Parsers add replayability for casual players

[ForteNightshade]

zero chance of that anyway your not getting your toxic elitist bullshit in ff 14 if you want your beloved parsers world of shitcraft is that way i hear ion is adding blizzard io so you can truly feel like a special snow flake

alas in a perfect world you would not have to be in a party with me you'd be banned for using a illegal parser
but you know this is simply my opinion i simply believe that people should follow the rules that they agreed to when they signed up for an account and that rule says that the programs you people are using are not permitted by the game yet you keep arguing for it if anyone is toxic its you people and your constant rule breaking

Profanity and Offensive Language. You may not use profanity or any language that a reasonable person would find offensive. The Game is for players aged 13 and older. You agree to behave accordingly.

So... about that.

[Katie_Kitty]

So... about that.

Anti-parsers being hypocrites? Say it ain't so.

[ForteNightshade]

It does the job it's intended for, "Do you do enough damage to clear the content?" The rest comes with practicing said content. For the purpose of measuring DPS it's your only "Official" source of info.

Edit: If you can pass a DPS check without buffs then you'll be fine with buffs.

SSS is a terrible metric though. Not only is it inaccurate, you're attacking a stationary target. This doesn't reflect a raid scenario where you'll have mechanics to respond to. Bard and Machinist have notoriously been victims of the dummy not being tuned properly.

Anti-parsers being hypocrites? Say it ain't so.

At least you acknowledge your hypocritical stance.

[Xia_Thas]

SSS is a terrible metric though. Not only is it inaccurate, you're attacking a stationary target. This doesn't reflect a raid scenario where you'll have mechanics to respond to. Bard and Machinist have notoriously been victims of the dummy not being tuned properly.

You seemed to miss the multiple follow up posts about how it's not about it's quality it's about the fact that it's there in game. Good or bad it is official and a metric regardless of the quality of it, especially compared to parsers.

If you are going to quote me at the very least understand it's point instead of repeating what's already been said.

[TaleraRistain]

You seemed to miss the multiple follow up posts about how it's not about it's quality it's about the fact that it's there in game. Good or bad it is official and a metric regardless of the quality of it, especially compared to parsers.

If you are going to quote me at the very least understand it's point instead of repeating what's already been said.

This debate about SSS brings up another point.

SE put in SSS and players don't use it and think it's wrong.

What happens if they did put in an in-game parser and their metrics are different than "that" third party software?

[ForteNightshade]

You seemed to miss the multiple follow up posts about how it's not about it's quality it's about the fact that it's there in game. Good or bad it is official and a metric regardless of the quality of it, especially compared to parsers.

If you are going to quote me at the very least understand it's point instead of repeating what's already been said.

... if it's of poor to downright useless "quality," then it isn't useful. Being able to perform decently on a dummy doesn't translate into an actual fight. Did you also ignore that some jobs straight up can't kill their dummy because they aren't tuned correctly?

SE put in SSS and players don't use it and think it's wrong.

Except we don't think SSS is wrong. We know it is because people have tested it. If an in-game parser differed enough from what ACT showed, people would look into why.