+- Hydaelyn Role-Players (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18)
+-- Forum: Final Fantasy 14 (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=41)
+--- Forum: FFXIV Discussion (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Thread: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed (/showthread.php?tid=13117)
RE: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed - Aaron - 08-28-2015
(08-28-2015, 02:11 AM)Verad Wrote: I'm apathetic as to whether or not the content will be gated in future expansions, and will be basing my purchasing decisions on other criteria that will often seem shallow to more dedicated gamers.Everyone needs to do this. There'd be a lot less complaining.
Is anybody else going to do this?
RE: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed - Warren Castille - 08-28-2015
I know people love ignoring the convenient truths for the sake of being correct in a subjective argument (I do it all the time) but you all do recall SE bumping the MSQ exp when 3.0 came out, right?
People bitched to high heaven about how hard it would be to hit i90 before 3.0 and SE just added gear to the 2.x quests to help level it out. I'm happy that no gating will remove a bunch of angst from public conversation but I'm a little worried that it means people will be lacking actual experiences from things that will be added over the next four or five content patches. For example: You could always tell who'd glimpsed T5 when doing ST because anyone marked with the big ol' DIVEBOMB target would either run to the outside to not hit the entire raid (someone who's seen T5) or stand clustered and cause thousands of points of damage to everyone through ignorance.
Not a big deal, no, but discouraging.
Also, regarding WoW: Try to play WoD without having anything post-BC installed, and tell me how that goes.
RE: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed - Oli! - 08-28-2015
(08-28-2015, 05:47 AM)Calliope Cloverbloom Wrote: If they have in fact cut the exp in WoW that sharply, do again bear in mind we're talking about a nearly 11 year old game, not a 1 year old game... so we can't quite consider it apples to apples in terms of "get people hurried along to the most current content". For a great many players in a game so young as this, it's all current content.
This is a contradiction to an earlier stated point.
If a "new game" is "always new" to a new player, then the age of the game is irrelevant, because they have not played the content.
Yet, here it is stated that World of Warcraft's usage in the argument is irrelevant because of the game's age.
I'm not really sure what that has to do with the context of the argument anyway, but it's in direct contrast with what was stated before.
We must therefore decide whether a new game is Always New to a new player, or whether the age of the game somehow makes notable impact in the experience of someone who has never played something before.
RE: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed - Warren Castille - 08-28-2015
(08-28-2015, 10:22 AM)Oli! Wrote:(08-28-2015, 05:47 AM)Calliope Cloverbloom Wrote: If they have in fact cut the exp in WoW that sharply, do again bear in mind we're talking about a nearly 11 year old game, not a 1 year old game... so we can't quite consider it apples to apples in terms of "get people hurried along to the most current content". For a great many players in a game so young as this, it's all current content.
This is a contradiction to an earlier stated point.
If a "new game" is "always new" to a new player, then the age of the game is irrelevant, because they have not played the content.
Yet, here it is stated that World of Warcraft's usage in the argument is irrelevant because of the game's age.
I'm not really sure what that has to do with the context of the argument anyway, but it's in direct contrast with what was stated before.
We must therefore decide whether a new game is Always New to a new player, or whether the age of the game somehow makes notable impact in the experience of someone who has never played something before.
Solve for actual number of new players WoW draws with each expansion. WoW had what, ten million subs prior to WoD? Or immediately post-Cata? They lost three to four million over the life of the expansion. If WoW was seeing an influx of new players with each expac, they'd probably be louding "WoW eclipses 25 million accounts" instead of trying to talk about concurrent subscribers. XIV does this, too: They passed two million accounts recently, but didn't disclose active subs.
At this point I feel it's safe to say most people are going back to WoW, not trying it for the first time. XIV's new enough to still get legitimate new blood.
Additionally, grinding a new character in an old expansion world (BC, Wrath, Cata, Panda) doesn't really preclude the experiences you'd have playing during the lifetime of the package. Questing to cap and moving on isn't grinding dungeons or raids, or doing the World PVP, or doing anything besides flying up to the "actual game." For better or for worse, XIV forces players to see these things along the way. You can get to level cap in WoW without having ever done any dungeon ever. XIV forces you to see the entry-level trials and dungeons, and HW makes you put up with people at your level at least five or six times. Warcraft might as well be a solo game until the level cap.
RE: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed - Oli! - 08-28-2015
(08-28-2015, 10:31 AM)Warren Castille Wrote: Solve for actual number of new players WoW draws with each expansion. WoW had what, ten million subs prior to WoD? Or immediately post-Cata? They lost three to four million over the life of the expansion. If WoW was seeing an influx of new players with each expac, they'd probably be louding "WoW eclipses 25 million accounts" instead of trying to talk about concurrent subscribers. XIV does this, too: They passed two million accounts recently, but didn't disclose active subs.
At this point I feel it's safe to say most people are going back to WoW, not trying it for the first time. XIV's new enough to still get legitimate new blood.
That's all well and good, but what was being discussed was the experience of a new player booting up the game for the first time, and what their interaction with the game would be like, so whether or not people are going back to WoW, or whether or not it is gaining new subs, isn't exactly relevant to the discussion at hand either. As an aside, it seems a little hyperbolic to suggest that no one new at all is trying WoW. This is also shown to be false in Liadan's post. Additionally, I too know a few people that are planning to / already trying WoW in preparation for Legion.
Regarding WoW being a solo game: Only if you want it to be. That's part of the magnificence of player choice. If you want to, you can level up traditionally, do all the dungeons, do whatever. Or you can stick specifically to world-quests. Or you can PvP your way to the top. Or you can roll with a group of buds and explore. Or you can do nothing but slay hard to kill monsters. Or you can jump around the content and level where you want, when you want. Part of the reason why people were somewhat fascinated and / or got a good laugh out of the person that stayed in Pandaria and picked flowers all the way to the level cap is because the idea that you could do that in the first place never even crossed their minds; that's part of the miracle of player choice. It lets you experience a game in a myriad of ways, and perhaps make people think of whether they would like to experience the game that way, too. My own experience was a mixture of dungeons, PvP, and buddy-questing. It was never solitary for me, and I in fact feel much more "alone" in XIV because of its story content, even with a group of friends to talk to.
It seems like a lot of concern here is coming from the idea that "new players won't know the content." To be honest, this situation is no different than no one knowing the content when a new expansion launches. A bunch of people sitting in a boss room on Day 1 aren't going to know what that boss is going to do. Chances are most of the playerbase won't even know what they're supposed to do until at least a month into the expansion, because they're still getting there, and explanations will therefore be necessary. Additionally, if you really feel that that would impact your gameplay experience that much, then coach people through dungeons and tell them to do the same to other people that don't know, or point them to guides and ask them to read. Or, only run with people that have done all the content before you.
Personally, I don't think it takes much more time to say "If you're marked with a meteor, run away from everyone" than it does "you know that thing in <X> bossfight? Yeah do that." The additional effort required is minimal.
I took a break between 2.1 and 3.0, or something like that. I haven't done Turns or Crystal Tower, since those have come up previously in this discussion. If a bossfight called for past mechanics, even though I'm an "old" player, I wouldn't know what to do. That doesn't mean I couldn't learn, and it also doesn't mean that I shouldn't be "playing" the game. As someone else even mentioned, those were intended to be optional pieces of content from the start; would we tell new players to go back to content that is not only old, but also optional in order to ensure that they were on a level that we deemed acceptable?
Forcing a preferred gameplay experience on a person solely for the betterment of your own experience seems somewhat questionable to me.
RE: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed - Warren Castille - 08-28-2015
I never said there wasn't any new blood in WoW, I said it's a fair bet there's not much of it.
WoW being a single player game if you want it to be is part of the challenge presented here: Why play an MMO at all if you're not interested in the "MM" part of it?
I'm having trouble articulating what I mean exactly, but removing the obstacles to reaching X point feels like it removes part of the bond between players. Everyone from 2.0 launch has war stories from Titan HM. Most folks who care about the story came away from 2.55 with powerful emotions regarding the climax. Removing those things from the prerequisites satisfies in the short-term, in my opinion. It means the strangers I'm playing with might truly be strangers, and there would be fewer things that we experienced together-yet-separately to try and draw common ground.
This community can be stand-offish enough without there being less we all have in common. Then again, maybe I come at this with my own biases. I never understood the "I don't want to play the game" mentality. I didn't have a problem with Ishgard being locked behind content. I don't have a problem with lore cementing jobs in specific places. It just gives me something to strive towards, which to me is the entire point of gear-treadmill games.
I mean, I don't want to PLAY Pokemon, I just want all my favorites in the starter area. Not everyone plays to collect badges, and less than 3% have beaten the Elite Four. Why should I have to go to other cities to get what I want every time I play it?
RE: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed - Oli! - 08-28-2015
(08-28-2015, 10:56 AM)Warren Castille Wrote: I never said there wasn't any new blood in WoW, I said it's a fair bet there's not much of it.
WoW being a single player game if you want it to be is part of the challenge presented here: Why play an MMO at all if you're not interested in the "MM" part of it?
I'm having trouble articulating what I mean exactly, but removing the obstacles to reaching X point feels like it removes part of the bond between players. Everyone from 2.0 launch has war stories from Titan HM. Most folks who care about the story came away from 2.55 with powerful emotions regarding the climax. Removing those things from the prerequisites satisfies in the short-term, in my opinion. It means the strangers I'm playing with might truly be strangers, and there would be fewer things that we experienced together-yet-separately to try and draw common ground.
This community can be stand-offish enough without there being less we all have in common. Then again, maybe I come at this with my own biases. I never understood the "I don't want to play the game" mentality. I didn't have a problem with Ishgard being locked behind content. I don't have a problem with lore cementing jobs in specific places. It just gives me something to strive towards, which to me is the entire point of gear-treadmill games.
I mean, I don't want to PLAY Pokemon, I just want all my favorites in the starter area. Not everyone plays to collect badges, and less than 3% have beaten the Elite Four. Why should I have to go to other cities to get what I want every time I play it?
EDIT: Because I forgot to address it, there are many reasons why someone might choose to have a single-player experience in an MMO. Maybe they like the game's mechanics or visuals, but don't want to talk to anyone. Maybe they want to be a Lone Wanderer and talk about all the things that they managed to achieve on their own. Maybe they like the story or the world, and don't care much for multiplayer aspects like dungeons and PvP. Maybe they just enjoy making and dressing a character and running around. Maybe they're just there to play with their two or three friends and no one else.
Some people purchased WoW because they wanted to see Warcraft continue its story. Some people played City of Heroes because they wanted Superheroes, not specifically a Superhero MMO. Lots of people bought ESO because the Elder Scrolls universe is crazy and they love it, and not because they wanted an MMO out of it (this was actually a big point of contention surrounding the game ever since its launch). In this very game, in fact, there are people that are only here because they like Final Fantasy, a series of single-player games, and want more of the storytelling, visual aesthetic, and themes that that series provides. Not because they want to socialize in an MMO.
People play video-games for fun. What is fun is subjective, and therefore one person's fun is no more Right or Wrong than someone else's fun. If someone who only played Arena shooters sat down and watched you play the campaign of Halo or Goldeneye or something, and asked, "why are you playing a shooter if you're not gonna play multiplayer? That's what it's for," it's going to sound a bit like an odd question. There are many reasons to enjoy shooters outside of multiplayer, just as there are many reasons to enjoy MMOs outside of interacting with people.
-----Original Post-----
I would actually argue that any such bond isn't universal at all. This thread, in fact, is part of the proof.
The extent of my connection to the gated content was "well I guess it was okay, but I really only did it so that I could do the Cool Stuff I actually wanted to do, like Roleplay and explore the new zones." If you asked me for a Titan HM war story, my best would be along the lines of "well we got knocked off the platform a lot, and it was honestly just kind of annoying, and the tank and healer had to solo the last 25% for an hour because we were all dead." It's not quite as romantic for me and many others as it might be for another fraction of the playerbase.
We're already much more splintered than it might seem, though in this case, it's not because we chose to play the game differently (because we're all supposed to do the same content to advance) but instead of the way that we think about the content. Just as people came away from the 2.5 ending going "wow, that was deep," there were people that came away saying "meh, predictable bullshit." Just as there are those that think, "I love the housing system, it feels more meaningful because there are a limited amount," there are those that think, "this is stupid, I want a house, my friends want a house, just instance them so we can all have houses." Just as there are people that think, "I love this game's story, and I'd play it over and over if I could," there are those that are thinking, "I guess it was okay. I dunno. I'd rather not play it twice. Whatever."
The only bond is that we all have the same experience, and even that isn't very strong, as I have stated. It splinters further when we talk about what we think of it. If there really was a bond as tight as you think it would be, we'd all either be dancing about how happy we are that gated content is ending, or collectively up in arms over the fact that our precious game is being edited.
We're both.
RE: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed - Flickering Ember - 08-28-2015
I agree with you, Warren, about the importance of community. Playing WoW since vanilla, it was very sad to see its community slowly wither away as time went on. I dunno if the MSQ really contributes that much to the community though. I can't say I've ever found myself sitting in a random, discussing the MSQ.
I think getting rid of gated story content does the opposite for the community by allowing more people to play. The more hoops people have to jump through to get to a certain point, the less people there will inevitably be.Â
Plus, I don't think that Pokemon analogy works very well. MMOs aren't supposed to be like single player games. You can raid if you want, or if you don't want to raid you can pvp, don't want to pvp? go crafting, don't want to do any of those things? focus on the story content, RP, whatever.
RE: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed - Warren Castille - 08-28-2015
Sliding scale of investment, I suppose. Something about geese and ganders.
RE: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed - Telluride - 08-28-2015
There's also a bit of a danger in suggesting that the only way one can be part of "the community" is to have "war stories" about content. If I'm somewhat less of a part of the community because I refuse to put up with the shenanigans of certain parts of the game, Titan HM being amongst them, then I have to at least stop to question if it's a community that I really want to be a part of, anyway. If my War Stories don't match up to what The Community expects, am I somehow not worthy?
For example, If I refuse to do Ravana or Bismarck EX because I find the ratio of enjoyment/reward to frustration to be all wrong, and I hate those fights, am I not a True Scotsman?
I have never done Ultima HM or EX since I started playing the game a year ago. Am I No True Scotsman?
If I think that most of the primal fights/trials are overrated wastes of time, and am happy to do dungeons and the occasional raid, meaning that I have collected fewer Pokemon and should not want to see anymore until I've collected them all (even though some of the "Pokemon" really are a lot more annoying than anything else), am I lower on this sliding scale of investment?
RE: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed - Warren Castille - 08-28-2015
(08-28-2015, 11:34 AM)Telluride Wrote: There's also a bit of a danger in suggesting that the only way one can be part of "the community" is to have "war stories" about content.
I don't recall seeing this brought up.
RE: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed - Telluride - 08-28-2015
(08-28-2015, 11:36 AM)Warren Castille Wrote:(08-28-2015, 11:34 AM)Telluride Wrote: There's also a bit of a danger in suggesting that the only way one can be part of "the community" is to have "war stories" about content.
I don't recall seeing this brought up.
These are the words I'm reacting to (emphases mine):
"I'm having trouble articulating what I mean exactly, but removing the obstacles to reaching X point feels like it removes part of the bond between players. Everyone from 2.0 launch has war stories from Titan HM. Most folks who care about the story came away from 2.55 with powerful emotions regarding the climax. Removing those things from the prerequisites satisfies in the short-term, in my opinion. It means the strangers I'm playing with might truly be strangers, and there would be fewer things that we experienced together-yet-separately to try and draw common ground."
and...
"This community can be stand-offish enough without there being less we all have in common. Then again, maybe I come at this with my own biases. I never understood the "I don't want to play the game" mentality. I didn't have a problem with Ishgard being locked behind content. I don't have a problem with lore cementing jobs in specific places. It just gives me something to strive towards, which to me is the entire point of gear-treadmill games."
The point of discussion, if I understand you, is that you feel we lose something from The Community if we've not all gone through certain content, and have shared skills/achievements/solutions from going through all the same stuff.
It strikes me as kind of like comparing driving with a stick shift to driving with an automatic transmission, maybe. One is harder than the other, and actually can build and require more skills and practice, but such aren't a requirement to enjoy a drive, and in the end, we're all on the same road.
I know that some hate the idea of a player base having too much control/influence over a game's development My own bias, to be fair, is that while I can see this point, I also see the inevitable "Get Gud, Nub, or Get Out" responses to other player issues/wants. While yes, a good game SHOULD have a clarity of vision and its own demands, and there is a point where certain players just might find a better time elsewhere, relying too much on this idea that player complaints and wanting a few shortcuts here and there over time are inherently bad things is just as much a recipe for disaster. C.F: Wildstar.
I am not trying to be terribly confrontational about the subject, but I also hold as a truism that a decision isn't a good one JUST because a dev makes it, nor that getting inured and used to to certain things in a game is the same as ENJOYING them.
Even the best works can benefit from a bit of tweaking over time, and not every challenge is good JUST because it is a challenge.
RE: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed - Syf - 08-28-2015
Maybe I could offer some insight into this thread. I purchased FFXIV and the Heavensward expansion about two weeks ago, looking forward to trying out the job of Dark Knight. I did a little research and found that I needed level 30 in any class in order to play the new jobs offered. But as I reached that milestone, I found out that I would not only have to reach level 50 in order to access Ishgard, I would also need to finish all the story quests from patch 2.0 to 3.0.
The total time it took me to finish all the quests was around 120 hours. I know that a lot of these quests were given buffed rewards to smooth out the process, but it's still a long time to ask a person to invest for content that they want to experience. Whether it is a certain job or just relevant PvE content or access to new zones, it's a ludicrous amount of time for a person to invest in. If I had leveled as dps, or if I didn't have this much free time, it could have taken me more than a month and a half of just pure story progression to reach Heavensward content. I don't hate gated content in general, but this enormous gate just made me anxious to rush through stuff that the developers most likely wanted you to savor and enjoy over several months. I did not enjoy most of the story content, the characters didn't get fleshed out enough, and the nature of your character is just to *nod* and do the hard work.
I'm glad 4.0 will not need 3.0 to be completed. If I ever want to roll an alt or quit for extended period of time, I won't have to rush myself through quests and content in order to play a new job or do dungeons with my friends.
RE: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed - Warren Castille - 08-28-2015
Fair, but at no point did I say these things were the ONLY way. If your take on Titan HM was "Shit sucks, I got sick of the pressure/the pugs/the whatever and didn't bother" you'd probably still get a large amount of people agreeing with you. Even if you tried content, hated it and never went back, that still gives something to build on or discuss. Not that anyone really chats up DF groups, really.
I admit to my own biases regarding this stuff; That's easy because I know what I want and get out of playing MMOs. I don't comprehend the argument to have access without having done anything for it, but that might just be the old guard reflexes and instincts acting up.
I'm still curious how many new players have issue with the content being a gate, though. Large majority of the discussion is centered on alts, or friends of currently-finished players. It's hard to dig out the motivations or thoughts of a truly-new person that comes into the game without knowing anyone or anything about it.
...might be time to start blowing up introduction threads with a questionnaire. For science.
Edit: Heh.
RE: 4.0 will not require 3.0 to be completed - Saravahn - 08-28-2015
http://www.mmospotlight.com/final-fantasy-verges-on-exceeding-current-number-of-wow-users/
Posted for some relevance to the slightly off topic topic.