Originally posted by DarknessReign

I found some info from FFXIVCORE notes taken from Yoshi-P what to expect in a nutshell

FFXIV “Version 1.0” General Additions between September 2010 & September 2012:

• Spirit Bonding and Materia System (similar to FFVII) where you can equip gear, it has a “spirit gauge” bar and when it maxes you can break it down into material you can equip which boosts your stats.
• Grand Companies for each city which serve as a main focal point for story quests (also issues your Chocobo)
• Primals and Weapons (Ifrit, Moogle King, Garuda)
• Airships between cities
• Auto-Attack
• Quests that grant EXP
• EXP parties with exp chains
• Jobs, Artifact Armor, Relic Armor
• Fatigue System is LONG gone

• The Free Company system. Think of these as Linkshells (FF equivalent of guilds) taken to the next level. The details are scarce at this point, but things such as company bases, company summons, and other large, cool stuff of that nature has been hinted at.

• Instanced Housing System (3 sizes, small, medium, large. Medium and Large cost high amounts of gil.) – Need to read more on this. Comprehensive Info.

• Adjustment to Gil Retention (All costs were brought down, so you will have less gil when you start.) Example: V.1.0 You had 10,000, now have 1 less numerator = 1,000.

• Auction House (Finally)

• Chocobo Augmenting / Gearing the Chocobo/ Fights with you out in battle / Can call it anywhere outside of cities

• New mounts (Courels, Drakes)

• PVP (this will be contained to two main areas; one for small-medium scale encounters and other for much larger, objective based encounters.)

• Delivery Box (Mognet?)

• Jumping Function

• New summons (Titan and Odin)

• Rebalanced/new class abilities and traits.

• Redesigned combat / Limit Break System

• New notorious monsters (rare enemies; small and large varieties) and new enemies/monsters.

• FATE System (to add)


• Armory System / Job System (Classes & Jobs)

You start the game as either a Disciple of Magic or Disciple of War. These are classes you can start as. At level 30, you can advance to the designated class job, which grants you more skills, power, and equipment.

Gladiator > Paladin
Marauder > Warrior
Pugilist > Monk
Archer > Bard (P.s. Archers don’t need to buy arrows separately anymore)
Lancer > Dragoon
Conjuror > White Mage
Thaumaturge> Black Mage
*NEW* Arcanist > Summoner

Artifact Armor / Relic Weapons
Each job has a set of artifact armor (AF) that you can start gathering through a string of quests starting at level 30.

Relic Weapons have a string of quests that are much larger in length. (Anyone who played FFXI knows this)

• Leveling / Experience Points / Quests

Gone are the days of grinding. Side quests, game content, and the main storyline grant you the majority of your experience points for your job to level up to 50. There are NUMEROUS side quests. Quests pop up over NPC’s heads and have a “Where to go” feature on mini map.

• Main Storyline

The main story is brand new in FFXIV:ARR and the main storyline alone can get you from level 1 to 50.

• End Game

• CROSS-SERVER dungeon/content finder (Automatically matches you up with those that are seeking the same content.)

• Crystal Tower (TO ADD)

• Bahamuts' Labyrinth (TO ELABORATE)

Full Parties = 8 People
Alliance = 3 Parties (24 people for End Game Runs)

More or less all this info can also be found on the front page reading and watching the links. Maybe this can clear up some issues and awnser questions people have.

Yes saw this as well lets just say that  EXP parties with exp chains is true lol.

Originally posted by Metza

This is just the questing system, they really did not take any chances with it, I would like to see how important it is to do these really though. I would prefer that they make your main source of leveling similar to ffxi which is grouping, maybe just give a few more things to do as a group than travel to a place and pull the same monster over and over.

As for the combat, It is very close to what I expected it to be and what I would want in my FF game, there are plenty of "action" titles out there to play the combat is a more traditional rpg style pretty much turn based, I enjoy this kind of combat at least the way it was done in ffxi I did. Those looking for an action game are not going to find it here with this combat, but the combat (at least in ffxi) was alot deeper than just standing there as it appears to be on these monsters.

It is deeper the video just shows one player beating on lower level mobs.

Originally posted by zanfire

Originally posted by drivendawn

Originally posted by zanfire

Originally posted by drivendawn

Originally posted by KhinRunite

Have you been around here when SWTOR, GW2, and to lesser extents TERA and TSW are getting hyped? You should have seen this coming from a mile away to know better than to fight it. It's a cycle that every new (Themepark) MMO goes through.

Based on this video it really does feel like the traditional quest system WoW popularized. We all know that's not the entirety of the game, but what they've shown here screams of "traditional". Maybe they do have cutscenes on main quests, I don't know, but I hope they do.

Agreed, it is as you say but yoshi said that it would not be action combat and would be quest based and people have known this for a while. So i dont know what people were thinking. That they would see alpha and find out it was just the opposite? Anyway SE said they would have both voice and text cut scenes for the three different story arcs.

quests are fine, just not how they tend to be in games like WoW (see my post above as to what i mean)

i just dont understand why they would supposedly take away options to level (dungeon runs, camp grinds) and make the really effective way only 1 way.

Im in alpha I wish I could address those points but I can't with the NDA .

those points are my HUGE fears that this game will become just like eveything else. I liked how 1.0 was going, but they clearly changed quite a bit. As much as i would like FFXI-2, i know there are some things that id change to todays standards...but those ones i listed are what drives me from so may MMOs.

I can say that FATE will be a fun way to level SE said there would be 5 to 10 in each zone. Plus they said something about a beastiary being  viable way to do so which I like the sound of.

Originally posted by zanfire

Originally posted by drivendawn

Originally posted by KhinRunite

Have you been around here when SWTOR, GW2, and to lesser extents TERA and TSW are getting hyped? You should have seen this coming from a mile away to know better than to fight it. It's a cycle that every new (Themepark) MMO goes through.

Based on this video it really does feel like the traditional quest system WoW popularized. We all know that's not the entirety of the game, but what they've shown here screams of "traditional". Maybe they do have cutscenes on main quests, I don't know, but I hope they do.

Agreed, it is as you say but yoshi said that it would not be action combat and would be quest based and people have known this for a while. So i dont know what people were thinking. That they would see alpha and find out it was just the opposite? Anyway SE said they would have both voice and text cut scenes for the three different story arcs.

quests are fine, just not how they tend to be in games like WoW (see my post above as to what i mean)

i just dont understand why they would supposedly take away options to level (dungeon runs, camp grinds) and make the really effective way only 1 way.

Im in alpha I wish I could address those points but I can't with the NDA .

Originally posted by KhinRunite

Have you been around here when SWTOR, GW2, and to lesser extents TERA and TSW are getting hyped? You should have seen this coming from a mile away to know better than to fight it. It's a cycle that every new (Themepark) MMO goes through.

Based on this video it really does feel like the traditional quest system WoW popularized. We all know that's not the entirety of the game, but what they've shown here screams of "traditional". Maybe they do have cutscenes on main quests, I don't know, but I hope they do.

Agreed, it is as you say but yoshi said that it would not be action combat and would be quest based and people have known this for a while. So i dont know what people were thinking. That they would see alpha and find out it was just the opposite? Anyway SE said they would have both voice and text cut scenes for the three different story arcs.

Originally posted by XxGrimmxX
From what I've seen of FF XIV: ARR, it is a very detailed tab targetting game. The quest hubs still are the main source of any xp and they are still sticking with the stupid leve system. While FFXI is an extremely out-dated game, I'm sure that FFXI veterans are going to call this a disgrace to the franchise, much like FFXIII was for the single-player versions of the FF series.

Well I am am FFXI vet since 2003 and I love what they have done so leave this speculation at door.

Originally posted by azzamasin

Originally posted by drivendawn

Originally posted by ZigZags

Originally posted by drivendawn

Originally posted by azzamasin
WOW, not to sound a complete idiot but who in there right mind could endure such pathetic combat.  I thought Vanguard was slow when I tried it a few months ago but this takes the frikken cake.  Sure the scenery and gfx look amazing and the UI 'isn't half bad, but that combat is lets jsut say........the worse thing I have ever seen in an MMO.  It may as well go complete turn base liek the old FF games.

WOW, blah blah blah i like action combat. Ok we get it you want action combat and thats your opinion, but some of us like the tactic style combat so we are nutty not your game move on. lol 

Well sad for you because this is not tactic combat because it is still in real time and not turn based. It looks turn based because of how slow and in place it is. But in reality, its not.

 

This game will be as unpopular as its failed predecessor.

 

Yes it is just because its not turn baced doesn't mean its not tactical.

If you think that style of combat is tactical I feel for you.  I would take tera's combat over that anyday of the week and twice on Sunday and Its safe to say I am not a fan of Tera's combat.

I'll have to remeber to cry later . If you played 14 in parties and did the dungeons you would know it was very tactical not just boss mechanics although those were good as well. They had a combo system that was baced on where your positioning was to the mob and many other tacical mechanics that will be in ARR. If you want action baced combat then this isn't your game.

Originally posted by ZigZags

Originally posted by drivendawn

Originally posted by azzamasin
WOW, not to sound a complete idiot but who in there right mind could endure such pathetic combat.  I thought Vanguard was slow when I tried it a few months ago but this takes the frikken cake.  Sure the scenery and gfx look amazing and the UI 'isn't half bad, but that combat is lets jsut say........the worse thing I have ever seen in an MMO.  It may as well go complete turn base liek the old FF games.

WOW, blah blah blah i like action combat. Ok we get it you want action combat and thats your opinion, but some of us like the tactic style combat so we are nutty not your game move on. lol 

Well sad for you because this is not tactic combat because it is still in real time and not turn based. It looks turn based because of how slow and in place it is. But in reality, its not.

 

This game will be as unpopular as its failed predecessor.

 

Yes it is just because its not turn baced doesn't mean its not tactical.

Originally posted by azzamasin
WOW, not to sound a complete idiot but who in there right mind could endure such pathetic combat.  I thought Vanguard was slow when I tried it a few months ago but this takes the frikken cake.  Sure the scenery and gfx look amazing and the UI 'isn't half bad, but that combat is lets jsut say........the worse thing I have ever seen in an MMO.  It may as well go complete turn base liek the old FF games.

WOW, blah blah blah i like action combat. Ok we get it you want action combat and thats your opinion, but some of us like the tactic style combat so we are nutty not your game move on. lol 

Originally posted by ezpz77

Originally posted by DarknessReign
and you base this on a alpha build that only has 5% of content and the bare basics in terms of mechanics? wait until beta 3 to cast judgement

 

I remember the exact same crap was being said all throughout early and even much later testing cycles for the original game...

 I  was on 14s first beta and your right but for different reasons than what is being talked about in this thread. I am in alfa now and let me tell you its tons better  than the orginal betas and most people on the alfa forums think so to.

Originally posted by TangentPoint

Originally posted by drivendawn

They were slammed by critics the first time because "being original" meant having a non-working UI and no jump and zero content outside of levequests and 10 story quests.

 

So, no, the game didn't fail because it was "original" or "non-WoW".  It failed because it just sucked.

 

Sorry have to disagree it wasnt just the UI and jump they tried to be different with the market wards and guild leves as a different way of questing both of which no one liked thus the changes being made in ARR.

Umm... I think you need to re-read his post, because you just completely skipped over two major things he pointed out.

If you notice the bits I highlighted in each of your posts, you'll notice he mentions 4 different things. You acknowledge only two, and then characterize it as him noting "just" the UI and no jump - even though he clearly noted more than that. I'm not sure if it's cherry-picking, a strawman, or just plain poor reading comprehension, but what you did there is a textbook perfect example of something.

What's even more interesting is how, even after ignoring their mention of levequests, you turn around and bring it back into the discussion - albeit from a different angle.

FFXIV 1.0 failed for a number of reasons...

1. The UI was laggy/slow and required entirely too many button clicks to get even the simplest tasks completed.

2. The engine was an absolute dog, and ran like utter crap on even high end-machines

3. Levequests were (initially anyway) the only significantly available content in the game, and they were poorly and lazily implemented (nothing but a bunch of repetitive "kill x of y" type quest - which people did not enjoy. Aside from that, many of them were poorly planned and designed.

4. I don't believe the lack of jump did turned away so many people as folks assume. People complained about it, but ultimately kept playing. I chalk the whole "people quit because of no jumping" up to hyperbole. I could believe it was "a straw that broke the camel's back", on top of numerous other issues. But I don't believe "no jumping" by itself was *the* deal breaker on its own. There's too many wildly successful games out there without jump that people are just fine with - so clearly it's not a "mandatory" part of a game experience as people make it sound. It's just selective arguing.

5. Limited story content, whether main storyline or side-quests, as was pointed out.

6. The notoriously bad "copy-pasta'd" terrain everywhere.

7. Limited environments to explore in, making the "copy pasta" thing even worse because there were so few different environment types to begin with.

8. At the beginning there was the "fatigue" system (can only level a given class for so long before xp would slow down and eventually stop completely before having to be given time to "reset" by switching to another class). People did not like this.

9. The Market Wards were an absolute train-wreck in every way. Unstable, unintuitive, poorly planned, poorly organized, and on and on. With the slow/kludgy UI, it made even *finding* an item you wanted a ridiculous endeavor, nevermind buying it.

10. No chocobos at launch, which meant a *lot* more running on foot for a far longer period of time than should have ever happened. In FFXI, you got a chocobo by level 20 and then you could go anywhere on foot by riding one, which sped things up a lot.  In FFXIV, you could get to level 40 and still be running on foot, for very long distances.

11. Gathering and how to actually gather with each was poorly explained and too tedious for many people. I'm all for mini-game type activities over the "click and profit" approach... but XIV's implementation was just horrid to me.

And on and on...

Also have to remember, that not every single person held every single thing as "an issue" or as a "deal breaker". I remember people arguing in favor of the market wards, feeling they just needed to be "tweaked a little". People loved the fatigue system... and so on. So depending on who you ask, you're going to get a different spread of "reasons FFXIV failed for them", and they're going to rank various issues differently than others.

Overall though, FFXIV tanked for all those reasons, not just "this or that one that happened to be an issue with me".

 

 

I know what he said and he was commenting on a post i made pages ago where i said "I think you're missing his point. He's saying the first time, they were trying to be more unique and it failed. Now that they're trying to be truer to the mmo standard, they're getting a bunch of complaints about them not being original enough. That's why he was saying damned if you do, damned if you don't. I would have to agree with this sentiment." And his post to this reads like hes saying that the UI and jump was the only things that got away from the standard so the reason that it flopped wasn't that it was trying to get off the norm but the lack of content and such. I agree lack of content was a major thing but I disagree that the UI and lack of jump were the only things that weren't the standard.  Anyway, my point is is that I agree it failed because it sucked. The cause of it sucking, however, wasn't just lack of content but also the fact that it was trying to implement unheard of things, for the sake of innovation, that nobody liked. If he wasn't trying to say that lack of content alone contributed to the failure of this game, then I retract the above post. If he is, then my statement stands.

lol

Originally posted by SuperXero89

Looking at that first video, how far are you from beyond Limsa Lominsa?

 

Beautiful yes, but the game really lacks variety in the landscapes.

 sorry wrong thread

Originally posted by alyosha17

Originally posted by drivendawn

Originally posted by Ralstlin

Originally posted by Whitebeards

Yeah because first attempt was so damn successful right? what possible reason they could have to rework on entire game from scratch?

Damn if you do and damn if you don't.

Damn if u do? i think u are wrong on that. FFXIV: ARR have a new Producer and Director and a lot more people than previus fail working on this title... is like u say that FFXII had no future because FFX-2 was so bad. FFXIV: ARR Is completely a new game with the same lore, and lore was not bad in 1.0.

 

 

I think you're missing his point. He's saying the first time, they were trying to be more unique and it failed. Now that they're trying to be truer to the mmo standard, they're getting a bunch of complaints about them not being original enough. That's why he was saying damned if you do, damned if you don't. I would have to agree with this sentiment.

They were slammed by critics the first time because "being original" meant having a non-working UI and no jump and zero content outside of levequests and 10 story quests.

 

So, no, the game didn't fail because it was "original" or "non-WoW".  It failed because it just sucked.

 

 

Sorry have to disagree it wasnt just the UI and jump they tried to be different with the market wards and guild leves as a different way of questing both of which no one liked thus the changes being made in ARR.

Originally posted by alyosha17

Originally posted by DarknessReign

When i explored for the first time and i came to this zone i was like WOW! i love this place and the music

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkgKX9BOP5g&feature=g-hist

 

I also liked this plae

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9ERvWr3ylE

It's going to be funny to see how butchered those zones are in ARR.

 

Your opinion baced on nothing.

Originally posted by Whitebeards

Originally posted by fundayz

Originally posted by Nitth

 

---

Originally posted by fundayz

---

Originally posted by DavisFlight Putting in a dungeon finder in any game is basically admitting that you screwed up the game design and have given up.

---

How so?

---

 

I guess the theory is if you make an engaging immersive world then you would not need a dungeon finder.

People have changed tho, They want quick n' easy access to dungeons without the "adventure" of seeking out others and adventuring across the land to the depths of a dungeon..

People haven't changed, they've ALWAYS liked quick and easy. The MMO playerbase has changed:now it is not limited to basement dwellers who have all the time in the world to pretend their life away.

 

 

 

And what is interesting is that GW2 is a game for casuals and dungeon finder fits perfectly in this which is something casuals appreciate. It saves time and is great convenience for those who can not spend hours spamming for groups.

This right here

Originally posted by ForumPvP

Originally posted by drivendawn

Originally posted by ForumPvP

Originally posted by drivendawn

Originally posted by fundayz

Originally posted by DavisFlight
Putting in a dungeon finder in any game is basically admitting that you screwed up the game design and have given up.

How so?

Yes I would like to know as well.

That game,how they put it,they will find new friends because of automated teaming everywhere,automated "friends" everywhere,in WvWvW in quests ,bosses ,can be in multiple guilds and x-server too i think,whatever there is.

If that was true that they will find "friends" that way,its good for socializing etc,now where is those "friends"

They have teamed now for about 10,000 people or something like that,they should now have atleast 100-500 friends on their friendlists but what kind of friends are those if they are not willing to help in dungeons and theres only 9 of those,says wiki.

to me it looks like that those kind of socializing tools are scumbag finders.

 

So people who use dungeon finder are scum back this crap up with numbers and proof. Like I said people will often use this when guild mates are busy calling these people scum is BS.

Thats just how you see it and most likely think that way.

But what im talking about is the result what these people gets from that kind of tools.

 

Yeah whatever I made a few friends using said tool and the ones that I didn't make freinds with new as most people do that this is a tool of convenience.

Originally posted by ForumPvP

Originally posted by drivendawn

Originally posted by fundayz

Originally posted by DavisFlight
Putting in a dungeon finder in any game is basically admitting that you screwed up the game design and have given up.

How so?

Yes I would like to know as well.

That game,how they put it,they will find new friends because of automated teaming everywhere,automated "friends" everywhere,in WvWvW in quests ,bosses ,can be in multiple guilds and x-server too i think,whatever there is.

If that was true that they will find "friends" that way,its good for socializing etc,now where is those "friends"

They have teamed now for about 10,000 people or something like that,they should now have atleast 100-500 friends on their friendlists but what kind of friends are those if they are not willing to help in dungeons and theres only 9 of those,says wiki.

to me it looks like that those kind of socializing tools are scumbag finders.

 

So people who use dungeon finder are scum back this crap up with numbers and proof. Like I said people will often use this when guild mates are busy calling these people scum is BS.