The issue nobody wants to address

[Welsper59]

Not really, though. Devs have asked people not to use them for harassment, but they've never really said that they would cause more - that's just something the community decided. This source is a bit old (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-WX...outu.be&t=6m5s) but he never even mentions harassment as one of the reasons, let alone the foremost. Here's another interview (http://gamerescape.com/2014/02/12/ps...naoki-yoshida/) where yoshi's asked about it and never mentions harassment in a 3 paragraph answer. If your argument is that it's a dev position, then you should really have a source. In this case, that's not the dev position, it's a community position.

I know everyone says it's a dev position, but it's really bugging me because it's really not true at all. After the first ZAM interview where he laid down fight club rules, everyone started saying stuff like "so basically as long as you don't use it to harass people, no one will know." Which is true. But that was just because harassment would break the fight club rules; harassment itself was never the focus until the community made it that way. Harassment being in any way relevant to parsers was a conclusion drawn by the community via a series of implications, none of which are really tied to any dev statement.

At this point everyone just assumes it's true because so many people say it, and people say it because they assume it's true, and they assume it's true... ad infinitum. That argument might trump all others if it were true, but it's not.

As for your personal opinions about it... where are you gathering this evidence? Everything I've seen and experienced personally (stuff like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFWh9aY4pas) suggests the opposite. If you're going to appeal to history, can you find any examples? I agree that there's no reason to think history wouldn't repeat itself, but we apparently have very different ideas as to what that means.

Apathy doesn't exactly exist to the same degree here when it comes to reliance on DPS. I've commented about this before in how DPS in WoW is not the same as DPS here. Combat mechanics in FFXIV rely far more upon DPS (or players in general) working together to be capable of proper output, even in normal dungeons. This has not existed in WoW, outside of very specifically intended difficult content (like challenge dungeons), but it does here. A single well geared player, playing decently or to the best of their ability, can output three or more times the output of a fresh player trying their rotation to the best possible way. You can't do that here. You'd be lucky to even reach double the numbers. Meaning, your presence is far more noticeable than it is in WoW. The point of that video was how content, and the ease of being a single player in a far larger group of the same role in a raid, removes the need to learn to progress. You get what you want for absolutely no effort. It's like how people would just AFK in vanilla raids like MC. 40 people = more opportunity to do absolutely nothing because the fights are hard to balance out against so many variables.

Regarding the evidence, uhmm... have you ever played games with parsers and paid attention to group chats or shouts? Have you ever played WoW back in the day? Have you ever paid attention to the constant bickering that happens even here in-game about performance? It doesn't happen all the time, but it certainly does happen. That alone could possibly be reason enough for the devs here to not want it beyond what we currently have.

As for the parsers thing, you have to sort of think outside of what's laid out in front of you when it's something vague. When they're saying to not use the tools improperly, what else do you think they're referring to among the player base? "We're all adults here" kinda stems from immaturity being a concern. He may not have literally said the harassment bit, but it's obviously implied. You can't just take something vague and leave it be. There's meaning behind words, including vague ones. Suggestive evidence often supports opinions and perspectives. It's pretty obvious what he meant by that. Take for example someone saying something is "bad". Okay... it's bad. Do you just end it there? Should a dev just think "Oh, it's bad. Time to start over"? No! Why does someone think it's bad, what can be changed if found to be the common reaction, etc.

Harassment is not a concept derived simply because the community thought it's a problem. It's a problem that inevitably exists, whether or not you see it firsthand. If you've ever been in charge of a project that goes live to people other than yourself, you have to contemplate many things. You have to find ways to combat wrongdoings, for example. You have to think how something may be manipulable, if that's a problem. This is why things like the ToS exists. It's the preemptively lay out the rules that one cannot do certain things. It doesn't matter if these things happened already, it's to help prevent them from happening at all and to protect the company from lawsuit.

I mean, again, think about it. What else could possibly be meant by that statement when you put all the pieces together? His final words of "minna wa otona nandakara" or "we're all adults" kinda leads one to think something very specific about it.

[Malevicton]

He wasn't particularly subtle about the fight club rules. If he wanted to say something about harassment he'd say it. Even assuming that's not the case, drawing an implication is very very different from having an official dev source. "We're all adults" could be referring to any number of things if we really wanna start going down that rabbit hole.

I'd personally go with "We're all adults here" being generally used to be intentionally vague. Most of the times that that phrase is used it's meant to be a call for general blanket maturity.

Regarding the evidence, uhmm... have you ever played games with parsers and paid attention to group chats or shouts? Have you ever played WoW back in the day? Have you ever paid attention to the constant bickering that happens even here in-game about performance? It doesn't happen all the time, but it certainly does happen. That alone could possibly be reason enough for the devs here to not want it beyond what we currently have.

Yes I have, and our experiences are apparently very different. That last sentence is another good example of people putting words into the dev's mouths to suit their own arguments. If your position is going to be based on the devs, then you need a source or a quote or something. Saying that they may possibly think something because of how you think things work is not how dev sources work.

Edit: End of the day I don't really care how people feel about parsing, my point is just this: if you wanna say "I feel [such and such] about [whatever topic]" then go ahead. But if you're going to say "the devs feel [such and such] about [whatever topic]" then you need a source. Otherwise you're just making up arguments, which is usually a sign that you don't have a legitimate argument.

[Welsper59]

I'd personally go with "We're all adults here" being generally used to be intentionally vague. Most of the times that that phrase is used it's meant to be a call for general blanket maturity.

Exactly. They want people to be mature about it. Why even say that at all though? It's not like he says that after every interview or statement. "Please look forward to it. We're all adults here." lol. So there must be some reason that it's suddenly said. What sort of problems might occur due to possible immaturity when it comes to parsers? You have to keep going with your thoughts. As I implied, it doesn't just end, so you kind of have to think for yourself, if not for the obvious reason of not doing something obviously bad. The possibilities are endless, but they're essentially all in the same category of problems - "Things they don't want to have to deal with". That is a very general statement and encompasses every single annoyance or negative outcome of development (or anyone alive, really). I guarantee that's an underlying reason why, if not just for personal reasons. Who actually wants to deal with problems that come from other people being stupid? lol.

Having a direct source for something vague to be defined is impossible. That's why we draw logical conclusions. Your outlook is along the lines of "Well they didn't state this specific exploit/cheat, so it should be perfectly fine". You need it written in words specifically, despite obvious official implications, to believe something that is rather logical and straightforward. It's the same sort of reasoning that comes from people trying to think they're tricking the system for doing something bad (not accusing you of this, obviously). This is not a courtroom. This is not an audit report. There is no multi-million/billion dollar contract or company on the line. It's just a guy addressing people about being civil with each other when it comes to using something they don't officially approve of.

[Malevicton]

It's not vague to be defined though. He'd just have to say something like "We're concerned that depending on implementation it may be open to player abuse." Done. In the second source I put he spends the entire time talking about software compatibility. You aren't drawing logical conclusions, you're drawing implications.

Also in the first post of yours I quoted, you literally said it was a fact. It absolutely is not.

Think whatever you want about parsers. I really don't care. Just don't call your opinions facts.

[Welsper59]

It's not vague to be defined though. He'd just have to say something like "We're concerned that depending on implementation it may be open to player abuse." Done. In the second source I put he spends the entire time talking about software compatibility. You aren't drawing logical conclusions, you're drawing implications.

Also in the first post of yours I quoted, you literally said it was a fact. It absolutely is not.

Think whatever you want about parsers. I really don't care. Just don't call your opinions facts.

You got me there. Poor word choice on my end. I still stick by the idea that the devs are human though, and not some saint that is immune to the annoyances that come with working with others. That's essentially where I drew "fact" from. As I said before, who actually wants to deal with people screwing up your work because they just want to be bad? To me, with my idea of them being human, it's a "fact", psychologically, that they don't want to deal with the problems to come from people misbehaving, as one of many reasons why they don't want to do it yet.

[Colorful]

Regarding the evidence, uhmm... have you ever played games with parsers and paid attention to group chats or shouts? Have you ever played WoW back in the day? Have you ever paid attention to the constant bickering that happens even here in-game about performance? It doesn't happen all the time, but it certainly does happen. That alone could possibly be reason enough for the devs here to not want it beyond what we currently have.

I know your question wasn't targeted at me but I feel like answering it regardless. I have played several games with DPS metres, including WoW way back when. I did experience threats to the point of someone saying they were going to hunt me down, some people saying I should kill myself, etc. I don't think the 13 year old me took that very well haha, but regardless I moved on with my life and that actually got me to look into what I was doing wrong. Not to mention they were very few and far between, other than when I first rolled a Holy Paladin and didn't heal in the dungeon because I didn't know I was supposed to. I had no idea what I was doing, I was standing in every fire possible, but eventually due to people yelling at me, I learned to improve. This has toned down significantly, the last time I played WoW and intentionally tried doing the least amount of DPS possible in a leveling dungeon to see if the community was as toxic as everyone on the WoW forums was spouting, nothing. Nobody gave a rat's ass because it was getting done.

I guess what I'm trying to say, people are going to be rotten about it and that's unavoidable, but it does come with its benefits. I think today's crowd is far too sensitive to big bad mean words said over the internet, but it gives people room to improve. I'd likely still be clicking a 3 button rotation thinking I'm doing fun, when really I'm not. It's not bad to give people that push, right now I'm too afraid of pointing out someone's poor DPS and giving them tips if they're a Ninja due to the fear that I'll get reported and smacked with a temporary ban.

I'm not making this look good for pro-parser side, am I?

[Kosmos992k]

I'm sorry, but this trope has to go. Again, this talking point functions on a false dichotomy that fails to take into consideration people who know their job, execute their rotations when the situation allows them to do so, and use abilities in a timely fashion, but have no desire to focus on their numbers more than necessary. It also fails to take into account those of us who have no objection (let me repeat that: No Objection) to parsers that show one's own numbers in an accurate fashion (i.e. no slurring over DoT numbers, pet damage, etc.). Something like that would certainly help those of us who wouldn't mind tinkering with our rotations or finding ways to work around anti-mage mechanics (but that's a different subject altogether).

Parsers are something I dislike because a) an annoying minority ofplayers use their parser data to justify verbally abusing others over their performance; b)because it takes something that should be learned and mastered and turns it into paint by numbers; c) some players develope tunnel vision focuse on their parsed dps, and little else resulting in poor situational awareness; and d) in the case of some players/parser users, it extracts the fun of the game and replaces it with a cold mathematical exercise in achieving a certain number, itseems to my like it ceases to be a game and becomes more work-like with specific performance levels.

The current meta that people often talk about in the tank forum is the "moar dps" meta. In my opinion parser use feeds into that because it creates targets and expectation that show up third hand when some on demands a tank should wear STR accessories in 4-man DF content. I feel like the only target in a dungeon run is a successful run, preferrably without wipes. That's kind of the expectation implicit in the game and so long as players are not griefing by deliberately plaing poorly to interfere with other players, and are putting out damage sufficient to kill trashpacks and bosses, they are meeting the only targets and expectations that matter.

But, I fear that a standard parser included in game will legitamize someof the milder parser user to tell others their numbers are poor, because after all if the parser is included, it' ok to use it right?

Please note I am not saying that the majority of parser users abuse the tool or infromation it provides. Although for a player on the receiving end, what is meant as constructive advice based on parser data can come across as critical and mildly bullying simply because the player giving the advice is frustrated and more curt than intended.

I'd prefer it (parser use) be left in a grey area of 'ask me no questions, and I'll tell you no lies'; where those who use parsers privately can do so to their heart's delight, but those using parser data improperly are subject to potential discipline if reported.

This issue that nobody wants to address, topic seemed to start by talking about the speed with which DF dungeons are run, but seems to have become centered around the use, or not, of parsers...presumably to improve dps performance by all to speed up runs?

It kind of seems like we are looking at the difference between amateur athletes that run, jump, whatever else because they enjoy it, but are not competitive versus competitive athletes who treat every practice run as a competition the must win, and think they are helping by demanding more performance from the fun runners to 'help them improve'. Despite the fun runners being quite happy with their pace and being able to participate in and complete races with others. The well intentioned demand to improve could esily result in the happy, fun, comfortable feeling the fun runner has tobe lost, andthat runner quitting. The fun runners are not stopping the competitive athletes from competing, and would never impose themself into a relay race team, because they know they are unable to performat the same level as the competitive team. Because duty finder randomly groups players together, ther is a good chance that fun runners and competitive runners get put into the same group. The competitive runners really just need to accept the other runners and make the best of it, if competitive runners don't want to do that, then perhaps they should preselect their 4-man relay team from amoung competitive runners?

In short if you expect a fast 4-man 'relay' then pre-form the group from competitive players, when using DF be prepared to accept the fun runners.

[Welsper59]

I know your question wasn't targeted at me but I feel like answering it regardless. I have played several games with DPS metres, including WoW way back when. I did experience threats to the point of someone saying they were going to hunt me down, some people saying I should kill myself, etc. I don't think the 13 year old me took that very well haha, but regardless I moved on with my life and that actually got me to look into what I was doing wrong. Not to mention they were very few and far between, other than when I first rolled a Holy Paladin and didn't heal in the dungeon because I didn't know I was supposed to. I had no idea what I was doing, I was standing in every fire possible, but eventually due to people yelling at me, I learned to improve. This has toned down significantly, the last time I played WoW and intentionally tried doing the least amount of DPS possible in a leveling dungeon to see if the community was as toxic as everyone on the WoW forums was spouting, nothing. Nobody gave a rat's ass because it was getting done.

I guess what I'm trying to say, people are going to be rotten about it and that's unavoidable, but it does come with its benefits. I think today's crowd is far too sensitive to big bad mean words said over the internet, but it gives people room to improve. I'd likely still be clicking a 3 button rotation thinking I'm doing fun, when really I'm not. It's not bad to give people that push, right now I'm too afraid of pointing out someone's poor DPS and giving them tips if they're a Ninja due to the fear that I'll get reported and smacked with a temporary ban.

I'm not making this look good for pro-parser side, am I?

Challenges are always what forces us improve, which in the case of video games, mentally more than anything else. People are a lot more sensitive these days. Some even to the point that simply telling someone they should use X will cause them to flip out in a rage as though you threatened their very existence lol. Can't really blame them though, given that the vocal ones that stand out are the bad ones, even if they are far and few.

I'm actually neutral on the matter, given where we are with it officially. It exists and is "okay" to use, albeit in an under-the-table sort of way, so that's good enough lol. As you said, it's unavoidable to be misused, so it really is a "meh" situation to me. The current usage of parsers won't worsen and you'll absolutely always be at liberty to use them, just like how they can't stop a significant number of people from botting. I'm just on the other side of the fence as far as how much of an impact it is to the overall population from where we are now. It's just like the information that we have readily available to us online about how to play a job. It's like the tooltips that exist when you highlight a skill in-game. Just because it's there, doesn't mean it'll be used. People that want to improve, such as you in your recalling situations where you felt you had to, will improve. Others just won't care. That's the population that exists now. A handful of people may be swayed, but it won't be anywhere near as many as some folks might like to believe. Just as that vid that the other guy posted about WoW and the apathy that exists showed, I'm guessing, to argue how it won't cause problems here, so too does it show evidence that it won't help these people despite MANY tools to improve performance being available, both officially and unofficially.

[Ryel]

Parsers are something I dislike because a) an annoying minority ofplayers use their parser data to justify verbally abusing others over their performance; b)because it takes something that should be learned and mastered and turns it into paint by numbers; c) some players develope tunnel vision focuse on their parsed dps, and little else resulting in poor situational awareness; and d) in the case of some players/parser users, it extracts the fun of the game and replaces it with a cold mathematical exercise in achieving a certain number, itseems to my like it ceases to be a game and becomes more work-like with specific performance levels.

Scripted fights and DPS checks already do this regardless of if we can read the numbers or not.

lets not pretend that almost every single endgame encounter isn't designed with some combination or variation of do the dance and meet the DPS check. I mean if you haven't stepped foot into any of these fights (by your admission) I'd take a 20 second stroll over to youtube to see for yourself.

In fact I'd argue that normal dungeon runs offer more variation in content design at this point.

The current meta that people often talk about in the tank forum is the "moar dps" meta. In my opinion parser use feeds into that because it creates targets and expectation that show up third hand when some on demands a tank should wear STR accessories in 4-man DF content. I feel like the only target in a dungeon run is a successful run, preferrably without wipes. That's kind of the expectation implicit in the game and so long as players are not griefing by deliberately plaing poorly to interfere with other players, and are putting out damage sufficient to kill trashpacks and bosses, they are meeting the only targets and expectations that matter.

This is an itemization issue and not a parser issue, you don't even need to run numbers to see when a tank is eating damage and sitting at 80% of their health bar (with CD usage) because they simply have more HP than they need for the encounter.

At that point do you really need more HP?

Regardless of where you stand on the itemization though, i doubt anyone is going to get kicked for wearing full VIT in 4-man dungeons almost any content.

But, I fear that a standard parser included in game will legitamize some of the milder parser user to tell others their numbers are poor, because after all if the parser is included, it' ok to use it right?

Please note I am not saying that the majority of parser users abuse the tool or infromation it provides. Although for a player on the receiving end, what is meant as constructive advice based on parser data can come across as critical and mildly bullying simply because the player giving the advice is frustrated and more curt than intended.

Why is this even a realistic fear in any capacity when over a decade of MMO history spanning dozens of games worldwide that have either allowed or included some form of performance measurement have shown that the cases of harassment that have arisen due to those features are statistically insignificant?

I mean it's so rare that you actually encounter / hear of anyone doing that and in the (unlikely) event that a player does they simply get reported to a GM and you carry on with your day.

If you're afraid that constructive criticism can mistakenly come across as bullying then the answer is to work on community communication, not to deny positive game features and progress instead.

I'd prefer it (parser use) be left in a grey area of 'ask me no questions, and I'll tell you no lies'; where those who use parsers privately can do so to their heart's delight, but those using parser data improperly are subject to potential discipline if reported.

This issue that nobody wants to address, topic seemed to start by talking about the speed with which DF dungeons are run, but seems to have become centered around the use, or not, of parsers...presumably to improve dps performance by all to speed up runs?

It kind of seems like we are looking at the difference between amateur athletes that run, jump, whatever else because they enjoy it, but are not competitive versus competitive athletes who treat every practice run as a competition the must win, and think they are helping by demanding more performance from the fun runners to 'help them improve'. Despite the fun runners being quite happy with their pace and being able to participate in and complete races with others. The well intentioned demand to improve could esily result in the happy, fun, comfortable feeling the fun runner has tobe lost, andthat runner quitting. The fun runners are not stopping the competitive athletes from competing, and would never impose themself into a relay race team, because they know they are unable to performat the same level as the competitive team. Because duty finder randomly groups players together, ther is a good chance that fun runners and competitive runners get put into the same group. The competitive runners really just need to accept the other runners and make the best of it, if competitive runners don't want to do that, then perhaps they should preselect their 4-man relay team from amoung competitive runners?

In short if you expect a fast 4-man 'relay' then pre-form the group from competitive players, when using DF be prepared to accept the fun runners.

As long as endgame continues to be designed around DPS checks it makes less and less sense to not include a tool of some kind to gauge performance.

Whenever players talk about adding these features what is stated above is what they're referring to, nobody really cares what happens in 4-man content usually, unless there is a DPS check involved (see: Demon wall on release.) Or the discrepancy between two players is so large that it might as well be just one player doing all of the work. However they do care when it comes to something like Bismark Ex, or Savage Alexander, I once again welcome you to take a stroll over to youtube to find out why.

Whether or not a player personally uses a parser they still indirectly benefit in a wide variety of ways from second and third hand information, the job forums on this website would probably be dead if not for the posts, findings, and numbers done by players using them in some degree.

And as said before, If tanks and healers can have their performance be so transparent in everything they do ranging from 4-man content to endgame, why are DPS not subject to the same accountability?

EDIT: You make the comparison to ending up with fun runners in 4-mans, but i promise you the fun running tank that can't hold hate or doesn't mitigate damage, or the fun running healer that doesn't heal party members will very quickly find themselves warming the bench.

[Kosmos992k]

**snip**

I very clearly did not mention end-game content, and the parallel I drew was explicitly 4-man content. I feel you miseed the point. You mentioned the Demon Wall in AK, which I've mentioned in such discussions before also. I said that as long as players were capable of completing content, preferrably without a wipe, doing damage agequate to complete the content, they were meeting the goals, targets or expectations implicit in the content itself.

In short if you expect a fast 4-man 'relay' then pre-form the group from competitive players, when using DF be prepared to accept the fun runners.

Let me be clear, I am not referring to end-game content.

The point is that bringing the mentallity and tools of competitive running to fun runners doesn't enhance them, it either alienates them, or possibly turns them into competitive runners with more limited capability to perform. Whatever happens, making fun runners conform to competitive running mentallity and tool use, fundamentally changes the fun run into pseudo competitive running, which isn't what the fun runners wanted or else they'd already be doing it.

Requests for in-game parsing tools and demands for faster runs with the clear corollary being players are bad for not doing these things, are - imho - simply leading toa greater divide between players.

In the end, with regard to parsers and speedof completing a run, I stand by the comparison I drew against fun funners and competitive runners running 4-man relay races.