Define a good player

[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?