Talk:Final Fantasy XI/Archive 2

message: The article is kind of a mess right now.  It seems like a lot of editors have descended upon it in the last month, since the MPK "fix" and the recent hyperinflation across all servers, and the article is now filled with grammatical errors, speculation, anti-gilseller POV, and lots of other undesirable stuff.  My first inclination is to add a cleanup|date tag to it, but I'm not sure how necessary that is. The article could use a good copyedit, a bit of downsizing, and some serious rewriting in several places.  The Game Economy section needs the most work, and I won't touch it since I've had my wrist slapped, rightfully, for mouthing off about the game's troubled economy when I don't know much economics myself.  The MPK section could use some work too, which I plan to at least try to attack myself.  Anyone else up for this project?  Untangling this article is going to take a bit of work, but I think it's worth it.  I also think that once it's cleaned up some dedicated editors (myself included) should put it on our watchlists so any messes can be cleaned up as they arise.  Thoughts?  RaCha'ar 23:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I must say that your consideration is well intentioned but breaking down a job to simple a discription (in my opinion) might only serve to further fan the flames of the "job controversy": For example, what would a Red Mage classify as? a Melee? A enfeebler?--Caesius 22:27, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say it's "A mix of melee and magical skills, with a high level skill in enfeeble". I like the format Silverelf has suggested. Any of that extra information can be put on the FF job page if anyone feels it needs to be said. Chanlord 22:37, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I like this format myself.  It allows for a lot less POV of a job's usefulness and purposes.  As evidenced by the discussion already, we'd have to be very careful about how things are phrased.  Maybe "job-specific abilities" would be better than "abilities of note"? RaCha'ar 18:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Definitely agreed that it's too big, but I question whether it's big of necessity.  I don't think it needs to be as large and rambling as it is, which leads me to question whether it really needs its own page.  I would be generally more supportive of its being added to the overall MMOG controversy page than of a new page for controversies of this specific game.  I also would support a downsizing of this section on this main article page, with a lot less anti-gilseller and economics ranting.  Economics is very complicated, especially in a virtual economy like FFXI's, and it's so hotly debated what the precise cause of the inflation and other bizarre economic activity is that we would have to be very, very careful to present all possible ideas as NPOV as possible, or none at all.  Whatever the case it really can't sit as it is. As for the rest of the article I'm going to start to rewrite parts of it, but I'll post the sections on my talk page, with a note here so they can be reviewed and approved, before I actually make any edits.  Given the combative nature of most FFXI players on game-related forums, and that they don't always seem to understand that Wiki is not like Allakhazam or KI, I feel stepping lightly is probably the way to go to avoid edit wars. RaCha'ar 18:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: General Cleanup

message: Just tagged people and politics section for cleanup, because it really needs it. Mostly its a dumping ground of related topics to the game. Perhaps take some section out and merge them nicely into the Vana'diel article, get rid of them altogether or present them in a nicer way on the page. at the moment it just looks like a haphazard collection of topics -- čĥàñľōŕď 23:24, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good on you.  I'm of two minds about this: either we make this section a much shorter sort of "survey" of topics and add more information onto separate pages, or console ourselves with having a very small amount of information about everything on this page.  The only section I want to weigh in on right now is the jobs section.  The more I try to edit it, the more convinced I become that the wisest course of action is to make a new page about the jobs in the game.  I understand the argument that it should suffice to add a blurb about the job's function within this game to each job's existing FF page.  However, I'm concerned that a paucity of information in the main article will just end up with us back where we are right now, with floods of editors coming in to add more cruft about their favorite job, without even looking at the other pages.  Also, jobs in FFXI function differently enough from the classic FF jobs they borrow from that it seems a bit out of place to add much description about them to the existing job pages.  I favor a compromise of a new page for FFXI job classes and a simple list of classes on the main page.  Again, I think the "details" section for the body of the main article with perhaps some fleshing-out, then links to more specific pages dedicated to different parts of the game, would work very well for the article. (On a side note, is it time to archive the existing discussion on the talk page yet?  This is getting a little long.) -RaCha'ar 23:35, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I think having all the info here is fine; then again, I'm a mergist =P Deckiller 23:37, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would rather not create seperate pages because I don't think it really needs it. No need to clog up more HD space on the wikipedian servers. There is precedent to have seperate pages for jobs (see World of Warcraft), however I think it would be more convienant to merge any more detailed stuff about classes in the class pages for Final Fantasy games. Makes a lot more sense that having seperate pages for seperate final fantasy games and it keeps the info together. Besides if a seperate page was created for each job in FFXI, it would probably be suggested to merge with FFXI or the job pages anyway. -- čĥàñľōŕď 23:53, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: -=nods=-.  Now we need to get a Merging Star Wars articles wikiproject going ^_^ Deckiller 23:54, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

text: No no, I guess I wasn't clear about this.  I'm not suggesting a different page for each job, not by a long shot.  Just one page for "FFXI jobs."  I don't feel that just adding the information to the existing pages necessarily works, because most of those pages are a general discussion of the functions of each job in the FF series.  In those few that do have a separate heading for FFXI, it sticks out like a sore thumb (see White Mage for example, where FFXI is the only game that gets a separate mention).  Does that make more sense? It just seems to me that if there's a page just for FFXI characters, a page for the jobs in the game wouldn't be too out of place. -RaCha'ar 00:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Those articles are very short and could use with more information. I don't see any problem with each games that feature a particular job having a seperate heading (And thus easily linked to with #Final Fantasy XI). Have a look at Final Fantasy airships. You could have a general discussion of the job at the begginging and go into more depth about each game they are featured in and other nuances of the job. A seperate page for FFXI jobs seems like a bad idea, as it would just end up being a dumping ground and allow tonnes and tonnes of fancruft (and probably edit wars between anonymous users) -- čĥàñľōŕď 00:22, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, but that's well out of the scope of editing just the main FFXI article, and while I've played most FF games I sure as hell don't feel comfortable trying to make those changes myself.  I'm going to step out of this one and let the FF project handle it. -RaCha'ar 15:34, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: People and Politics Cleanup

message: Please add to this section if you can find artwork for any other version of FFXI. Only include stuff that includes that base game (eg, not the seperate packaging for the expansions). We're missing at least 
*PS2 in Japan
*PS2 in Europe (was it released anywhere in Europe?)
*Vana'diel Collection 
*Xbox360 There may be more. Cheers -- čĥàñľōŕď 23:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As for europe, the UK box-art is the same as the USA's. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 22:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh ok. I pulled that off a UK website. Can you scan or locate a scan of the UK boxart because it is likely to be slightly different (regional info, rating etc) Cheers, čĥàñľōŕď 23:10, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My mistake, sorry. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 23:14, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

text: You can take down "PS2 in Europe". There is no European PS2 version (due to the fact, that Sony never released the HDD in Europe). --84.184.108.113 00:38, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Packaging Artwork

message: A small template has been added to the FFXI article sitting on top of the main Final Fantasy series template. I've taken the expansion packs out of the main FF template and put them in the FFXI one, because they aren't really standalone spinoff games and mostly related to FFXI. Thought? -- čĥàñľōŕď 02:00, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Template

message: "It should be noted that Final Fantasy XI angered many long time fans of the series for not being an epic like previous games had been. Fans have complained about a lack of an overall storyline with a single major conflict, followed by a resolution."
It's at the end of the intro and when I first saw it my eyes just bugged instantly. This does not sound like any form of "neutral" statement that can be made about the game.--Talv 03:17, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone just edited that in today.  As far as I'm concerned, it's wholly unnecessary. Unless they have a cite for it it really has no place in the article.  I'm taking it out with the caveat that if the person who added it has an actual source for the comment and can rephrase it, they can add it back in.  -RaCha'ar 03:28, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I put that in because of complaints I've been getting from a lot of geeks, gamers, and long time fans of Final Fantasy. I'll scour the internet a bit to see if I can find mention of the complaint. (Uta 22:19, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me.  :)  I wasn't trying to be rude, just as a longtime FF fan myself seeing that edited into the artice was a bit of a shock.  I don't recall hearing any complaints of that nature, which is not to say that they're not there, but I'd certainly rather have a cite for something so openly hostile. When you put it back in, Uta, could you try to rephrase it so it comes off as a bit less of an attack?  -RaCha'ar 23:07, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can speak from personal experience when I say the switch to MMO angered many fans. Finding a source for that may be somewhat more tricky. I shall have a look also. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 23:11, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

text: No problem. I didn't intend it as an attack, but I guess it's hard to come off with a NPOV when talking about complaints. I'm personally fond of XI, though I think it wasn't the smartest move for Square Enix to make. (Uta 23:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this POV? 

message: Okay, to try to stop the edit wars that are going on over SMN right now: It is 'not' a Zilart job.  It should be included under the Extra Jobs heading and it should stay there.  Stating this for the record so in the future it's understood why it keeps getting moved around. -RaCha'ar 16:40, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Understood. I'm aware there's controversy about it, but technically it wasn't released with RoZ.  As someone posted in their edit notes for the page, it isn't identified as an RoZ job in any of the official documentation, so that's the definition we went with. -RaCha'ar 18:26, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Summoner

message: After waiting two weeks for any sort of response, I'm going ahead and replacing the entire jobs section with the paragraph I posted above.  Edits to the individual job pages will take more time, as I'm still extremely uncomfortable with invading the FF project's space.  Nevertheless, I do have job descriptions ready to be placed in each job's space and may have this done by the end of the day.  I hope there are no complaints. -RaCha'ar 18:45, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you able to transpose some of the info to the seperate jobs page, if needed. -- CHANLORD [T]/[C]  21:00, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, I did say that I'm working on that, but it's going to take some time.  :)  I wasn't planning on just taking everything out and leaving it out for good. -RaCha'ar 22:49, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm running into a problem.  In the case of articles like Warrior, which is a survey of the character class across a wide range of games, adding the subheading about the job in FFXI is unnecessarily specific. If all the linked job pages were just about a class's function ONLY in FF games, it would be one thing to add the paragraph about the job in FFXI and something I wouldn't argue about at all, but as it stands I just don't think it works to move the information off to the individual class's pages. I would like to again suggest that we just create one FFXI Jobs page and put all of the information there.  I think this would be much, much cleaner and much easier than either creating new FF-only job pages, trying to clean up the existing ones where the FF Jobs template appears in the middle of the page (see Monk), or just inserting a brand-new subheading for the specific job's function in FFXI in a page that doesn't deal solely with a FF job's function.  Chanlord, I understand what you are trying to accomplish, but the nature of the pages that already exist across Wikipedia that would be affected do not support it, and there is already precedent for separate job pages with World of Warcraft.  While I do not think every FFXI job needs its own page, I do think it would save us a lot of trouble in the long run to move all the job information onto one page and leave it off of the individual job's page. -RaCha'ar 00:14, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, now that I just found that there's a proposal on the table at the FF Project to possibly do the articles as Class (Final Fantasy) types, a lot of what I just said is semi-moot.  If that does happen then I'll shut up and happily add the FFXI related info to every job's page.  If it does not happen then I still think making a new "FFXI Jobs" article is the best option.  YMMV. -RaCha'ar 01:45, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I've agreed from the start that all that information should be put on the job's respective pages (Hey I made that huge translation guide in Ninja..) As it is now all that infromation is just...gone. It just seems like such a shameful waste of great stuff.--Kiyosuki 07:50, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's really not.  I moved almost every job's information to their respective pages, but stopped at Paladin when I saw what that page looked like.  I'm not comfortable moving the rest of the stuff until there's some kind of consensus about how the job pages are going to be done.  The information is never going to be gone forever, that was never the intention.  But in the current state of some of the individual job class's pages, inserting a paragraph about FFXI just wouldn't fit. I'd really appreciate input from anyone else on how best to handle this. -RaCha'ar 21:05, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Jobs

message: This seems to be a frequent target of crufty additions.  I want to state here for the record that IMHO this short section is one of the few parts of the article that contains exactly the right amount of information to explain the system without being too much of a game guide.  Please don't add anything more to it unless you can make a compelling argument for the addition of the information you want to put in.  -RaCha'ar 23:34, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merit Points

message: I tried putting this directly on the page however it was deleted and said to be a non nuetral point of view. It is just supposed to be discussing some of the factors that affect the economy of an MMO. Rather than just deleting it can we find were the biases are and prehaps remove that section, then put this on the main page?
Additional Economic Controls'   
- I would just like to present one reason of why the economy in this game is struggling. First you must consider the huge number of players that are playing this game all day long. Then think about the fact that each time one of these players kills a "beastman", a small amout of gil will drop. This does not seem like a big deal, but when you look at how many are being killed every second, thats a huge raise in gil everyday. Not to mention every time something drops and the play just sells the item to a vender or a player compleats a quest that gives a material or gil reward, thats just more money into the game. Now this is not the reason the inflation is so large, the problem is the lack of money sinks. A money sink is a method of taking money out of the game. Yes the developers have implemented some small methods (eg taxes, choco prices) but they are too small. The best way for a game to destroy money in the game, is to make the player actually have to spend money on items. As it is right now, a player can spend a larger amount of money on an item at a givin level, then as they progress to a new level with better items, they can turn around and sell their other item for the same price they bought it for with little or no loss in money. For example, a player looks at a piece of chest armor and it says it will cost them 1 million gil, they know that is a very high price, but they are willing to spend it because they know they can get it back. So they buy the item, after gaining a few more levels they are now able to use a better piece of armor on their chest. Well now they can take that item the used for the last few levels and turn around and sell it for 1 million gil. Aside from some taxes, there is no gil being removed from the game.   
-    
- Solution: Items that bind to players. When a player buys an item, they can do what ever they want with it, but as soon as they equip the item, it becomes bound to them, meaning they can no longer sell it to another player. So back to the example, a galka buys a chest piece for 1 million gil, after passing a few levels he wants to buy a new chest piece. Well now the only thing he can do with that chest piece is throw it away (or possibly sell it to a vendor depending on how the developers would like to impliment it). There is 1 million gil, out of the game. It also adds a little realism, that galka cannot turn around and sell that item to a taru and watch the item be magicly shrunken down to fit the taru.   
-    
- -Specman016 March 02, 2006
:Such a piece should be posted on the Allakhazam forums, not on Wikipedia. Wikipedia's meant to provide detailed information about the game, not a place for people to postulate economic theories for MMOs. It also violates WP:NOT which states that Wikipedia is not a game guide -- CHANLORD [T]/[C]  23:08, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What Chanlord said.  Wiki's also really not someplace for speculation or essays.  -RaCha'ar 00:43, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Specman016, Please do not remove comments from the talk page. If you have changed your mind, then please say so (or strike out your text with TEXT HERE. -- CHANLORD [T]/[C]  01:50, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Perhaps summarizing this to "item binding may provide a solution" could be implementd if a new reference page is added (unless there's a stub to discribe the MMO process of item binding already).Black Orpheus 23:42, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Request to be place on page

message: Would Escape really be considered a form of transportation?  wanting some kind of consensus before I remove this. -RaCha'ar 04:43, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the transportation section should be edited into prose and transcluded into the Vana'diel acticle. At the present time, the way Vana'diel article is structured it can't support this, but I hope to edit it a bit more, so it can (with a History section, etc, rather than just discussing regions). -- CHANLORD [T]/[C]  05:55, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Not in my opinion. Could be listed in a description of spells, but because the spell Escape does not transport someone to a predetermined location wherever they are I don't see it as a legitimate method of transportation in-game. Black Orpheus 23:44, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is supposed to be a wikipedian article on the game not a game guide. Listing spells gets us nowhere. -- CHANLORD [T]/[C]  00:31, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Transportation

message: There is no cite for this as of yet that isn't hearsay posted on message boards.  I will add an official cite as soon as there is one available; I have posted this now because it won't be long before someone else does. -RaCha'ar 04:39, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Puppetmaster

message: Just a couple things of interest about FFXI's internal time:
* For every second that passes in real time, 25 seconds pass.
* A day lasts 57 minutes and 36 seconds.
* A year is 12 months with each month lasting 30 days (360 day year).
For you regular players out there, I'm sure you've noticed that the game time is getting close to reaching Year 1000. By my calculations, this will occur exactly at 5:24:00am on 30 June 2006 (UTC).  I wonder if SquareEnix has any special plans for it. --Krellion 16:07, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  FFXI Time 

message: EXPANSION FOOTAGE out now follow this link http://www.playonline.com/ff11us/ahturhgan/index.html its at the bottom of the page, new jobs, Blue Mage, Corsair, and the newly announced "Puppet Master".
including more landscape and adventures, missions, A NEW LEVEL CAP, to 85!!. plenty more weapons and mobs to defeat, including new World Boss's
:Seriously, where do you get "A NEW LEVEL CAP, to 85!!" from? That's not mentioned anywhere in the video, and I am sure the FFXI devs have mentioned how a further level cap increase is highly unlikely. Even an increase to 80 would break some elements of the game - the Merit system, for example. Rawling 00:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Posted in article by [[user:86.141.117.2]] 

message: I removed all the beastmen races from the forthcoming expansion pack for the same reason that the ToAU storyline entry was removed - the expansion has not yet been released and thus information should be kept out of this article until it's actually relevant to the current existence of the game.  If there is opposition please say so, but since we don't have the "currently in production" template at the top of this article it seems to me we should keep it to things that actually do exist in the game. -RaCha'ar 23:13, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ToAU

message: I added a few things to the Paladin, Warrior, and Monk sections.
It was just a few job abilities left out.
I also like the FFXI tag :)
{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: #CCCCCC;"	FFXI	This user plays Final Fantasy XI.
Suichi 18:04, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tiny Additions

message: Since there seems to be a lot of editing going on about linkshells:
You can create and distribute as many linkpearls as you like. However, only 64 members can activate linkpearls for a linkgroup at the same time. Because of this, if you distribute more than 64 linkpearls for a linkgroup, not all of the members will be able to participate simultaneously. If you feel that your linkgroup has too many members, you may want to consider purchasing additional linkshells and creating new linkgroups.
Directly from the Q&A on POL's site.  I can't link directly, unfortunately.  Please stop squabbling over this; the information is current as it stands. RaCha'ar 17:29, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Linkshell

message: I removed some additions to the Race section made by 69.177.185.12 who copied directly from SquareEnix's information about the game.  I've left a note on his talk page about this and his edits to the character class article, but I wanted to leave a heads-up here as well.  -RaCha'ar 22:42, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyvio

message: I noticed that the Dragoon image has a description of "A Dragoon, one of the classes affected by "nerfs"".
Is the nerf information really necessary there? It seems to me that it would be better served by replacing it with "A Dragoon in full artifact armor""
I'm just afraid it will create a negative view of the job class.
Achilles2.0 05:15, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Changed -- CHANLORD [T]/[C]  05:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dragoon Image Description

message: I was going to be bold and remove "the "Elves" of Final Fantasy XI." from the elvaan section about races. But I felt I couldn't find anything appropriate to replace it with. I just feel that it's not a good description at all. They have very few similarities with the elves of other fantasy worlds (whether elves in other fantasy worlds are alike is another topic). I do feel it should be removed, but someone needs to come up with a replacement to go with the short first statement about the other races.
Anyways, I guess it's just nitpicking... Good job on the clean-up!Fabjan 09:16, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elvaan 

message: It should be mentioned that the systems in use in teh game are hardly secure, one can purchase ones own items from the auction house using mutiple characters to create a false history (and it works) among other method of forcing a price up or down. Typicly those selling game currency for real world money force up desirable items they have a stockpile of, and force down items the average player uses to get ahead in order to increase demande for game currency on their website. 
I do not fully understand this aversion to putting gilsellers/RMT in a bad light around here - it does damage the game world this is fact, stating such facts do not necessarily violate the policy of being neutral and not having an official oppinion on the page. Saying "ige.com destroys the economy" would, saying "the selling of in game currency for real world money has some negative effects, as do the method of aquiring it in  game by those doing so" does not.
Also, I don't know hwo I would talk to about this so I'll state it here. Edits to the page by persons coming directly from allakhazam.com or that have a proxy IP from http://www.proxy4free.com/page1.html are..Questionable. I've noted several times someone make s rant about the economy on alla, and links the wiki page, and suddenly theres a bunch of edits that make a mess and we have to clean it up/roll it back again. Either stuffing the page full of "ige is teh devil it iz cuz of them" or "rmt cn actually be stablising factor" from the opposite camp. I recall someone even complaining on the talk page that the wiki was "putting rmt ina bad light"...It puts itself in bad light..
4.225.235.229 06:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Financial Situation