Talk:Final Fantasy XI/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3

General Cleanup

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)

I totally agree with you. There is actually too much information on the wiki right now as it is. I guess everyone just wants to share what they know and over time, it just gets too huge since it's always only additional stuff. Alot of the stuff on here is a lot more detailed then is necessary, IMHO. I am definitely up for cleaning this article up.. just worried that my edits are .... not agreeable ^^ --Silverelf 17:02, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm thinking of editing the Jobs section in this manner. Instead of wordy paragraphs, change them to a list like so:

  • Warrior (WAR):
    • Melee
    • Offensively and defensively balanced.
    • Abilities of note:
      • Provoke (draws the attention of the target)
      • Double Attack (randomly adds a second strike to a melee attack)
    • 2-hour ability: Mighty Strikes (guarantees critical hits for 30 seconds)

--Silverelf 17:50, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

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)
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)
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)
  • Now for my own suggestion, the controversy section is quite large and full with a lot of info that can be associated with other MMORPG's . I suggest either we move a lot of the information onto a seperate page ie. Controversies of Final Fantasy XI or incorporated into a more general article like MMOG genre challenges. What do you think?Chanlord 22:37, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
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)

Cleanup Proposal

I've been reading through the article with a red pen for the last half an hour or so. It's MASSIVE! 14 printed pages is much, much too long. It's my feeling that the format presented in the "Details" section is nearly an ideal summary of the game and perhaps should constitute the entirety of the main artcle. And, that the glut of information in the main article as it stands now should be split off into sub-articles, if it must be included at all. Also, I would like to reiterate that the Game Economy and In-game controversy sections are extremely POV; parts of Game Economy are nothing but thinly-veiled complaints about SE's insistence on a wholly player-run economy, and "controversy" is largely the usual complaining about nonconformity and gilsellers that you can get on any FFXI forum. I don't feel that any of these things are appropriate for Wikipedia.

My list of suggestions for the article:

  • Keep the "Details" section, with a few minor tweaks
  • Delete or split off into separate articles all other information, except for the bare-bones facts in the introductory paragraphs and the final "release dates" and template-related information
  • Rewrite the "Game Economy" and "Controversy" sections to be as NPOV as possible, and if it isn't possible to make them NPOV, get rid of them entirely. Chanlord, I know you were thinking about merging the controversy sections into the larger MMO controversy article, so maybe you'd want to take the helm for that?
  • In response to your comments about the "Game Economy" section, I was the author of the majority of the "Financial Situation" section and the first paragraph of the "Economic Controls" section. I appologize if I have come off as overly opinionated, but I was attempting to get away from the constant fourm ragging placing blame on the gilsellers - which is clearly a very sujective position. I do have some training and knowledge of economic systems which is why I wrote the section with somethine more analytical in mind. I've been tempted to dive back in and remove some of the overly opinionated (and poorly written) additions; just check out the second paragraph of the "Economic Controls" section. I certainly didn't write that and it is very opinionated against gilsellers. Please contact me if you would like some additional input. --Black Orpheus 23:39, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
  • The jobs section is way too big. I like Silverelf's proposal for cutting it down, especially if it's going to remain part of the main article. Alternatively, we could split the jobs section onto its own page. Right now it's three pages long, which is 20% of the total article. Considering that the last two pages consist of the release dates and template sections, it's more like 25%. Seems to me like an obvious place to go if we want to cut the article size down.
  • I don't personally feel that including information about the upcoming expansion amongst the verifiable info about the expansions that are already out and being played is wise. The expansion has its own page and information about the Blue Mage job and the forthcoming beastmen classes should go there until the expansion is actually released. Thoughts?

I have more specific ideas and suggestions, but at this point this is beginning to look like a project page, not a discussion page, so I'm going to shut up and open the floor to everyone else. There's a fine line between being enthusiastic about the game you play and love and over-informing a neutral audience, and right now this article isn't even close to walking that line. I'd really like to get us there.  :) RaCha'ar 19:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

  • I definitely think we should be going for Silverelf's proposal with regards to the jobs section. And skiving any additional info pertaining to the job into the job article. They are usually pretty small if they can fit, why not. MMOG genre challenges and Virtual crime would the places to include info pertaining to challenges and controversies of FFXI. Possibly the best way to go would be to include a few sentences on problems in FFXI in the various sections there and a brief summary on the Final Fantasy XI page with a Main article link. There are sections on Inflation, Bots, Player killing (could be expanded to include MPK, Time commitment, RMT and Farming. Definitely where our info should go (albiet just a sentence or two on the differences with the situation in FFXI). -- Chanlord 23:53, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Cleaned up in-game controversy a bit. Deleted a lot of the crufty detail (people don't need to know the nuiancances of the way in which people gamble in FFXI) and moved a lot of info onto different pages (MPK), Real-money trading which are both stubs). Please clean up a bit more if you feel like it and fix my grammer mistakes lol. External links are going to be put next to each "nerf" patch for verifiability and also so that people who couldn't care less don't have to read all about the detail. Also a lot of that stuff in detail needs to be cut down. The economy stuff could go on the RMT page easily (by generalising it a bit). Questions, comments? -- Chanlord 04:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Good stuff so far. I'll be working on this on and off throughout the day. I might start working on implementing Silverelf's job changes too, since people keep tacking on still more information. To give people who are editing the article but obviously not reading the discussion page a heads-up, I may go ahead and add a cleanup tag to the whole article. Maybe this will stand a chance at getting people to stop adding MORE stuff instead of taking things out, although I doubt it. On another note, maybe the "nerfs" merit their own article as an offshoot of this? RaCha'ar 18:28, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Take a look at the World of Warcraft page - there is a very, very good example of a well-written, excellently concise article with a minimum of POV fan-wank (though it's definitely there). I'm considering adapting their format for this article. The WoW vs. FFXI crowd will love me for that! RaCha'ar 19:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Tidied up the in-game controvesy section again. Better? Chanlord 00:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Not just better, awesome. Really good NPOV way of presenting the issues at hand concisely. If we can just do that for the rest of the article we'll be golden. RaCha'ar 04:34, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Jobs cleanup

I'm working on Silver's proposed job formats now. I do have a question though; the links on the individual jobs right now link to a description of the job throughout all FF games. I don't think it would be a bad idea to move the information that's currently there for every job to another page; however, I wonder if it wouldn't be unnecessary and superfluous on the general FF job description pages. Should we create new FFXI-specific job pages, or is that too much? RaCha'ar 18:36, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Too much, I say. Incorporating it into the general job description page is a lot better, even if it's under a seperate heading. čĥàñľōŕď 21:25, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Pretty much what I figured. Okay, I'll do that. Here's hoping the maintainers of the individual job pages have no protests... ;P Perhaps we should bring this up to the FF Project before I go ahead and invade their pages? RaCha'ar 23:03, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Possibly. Bear in mind that not every absolute detail needs to be included in the job description. Some of the stuff that's in those descriptions belongs on Allakhazam not Wikipedia. čĥàñľōŕď 23:19, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm beginning to reconsider whether Silverelf's format for the jobs section is best. My concern with it is that it guarantees 6-10 lines dedicated to every job, which will provide the illusion of length, if not an actual excess of words. I'm experimenting now with simply rewriting to downsize the existing job descriptions. Most of the "standard jobs" have perfectly acceptable descriptions right now, excepting thief, but after that they're all unnecessarily wordy. Thoughts? -RaCha'ar 19:10, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I've almost completed what I hope to be a more acceptable version of the jobs section than what currently stands, although I'm afraid it's still going to be too wordy for our tastes. I have one question, however. Are job classes properly referred to as proper names (eg, White Mage) or not (white mage)? I want to standardize how they appear throughout the article.-RaCha'ar 22:48, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
May I suggest putting the job info into some sort of a table? At the moment, we keep getting unindated with adds to the jobs section with extra info better suited to the job specific page. čĥàñľōŕď 22:31, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Knock yourself out; I know you'll make these articles great, so I'd say do what you want with them ^_^ Deckiller 22:39, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
We need to do something, that's for sure. In the meantime, any opposition to immediate reversal of any bogging-down cruftiness (such as the recent edits to Bard)? -RaCha'ar 18:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I'll do you one better. Pending approval from y'all before I do something very drastic, I'm going to cut out the entire existing job section and replace it with the following text:
There are currently (January 2006) a total of 15 jobs to choose from. In homage to the six job classes available in the original Final Fantasy, the initial jobs available to a player are White Mage, Red Mage, Black Mage, Warrior, Thief, and Monk. Upon achieving level 30 in any of these jobs, a player may opt to complete quests to unlock the jobs of Paladin, Dark Knight, Beastmaster, Ranger, Bard, and Summoner. Introduced in the Rise of the Zilart expansion pack were the Samurai, Ninja, and Dragoon job classes, which can also only be unlocked after a character reaches level 30. In the next planned upcoming expansion for Final Fantasy XI, Treasures of Aht Urhgan, new jobs are slated to be made available in the game. Only two have been officially confirmed by the PlayOnline website[1]; these are Blue Mage and Corsair.
When the text is added it will, of course, have a note directing people to the individual job's pages if they want more information. If this is okay with everyone, I'll then go and place the cleaned-up job descriptions that I'd been working on on each job's individual page, under a "Final Fantasy XI" subheading. Were there any plans to add Chanlord's suggestion of adding a subheading for a job's role in every FF to the Final Fantasy project? I'm not a member of the project so I don't feel comfortable doing it myself. In a similar vein, the current list of the races available in the game could be replaced with just a sentence redirecting people to the more in-depth information on the Races of Final Fantasy page, as it is on the Vana'diel page. -RaCha'ar 18:37, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
It's been a week since I posted this. One more request for comment before I go ahead and do it. -RaCha'ar 16:11, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Cite needed

Can we get a source for Square's definitively saying the level cap will never be increased past 75? I seem to intuitively know this to be true but searching is not finding me anything. -RaCha'ar 23:19, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I know there is none, but people generally believe that the level cap will never be raised because of the merit system and how final it seems. It would seem a bit funny if the cap was suddenlly raised, and all these 75's that used merit to raise a multitude of stats had to level with those. I guess its not far fetched, to my knowledge as I said...this has never been stated. It just seems unlikely to most.--Kiyosuki 22:54, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, the problem is that the article states that Square Enix has "announced" that the cap will never be raised, and if we can't find a cite from Square Enix saying that we really have to change the way that's phrased.  :) -RaCha'ar 23:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm trying to remember where this could of been said. Certainly not on POL.. It was probably one of the special get together events like Summer Carnival 2005.--Kiyosuki 23:21, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah ha, spoke too soon. I found a link, now can someone help this Wiki noob put the source into the article? It's located in the official Q&A's on Playonline's site. Link -RaCha'ar 23:22, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Just copy and paste the link where you want to put it, then highlight it and press the "external link" button at the top of the text window. It looks like a little globe with a paper on top of it.--Kiyosuki 23:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
That doesn't prove that they won't increase the level cap in some future update or patch. And I quote
Currently, the maximum level for a FINAL FANTASY XI player character is level 75. If your character has reached level 75, it will not gain any more experience.
Means at the current time it isn't any higher but doesn't say anything about it going up in the future -- čĥàñľōŕď 23:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Exactly right, and further proof that the statement that the level cap will "never" be increased is unsubstantiated, which is what I was trying to figure out. As this is the only statement from Square-Enix I could find, I'd change what the article says, with this link as the source, rather than leave it as it stands. -RaCha'ar 23:40, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

1UP did an interview with the producer of FFXI, Tanaka Hiromichi, who confirmed that there will never be a level cap increase. [2]

People and Politics Cleanup

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)

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)
Personally, I think having all the info here is fine; then again, I'm a mergist =P Deckiller 23:37, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
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)
-=nods=-. Now we need to get a Merging Star Wars articles wikiproject going ^_^ Deckiller 23:54, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)

Packaging Artwork

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)
As for europe, the UK box-art is the same as the USA's. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 22:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
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)
My mistake, sorry. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 23:14, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
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). -- 00:38, 19 February 2006 (UTC)


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)

Is this POV?

"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)

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)
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))
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)
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)
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))


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)

Sorry for moving summoner to the Zilart section, but i have a good excuse. I started the game in feb 2003 before the 1st expansion was released and before smn was in the game. The reason i moved smn is because it technically was introduced right before the 1st expansion came out to motivate people into buying it. Also without the release of the expansion you wouldnt be able to start or collect it's AF. The AF quests and coffers are in the Zilart areas and should make it a Zilart job. SMN was the 1st and only job not to have any background information in the japanese version instruction books, correctly making it not one of the orignal eleven jobs. It's only right to classify and a Zilart job since it purpose was to get people interested in the expansion.(Neoninja68 08:38, 17 February 2006 (UTC))

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)


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)

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)
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)

::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)

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)

I've just left a similar note on's page, but I'm going to post it again here in case anyone is curious. I am reverting from the bulleted list format that was introduced back to the paragraph I inserted yesterday because I'm positive that leaving it in bulleted form is going to encourage people to come along and add a sentence of description about their favorite job, and then someone else is going to come along and add another sentence, and so on and so forth until we're right back where we started. If there is support for the bulleted format I would really appreciate its being discussed here so we can reach a consensus about it. -RaCha'ar 18:21, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

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)
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)

Merit Points

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)

Request to be place on page

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)
What Chanlord said. Wiki's also really not someplace for speculation or essays. -RaCha'ar 00:43, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
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 <strike>TEXT HERE</strike>. -- CHANLORD [T]/[C] 01:50, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
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)


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)

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)
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)
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)


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)


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)

A Chrono Trigger-style millenial fair would have been nice. complete with a short-range teleporter that warps you back to the year 600. Alas, it would appear they made no plans for it

  • it should also be noted that exactly 25 game days are in one real day
  • further, a full moon cycle lasts 84 game days, or 3 days, 8 hours, 38 minutes, and 24 seconds exactly

--Pandora Xero 13:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Posted in article by user:

EXPANSION FOOTAGE out now follow this link 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)


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)

Tiny Additions

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 :)

FFXI This user plays Final Fantasy XI.

Suichi 18:04, 10 March 2006 (UTC)


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)


I removed some additions to the Race section made by 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)

Dragoon Image Description

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)Achilles2.0

I agree. Changed -- CHANLORD [T]/[C] 05:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


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)

Economy Note

First, my apologies, as this is my first time making a wiki entry and I'm almost bound to make a mistake. I have played FFXI since just after the US release.

"Inflation" as used by the FFXI community is a misnomer. Yes, inflation is inevitable in FFXI regardless of RMT action. People in FFXI commonly refer to any incidence of prices going up as inflation, but what they are really referring to is the phenomenon of price hikes as a result of monopolization. The gilsellers (RMT) effectively hold items for hostage at higher than standard prices which players immediately recognize, then people buy money from them to exchange for the item. The only time inflation somewhat occurs is during times of high gil purchasing, like we saw last holiday season. The wiki cited doesn't take into account that gil in the hands of RMT is in some regards not a part of the economy because it is not gil held with the purpose of being spent within the economy or used for any other means... until someone buys it. Thus, when a lot of gil is sold over a brief period of time, a pseudo-inflation does occur as much more spendable income is released into the economy (as players buy more and more).

Then, as those prices go up, more people are lured into buying currency, and the process repeats until it effectively crashes. Then it starts over again. It's quite a scam, and the effects are very real and serious (in as much as a game economy can be serious). Monopolization is the bane of any free market's existance, as you would expect. It interferes with the intended nature of supply and demand.

I hope that clarifies the situation for you. (and I hope this works)


Financial Situation

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 " 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 or that have a proxy IP from 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.. 06:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)an FFXI player who has seen the page get peed on by people from allakhazam far to often