Define a good player

[thegreatonemal]

A good player is consistent. Consistent damage consistent proper handling of mechanics this is a game that requires you to do the same things at the same time every single time so you should be consistent.

[Usho]

A Good Player is one who doesn't wipe the party/alliance. A Good player will do mechanics, and even if their new, they can learn as they go (on the fly). A Good player will not tank groups of mobs in dps stance and use cooldowns effectively. A Good player will not only heal the party to ensure victory but will also contribute to damage output and make the runs go faster. A Good player will not prepull the boss before the tank goes to grab it. A Good player does what's best for the team (party) not just for him/herself.

Last, but certainly not least, a Good player is not a ***k. Treat others the way you want to be treated.

[RiyahArp]

There's no point. Everyone is just saying what they happen to like or dislike. Kaiva thinks a good player is one who beats the hardest content in the game. Others think a good player is mechanically proficient and doesn't waste other people's time. Others think that a good player is kind, and easy to get along with. All it does is says something about the person who defines it.

Just play the game and have fun.

[Sigma-Astra]

There's no point. Everyone is just saying what they happen to like or dislike. Kaiva thinks a good player is one who beats the hardest content in the game. Others think a good player is mechanically proficient and doesn't waste other people's time. Others think that a good player is kind, and easy to get along with. All it does is says something about the person who defines it.

Just play the game and have fun.

.....If there's no point, then what was the point of your post besides making snide and subtle rebukes about everyone posting in the thread? The whole point of this thread was to get different perspectives of what a collective and broad range of people define what a good player is in their eyes and to see if others may or may not agree with them. That was the point.

We're not a hive mind, we're not all going to have the same opinions about what defines a good player so, of course, it's what one individual happens to like or dislike over the next person. I don't know what else you'd be expecting from a thread like this unfortunately.

[Tridus]

There's no point. Everyone is just saying what they happen to like or dislike. Kaiva thinks a good player is one who beats the hardest content in the game. Others think a good player is mechanically proficient and doesn't waste other people's time. Others think that a good player is kind, and easy to get along with. All it does is says something about the person who defines it.

And Riyah thinks a good player is someone who can't answer the question in the thread but feels compelled to complain about it instead.

[RiyahArp]

There's no point because ultimately caring about good or bad in this sense is letting other people define your own conduct by what other people like. I think Kaiva themself suffered from that when they fell into the trap of believing a good player has a high parse on savage content. People tend to care about good or bad because they want people to externally validate what they do, but it's never enough; if you get good at casual content, someone will look down on you for not doing savage. if someone clears savage they won't think you are good unless you can farm it. If you farm it, then people will think you aren't good if you have a low parse. If you do PvP, there's a whole ranking system you can use to look down on people or look up to them, from bronze wolf to top 100.

If you allow others to set these standards you're always going to fail them, but setting "good and bad" standards isn't as much for yourself as you think, it's because you want people to say "oh, he's such a great player!" or don't want them to say "oh, he's bad!" You shift the aspect of playing a game a bit to fulfilling other players ideas of how you should play a game, and that's a bad aspect of gamer culture. Good or bad is dumb, it's whether or not you have fun or enjoy the game. You can be good by someone's standards, and hate every second of it, or be bad and have a great time.

So much of this is just players desire to control and erect status monuments. It's not enough to play a game and have fun in it (especially in one as forgiving in casual content as this), you have to win worship by satisfying whatever crowd you aspire to's conditions of being a good player. Kaiva would just have a lot more fun if they didn't worry about what others said; if mastery of a game is fun, you don't need other players to tell you how good you are; the journey itself is fun. But all of this said here is just how fragmented that idea is; some people will think you bad if you are patient with bad players, some people think you are good if you mentor them, some people think being nice is better than being skilled, some people think its better to be mean if it spurs people to git gud...what's the point of asking? Everyone will ask you to be all things at all times.

[Aniya_Estlihn]

Just play the game and have fun.

Arguably, this is actually a miraculous feat in and of it's own as the developers have gone out of their way to suck the fun out of as many things as humanly possible this expansion.

[Sigma-Astra]

There's no point because ultimately caring about good or bad in this sense is letting other people define your own conduct by what other people like. I think Kaiva themself suffered from that when they fell into the trap of believing a good player has a high parse on savage content. People tend to care about good or bad because they want people to externally validate what they do, but it's never enough; if you get good at casual content, someone will look down on you for not doing savage. if someone clears savage they won't think you are good unless you can farm it. If you farm it, then people will think you aren't good if you have a low parse.

...And what's wrong with Kaiva's viewpoint? What is it with you and this "hate boner" you have for people who do Savage content...? Like seriously, any time it's brought up, you're on a warpath with it lately I've noticed.

Good or bad is dumb, it's whether or not you have fun or enjoy the game. You can be good by someone's standards, and hate every second of it, or be bad and have a great time.

I don't know, I don't really enjoy the game that much when I have a bunch of bad players in Weeping City or Rabanastre that consecutively die to the same thing five times in a row and I have to keep Manashifting the healers to raise them on BLM. That's not really fun, in my opinion, just saying. I'm glad though that the other person lying on the floor five times in a row is having a great time, while I'm thinking that I need to play a different game for a few hours or quit the raid entirely. You see how much of a double edge sword that is?

[RiyahArp]

...And what's wrong with Kaiva's viewpoint? What is it with you and this "hate boner" you have for people who do Savage content...?

Nothing I said in that was savage was bad; the point was rather that no matter how you define "good" there's always a higher step defined by other people. I used the progression there to show that even as you fulfill "good" conditions, there's always something people can use to look down on you.

I don't know, I don't really enjoy the game that much when I have a bunch of bad players in Weeping City or Rabanastre that consecutively die to the same thing five times in a row and I have to keep Manashifting the healers to raise them on BLM.

Then you can structure the game so you have fun; only play with friends, leave bad runs, vote kick the bad players, etc. Obsessing about them being bad does what?

Arguably, this is actually a miraculous feat in and of it's own as the developers have gone out of their way to suck the fun out of as many things as humanly possible this expansion.

Hah, well, yeah it's a bit of a bad time for them right now. Too much repetition doesn't help I guess, and a lot of the good/bad stuff probably happens when there isn't that much to occupy us.

[Sigma-Astra]

Nothing I said in that was savage was bad; the point was rather that no matter how you define "good" there's always a higher step defined by other people. I used the progression there to show that even as you fulfill "good" conditions, there's always something people can use to look down on you.

Well, yes, again, that's the point. Everyone has their own merits and criteria for what they deem acceptable and unacceptable behavior. It's just like the real world in that regard. That's why I don't understand what else you were expecting from this thread, yet still felt the need to post in it and say that there's no point and complain about everyone's idea, not even showing constructive criticism about it because all you've offered on the table is "there's no point" and "just play the game and have fun" which doesn't add anything else to the conversation. It's no different than walking into a job and your potential employer having certain criteria and merits that they expect you to have over the person standing next to you that may display even better quality traits or completely abyssal ones instead. Just because you find that the concepts of a "good player" or "bad player" are dumb doesn't deny their existence or deny others from having certain standards and upholding those standards.

Then you can structure the game so you have fun; only play with friends, leave bad runs, vote kick the bad players, etc. Obsessing about them being bad does what?

It's impossible to only play with friends in a 24 man raid unless I have 24 friends all on at the same time from the same server or different servers on my Datacenter to run it with. After queuing for 15 minutes, why should I leave a bad run because a player thinks it's hilarious to stay dying on the floor five times in a row? How can I kick them if it's not a group majority vote? It's not really obsessing about bad players so much as it's just me expecting, you know, other players to be somewhat competent and realize that the orange puddle means death after the fifth time.

You want everyone to just ignore these factors and play the game and have fun, which I guess could be said that they are your standards, however, you're still not going to convince anyone here that we should just casually ignore these things in favor of "just have fun guys". A person can be bad and enjoy the game, great...that doesn't mean I have to enjoy them being bad in order to enjoy my playtime either.

Fun is subjective for everyone.