why are people so resistant to constructive criticism about the game?

[Shougun]

Anecdotal evidence being a strong cause.
Player X says their way is the true way to do things.
Player Y says the opposite is the true way to do things.

Both players encounter ppl of the opposite opinion, who tell them to do the opposite method. How does one distinguish who is in the right? Well, that depends on what the person determines is a proper way to find out results. (usually again, due to anecdotal evidence) If looking into the evidence, they experience an opposite result where the evidence suggests otherwise, that "evidence" is no longer seen as a reasonable argument. (Lets say "DPS properly" is the stance. Some group, maybe 3 times in a row, tries to DPS properly, but messes up something else. (such as a dodge mechanic) They may now think all evidence that suggests "good DPS" is a "good thing", is no longer reasonable evidence of "proper play".)
Also keep in mind, the more they keep hearing something they dont agree with, the more annoyed they get, no matter how constructive it is.
This of course excludes the inability to hear "tone" in text, and that even "constructive criticism" can be a veil for someone to just vent/lash out. (feeling "morally in the right", as long as their lash outs are constructive in their phrasing. (but maybe not in their context)) An example; Someone curses at work, but in a manner thats completely neutral, such as "I had a F**king hotdog today!" This doesnt mean that person is getting smart, or showing an attitude with another employee. But they "could" be punished for "doing wrong". But another employee can use "please and Thank yous" while giving an attitude/being a smart a** about it. But they dont get in trouble, because "please and thankyou" isnt against the company rules. (Seen these examples play out at my work places for many years)

Sadly, "Constructive criticism" is never going to be easily seen as such, despite how unfortunate that is.

Was going to quote a few people since the sentiment has been said in different ways but you win being the last before I posted so I'm just going to quote you lol.

I saw this a few times in this thread already where someone views something as impossibru or just not their values and therefore not constructive / criticism, and in context of the thread apparently worth telling them to go away too.

I see people who are saying "x, y, z, q, p, r, t are not constructive". I'd like to remind people that SE actively caters to a very diverse audience, and I've seen over the years here many many many MANY times where someone say something cannot be done, just impossible, and they say this as if on behalf of SE like their uncle works there or something, and then later some sort of variation of it is totally done by SE. Sometimes this is even SE "we can't do that", two years later- oh guys we did it.

Can't can't can't, not constructive, can't. No NO NO NO NO NO NO, LEAVE THE GAME.

SE: Hold my Gysahl Greens, I'm going in!

Of course the more extreme example of someone asking for this game to go from MMORPG to RTS, well okay.. sure.. lol. Can't happen, insane for thinking so, but vast majority of feedback isn't to that wild of a scale. And as a smaller example, what can happen, is we do have LoV (kind of rts content). Now of course LoV is a bit of a red feathered step child chocobo of the black tipped choco family, but just an example that SE has a history of, and will continue to, branch out.

Just because you don't think it's likely, even if SE said they've difficulty achieving whatever desired feature, or you just don't like the idea at all doesn't mean it isn't potentially constructive criticism.

High quality very likely to be implemented perfectly in line with your world view constructive criticism, which is what I feel a lot of people are 'actually' looking for when they say that- well yeah that'll be far more rare lol.

Unless someone here is secretly actually working for SE at a high level position I find the people telling others off on their desires based on nothing more than 'it can't fit, because I say so- even though I've been repeatedly wrong before' tend to be more in the wrong than the person with the wild idea who may of jumped the shark a little.

I am more impressed when people say no because they internalize the concept and then form their own constructive criticism in response than someone who just retorts with 'no'. As they say it's easy to destroy but hard to build, which of course should be a friendly reminder when talking to SE too. . easy to put SE down even when it's hard to do what they do (that isn't to say we accept anything they do as perfect just because it took effort, jut a reminder that it takes a lot more effort to make something than to say it isn't any good- so sometimes you can use that to help shift your wording from 'sucks sucks sucks, to 'this could be better for the following reasons, here are some ideas that I think might work in place of that''.

I tend to believe the 'no it will take resources away from something that maybe might possibly affect me even though I've no idea what their distribution of resources and people priority is' or 'no it's not feasible because I honestly have no idea what is going on at head quarters but am going to pretend I do" are some of the least impressive way ideas get shot down, unless they come from SE in which case we have to decide if we believe them or not (lol). There is of course a difference from shooting things down based on your backseat managing and accounting, or hyper restrictive interpretation of lore (like when people refused, on behalf of SE, the concept of Demi content for SMN until SE did it and then suddenly and magically it was all okay), and a 'that'll probably not happen'. Telling people off therefore gets a huge 'I'm terrible at conversation, for this moment at least, and don't really care to have this one and am giving you a minimum effort 'no'' award from me, at least on average lol, when people begin to act as SE's accountant or content planner putting their seal on things that can and will and things that can't and wont. Which again is different from constructively criticizing their criticism. As you pointed out sometimes people will feel pushback on their idea by engaging that idea as some sort of resistance to the concept of constructive criticism but it's actually in support of quality conversation (by constructively criticizing them back).

A. What do you think about accerlated story options now that it takes two full witcher 3 games to catch up?
B. I think it takes a long time indeed but that's the charm of this game! I know it doesn't directly affect me if it was added but indirectly I believe it might direct the game and the community away from this story focus. I think people have to do it, like in dark souls if you added an easy mode it just wouldn't make the same community or feeling.
A. But this is a theme park mmo, is it really that important to force a vibe like that?
B. I know it is but I still want this is to be required experience to the game, I understand the concern.. they're trying to make it better by streamlining stuff, I just don't think it'll be good for the community or vibe to the game if they go too extreme. This smaller solutions I am more for though (streamlining).
A. Okay, what about the current story skip options?
B. I don't love them but they cost real money and so few use them.
A. I see, if they added it anyway would you quit assuming that it makes no change to story structure?
B. No... but I still am saying I don't think it'll be good- I think people should have to do it.

SE can see that, I think, and get some really valuable information. Knowing what people feel, want, and possible solutions/counter-proposals can really help guide them away from traps or understand consequences if they choose to do that anyways. As obviously sometimes they know someone is going to be upset and will do it anyways because of other reasons they feel worth it.

vs something like

A. What do you think about accelerated story options now that it takes two full witcher 3 games to catch up?
B. This is a story game and if you don't like that then you need to play something else. This cannot be done, even if it's optional and doesn't actually change the structure of the game for myself, it's not possible. leave!

One clearly tells SE a lot more, and also is more realistic. SE 'can't' do something? pffffttt. lol. SE can and has done things before that people think they can't do. But with the first they can see the person is worried about the culture, and perhaps that's reason enough, like people are worried about parsers ruining the culture if they're openly accepted. I'm not saying I accept that argument in all cases, but it is an argument to consider. Culture can be hard to cultivate but is worth considering from a design perspective.

It can't be done because it changes the core of the game (RPG -> RTS), sure that sounds pretty logical but that's a rare sort of request. More often I see it can't be done because they don't like it and not actually because there is a reason it 'can't' be done. Like if SE added ultimate content, which is hard enough to make savage closer to normal mode than savage to ultimate lol, and people are like 'but my core, my money your spending somewhere else that should be spent on what I tell you to'. Well SE never changed the core of the game, it's still pretty casual, they just added another optional piece. To be fair and clear I'm not saying you can't be annoyed if SE spent millions on some silly feature like 'great news you can now use minons in pvp, it cost us a few mill to do though' and people would be like.. .seriously? I'm saying just because you don't like it, or you want money spent somewhere else, has no relevance to them 'can't' do it or that it's not constructive criticism.

Although I doubt people who are hyper conservative on what counts as constructive criticism / allowed feedback and desires are going to change their mind, or even read what most people say that is counter to that. So... probably mostly just high fiving a few people with silent likes and that's it. Magic of the the internet lol /shrug. (using conservative as a word, not as a political ideology- just in case someone felt I was attacking politics ).

Also would agree with another that says this is just the nature of game forums, well fan forums in general, where people will be all for what they like and then sharp, matter of factly, against whatever they don't value- which is why I'm very glad this forum doesn't have reddit like features. The echo chamber would be intense as people refuse to engage in conversations that are not to their fancy by just hiding the entire thing.

I know sometimes something is just troll bait or is just 'make this an RTS' but more often I see not that and it's more like what you said where people will just devalue the opposing argument because it's not their argument. Easier to argue against something if you remove all their value before even engaging- you've no power here because I wont recognize any of it *muahaha*, it's why dehumanizing is so popular. I couldn't treat a person horribly but if they're a monster then my horrible behavior is justified, I can be a jerk and still be a good person - secret cheat codes unlocked! That last bit being more of a general statement lol, I don't see that behavior too often here but I have seen it on infrequent occasion.

[PyurBlue]

If you dont want to play through the story and find a way for yourself to take in as little as possible, thats your right.

I really want to point out that I'm not even coming from that perspective. It's not about wanting to experience the story vs not, but how you experience it. I don't equate the desire for an optional story with being uninterested in the story. The issue is that you might not want to put off other things for hours, days, or weeks just to do the story first when you could do it in the opposite order. This certainly wouldn't work for everyone, but that's not an issue. At least if the option was given, any given player could choose what works best for them.

But my worry would be that by turning the story into more optional content - instead of having most things in the game tied to it in some capacity, requiring you to pass certain points within the story to unlock NPCs, areas, dungeons etc. - my worry would be that the story would lose its strong connection to the world and in turn would lose meaning and maybe even quality.

I didn't want to get into what effect an optional story would have since this thread is more about how differing opinions interact, but it does tie into what I said already. I don't see how making the story optional would change the game any more than making cutscenes skippable or jump potions purchasable would. SE wouldn't have to change anything except for adding a UI somewhere that let's us bypass stuff. What that would look like exactly, and precisely how much control it would give us isn't easy to determine, but I think it's fair to say that it wouldn't be very influential to the direction of the game since it would still allow you to have the exact same experience that you have now. As always, there is the chance that I'm wrong, or that people disagree with me. I accept that, but this is how I see things at the moment.

Speaking in terms of the series as a whole: The story has always been the driving factor in these games. The story was never optional - areas, dungeons, NPCs, partymembers... all of that has always been locked behind the story - so yes, in a sense, an optional story would make it less of a Final Fantasy game.
Now, admittely that argument "Its always been like this!" is obviously not the best or strongest one to be made. Given the basic design of this game though, I think its a fair one to be considered. To me it doesnt seem that content is locked behind the story just to force people to go through the story - its locked because it has its place within the narrative and disconnecting the two would cheapen both the story-experience aswell as the duty-experience.

All of that makes sense, but I think it's still something limited to one perspective (which is still totally fair, you went out of your way to say this was only your personal opinion). For some people, going through the story after the fact might not cheapen it. It didn't in my case. ARR did nothing to sell FF14 to me as a story focused game. I watched early cutscenes purely out of interest because I love a good story, but nothing really drew me in. A few bits of the story even felt like completely generic filler and I started to skip. I also had the misfortune of giving ARR another chance during one of the low points of the story, which drove me to skip more or less everything until well into HW when a particular scene caught my interest by chance. This didn't prevent me from eventually going back, filling myself in, and enjoying the good aspects of the story. I don't regret skipping either because it didn't negatively impact my experience, and even if the story caught my interest from the very beginning I probably would have skipped just for the sake of catching up to the friends that brought me into the game. I don't really see any solution to the second issue besides letting players jump ahead and come back to the story later. In a way I suppose you could consider it a selfish request on my part, but I do acknowledge that FF14's story should be maintained as a core component of the game even if it is no longer a requirement. I don't want the people who disagree with me to have to give up anything that they enjoy.

[SturmChurro]

I think that with a lot of games people take any sort of criticism towards it as an insult towards them. So all criticism it the same for the no matter if one is just a "I hate x" or a post with many good thoughtout points. (And some just want to troll)

You will have people that enjoy the story of a game and that post that anyone who does not like it or complain about it just simply did not understand it..like the complainers are not intelligent enough..they are bascially putting down others to make them feel better. So maybe those that are so aggressive with even constructive criticism have low selfesteem too? (Or too much of it and believe to be always right)

Even here on the forum you have enough posters that are so unbelievable passive agressive to most of the criticism even if it makes sense or would not hurt the game or them in any way..until they too have something to complain about...

So I guess its just discussion culture in general. You will sadly always have those that are insulted by any criticism no matter how good it was..

Yeah, you are right. It's people seeing outside of their echochamber. By others talking about issues with this game, or improvements that can be made, people are probably seeing that as a personal attack - especially when it comes from new players, or players from another game. Like their opinion is wrong. Good take.

[linayar]

That is entirely possible, but I tend to believe we are not the ones that should be SE's 'final' content planners to that scale.

I don't think that's the point as SE will do what it wants. At the same time, by having those voices, SE is also notified that there are existing players within its player base that do like the existing content how it is. So when SE decides what new content to make and possibly what existing content to not make new iteration of (either temporarily or permanently), it can take all the feedback it gets.

Yes, I think you made a real possible example, but also no I don't think players should be playing the accountant / content gate keeper . Like I see fairly often people with very fixed ideas of what lore can or can't do, with zero room for maneuvering, but then a month later SE proves them wrong, SMN can't do that, beast tribes can't have this, etc, etc, then SE is like 'but wait they can!". lol.

The problem is not that SE can't do something new, but that SE often has to sacrifice something else in the process (even though they may be unrelated). To keep a consistent content cycle, SE has a limited amount of things to work on for each patch.

Personally think it's better we say what we wish, why we wish it, and perhaps if you've the thoughts the how as well, while not threatening SE of course. And if you legitimately hate the game then sure.. of course you should probably go play another game, but I've seen and both been personally told to play other games because a bit sour feeling about a single piece content out of a huge pile, or if a bias to a certain type that could or does already exist without a complete reconstruction of the identity of the game.

Well, obviously, I don't think telling people to go away for any criticism is productive. But it depends on the person, and sometimes the game may just not be a right fit. It's certainly something to consider in some cases.

[Shougun]

I don't think that's the point as SE will do what it wants. At the same time, by having those voices, SE is also notified that there are existing players within its player base that do like the existing content how it is. So when SE decides what new content to make and possibly what existing content to not make new iteration of (either temporarily or permanently), it can take all the feedback it gets.

Maybe when I said final content planner it wasn't super clear. I didn't mean not to give feedback, I meant players shouldn't put themselves into the position of gate keeper. That they are in no position to slap their seal on things, and are regularly proven wrong and yet still attempt to do so. I was just addressing that concept.

I love feedback, that's good lol. And I've the sense that if feedback is 1000000000 miles from what SE intends that they've the mind not to rip their ship upside down to accommodate it so I don't see it necessary or valuable to have players act as SE's final approval board (you like how it is is and why, and that their suggestion will have repercussions onto that is different than saying it can't change or be accommodated because.. 'because'). It would be better to communicate the value of the concept and apply constructive criticism, assuming good faith (which should always be done in the beginning of new conversations at least), and go from there.

SE can do SE. Honestly it sounds like we're agreeing here, maybe I just wasn't well spoken lol.

The problem is not that SE can't do something new, but that SE often has to sacrifice something else in the process (even though they may be unrelated). To keep a consistent content cycle, SE has a limited amount of things to work on for each patch.

True that nothing is free, but wouldn't you also say it's true we've no idea what they've secretly worked on, what they secretly WANT to work on, who is free, who isn't, who would be willing to put in extra hours because they see some value people want? That we don't have an adequate concept to actually plan our their resources?

I can understand if you're like "seriously SE did you just tell me you spent 10 mil on allowing players to animate players taking their sandals off?" "REALLY?". lol. Of course that's a hyper exaggerated example, but one can be annoyed at the use of resources but I don't think it validates one's ability to affirm or deny the use of resources.

Still no right or actual power to be the gate keeper. People will of course up vote the gate keeper it if they don't like something, but I feel they've offered nothing of value to the conversation if they say it can't be done because they're planning out SE's budget. There is of course a difference from "that doesn't seem like a good use of resources, because X" and "that wont happen because I determined it so".

Like using lore as an example as I see that fairly often, difference from saying something is unlikely because of x and can't because of x when the only reason it would be can't is because a refusal to believe in wiggle room or that new lore can be added. NO WAY EMET CAN COME BACK, ignores the fact they could have flash backs, ptsd, fragments, or what have you- no actually you're not right in say it's impossible, but you could say its unlikely because reasons.

Well, obviously, I don't think telling people to go away for any criticism is productive. But it depends on the person, and sometimes the game may just not be a right fit. It's certainly something to consider in some cases.

Totally agreed mate. That is simply what I'm pushing for. Consider things sincerely, approach with good fatih, if it's worth criticizing then do so because this is called communication and that's acceptable, but do not position yourself as the de facto seal maker for SE because you (generic you, not saying literally you lol) have no position to be in that chair (unless you're secretly Yoshida posting on the forums, but then how would we know ).

Mostly you can read my long freaking posts XD as a tl;dr of "shutting stuff down is not impressive, especially when you're at fault (misunderstood, giving yourself the gate keeper seal, etc), it's not impressive to take an exceptionally narrow perspective and determine that is the only way possible, and makes me think you don't even care to have a conversation and more onto just hearing yourself say no, and that makes me a bit sad because the sincere back and forth are a hallmark of quality feedback and communication".

Of course if people put no effort in the start maybe it's not as desirable feeling to put effort in return, but I see a lot of people putting effort in the start and then another person coming by and just slapping it down with few or zero considerations 'yolo style'. Or more succinctly and as you put it, I would like people to sincerely consider. It would be nice to see more people approach with good faith (that someone is attempting to be constructive and reasonable, and not a tyrant to their existence), and as such attempt to constructively criticize back if they've find they are at odds with someone would like.

Feels like a FFXIV message at some point lol.

Hear, feel, think. XD.

[linayar]

For example, the transmog format of WoW I think is broadly superior to how the glamour dresser here works.

Just a little nitpick. That's not the transmog format that's superior to how glamour dresser works. It's the appearance collection.

You add an appearance collection and hook it up to the glamour dresser and that would be a superior glamour system than WoW's transmog system, in my opinion.

The Big Mac can go. Such a weak-ass burger. Ain't even that big either.

Yeah, I'm so sad thinking about it. But it's still delicious, so I just buy 2 Big Macs nowadays. (Of course, I only eat it very rarely as it's probably not very healthy.)

Right right. The bad thing is, there really isn’t any way to “vote with your money” like you could with a burger shop, as it’s pay the sub for everything or not. I guess it might be more comparable to buying a car?

Though I’ve always been of the mind of doing in game kickstarters. Players buy generic crysta pledged towards something they really want, and if a threshold is met, SE will commit to make whatever it is. Players keep the crysta to shop in mogstation.

Personally I’ve never bought any, but if I knew I could influence getting a new job or dungeon, I would be much more likely to do it. Maybe big spenders get an NPC in dungeon they can name XD

You know, that's probably why some people are quick to tell others to leave. The sooner they leave, the less dissenting voice there may be, and the hope is that SE will cater more and more to those who stick around and new comers who are like minded.

The story being part of the game is something different entirely than making the story required. This is why I don't understand why people bring up that it's a Final Fantasy game when people want to prioritize doing something else ahead of the story. Unless people ask for the story to be removed, which I don't really recall seeing, no one is attempting to make it any less of a Final Fantasy game. If anything an optional story would benefit the MSQ. There would be no need compromise it for the sake of trying to make it appeal to everyone.

You're still missing the point. It's not that the story cannot be optional, it's that the story can be mandatory.

There are other games where story is optional, and those stories just don't draw me in as much, especially if it's supposed to be an ever expanding story, as there is a disconnect between wanting to experience the story and knowing that it's all optional, so let this one be. If FFXIV's story had been optional when I started playing, I probably would never had been able to go through it.

[Melichoir]

Just a little nitpick. That's not the transmog format that's superior to how glamour dresser works. It's the appearance collection.

You add an appearance collection and hook it up to the glamour dresser and that would be a superior glamour system than WoW's transmog system, in my opinion.

I was over simplifying the terminology for how WoW handles glamour, but yeah, the catalog system from WoW joined with the glamour plate system so you can have a catalog and make a few separate glamours you can use on the fly would be the most ideal hybrid we could get. Would also be nice if we could apply plates anywhere too.

If only we lived in an ideal world /sigh.

[Arngrim_Greyashe]

When ARR launched, it added male Miqo'te, female Roegadyn and female Highlanders to the game, all of which were not a thing in 1.0. Seems they thought it would be a good idea to add the missing genders for the reboot.

Now jump ahead to the announcement that Viera. I remember being so incredibly confident that there was absolutely no way they'd limit it to only female, especially given their inclusion of the missing gender options at ARR launch, but alas, we know how that played out. To say the least, I was completely shocked and amazed that they went with that decision.

The Devs have given there reasons why they opted to go this route, but to me it all just feels like an incredibly bad decision and any criticism is well deserved. I've not read a majority of the pages in the Viera thread, but I 100% understand why they want them to be a thing why they feel they should be a thing. To write it off as a mere delusion is really doing a disservice to the playerbase and their voices.

SE has made plenty of questionable decisions in other areas of the game as well, the limited races are just the latest to be tossed onto the heap. I wonder if all the backlash was worth it for them (I'm not just talking the forum backlash).

There's a difference between wanting a thing and expecting a thing. In that thread they have delusional expectations of when they would be added. 5.x or 6.0 being their usual expectations (but not everyone's). That's what I'm calling delusional. There's nothing wrong with wanting something. However when you've talked yourself into believing something that has no substantial proof, in fact it has quite the opposite, then you're in dangerous territory. I've seen a few around here saying they're going to throw a fit if they're not introduced at 6.0.

[Arngrim_Greyashe]

I saw a personality disorder about that. I wonder if the DSM VI is going to have a section literally just called twitter.

There probably already is, knowing how crazy Twitter is.

[Skivvy]

There's a difference between wanting a thing and expecting a thing. In that thread they have delusional expectations of when they would be added. 5.x or 6.0 being their usual expectations (but not everyone's). That's what I'm calling delusional. There's nothing wrong with wanting something. However when you've talked yourself into believing something that has no substantial proof, in fact it has quite the opposite, then you're in dangerous territory. I've seen a few around here saying they're going to throw a fit if they're not introduced at 6.0.

Ahhh, gotcha. I was taking it as the overall idea that male Viera should be a thing is the delusion itself, and that I'd take some issue with. :X Sorry for the misunderstanding.

But I do completely agree with your comment here. It's one thing to really hope for something, maybe even to push strongly for it, but at the end of the day it all boils down to being SE's decision on how/if they implement something. Probably not a good idea to set hard deadlines for things happening in game, unless of course they just really like dealing with disappointment.