·English·Theme
- Forums
- Final Fantasy XIV
- General Discussion
- I think ARR will succeed.
I think ARR will succeed.Follow
Nah, most people only need to worry about money if they're living beyond their means. Same thing as being overscheduled, really. Not enough time or not enough money are basically the same problem.
They are not at all the same problem.
A person can have months of extra income saved up and still worry about losing a job, medical emergencies, etc.
On the other hand, spending time fighting a Notorious monster is just... Playing a game.
It is a nuisanced difference.
EDIT: Also, Kachi, your point of view completely disregard people who ARE struggling financially who play MMORPGs as a means of cheap entertainment. Unless you are in this position, you really have no right to compare gaming with gambling.
Edited, Mar 9th 2013 1:07pm by Thayos
A person can have months of extra income saved up and still worry about losing a job, medical emergencies, etc.
On the other hand, spending time fighting a Notorious monster is just... Playing a game.
It is a nuisanced difference.
EDIT: Also, Kachi, your point of view completely disregard people who ARE struggling financially who play MMORPGs as a means of cheap entertainment. Unless you are in this position, you really have no right to compare gaming with gambling.
Edited, Mar 9th 2013 1:07pm by Thayos
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
Jormungandr
Hyperion
Kachi wrote:
Louiscool is correct on the statistical question. I'm not talking about one player getting the drop, either, but any given player. As I said, you basically have the same odds of getting lucky (less than 14 attempts) as you do being unlucky (more than 14 attempts). Statistically, they should center around a mean of 14 attempts. Using the math of combinations and permutations isn't relevant to these sorts of statistical incidences.
Actually, there's only a 36.2% chance you'll fail 14 times in a row (.93 ^ 14 = .362).
On a thousand scrolls, if I got $40 for every scroll that took less than 14 tries, and you got $60 for every scroll that took more than 14 tries, I would have thousands of dollars more than you.
And I can prove it... with computer simulation.
Below is an HTML page with a JavaScript simulator of collecting 1000 scrolls with a 7% chance of success. If you paste it into a notepad and save it as a *.htm file, you can open it in your browser to see the results (you may have to give permission for the script to run, I promise there's no virus). You'll see the average is 14 attempts, but the vast majority will be finished before they hit their 14th attempt. Around half will be done in 10 or less tries. You can run it over again by refreshing the page but the results don't really change that dramatically.
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" >
<head>
<title>1000 scrolls with 7% drop rate</title>
</head>
<body>
<script type="text/javascript">
var MAX = 1000;
var tenOrLess = 0;
var lessThan14 = 0;
var exactly14 = 0;
var moreThan14 = 0;
var avg = 0;
var total = 0;
for (var i = 0; i < MAX; i++) {
var attempts = 0;
var success = false;
// don't stop till we get a scroll
while (!success) {
attempts++; // increment the attempts by 1
var oneHundredSidedDie = Math.floor(Math.random() * 100) + 1; // generates a random number between 1 and 100
if (oneHundredSidedDie <= 7)
success = true; // rolled a 7 or less, so got a scroll, hurray!
}
// okay, got a scroll, let's tally the results
if (attempts <= 10)
tenOrLess++;
if (attempts < 14)
lessThan14++;
else if (attempts == 14)
exactly14++;
else
moreThan14++;
total += attempts;
}
avg = total / MAX;
document.write("<p>Less than 14 attempts for scroll = " + lessThan14);
document.write("</p><p>Exactly 14 attempts for scroll = " + exactly14);
document.write("</p><p>More than 14 attempts for scroll = " + moreThan14);
document.write("</p><p>10 or fewer attempts for scroll = " + tenOrLess);
document.write("</p><p>Total attempts for 1000 scrolls = " + total);
document.write("</p><p>Average attempts per scroll = " + avg + "</p>");
</script>
</body>
</html>
In other words, you know how sometimes it feels like most people get their drops right away and you're left behind in the land of Still-No-Drop? It's a mathematical fact!
I don't know about gambling or statistics (although that javascript was pretty cool), but I'll have to agree with Thayos on wanting there to be (at least a few) items, or things that are difficult to obtain.
Most times things that are difficult to obtain inherently involve timesinks or are just boring. But they add an aura of mystique and motivation; as an allusion to the real world.
However In the MMO world timesinks to a difficult end goal can be supplemented with fun activities, whereas in the real world obtaining something, like a Ferrari is almost impossible or never 'fun' to get there. Unless you consider investment banking fun.
...and (ironically) those that enjoy what they do (IRL, and are successful) don't care as much about the end goal (the Ferrari) because that isn't why they are doing what they do.
So in the end I kinda see both points, but it just makes sense to cater to what most people want; the carrot(s). And since an MMO is inherently a game, by virtue of it being separate from RL, it's already an escape free from most of the rules of the real world; where I have more control over obtaining things. And I can have 'fun' doing it.
A game has a set of rules, however in this game I am immortal, and have (over a period of time) the opportunity to obtain everything within it. I think by those standards some of the rules of psychology must differ greatly from RL; where we have a finite time on earth, limited resources and limited knowledge of how to get where we want.
I'm too lazy to carry an in depth conversation today (with Kachi, or whoever else) but I'd assume that theories of motivation and other psychological ideas would have to account for these sorts of things, like immorality and different rulesets. RL vs a game world, and concepts like these, I'm sure, aren't necessarily cookie cutter, for the lack of a better term.
Most times things that are difficult to obtain inherently involve timesinks or are just boring. But they add an aura of mystique and motivation; as an allusion to the real world.
However In the MMO world timesinks to a difficult end goal can be supplemented with fun activities, whereas in the real world obtaining something, like a Ferrari is almost impossible or never 'fun' to get there. Unless you consider investment banking fun.
...and (ironically) those that enjoy what they do (IRL, and are successful) don't care as much about the end goal (the Ferrari) because that isn't why they are doing what they do.
So in the end I kinda see both points, but it just makes sense to cater to what most people want; the carrot(s). And since an MMO is inherently a game, by virtue of it being separate from RL, it's already an escape free from most of the rules of the real world; where I have more control over obtaining things. And I can have 'fun' doing it.
A game has a set of rules, however in this game I am immortal, and have (over a period of time) the opportunity to obtain everything within it. I think by those standards some of the rules of psychology must differ greatly from RL; where we have a finite time on earth, limited resources and limited knowledge of how to get where we want.
I'm too lazy to carry an in depth conversation today (with Kachi, or whoever else) but I'd assume that theories of motivation and other psychological ideas would have to account for these sorts of things, like immorality and different rulesets. RL vs a game world, and concepts like these, I'm sure, aren't necessarily cookie cutter, for the lack of a better term.
@Thayos, I'm not saying they're exactly the same, but the mechanics exploit the same mentality. MMOs do it in a vacuum which mitigates real-life damage, but the mechanisms are the same. It is the substantial risk of time or money lost that generates the "thrill" of big, rare loot.
@Kierk, It seems like you didn't actually read my reply. Which I understand, but you missed some important things, namely the part about why there should be items which are difficult to obtain. We just disagree on the KIND of difficulty that should be used. Timesinks are considered fake difficulty, which is discussed in many articles, most of which aren't even technical.
@Xoie, Again, I'm talking about the population of players, not a single given player. I'm not going to check your math or your script (wouldn't know how to do the latter).
@Kierk, It seems like you didn't actually read my reply. Which I understand, but you missed some important things, namely the part about why there should be items which are difficult to obtain. We just disagree on the KIND of difficulty that should be used. Timesinks are considered fake difficulty, which is discussed in many articles, most of which aren't even technical.
@Xoie, Again, I'm talking about the population of players, not a single given player. I'm not going to check your math or your script (wouldn't know how to do the latter).
I like moogles :3 <3
Kachi wrote:
@Xoie, Again, I'm talking about the population of players, not a single given player. I'm not going to check your math or your script (wouldn't know how to do the latter).
It simulates the acquisition of 1000 scrolls. It shows the median is roughly around 10 attempts even though the average is 14. It's the distribution you have wrong. The average is not the halfway point between getting a scroll or not, the median is. The average is higher than the median because of a sad few people who will be very unlucky, and will have to try an exorbitant number of times which drives the average up.
I've proven this with math and a computer simulation versus your say so. If this can't convince you then you can't be convinced no matter what the evidence. But you're the one who brought up statistics, not me, and you dismissed my results even though you have nothing to refute it with.
I'm not saying you're wrong, just that your calculations were for the wrong problem, insofar as the point I was trying to make.
I don't see why challenge is being put on a pedestal, ignoring everything else.
Difficult items can be difficult to acquire because they require commitment. Commitment is not something everyone has, and most activities where one can excel involve little difficulty but a lot of commitment for one to become proficient in. Say, learning to play the piano or learning a language.
Doing something like that can't be considered an achievement, because there is no challenge to be had (outside the commitment required)? I wholeheartedly disagree. That said, difficult items can be difficult to obtain solely through the commitment they require, and satisfaction in obtaining said items is not lost just because there weren't only challenges involving skills as a gamer.
Difficult items can be difficult to acquire because they require commitment. Commitment is not something everyone has, and most activities where one can excel involve little difficulty but a lot of commitment for one to become proficient in. Say, learning to play the piano or learning a language.
Doing something like that can't be considered an achievement, because there is no challenge to be had (outside the commitment required)? I wholeheartedly disagree. That said, difficult items can be difficult to obtain solely through the commitment they require, and satisfaction in obtaining said items is not lost just because there weren't only challenges involving skills as a gamer.
Hyanmen wrote:
I don't see why challenge is being put on a pedestal, ignoring everything else.
Difficult items can be difficult to acquire because they require commitment. Commitment is not something everyone has, and most activities where one can excel involve little difficulty but a lot of commitment for one to become proficient in. Say, learning to play the piano or learning a language.
Doing something like that can't be considered an achievement, because there is no challenge to be had (outside the commitment required)? I wholeheartedly disagree. That said, difficult items can be difficult to obtain solely through the commitment they require, and satisfaction in obtaining said items is not lost just because there weren't only challenges involving skills as a gamer.
Difficult items can be difficult to acquire because they require commitment. Commitment is not something everyone has, and most activities where one can excel involve little difficulty but a lot of commitment for one to become proficient in. Say, learning to play the piano or learning a language.
Doing something like that can't be considered an achievement, because there is no challenge to be had (outside the commitment required)? I wholeheartedly disagree. That said, difficult items can be difficult to obtain solely through the commitment they require, and satisfaction in obtaining said items is not lost just because there weren't only challenges involving skills as a gamer.
This is the attitude that caused SE to make the level 95 Empyrean weapon require fifteen hundred Heavy Metal Plates.
Hyanmen wrote:
I don't see why challenge is being put on a pedestal, ignoring everything else.
Difficult items can be difficult to acquire because they require commitment. Commitment is not something everyone has, and most activities where one can excel involve little difficulty but a lot of commitment for one to become proficient in. Say, learning to play the piano or learning a language.
Doing something like that can't be considered an achievement, because there is no challenge to be had (outside the commitment required)? I wholeheartedly disagree. That said, difficult items can be difficult to obtain solely through the commitment they require, and satisfaction in obtaining said items is not lost just because there weren't only challenges involving skills as a gamer.
Difficult items can be difficult to acquire because they require commitment. Commitment is not something everyone has, and most activities where one can excel involve little difficulty but a lot of commitment for one to become proficient in. Say, learning to play the piano or learning a language.
Doing something like that can't be considered an achievement, because there is no challenge to be had (outside the commitment required)? I wholeheartedly disagree. That said, difficult items can be difficult to obtain solely through the commitment they require, and satisfaction in obtaining said items is not lost just because there weren't only challenges involving skills as a gamer.
Uh, you're using examples of SKILLS that require a commitment to acquire. Learning to play the piano and learning a language are skills. And what makes skills meaningful is that they regularly present you with new challenges to overcome, whether it's a more technically difficult piano piece or translating sentences that require greater fluency. These are good things!
Killing the same monster over and over is like working on a factory line. It requires perseverance, yes, but it's also miserably boring to most people which is why the attrition rates are ridiculous despite relatively good pay. There are no escalating challenges; you're just doing the same things over and over. It's literally where the term "grind" comes from.
I'd like to see both types of difficulties in the game. I don't see why it has to be one or the other. Time commitments are one of the best ways to keep players playing the game between content updates, and having the patience to see it through is difficult. Difficult fights can be some of the fun and most memorable. Again, I don't see why it has to be one or the other, when both are difficult for different reasons.
Edited, Mar 9th 2013 9:14pm by Ryklin
Edited, Mar 9th 2013 9:14pm by Ryklin
------------------
It's not that I criticize the presence of timesinks (or "commitments" as I guess we're calling them now) as much as I criticize the absence of rewarding skill. It's fine if they're -alternatives- for players who want them. Too often they are the only mode of achieving your goal. And realistically, very few players choose them when presented with the option, because they're boring. Usually the only players that can stand them are those that are already irrevocably invested in the game (which in some cases actually also mimics the sunken cost fallacy gambling habits).
Also, this idea that timesinks are essential to ensure that players keep playing is pretty outdated. Developers are totally capable of releasing games with sufficient content to carry through to major updates or expansions now. That's triple true for established games.
Xoie wrote:
Kachi wrote:
@Xoie, Again, I'm talking about the population of players, not a single given player. I'm not going to check your math or your script (wouldn't know how to do the latter).
It simulates the acquisition of 1000 scrolls. It shows the median is roughly around 10 attempts even though the average is 14. It's the distribution you have wrong. The average is not the halfway point between getting a scroll or not, the median is. The average is higher than the median because of a sad few people who will be very unlucky, and will have to try an exorbitant number of times which drives the average up.
I've proven this with math and a computer simulation versus your say so. If this can't convince you then you can't be convinced no matter what the evidence. But you're the one who brought up statistics, not me, and you dismissed my results even though you have nothing to refute it with.
Math is hard on my head, I'll believe you.
Edited, Mar 9th 2013 10:35pm by Louiscool
Hyrist wrote:
Quote:
Wow talk about fanboy... Damm! I hate sephiroth, i would put kuja or exdeath before him, but to say darnus was equal to sephiroth... that is just kinda sad.... sephiroth not only owned angeal and genesis in a 2vs1 like they where amateurs, but beat zack like he was a toddler, then proceded burn nibehelm down(I guess that was before owning zack) killed a flower girl, killed a president who was guarded by an army, taunted you all the way to a creater with a clone might i add, then awoke, unleashed some weapons, put a mega barrier around it, and waited like a boss till you showed up to kick his ***...
Also sephiroth Summoned his meteor, darnus meteor was already casted hundreds if not thousands of years ago, and it was not like Bahamut chose him, he was the only crazy person to try and guide the meteor back to the planet) he was basically a puppet that got to do what sephiroth did, with better CGI and stuff lol
Not fanboing, you're taking so much side story and backstory BS as trying to push up Sephrioth that you ignore the crap that belittled sephiroth too.
First off. Let's break down the accomplishments.
1. Dueling between Angeal and Genesis. All three opponents were holding back in that fight. Evidenced by the fact that Genisis forced Sephiroth to stop holding back himself by ramping up his own combat intensity (And queing his theme). The pecking order was never established between them because Angeal interrupted the fight (twice). As it was plotted that Genisis was essentially Sephiroth's equal until he started to corrode. There are several other instances in which this is indicated as well. It's symbolized entirely by having the opposing 'one wing' to Sephiroth of the same color. So no, that achievement is taken away from Sephrioth. I'm pissed they never made the sequel that was supposed to bring Genisis up as the primary antagonist for a full game - it was planned, then scrapped.
2. Zack's Sephiroth fight. He 'Beat Zack like a whelp' that's equivalent to any main villian beating the crap out of the Heros. You cite Exdeath above Sephrioth, but remember Galuf from FFV beat Exdeath down on his own (giving his life to defend his friends and grandaughter). Sephrioth on the other hand, immeidately got pelted by an emo kid in the back (who then managed to survive a stab wound through the chest to kill him). No such trite weaknesses from Nael. He wipes the floor with an entire party in one non-evaded blow. (and can do so in the actual gameplay with one good combo if you're not paying attention.)
The Rest.
It's been an ongoing debate whether or not this influence, or even Sephiroth's motivations after the point of going mad, are even his own. You claim Darnus to be the puppet of Bahamut, Sephiroth can very well be argued to be the same for Jenova. Every thing he does from the moment he discovers his origins on is an attempted replication of his mother's behavior. Even when he came back in Advent Children, he was still trying to be like 'Mother'.
In fact, if you really dig into it, it's very difficult to tell where the influence of Jenova ends and Sephiroth begins, and vice versa. But that's a discussion for another time. Suffice to say, the very self identity of both characters are muddied by the will of an external source - wherby their accomplishments are demeaned by them.
But there are some historical inaccuracies.
Meteor Meteria finds nearby space bodies and pulls them downward, it does not in fact create them. Therefore Meteor Meteria and Project Meteor are essentially the same, with the difference being that Dalamud was in fact a prison for Bahamut.
Additionally, Weapons were unleashed by the Planet, not by Sephiroth. It was reactionary to the use of Meteor meteria and Sephiroth's interference in the life-stream. The barrier around Northern Crater? Unknown if the origin source is actually Sephiroth or the Planet itself. It's existence was merely a plot device to close a loophole if it was not there.
That's not to say Sephiroth/Jenova (I tend to regard them as one entity) is not a superior villian to Nael Darnus. I'm simply putting Sephiroth as a villian into the proper light and perspective. His story has a lot of complexity that adds to the depth of his character, but tends to lessen his tale as a 'badass'. Then agian, the Villians of Final Fantasy games tend to leave a bit to be desired in the 'badass' department. Any who do wind up being heroes in disguise or victims of circumstance.
Darnus was created to be the catalyst to the Seventh Umbral Era. In that, he not only served his purpose, but played his part well. As a villian, he is derivative from Sephrioth in action, the Judges from XII in appearance, and mixed Kuja and Kefka in demeanor. This combination worked and his impact was memorable for what it was. But even I don't consider him a bonafied badass.
I could analyze the reasons why there's not much badassery in Final Fantasy but I think that's a topic for another time.
Edited, Mar 7th 2013 11:27pm by Hyrist
Hyrist wrote:
Quote:
Wow talk about fanboy... Damm! I hate sephiroth, i would put kuja or exdeath before him, but to say darnus was equal to sephiroth... that is just kinda sad.... sephiroth not only owned angeal and genesis in a 2vs1 like they where amateurs, but beat zack like he was a toddler, then proceded burn nibehelm down(I guess that was before owning zack) killed a flower girl, killed a president who was guarded by an army, taunted you all the way to a creater with a clone might i add, then awoke, unleashed some weapons, put a mega barrier around it, and waited like a boss till you showed up to kick his ***...
Also sephiroth Summoned his meteor, darnus meteor was already casted hundreds if not thousands of years ago, and it was not like Bahamut chose him, he was the only crazy person to try and guide the meteor back to the planet) he was basically a puppet that got to do what sephiroth did, with better CGI and stuff lol
Not fanboing, you're taking so much side story and backstory BS as trying to push up Sephrioth that you ignore the crap that belittled sephiroth too.
First off. Let's break down the accomplishments.
1. Dueling between Angeal and Genesis. All three opponents were holding back in that fight. Evidenced by the fact that Genisis forced Sephiroth to stop holding back himself by ramping up his own combat intensity (And queing his theme). The pecking order was never established between them because Angeal interrupted the fight (twice). As it was plotted that Genisis was essentially Sephiroth's equal until he started to corrode. There are several other instances in which this is indicated as well. It's symbolized entirely by having the opposing 'one wing' to Sephiroth of the same color. So no, that achievement is taken away from Sephrioth. I'm pissed they never made the sequel that was supposed to bring Genisis up as the primary antagonist for a full game - it was planned, then scrapped.
2. Zack's Sephiroth fight. He 'Beat Zack like a whelp' that's equivalent to any main villian beating the crap out of the Heros. You cite Exdeath above Sephrioth, but remember Galuf from FFV beat Exdeath down on his own (giving his life to defend his friends and grandaughter). Sephrioth on the other hand, immeidately got pelted by an emo kid in the back (who then managed to survive a stab wound through the chest to kill him). No such trite weaknesses from Nael. He wipes the floor with an entire party in one non-evaded blow. (and can do so in the actual gameplay with one good combo if you're not paying attention.)
The Rest.
It's been an ongoing debate whether or not this influence, or even Sephiroth's motivations after the point of going mad, are even his own. You claim Darnus to be the puppet of Bahamut, Sephiroth can very well be argued to be the same for Jenova. Every thing he does from the moment he discovers his origins on is an attempted replication of his mother's behavior. Even when he came back in Advent Children, he was still trying to be like 'Mother'.
In fact, if you really dig into it, it's very difficult to tell where the influence of Jenova ends and Sephiroth begins, and vice versa. But that's a discussion for another time. Suffice to say, the very self identity of both characters are muddied by the will of an external source - wherby their accomplishments are demeaned by them.
But there are some historical inaccuracies.
Meteor Meteria finds nearby space bodies and pulls them downward, it does not in fact create them. Therefore Meteor Meteria and Project Meteor are essentially the same, with the difference being that Dalamud was in fact a prison for Bahamut.
Additionally, Weapons were unleashed by the Planet, not by Sephiroth. It was reactionary to the use of Meteor meteria and Sephiroth's interference in the life-stream. The barrier around Northern Crater? Unknown if the origin source is actually Sephiroth or the Planet itself. It's existence was merely a plot device to close a loophole if it was not there.
That's not to say Sephiroth/Jenova (I tend to regard them as one entity) is not a superior villian to Nael Darnus. I'm simply putting Sephiroth as a villian into the proper light and perspective. His story has a lot of complexity that adds to the depth of his character, but tends to lessen his tale as a 'badass'. Then agian, the Villians of Final Fantasy games tend to leave a bit to be desired in the 'badass' department. Any who do wind up being heroes in disguise or victims of circumstance.
Darnus was created to be the catalyst to the Seventh Umbral Era. In that, he not only served his purpose, but played his part well. As a villian, he is derivative from Sephrioth in action, the Judges from XII in appearance, and mixed Kuja and Kefka in demeanor. This combination worked and his impact was memorable for what it was. But even I don't consider him a bonafied badass.
I could analyze the reasons why there's not much badassery in Final Fantasy but I think that's a topic for another time.
Edited, Mar 7th 2013 11:27pm by Hyrist
It is a fact that Sephiroth is the stronger of the 3 subjects of the Acient Project. Where the 3 of them holding back ? Yes but even then sephiroth was able to easily hold his own againts angeal and genesis, when genesis challenged Sephiroth and got serious, Sephiroth was not even breaking a sweat, angeal went in and got blasted in the face by genesis, and Sephiroth swated his attack like it was nothing, if they where all equal in power, how come Sephiroth is the only one hailed as the hero of the wutai war ? The superior soldier ? Because he is the stronger of the 3, even tho all 3 of them where part of the the same project(Just done differently) only Sephiroth is the succesfull outcome of the project, for he was injected with a much more dense dose of Jenova cells directly as a fetus, thus his phisical and magical streght is much more augmented than the other two subjects, he is also the only one to not show any degradation at all, all of genesis and angeal clones are dead and where not much to begin with, Sephiroths clone is Cloud :/
As for Zack being a Whelp, when compared to Sephiroth ? Of course, but you have to take in consideration that Zack had already killed Angeal, and had defeated genesis 2-3 times already, he was no slouch, he in fact was the second strongest 1st soldier to Sephiroth. And Sephiroth destroyed Him! And even tho sephiroth got stabed by cloud, it was a surprise attack, and then again zack did die againts a bunch of soldiers, so no metter how strong and amazing you are, you can still get canned XD!
As far as Sephiroth and Jevona, i will not comment since all that is mumbo jumbo that is never implied in any of the FFVII games, is all opinion based, for not one line of text indicates that Jenova has taken over his mind, imagine if you where sephiroth and you find out you are extra special, and that you have inherited all the powers of your mother, a intergalactic space parasite, and you could travel the cosmos... Would you give all that up to be the lapdog of a coorporation ? But then again i do see where that thinking comes from, and is a valid and intriguing argument.
As far as historical innacuracies, Meteor/Meteo has never ever been a materia/spell that draws an asteroid/meteor, it has since it's inception been a spell that SUMMONS a meteor shower, only since 7+ has meteor been a "Special" spell/summon that brings one giant Meteor( In IV it was the strongest spell and it was the first time Meteor/Meteo had any storie relevance) In fact in FFVII it is explictly said that the black materia is a Summon materia, and Sephiroth could only cast the spell in the lifetream river that was the northen crater. The meteor in XIV was casted thousands of years before Darnus was ever born, Darnus only served as a conduit to guide the meteor, nothing else.
As far as the Weapons go, you are correct, the weapons did awaken when sephiroth awoke as a reaction to him, now why did they chose to attack the population and shirna instead of the big bad guy in the crater is beyond me, but i guess they really like their mako ? As for the shield i am not entierly sure, but i do seem to recall it was sephiroth who put it up, tho it could have been the "Planet" or something, i'll have to check on that one.
As for the Sephiroth/Darnus comparions, yes darnus was by all intended purpossed created to be a sephiroth clone in XIV, but that is exactly what i am againts, he could have been XIV bad guy w/o having to rely on any of the previous main villains in the series, now do not get me wrong, there could have been a nod to sephiroth with the fire scene and all that, sure but his legion was the VII legion.... The fire scene, the meteor, how he just went CRAZAA! Etc Etc.
Also do not mention Kefka in the same sentence as Kuja or Sephiroth.. I am a VI Fanboy!
Kachi wrote:
Also, this idea that timesinks are essential to ensure that players keep playing is pretty outdated. Developers are totally capable of releasing games with sufficient content to carry through to major updates or expansions now. That's triple true for established games.
Kachi wrote:
Also, this idea that timesinks are essential to ensure that players keep playing is pretty outdated. Developers are totally capable of releasing games with sufficient content to carry through to major updates or expansions now. That's triple true for established games.
That is not true at all, the only developer who has been able to do that, is Blizzard.
Every game that is released for the past 6 years, has had to live up to World of Warcraft, and even i have been guilty of comparing a brand new MMO to WoW in content, and is not even fair, No new MMO will be able to launch with 10 years of content... Is just not possible.
Ostia wrote:
Kachi wrote:
Also, this idea that timesinks are essential to ensure that players keep playing is pretty outdated. Developers are totally capable of releasing games with sufficient content to carry through to major updates or expansions now. That's triple true for established games.
Kachi wrote:
Also, this idea that timesinks are essential to ensure that players keep playing is pretty outdated. Developers are totally capable of releasing games with sufficient content to carry through to major updates or expansions now. That's triple true for established games.
That is not true at all, the only developer who has been able to do that, is Blizzard.
Every game that is released for the past 6 years, has had to live up to World of Warcraft, and even i have been guilty of comparing a brand new MMO to WoW in content, and is not even fair, No new MMO will be able to launch with 10 years of content... Is just not possible.
Reread what I said. It's easy to launch with enough content to sustain up to the next major update and/or EXPANSION. Nowhere did I say they could release 10 years of content at launch.
Games can absolutely launch with enough content to sustain play for a year or two given the average pool of resources for triple A titles. Games like GW2 prove this, even though they failed to capitalize on it by allowing players to burn through content in no time at all.
Quote:
Games can absolutely launch with enough content to sustain play for a year or two given the average pool of resources for triple A titles. Games like GW2 prove this, even though they failed to capitalize on it by allowing players to burn through content in no time at all.
One problem with comparing FFXIV to GW2 is that both Guild Wars titles have leaned heavily on PvP content... the average GW player is pretty intense about PvP, hence the big "WvWvW" feature of GW2 (which I still haven't played yet, but really should). Meanwhile, the average FF player cares less about PvP. And if you want to talk about compelling timesink content, well, is anything more of a timesink than PvP? Not only is it supposedly addictive, but all developers really need to do to build content for PvP is provide some kind of space for it.
GW2 did have a lot of open-world content, but all the cool public quests get suffocated by ArenaNet's decision to install so many disposable quest hubs. The best way for players to level up is just to run from hub to hub, grinding away on the easy heart quests/vistas/telepoints/points of interest, and then run on to the next one. There's no incentive or reason to revisit past areas, so all of those interesting public quests are basically one-and-done for the player, too.
I think creating actual content that's not dependent on timesinks (something that ultimately isn't disposable) is pretty difficult, which is why I'm totally fine with having a certain degree of timesink in the game. Timesinks help to keep content relevant, while also building up that feeling of having to put in some effort to get something. My wife (who isn't nearly as much of a gamer as I am) is really sad about how certain timesinks have been removed from games, such as having to actually walk places, rather than hit the "fast travel" button. I'm in total agreement... in the early stages of FFXI, even having to walk from the Craig of Dem to Valkurm Dunes, and then have to watch out for goblins/tunnel bats on the way to Selbina (while also risking death from undead), was part of the game's content that didn't require any special NMs or dynamic quests to be implemented.
Ii think Yoshi-P & co. are doing a very smart thing by implementing various dungeons throughout the game that will be the optimal places for players to level up. None of that content will be disposable, considering how FFXIV players are allowed to level up more than one job at a time. It will be interesting to see what else is there to keep players busy.
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
Jormungandr
Hyperion
Thayos, I'm not trying to antagonize, but you seem to have a habit of taking the examples I use to demonstrate a certain point and then strawmanning them into a wider, irrelevant argument. For example, my reference to GW2 was specifically about the quantity of PvE content. That's the only point I was making in highlighting it as an example, and comments about PvP and hubs really don't relate to that point in any way, so there's no "problem" in using GW2 as an example.
That aside, I don't disagree with your points about player transportation, hubs, etc. They're just tangential to the point I was making.
That aside, I don't disagree with your points about player transportation, hubs, etc. They're just tangential to the point I was making.
Quote:
For example, my reference to GW2 was specifically about the quantity of PvE content.
Ah, my bad... I missed that.
However, where my argument is relevant is that FFXIV really can't lean on PvP content like other games can, because the average FF player doesn't really care about PvP. This makes life more difficult for the FFXIV dev team.
EDIT: And don't worry, you're not at all antagonizing me... I apologize if I've seemed antagonizing to you. More than anything, I just love the back-and-forth discussion between like-minded people.
Edited, Mar 10th 2013 10:06am by Thayos
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
Jormungandr
Hyperion
No problem, and I agree with your point. They don't need to rely on PvP to create sufficient content without timesinks, was mine.
Not all "timesinks" are bad. A game that's all "reward, reward, reward, reward" leaves little room for the playing part. But it is important that those inbetween parts that take time are actually playing more than working.
Not all "timesinks" are bad. A game that's all "reward, reward, reward, reward" leaves little room for the playing part. But it is important that those inbetween parts that take time are actually playing more than working.
Kachi wrote:
Ostia wrote:
Kachi wrote:
Also, this idea that timesinks are essential to ensure that players keep playing is pretty outdated. Developers are totally capable of releasing games with sufficient content to carry through to major updates or expansions now. That's triple true for established games.
Kachi wrote:
Also, this idea that timesinks are essential to ensure that players keep playing is pretty outdated. Developers are totally capable of releasing games with sufficient content to carry through to major updates or expansions now. That's triple true for established games.
That is not true at all, the only developer who has been able to do that, is Blizzard.
Every game that is released for the past 6 years, has had to live up to World of Warcraft, and even i have been guilty of comparing a brand new MMO to WoW in content, and is not even fair, No new MMO will be able to launch with 10 years of content... Is just not possible.
Reread what I said. It's easy to launch with enough content to sustain up to the next major update and/or EXPANSION. Nowhere did I say they could release 10 years of content at launch.
Games can absolutely launch with enough content to sustain play for a year or two given the average pool of resources for triple A titles. Games like GW2 prove this, even though they failed to capitalize on it by allowing players to burn through content in no time at all.
Kachi wrote:
Ostia wrote:
Kachi wrote:
Also, this idea that timesinks are essential to ensure that players keep playing is pretty outdated. Developers are totally capable of releasing games with sufficient content to carry through to major updates or expansions now. That's triple true for established games.
Kachi wrote:
Also, this idea that timesinks are essential to ensure that players keep playing is pretty outdated. Developers are totally capable of releasing games with sufficient content to carry through to major updates or expansions now. That's triple true for established games.
That is not true at all, the only developer who has been able to do that, is Blizzard.
Every game that is released for the past 6 years, has had to live up to World of Warcraft, and even i have been guilty of comparing a brand new MMO to WoW in content, and is not even fair, No new MMO will be able to launch with 10 years of content... Is just not possible.
Reread what I said. It's easy to launch with enough content to sustain up to the next major update and/or EXPANSION. Nowhere did I say they could release 10 years of content at launch.
Games can absolutely launch with enough content to sustain play for a year or two given the average pool of resources for triple A titles. Games like GW2 prove this, even though they failed to capitalize on it by allowing players to burn through content in no time at all.
Name me one game that has been able to do it ? Not Swotor, not rift and not GW2 was able to mantain it's playerbase until its expansion release with the content from launch, either to little endgame, or content that was so easy that got burned before the expansion came.
So you understand that if they made the content more difficult, it would last longer, right? You seem to have answered your own question.
If nothing else, you can easily see how most of those games released with significantly more content than, say, FFXIV.
Recent Visitors: 86
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (86)
- Forums
- Final Fantasy XIV
- General Discussion
- I think ARR will succeed.
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC