This whole Meta Party thing is hurting me. x_x

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veliena

1. Less skilled players shouldn't be doing the hardest content.

---

Uh yes they should, content is there for everyone to try out, having them clear or not. And poor job balancement pressures them to not play some jobs that are bad in less skilled enviorments. BLM is one of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Karshan

A6: We believe everyone is focusing on their main job; however, we’re making sure the experience when playing the jobs are different. At the very least, we have no plans to add any new support abilities in the 4.x series. Also, there seems to be a trend where players believe they are at a disadvantage when they bring certain jobs to raids, but there won’t be any major disadvantage or advantage no matter what setup you have.

---

They're technically not wrong. But the percieved advantage is big. Game is actually way more balanced than people feel like it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veliena

All you have done countless times is simply state blm needs a buff, and other jobs need to lose theirs. You say you want blm to remain as it is, a selfish dps, we point out they are indeed the top dps currently and you just say no. You state that taking a "meta" comp is the only way for less skilled players to complete the hardest content.

Ok
1. Less skilled players shouldn't be doing the hardest content.
2. If players want to play by self imposed rules to shorten the fights length, thats the players problem
3. Currently every job in the game can complete the hardest content if the players on the jobs are skilled enough
4. If players do enjoy going for speed kills ect, then they have chosen to do so and if 1 comp is better then the others due to their self imposed rules, again, thats their problem.
5. The only time when the time it takes to kill a boss matters is in world first races, again self imposed rules. Be that as it may, for everyone below #1, meta doesn't really matter.

---

It seems you are having problems reading my posts. I have said that Black Mages personal dps is not enough to counteract the lack of utility. Black Mages total contribution to raid dps is not top.

Please re-read your posts next time. Thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Karshan

And btw the devs opinion on meta in today's LL :

A6: We believe everyone is focusing on their main job; however, we’re making sure the experience when playing the jobs are different. At the very least, we have no plans to add any new support abilities in the 4.x series. Also, there seems to be a trend where players believe they are at a disadvantage when they bring certain jobs to raids, but there won’t be any major disadvantage or advantage no matter what setup you have.

understand : stop annoying us with meta, we won't be working on it cause it's your problem (players choice)

---

The dev's are correct that they shouldn't add any new support abilities, but they are absolutely incorrect by saying the part I have bolded. They don't have a clue what they are talking about.

I think that in their eyes the fact that you can basically change to any job you want plus the fact that gear is extremely easy to come by AND the fact that each new tier is a de facto gear reset means that their priority is making all jobs able to clear the content and balancing them all is a much lesser topics for them.

I'll keep myself in the middle on this because imho it's understandable but also a bit aggravating

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Remedi

I think that in their eyes the fact that you can basically change to any job you want plus the fact that gear is extremely easy to come by AND the fact that each new tier is a de facto gear reset means that their priority is making all jobs able to clear the content and balancing them all is a much lesser topics for them.

I'll keep myself in the middle on this because imho it's understandable but also a bit aggravating

---

Which would be fair enough if each class had its fair share of times when they are strong and weak, and if every role was represented. But that isn't the case and hasn't been for the DPS roles for a long time. How dare anyone consider BRD/DRG/NIN/MCH nerfs without corresponding fixes that increase their DPS

You are absolutely right on that point hence why I say that while a bit understandable it's a bit aggravating given the circumstances, though I'd prefer them creating a caster efficency over destroying the ranged /melee one

I think what most people also forget is that they're working as any project team, in the real world, on a job market : faced with recommandations, they analyse the benefit/risk ratio.

Risk : hours and hours of debate and testing, and still being at the mercy of rant. Benefit : pleasing the less than 1% players who have a use for meta and care about it.

I can bloody tell you right away team leader's decision : let them rant in threads we don't even read. Most are still subbed and even if not, meh 2k less players

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Karshan

I think what most people also forget is that they're working as any project team, in the real world, on a job market : faced with recommandations, they analyse the benefit/risk ratio.

Risk : hours and hours of debate and testing, and still being at the mercy of rant. Benefit : pleasing the less than 1% players who have a use for meta and care about it.

I can bloody tell you right away team leader's decision : let them rant in threads we don't even read. Most are still subbed and even if not, meh 2k less players

---

I work in the industry. I have also previously led a game balance team for another game. They are completely out of touch. The issue stems from no-one at the company playing the game to a decent level - even the dev's and playtesters play the game with godmode enabled for development purposes. Look at what happens when Yoshi-P "shows off" his BLM gameplay - he rarely uses an optimal rotation at all. I'm not saying it is easy. I'm not saying it can be done overnight. But the comments that come out from Yoshi-P are flat out insulting for a portion of the playerbase. Just because the issue isn't visible to other users, doesn't mean the issue isn't high impact.

You don't even have to have too much risk in the game when even community members have made applications to take into account raid dps buffs.

And if you think class performance is for less than 1% of the currently subscribed playerbase, you have been reading reddit too much.

No offense but I'd prefer to have some source on them using godmode on every testing, I'd rather not have another meme running around like they catering to the JP playerbase when according to the japanese playerbase it's the opposite

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Remedi

No offense but I'd prefer to have some source on them using godmode on every testing, I'd rather not have another meme running around like they catering to the JP playerbase when according to the japanese playerbase it's the opposite

---

IIRC Its been said a number of times in Liveletters and interviews. Here is a video of it in action:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07jeXOiHPmw

They then do the DPS calculations for fights based on their own internal calculations (again, said by him) but its often speculated by the community that they don't take into account high tank and healer DPS into account, as well as stacked raid buffs. There also seems to be some sort of disconnect on what they calculate is theoretically possible on some classes if Stone Sea Sky is any indicator - BLM's dummy being above SAM is one example last raid tier - especially given what we know about cast times and ping/hardware.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veliena

Meta is a arbitrary set of rules, they don't actually exist except in peoples minds. They think if its not meta it won't work, or it isn't good enough and thats a bunch of bull. Even the devs have said to themselves but of course, you say they are wrong because, why would they know ANYTHING about the game they make.

---

Meta is the culmination of data and execution. It is the most effective party composition not because people say it is, but because it is mathematically proven.

Play whatever you want. Get good at it. Find a team that's willing to sacrifice something and cater to your preference. No one's arguing that.

But the stark difference shouldn't be so cut and dry. Between equally skilled Blam / Sams and a Machinist, the machinist wins out every time and that's the problem.

I don't really think that LL footage can or should be considered an evidence of this, since the footage is mostly for show, can you pinpoint me towards some interwiews were they discuss about this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Remedi

I don't really think that LL footage can or should be considered an evidence of this, since the footage is mostly for show, can you pinpoint me towards some interwiews were they discuss about this?

---

https://www.bluegartr.com/threads/12...tions-requests

He does say that they turn it off to test at the end, however that is for fight balance rather than class balance, and there are some fights that they haven't tested in a true completely toolless state - he also hints that the dev team have "sort of cleared"

As another example of where they get their testing wrong, when Ninja was released and then nerfed shortly afterwards, Yoshi-P remarked that the community worked out a much better rotation than they expected.

Ty, will read it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsilyi

Snip.

---

The development team today clearly—and definitively—stated that there are no major advantages or disadvantages to any setup. In short—this 'meta' is a player made concept, and to the individuals who have access to all the information and data, it is a silly construct.

Now as for the specifics. Yes, whoever parses the most DPS is the optimal DPS. There is a law of averages; if a few parses had a raid feeding the BLM to do the most possible damage, it would be balanced out by a myriad of logs from countless comps. There is more than enough data on FF Logs to squash the outliers. So if you cannot agree that the highest parsing DPS is the best / optimal DPS, then it just shows you do not understand how DPS works.

And to bring it all back to the tidbit I listed: the developers definitively said there are no major advantages or disadvantages to any comp. Meta or not, buffs or debuffs or not, the devs do not think that there are any meaningful benefits, and thus you can take the numbers as they are. That should be /thread. Unless you want to say the creators of the game do not know what they're talking about, which is rather silly.

Although it is nice to have a discussion, instead of another poster who just wants to scream WRONG at everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eli85

And to bring it all back to the tidbit I listed: the developers definitively said there are no major advantages or disadvantages to any comp. Meta or not, buffs or debuffs or not, the devs do not think that there are any meaningful benefits, and thus you can take the numbers as they are. That should be /thread. Unless you want to say the creators of the game do not know what they're talking about, which is rather silly..

---

Except it's objectively wrong, so, you know.

Keep on trucking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

Except it's objectively wrong, so, you know.

Keep on trucking.

---

The development team—who has access to more numbers and data than anyone else—is wrong? Do you realize how asinine that sounds?

People can make mistakes, but when the devs look at their mountain of data and say "there are no major advantages or disadvantages," there is no feasible, logical counter to it. Namely, because any argument you can make lacks the data that the devs have at their disposal.

If there is honestly any argument on devs objective data analysis, then this thread has gone truly south.

The meta is a fiction, confirmed by the development team. It's time to drop it, completely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eli85

People can make mistakes.

---

Developers are people too.

If developers didn't make mistakes, there'd be no reason to have Q/A or playtesting.

What they have is a difference of opinion. They believe there is no major disadvantage or advantage to compositions, but that is objectively false.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

Developers are people too.

If developers didn't make mistakes, there'd be no reason to have Q/A or playtesting.

What they have is a difference of opinion. They believe there is no major disadvantage or advantage to compositions, but that is objectively false.

---

I did acknowledge that people can make mistakes. It is not, however, a matter of opinion to look at hard lined, mathematical data and say 'there is no major advantage of disadvantage to compositions.' That is an objective statement anchored in mathematical data subsets.

As a community, we cannot argue against that statement. All of our data, relative to the developers, is incomplete.

What the developers said is objectively true, not false.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eli85

I did acknowledge that people can make mistakes. It is not, however, a matter of opinion to look at hard lined, mathematical data and say 'there is no major advantage of disadvantage to compositions.' That is an objective statement anchored in mathematical data subsets.

As a community, we cannot argue against that statement. All of our data, relative to the developers, is incomplete.

---

That is an assumption, and subjective by nature. You cannot make this claim with certainty and thus the argument is, while somewhat valid, not indisputable in the least.

Saying there is no difference would be false. Saying there is no MAJOR difference is what they said. It's kinda the players that have a tendancy to exagerate further than reasonable any discrepancy.

Yes meta comp is more effective. Also, to do reasonable comparison there should be tests made by the speedrunners. For exemple, on O5S best time is 36 500 rDPS, it would be interesting to see if the same guys with non meta jobs reach 35k or only 32-33.

https://fr.fflogs.com/reports/yaKGnV...pe=damage-done
What would these guys do with MNK, BLM, BRD and SAM ?

That's the data I would need to evaluate if it is Major or Minor and make my mind about devs' or players' point of view.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eli85

As a community, we cannot argue against that statement. All of our data, relative to the developers, is incomplete.

What the developers said is objectively true, not false.

---

Even this very LL that you use as an argument proved that devs make mistakes and overlook stuff - look at their comments about tank LB. We have situations like that all the time. Another thing is, they don't play on optimal level. All they stated is that the balance doesn't affect normal players, which is true. But neither does meta. What we talk here is about speedkills, where even 1 point of DPS matters.
You want to fight solid math with words that might as well be a PR. There is no point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eli85

The development team—who has access to more numbers and data than anyone else—is wrong? Do you realize how asinine that sounds?

---

You do realize ACT calculates its results from the battle log, yes? As in the same numbers the developers use. Now there may be occasional hiccups, especially involving dots but we're talking very small fractions—not enough to matter in the grand scheme of things. To say the meta is fiction based on a PR statement is what's actually asinine.

Now if you want to argue meta jobs aren't required. You'd be correct. Alas, some jobs are objectively superior. No amount of balance will ever change that unless we have full blown homogenization.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HaroldSaxon

https://www.bluegartr.com/threads/12...tions-requests

He does say that they turn it off to test at the end, however that is for fight balance rather than class balance, and there are some fights that they haven't tested in a true completely toolless state - he also hints that the dev team have "sort of cleared"

As another example of where they get their testing wrong, when Ninja was released and then nerfed shortly afterwards, Yoshi-P remarked that the community worked out a much better rotation than they expected.

---

It's as you say that they use it especially at first to test the functionality of the fights, afterall we get a redacted version of what the fight really are (ex. the time bombs in ozma were aoe during tests) however it's worth noting that the context of the interwiew was gordias and since then they changed considerably the raid fights.

Frankly I am a bit neutral about the playerbase finding different more functional rotations than the devs, since honestly many eyes see more than few

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bourne_Endeavor

Snip.

---

Of course I am aware that ACT calculates from the battle log. Yet that is still not a complete picture of the numbers. Internal testing, raw mathematics (formulas, interactions) on the coding level, those are all things that we do not have. And I'm sorry, but I will believe the creators of the game far more easily than any player. It's nothing personal, but no player knows the game nearly as well as the developers do.

As for the others who quoted me: if you truly, truly believe that the developers are wrong with an objective analysis of data subsets, there is no convincing you. But the meta is a fiction. The sooner we let go of it, the better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eli85

...

---

You're basically taking the words of some developer and trying to pass it off as "objective data, raw mathematics, etc." which is absolutely insane. Reference Link, please? You see to have seen them yourself, given how reliably you view them to be.

I will take the hoards of data gathered by the community over what the developers "say," any day.

Developers in these games make mistakes on a monthly basis, and companies will never admit their game is imbalanced in a fundamental way. This is 100% PR. It's pretty obvious that certain setups are clearly better than others, and certain classes simply have no place in the optimal setups.

The fact that the community performed better, on a class they added, than even they anticipated should clue you into just how "reliable" their views and numbers on class performance are.

And, rude... trying to shut people up and dissuade them from having a dialog on the matter.

META is not fiction.

I get where the OP is coming from, and I feel the same.
I just recently resubbed again and all of this is already making me rather demotivated to play.
BLM is my fav job, and while I don't mind playing SMN or any healer I just REALLY want to play BLM but all of the doom and gloom is really off-putting.
It's sorta nudging me into playing healer even tho I have less fun with it.

I don't really think that the major problem is the meta itself ( even tho it could be more balanced ), but rather the people that ain't as good as they think that they are who obsess over it even tho they're not good enough to even take advantage of it to begin with and end up making certain aspects of the game rather toxic for a lot of people.
Like if we're talking about people trying to progress and '' accomplish greater things '' so to speak then sure. Obsess over it all that you want.
But if we're talking about more casual play, then I think that certain people need to calm the hell down with it.

I just think that it often tends to be the wrong people who obsess about it.
And it sucks to always have that label over your head of '' not meta '' and being reminded of it constantly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trensharo

Snip.

---

Yes, that is how it works. Development decisions are based entirely on internal testing, combat logs, and raw game data. They have far more data at their disposal than the "hoards of data gathered by the community." Not only that, but they understand how the game works and balanced far more than you, me, or anyone else.

Talk to anyone who has been in game development and they will tell you that they make objective decisions based on data subsets.

So when the game director says there are no major advantages or disadvantages to any given comp, we should take that as an objective truth. After all, they have more data at their disposal than anyone else.

There is no dialog to be had on this issue. There are only individuals who need the 'meta' so desperately that they're willing to throw logic and rationality away.

The meta IS a fiction. The more we argue against this, the worse off the community is.

I never bothered with the meta. I just play w/e I like. For example I'm playing BLM at time and I'm having fun with it. Just play w/e you like and stop caring for the meta unless you wanna go tryhard end game.

https://puu.sh/zmXII/8724ab64da.jpg

Playerbase have shown to be better than the devs at playing at the utmost level of play. This was just the back in July of 17.

Just play what you like. What's more important is how well you can perform on any particular class you've chosen and how well you understand the fight. PF groups that lock for meta comps give me the impression of someone lacking confidence, someone who is looking to be carried by a meta advantage. It's one thing to prefer a comp, but another to require it, full stop. I don't understand the mentally behind wanting harder content, yet demanding the absolute "best" possible comp in an attempt to make things easier.

People will beg for a challenge then bend over backwards to try and preemptively make the fight less of a challenge. On one end of the spectrum you have groups that intentionally run with unusual comps just to experiment and prove that it can be done.
On the other end, you have people who won't run unless they have the perceived meta advantage.

Lastly, do people realize that the meta is being set by world firsters and people competing for the fastest possible progression times in a competition? These are highly coordinated groups.
These groups set the meta, but they aren't exactly playing the same game that a pug is playing. Your average PF pug is just a bunch of random uncoordinated people thrown together.
Aren't meta comps built up around coordination and team synergy? If so, isn't the average uncoordinated pug going to get less mileage out of a meta comp anyway?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Levy9

Aren't meta comps built up around coordination and team synergy? If so, isn't the average uncoordinated pug going to get less mileage out of a meta comp anyway?

---

No. An average player is going to perform less no matter what job they're on, but a low damage blackmage is worthless, where a low damage machinist can still manasong and hypercharge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

No. An average player is going to perform less no matter what job they're on, but a low damage blackmage is worthless, where a low damage machinist can still manasong and hypercharge.

---

This is what people don't get.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

No. An average player is going to perform less no matter what job they're on, but a low damage blackmage is worthless, where a low damage machinist can still manasong and hypercharge.

---

You're missing my point. Is the average player going to sync up their raid buffs in coordination with another player's buffs so that they stack consistently in a pug group? Probably not. If they don't coordinate like this, the benefit of having a meta comp decreases from when a coordinated group is using it. I didn't say there was no possible advantage for a pug. Secondly, the Blackmage's job is pure damage. Your point is a little unfair, because it assumes that the blackmage player is bad at their job's designated task while the MCH is at least half aware. Suppose the MCH forgets to hypercharge again after the first or second CD.

I've played with many Bards and MCH's who never use any mana/tp raid buffs in 24 mans while the healers casts multiple raises.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eli85

So when the game director says there are no major advantages or disadvantages to any given comp, we should take that as an objective truth.

---

serious?... SE broke their claims several times the last view years about housing, about pets, about pure raw dds, about skill usages, rotas etc. - anyone who trust them blindly is just totally naiv... sry : /
Maybe you are right, maybe they never intend a Meta, but actually everywhere where you have a choice out of several options there will always be a meta - if you like it or not. Should the com focus that bad on meta comps tho? hell no - imo meta-fans (out of worlds-firsts race) are just lazy lemmings... but thats subjective and doesn't matter for the question if "meta" is real or not. it is real for sure : /

personal opinion about meta...
...meta sucks... and people who rely on meta, suck as well... I lol so hard everytime a "pro" random left a casual byakko farm party because "dbl cls won't reach lb3 mimimi"... fuck you, have u even tried BYAKKO with dbl cls? people read or hear things about meta and praise those infos like the holy grail... without actually knowing why this meta even exist and what its primary was build for. nowadays those meta is adapted to nearly every pf farm grp what sucks hard.... I wonder if people are just fucking lazy as hell looking for to get carried... or if they really believe content can't be cleared without meta nowadays... - im not even talking about the false opinion that meta comp grps =/= use of meta utility syngery – especially in random pfs. people just don't think 2meter further ahead if they set up "meta farm grps" in pf... but well thats maybe just me : /

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

where a low damage machinist can still manasong and hypercharge.

---

While it's true that implies said players using them which isn't usually the case for the mayority of ppl

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Levy9

You're missing my point..

---

Your point is trying to bring in a factor we assume equalized in these discussions because it is a variable that ultimately doesn't have any bearing to the strength of a class.

A white mage can outdps any dps job if the skill disparity is high enough. We set baselines, we set assumptions, to remove these variables because then we can only look at the objective strength of the class, not the wide differential in the players playing them.

A non-meta group with no coordination is still at an disadvantage to a meta one with no coordination. The disparity in damage is not that high, and the amount of tools available are greatly improved. No matter where you set the slider for skill, this doesn't change.

The people who lock out roles in pf are in pf for a reason. They're most likely bad and not very fun to play with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Levy9

You're missing my point. Is the average player going to sync up their raid buffs in coordination with another player's buffs so that they stack consistently in a pug group? Probably not.

---

They don't have to be. A Dragoon can pop Battle Litany willy-nilly and it will still have a significant impact on Bard's overall damage, albeit less of one than if paired with a competent Dragoon. Regardless, it's unfair to compare unskilled meta job players with skilled non-meta ones. All things need to be relatively equal to calculate any worthwhile data. A bad Dragoon will still provide more to the raid than a bad Samurai unless the former is flat out not pushing buttons. Statics that want meta jobs aren't going to settle for a forty percentile Dragoon over a eighty percentile Samurai. They'll hold out for a better Dragoon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eli85

Of course I am aware that ACT calculates from the battle log. Yet that is still not a complete picture of the numbers. Internal testing, raw mathematics (formulas, interactions) on the coding level, those are all things that we do not have. And I'm sorry, but I will believe the creators of the game far more easily than any player. It's nothing personal, but no player knows the game nearly as well as the developers do.

As for the others who quoted me: if you truly, truly believe that the developers are wrong with an objective analysis of data subsets, there is no convincing you. But the meta is a fiction. The sooner we let go of it, the better.

---

You're essentially claiming the battle log lies to us. Assuming all players are of equal skill, a composition of PLD/WAR/AST/SCH/DRG/NIN/BRD/MCH will outperform one consisting of PLD/DRK/AST/WHM/SAM/NIN/BRD/RDM

There is no internal formula that abruptly balances out the latter group. The Bard alone will suffer a significant damage loss due to how much of its DPS revolves around Crit (Battle Litany; Chain Strategem) and Disembowel. DRK lags behind WAR in overall damage output and has nowhere near the utility.

Yoshida isn't even denying the meta exists. He's merely insisting all jobs are viable, which they are. That does not mean they are all equal. In an interview with MrHappy last year, he outright asked Happy to tell his audience healer DPS doesn't matter and they don't expect it when calculating enrage timers unless people are undergeared. By your logic, people should accept non-DPS healers since Yoshida defended them. You'll be hard pressed to find any worthwhile static allowing their healers to literally do nothing in between healing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bourne_Endeavor

You're essentially claiming the battle log lies to us.

---

This is a really bad case of putting words in my mouth. My claim (which really isn't a claim, as it is a fact): the developers have a higher quality of data than the players do. Ergo, when objective data analysis is done, I (and everyone else, quite frankly) should put far, far more weight into the developers claims (since) they are working from a higher quality of data.

Development metrics, internal numbers, more thorough understanding of how skills and abilities interact with each other, better testing environments—all this, combined with far more logs than any player has seen, gives the developers a much higher quality of data.

Quote:

---

Yoshida isn't even denying the meta exists. He's merely insisting all jobs are viable, which they are. That does not mean they are all equal.

---

I fear you are misreading Yoshida. When he says that 'there are no major advantages or disadvantages to any setup,' the suggestion is very clear: the perceived advantages and disadvantages of the "meta" are not as profound as players make them out to be. So why? The higher quality of data the developers are privy to suggest this, which is why he said what he said.

I think that maybe it's a bit of a self-fullfilling prophecy.
People who are better and are trying to get those quickest speedkills are naturally going to be min-maxing as much as possible, hence the meta.
But how big of a difference does it even make for them? And even if it's a noticeable difference then does that difference become noticeable because they're so good that they can elevate the meta to that point or is it just because the meta is actually that much better?

Like how big of a difference does it truly make for the average player that isn't a 1337 ninja warrior deluxe of doom?
Is the meta a '' must have '' because the hardcore players are trying to min-max for the best speedkill where every single second counts, or is it a '' must have '' because it's actually THAT much better than non meta?


I am not too read up on this, it's just my thoughts on it as more of an outsider.
I wonder how much of it is just people obsessing over what people who are trying to save seconds are doing rather than what is good for the average player?
Like is the average player, or even players that are great even going to make the meta work to the extent that it justifies telling people to play something that they don't enjoy rather than their favorite job?
I dunno.
I am not saying that it isn't '' better '', just wondering if perhaps it's way blown out of proportions.