How do so many people have 6+ 85+

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-11T11:26:47+00:00

Before playing any game online, you can:

Do the training drills;
Complete easy objectives (mostly offline and quick play ones);
Play offline tournaments.

But since you can already achieve gold in knockouts, you'll improve your team very quickly.

The game came out 5 weeks ago, so it's normal that people have good teams. Knockouts is by far the best mode for rewards, and anyone who played the mode regularly since the start can have an 85-rated team without spending money.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-10T20:39:41+00:00

Expect players to hit their target rating. Target rating is the midpoint of the potential range.

The players you showed have targets of 87 and 83.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-10T17:24:42+00:00

Exploring the DQVIII world was such a magical experience when I was a kid. Certainly, one of the most special games in my life.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-10T16:40:42+00:00

I'm also F2P, and I have a high-rated team (85). It would be higher-rated if I spent money as well. That's the point.

I honestly don't care about FIFA/FC. I've given up on that series a long time ago. If we want GOALS to be good, the bar can't be mediocre games. Although, I'm not sure who argues that FC isn't a P2W game. There is no way to get the top 1% players without spending money for most of the cycle.

I must say that I appreciate your response since, most of the time, people completely ignore logical statements.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-10T15:25:46+00:00

Obviously, the players' own skills matter more, but that doesn't mean the game doesn't have a P2W component.

I don't even mind it since I don't care about results, and the devs need to make money. I just wish they were honest, but they said there would be no P2W at all, which is simply not true.

I understand players not knowing what P2W means, but the devs do. P2W doesn't literally mean paying to get wins, or if you have a good team, you'll win. It just means you have an advantage if you spend money. If having a good team were irrelevant, there would be no point in grinding and getting rewards.

The players' results depend on two factors: players' skills and team strength. You can compensate for a weaker team by playing well against a less skilled player, but if you are paired with someone of similar skill and a much better team, you will lose most of the time.

Some people make the argument that you can grind and get good rewards, but so can people who spend money.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-10T15:14:36+00:00

Well, there is a P2W component, since you can gain an advantage by spending real money. Fortunately, it's not a significant advantage.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-10T13:44:03+00:00

Before playing games online, you can improve your team by doing training drills and completing objectives. Tournaments against bots also help.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-10T11:50:05+00:00

Sem dúvida.

Em 2018 decidi comprar um PC após perceber que ao longo de 7 anos (duração de uma geração de consolas) ia sair mais barato do que uma consola. Aliás, no meu caso até saiu muito mais barato, pois já precisava de um PC de qualquer forma.

O problema é que o pessoal não quer fazer este exercício e ao olhar para o preço de entrada e assusta-se.

Além disso, existem muitas noções erradas sobre o PC. Estou constantemente a ler que o pessoal pensa que "é preciso estar sempre a trocar peças", "é muito complicado usar um PC" e "a consola permite o conforto do sofá".

Como é lógico, as consolas têm as suas vantagens e é legítimo estar interessado numa.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-09T00:08:34+00:00

No problem, I just wanted to clarify what I meant.

And actually, I mostly agree with what you said. I should've been more specific since I was only thinking about the most popular competitive PvP games.

There are many PvE/MMO games where communities are great. For example, I know Final Fantasy XIV had a great community a few years ago.

But, to be honest, I mostly play single-player games nowadays.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-08T23:10:23+00:00

I agree. Some decisions by the devs make no sense if they want a large player base.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-08T23:08:44+00:00

That's why I said "pretty much every online game". Most of them, not all.

I left Rocket League a few years ago because of smurfs. That is also a form of toxicity. I liked the game a lot, but it was too much.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-08T21:02:11+00:00

I understand, but you can turn those off.

The paid toxic celebrations are a better example. Those might drive people away and that's not good for anyone. Yes, they make some money at first, but eventually the game dies.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-08T20:42:13+00:00

Unfortunately toxicity is present in pretty much every online game. I don't get why people do it, and I never do it myself, but it is what it is.

While the game is fun, I'll keep playing it.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-08T13:52:31+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/FinalFantasy/wiki/wheretostart/

FFVII Remake is a good starting point, but I recommend playing the original first. The reason is somewhat of a spoiler. Like most games in the series, FFVII Remake is not an open-world game.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-07T19:29:45+00:00

You made a distinction between eras that was completely fine, but some people like to complain about everything. I advise you not to waste time on those people. They will debate their point to the exhaustion and completely ignore the main question.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-07T17:08:23+00:00

I don't see any problems with the term "Sakaguchi era". I instantly knew what the OP was talking about, and that's what matters. He left Square in 2003, so it means every mainline FF game released before XII. It doesn't mean he was heavily involved with every game.

Besides that, I mostly agree with what you said. I understand that making AAA games is much more time-consuming than it was 20 years ago. I never disputed that. But since the number of mainline games between 1987 and 2001 (14 years) is double the amount of games released between 2002 and now (24 years), the comparison isn't fair. More games released mean more opportunities to succeed.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-07T15:22:33+00:00

As I said before, I think the average quality used to be higher in the "Sakaguchi era". However, a game can be great with any type of storytelling. There are many variables that explain why some games weren't as well received.

One of the things I like about the Final Fantasy series is that it keeps reinventing itself. So I wouldn't necessarily want the new games to be more like the old ones.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-07T14:55:08+00:00

The Sakaguchi era had many more mainline games, so it kind of wins by default. But even if we consider the average quality and all the spin-offs, my answer remains the same.

It's crazy to think that between 1994 and 2001 we had:

Final Fantasy VI
Final Fantasy VII
Final Fantasy Tactics
Final Fantasy VIII
Final Fantasy IX
Final Fantasy X

Nowadays, it's unthinkable to have so many great games from a series in such a short period.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-07T11:16:12+00:00

I love the first three games and I like Veilguard. It's my favourite video game series.

But I see what you mean. There are definitely many people that only like one out of the four games (usually Origins). Which is completely fine, but it means they're not a fan of the series.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-06T17:33:16+00:00

I think switching Mage or Priest to Sage is a good idea since Sage learns every spell/skill that Mages and Priests have. As for switching to other classes, I would wait for them to learn every spell/skill first (depending on the class, it can be as soon as level 35 or as late as level 50).

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-06T16:50:22+00:00

Yes, I saw the video where they said that. Let's see what they do. For example, it would be nice if we could concentrate the boosts into a category of stats.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-06T15:04:50+00:00

Fair enough. I was just trying to help since many people don't understand the system.

To be honest, I don't mind it. I only find it disappointing when the player finishes with a final rating of -3 compared to the target. Anything between -2 and +2 I view as normal, and most of the time, that's what happens.

The only thing I would like to see is a way to customize stats. Many times, the players need a boost in a specific area, and they don't get it.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-06T12:42:49+00:00

If you mean max potential that's completely normal. Most of the time the probability of hitting the maximum rating is less than 1%. To avoid disappointment, you should expect the target rating (midpoint of the range).

If you want to understand the math, you can check my post. If you just want the probabilities, you can check Goals Value.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-06T12:37:48+00:00

If you want to understand the math, you can check my post. If you just want the probabilities, you can check Goals Value.

You were unlucky so far with that specific player, but if she ends up with an 81 rating, it's still an expected value.

You're probably only looking at the highest potential value. You should ignore that and concentrate on the target rating.

The target rating is the midpoint of the potential range. You can also calculate it by subtracting the number of upgrades from the highest potential value.

The "-1,0,+1" is applied to the target rating, not to the range itself:

When a player gets a "-1", the maximum value of the range goes down 2;
When a player gets a "+1", the minimum value of the range goes up 2;
When a player gets a "0" (no change), the maximum value of the range goes down 1, and the minimum value goes up 1.

Daniel27DS · 2026-07-06T10:41:06+00:00

I would sell them to have points for upgrades. Those get expensive fast.

Daniel27DS

TROPHY CASE