 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups Platforms PCXboxPlayStationNintendoGames ActionStrategyRole Playing GamesSimulatorsSport Games |
Game Forum / Role Playing Games / Final Fantasy / April 2004FFXI, The Dreaded Thread
I'm writing in defense *gasp* of FF XI. First off, the remarks about how pathetic MMORPGs are. Well, dang, all video games are pathetic. They're ways for people to escape to a world of fantasy. The only thing that makes MMORPGs more pathetic is that there are a few people (this is actualy fairly rare) who take them to extremes, replacing their real lifes with them, even going so far as to spend real money on individual imaginary items. ("character- I just got a sword of +5 off of ebay!!! myself- 'whoopity do-da', *cough* pathetic *cough*) Second, as far as MMORPGs go, it isn't the piece of crap that some people say. Some people look at a game that's a bit different, and don't even give it a chance. All of the Final Fantasy games are quite different, but FFXI takes it's differences to the extreme just be being online. Now, as far as setup goes, yes it sucks. Did you expect it to be a blast? Of course not. You bought the game for the part you actually play, not the setup. Character wise, FFXI gives you a fair amount of choice, but just like other FF games, it doesn't hole a whole lot of relation to it's predecessors. For example, there was someone who mentioned that the Tarutaru (the cute little deformed characters) were Squares attempt at making the classic black mage (you know, the Orco type guy). This has never been stated by Square or anyone else proficient. Someone saw some similarities and drew their own conclusions. Think what you will about the different races in it, but the worst that can truly be said is that the Elvaan should just be called elves, while the Humes should just be called humans. As far as story wise, it's not nearly as bad as most people have stated. It's plot lies in the form of missions that you can take, where ....spoilers coming up, beware: Spoiler start Just within the first three missions (if you're a member of Windhurst), you find several things. One: two minsters of Windhurst are seeking an old type of magic which has been banned, and two: an alliance with a the race called Yagudo has gone downhill to the point where it's being totally put aside. Spoiler finish. On top of the above, just the basic plot that an ancient race (called the beastmen) have come back from defeat and are starting to take prominence gives at least something to the story right from the start. In addition to that, we have the different nations of Van'diel all vying for dominance over the world. In short, there's quite a bit. Also, like all online games, FFXI has one factor that's especially important. It's continually being updated and changed. New areas are added, new features are added, new npcs are added, new job classes, etc. It's a continually changing world. On top of that, some of the same people who bash MMORPGs (not all of you though) also complain about how FFXI isn't as good, since there isn't as much "socialization". Ironic, how the MMORPG bashers are the ones that state this, but I digress. I've played Everquest for two months, and this for...well...I guess about two weeks now. So far, FFXI has proven to be much more social, at least on the server I'm on (Asura). I have about 15-20 people on my friends list, ranging from lvl. 1 to lvl. 38. In fact, almost everybody seems to be at least kind to each other, if not exactly talkative. Lastly, several of the missions are geared towards groups, almost forcing you to be somewhat "sociable" So, does that mean that there isn't any just straight out creature bashing? Of course not. It wouldn't be an RPG if that wasn't the case. I guess what I'm truly trying to say is that whether you like it or not is strictly a matter of opinion. Some love it, some hate it. Others, like me, enjoy it when we can (for example, I don't play it all that often, since I work full-time and attend college full-time). Enjoy it for what it's worth. It's a GAME. Asgeras >First off, the remarks about how pathetic MMORPGs are. Well, dang, all >video games are pathetic. They're ways for people to escape to a world of Perhaps so (though I wouldn't call, for example, GTA3 pathetic), but some games are certainly more pathetic than others, and MMORPGs are pathetic enough to attract special notice. >fantasy. The only thing that makes MMORPGs more pathetic is that there are >a few people (this is actualy fairly rare) who take them to extremes, >replacing their real lifes with them, even going so far as to spend real >money on individual imaginary items. ("character- I just got a sword of +5 >off of ebay!!! myself- 'whoopity do-da', *cough* pathetic *cough*) Interestingly enough, those are the only people who are actually successful at MMORPGs. This just highlights their pointlessness. >Now, as far as setup goes, yes it sucks. Did you expect it to be a blast? >Of course not. You bought the game for the part you actually play, not the >setup. That sounds awfully similar to the defense developers give for when they release a game that's so buggy as to be a beta. The fact that you don't actually play the installation sequence is irrelevant, especially considering the fact that you don't really play MMORPGs themselves either. >Character wise, FFXI gives you a fair amount of choice, but just like other >FF games, it doesn't hole a whole lot of relation to it's predecessors. For The other FF games are far more related to each other than you're willing to admit. The differences between FFXI and the other FFs are large enough to merit exclusion from the series. It should've been called "Final Fantasy Online" instead. >On top of that, some of the same people who bash MMORPGs (not all of you >though) also complain about how FFXI isn't as good, since there isn't as >much "socialization". Ironic, how the MMORPG bashers are the ones that I dunno who does that. I'm against all MMORPGs equally, and I certainly wouldn't think that one is better than the other because of socialization. When I want socialization, I go to a chat room or (better yet) actually leave the house. I think most people here are the same way. Rob ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net  SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "When the vice president and I are alone, it's Colin and Dick." --US Secretary of State Colin Powell >>First off, the remarks about how pathetic MMORPGs are. Well, dang, all >>video games are pathetic. They're ways for people to escape to a world of > >Perhaps so (though I wouldn't call, for example, GTA3 pathetic), but >some games are certainly more pathetic than others, and MMORPGs are >pathetic enough to attract special notice. If video games are pathetic then so is reading a book. They both accomplish the same thing. Consider your regular RPG as say the LOTR series. Now take your MMORPG as one of those book you start on page 1 and make a yes or no decision to go to page 24 or 71. You get to chose your own outcome. Either way you look at it, your still reading a book. >>fantasy. The only thing that makes MMORPGs more pathetic is that there are >>a few people (this is actualy fairly rare) who take them to extremes, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Interestingly enough, those are the only people who are actually >successful at MMORPGs. This just highlights their pointlessness. No.... they are just successful quicker. Letting someone else do the work for them. >>Now, as far as setup goes, yes it sucks. Did you expect it to be a blast? >>Of course not. You bought the game for the part you actually play, not the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >especially considering the fact that you don't really play MMORPGs >themselves either. What online game hasn't had patches put out due to buggyness? >>Character wise, FFXI gives you a fair amount of choice, but just like other >>FF games, it doesn't hole a whole lot of relation to it's predecessors. For [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >large enough to merit exclusion from the series. It should've been >called "Final Fantasy Online" instead. Agree "Final Fantasy Online" >>On top of that, some of the same people who bash MMORPGs (not all of you >>though) also complain about how FFXI isn't as good, since there isn't as [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >Rob >ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net Socializing is a personal preference. Whether you go to a bar, hang out on a street corner, stare at someones web cam, or start up an online video game. They all have there ups and downs. Judging someone by how they socialize is like judging someone by how they eat their Reeses Peanut butter Cup. > >>First off, the remarks about how pathetic MMORPGs are. Well, dang, all > >>video games are pathetic. They're ways for people to escape to a world of [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > If video games are pathetic then so is reading a book. They both > accomplish the same thing. Uh, really not. There has yet to be a game that operates on the level of great literature. Planescape was the best effort I'd seen in this regard. If you replace "book" with "low-rent genre book," I'll agree. > >>Now, as far as setup goes, yes it sucks. Did you expect it to be a blast? > >>Of course not. You bought the game for the part you actually play, not the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > What online game hasn't had patches put out due to buggyness? This in no way ameliorates Rob's point. It comes closer to arguing for what he's seeing. > >>On top of that, some of the same people who bash MMORPGs (not all of you > >>though) also complain about how FFXI isn't as good, since there isn't as [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > by how they socialize is like judging someone by how they eat their > Reeses Peanut butter Cup. Right; someone dressing up in a fursuit and yiffing with someone else in a fursuit is as completely healthy and viable as any other means of relating. For example. - Steve > >>First off, the remarks about how pathetic MMORPGs are. Well, dang, all > >>video games are pathetic. They're ways for people to escape to a world of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > If video games are pathetic then so is reading a book. I'll have to (somewhat pretensiously) disagree with you there. The quality of stories and depth of characters in games rarely ever approaches the quality found in good books (let alone great books). They both > accomplish the same thing. Consider your regular RPG as say the LOTR > series. Now take your MMORPG as one of those book you start on page 1 > and make a yes or no decision to go to page 24 or 71. You get to chose > your own outcome. Either way you look at it, your still reading a > book. Choose your own adventure books are objectively sh.t for literature, actually. Character development is almost completely absent, and you just move from event to event with the only real variable determining what happens next what you did /last/. In a way, that is a decent analogy of the difference between story-based RPGs and MMORPGs. > >>fantasy. The only thing that makes MMORPGs more pathetic is that there are > >>a few people (this is actualy fairly rare) who take them to extremes, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > No.... they are just successful quicker. Letting someone else do the > work for them. I guess, then, the difference is that most people are reading through the same stupid paragraph in their choose-your-own-adventure book, trying to find the best solution, and those guys are skipping ahead a few pages to see which choice will provide the best outcome. Still sounds like a shitty game to me. > >>Now, as far as setup goes, yes it sucks. Did you expect it to be a blast? > >>Of course not. You bought the game for the part you actually play, not the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > What online game hasn't had patches put out due to buggyness? That was not the point. Nor does it argue against it in any way. > >>On top of that, some of the same people who bash MMORPGs (not all of you > >>though) also complain about how FFXI isn't as good, since there isn't as [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > by how they socialize is like judging someone by how they eat their > Reeses Peanut butter Cup. Not if eating your peanut butter cup by grinding it into the ground is less efficient than simply sticking it in your mouth. That is, some forms of socialization are of a lower quality (in terms of what is required for complete, effective communication) than others. IM'ing or using the telephone, for example, are a significantly lower quality of communication than face-to-face communication. Though, I don't think Rob's point was to pass judgement on how MMORPG'ers communicate. I think he was just saying it was irrelevant in his determination of why they are bad. Balthasar SignatureLife contains but two tragedies. One is not to get your heart's desire; the other is to get it. --Socrates "To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting." --Sun Tzu, The Art of War >> >Perhaps so (though I wouldn't call, for example, GTA3 pathetic), but >> >some games are certainly more pathetic than others, and MMORPGs are [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >of stories and depth of characters in games rarely ever approaches the >quality found in good books (let alone great books). I was going more toward they both take you somewhere that your not. a.k.a - Imagination >They both >> accomplish the same thing. Consider your regular RPG as say the LOTR [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >which choice will provide the best outcome. Still sounds like a shitty game >to me. I remember I used to do that. For the record, what i come across in online gaming is that it is highly considered cheating if you spend real money to get things in the game. If a player does this it is usually kept hush hush. Kinda like downloading one of those game saves of the net for say FF7. Then telling your friends you got all your characters up to lvl 99, all magic, yada yada etc. If your friends find out you cheated, get ready for a beat down. >> >>Now, as far as setup goes, yes it sucks. Did you expect it to be a >blast? [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > >Balthasar How efficient a form of communication is can only be determined by the persons having the conversation. "Low Quality" to some may be "High quality" to others. > >> >Perhaps so (though I wouldn't call, for example, GTA3 pathetic), but > >> >some games are certainly more pathetic than others, and MMORPGs are [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I was going more toward they both take you somewhere that your not. > a.k.a - Imagination Okay, fair enough. > >They both > >> accomplish the same thing. Consider your regular RPG as say the LOTR [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > I remember I used to do that. Yeah, I did it once or twice. But only after I had already gotten through it once, so I could see all of the alternate paths. > For the record, what i come across in online gaming is that it is > highly considered cheating if you spend real money to get things in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > magic, yada yada etc. If your friends find out you cheated, get ready > for a beat down. Yeah, but it doesn't seem to stop anyone. Whatever happened to that "Everquest Economy" that could rival with some third-world countries? > >> >>Now, as far as setup goes, yes it sucks. Did you expect it to be a > >blast? [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > How efficient a form of communication is can only be determined by the > persons having the conversation. I used the word efficient to refer to eating, since there is no such thing as "quality of eating." They're not really interchangable words, though. > "Low Quality" to some may be "High > quality" to others. I disagree. What I am refering to when I talk about quality is very objectively determined. Specifically, I'm talking about possible avenues of interpretation of ideas. On IM, all you have are words. The way you say what you want to say is paramount--you could be frowning when you type, but completely mask that anger with your words. And the opposite can happen as well, where someone can think you are angry because they can't see your face and hear the cadence of your speach. The fewer of these sorts of cues available to us, the greater the probability and range of complete misinterpretations. So, objectively, the quality of communication obtainable through face-to-face communication is potentially higher. Balthasar SignatureLife contains but two tragedies. One is not to get your heart's desire; the other is to get it. --Socrates "To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting." --Sun Tzu, The Art of War > >> Socializing is a personal preference. Whether you go to a bar, hang >> >> out on a street corner, stare at someones web cam, or start up an [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > >Balthasar I would not say that face-to-face is not the most efficient way of communication. However, there are circumstances where face-to-face communication cannot be obtained. Take for instance my friend was in Iraq for 9 months. Of course i would not be able to communicate to him F2F. So our most efficient form of convo. was an email once or twice a week. However, our highest quality form of communication was a telephone call that he was able to make maybe once every 2 weeks. > > >> Socializing is a personal preference. Whether you go to a bar, hang > >> >> out on a street corner, stare at someones web cam, or start up an [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > I would not say that face-to-face is not the most efficient way of > communication. I wasn't talking about efficiency. Read above. However, there are circumstances where face-to-face > communication cannot be obtained. Take for instance my friend was in > Iraq for 9 months. Of course i would not be able to communicate to him > F2F. You're not paying attention. Balthasar SignatureLife contains but two tragedies. One is not to get your heart's desire; the other is to get it. --Socrates "To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting." --Sun Tzu, The Art of War > > If video games are pathetic then so is reading a book. > > I'll have to (somewhat pretensiously) disagree with you there. The quality > of stories and depth of characters in games rarely ever approaches the > quality found in good books (let alone great books). Okay, bad example. I was referring to fantasy novels/ sci fi novels. Particularly fantasy. Nobody can deny that reading "The Republic", for instance, will definitely give you a better grasp on life than any video game will. > They both > > accomplish the same thing. Consider your regular RPG as say the LOTR [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > happens next what you did /last/. In a way, that is a decent analogy of the > difference between story-based RPGs and MMORPGs. Really? I'll agree with the bad analogy, but if you truly read my first post, you'd see that FFXI DOES have a story, just like the other FF games. > > >Interestingly enough, those are the only people who are actually > > >successful at MMORPGs. This just highlights their pointlessness. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > which choice will provide the best outcome. Still sounds like a shitty game > to me. Okay, now YOU'RE taking the analogy too far, drawing the fact that it's a 'shitty game' only from the fact that the books have always been worthless. Does the fact that you CAN cheat in a game make things worse off for those who don't? If so, almost every game ever produced for the computer sucks, since you can downlead cheats for them. However, most of us are satisfied with playing for the game properly. > > Socializing is a personal preference. Whether you go to a bar, hang > > out on a street corner, stare at someones web cam, or start up an [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Balthasar *shrug* Well, as I've said, I agree with the fact that face-to-face is much better than over the net/ on a computer, however, I do still enjoy socializing in other formats (IM, email, newsgroups, etc.) Asgeras >> > >Interestingly enough, those are the only people who are actually >> > >successful at MMORPGs. This just highlights their pointlessness. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >Okay, now YOU'RE taking the analogy too far, drawing the fact that it's a >'shitty game' only from the fact that the books have always been worthless. Actually, he's just saying that game sounds shitty no matter whether or not you cheat in it. His reasons for believing that MMORPGs are crap go much farther than that. >Does the fact that you CAN cheat in a game make things worse off for those >who don't? If so, almost every game ever produced for the computer sucks, In an MMORPG? Yes. Rob ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "When the vice president and I are alone, it's Colin and Dick." --US Secretary of State Colin Powell >>>fantasy. The only thing that makes MMORPGs more pathetic is that there are >>>a few people (this is actualy fairly rare) who take them to extremes, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >No.... they are just successful quicker. Letting someone else do the >work for them. And because of Malthusian starvation, they are the only ones who are successful. The people who are actually mentally balanced give up on progressing and use the MMORPG as a glorified chat room. Rob ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "When the vice president and I are alone, it's Colin and Dick." --US Secretary of State Colin Powell In a daze, I read Rob Browning's post, then collasped. > use the MMORPG as a glorified chat room. You mean like a/s/l type of stuff? Signaturehttp://animehistory.keenspace.com/d/20020310.html http://www.cafeshops.com/creexul.2534632 Charlie Sheen: I'm gonna carve this turkey, WITH MY MANHOOD! http://asagi.sakura.ne.jp/~walhalla/gallery/gallery_image/womb.jpg 1) Sometimes discuss video games as if they're important,2) Ape Jerkcity.com,3) Pretend that Penny Arcade and Nuklear Power are good sites,4) Pretend that AGFF subscribers are the only ones who know that anime sucks,5) hrhfhrufhrhfhrghfgrh > If video games are pathetic then so is reading a book. They both > accomplish the same thing. Consider your regular RPG as say the LOTR > series. Now take your MMORPG as one of those book you start on page 1 > and make a yes or no decision to go to page 24 or 71. You get to chose > your own outcome. Either way you look at it, your still reading a > book. I've now written and deleted three attempts at responding to this paragraph. I just don't know where to begin explaining what's so incredibly, incredibly wrong with it. Dan. SignatureDan Posluns - remove the obvious from my e-mail address to reply http://www.danposluns.com ICQ: 35758902 >> If video games are pathetic then so is reading a book. They both >> accomplish the same thing. Consider your regular RPG as say the LOTR [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >paragraph. I just don't know where to begin explaining what's so >incredibly, incredibly wrong with it. You could probably start with the fact that the analogy is completely off-base. Rob (Also has nothing to do with what he was replying to) ploovTeHSPaeMBLoKuR@charter.net SignatureOwner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from. Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as a good day on AGFF without JT bashing! Owner of David Watson, rec.arts.anime.misc "When the vice president and I are alone, it's Colin and Dick." --US Secretary of State Colin Powell So says Asgeras: > I'm writing in defense *gasp* of FF XI. iz this a FFXI thread cuz i think tha tgame sux - Avenger |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.