1
Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

FFXI Mobile News TidbitFollow

#1 Mar 06 2017 at 3:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Hey all,

I don't play much XI anymore, but I always keep an ear to the tracks. Found this PocketGamer article today with a single line about FFXI Mobile.

Quote:
2017 will also see Nexon launch Lego Quest and Collect and Final Fantasy XI on mobile, which have the potential to be very big releases for the company.


Not sure if the writer is making an assumption, or if there's a line about that in Nexon's Q4 reports, which is the basis of this article. Still, that's the first media mention of the XI mobile version I've seen in months, so figured I'd pass it along here in case others had more intel.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#2 Mar 06 2017 at 3:46 PM Rating: Good
***
3,702 posts
Heady company there... Is FFXI worthy to be released alongside such magnificent giants as Lego Quest and Collect? Might be overshadowed.

Smiley: clown
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#3 Mar 06 2017 at 5:02 PM Rating: Excellent
I don't understand Lego games. I'd much rather just play with actual Legos. Then again, that's my logic with Minecraft, too.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#4 Mar 06 2017 at 6:50 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,702 posts
Thayos wrote:
I don't understand Lego games. I'd much rather just play with actual Legos. Then again, that's my logic with Minecraft, too.


You'd prefer to punch actual trees? Smiley: eek
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#5 Mar 06 2017 at 7:23 PM Rating: Good
***
3,397 posts
Well, see, Legos cost money. A lot of stinking money.

$100 might get you a 200 or so piece set which is... nowhere near enough to actually build anything significant. I used to play with legos when I was a kid, and I had a plastic bin half full of lego... probably at least $500 worth of lego built up over years of parents buying me a set here, a set there.

......and it still wasn't enough to really build anything too huge. A few houses here, or a couple large buildings there, but not the kind of lego structures you see people doing, or in games.

So, lego-based games allow for a potentially unlimited number of lego, all you need to do is buy the software. Which is a LOT cheaper than buying a crapton of little plastic bricks.

And of course you never have to worry about stepping on any....

Tho to be honest, doing it via software doesn't give you that "real" feel of a lego clicking onto a lego... or the ability to actually work with your hands... but yet it is a lot easier and more efficient cost-wise.

Edited, Mar 6th 2017 8:25pm by Lyrailis
#6 Mar 07 2017 at 8:56 AM Rating: Good
******
49,575 posts
Lyrailis wrote:
$100 might get you a 200 or so piece set which is...
A box of 200 random pieces on amazon costs like $13. Even licensed stuff like the Star Wars Force Awakens Millennium Falcon kit is 1,300 pieces and costs about $120.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#7 Mar 07 2017 at 11:14 AM Rating: Good
***
3,397 posts
Well, maybe an exaggeration on the # of pieces, but not an exaggeration on how many pieces (or shall I say, how many sets) it takes to build anything of any size or complexity.

Buying random pieces might get you a lot of pieces, but yet if you want to build something that looks nice, what's the chances of you getting the pieces you actually need out of a bin o' random bricks?

And the licensed stuff can actually be worse; there's a lot of uniquely shaped pieces there that aren't really practical for use in actual building. Sometimes you get lucky and find that a specific piece is useful to you, but a lot of times... not.

And still, again, you pay what again, $50 for lego software that gives you infinite pieces? lol. *shrugs*
#8 Mar 07 2017 at 5:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Well therein lies the charm of Legos. You can't just pull whatever piece you want out of thin air. You've got to build and be creative with what you've got.

Also, when you're done, you have something real. You can hold it in your hands and set it on your shelf. You can build spaceships and make them battle each other, or toss one down your staircase and watch it shatter (always fun). You can work with instruction booklets, or totally freelance with random bricks, never building the same thing twice from the same finite pool of resources. You can sit on the floor and play by yourself, with your siblings, with your parents, with your friends. It's so much more interactive and social than staring at a screen.

Granted, I obviously enjoy video games, but I don't see much of a contest between Minecraft and Legos.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#9 Mar 07 2017 at 5:47 PM Rating: Good
***
3,397 posts
I will admit that I had some really awesome fun with my brother.

We had legos, but when I was a younger kid, my parents bought some kind of lego-like stuff called Construx or something like that. Anyways, this stuff was good for making a catapult out of (just needed a couple good rubber bands).

Then we made forts out of lego, and we halfed up all of our lego guys, and we took turns with the catapult, using marbles. Whoever lost all of their guys first, lost the battle. There were of course some rules, like no walls thicker than 1 brick thick (2 bricks thick was almost invincible against the flung marbles and was a bit unfair), one guy was designated as the 'king' and if he was killed, you lost instantly, etc. We'd take turns with the 1 catapult, in kinda.... turn-based combat, where we'd each get 5-10 shots at each other's fort. If a lego guy or the brick(s) he's standing on were knocked off, the guy was considered dead.

We used to spend hours doing that.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 172 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (172)