Thank you Yoshi for your stance on DPS meters

[QT_Melon]

I think the initial point they were making is that if one player is holding you back because they have super low dps, you can only tell through parsing, and you're not allowed to call them out for it, no matter how polite you are about it. Instead you kind of have to leave instance, kick the player and replace them which isn't any better imo but the status quo SE would rather have.

Asking a tank to focus on a swap after they screw up is ok. Calling a healer out for dpsing and not healing is ok. Calling a dps out for low dps isn't.

Because 90% of the time the above is a problem is because people call them out using a parser. There have been many ways people have stated a singular player isn't doing their job optimally without harassing and being constructive.

[EaMett]

Because 90% of the time the above is a problem is because people call them out using a parser. There have been many ways people have stated a singular player isn't doing their job optimally without harassing and being constructive.

It doesn't matter how polite and constructive you are. The second you isolate a single person out for their dps you're walking a fine line and risk being reported. Your stance would come from parsing anyways because there aren't really any other ways of knowing if a single person's DPS is low, the in game threat meter is too small to tell most of the time.
The flip side to this is you don't parse and you wipe consistently to enrage or dps checks and don't know why. This clearly shows the game is lacking some form of mechanic/tool.

Without parsing you would also be hard pressed to put a group together of similarly skilled players. Which is a must for static integrity. Again the game is lacking something here to stand by itself. It would all be fine and dandy if the content were all super easy, but since they push content that really entices optimization there's a real dichotomy between the high tier content they put out and their "no" parsing ToS (which is diff from their "don't mention it" stance).

[QT_Melon]

It doesn't matter how polite and constructive you are. The second you isolate a single person out for their dps you're walking a fine line and risk being reported. Your stance would come from parsing anyways because there aren't really any other ways of knowing if a single person's DPS is low, the in game threat meter is too small to tell most of the time.
The flip side to this is you don't parse and you wipe consistently to enrage or dps checks and don't know why. This clearly shows the game is lacking some form of mechanic/tool.

Without parsing you would also be hard pressed to put a group together of similarly skilled players. Which is a must for static integrity. Again the game is lacking something here to stand by itself. It would all be fine and dandy if the content were all super easy, but since they push content that really entices optimization there's a real dichotomy between the high tier content they put out and their "no" parsing ToS (which is diff from their "don't mention it" stance).

First off, what is parsing? What is ACT?

They are tools. Right? The tool does what? Read your battle log. It tallies up the numbers for you. The settings also allow for things like an "end encounter rate" whether or not you want Pets in the damage equation/healing equation etc...

So the argument is that "there's no way of telling" Oh there always was. It's just cumbersome. So I understand why said tool exists and not arguing about using said tool.


What I am talking about is the harassment issue involving said tool. We also have the fact it's against the terms of service to use said tool. So that's why even though we know people use them for ease of access on the PC platform particularly - the general idea holds present.

A person who raids should know what the entire group should be putting out. That also includes tanks and healers.

My statement asked about this part of the in game parser. Where do you stop on the parsing - like ONLY DPS? If you have a low DPS, is that person really the problem? If we're talking about a person that does half their DPS, you can mention the person has issues with their rotation and move on. The other part may be culture as Japan doesn't bother (unless you are exceptionally bad and they want to send 2ch after you) bickering in parties, they disband and move one AND THAT'S WITH ALL JOBS INVOLVED.

But going on. It may not be the lowest performing DPS is a tank in a particular instance isn't doing much damage at all and doing 1/3 of the damage output that's normally in range for that tank. If we have a parser FOR ONLY DPS in game, and it's a TANK that's part of the issue...considering they generally have the most uptime. People only getting part of that equation are going to start harassing the DPS.

A lot of the people arguing back about not having the parser, say it in the worst, least engaging way as possible for the other side to see how one can be constructive and positive about it. That's the problem. I'm actually offering ideas for players to engage with others in a positive way that's far less likely to cause problems, but people still want to act overly negative about it. So that's why I do feel we've dug our own graves in EVER having a meaningful conversation of having an in game parser. It also didn't help to have the Koike incident - https://www.reddit.com/r/ffxiv/comme...arser/ddxxeua/ to cement this issue.

So sadly now I can see why the other camp wants to dig its foot in and say "the community is toxic and shouldn't have parsers" if the person can't even TRY their best on talking with players but then demand others TRY their best

[EaMett]

snip

I'm not arguing for an ingame parser, nor do I think talking about someone's DPS should be done in any manner other than politely and constructively. I'm just saying SE's ToS, stance, and enforcement (or in the case of parsers, lack of) is a bit of a mess and in some cases creates double standards.

At the end of the day, the raiding community will still parse, SE won't do anything about it unless it's used to harass people (as they should) and we'll keep seeing threads either complaining about parsing or asking for official parsers. The great cycle of mmo life.

[Shurrikhan]

First off, what is parsing? What is ACT?

They are tools. Right? The tool does what? Read your battle log. It tallies up the numbers for you. The settings also allow for things like an "end encounter rate" whether or not you want Pets in the damage equation/healing equation etc...

So the argument is that "there's no way of telling" Oh there always was. It's just cumbersome. So I understand why said tool exists and not arguing about using said tool.

While I'll agree that there are ways to tell when someone is underperforming, you're purposely leaving out two important factors:

1. It doesn't matter if you find out who's wasting everyone's time without a parser if they can just accuse you of using a parser. As there is no way to prove use of a parser short of screenshots, any stance the developers take against parsers in practice will require that the accuser's words are taken as fact. They could be considered partial, such that X number of reports must be filed against a given player for them to be banned, but you nonetheless empower people to harass others with zero proof, be it of actual harassment or of use of third-party tools.
   
   
2. Constraints of available time, effort, and attention do matter. That you could do a particular task given infinite time is not the same as being able to complete it within the time given or the task being practically applicable. No one has ever claimed that parsers provide unique information, only that they are uniquely convenient. That convenience does in some way make them uniquely informative. Please do not conflate a computer program and an abacus for sake of twisted argument.

Yes, I can identify an Ice Mage as an underperformer by the simple fact that he is refusing to use Fire spells. I can tell when a DRG is cutting their combos short, or when a Bard is delaying between song refreshes, or even when a SMN isn't juggling their Tri-disasters well. The obvious will remain obvious, to whatever degree the party is familiar with the jobs in question. Bad luck if you're a popularly played job (or if the possible errors therein are considered common knowledge, however flawed that knowledge may actually be); good luck if you're a more rarely played job.

The problem is the closer calls and the toxicity a lack of timely information enforces. You now have to wonder whether a person actually made more mistakes, or if their mistakes were just more visible. And in any kick, you have to wonder who's going to take the blame and the potential ban for having removed a player who had no business expecting everyone else to carry them through the content. That is, again, toxic.

[Shurrikhan]

Because 90% of the time the above is a problem is because people call them out using a parser. There have been many ways people have stated a singular player isn't doing their job optimally without harassing and being constructive.

No, it's a problem when you put a gag order on criticism, arming each player who'd rather threaten others than improve with... a ban gun. Most of the time that gun will merely fire blanks, but if you're just going about your day, how often will that threat have zero effect on your ability to kick one petulant underperformer for the benefit of everyone else? Suddenly every group decision has to be weighed against who's going to take the flak for a good call, all atop no longer being perfectly certain that you are in fact making the right call.

That is a toxic environment.