Parsers add replayability for casual players

[Wavaryen]

Hard disagree, as their party member, their performance directly impacts my enjoyment of the game, I'm not going to not say anything when I die in a pull because the WHM wouldn't stop using Cure I instead of more potent tools, or if some guy completely ignoring mechanics will force me to drain my MP to babysit him at the risk of receiving abuse if I choose to let him eat dirt.

In a queue system you don't really have that right. Now if you are in a ls or made the group yourself. You can set whatever standards you want. Also you can have the group vote kick someone, but telling them what they can and can't do? Nah no place for that in a queue base system that builds your groups for you. These convenience tools need some sort of risk, or it would crush the social element more so than it already has.

[Shurrikhan]

As I said, queue systems that auto makes groups. I don't think anyone has a right to tell others how they should play. Even if they are playing wrong. The group can vote kick and that is fine, but telling someone what they can and can't do in a queue setting?

Wait, wait wait...

Let's consider what's actually involved in that "telling someone what they can and can't do". This is the stuff of "Now that you've learned Flare, it's really not worth casting Fire 2," "Please AoE when there are 3+ targets," and "The red AoE indicators indicate AoEs. AoEs are not good to stand in. As your healer, who has limited time and competing interests, I would greatly appreciate it if you not accumulate avoidable damage like some valued collectable". It is not some fascistic control over one's likes and dislikes.

Even if commenting on others' play or holding them to some minimal standard were borderline overbearing, though, communication is something one can ignore. Being removed from a party after 20+ minutes in queue because you've apparently no idea that you have a skill called Doom Spike is not a state one can will into having no impact upon your play or actions by ignoring it. Be emotionally unflappable about the kick all you like, but you still have to repeat the rather long queue. That hardly seems a favor over asking from the poor gal or guy some minimum quality of play or, ultimately, helping them learn their job, and it feels real awkward that you're treating it as such.

[Wavaryen]

Wait, wait wait...

Let's consider what's actually involved in that "telling somehow what they can and can't do". This is the stuff of "Now that you've learned Flare, it's really not worth casting Fire 2," "Please AoE when there are 3+ targets," and "The red AoE indicators indicate AoEs. AoEs are not good to stand in. As your healer, who has limited time and competing interests, I would greatly appreciate it if you not accumulate avoidable damage like some valued collectable". It is not some fascistic control over one's likes and dislikes.

Even if commenting on others' play or holding them to some minimal standard were borderline overbearing, though, communication is something one can ignore. Being removed from a party after 20+ minutes in queue because you've apparently no idea that you have a skill called Doom Spike is not a state one can will into having no impact upon your play or actions by ignoring it. Being emotionally unflappable about the kick all you like, but you still have to repeat the rather long queue. That hardly seems a favor over asking from the poor guy or gal some minimum quality of play or, ultimately, helping them learn their job, and it feels real awkward that you're treating it as such.

That is part of the risk. If players want to vote kick you that is fine. What is being said by the developers and how the rules are enforced. It is consider harassing for telling others how to play in that manner. These players who get kicked should understand why they are and not be upset with it but we all know how players are.


Myself like i said I think that risk balances out these overpowering queue systems.

[WoW]

Depends. What if I were to approach some woman in the mall and gently inform her that she's ugly? Factual or not it was completely unnecessary and probably a little embarrassing for her.

Well, if she joined a beauty contest, it's fair game to tell her she's ugly.

You don't want your DPS to be criticized, play a game that doesn't require it.

[Lanadra]

almost no one (of the raiding folk that posted) said that casuals should be held to their standard, not a single one, yet most of you anti-parser posters are pretending they do and endlessly post and preach about it as if they do

Speaking as someone who would qualify as 'anti-parser', I can and will recognize that what most pro-parser folks are asking for is not 'play Stone Vigil at Savage level' but rather 'have a decent understanding of the basics of your job and use them as is generally regarded as common sense'.

Common sense in this case being: Don't stand in the bad stuff. Use AoE's for grouped enemies. Pitch in with DPS as a healer when the situation allows for it (which is plenty often). Use enmity skill as a tank. Do rotations that make sense and as the skills literally tell you to. Etc.

None of the above gives me any kind of an inkling of a reason as to why DF content, why, to use the same example, Stone Vigil needs a parser used in it. But then that has been my primary issue with this entire subject and as I've stated numerous times at earlier points in this thread.

The status quo purely from a 'how do we use parsers' perspective works. Those who want it, have it, those who don't want it, don't have to deal with it. Those who harass others with it are actioned for it. This is how SE wants it to function, where they'll turn a blind eye to those who use these tools in good faith and are free to smack down any bad actors as they desire.

People.. pro-parser people, have already indicated that they don't need a parser to see whether or not someone is underperforming, they can tell even without. This all seems to be about some strange desire to force an officially sanctioned parser on everyone whether you want it or not.

Above is also why I personally am anti-parser. I don't care that people who play savage/ultimate use it. I understand that the content and specifically DPS checks require such. Have at it.

What I do care about is that I don't have to deal with it. I don't use a parser. I don't play content that requires a parser. I play my jobs competently for normal difficulty content (read: not savage level). I simply do not want to be forced to deal with a parser. If I wanted one, I would be using ACT.

This is what a lot of pro-parser people don't seem to get. Just because someone doesn't want a parser forced into their face no matter what they do, does not mean that we accept or excuse poor play, as in, exceptionally poor play or silliness like 'i don't want to use half my kit because I'm ice mage'. I would be just as annoyed as any of you would I be forced to deal with such nonsense.

Yes, DF means you, even if through gritted teeth, sometimes have to deal with shit people. At the same time, asking a healer to use more than just Cure as well as DPS in the ample down time they get is not 'telling someone how to play', it's asking them to be at least moderately considerate of the fact that they're only one of 4/8/24 people doing the content and that others also rely on their performance to ultimately clear content in a way that everyone can be happy with.

[Shurrikhan]

That is part of the risk. If players want to vote kick you that is fine. What is being said by the developers and how the rules are enforced. It is consider harassing for telling others how to play in that manner. These players who get kicked should understand why they are and not be upset with it but we all know how players are.


Myself like i said I think that risk balances out these overpowering queue systems.

So I should just, what, be glad that people aren't taking any time out of their day to interact with me when there's a point in conflict (instead opting to just kick me immediately because otherwise there may come a point of contention with the rules)?

That... doesn't strike you as the far more toxic trend of events?

_________________________

...And in what possible way does risk of your queue time being wasted, let alone due to an odd adherence to the letter of the rules over the spirit thereof, "balance out" queues? Rather, how is it necessary to penalize queues for whatever relative advantages they have?

If you've some principled disgust for matchmaking, let's not take that out on players who just want to be able to do group content through the means the game makes natural, ideally without being kicked just because people would rather not even try to talk them through points of otherwise transient conflict.

[Wavaryen]

you don't got to be glad. You just got to understand that is the price of convenience with said tools.

Be it right or wrong is not really up for debate, as both sides can make a case for the same thing. The only thing matters is what rules get enforced by the gms. Way I see it anyway.

[Shurrikhan]

People.. pro-parser people, have already indicated that they don't need a parser to see whether or not someone is underperforming, they can tell even without. This all seems to be about some strange desire to force an officially sanctioned parser on everyone whether you want it or not..

People... pro-"literacy" people, have already indicated they don't need books to learn how to do the tasks they encounter. This all seems to be about some strange desire to force officially sanctioned ink-bound paper masses on everyone whether you like it or not.

I don't mean to tease, exactly, but if a competing viewpoint is that the only thing the tool (a parser, in this case) uniquely provides is a information of threshold convenience as to be useful as a learning tool or to better contextualize what one is already seeing, why are we treating "parser" as if it were itself derogatory? Just a note, and I apologize if I've misread the tone here.

What I do care about is that I don't have to deal with it. I don't use a parser. I don't play content that requires a parser. I play my jobs competently for normal difficulty content (read: not savage level). I simply do not want to be forced to deal with a parser. If I wanted one, I would be using ACT.

Personally, I don't like playing group content with my mini-map open or chat open unless I need them. As integral as they may seemingly be in general, or certainly be when their need arises on the rare occasion, I have absolutely no use for them most of the time. To me, they're distracting. But, nicely, I don't need to see them. Unless/until there are markers set up, call-outs, or likely points of discussion following a wipe, I simply have them hidden. I can do that.

Why, in content that has no need for a parser, would the toggleable parser UI element be any different from any of the other, similarly toggleable, UI elements?

I don't ask this to harass, but rather in the vein that there is a mutual exclusive element here... if those who do want to, even if only a single time, right-click (down thrice, right once, X, left, down, X, Circle x2 on Controller) on their parser would occlude any and all affordances of real-time or post-combat conveniently compiled quantitative information to all console users or any PC users who don't want to risk ToS infringement or aren't comfortable installing addons.

I understand the concern, if held, that the inclusion of a parser could sort of "roll over" into areas beyond the UI element itself, be that through additional support or learning systems that make mention of the information from such a system or social mention (people talking about numbers). Anecdotal though it be (and virtually all evidence is until compiled through scale and methodologies that generally have little in common with actual player experience), my experience is that the latter concern need not be one. Whether in ESO, GW2, NWN, RO, B&S, Vindictus, Tera, or WoW (see the page 37), for instance — all MMOs with substantial parser use, "parser culture", and/or similar official baseline information systems — parsers have bled through beyond personal, optional use only so far as friendly competition, apprenticing (i.e. learning from those who outparse you; and if you think parsing low has ever given space for a casual jab, going sweaty in casual content opens one up plenty to teasing like "So, you gonna teach us how do that, big sis, or is it all just gear?"), and when it's actually needed (i.e., serious content with actual throughput-related walls to present progress). As for the prior, I can't imagine the small savings in immersion being worth avoiding that kind of in-game support, especially if done tastefully, that could open up more of the game to more of its players and/or eventually allow for more means of player engagement as naturally contextualized learning becomes less of a hurdle.

I do think that any concrete discussion of implementing a official parser or similar system of information must include discussions of...

1. quality — e.g., how well can it provide information that actually helps the player improve, such as giving performance information in terms that are minimally skewed by gear and ensuring that the information is surrounded by sufficient context to be of use and not skew play towards tunnel-visioned button-crunching), and
2. tasteful implementation — both in the sense of minimizing novel purely symbolic interactions (those that are more about the information itself rather than interaction with the events/content/play being described, including the hypothetical "parser fights", which I can readily imagine even though I've never seen one occur across an unhealthy amount of MMO play) and minimizing fourth-wall breaks, etc.

However, to me at least, it does seem painfully restrictive to deny an optional learning tool's — especially one with, across many an MMO, a deep history of being significant and uniquely helpful to hands-on or through-practice learners — being made greatly more convenient just to remove a more-than-likely one-time inconvenience. (And that's assuming the parser wouldn't be locked behind the likes of the Halls of Novice, the thematically-fitting Arcanists' Guild, or the like, in typical systems-roundabout XIV style, leaving you to simply avoid picking it up in the first place.)
_______________________

:: I apologize if this has come off as disrespectful to your view here. I cannot promise that I understand it entirely (though mostly just from the same general caution by which I'd be loathe to say "I understand what you're going through"), but let me say that it seems very reasonable. I've encountered my own share of overly intrusive meta-elements or content-to-social fixations in certain games, or even just programs or tasks/activities in general, and were an official parser to inevitably follow that suit, I'd want nothing to do with it. (Perhaps the chief difference here is only that I expect such will not be the case, and that I am at least willing to set criteria for success, if discussion goes more concrete.)

However, we are at a point of necessary conflict here. While I would not want an official parser that does not meet some pretty high standards of quality and tasteful implementation (above), I do believe that such is possible and therefore must try to promote at least a conditional place for informational learning tools, among which parsers are a tried and tested success even despite, imo, a distinct lack in quality across most existing versions. My expectation is that, parsers being already significantly useful, improvements in parsers' quality would only make them better and would, in direct consequence, also address many of my chief concerns regarding tasteful implementation.

[Raelsar]

Well... not going to sift through this behemoth of a thread to see where the conversation's at.
To put it as simply as possible:

No, just... no.

Parsers appeal to one subset of players only, and it's not "casual" players. It appeals to competitive players ONLY, those who are predominantly interested in some form of progression. As I've seen in other games, these sort of metrics also tend to be quite domineering and tend to overwhelm every other aspect of the game. It will eventually turn the game into a warped and perverse version of what it once was, often driving away the "casual" players as those obsessed with performance and optimization take over. You could say "casual fun" is forced out because optimization becomes an absolute and you're not allowed to goof off anymore because it's not "efficient".

Casual players don't like to measured, they just want to have fun.
Only hardcore players care about improving their measurements.

[Miracle_Diva]

Casual players don't like to measured, they just want to have fun.
Only hardcore players care about improving their measurements.

So you imply that hardcore players can't have fun because they want to perform well?
Also would you mind explaining what do you mean by *Casual players don't like to be measured, they just want to have fun.* Does this mean that they don't care if they are a burden for other 3/7/24 people?
I will repeat myself again, no one ever expects anyone to have a "perfect performance". Just be decent, even if you're a casual.
Time and time again I am disappointed that it's a sin in this game to be good, yet it's completely fine to be an absolute pepega gamer that just presses one button or none at all. Others will carry right? Don't you dare asking someone to do their job, what if they are having fun and you will ruin it? And I am in no way talking about NEW players. I couldn't care less if new players in lower level content are *bad*.