Letter to MR Yoshi: Why parses system is destroying the ffxiv world.

[Granyala]

Problem is if we agree that SE doesn't know how to play this game, we can't really expect them to just tell us how to play the game only for then findining out that those rotation are utter garbage and ppl should follow player drivens one.
It's better if this is left up to us honestly.

While designers typically have different goals in mind and sometimes overlook things that crafty players find out, I think it's a bit arrogant to assume that they don't know how to play the game they have created.

Though some decisions indeed range from questionable ... to bat shit insane.
Then again, they are Japanese, some measure of insanity comes with the territory I guess.

Practising rotations on a dummy with a parser open, that was the argument being made in regards to learning by theorycrafting

That's a lot of practicing in order to get the statistical fluctuations under control.
I always get a good chuckle when some poor sod gets +100 crit on his gear and subsequently runs to the dummy to find out whether he does more damage now. :S
Even simulationcraft had difficulty with that one and there I could run 100k iterations of a 10 Minute fight.

[Nixxe]

When I was a new player I really wanted something to help me measure my damage. As I progressed through levels I just never knew if I was doing well. Parsers certainly could have taught me a lot with regards to my rotations. I feel like this would have been especially true for DoT's which I underestimated and didn't really focus on keeping up. I might have also realized that things like Swiftcast aren't actually a DPS gain unless your spell has a longer cast time than recast time. Parsers can certainly be helpful at every level of gameplay. One might even argue that they would be more helpful at low level than at high level just because a newer player will make larger mistakes which would be more obvious in their DPS numbers.

A parser actually seems like it would be a distraction because the issue here is that your grasp of what goes into doing good DPS was so completely lacking that you couldn't even do basic quantitative reasoning on your own. You were new, so that's understandable, but a number utterly deprived of context is unlikely to yield any great insights, especially because whether it's higher or lower than last time doesn't strictly depend on whether you played better or worse. Even if you log whatever it is you intended use as a test, without a solid understanding of how the game works, it's just going to be rows upon rows of data and is more likely to overwhelm the rookie than anything. For instance, should you happen to crit a bunch the time you didn't use dots and end up doing more damage, what then? Are you just going to conclude that dots are a waste of time? You obviously shouldn't, but that relies on understanding that dots are higher damage per cast time than many of your other spells, in addition to whatever other higher damage opportunities they may open up. A parser really isn't a teaching tool until you have a solid grasp of the game in order to make sense of the information it provides you. Someone still at the level of wondering if dots are a good idea doesn't need a parser. They need an understanding of what potency is, what their stats do, and the fundamentals of DPS.

[Elixirboy]

I think it's a bit arrogant to assume that they don't know how to play the game they have created.

Although I can't find it in writing, I remember reading that SE's internal testers could not beat A3S or A4S without godmode.

[Remedi]

While designers typically have different goals in mind and sometimes overlook things that crafty players find out, I think it's a bit arrogant to assume that they don't know how to play the game they have created.

Though some decisions indeed range from questionable ... to bat shit insane.
Then again, they are Japanese, some measure of insanity comes with the territory I guess. .

Eh I agree, I honestly don't think they are that clueless but I'm just going with the flow at this point

Although I can't find it in writing, I remember reading that SE's internal testers could not beat A3S or A4S without godmode.

They never said that outright, they simply told a bit about how their testing works and ppl have filled the gaps with what they wanted to hear

[PyurBlue]

A parser actually seems like it would be a distraction because the issue here is that your grasp of what goes into doing good DPS was so completely lacking that you couldn't even do basic quantitative reasoning on your own. You were new, so that's understandable, but a number utterly deprived of context is unlikely to yield any great insights, especially because whether it's higher or lower than last time doesn't strictly depend on whether you played better or worse. Even if you log whatever it is you intended use as a test, without a solid understanding of how the game works, it's just going to be rows upon rows of data and is more likely to overwhelm the rookie than anything. For instance, should you happen to crit a bunch the time you didn't use dots and end up doing more damage, what then? Are you just going to conclude that dots are a waste of time? You obviously shouldn't, but that relies on understanding that dots are higher damage per cast time than many of your other spells, in addition to whatever other higher damage opportunities they may open up. A parser really isn't a teaching tool until you have a solid grasp of the game in order to make sense of the information it provides you. Someone still at the level of wondering if dots are a good idea doesn't need a parser. They need an understanding of what potency is, what their stats do, and the fundamentals of DPS.

You're absolutely right in pointing out that parsers have their own limitations and issues, but I still think having the extra data would end up being a net gain in many situations. I learned fairly quickly that there was damage variance in the game, although I didn't really know how it worked. I definitely didn't know that there were two kinds of damage increasing hits (DH and Crit) and I think this information escaped me until I started looking at endgame guides. Simply by having a parser that recorded what kinds of hits were occurring I would have been made aware of them and perhaps looked them up to better understand them. As far as damage variance as a whole goes, recording that variance in numbers over a long period of time is better than trying to guesstimate what the variance is. You don't need to account for the variance if you can just do the theoretical average math like you suggest, but the game is lacking in this area too. Some of the damage increasing skills don't give you numbers but instead just describe the effect. For example PLD's Spirits Within doesn't tell you how much the damage drops with HP so the only way to figure it out would be through measurement. There is a similar issue with BLM's Astral Fire as I don't think the game ever explicitly tells you what the damage multipliers are.

A parser will not magically make a new player perform better, sometimes it will take work on their part to make use of the data. If these players are really looking to improve though, then I think having more data available rather than less will be beneficial for them. Also consider that having a parser available for all probably means that a good chunk of the player base would be familiar with it. Players could help each other understand how to use the tool, just as they do with the rest of the game.

[Granyala]

Although I can't find it in writing, I remember reading that SE's internal testers could not beat A3S or A4S without godmode.

I would not expect them to be able to do so. In a business environment, their testers don't have enough manhours at their disposal to progress a raid encounter in the manner we, as players, do.

[Nixxe]

You're absolutely right in pointing out that parsers have their own limitations and issues, but I still think having the extra data would end up being a net gain in many situations. I learned fairly quickly that there was damage variance in the game, although I didn't really know how it worked. I definitely didn't know that there were two kinds of damage increasing hits (DH and Crit) and I think this information escaped me until I started looking at endgame guides. Simply by having a parser that recorded what kinds of hits were occurring I would have been made aware of them and perhaps looked them up to better understand them. As far as damage variance as a whole goes, recording that variance in numbers over a long period of time is better than trying to guesstimate what the variance is. You don't need to account for the variance if you can just do the theoretical average math like you suggest, but the game is lacking in this area too. Some of the damage increasing skills don't give you numbers but instead just describe the effect. For example PLD's Spirits Within doesn't tell you how much the damage drops with HP so the only way to figure it out would be through measurement. There is a similar issue with BLM's Astral Fire as I don't think the game ever explicitly tells you what the damage multipliers are.

A parser will not magically make a new player perform better, sometimes it will take work on their part to make use of the data. If these players are really looking to improve though, then I think having more data available rather than less will be beneficial for them. Also consider that having a parser available for all probably means that a good chunk of the player base would be familiar with it. Players could help each other understand how to use the tool, just as they do with the rest of the game.

I'm not saying parsers are not helpful. I'm saying that in the situation you outlined it's putting the cart before the horse.

[SaitoHikari]

They never said that outright, they simply told a bit about how their testing works and ppl have filled the gaps with what they wanted to hear

The explanation I heard was that they did test A3S and A4S, but not thoroughly. Like they tested each phase separately, so the testers were going into each phase with all of their cooldowns available, which is why some of the A3S DPS checks were really really absurd in a real environment.

[Genoreaper]

People are still using shadow villains (who tend to be a**holes with or without factual data driving them) or outright bad players who wouldn't be interested in playing better to fear monger and generalize why parsers are bad, if it helps anyone it should be an option. There are already people who ignore mechanics for extra dps blindly, there are already jerks who will by an internal guess assume someone's doing badly and act toxic or kick them without any way for them or the victim to prove otherwise.

If every job boils down to mainly doing damage why keep it blind. You could easily have opt in/out for self and party parses. It's akin to if there were no threat meters and tanks asking for it to do their job more easily and get a feel for when they can drop tank stance and people saying no because they might be jerks and toxic when they see other players not using aggro reducing skills.

[Sebazy]

The explanation I heard was that they did test A3S and A4S, but not thoroughly. Like they tested each phase separately, so the testers were going into each phase with all of their cooldowns available, which is why some of the A3S DPS checks were really really absurd in a real environment.

Pretty much this. Quite the amusing oversight, it did make for a mostly good raid tier though!