What's the point with that quite lackluster story in Endwalker?

[Theodric]

From what I've seen, some people are very choosy when it comes to declaring the weight of what a 'minority opinion' actually is. Nor do I think there is any particular reliable measure of it in a community notorious for shouting down and sabotaging opposing opinions.

It's a lot like how the social media sphere is very loud and very active but often finds itself completely out of alignment with the views of regular people who have more important things to worry about than whatever social media is whipping itself up into a frenzy over on any given day.

Furthermore, Garlemald has a decent amount of fans. It just so happens that any time it is brought up those who dislike it feel compelled to ignore that personal tastes differ and they have to go off on a tangent each and every time it is mentioned even in passing. As such, all but the most stubborn of fans ceased to bother talking about it in public.

Something which - up until Shadowbringers - applied to the Ascians as well. Which ties rather well into this thread's purpose. By existing and remaining active more people emerge with the confidence to weigh in with their own thoughts and feedback.

Either way, I don't care much about 'managing expectations'. I'm putting my thoughts out there in the hope that they're taken on board. If not? So be it - there's other games to play if 6.2 does not show an improvement.

Some of us have been here before. World of Warcraft had a lot of players who insisted that any criticism of the direction of the story or other elements of the game came from a 'minority'. The result was that it went from having ten million active players at its height to fading into relative obscurity.

[CrownySuccubus]

Furthermore, Garlemald has a decent amount of fans. It just so happens that any time it is brought up those who dislike it feel compelled to ignore that personal tastes differ and they have to go off on a tangent each and every time it is mentioned even in passing. As such, all but the most stubborn of fans ceased to bother talking about it in public.

To be fair, along with G'raha Tia, you mention Garlemald "in passing" a lot. It's often one of the first things you mention in a thread, so there's no surprise that people respond to it.

[KizuyaKatogami]

Uh, no? The actual problem is that the argument relied on those famous Weasel Words "many people" [dislike G'raha Tia], which is irrelevant given the fan-favorite status of the character. The way it seems intended, as Brinne said above, is "lots of people agree with me, so I must be correct on some level."

The thing is though, is that this is the argument a lot of people use to show that more people are dissatisfied with EW than there seems to be. So im just curious why its okay(not saying you just in general) to say it under those circumstances, but then when it comes to Graha its used as a way to denote the criticism.

[Theodric]

To be fair, along with G'raha Tia, you mention Garlemald "in passing" a lot. It's often one of the first things you mention in a thread, so there's no surprise that people respond to it.

I post about a great many things. I did just win a bet with a friend in regards to stating that, once again, a long post of mine would be trimmed down in order for a certain someone to focus almost exclusively on the mention of Garlemald, though.

As an aside, here's something else I talk about a lot - cats:

https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...Coon-minion%21

[CrownySuccubus]

The thing is though, is that this is the argument a lot of people use to show that more people are dissatisfied with EW than there seems to be. So im just curious why its okay(not saying you just in general) to say it under those circumstances, but then when it comes to Graha its used as a way to denote the criticism.

It's not okay, though. As myself, Brinne and tokinokanatae (edit) just said, it's not a particularly strong argument regardless of whether you're criticizing the game itself or G'raha in particular.

I post about a great many things. I did just win a bet with a friend in regards to stating that, once again, a long post of mine would be trimmed down in order for a certain someone to focus almost exclusively on the mention of Garlemald, though.

Send them my way so I can win my own bet the next time G'raha, Garlemald, or burgers are brought up. Oh and democracy.

Right but the thing is i’ve seen those same types of arguments said in here occasionally by those posters and many people in here in general. Which is why i bring up it seems the case is its okay to bring it up for x argument but not y.

Okay? Some guys said some things somewhere at some time, I guess. Not sure how we're supposed to comment on that.

[KizuyaKatogami]

It's not okay, though. As myself, Brinne and Midareyukki just said, it's not a particularly strong argument regardless of whether you're criticizing the game itself or G'raha in particular.

Right but the thing is i’ve seen those same types of arguments said in here occasionally by those posters and many people in here in general. Which is why i bring up it seems the case is its okay to bring it up for x argument but not y.

[Brinne]

Right but the thing is i’ve seen those same types of arguments said in here occasionally by those posters and many people in here in general. Which is why i bring up it seems the case is its okay to bring it up for x argument but not y.

Please feel free to call me out if you catch me doing this! I am also human and sometimes cranky and don't fully think out what I write on the fly!

[redheadturk]

Because there was no reason for you make such a statement other than as an oblique attempt undermine the argument, which I think you know.

I'm baffled as to why anyone in this thread would continue to try to do this when the very reason this thread exists, and why we're here, is to refute the notion that popularity or majority mindsets are automatically correct, or that seemingly minority opinions are unequivocally wrong for being just that.

I don't even think we are the minority. I think that we are the majority [as is demonstrated by Yoshi having to explain himself in a special live letter] but even as a majority the moment we step into the safe spaces of those who like the game we get downvote nuked into oblivion.

[KizuyaKatogami]

Okay? Some guys said some things somewhere at some time, I guess. Not sure how we're supposed to comment on that.

This coming from the person who linked someone else’s old posts?

[CrownySuccubus]

This coming from the person who linked someone else’s old posts?

????? Huh?! I don't think you understand my point.

You aren't telling us who said what, when they said it, where they said it, or in what context, so there's no way for anyone else to comment on it beyond a vague response of "Okay, sure".

The entire point of linking to old posts is to specifically show who said what, and in what context. Which is essentially the same purpose as quote tags. So that people know what you're talking about.

If you need further demonstration on why it matters, from now on, you could try replying to specific posts in this thread without using any quotes and just the basic "Reply" button. It will become much easier for people to get completely lost.