Talk:Final Fantasy XIV (2010 video game)/Version 1.0

Xbox 360 Not Confirmed

I was sent a link to an article that all but solidly confirms Final Fantasy XIV's release on Xbox 360. It can be viewed here for anyone wanting to officially add it to the FFXIV Article here on Wiki. http://www.ffxivblog.com/ffxiv-confirmed-for-xbox360 --Wordlifee (talk) 08:28, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Will add it and cite the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.46.30 (talk) 01:02, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Not so fast: http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/030910-ps3-final-fantasy-xiii-includes.html "In an entry posted on the official PlayStation blog, Sony's Rob Dyer revealed the following exclusive offer that will be included with the PS3 version of Final Fantasy XIII. He also reiterated that despite XIII being available for the Xbox 360, the only console iteration of the online-only MMO Final Fantasy XIV will be for PlayStation 3." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.216.211.156 (talk) 06:05, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

TBA 2011?

Official source of the news? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.16.122.211 (talk) 17:56, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Pay for Game Items Rumours

There is a rumour that says the it will be possible to buy with real money some objects and equipments in the game, should this be mentioned? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.11.103.122 (talk) 16:14, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

No because this is just that, a rumor. A false one at that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.249.47.166 (talk) 16:59, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

It's not a provable rumor, but with SE history repeats. Or did you forget/not play FFXI? The tidal talisman is an example. I think it will be shocking NOT to see such things come around again. So "a false on at that" is a little harsh considering SE's history with such things. Still, I don't think it belongs in the article at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.169.224.97 (talk) 07:55, 19 May 2012 (UTC) It's not a "rumor" just an acurate "prediction" of future events. It's worth having it kick around the talk page for a few years as an online told ya so, but does not belong in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.169.224.97 (talk) 07:59, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Concept video

I am not 100% sure that concept video is for this game, seeing as it's apparently from 2005. --Zeno McDohl ^(talk) 16:52, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

It's mentioned in one the articles: it's not. It's a technical demo for the Xbox 360, unrelated to this. – Seancdaug 01:49, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Again, you are in error. At the FFXI Fan Festival 2006, Square-Enix revealed that the tech demo was in fact development of the new MMORPG to follow Final Fantasy XI. This is NOT a sequel to Final Fantasy XI. They even presented slides.

We'll need a source, in that case. --Zeno McDohl ^(talk) 00:33, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I also feel the need to point at that Seancdaug's comment, It (the tech demo) was mentioned in one of the articles, and therefor it isn't, is completely wrong. It is only briefly mentioned in one of the articles, and all it states is "Square Enix has previously shown trailers for a next-generation MMORPG engine without actually announcing a final product based on it." This does not deny it was footage of the untitled project itself.

Page name

Anyone else think that this should be "Untitled Square Enix MMORPG" instead? Since in case SquareEnix announces another game (but not a name), it could cause conflict. --Zeno McDohl ^(talk) 23:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I second that! --Quintes 11:34, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Fantasy Earth Zero

Could this game be the game that this page refers to?

www.fezero.jp PKKnoHaseo-san 00:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I know it's not the Fantasy Earth game that was already released in JP. --Zeno McDohl ^(talk) 01:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

A little edit..

After checking the sources, I am inclined to think that the Xbox360 was never officially mentioned. The interviwe with the producer simply stated that it was in development for PS3 and PC. Xbox 360 was brought up by Niekii which was later proved false by Square's official notice. Of course, I am not entirely sure so feel free to bring up anything that I may have missed. Parafusion 00:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I actually interviewed Tanaka at E3 2007. He did mention they would be developing for Xbox360. See my interview here. Ganiman 21:31, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed that the page states FFXIV is "the fourteenth game in the Final Fantasy series." This is incorrect, as it fails to take into account the Final Fantasy Tactics games, FFX-2, and FFXII-2. FFXIV is actually the... 18th game, I believe?76.124.106.140 (talk) 18:55, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

White Engine

I think use of the engine should be mentioned. Quote: “Development is proceeding smoothly now, with the framework now beginning to take shape. Last year we went through a development reorganization, with the development of our own cross-platform middleware – the white engine. This is the foundation for FFXIII and the new MMO. It’s safe to say that it won’t be much longer before I’m able to unveil even more secrets about what the future holds for Square Enix.” Sources: AGDC: How Square Enix Hunts The Hunters, Square Enix's White Engine is cross platform and Austin GDC: Live at the Hiromichi Tanaka keynote GLdK 05:55, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Final Fantasy XIV

Apparently there are rumblings that this is, in actuality, Final Fantasy 14, and is being devloped concurrently with 13, hence the glacial pace of development of both games. Keep your eyes out for a source, because (and here I take off my Wikipedia hat, and slip on my fanatical gamer one) that would be effing awesome. 72.240.220.234 (talk) 09:41, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

There are also rumblings that this is actually a football game developed by a team of Costa Rican slave workers. Keep your eyes for a source, etc. FightingStreet (talk) 10:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Then there are those rumors that you have something to contribute, which you have just dashed to pieces; so thanks. 72.240.220.234 (talk) 05:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Now, now, no need to start a flame war. It is possible that it could be FF14 in disguise, but I really doubt it. Square Enix already has an MMORPG that they have claimed to still be adding to. Also, the Fabula Nova Crystalis thing is probably the thing that's causing the glacial pace of development.Phoenix1304 (talk) 08:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Fighting, please watch the biting. Axem Titanium (talk) 00:01, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Says the editor who tried to redirect Final Fantasy VII (Famicom) without any discussion. FightingStreet (talk) 15:31, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but was that ad hominem? I couldn't tell because the sound of you murdering WP:NPA was too loud. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:32, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

What was that about football? 71.64.154.24 (talk) 22:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I removed the citation request from the comment on the battle system because the interview also stated such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.36.24.163 (talk) 22:10, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

"It is possible that it could be FF14 in disguise, but I really doubt it." Haha. Well... it's not like you could have known then that you were wrong :) Huzzah for FF14. Let's hope SE improves their customer service. 210.253.243.157 (talk) 05:36, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

PS3

I did an edit to add the PS3 to the list, this has been removed.

I am not sure why when it has been said on the previous interview a user did below: http://forums.ffxiclopedia.org/viewtopic.php?t=5032

That they're shooting for PS3

Is wiki xbox fanboy? lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vixonx (talk • contribs) 05:03, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

A forum post isn't a reliable source, that's why.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 06:43, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

It was reliable for xbox 360 and PC.... :S lol. So why isn't it reliable for PS3? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vixonx (talk • contribs) 03:50, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

They announced over a year ago it was coming to PS3 and not XBox360, and now they reversed it, and so that is why it is as it is. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:07, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Ganiman is the owner of the FFXiClopedia website, which is the largest FFXI Wiki site and is supported by Square Enix ( http://www.playonline.com/polapps/s/fansite.site.Top?polg_loc=en ). The forum post was directory from his personal Interview with Square Enix, and is no different than him posting an article itself on the internet over a forum post. This is a reliable source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aikar (talk • contribs) 08:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

They're in the process of signing people up for a PC and PS3 beta test. They've said the PC beta will being before the PS3 beta. So I imagine that would mean it's definitely coming out for both. I'll try and cite it if I can find an article. Danner578 (talk) 17:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

GDC

At first the article was talking about info released at E3 2008, there was no info of Rapture released at E3 2008. That info was released at GDC 2008 and was already cited to the article. So I edited it to GDC 2008 instead of E3 2008. Now my IP address got reported for vandalism, while now the most current version still has GDC 2008 like it should be.

So I pretty much got called on vandalism for no reason... thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.93.87 (talk) 20:37, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Whats happening

Seems since February this has died. I've not heard a single thing from it. Anything leaked?

Also where did we get the info that there was a "estimated" Q4 2009 release? I HUGELY doubt it. It's Square Enix... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vixonx (talk • contribs) 10:11, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Wouldn't surprise me if that was gotten from GameStop. They've been putting out fake release dates forever (I remember seeing Dec 2006 release for FF13 listed before FF12 was even released that October...)71.74.228.230 (talk) 07:58, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

E3 rumour

I posted the 3d rumor and now it's gone, will people stop removing posts without adding it to the discussion of why. I am just going to report the people that did it for vandle. Considering this is a STUB, with no edits in almost a year, a widely announced rumor is fine, it's on many sites. Plus it's stated not factual.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&channel=s&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=L6x&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=FFXI+Sequel+to+be+announced+at+e3&spell=1

Discuss before you remove.

(Vixonx (talk) 14:39, 9 January 2009 (UTC))

I've heard of this on petfoodalpha.com if you looking for another source.

http://petfoodalpha.com/2143/rapture-at-this-years-e3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.34.34.48 (talk) 18:53, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Merge

I suggest removing the Xbox 360 so the fanboys wont be hurt any further —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.26.4.120 (talk) 01:20, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

This needs to be merged with Rapture_(video_game). (Satertek (talk) 19:50, 2 June 2009 (UTC))

Merge complete Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 20:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Hold on, how do we know that Rapture and Final Fantasy XIV are one and the same? Pooty the Echidna (talk) 20:28, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Citing http://e3.gamespot.com/story/6210893/final-fantasy-xiv-online-trailer-impressions?tag=top_stories;title;2: Originally under the code name of Rapture, the game is officially the next title in the long running series, titled Final Fantasy XIV online. Jack Masamune (talk) 20:44, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The main reason i'm not yet convinced is because Rapture was said to be heading for PC, Xbox 360 and PS3, while this is a PS3-only game. However, since I can't prove you wrong, i'm going to bite my lip for now. ;) Pooty the Echidna (talk) 21:06, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Since when is gamespot's "trailer impressions" a worthy source? Whatever, hope this isn't a mistake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.116.123.35 (talk) 21:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Whoa, this is interesting. The official Final Fantasy XIV website says it's coming out for Windows, too. Still nothing on this "Final Fantasy XIV is Rapture" debate, though. Pooty the Echidna (talk) 21:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

This will be on the PC, there are a few sources such as IGN reporting it. Until its denied its logical to assume it will be an platform for the game--69.165.160.222 (talk) 21:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

At the press conference, the guy said "you'll only be able to play it on the PS3 when it releases in 2010." Maybe it's just me, but that sounds suspiciously open to an Xbox 360 port later on. 71.245.139.158 (talk) 22:52, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

While I agree that this suggests that it will eventually be released on the 360, it's probably best to leave the 360 out of the article until there's a definite confirmation from Square-Enix that a release is in the works. --Junior612 (talk) 19:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

How about adding a xbox 360? As fanboyish as I sound, it's obvious it will be released one year or months after the PS3/PC release. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.23.107.106 (talk) 03:15, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Link to FFXI

There definately seems to be a link to Final Fantasy XI in this game, if you look at the trailer and the main site. For one, the artstyle is the same (both for Rapture, FFXI and FFXIV), the trailer shows the Galka, Hume and Elvaan race, plus the site shows the Tarutaru and Mithra in addition. Giving these are the exact same races as FFXI, and the setting is similar, one can only speculate on the possible sequel status. This is reinforced by the wording in the trailer, possibly referring to a (future) version of Vana'diel, asking adventurers to take up the sword again.Jack Masamune (talk) 05:22, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, one can speculate, one can speculate. Milkedslime (talk) 11:20, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

You can speculate things like if its a parallel universe but I think it is hard to deny that the races are the same. Theres an additional one seen in the art on the website but that fits under speculation, but looks a lot like http://finalfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Gria--Pearlsea (talk) 15:38, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

There isn't a link to FFXI other than setting and similar races. In the SE Q&A today at E3, it was stated that they're two separate games with really no links. Just the races will be similar.--TwistedArachnid(talk) some time, June 4 2009

More specifically, the similarities are there because the developers want FFXI players to feel comfortable making the transition to the new game. Keeping the same races allows players to create a new character that the player can continue to associate with his or her old character. But SE was clear that this is a completely new world, and people have noted differences in the trailer - such as the apparent lack of a tail on the Galka. --Junior612 (talk) 19:47, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm Confused

Er...why is Final Fantasy XIV about Final Fantasy XI?; it has absolutely nothing about what it's titled as, as far as I can tell. ??????? Mollymoon 23:03, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

That'd be because someone vandalized the page, in a poor parody of XIV's nature as XI's successor. 71.246.230.18 (talk) 17:27, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

beta

beta starts june 9th just found out this morning from square enix —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.90.14.74 (talk) 15:25, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Technically, beta started on the 2nd with the release of the beta client (wherein the beta test of the update client was initiated.)71.74.228.230 (talk) 08:02, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Subscription fee?

How much does subscription cost around the world? Is there a different fee for each country, does it all equal to be the same value or are some countries charged relatively higher prices than other countries, or what? Incomplete Wikipedia article is incomplete. 203.211.120.225 (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles do not include pricing without good reason (see Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory, no. 5 "Sales catalogs"). GDallimore (Talk) 01:30, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

That sales catalog rule seems to apply to competitive products. FFXIV subscriptions are offered by 1 vendor and there is no other product/service that allows access to FFXIV. Therefore, I don't think the sales catalog rules apply. 76.166.128.21 (talk) 22:42, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Reception

Though I see you linked the cheatcode central review, it's fairly misleading that you only used the score when the article itself ends with: "We can’t recommend that you spend $50, and then $12.99 a month after the first 30 days, on a title that has as many flaws as FFXIV does."

While the score itself is baffling after their negative comments, it doesn't seem like a favorable review if you actually read it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.8.13.191 (talk) 07:40, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure cheat code central counts as a notable website. It seems like it was just thrown in there because they were the only ones to give it a positive rating. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.77.214.78 (talk) 18:48, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the above three comments, and would make the change myself but I'm not a confirmed user yet. Cheat Code Central's review borders on the schizophrenic if you actually read its text. Had the number not been there it would have been an unquestionably negative review. Xjph (talk) 07:52, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Well someone needs to add GameSpy score, which is.. 4/10. http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/square-enix-next-gen-mmorpg/1127142p1.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.177.115.214 (talk) 01:09, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Done! Also, 108.8.13.191, the sentence you quoted doesn't exist. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 09:07, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Why is CheatCC even up there? I don't think it's a creditable source at all. It's like someone tried really hard scrounging up some random review that favors the game to make it look better when MUCH more creditable sources universally pan it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.70.185.135 (talk) 22:42, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Controversies

Are there any reliable sources out there that can be used regarding the whole "Horsebird" thing? I have a few blog-esque links, but I'm not sure if they can be accepted. Additionally, I heard that the hiring of Chinese speakers for management of the game caused quite a stir in Japan. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 13:09, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Final Fantasy XIV

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Final Fantasy XIV's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "GR":

• From Final Fantasy VII: "Final Fantasy VII". Game Rankings. Retrieved June 6, 2009.
• From Final Fantasy VIII: "Final Fantasy VIII for PlayStation". Game Rankings. Retrieved 2009-10-29.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 19:28, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Game classes and if they are appropriate to list

Please focus all discussions concerning if it is appropriate to list the characters here. For reference the original comments that spawned the debate

New Age Retro Hippie (talk | contribs) (31,070 bytes) (→Classes: I've not played an MMORPG, but my best instinct is to remove class lists. Unless replaced with an appropriately detailed, well-referenced section discussing the classes' impact on the game. Of course, prose is better.)

JASpoon (talk | contribs) (31,619 bytes) (Giving the names of the classes helps give the reader and idea of the overall flavor of the game itself. Classes are basically the backbone of MMOs and what they are called is what sets games apart.)

New Age Retro Hippie (talk | contribs) (31,098 bytes) (Wikipedia is not a player's guide. This article is not for the purpose of providing classes for people playing the game, or to sell the game. The classes may only be listed if there are reliable sources discussing them individually.)

24.248.243.102 (talk) (31,647 bytes) (Trying to give a good overview of an MMO without at least mentioning clases is like trying to explain how a car works without mentioning there is an engine.)

Suggested reasons to remove

Not detailed enough-

• Probably true, but the information is easy to find online on their sites. In cases like these I personally feel it is better to at least leave the information there to prompt others to complete it rather than remove information because its easier

Not for sales/guide-

• Unsure where you got this, while this statement is true listing the character classes hardly constitutes a guide or sales plug

Suggested reasons to list

Flavor of the game-

• While I agree simply listing them isn't ideal, giving the class names fleshes out the game's time and environment almost as well as a back story and much more succinctly

Necessary for proper description-

• I agree with JAspoon, the character choices define the most important aspect of the game, how I can interact with it. Showing the number of choices, focuses, and synergy options I have when I play with others is one of if not the chief factor of any MMO.

Misc arguments

• Since a conclusion has not been reached for the time being, the subjective nature of the topic, and since the original remover stated they are unfamiliar with MMOs I chose to leave it up for now —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.61.101.246 (talk) 21:27, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
  • As it stands, the list is comprised of nothing that would help anyone who is not a fan or interested in this game. It is merely there for guide purposes. The fact that it COULD be improved doesn't mean that it is. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 06:09, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I'd also be in favour of cutting out the list - it's just a random list of professions/classes, more suited to Wikia. The Characters section needs to be tweaked, so it doesn't read like a guide, too. Thanks! Fin©™ 10:55, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I also think the list should be cut.Bread Ninja (talk) 19:57, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

• I think classes are important to mention, but would look better in prose actually talking about and explaining the classes, not just listing them. (Btw, Bread, you removed my comment.) _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 19:56, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about that. must've accidentally highlighted it.Bread Ninja (talk) 20:07, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

• I agree with Bws2Cool on this, migrate it to the prose, and avoid listing them. When we list it seems to be coming accross too much like a guide to the game. Ottawa4ever (talk) 20:21, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

• I feel that mentioning the types of classes available with a few examples for each type would useful, but listing every class seems unnecessary. I agree that prose would be more helpful as a bulleted list does not provide much information for those who don't already know how the classes are expected to behave. I would guess that sources discussing the game take a similar approach, perhaps even comparing them to traditional Final Fantasy character jobs. —Ost (talk) 20:26, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Promo Trailers Section.

The FFXIV article needs more information - and a section on the game trailers. --Player017 (talk) 23:26, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Lack of Cost For Relaunch

One issue with this article is it doesnt mention whether or not people who bought/played FF14 initially will have to pay again for the physical copy of the relaunched title. Figures are unnecessary, and would violate the directory rule. but whether or not people will have to pay again is, I believe, quite important. So if anyone has this information from a good source, I think it would be good to add it. Again, no real figuers necessary, just whether or not it will cost anything for those who payed for the initial game. 74.132.249.206 (talk) 17:04, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

• Presently there is no known information discussing how this is to be handled. I'd assume the relaunch will be sold as an expansion pack for the game. But this is my assumption. --MeStinkBAD (talk) 13:12, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

• I'm pretty sure the game will be patched or digitally redownloaded for existing customers, and the old versions in stores will be discarded and 2.0 versions will be put on shelves. Valeriya (talk) 17:10, 6 July 2012 (UTC)