Talk:Flyff

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on November 12, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.
Famicom style controller This article is part of WikiProject Computer and video games, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Portal:CVG
 CVG Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
CVG To-do:

"Flyff is billed as the first MMO to have a flying system, which it does to great effect." -- This needs to be expounded upon or corrected, since City of Heroes has flight, EverQuest has something approximating flight, and Earth and Beyond was a space flight sim MMO. --FreelanceWizard 11:42, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, that has been fixed. The original writer for this article probably took that off the game's ads on random sites; these ads state Flyff to be "The World's First Flying MMORPG!". What the creators probably meant is that this is the first game where you can actually use flying as a primary form of transportation, similar to mounts in World of Warcraft. --RagolSlayer 18:00, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Article Length?

Anyone think this article is a bit too long and indepth? It's like how the article on truthiness is longer than the article on lutherans. (If anyone got that, you're awesome. If you didn't, it's colbert on wikiality. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmHm0rGns4I) Well, I think a lot of it, especially the sections on Game mechanics, Flying, PvP and Classes should be moved to wikibooks. -spotco

[edit] Inappropriate Tone

I'm tagging this page under inappropriate tone for the use of the second grammatical person. I know some of you might object, but use of it is highly unprofessional, rude and condescending to the reader because it assumes the reader wants to actually play it, rather than be informed about it. The use is so extensive I would have taken the time to clean it all, but I'm busy at the moment. I hope you can cleanup the second person references, make them in the third person ("players", perhaps). Then the tag can be removed. --Antoshi~! T | C 05:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I just removed every instance of "you" and "your" I could and attempted to tighten up the article a bit. While this arguably would be enough to remove tag, the article still needs cleaning up and damned if I'm not sure which tag to replace the current one with. Sethimothy 11:42, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I edited the page--I only took out a small graffitti someone had left about how "blades own" or whatever.

-In the flying quest section I tried to correct the use of the word 'you' and reworded a bit of the content..(I'm not sure if I went about it correctly though, I'm a new user ^^;). As a player of flyff, I'm also a bit unsure of the correctness of some of the information, as I don't remember having to do a 'flying test' to obtain a 'license', though I left it as it is. Kat 10:56, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'm going to remove the inappropriate person tag, 'cause I can't find any more instances of it. The class selections need a little weeding out of walkthroughish stuff though, and I'm not sure exactly what constitutes that, so.... --Niroht 16:52, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What a mess

The layout is utterly horrific. I tried fixing up the "class" section, but I'm not sure how well I went about doing it.

The "locations" section should be removed entirely, along with the "story" section since it contains copyrighted (and Engrish) descriptions of the setting. I'll work more later...I have finals now. — Indi [ talk ] 11:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I've reviewed the story, and I couldn't find anything that would backup your 'Engrish' claim; it's proper English as far as I can tell. I agree on your copyright claim though, it needs to be reworked ASAP as it was copied word from word from the FlyFF Philippines site. --Aeon17x 14:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Guide-ish Read and Relevance

Most of the article reads like a guide, with the author of sections suggesting things like "It's probably best if you ignore it. Seriously.", and giving hints and suggustions to the reader. With some things having little point at all: "Q and A" and the "Flying Quest" sections, anyone? The "Q and A" section states "Post a question here and maybe someone will edit a answer in" or somthing like that. I haven't checked the Wikpedia policy, but I'm pretty sure that Wikipedia shouldn't be used as a guide, much less a bulitin board for Q and As. I've put up the template as of the 9th of July, 2006. Emerald 04:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Ahh, I've found a better template. Sorry for the first one. Emerald 04:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Alright, i guess i should try to edit the Flying section a bit then. Btw, any other sections you think is too... guide-ish? Personally, i think the whole of the Flying Quest section is pretty much useless to a non-player. However, both the quest and combat sections could be included as a note in the Flying section... --Slayze 15:06, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Vagrant leveling is too guide-ish, such as don't put any int, etc. The article is fairly good, but it doesn't really belong in an encyclopedia. --Wirbelwind 22:00, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
I edited the flying section a bit, but the flying combat section seems entirely "guide-ish". Although it may be worth mentioning that the game has flying combat, the whole entry revolves around the statement: "The easiest method to fight one is…" Definitely needs editing if anyone knows more about the game than I do. --dyn 01:07, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Will this work?

Maybe we should take out the Flying Quest section? It doesn't seem necessary then. I just left it in in case someone has a reason to not get rid of it. Oubliette 22:21, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion, the entire flying section should either be rephrased, or get most of its parts deleted. -Slayze 13:40, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Note: By "flying section", i meant both the Flying and Flying Quest sections.

I am also rewriting the Secondary Classes section so that it gets to the point without as much "guide-ish" writing as before. Tell me if the edits themselves need improving. Oubliette 12:50, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I deleted the price data since it was unnecessary. Sorry for not adding an edit summary. Squids and Chips 04:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PXP

As far as I know (I play the game regularly) PXP is only expended if the skill you use is set to levelling up (the level of the skill not the character), otherwise it uses only FP or MP.
Codegrinder 18:59, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

"currently has 120 levels of possible character progression." a quote from download.com (http://www.download.com/Flyff/3000-7543-10460145.html?part=dl-Flyff&subj=uo&tag=button)

[edit] Category suggestion

Now, I'm still pretty new to the inner workings of wikipedia, but I'm wondering, would a "Free to play MMORPG" category be a good idea? Or maybe a broader "Free to play online games" category? If it is, how do you go about getting a category created? Errick 19:19, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Use of "Subclass"

I'm not entirely sure that "subclass" is the right word to use to describe the second job classes, as subclass tends to describe a division of a higher class. For example, while Blades and knights technically do come from the Mercenary class, they are not really mercenaries anymore. An couple examples that do fit the word subclass, though, would be Bow Jesters or Full Support Assists, since they, despite build types, are still Jesters and Assists, respectively.

In summary, the second job classes in Flyff are more of a higher ranking of first job classes rather than lower devisions. Maybe a more appropriate word is needed here.

Well, that is true, i guess. If anyone wants to, go change all the subclass refences to "Advanced Class" or something, i suppose.--Slayze 06:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Where is the Acrobat picture?

If someone here could put up a decent picture with the Acrobat (classes) in it, that would be great. I'd do it myself, but I don't know where I can just upload a picture here on Wikipedia. Oubliette 02:30, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I would be able to put that up, if only i could find a nicely cropped picture of the Acrobat class. In the fansite packs for the various versions of Flyff, i could only find the other 3 classes and their subclasses, with no clean pictures of the Acrobat classes at all. And the upload page for images is here.--Slayze 06:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

È

[edit] Linkspam

This whole article gets waaaay too much linkspam. Problem is, with that "unofficial" heading I'm not sure what I should remove. I'm inclined to remove that section altogether. So.....what defines what I should remove, and how far does an "unofficial" heading legitimize links? --Niroht 15:18, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I removed the ones that seem like personal site promotions, as well as the sites based around a forum instead of guides. The video one is iffy to me though. --Wirbelwind 16:49, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm tempted to remove it, and I'll check a couple of the other ones as per Wikipedia is not google. --Niroht 16:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I've removed a bunch of them. I decided that we only need one guide link.--Niroht 16:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I have added the links again please do not remove them this is vandalism some of these where very usefull to me and have guides that arent on other pages. If you have to remove links be more carefull next time. Thanks. Also this isnt 'way to many linkspam' imho. This are only a few lines ad a few bites of information thats usefull so dont delete it. If you dont like it, I do so pleeeeeaase leave it alone.

I'm afraid that this isn't a FAQ or weblog. Or Google for that matter. As per Wikipedia: External Links this IS too many links. We want ONE guide and ONE fansite only if fansites are important. This is NOT vandalism. I'll give you two days to give me a GOOD reason to leave those links there, and if I don't get one I'm removing them. --Niroht 15:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, the links im using are still there so Im happy with that.

I added a Player killer information chart. It's a useful image, and the only one on the interweb that isnt in japanese or korean. I made it, so no copyright infringment there. -Clockworks

[edit] Maximum level

Do anyone actually know what is the real maximum level? 150 or 120? If i'm not wrong, we've been switching between them for quite a while now. -Slayze 15:33, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

As according to the system, it is 150. But kFlyff had indirectly hinted that they have something planned at 120... hence the switching. To some degree, both of those information are correct... But I would root for 150, since that was the limit we saw during the hacking craze at the early stage of the game. Either way, max. level is unachievable through normal means in game no matter which version of Flyff you are playing. - Crystalis

L150. There's a proposed third jobchange at L120. -Zan

[edit] Criticism

The "criticism" section is in major need of toning down, I get the impression that it was written by a bitter player who had made a few mistakes at the Cash Shop and wanted to get back at the game by flaming it in an "acceptable" manner. Nonetheless, if someone with more patience then I could reword that to be less harsh then I think that would probably be well deserved. 67.171.35.4 19:18, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I still plan on it eventually, like I reworked from the top to the end of the flying section and haven't gotten to the rest. --Wirbelwind 01:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Mercenary class is NOT crippled. I've had a level 32 character that was slaying level 40 monsters. I'm not sure anyone cares about two skills that much. Oubliette 15:23, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Gameguard makes the system unstable and unreliable? That doesn't seem to be the case with my system. I think the Gameguard part in the 'Criticism' section needs some cleaning up, as it seems a little one-sided instead of being neutral. -jeffk

Most thing in there is one-sided, unfortunately. Personally, I don't think most of it belong at all, and certainly not under a section called criticism. --Wirbelwind 03:21, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I would be toning down and balancing more of it, but to be honest I know virtually nothing about Gameguard and haven't seen much of the glitches and things that're mentioned, so I can't remove them. If someone could do some research on that sort of thing and work based on that, it'd be great. I've been reduced to just rewording it to sound less harsh. 67.171.35.4 19:18, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I think a critisism section should be appropriate, there is a lot of critisism from players on the flyff forums aswell. Often complained about is:

  • The cash shop policy: Items to expensive, pets removed from game and put into cash shop, items not tradable, shop *items cannot be sent trough mail (in game item transfer system)
  • the economy, cash shop items are under mayor inflation as are other rare items. Some prices are truely insane.
  • Hacks, the game has been suffering form hackers alot including kill hacks, attack speed hacks etc
  • Server reboots etc...
  • Bad costumer service, although flyff is said to befree to play, reality is alot of players donate money to support flyff.
I'm not denying that, but those are player remarks, and nothing notable, such as gaming magazines, etc, and have no reason to be in the article. I can, however, go on a gaming wiki if you so choose. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 00:40, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Um... help? :(

If anyone knows how to put pictures in a box next to specific text, could you put this image I uploaded next to the Clockwork's Cage section? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Clockworks1.PNG Oubliette 02:44, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be using a picture of the cage with Clockworks, instead of just a picture of Clockworks though? In any case, I placed it in... a few weeks later though. Wasn't looking at this article for quite a while... If you get a picture of the cage itself, please replace this image.--Slayze 04:07, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

If only I could... :( But I don't have/don't know/can't bribe a guild that will let me in the cage just for the necessary screenshot. :( But hey, there he is rampaging through Saint Morning. :P And after months of procrastination, there's a nice Acrobat screenshot. Oubliette 06:02, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Revamp

I did what I could. I removed the little needed criticism section, fixed the classes section to be less guide-like, added the notability reference, etc. I haven't touched the areas section though. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 07:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Concerned...

About the Second Classes section. I know I added to the First Classes part to include some abilities of each class, but I just did that to make them longer. We didn't need to do the same thing to the Second Classes thing. It's turned into a "guide" again. I want to change it back to the format I wrote months ago, but I don't want to climb the Reichstag dressed as Spider-Man. If it's all right, could we change it back?

And I know that there might be a problem on what I put for the first classes based on my above logic. All I can say is, i'm working on it. I also added to the first classes section to accomodate the Acrobat picture I put in, or there would have been too much empty space.

Thank you.

Oubliette 04:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think specific abilities and what they do are necessary for a encyclopedic entry. Squids and Chips 23:26, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../f/l/y/Talk%7EFlyff_fe8e.html"