People are deliberately ruining the story for others

[Knahli]

No, most people aren't holding them to the same standard actually. I know I'd be pretty pissed if a veteran to the game decided to just afk through the entire dungeon and I'd probably kick them, whereas a new player I don't mind if they watch the cutscenes instead of participating. I honestly hope when 4.0 rolls around that they either get rid of these dungeons entirely or rework them somehow. I can see what they were aiming for but unfortunately it just doesn't stand the test of time. I don't think there's been a single week that's gone by without a thread about them, so it's obviously a huge issue that needs to be addressed. The thing is, I also think it should be addressed in an efficient way so as to minimize dev time spent on it.

I never at any point said "most people". I was directly talking to the person I had quoted. However, you just said you hope they "rework" them somehow, and I have suggested a possible way to do that which creates absolutely minimal perceivable effect on speed runners, but somehow I am still reading replies that respond as though I am suggesting a revamp that takes something away from non-new players which is honestly frustrating because I don't know how much more clearly I can attempt to present my point.

...So your open volley is an attack. Keepin' it classy. But I digress.

No it was not. It was my understanding that it was synonymous with being called stubborn or difficult, only in a less deliberate fashion. If that is incorrect and it came across negatively then I apologise.



From this point on I am going to try and break down my responses into smaller more readable points. It is not intended to be condescending but I am unsure of how else I convey myself without being misunderstood again and again.

Because we don't need a SECOND way to make that happen. They already can, they just don't want to do PF for some reason that we cannot fathom, and instead they would rather force their demands in conflict with the other people (the majority of people) who want to run it a different way.

1. New players almost certainly never had to use the PF before now and possibly are unaware it even exists.
2. PF relies on recruiting seven strangers willing to give up a ton of free time for nothing in return.
3. I sympathise with new players who are forced to skip cutscenes/miss battles. Regardless, I never once came even remotely close to suggesting the majority of the party should bend to their demands. You are confusing me for other posters.

People play differently. Some people have jobs, wives, kids, and limited time to get through content, and want to proceed quickly. Others want to sit down with popcorn and analyze every facet of every piece of dialogue before moving on. Both are perfectly valid, but both are also in great conflict with one another. If a player expects to be able to go at their own pace, they must either negotiate something with the party majority (whatever their plan may be), or find another party. Any deviation can potentially be considered as disruptive harassment.

1. This is the problem my suggestion attempts to solve.
2. My suggestion enables speed runners to avoid being partied with new players who wish to watch cutscenes. Their current reward will not be reduced.
3. My suggestion enables new players to be partied with both new and experienced players willing to engage in longer runs, with experienced players offered a significant DAILY roulette reward of extra tomes to enhance queue times.
4. Speed runs will certainly remain the most popular choice and therefore experienced players should not suffer any significant queue times as a result of a split option.

No. No, we are not. We ARE, however, holding them to the expectation to understand that Duty finder is a queue of random people, and as such, progression is defined by a majority decision; Therefore, they can either ride the wave, negotiate a compromise with the party they land in, or leave and try their luck again/form their own party with their own rules.

1. No other piece of content in the game causes a disruption similar to this. There is no lesson to learn from forcing them to join speed runners and hope they are among the 1% willing to wait.
2. The current system comes down to a majority vote, with one side getting shunted as a result. My suggestion erases the mixture of people seeking different types of runs. i.e No compromise necessary. No differing expectations.

'Impossible' is an extreme overexaggeration, I regularly see people use PF for story purposes. Those who pay attention to story should be more than capable of paying attention to the features of party finder.

1. Before the introduction of undersized parties, I set up PF on multiple occasions for friends I invited to the game to experience the dungeons properly. No-one ever joined despite waiting for over 40 minutes. I am on Balmung.
2. Expecting new players to know about and use the PF all of a sudden without any warning that is it even necessary is holding them to the same standard as experienced players like us who understand those runs are exceptions to the rule.
3. With my suggestion, even if speed run queues unexpectedly suffered, experienced players who are well aware of the existence of the PF and it's utility for setting up speed runs can continue to function as normal that way.

No, except PF WAS the fix. So there's that.

1. Explain to me at what point in the journey from 1-50 are players typically expected to set up Party Finders as opposed to simply queuing via the DF. Tell me what hint exists in-game that players need to set up a PF at all, a hint that tells them they can expect (very rightfully) unobliging players in Castrum and Praetorium runs. Do so, and maybe I can begin to humour the idea that new players are supposed to know any better.

Clearly.

1. Though apparently stemming from the fact that you are seemingly confusing other poster's beliefs with my own simply because they share the sentiment that the matter of new players getting shafted should be actively remedied with some form of update.

It is not a compromise when it takes away the very thing the majority joins for- efficient tomes. A compromise would be you giving up something, us giving up something, and ultimately everyone gets most of what they wanted. But we have already gone around in circles on this. The so-called "compromise" on your part is effectively "we won't boot you before the last boss dies". Which is laughable.

1. Please explain to me in detail what you think my suggestion is because judging from this line alone, I am having serious doubts that you even read what it was.

Its more in the light of "Why fix something that isn't broken". PF was implemented as a fix, and is simply being underutilized. that isnt my fault or your fault or even SE's fault per-say. We are trying to urge players to use it early and often, because it IS useful.

1. Finding a manner in which to promote the PF AND notifying new players that they should use it before initiating Castrum/Prae along with an explanation why would be a positive step and certainly better than nothing, but it would not be even remotely effective.
2. Your suggestion relies on grand generosity and sheer luck in addition to the massive expense of a new player's time which they must invest in waiting.
3. My suggestion at worst has a marginal impact on DF speed run queues while creating a secondary option that significantly increases queue time for new players. If this is really that much an issue, the speed runners can set up the PF.
4. Speed run PF = easy and fast results. Cutscene PF = Barren and desolate. It has never worked in my experience.

Wrong again. I would never argue such a toxic stance. It was a niche that needed to be filled, and now it has been filled. just like PF is a perfectly reasonable option here.

1. If you think waiting an hour or more in the PF to get into a single run(if you're lucky) and call that a reasonable option then you are out of your mind.
2. If you think a Speed Run PF listing will take even fractionally as long to fill up then you are deluded. That is even while ignoring the fact that my suggestion caters to neither experienced nor new players necessarily needing to use the PF in the first place.

Step 1: open PF and recruit for cm or Praetorium.
Step 2: set the rules you want.
Step 3: get 4-7 more people to join. (why as few as 4? because then you are the majority of the party, and the rules people adhere to are already your rules.
step 4: you get your way.

Step 5. Wait to see how your luck fares.
Step 6. If extremely lucky, queue with 4 or so members and ignorantly impose a very long run on the 3 or so randoms who were fairly anticipating a typical speed run. (Skip step 7.)
Step 7. If unlucky, proceed to wait for upwards of an hour for one person to join before eventually disbanding in frustration.



Or.... reverting to my suggestion.

-Main Scenario Roulette (No CS)---------------------[Daily Tome Bonus: 120 poetics ]
-Main Scenario Roulette (Progression-locked)-------[Daily Tome Bonus: 240 Poetics~]

Speed Runner A:
I don't have time for this, I'll take option 1 and just do multiple speed runs for efficiency

Speed Runner B:
I don't feel like farming Poetics that hard today and can honestly afford the wait, I'll just do my daily roulette, pick the lighter, more rewarding second option and just alt-tab while the newbies enjoy their cutscenes.

Speed Runner C:
The speed run version has slow queues today...... I better set up a PF. People will join that quickly anyways.

[Skivvy]

This is a lot of fuss over content that is 3 years old. SE has changed their ways and has also implemented under-sized party options and PF. Why should they waste more development time trying to make yet another option here?

[Kaurie]

This is a lot of fuss over content that is 3 years old. SE has changed their ways and has also implemented under-sized party options and PF. Why should they waste more development time trying to make yet another option here?

It is not 3 years old content for new players. If Square wants to retain new players, it would be a good idea to address the problem.

[WinterLuna]

This is a lot of fuss over content that is 3 years old. SE has changed their ways and has also implemented under-sized party options and PF. Why should they waste more development time trying to make yet another option here?

My thoughts exactly. It's funny reading these walls of text in defense of something which SE most likely won't do anything about. What's even funnier is people demanding that players running those duties for the tomes help the new players, yet are doing little for the new players themselves and probably don't even run the roulette.

Tomes are incentive, not a binding contract and obligation.

[Skivvy]

It is not 3 years old content for new players. If Square wants to retain new players, it would be a good idea to address the problem.

But they have addressed the problem. Is it to your liking? Doesn't seem so, but they've put in ways to deal with it.

[Dualblade]

If there was any change to make, it would be cutting it down from 8-man to 4-man, with the correct scaling for the mobs/bosses. This way it could also be put with the ARF, which also takes a while to do (and is also ilvl-synced) AND you'll have a better chance of having more patient people with you.

Maybe, if need be, throw in an extra option for the Roluette in paticular that increases the rewards for it, but you can't skip cutscenes.

[Velhart]

It is not 3 years old content for new players. If Square wants to retain new players, it would be a good idea to address the problem.

It isn't that simple. There is not a middle road beyond finding people via friends and party finder. SE has already resolved the issue by not doing it again and putting the story at the beginning or end of the dungeon. If you put restrictions on people, they are not going to do the roulette to begin with, thus making it take forever for people to get a que for it.

It is cruddy how people are not considerate towards newer players, but you can't make the community change their mind. That and Castrum are the only two pieces of content in the game where it is better to find others to go through it. It isn't hard to grab people via friends and PF. Can even undersize parties now and have lv.60's help.

[Duuude007]

Can even undersize parties now and have lv.60's help.

You know, this is a fantastic point that most nay sayers are ignoring or forgot.

If you are a healer, grab a tank and dps (or any other combination therein) friend who happen to be 60, blast thru adds with 3 people and no issues convincing them to let you watch story. After all they are you're friends... or, you mercced them, which is probably even simpler/faster for some people.

Yet another solution that doesn't even require PF. Thanks for reminding us!

[Niwashi]

Very misleading inference. You use absolute adjectives such as "only", "impossible" and "always" far too often, my friend.

The most realistic reason that people would WANT to join a CM or praetorium run in PF is if they were there for the rules implied in the expectations. if you have 5 people who support your cause, and 3 choose to ignore it and drive forward, they won't really be able to. Level Sync keeps them from progressing very far, at all.

I agree on the "no way for ..." statement I'd originally made, and immediately on re-reading it went back and corrected it by adding "(except through incredible luck on who joins them)". It is at least theoretically possible to get a group together who will run the duty the way the PF they joined said it would be run. Maybe once in a while someone might get lucky enough for that to happen.

I'd be delighted if only 3 people rushed ahead and 5 supported the rules they'd agreed to by joining a "no cutscene skipping" PF. The only pattern I've ever seen actually happen though is that all 7 who join rush ahead. Nobody I've come across takes PF rules seriously. That's why I don't agree with your belief that the existence of PF takes care of the matter.

[Skivvy]

I'd be delighted if only 3 people rushed ahead and 5 supported the rules they'd agreed to by joining a "no cutscene skipping" PF. The only pattern I've ever seen actually happen though is that all 7 who join rush ahead. Nobody I've come across takes PF rules seriously. That's why I don't agree with your belief that the existence of PF takes care of the matter.

How many PF groups have you actually set up specially for a non-CS skipping run? O.o I can't see this being done too often to form any sort of actual statistic, but who knows.