling ideas.

[HappyHubris]

To an extent, I can agree with that sentiment. However, it also doesn't address the question. I can compare 2 jobs and come to a conclusion that one is more complex than the other. Fine, what if someone else comes along and says, I don't agree. Who is right?

Therein lies the issue. That grey area in the middle that noone really knows what it means. This is why it is important to define such terms and, if they cannot be defined, then a better explanation should be added. I think Job A needs more complexity and in my opinion, they could do that by doing something along the lines of X. That way at least people have an understanding of what what someone means via an explanation. As you have done, by comparing 2 Jobs, you compare the before and after for the job and analyse it to see what potentially comes of it.

Definitely a difficult thing to pin down.

It's not, though. There are different types of complexity (e.g., proc based vs. memorized sequence based jobs), but almost everyone can agree that PLD is more complex than WAR or BLM is more complex than SMN - and we can ignore the wrong people.

You can reuse your text for anything in the world. "You and I agree that cows and cats are different species, but what if someone disagrees with us that they are different? It's tough to pin down!" You're just demanding busywork for the obvious. I can play SMN for 20 minutes and confirm that it's braindead and lacking complexity without pitching an entire class redesign to you.

[Aravell]

I find it extremely strange how people can spit on job complexity, calling it nothing but memorisation once you figure it out. Yet they also have nothing but praise for complex fights, even though the same thing applies, it's also nothing but memorisation, no?

As for job complexity, no, I'm not looking for something that's eternally complex, because that's not feasible. What I'm looking for is something complex to master that is also consistently engaging. A small example of an engaging mechanic would be RDM, the engagement comes from watching your Fleche/Contre Sixte timers and deciding whether or not you have to use Acceleration to prevent cooldown drifting at that moment. Reacting to RNG is also something consistently engaging.

Really, anything that can't be played entirely by a macro would be going in the right direction.

[MagiusNecros]

All the fights are heavily scripted. If fights in each phase had 5+ variations in what the AI(and if it's scripted AI is doing very little decision making anyway) decides to do then I might consider fights complex. Only thing that realistically makes fights hard is failing a mechanic and you get one shot(artificial difficulty) because of it which then leads to a party wipe if you can't meet a DPS check. And honestly all of the big fights in the game should have independent Tank, Healer, and DPS checks on top of party coordinated checks(you know like stack markers, party splits and the enrage where boss wipes raid if you don't kill the last 5% HP in time).

Job classes should have their each unique playstyle that separates themselves from everyone else instead of heading down the DPS Warrior Fell Cleave 2 minute meta rabbit hole where the only thing that separates them is aesthetics and appearance.

PvP does things right where jobs have a clear identity alongside a personal Limit Break that they build gauge for by doing stuff or overtime in combat. Give classes stuff that says "Only a BLM can do this and only a NIN can do that" would go a long way.

All the jobs in the game are easy to learn hard to master due to the necessity for everything to be accessible to everyone of all skill levels starting from rock bottom.

Only jobs I'd consider difficult or is the right word stressful is Healers. But it's not because of fight design. It's due to bad players causing the stress if they are bad at the game or just new to playing.

Until fight design starts off with easy stuff in ARR and then moves onto more complex things like stack markers and then even later on gives debuffs for players to keep track of it's going to remain faceroll.

And the only reason endgame fights were even hard was the gear they gave you kept you undergeared for the content on purpose. And once you get into what gear actually does it's actually pretty worthless in hindsight and you never feel stronger.

It's why your defense and DPS/HPS gets reset at the start of a new expansion. Feels awful half of the time.

Not really sure what the answer is. It amazes me that FFXI has great job complexity and identity and a subjob system that amplifies the main job you play but in XIV it is so cookie cutter in comparison.

But I think XIV has done things a certain way for so long it does not know how to do it any other way. It is a worn leather shoe that is rough and rigid and you've just grown accustomed to wearing it you can't imagine wearing anything else.

[LianaThorne]

Not really sure what the answer is. It amazes me that FFXI has great job complexity and identity and a subjob system that amplifies the main job you play but in XIV it is so cookie cutter in comparison.

Perhaps that's why, maybe they wanted to get away from their identity in FFXI and create something more appealing to a wider audience. The reality is, not everyone wants to sit and do mental math over what attack is better in each situation or consider cooldown drifting and things like that. Some people want to just sit down, push buttons and complete content quickly without too much thought behind it. The study I linked above basically shows that strategy/critical thinking in video games is on a downward trend. We also had sub jobs here originally but they were removed, most likely at the request of the player base.

I think times are just changing and Square is trying to future-proof for the majority and the incoming generations who are being raised on short-form media/TikTok (media that doesn't require much brain power to comprehend). Those who want something complex just might not be their target audience anymore.

[MagiusNecros]

Perhaps that's why, maybe they wanted to get away from their identity in FFXI and create something more appealing to a wider audience. The reality is, not everyone wants to sit and do mental math over what attack is better in each situation or consider cooldown drifting and things like that. Some people want to just sit down, push buttons and complete content quickly without too much thought behind it. The study I linked above basically shows that strategy/critical thinking in video games is on a downward trend. We also had sub jobs here originally but they were removed, most likely at the request of the player base.

I think times are just changing and Square is trying to future-proof for the majority and the incoming generations who are being raised on short-form media/TikTok (media that doesn't require much brain power to comprehend). Those who want something complex just might not be their target audience anymore.

Sure. On the same token though I never saw anything wrong with cone AoEs or Samurai Kaiten. Stuff like that made the jobs engaging to play and there wasn't any math to form out. It was pretty clear cut and dry. Use skill to buff the next skill or stand here for the most amount of cleave. Instead of making everything a circle or removing that extra step.

Now it's just Attack A now always has auto crit.

But you are correct they want to draw in a more casual crowd that isn't required to think. Been that way for a while. Started in Shadowbringers. The signs were there in Stormblood. More began to notice in Endwalker.

Subjobs in XIV was just some cheap Cross Class skills. Subjobs in other iterations of the franchise either had you use other jobs skills or had you acquire traits from other jobs to boost the primary one. This can be seen in many either through the multiclass systems, materia, gear, and of course in standard job based games an Ability Point System.

I'd say if XIV wanted to branch out(it doesn't) they could implement a Mastery Point system that served to increase the effectiveness of a base job. Whether it's simple DPS increases, shorter cooldowns, slef buffs by going through the rotation, stat increases, changes in gameplay, faster Limit Break gain.

And that you only would gain Mastery Points after max level. So even after you maxed your job you always have something to work towards. Cuz you know a lot of people say "I got nothing to do".

Or instead of a relic weapon as they do you have a relic questchain that involves you acquiring gear for your offhand slot or a new slot in general and it alters a skill to do something else to change how you play the job in a completely different way. And if players wanted to metagame and cry about it you could just unequip it and use the base kit.

All perfectly fine ideas. But hey if the goal is to make the game so accessible it becomes boring to play that's a dev choice.

[LianaThorne]

Unsure if related but I watched a video recently on a study: https://quanticfoundry.com/2024/05/21/strategy-decline/ (Title: Gamers Have Become Less Interested in Strategic Thinking and Planning)

What it basically says is that over the last 9 or more years, the appeal of strategy based games/critical thinking/planning/etc. has decreased more than any of the other 11 motivations they tested (Destruction, Excitement, Competition, Community, Challenge, Completion, Power, Fantasy, Story, Design, Discovery).

A quote: "When we looked for long-term trends across the 12 motivations, we found that many motivations were stable or experienced minor deviations over the past 9 years. Strategy was the clear exception; it had substantially declined over the past 9 years and the magnitude of this change was more than twice the size of the next largest change."

It is also something that has been on a downward trend before Covid, the study shows that this has been occurring since as early as June 2015 but suggests it could even be earlier.

They end with the following:
"Even if the underlying cause(s) cannot be identified, it’s clear that gamers have become less interested in strategic thinking over the past 9 years. It implies that gamers are now more easily cognitively overloaded when they play games and are more likely to avoid strategic complexity. This has implications for game design and marketing. Overall, gamers now prefer shorter time horizons to plan for (i.e., the number of steps and branching outcomes they have to think through) and less complex decisions that rely on fewer parameters to consider."
---------
Basically, complexity isn't what gamers want anymore, at least the 1.7m+ that they tested over the past 9 years. It makes sense to me more now why the game has been "dumbing itself down", because ultimately the people who want complexity are now becoming the minority.

[Tint]

Jobs are complex if you have to make decisions. When you have to adapt your rotation to the encounter. When you can fail at the job.

BLM has a simple rotation, but you constantly have to adapt to the encounter. Old DRK was easy enough to play but you constantly had to keep your mana in balance, decide how to spend it, not running dry and not overcapping. You had to decide what to do with the old AST cards when you were drawing something unfavourable.

Everything is so streamlined now that you can not fail anymore (Huton becomes a trait) and every inconvenience gets removed (no RNG AST cards anymore). The game plays itself now, you are just pressing the buttons.