Please add damage meters, Yoshi P.

[Ivtrix]

Just to be clear, these aren't my personal experiences. I do have players I can rely on to do content with. However, this is not about me, this is about the community at large.

Not everyone has the luxury of a group of players who you can clear content with, let alone a group of players who might all want to do the content at the same time. It is fine saying, just make your own group, however, it is not a solution that is always available, hence why PF is where you need to turn to.

Now, player growth is not mandatory, no, however, you are still expected to have a certain level for a certain piece of content. However, the game has no way of determining if you are ready for it (SSS has been notoriously horrible for this) and, unless someone gives them a reality check, they will continue to perform not at the level that the content is designed for and potentially, never improve.

I think your opinion that it is the games job to help the player to realize their toolkit and how it interacts within itself is correct, and I also think that the game does a pretty poor job. Job rotations are pretty rigid, this isnt like WoW where the playstyle changes based on tier and talents, so there really is only one correct way to play the job.

Im personally more in favor for revamping much of the older content with solo encounters that would require a little bit more strict level of optimization then to add a damage meter. The status quo of "dont ask dont tell" will be the closest I ever see the devs getting to it. You will see pushback on either solution but I think less on actually making the game better simply adding a meter.

JP still very much remembers the Koike incident, which is honestly one of the bigger reasons why I never see it coming.

IDK, I see the current status quo on a meter continuing ad finem. Not even WoW has their own built in meter, albeit they have a fairly different dynamic with 3rd party relationships. Why build one when fans can build details for free?

[Mikey_R]

I think your opinion that it is the games job to help the player to realize their toolkit and how it interacts within itself is correct, and I also think that the game does a pretty poor job. Job rotations are pretty rigid, this isnt like WoW where the playstyle changes based on tier and talents, so there really is only one correct way to play the job.

The game doesn't necessarily have to tell you how to use your toolkits (though it would be nice), however, people need to be able to take criticisms about their playstyle and be willing to listen to someone when they tell them how to improve and I would say this is the biggest hurdle.

[Bobby66]

Bobby: I will be brief.

The Arthars incident some months ago , his subsequent deserved suspension, is your answer. His behaviour that night, his harassment and PUBLIC abuse of a player is all the proof I need that YoshiPs stance is correct.

Parsers enable, and encourage, toxic abusive behaviour and attitudes.

That is my final stance and my position on the matter.



By whose standards?

Yours?

I dont think so.

He got punished for him actions, so the ToS works. Give us the tool and punish people as they abuse it. Why must this take the proactive approach instead of reactive like other forms of harassment? Also let us be fair that is his gimmick to be a toxic piece of shit to people he views as shit.

The issue is not with the underlying message being delivered to players, the issue would be the 'tone', or 'form' that this message takes on. Simply telling players that you don't think they're suitable to the party due to not performing proportionately to other members of the group is in a whole different league to telling people they're crap, that they're garbage, or taking on a condescending attitude by using some arbitrary derogatory term.

I would also argue the context of where this message is being delivered matters equally. Unless you're actively participating with the person underperforming then the comment is irrelevant and serves absolutely no purpose, most especially when the sole purpose is used thinly to dismiss rather than judge the merit, or lack thereof of the comment. Or in this case simply used as a thinly veiled attempt to be disrespectful on the forum.

In this regard, some people to an exemplwary standard show precisely why parsing within a community has a poor stigma amongst players.

Sure parsing has a negative stigma but once again that stigma stems from the people that misuse the tool not the itself. Punish the misuse not bar the tool.

For total transparency I still fall in the camp that people largely give too much weight to what some loser they will never met has to say about them over the internet. I say this as a loser that has bashed other players in the past.

[Kaurhz]

He got punished for him actions, so the ToS works. Give us the tool and punish people as they abuse it. Why must this take the proactive approach instead of reactive like other forms of harassment? Also let us be fair that is his gimmick to be a toxic piece of shit to people he views as shit.



Sure parsing has a negative stigma but once again that stigma stems from the people that misuse the tool not the itself. Punish the misuse not bar the tool.

For total transparency I still fall in the camp that people largely give too much weight to what some loser they will never met has to say about them over the internet. I say this as a loser that has bashed other players in the past.

I would be willing to agree with that, but the general premise behind the tool is that whether the tool is at fault or not, people view the tool as being a significant enabler of such behaviour, and taking this aside, I have said previously that generally speaking most people just use the tool for their own improvement, but they use it silently, and then you have a vocal minority, as exhibited in this very thread which just exacerbates the issue, and here... A loud minority will leave a much harsher reflection than a silent majority, generally. -- and for better or worse peoples' impression of the tool and the implications therein matters just as much as the tool itself, and the 'reality'.

Plus, there are numerous concerns in that whilst you can punish for harassment, which they do, and which they should, it does make it more of a sophisticated situation when the use of parsing is practically permitting public discussion around such, and in this regard, you have issues of inclusivity arise, which is a direct implication of having a native tool. There's a lot more nuance to this tool than just simple harassment, really. Like a sort of cascading effect.

For what it's worth, I do genuinely think more people would benefit than would not. But, I don't think that benefit outweighs the implications that are created.

Edit inc:

I'm at odds with this because, first and foremost unless parsing can have the same window of analysis that external websites do, then the use of such a tool will only serve to give consoles a very limited basis with which to 'interpret' their own performance. Similarly, those on PC will only continue to use a third party, if the opportunity and feature set of the third party exceeds that provided natively by Square Enix. So in this regard, I just think... What's the point? They'll either need to fully commit to this, or not at all.

On the other hand, if they could, it would be great because it would discourage the use of a website and system that uses an opt-out feature rather than an opt-in, which quite frankly is the dumbest thing humanly possible.

[Kira619]

Damage meters, such as those provided by FFLogs, can create an atmosphere of competition and toxicity within the Final Fantasy XIV community. While it is true that a small percentage of players utilize these tools, their impact can be disproportionately felt by those who do not wish to participate in this type of environment.

Instead of relying on external metrics to measure success, it is important to focus on improving one's own skills and abilities within the game. One possible way to do this besides doing raids constantly and learning your rotations, double weaving and timing the pulls, SE should/could add solo challenge dungeons specifically designed to hone these skills.

Overall, it is essential to prioritize inclusivity and enjoyment for all players, rather than catering to the desires of a select few who may be more interested in performance metrics.
Finally, you don't need Damage meters to complete any content in this game.

You pretty much summarized why we won't have DPS meters in the game incredibly well. The devs purposely decided to go a different route than WoW, and that's because they wanted the premise of the game to be different. They want this game to be enjoyed and accessible by everyone, versus WoW who pushes people towards a competitive nature. The Devs themselves have a vision, and that is FFXIV being a game that prioritizing inclusivity and enjoyment of all players skill level.

This is why the game offers you to play a duty quest on easy, or very easy mode if you failed the first time, something WoW has never done. I also believe this is largely why we have the NPC trust system. Ultimately the Devs know there will always be players of different skill levels. From kids who haven't develop the mental faculities to play at a certain level, to players with physical and/or mental disabilities, to players who just aren't that good in video games. The devs wanted to make sure that those who likely wouldn't make the cut in WoW would fully be able to enjoy this game, and I largely believe that's why the environment has been given such great reviews.

[Midareyukki]

You pretty much summarized why we won't have DPS meters in the game incredibly well. The devs purposely decided to go a different route than WoW, and that's because they wanted the premise of the game to be different. They want this game to be enjoyed and accessible by everyone, versus WoW who pushes people towards a competitive nature. The Devs themselves have a vision, and that is FFXIV being a game that prioritizing inclusivity and enjoyment of all players skill level.

And while this sounds fine on paper, it does then pose a question. One that's technically both allowed and disallowed by the terms of service and punishment guidelines.

What do you do when you're someone whose playstyle is underperforming, yet insist on remaining in a group or try to engage in high-end content where effort is more valued? Because if they kick you out and say "you're holding the group back", you can shout foul due to discrimination on playstyle, yet they can point out that there's simply a difference in playstyle.

If your answer is "Well, naturally, if it's high-end content, the devs are going to side with the group. Because the fights are designed with having a specific amount of effort, and if you don't match it, the group is in the right to not allow you to be there. No matter how uncomfortable it might make you." ... then we got a problem.

Because where else would parses be used the most? Definitely not in dungeons.
Where would you see these parses be implemented? Likely not in low-end content where skill and experience don't really matter.

So right there you'd have a contradiction. Because it's true the devs don't add this to the game for reasons already repeated, recycled and regurgitated in this and many other threads, both whether we agree with those reasons or not. But to say that this decision prioritizes inclusivity and the enjoyment for players of all skill? Are you sure? Because by design that's not what's going to happen, and under no circumstance would parses change that.

Fights aren't designed with that inclusivity in mind, and thus nor would be the implementation of official DPS meters.

[Shurrikhan]

And while this sounds fine on paper, it does then pose a question. One that's technically both allowed and disallowed by the terms of service and punishment guidelines.

What do you do when you're someone whose playstyle is underperforming, yet insist on remaining in a group or try to engage in high-end content where effort is more valued? Because if they kick you out and say "you're holding the group back", you can shout foul due to discrimination on playstyle, yet they can point out that there's simply a difference in playstyle.

Heck, they don't have to say anything. Communication is a luxury reserved for communities that aren't so armed against each other as our has been made to be.

The only thing the changes from parsers being made baseline is that underperformance goes from a subjectively-varied suspicion with a further aspect imbalance of imbalance between players (those actually performing being put under threat of spiteful witch-hunting and console-players uniquely blinded) to an objective shared known.

There's no good place or way to wield the knife the ToA has given us to use on each other regarding parsers or plugins, since no one can directly see whether anyone else is actually using them (only act on suspicions of what we imagine someone who uses a parser, plugin, etc. would do or look like -- which often isn't even based on what any of those tools do, but rather some sort of comic caricature).

Because where else would parses be used the most? Definitely not in dungeons.
Where would you see these parses be implemented? Likely not in low-end content where skill and experience don't really matter.

I'd argue even then, though, that there's no need to exclude it from any sort of content.

We use a context-sensitive view of harassment already. If someone's chewing someone else out for not popping all their CDs in a dungeon, "I'm tired/new, and it's just a dungeon" is an entirely appropriate response, and any further bugging of that player could easily be reported as harassment; it's not guaranteed, but the aggressor would know that they are pushing it and could be punished accordingly.

Moreover, especially if well made, that's a huge learning tool to strip away from players in the settings that are meant to prepare them for that later "parser-requisite" content. It makes little sense to hide someone's performance from them --given that could otherwise use it to game out or solve out fun bits of incremental improvement the whole way along-- until the final paper's rough draft is due to then tell them "Oh, you're failing, btw," leaving them only that most pressured time to then play around with it and improve as they like.

[Hoodcat]

you guys keep bringing up already answered scenarios in this post all this shit is already happened and is happening in game for years.

Low performance in a FC group, the FC handels it internally. Low in a non FC static, they are removed and replaced. Low in a PF they break up and reform blacklisting the offender with no explination,

this shits already in game and has been for years i dunno what the argument is here other than being able to tell someone they are not doing as well as they think they are doing.

if a player wants to go high end they will hit that wall and learn themselves, if the others want to be ignorant let them be ignorant, there is no escaping the meter on enrage content. I feel like the current system is fine of dont ask dont tell. People who do the content do all this stuff anyway. You are aren't going to magically stop people from being pc's of poo in normal content. They would weed themselves out, you play a diff game than them :|

[Shurrikhan]

Why are you putting up with 7 players who are not prepared for the content is the better question?

The onus is on you to curate your own experience.

Okay, so... how does one get 7 players who are not prepared for the content at hand?

Is it by creating a PuG for a Savage farm with the automated Duty Completed check and getting... 7 players all of whom were carried?

And that's supposed to be the party-starter's fault?

Or, heck, even if it's a DF for, say, Titania Normal... how the heck is the onus supposed to be on the single competent person to have just assumed no one else in a matchmade group would meet the various obvious expectations of going into a 73 trial and therefore make a PF instead where he would... what, check their logs? their achievements? require absurd ilvl?

The issue is not with the underlying message being delivered to players, the issue would be the 'tone', or 'form' that this message takes on. Simply telling players that you don't think they're suitable to the party due to not performing proportionately to other members of the group is in a whole different league to telling people they're crap, that they're garbage, or taking on a condescending attitude by using some arbitrary derogatory term.

Of course, but also...

Why would anyone need to say anything about the numbers if everyone has those same numbers? (Else we end up with the likes of "You're doing 18k." -> "And the brown floor is brown.")

The communication following shared facts would be the same as simply whatever would follow the finger-pointing and "No, I know my class perfectly!" / "Clearly not!" shenanigans we have now (all things I would think we'd rather not do / would rather skip past), leaving relevant only actionable or long-tail advice: "Hold 2nd wave of CDs; he jumps immediately," "Please dodge," "Please practice," etc.

[Mikey_R]

this shits already in game and has been for years i dunno what the argument is here other than being able to tell someone they are not doing as well as they think they are doing.

This is the reason right here. If you kick someone for no reason, they don't know why, so have no reason to change anything, however, tell them they are getting kicked because they are underperforming, the person getting kicked now knows they need to improve as a player in order to reduce the chances of being kicked again.

This is the main issue with people nowadays. They do not like to hear negative criticisms towards themselves, however, it is the negative criticisms that help you grow as a player. You now have the thing you need to improve, which means you can set a goal and work towards it. Getting kicked for no reason leaves you with nothing. You don't know why you were kicked, so it must have just been the party leader being an idiot. You then will not change as a player as you have nothing shown to you that you need to improve.