Grass

[Radacci]

You can't really compare aesthetics to activities man...they're not the same thing.

Your rebuttal uses activities such as fishing crafting, raiding etc, when trying to defend your position about grass being an element. You're trying to compare apples and oranges.

Grass, terrains, skies with clouds...they all exist for aesthetic purposes. Do they enhance the experience? Sure. Are they interactive? No. they exist purely as eye candy.

That is not the same as fishing, crafting, or other things you've mentioned. You are right in that these activities alone aren't the main focus of the game, but these activities TOGETHER balance the gameplay and offer a different level of experience (interactivity), than just staring at grass as you run by somewhere.

I was simply pointing out the stupidity of pointing people to other games, if you mention that you want this or that to be better. such as *grass is good as it is, if you like grass so much, go play flower, XIV might not be for you* seriously? Just cause we want grass to improve, doesn't mean we play for the grass; we're here cause we wanna play XIV. Whatever examples i use doesn't really matter, it's the same principal; i heard the same argument in jump threads too, or with auto attacks, and with other suggestions; you get people saying: well if you don't like it, go play WoW instead!
And you could make grass, landscape, clouds interactive too you could have high grass, where mobs can hide, and ambush you. you may need to climb a mountain, to reach that cave,,,that is hidden in a sea of clouds.

That is a really "stupid" analogy about fishing. You reply with spite, and you will get spite back.

I was just pointing out a game that does environmental physics really well. If you decide to play it, it is up to you.

Although since you like using fish as an analogy..
Someone cooks you a fairly nicely cooked fish that is much better then the last time they cooked it for you.
Do you return the plate and say "Could you cook it a little longer next time round?"
Because this is essentially what you are doing.

The grass is perfectly fine. I have played games with "better" grass, and I have played games with worse. I would rather see the resources going into content that actually matters to most people. SE do a pretty good job of attention to detail in regards to graphics.

that's odd analogy...you can overcook fish, then it won't be good anymore. there's no such thing as making grass look to good But sure if someone makes a better dish, what's wrong with pointing out it was better, and making suggestions to make it better still? i'm not gonna say no thank you, take this back, and make it better; Or in case of XIV bleh crappy game can't make grass right, im going to flower, until you fix it.
and grass looks like lego, i don't know how that's an improvement?

Well, as has been pointed out several times before, there's different teams for different things.
Adding grass is the same process as adding trees, rocks, rivers, buildings, or anything else with environment. It does NOT affect other things like adding new classes, housing, raid mechanics or whatever.
Since they made the whole meteor thing, to justify a remake of the maps and such; and the fact that they have remade all the maps, to not be copy-paste; then obviously the landscape IS important! otherwise they wouldn't have bothered!
If they wanna make trees look nice, and cool looking environmental stuff, then why sell yourself short on grass? if everything else looks great, and grass is ugly, it's gonna be like a crack in your monitor, that is distracting.
Why have real flowers at home, when you can have lego flowers?