I loved this Live Letter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AwesomeJr44

Start looking.

(Here's a hint, you can start your search with the OP)

---

Sorry, but no. As I said before, OP isn't being a white knight, they're expressing an opinion. So you know, people are allowed to like this game AND post that they like this game on this game's official forum. Doing so does not make one a white knight. Saying they're doing so in the face of negativity ALSO does not make one a white knight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tulvi

Why are you triggered by the fact that somebody likes the upcoming patch and enjoys the game? How is it toxic positivity if we enjoy what we pay for?

---

This.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hunkygladiator

UNFETTERED SKILL ISSUE

---

Regardless of your...assessment...the point is that I (and others accused of being white knights or toxic positive) often DO critique the game. Unlike the negative Nancies, the positive people are open with their criticisms, they just also express positively.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BaconBits

I can already feel the monkey's paw curling.

---

It does feel that way, doesn't it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WaxSw

...Yes? Thats the whole point of the forums? One thing is a game and another different is a person? The difference is pretty basic. One can try to argument with another player about the complains one may have, but there is actually a very big difference between doing that and calling others haters and telling them to "just unsuscribe".

---

And yet, many of the negative posters are doing just that - picking appart people/attacking people.

When you say someone is "toxic", "white knight" (used as an insult - and it is being used that way, let's not be coy), or demonstrating "toxic positivity" - those are not constructive criticisms on the game, they are arguing with, or rather attacking, another person. Calling a person toxic positive isn't less bad than calling someone a hater.

It was you who said the positive people didn't like the game as much and were blind, was it not? How was that "constructive criticism of the game", exactly?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atelier-Bagur

goes to show how little you actually pay attention to anyone on the forums except when the obvious loud people make their points. Ive stated numerous times on replies and other posts about how:

I dislike the current housing system, dislike the leveling experience, dislike the combat system, dislike the homogenous jobs, dislike the butchering of the holy trinity (tanks, healers, dps), dislike the character progression for being meaningless, dislike the dungeon and raid design, dislike the lack of meaningful rewards in Variant/Criterion dungeons, dislike parts of the MSQ, dislike the community, dislike the current EW relic steps being the exact same etc

Ive stated all of these things in one way or another but ofcourse because these statements have been mostly worded softly (for the most part, I'an no saint either) and or werent made into dramatic threads or abnoxious loud posts ala aveyond or hunkygladiator, they usually go unnoticed.

---

This.

Negative people insisting folks they are opposed to aren't negative enough are either ignoring the actual critiques we make - which ARE often examples of constructive criticism unlike the brigading positive posts to bring down the mood or attack OPs - and seem to have this "all or nothing" position that unless you're constantly negative on the game and anyone who likes it, you're "toxic positive". It's the most insane metric I've ever seen on a video game forum, and I've been on quite a few.

.

The long and short of it, though, is:

1) Positive feedback is ALSO feedback and is allowed and valid.

2) People are allowed to like a thing/game.

3) People not agreeing with you doesn't make them toxic or white knights.

4) Calling people toxic or white knights is...kinda toxic.

5) Feedback offered in neutral tone, without attacking people, that is precise and actionable, and that doesn't stoop to hyperbolic or hysterics is far more likely to be acted on than that which is...not.

6) Even the best feedback may be listened to but not acted on if the overall decision based on metrics that the person giving the feedback may not have access to suggests that it would be better for the game not to act on it, or act in a way different from the one giving said feedback wants. And that's perfectly okay, it's not being "ignored" and/or "silenced".

7) Despite all this, we're all Human, and I hope you're all having a lovely weekend. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

And yet, many of the negative posters are doing just that - picking appart people/attacking people.

When you say someone is "toxic", "white knight" (used as an insult - and it is being used that way, let's not be coy), or demonstrating "toxic positivity" - those are not constructive criticisms on the game, they are arguing with, or rather attacking, another person. Calling a person toxic positive isn't less bad than calling someone a hater.

---

While this happens is more often than not because those positive people just throw the classic "just unsub" or simply try to silence the criticism in any stupid way (just look how this thread exists for the very same reason). I dont doubt there are cases like that but usually the ones behaving in such an emotional way tend to be the toxic positive ones and the negative ones usually react to that toxicity.

Quote:

---

It was you who said the positive people didn't like the game as much and were blind, was it not? How was that "constructive criticism of the game", exactly?

---

Quoting myself "You (and to an extent all of those who think that any criticism that the game gets is hate) should realize that many of those "haters" are people who really love this game, probably way more than those who blindly praise the game, and want it to be the best it can be."

I said blindly praise, not blind, I said "probably more" when it comes to loving the games and I stand by my words, one must really like something to be able to enjoy it, see its flaws and go out their way to try to fix them. I didn't call anyone blind nor I talked in absolutes when it came to loving the game so, please, don't try to maliciously twist my words

"How was that "constructive criticism of the game"?

It wasn't but just because this entire thread focus is not the feedback towards the game. This thread is just a try to silence that criticism and that's why I called it out, because its unhealthy.

If you want to shut any argument I have with that question though, I could ask you the same question "How are your arguments constructive criticism of the game"?

Now I understand why in 1.0 there wasn’t an official forum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jokerz_93

Now I understand why in 1.0 there wasn’t an official forum.

---

Not the comparison I would want to make considering just how great and successful 1.0 was...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jokerz_93

Now I understand why in 1.0 there wasn’t an official forum.

---

Yes.

There was. Its still up.

https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...-Forum-Archive

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WaxSw

...

---

1) Source this thread exists "to simply try to silence the criticism in any stupid way"? How is this thread existing SILENCING criticism? Is this thread going around deleting critical threads? No? So how is this thread "silencing" criticism, exactly?

2) Dude, have you read the toxic negative posters here? They're acting "in such an emotional way". The positive ones here are the ones "usually react to that toxicity". Hell, the OP was a reaction to the toxicity!

3) I was wondering if you'd try to get off on a technicality. "blindly praise" means "blind". IT'S STILL AN ATTACK ON PEOPLE, not a critique. You aren't critiquing the game when you're calling people "blindly praising" a thing. Nor are you critiquing the game when you say that the people NOT critical of the game don't love it as much as you do ("probably way more"). No, you don't get to hand-wave that away.

4) "It wasn't". That's the answer to the question.

5) "This thread is just a try to silence that criticism": Source?

6) "Because its unhealthy"? HOW? And do you attack any negative threads as unhealthy since they're trying to "silence" the positive threads? No, you do not.

7) I'm not the one insisting that my arguments are constructive criticism of the game and telling off people for attacking others: You are. I'm just holding you to your own standard and watching how you waft.

.

The fact is, your position is hypocritical and non-self-consistent, and it also is divorced from reality. You have no evidence this thread was meant to "silence" negativity, and even if you did (you don't), a thread existing isn't deleting other threads, so it's not SILENCING anything. The closest you could argue is that it is trying to counter or balance the negativity, but neither of those things is bad (indeed, they're healthy for the game), and that would assume you could prove the OP's motivations were to do that, which you cannot.

Further, while chastising people for attacking those who are negative and not offering neutral criticism of the game, you're attacking people who are positive and not offering neutral criticism of the game.

Not only do you not meet your own standard, your standard is based on unsupported inference on your part (you trying to mindread the motivations of others) that you have no proof for, AND it's not even doing the thing you claim - this thread is no more silencing the negative ones than your claim the Devs are silencing the Healer forum by...allowing the people there to post endlessly without contest, deletions, or mutes.

I'm starting to wonder if you just don't know what the word "silencing" means...as that's the only way your perspective could make sense; if you don't know what the word means and think it means something else. Like "balancing" or "countering" (though the Devs aren't doing that in the Healer subforum, either...)

This is literally so hilarious

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RyuDragnier

Reminds me of a certain type of people I've dealt with in reality, they are not fun people let me tell you. They give the impression of having a hive mind and will bash anything that remotely is outside of their line of thinking, even attacking people for not looking the same.

---

Subtlety, thee know it not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

People are ALLOWED to post positive things. And when the same negative people going into all the positive threads to pick fights and berate people for being positive come into their threads, they are well within reason to rebuff those people.

---

People are permitted to post "negative" things as well. That's called criticism, and sometimes that is deemed very undesirable here. The amount of times I've seen it reduced to simple cases of "Negative Nancies" is quite frankly unacceptable. Do you truly mean to attempt to convince me that you've never once witnessed the myriad posters who come into critique threads for the sole purpose of stating "Yet another one of these threads...." with a dramatic sigh worthy of the heights of professional theatre? It is of course fine if you truly haven't, as not all of us are present here twenty four-seven but I'm here now to inform you they exist and are very prevalent indeed.

I daresay the moment any poster has the stones to post a critique thread, you are statistically guaranteed to attract at least three to five of these such bad faith actors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

I don't think I've seen a white knight in here yet.

---

Yet have you seen a "Black Knight"? Judging by your obvious bias, I heartily suspect you are inclined to see many.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

The negative people are coming into the positive threads picking fights. They aren't innocent victims and people aren't going out of their way to attack them. Even with all the negative people taking issue with OP's first line, his line wasn't attacking the negative people, it was saying "there's a lot of negativity here, but here is some positivity". That wasn't picking a fight or "chastising" anyone. The perma-negative people here took it as a personal attack because someone dared not agree with them that they should be down on the game, and raided this thread to try and prevent any positivity from taking hold. This happens in seemingly EVERY positive thread here, indicating it's not "toxic positivity and white knights" we have here, it's "toxic negativity and black knights".

The mud slinging almost always starts when someone posts something positive - either in their own thread (like this one) or as a comment in another thread - and the "black knights" go on to invalidate the positivity. And thus the cycle begins. It's almost always the black knights starting this fighting - which they immediately blame on the white knights that don't exist. Reading through a lot of threads here in General lately, I don't see many or even any "blind positive white knights". People saying the game isn't horribad right now are generally doing so by offering actual reasons.

TBH a lot of people who claim to be offering "constructive criticism" really enjoy attacking and destroying others arguments on here for the hell of it. They also enjoy pointing out any issue they can find in others instead of trying to understand the main point the positive poster is getting at. That seems extra toxic doesn't it? It’s the worse toxicity of the two by far.

---

I retract. Never you mind the inquiry, you answered it of your own free will. That's the issue we're having here, in my own humble opinion. Here in this very post, you're doing exactly what the "Black Knights" are constantly taking issue with. Reducing all of their critique, valid or no, to nothing more than mindless negativity whilst raising any positivity or hope to near deific levels of benevolence. I find myself incapable of agreeing with this stance, personally. I've seen plenty of arguable toxicity of differing varieties from each and all factions both.

I've seen both "sides" be extremely hostile, denigrative and toxic but so long as any one poster shows their bias in only taking a stance when defending the position with which they've aligned themselves no amicable solution can be met.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

The people offering positivity often have some critiques of the game, and even those that don't aren't "reactively overpositive", they're offering reasons behind why they think what they think. Rationally disagreeing with a person who is negative does not make one toxic.

It seems that the toxic negative black knights also severely overestimate how constructive and non-combative they are as a whole. Some individuals are exceptions, but on the whole, the black knight brigade is a problem here as it attacks any positive feedback. And positive feedback IS feedback.

---

Some of what you say may well be accurate. All the same, you make the opposite mistake in this post and underestimate just how petty and vindictive some of the "positive" posters can be and have been in the very immediate past. We have people in this very thread who claim their opinion represents the vast majority of players and posters who go on unhinged rants against dissenters with regularity.

Quite frankly, I do not know if any can claim the moral high ground here. Certainly very few to none I've seen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

The fact is, your position is hypocritical and non-self-consistent, and it also is divorced from reality.

---

Hmm. I would say the same could be said of many here, including your own august self in this and other posts here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

The closest you could argue is that it is trying to counter or balance the negativity, but neither of those things is bad (indeed, they're healthy for the game), and that would assume you could prove the OP's motivations were to do that, which you cannot.

---

To continue my point from my previous post, you bias is shining through like a beacon and you are incapable of divorcing yourself from it. Why? If this is truly so valid, why can it not be applied to "negative" posts as well? You yourself claimed that no white knights exist to the best of your knowledge, but many Black Knights and mindless Negative Nancies do. Can you not see how unfair and inaccurate such a wild and baseless claim is?

This may well be a new concept to you, but criticism is also rather healthy for MMORPGs, and you quite simply cannot hope to control of police the manner in which it is formulated. That's this forum's ordeal, in my opinion. Critique is apparently required to be vetted for acceptability purposes, but too many here mistake themselves as those with requisite authority to do such a thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

Further, while chastising people for attacking those who are negative and not offering neutral criticism of the game, you're attacking people who are positive and not offering neutral criticism of the game.

Not only do you not meet your own standard, your standard is based on unsupported inference on your part (you trying to mindread the motivations of others) that you have no proof for

---

......This is pointless, isn't it? Based on the inferences and claims you yourself have made, it would seem you do a lot of assumptions of intent yourself. Also, I hate to be the one to break the unpleasant news, however there is no such thing as "neutral" critique. Again, the manner in which critique is formulated isn't up to the forum posters here to decide on whether or not it's "positive" enough or what have you. If it's not outright attacking specific posters or utilizing obscene amounts of curse words and gratuitous slurs, it is valid regardless of whether it meets whatever arbitrary standards some posters seem to possess.

Regardless, I believe I'm going to back off now. I simply do not envision us getting anywhere rational or amicable with this discussion. It was a grievous lapse in judgement on my part to even begin such negotiations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VelKallor

Thats drawing a very long bow. Sorry, but disagree. I look at it from this standpoint..they are well aware of the housing issue, the idea of instanced housing has been raised before, they came up with the island as an alternative and are now working to make it happen. Housing is not a "snare to keep players subbed", but as time went on the limitations have become more acute, so this is their plan moving forward.

I find it elegant and brilliant, its a long term solution to a growing problem...btw, in case it had escaped you, this is also a masterstroke as guess what it now neutralises..the bot issue. You wont see bots or bot groups buying up islands en masse now, will you?

Some plans arent done overnight, I recommend we wait, as from what i can see here this IS a damned good idea. Implementation will take time, agreed. It doesnt help to ascribe sinister or ulterior motives where none exist..Id also say the massive influx we have had for the last few years has caught them all as a surprise, which exacerbated a problem that hadnt BEEN a major issue..up until now.

Did they get caught unawares? Id say yes, so the entire system had to be revised and a new alternative found.

I counsel patience.

---

I've thought more than once that if I wanted to test out some things with instanced housing, I would take similar steps to what SE has been doing. Limiting the islands to only those who finished EW means they won't have the entire population hitting the servers at once so they can get a good sample size for a stress test. And now with outdoor furnishings, they can see how that step works. I imagine they would keep plans very close to the vest in case something doesn't work, but I wouldn't be surprised if they're testing to see what will work and what won't for possible future instanced housing.