Final Fantasy XIV and a Culture of Enabling

[SturmChurro]

Yea I can see it in some things for sure. There comes a point where you have a good feel for how long it should take to down a group of mobs or a boss and I have been in things where I'm like "omg why aren't these dead already". I don't see that as often as others maybe because I do tend to run a lot of things with my FC and friends (or at least partial parties with them). But I've also been lucky to be in complete rando groups where things are melting at a good clip. But I have also been in some parties where it's just like what is happening here? I will say my own dps is not great when I'm learning a new EX fight. I'm too busy trying to learn the mechanics and not die, but when I have that down my dps goes way up because I know how to time my bursts, when I need to be ready to move, etc.

It's due to the design of the game. It's simply an objective fact when players are underperforming. There is a way, and a way not to do things as a standard. Sure, high-end players have figured out the timing, position, etc. to perfect this standard, but that's not what is being discussed or asked.
---

I think many players conflate clearing content with performing 'adequately'. I've made this argument many times, probably at least twice in this thread. You can generally clear content with several AFK players, if it nearly runs out the timer you can clear content. The issue here is instead of players encouraging others to do better, read their tooltips, etc. many in this community encourage the opposite. As if, encouraging another player to play at an adequate level is a sin, as if doing so is disrespecting that player, but in fact it's the opposite! The player choosing not to play adequately - yes 'choosing' - is in fact disrespecting every other player who has to carry them to complete even casual content. Make no mistake if there was a full party comprised of these players, who are choosing to play at this level, they would either not clear much content (even casual, or 'normal), or it would take FOREVER to do so.

[linayar]

But how is it going to be irrelevant if by doing this you damage the fucking learning curve of the game?

No idea, wasn't my position.

those who believe that ignorance is bliss will continue about their business regardless of what anyone says. I don't think these "easy mode" story scenarios are as detrimental as some may think. People have been able to level up fast for some time, even without buying boosts. This isn't anything new.

I think solo quests are the only situations where people cannot be blissfully ignorant. And if they're already easy enough as is, there is no reason for easier modes. It's not so much about the difficulty of the mode itself, but what the game is telling people by having it.

I wonder if fear of the playerbase finding out just how underperforming they are is an unstated reason why SE refuses to put any performance feedback system in the game? I wonder if they fear the beast that they have themselves made?

Nah, that kind of fear is easily remedied by nerfing content. There is is performance feedback system in the game: damage and debuff for failed mechanic and wipe for lack of dps/heal/cleanse/mitigation when the situations call for them.

You can generally clear content with several AFK players, if it nearly runs out the timer you can clear content.

Sorry, but that's an absurd scenario. If players are AFK, then that's not about underperforming, it's about not playing. It doesn't matter if you can still clear the content, (which I doubt the general population could if it's true that people are generally underperforming) that behavior is not acceptable unless your party agrees to it beforehand.

Also, if you nearly run out of timer, unless you have lots of deaths, in which case people should be encouraged to learn the mechanics to not die, then chances are people are AFK.

So, I don't know about anybody else, but that's not the situations I was discussing here.

[SturmChurro]

Sorry, but that's an absurd scenario. If players are AFK, then that's not about underperforming, it's about not playing. It doesn't matter if you can still clear the content, (which I doubt the general population could if it's true that people are generally underperforming) that behavior is not acceptable unless your party agrees to it beforehand.

Also, if you nearly run out of timer, unless you have lots of deaths, in which case people should be encouraged to learn the mechanics to not die, then chances are people are AFK.

So, I don't know about anybody else, but that's not the situations I was discussing here.

I'm not sure if you are getting my point. There is such a low bar of actually clearing much of the content in this game, that all it takes are people in the party carrying others, others who may be the equivalent of dead weight. I'd like to highlight this post:

If they actually have such code, I have reason to believe it would be in SE's best interests to do the opposite of your proposition. That is, 'bad' players would be grouped with good players and vice versa. What you're suggesting is basically going to ruin DF by putting 'bad' players in situations where they literally can't clear instances and probably ragequit while the 'good' players keep riding the tailwind of their 'skilled player' privilege.

If you want to play with 'good' players, enter as a premade. When entering duty finder, always expect to carry your party first and foremost to avoid disappointment.

It seems to be generally agreed in this thread, that if these players are put into parties with players who choose to play at this level. They generally will not clear content. What happens when you get a tank who doesn't use their CD's, and can barely hold aggro, who is coupled with a healer who can't keep up due to a subpar usage of their kit and the tanks level of play, combined with two DPS who aren't using AOE skills, so the mobs are alive longer and hitting a tank (or themselves) longer? A WIPE. That's what.

None of this would be a problem if these players were encouraged to play at an 'adequate' level. Instead of being a burden on others across all content in the game, they could be self-sufficient.

[linayar]

I'm not sure if you are getting my point. There is such a low bar of actually clearing much of the content in this game, that all it takes are people in the party carrying others, others who may be the equivalent of dead weight. I'd like to highlight this post:



It seems to be generally agreed in this thread, that if these players are put into parties with players who choose to play at this level. They generally will not clear content. What happens when you get a tank who doesn't use their CD's, and can barely hold aggro, who is coupled with a healer who can't keep up due to a subpar usage of their kit and the tanks level of play, combined with two DPS who aren't using AOE skills, so the mobs are alive longer and hitting a tank (or themselves) longer? A WIPE. That's what.

None of this would be a problem if these players were encouraged to play at an 'adequate' level. Instead of being a burden on others across all content in the game, they could be self-sufficient.

People carrying others is not in argument. That doesn't mean people should AFK regardless if you think you can still clear content with less people. So accepting that people may not perform to the liking of others is not the same as accepting people going AFK.

That not a feedback system, that is a roadblock system and a poor one at that. If they insist on not having a feedback system then they need to change their roadblock system to include more challenging content across the board to make sure everyone is contributing. It's only fair after all.

Feedback is anything that informs you of what you did. You could be in combat with full battle effects shown and not see anything, then you see a debuff, you know you were caught in the AOE.

Not liking the form of feedback doesn't make it any less of a feedback, especially since your character cannot die permanently unless you delete it.

[Vinupra-Rosa]

I'm not sure if you are getting my point. There is such a low bar of actually clearing much of the content in this game, that all it takes are people in the party carrying others, others who may be the equivalent of dead weight. I'd like to highlight this post:



It seems to be generally agreed in this thread, that if these players are put into parties with players who choose to play at this level. They generally will not clear content. What happens when you get a tank who doesn't use their CD's, and can barely hold aggro, who is coupled with a healer who can't keep up due to a subpar usage of their kit and the tanks level of play, combined with two DPS who aren't using AOE skills, so the mobs are alive longer and hitting a tank (or themselves) longer? A WIPE. That's what.

None of this would be a problem if these players were encouraged to play at an 'adequate' level. Instead of being a burden on others across all content in the game, they could be self-sufficient.

As that's my post, then I will deign to respond.

You're missing a very big part of the point (and something that I expanded on in another pots), and that is beginners often start of performing highly subpar. Because they are, of course, beginners. The game doesn't really give you much in the way of tutelage with regards to performing optimally, or at least what would be considered standard by the community. Active help and tooltips exist, but the former is something that most people ignore in my experience and the latter can sometimes (as in the case of silently updating tooltips and freecure) be misleading. Hall of the novice teaches super basic practices, some of which is outdated and/or harmful (it basically teaches single pulling).

Locking DF to tiers would case entrenchment of 'bad' practices amongst 'bad' players which would make it harder to 'graduate' and qualify to the 'upper tiers'. On that thread, running as a 'good' player, being saddled with a 'bad' player is not that big of a burden most of the time (20 minute run instead of 12? NBD) and that comes with the bonus that 'good' players will serve as role models for the 'bad' players. And that is what people should strive to be -- role models, to show new players how it's done, to push them to do their best while reassuring them that they can do it. But 'bads' being consistently grouped with 'bads' gives them little room to grow and instead saddles them with unnecessary frustration far greater than duties taking 8 minutes longer to complete than normal. Chances are this will result in more people leaving instead of learning, as well as create an expectation where duties are going to be horrible anyways.

I've stopped a few times to help newbies better grasp their kit, and got gratitude most of the time (sometimes another party member would become impatient, but hush -- i'm teaching the newbie). But even verbal instruction is not the limit of this -- a good tank mass-pulling a dungeon will show a DPS how 'things are done' so that they can do the same when they pick up tanking, for example. And a dps or tank witnessing firsthand the glory of Holy might tempt them to use the skill when they are the healer. That brings me to this point:

these players were encouraged to play at an 'adequate' level

Be a role model. Offer help. You can't just force people to learn, but you can set an example for them to look up to. That is how you encourage people to play at an 'adequate' level and have them stop being a burden. Does it always work? No - there are people who will resist, but not everyone will and that's what matters. Even people who at first 'resist' might later on 'wisen up' and learn.

People underperforming at 80 was brought up but, again, even at 80 it's possible to be misinformed and/or not grasp fully how a job works, or they might have known but forget due to disuse. For heavens' sake, a person I know personally adviced me to not expend the heat gauge on trash pulls and both of us were at 80. BLM confused me enough that I levelled it to 80 through trusts just to get it out of the way and while I once knew NIN I have forgotten how to play it. Someone trying to get back into a job they had not played in forever will mess up badly even with prior study. People need to calm down.

-Thread-

This whole thread does remind me though. I don't coddle: I put any sprouts I am helping through trials of fire, pushing them on pulls that would normally be reserved for veterans. The reason? I want them to commit errors and learn while in the presence of a friendly party who is willing to help so that they won't be making these same errors in the company of the elitists such as those who have aired their laundry in this thread, who may see no issue in kicking/attacking/insulting them and otherwise discourage them from playing further simply because 'bah, this person is being a leech! screw them!'

[SturmChurro]

...

I do not think it is the community's responsibility to carry dead weight. They should be contributing themselves instead of expecting others to carry them through content. As I have stated many times, it's disrespectful; it's a complete disregard of other player's time. I am not referring to new or learning players, I am referring to the players who are choosing to play at this level, and are set in their ways. This thread is pointing out the players who 'enable' this sort of behavior, even encourage it!

I'll offer help sure...if asked. I'm not gonna go around giving unsolicited advice. Players writing paragraph after paragraph is, frankly, annoying, and not only does it display an inherent bias, it can rob a new player an experience; to learn by doing. Naturally much of the "advice" given in chat I've read is awful, for that matter. Anyway, supposedly giving out "advice" can get a player banned by the GMs, if it's not written in just the right way.

[Vinupra-Rosa]

Snip.

If your intent is to help, it will reflect in chat. Most of the time, when I hear people complaining about 'giving help' causing them to get banned/penalised/cussed out a little observation of their conduct makes it apparent why.

That said, on non-newbie 'sub-par' players, one need not immediately assume that these players are being 'bad' by default. There are many ways a player can be not a sprout and still perform sub-par including but not limited to 1) real life issues (physical/mental ailments, medication, a distracting environment, hardware issues, hardware change, sudden internet stutter, etc), 2) not having gotten guidance (solo players are especially vulnerable, but being around groups that come to wrong conclusions/internalise bad habits leads to this too) and/or misunderstanding mechanics (in a general sense), 3) being given bad guidance, 4) unfamiliarity with their class/job/role 5) unfamiliarity with the duty, excacerbated by point 4, 6) rust/lack of practice and/or a change in bindings

A 'sub-par' player may be simply lazy, but they could also have a legitimate issue on their end. It would probably be for the best to not immediately assume malice without clear evidence.

A 'sub-par' player who is, indeed, lazy and refuses to get up and play properly even when given help is beyond anyone's ability to 'help'. If they are causing severe issues to the party (and, again, assuming that they have admitted to being lazy, and it's not just your assumption that they are) then you would certainly be free to remove them to help the party earn the clear. Otherwise patience is best exercised. It's not the community's obligation to carry people who are being 'lazy', certainly, but it's not also the community's right to immediately assume people performing sub-par are simply being lazy and that they should be removed.

As for this thread at large, it may be 'presented' that way (and included a legitimate tale about bad behaviour being encouraged) but if you look closely at OP's posts all through the thread you can see that it's honestly birthed from nothing more than the entitled snarling of an elitist who has repeatedly framed themselves as being 'taken advantage of' by 'half' the people in DF.

[Caurcas]

If your intent is to help, it will reflect in chat. Most of the time, when I hear people complaining about 'giving help' causing them to get banned/penalised/cussed out a little observation of their conduct makes it apparent why.

That said, on non-newbie 'sub-par' players, one need not immediately assume that these players are being 'bad' by default. There are many ways a player can be not a sprout and still perform sub-par including but not limited to 1) real life issues (physical/mental ailments, medication, a distracting environment, hardware issues, hardware change, sudden internet stutter, etc), 2) not having gotten guidance (solo players are especially vulnerable, but being around groups that come to wrong conclusions/internalise bad habits leads to this too) and/or misunderstanding mechanics (in a general sense), 3) being given bad guidance, 4) unfamiliarity with their class/job/role 5) unfamiliarity with the duty, excacerbated by point 4, 6) rust/lack of practice and/or a change in bindings

A 'sub-par' player may be simply lazy, but they could also have a legitimate issue on their end. It would probably be for the best to not immediately assume malice without clear evidence.

A 'sub-par' player who is, indeed, lazy and refuses to get up and play properly even when given help is beyond anyone's ability to 'help'. If they are causing severe issues to the party (and, again, assuming that they have admitted to being lazy, and it's not just your assumption that they are) then you would certainly be free to remove them to help the party earn the clear. Otherwise patience is best exercised. It's not the community's obligation to carry people who are being 'lazy', certainly, but it's not also the community's right to immediately assume people performing sub-par are simply being lazy and that they should be removed.

As for this thread at large, it may be 'presented' that way (and included a legitimate tale about bad behaviour being encouraged) but if you look closely at OP's posts all through the thread you can see that it's honestly birthed from nothing more than the entitled snarling of an elitist who has repeatedly framed themselves as being 'taken advantage of' by 'half' the people in DF.

Bro, its called being tired. Six years (soon to be 7) of dealing people not doing the smallest things to make the experience of those around them better wears you down. I am not an elitist but I'd rather throw my hat in with them as, at least in my interactions, they've proven to be less toxic and more helpful than the "casual" base.

[Awha]

If your intent is to help, it will reflect in chat. Most of the time, when I hear people complaining about 'giving help' causing them to get banned/penalised/cussed out a little observation of their conduct makes it apparent why.

That said, on non-newbie 'sub-par' players, one need not immediately assume that these players are being 'bad' by default. There are many ways a player can be not a sprout and still perform sub-par including but not limited to 1) real life issues (physical/mental ailments, medication, a distracting environment, hardware issues, hardware change, sudden internet stutter, etc), 2) not having gotten guidance (solo players are especially vulnerable, but being around groups that come to wrong conclusions/internalise bad habits leads to this too) and/or misunderstanding mechanics (in a general sense), 3) being given bad guidance, 4) unfamiliarity with their class/job/role 5) unfamiliarity with the duty, excacerbated by point 4, 6) rust/lack of practice and/or a change in bindings

A 'sub-par' player may be simply lazy, but they could also have a legitimate issue on their end. It would probably be for the best to not immediately assume malice without clear evidence.

A 'sub-par' player who is, indeed, lazy and refuses to get up and play properly even when given help is beyond anyone's ability to 'help'. If they are causing severe issues to the party (and, again, assuming that they have admitted to being lazy, and it's not just your assumption that they are) then you would certainly be free to remove them to help the party earn the clear. Otherwise patience is best exercised. It's not the community's obligation to carry people who are being 'lazy', certainly, but it's not also the community's right to immediately assume people performing sub-par are simply being lazy and that they should be removed.

As for this thread at large, it may be 'presented' that way (and included a legitimate tale about bad behaviour being encouraged) but if you look closely at OP's posts all through the thread you can see that it's honestly birthed from nothing more than the entitled snarling of an elitist who has repeatedly framed themselves as being 'taken advantage of' by 'half' the people in DF.

It is also not the communities obligation to assume the reason they are playing poorly. I understand this is your standard and that is awesome, I also get this may be your desire for the community which is also cool. The thing is not everyone needs to subscribe to the same standard. Sure when you frame it as you do it sounds far worse then it really is, though if you frame it like player x was removed because group y did not like how they were playing. It is does not sound so bad? It is not about the person, just how they play. The persons character is not being brought into question or anything.

In the end it is just comes down to certain people not wanting to play with others. Yes we have tools in place such as using the PF and playing with friends, and removing said players from the group.

Though in the end this divide will always exists between the factions so to speak cause the sad reality is not wanting to play with someone can be framed in a negative way extremely easy and does lend itself to negative connotations.