Parsers add replayability for casual players

[ZedxKayn]

So, you can definitely observe a tank in leveling content without requiring a parser.

Remind me again why you need a parser?

Times and times over the arguments of why we want parsers have been presented, you're free to skim through the pages, repeating ourselves is tiring.

[SturmChurro]

Worst part is when someone has stance and they can't take aggro. Situations like that are beyond help.

They probably don't like the look of their aoe skills, and there could be too many enemies.. we can't expect them to click through all of them!

[DPZ2]

Times and times over the arguments of why we want parsers have been presented, you're free to skim through the pages, repeating ourselves is tiring.

Not really. Time and time again, I read arguments citing 'bad players' and frustration at [level 77 tanks] that (somehow?) make parsers ok?


Here's the thing. Using parsers, official or not, is entirely up to the player. You want to use a non-official parser (and are on a PC), good on you. Nothing stopping you from utilizing tools at your disposal to do so.

You're on a PS4/PS5 you say? I've heard of this great set of internet resources that does all sorts of 'best rotations' work. Why not start with that?


You want to force a company that has already declined to incorporate an official parser in game? Your arguments had better be spot on and to-the-point, not the mish-mash of complaints and anecdotes I've been reading.

How, exactly, would having an in-game parser benefit those who you would label as a 'bad player' if they don't use it? I've never played Lords of Vermillion. It's in-game, and I don't use it. There are plenty of features in-game that players ignore. Why would this be different?

Unless, of course, you attempt to shame your so-called 'bad players'. And we all know that's the primary reason you won't get a parser.

You cannot demand a player use a parser to 'git gud' ... it's against the ToS.

You want to present a solid argument for in-game parser? Don't use a thread title like "Parsers add replayability for casual players', because that argument is patent nonsense. Don't use complaints about bad players. Don't use anecdotes involving leveling players. Lay out, in detail, who could benefit, who would not. And, for the sake of all, do not use the 'git gud' argument, or disparage a player you've run across who could definitely benefit from the use of said parser.

I don't expect to see a cogent thread title with polite people trying to make a solid argument rather than the tactics used so far for the simple reason that proponents can't keep themselves from arguing by anecdote and disparagement. The moment the term 'bad player' is written at the keyboard, the argument will be lost.

[Rinhi]

So, you can definitely observe a tank in leveling content without requiring a parser.

Remind me again why you need a parser?

because it makes it way easier? because then you'd have undeniable proof when someone is dragging several other players down? because then players like you would stop bending over backwards to defend griefers at every opportunity?

[SturmChurro]

because it makes it way easier? because then you'd have undeniable proof when someone is dragging several other players down? because then players like you would stop bending over backwards to defend griefers at every opportunity?

It is our duty as players to help each other out. If I have to spend another 70 minutes in a dungeon, to accomplish this feat - I will gladly do it, and I should expect everyone else in this community to do the same! If a player doesn't want to use AOE skills and only auto attacks, it is up to us to make the difference! Where would we be otherwise? It'd be like WoW that's what!

[Raelsar]

because it makes it way easier? because then you'd have undeniable proof when someone is dragging several other players down? because then players like you would stop bending over backwards to defend griefers at every opportunity?

How can I put this nicely?

This sort of attitude tells me one VERY clear thing -- this is the attitude and type of behaviour that indicates someone isn't the sort of player I wouldn't enjoy playing with.
Not because I want to be carried, be lazy, or anything like that... no, this just tells me that I'd be dealing with a generally unpleasant sort of person to be around.

From this perspective, a parser is more often than not just a tool to enable these attitudes and behaviours. As I said before, the potential for harm greatly outweighs the potential benefits.
I'd rather deal with (and if necessary, help out) players who are struggling or inefficient than deal with a highly effective and efficient *ahem* "unpleasant individual".

Judging from the current stance of the developers, I think they share the same perspective.
And I wouldn't be surprised if many other players share a similar viewpoint.

[SturmChurro]

Judging from the current stance of the developers, I think they share the same perspective.
And I wouldn't be surprised if many other players share a similar viewpoint.

Exactly! and thank God they (we) do! If we wanted to play WoW - we'd be playing WoW. This is FFXIV, and I think too many people are trying to bring ideas from WoW to this game! Our community has thrived for this many years due to how great it is, and it's only been gaining in popularity lately because of our community, and the developers who maintain this game - for us!

If people want to play WoW they should just play WoW, that's all I'm saying!

[linayar]

because it makes it way easier? because then you'd have undeniable proof when someone is dragging several other players down?

Easier for what? Proof of what?

There's been a discussion in this thread that people can tell who are not playing well and people can try to kick people they don't want to play with.

because then players like you would stop bending over backwards to defend griefers at every opportunity?

If you truly believe this, then you didn't understand the other side at all.

Then again, it's no wonder when you have statements like this:

If I have to spend another 70 minutes in a dungeon...

If that ever happened to any significant degree, then likely SE would nerf the "problematic" dungeon. But considering I don't see anything like that happening recently, that kind of problem is likely a rare occurrence in the overall player experience. And even within those rare occurrences, actual "griefers" would be even rarer. So anti parser is not the same thing as defending griefer.

[Dzian]

Times and times over the arguments of why we want parsers have been presented, you're free to skim through the pages, repeating ourselves is tiring.

true but most of those arguements are pretty dumb and stupid to be honest for example

Okay, what about an alphabetical rating system (A, B, C etc.) BUT, the lowest rank is A, and that A rank encompasses 60-70% of the playerbase. Above A there could be S, S+, S++ etc. depending on how specific you want the tiers.

This suggests that people want the numbers to lie to them essentially because if an A rank encompasses 70% of the player base how bad do you really have to be to get a B or even C rank.. and going the other way S+++++++.. really???? realistically such a system should put C at the 50th Percentile mark. B maybe at at the 60th. A at the 70th. and S at the 80th+ People want a metric but they want a metric that tells them there good even when thyere not. hence why the want 70% of the players to get an "A". and ifeveryones getting an Ahow do you then compare your A to someone elses A because 70% of players is a bloody huge range in terms of skill.

then you have people that want jobs to be measured differently makes sense in theory, but in practice not so great... how ould you measure ahealersperformance the amount of healingthey do? well that can vary significantly. a good party takes very little damage and thus requires very little healing. that healers gonna get a crap rank as a result..

tanks. how much damage they take and mitigate... sounds reasonable again buttt a goodparty will kill mobs prettydaman quickly so the tank will take less damage and thus mitigate less damage..there goes his grade....

What about a personal parse that ONLY shows my DPS.

again a pretty dumb idea as it indicates people have very little actual knowledge or how there dps is worked out and how much the other 3 or 7 people in your party can affect it. jsut seeinga number is useless if you dont know what it actually means. but this kind of ties in with the above. they want a number they can see getting bigger or smaller so they can think theyre doing great. even if that number is a thousand miles away from what it should be... wowi did 10k damage to that boss last time i only did 9,500 I'm so awesome... deluding themselves unaware that they should be dealing 15 or 20k but they dont want to be told that... same reason they dont want to see a B or C rank above.

Basically people just dont want the truth they want a number they can interpret anyway they so choose. which ironically is the issue with parsers in general. people just look atthe numbers and snap to a judgement call. kicking the lowest dps out of a party because the groups failing and blaming it on them instead of themselves for ballsing up mechanics.. (had a friend kicked from a diamond party for only doing 15k on bard, and we kept gettign to enrage.. the real problem wasnt the dps it was the idiots including the party lead who kept dying or messing up the flood ray)

[Quintessa]

Why are all you constantly trying to bait each other into admitting that you use it here so you can get each other banned?