RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes

Aldotsk · **06-13-2017, 08:44 PM**

Balmung will never be RP official server. It never was and it was legacy server. Stop asking ridiculous questions. This is the reason we got quarantined because people wrongfully assumed Balmung was officially RP server.

Toxicity is already existing. Diversity is harsh before any labeled server.

Flynn Rosenberg · **06-13-2017, 08:44 PM**

(06-13-2017, 08:41 PM)Teadrinker Wrote:
(06-13-2017, 08:38 PM)Oswin Wrote:
(06-13-2017, 08:37 PM)Flynn Rosenberg Wrote: I'm happy with the answer. It's not a definite "no we aren't doing this", it's just about being careful.

The important note is the definitive "NO" on giving Balmung the RP server label. It's too big, too old and too diverse.

That's not how I took this.

I'll rewind it when the VOD is out but what was said was

1.) Dev team is 50/50 about adding RP labels to certain servers.

2.) Adding this labels is easy peasy and not an issue.

3.) They're holding back because of fear of RPers creating a toxic environment by asking non RPers to leave the servers because it's an RP server.

At no point was it mentioned "We won't do this for Balmung."

They want to be careful about toxicity. Tagging Balmung as it is is not being carefulÂ :p

***Teadrinker*** · **06-13-2017, 08:49 PM**

I'm just interested in underlining what was actually said in the Liveletter.

If people want to infer doomsaying from it that's their business.

Sig · **06-13-2017, 08:49 PM**

(06-13-2017, 08:41 PM)Teadrinker Wrote:
(06-13-2017, 08:38 PM)Oswin Wrote:
(06-13-2017, 08:37 PM)Flynn Rosenberg Wrote: I'm happy with the answer. It's not a definite "no we aren't doing this", it's just about being careful.

The important note is the definitive "NO" on giving Balmung the RP server label. It's too big, too old and too diverse.

That's not how I took this.

I'll rewind it when the VOD is out but what was said was

1.) Dev team is 50/50 about adding RP labels to certain servers.

2.) Adding this labels is easy peasy and not an issue.

3.) They're holding back because of fear of RPers creating a toxic environment by asking non RPers to leave the servers because it's an RP server.

At no point was it mentioned "We won't do this for Balmung."

How completely disappointing.Â SE's reasoning is terrible and shows how unfamiliar the devs are with the RP community (probably because RP extremely rare in Japan).Â Any person who legitimately believes anything but a tiny, tiny minority of RPers (less than 5%) would harass PVEers for not RPing lives in their own special reality.Â The inverse is true: RPers are a small minority that are frequently ostracized and griefed.

Kylin · **06-13-2017, 08:49 PM**

The translator's words (some cleanup on my part in the middle due to fast typing lol) in regards to Balmung specifically:

"...we know that Balmung is one of those worlds where a lot of Rpers tend to RP and many would say that 'we're willing to be the suggested Rp server,' but there may be a group of people on that server who don't RP....and we don't want to disregard them"

They'll consider it for a newer server, but they're torn on it. I personally wouldn't hold my breath. They mentioned wanting to see data. If the data we've attempted to gather through polls and such isn't getting their attention already, I doubt it will in the future.

Fox · **06-13-2017, 09:03 PM**

(06-13-2017, 08:49 PM)Sig Wrote: The inverse is true: RPers are a small minority that are frequently ostracized and griefed.

An RP tag is not going to prevent this. In fact it will likely draw more people in with the intent of griefing.

And; time and again; XIV is going to look to their majority- they are going to consider their PVER's considerations first. Rpers already have a reputation unfortunately on this game for being entitled; and downright mean to PVERs. I have seen it on /r/ and the official forums; (which is where the devs have seen it) where rpers have said "Balmung is OUR server; PVErs need to move off". They aren't going to want to alienate PVErs/people who did not choose to have their characters migrated over on a Legacy server from 1.0; and there are quite a bit.

Haven's Fox · **06-13-2017, 09:07 PM**

The important take away is that they know the issues of adding in a RP server 4 years after the games release.

Momo · **06-13-2017, 09:11 PM**

(06-13-2017, 08:49 PM)Teadrinker Wrote: I'm just interested in underlining what was actually said in the Liveletter.

If people want to infer doomsaying from it that's their business.

I'm with Teadrinker, they know there is an issue, and they know it is something many players want to talk about. They specifically said: "We are thinking of this positively" so I am trying to figure out where people are STILL being naysayers after we already had to climb over the piles of people who insisted they would never even pay attention much less mention it in Live Letter.

Get with the picture, they are paying attention, let's make some noise and help them figure this out. Be positive about it and drive to do something about solving it instead of sitting on your hands and hoping someone else steps up.

To those of you somehow still stuck with your heads in the sand about them paying attention or caring, why don't you finish eating the first dust before you kick up seconds~

Mercer · **06-13-2017, 09:31 PM**

I wouldn't exactly be as aggressive as Momo, but yes this is a very good change in direction toward RPers.

I'd like to clarify what I said earlier, I jumped the gun on my understanding of what was said. Apologies folks.

The big thing now is we wait and see what SE has to say or do with surveys and data. In the mean time, I'm going to push out the next round of RP server polls once we know the transfer information.

Cato · **06-13-2017, 09:34 PM**

(06-13-2017, 09:11 PM)Momo Wrote:
(06-13-2017, 08:49 PM)Teadrinker Wrote: I'm just interested in underlining what was actually said in the Liveletter.

If people want to infer doomsaying from it that's their business.

I'm with Teadrinker, they know there is an issue, and they know it is something many players want to talk about. They specifically said: "We are thinking of this positively" so I am trying to figure out where people are STILL being naysayers after we already had to climb over the piles of people who insisted they would never even pay attention much less mention it in Live Letter.

Get with the picture, they are paying attention, let's make some noise and help them figure this out. Be positive about it and drive to do something about solving it instead of sitting on your hands and hoping someone else steps up.

To those of you somehow still stuck with your heads in the sand about them paying attention or caring, why don't you finish eating the first dust before you kick up seconds~

You're not going to convince many people with such a smug and self righteous attitude. It's a much more complicated issue than you repeatedly seek to paint it as - and your opinion on the matter isn't suddenly much more valuable than those who have brought up solid reasons as to why they're not interested in a designated server for role-play becoming a thing.

There's a significant number of role-players who have no interest in moving to a server that is touted as being focused on role-play alone. Balmung is so great because it houses many players who are focused on the PvE and PvP aspects of the game - and their presence is exactly why Balmung should not be converted into a special server primarily for role-play.

Fox · **06-13-2017, 09:36 PM**

(06-13-2017, 09:31 PM)Oswin Wrote: I wouldn't exactly be as aggressive as Momo, but yes this is a very good change in direction toward RPers.

I'd like to clarify what I said earlier, I jumped the gun on my understanding of what was said. Apologies folks.

The big thing now is we wait and see what SE has to say or do with surveys and data. In the mean time, I'm going to push out the next round of RP server polls once we know the transfer information.

If anything it does not look like they will tag Balmung with an RP tag.

1. They're concerned about people trying to push legacy people off the server.
2. Game had been out for several years, as others have pointed out they seem to want to be positive and possibly build something for the future.
3. Balmung is closed, it doesn't so much help the issue if they tag it.

Most likely it would be a new server with transfer perks which is good. It is a positive thing and I hope it does get sorted.

Kylin · **06-13-2017, 09:51 PM**

I don't think it's so much about being negative toward the situation, but rather realistic on the consequences of adding an official RP server this late in the game's lifespan. I know I probably give out conflicting vibes here. Back in the day, I was one of the biggest advocates for an official RP server and keeping everyone on ONE central RP server. Nowadays, I'm seen advocating a division of the RP community between two larger servers and various smaller ones.

Not to sound like a Sophia thrall, but it's really about balance/equilibrium. Back in the day, we only had 1.0's numbers (and FFXI's RP numbers) to go off on. This is why I strongly advocated the 'One RP Server to Rule Them All' stance. We got big though. Really big. Bigger than anyone ever really anticipated. Spreading out to two servers and smaller pockets scattered on other servers is, in my opinion, the most healthy solution. Adding a THIRD option (fourth if you want to include the EU crowd's efforts as well) 4-5 years into the game's lifespan will dilute RPers a bit too much. It'll make RP linkshells/FCs that much more aggressive in getting new blood to them, increasing hostilities and making for a very difficult overall environment for RP to thrive in. Friends in the RP community may be even further divided than they already are.

There's going to be a large bulk of RPers who will not leave Balmung, regardless of the housing situation. There are already pockets of RPers who won't leave Siren/Mateus/Gilgamesh/etc. Mateus's crowd will grow even larger in the coming months most likely as well. When you take into account all these people who won't move and an official RP server is finally added in, it can prove to actually be detrimental to the overall health of the RP community.

If the RP community is still growing as it is now by the time they implement said server, than it may not prove to be an issue. Alternatively, if the Mateus efforts ultimately failed (which I hope they do not) and everyone somehow got sucked to Balmung again (assuming it unlocks), it probably wouldn't hurt either. But those are the only two circumstances I see where adding yet another server, officially this time, would actually be more beneficial than harmful. Given the game's age, I doubt we're going to keep seeing this level of growth in the RP community for much longer.

To be clear, I'd love to see an official RP server thriving with a strong united front. But 4+ years in? It's just a bit late at this stage of the game's lifespan and I fear the consequences of diluting the RP community a bit too much. If SE does indeed decide to do this, I assume it will be after they implement more cross-world features. Depending on the growth of the community (and the nature of cross-world content) at that time, my opinion may very well change. But as it sits now, I worry of the social consequences of adding in an official RP server this many years into the game.

So yeah...I feel adding an official Rp server at this stage would tip the scales of balance too much. All hail Sophia, the one true Goddess.

ArmachiA · **06-14-2017, 01:36 PM**

They listened before, they said they'd think about it before, they ultimately told us no before.

Don't get smug yet.

(not that I wouldn't like an RP server either, but there's no reason to be condescending, people who are "naysayers" like me will more be pleasantly surprised than angry SE is doing it because we were "proven wrong")

« Next Oldest \| Next Newest »
Pages (10): « Previous 1 … 6 7 8 9 10 Jump to page:

If SE was to designate an RP server, would you move?

RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes