Zepla: Endwalker is the Worst FFXIV Expansion I have played

[Renathras]

The person literally said...

This is a problem I think you have - you interpret something one way, decide/think that's the ONLY way to interpret it, introduce negative stuff not in the original (the OP didn't say anything resembling "too bad so sad"), and then when people explain to you there are other interpretations or even if the original poster points out to you that wasn't what they said or meant, you insist it is still the only way to interpret it and must be what they meant, even if they outright tell you it wasn't.

For example, my interpretation of:

"backlog of content that new players can basically never catch up in side content[/QUOTE]

Veteran players have gone through a lot of their backlog, but a new player, there is so much content in the game already, even a trickle addition would be something one would be hard pressed to catch up to.

That's an entirely valid interpretation of that statement. Imagine if you were starting the game TODAY. First ever time you logged in. Think about just how much MSQ you have to go through if you aren't a cutscene skipper. Now think about all the optional dungeons. Optional raids. Optional PvP. Tens of thousands of achievements, hundreds for any one kind of content. All of ARR, HW, Eureka, and Bozja relics. All the sidequests. All the side-stories. All the Jobs to level. All the stuff to unlock and collect from mounts to minions to emotes to BLU spells.

Think about how much content if you were just going to 25% the game. That's a LOT.

Note that it says literally nothing about veterans - nor does it berate them as "too bad so sad". That was entirely an injection of your own mind.

Your way is not the only way to interpret it, "literally" or otherwise. The statement was not "new people can't catch up on side content. Grinding is bad". "Especially when there's such a backlog of content that new players can basically never catch up in side content, having the new side content no require you to spend hours a day grinding to cap this or grind out completions of this fate over and over is a net positive." does not actually make that statement anywhere. It says not grinding is a net positive, but makes no statement that grind is "bad". "But that's the ONLY way to interpre-" no, it's not. There are literally THREE other ways to interpret that outright; grinding is bad, grinding is neutral, grinding is good but not as good.

Your last line is you trying to deflect from being incorrect AND you trying to derail the thread with more personal attacks, so I'm not going to entertain it. (I do think it's funny you just indicted the very thing you do and don't realize it). I'll just say, again, that no, it's not "the only way you can interpret that post".

You need to stop doing this thing where you get stuck on YOUR interpretation and insist not only is it true, but that it's the only one, even after the OP themselves tells you it was not what they were saying.

[Supersnow845]

snip

Taking the first half of the point then stopping isn’t an interpretation, think of the wider point the person is making

1) new people will never catch up (and valid statement even though I think the volume of content the majority of new people will genuinely interact with is overblown)
2) grinding is in general bad
3) this was in a thread mostly being populated by older veterans stating their isn’t enough content in the game

You basically just responded to 1 and said “yep 1 is true”, but if 1 is true and used with 2 and 3 what other meaning are you basically able to draw from this other than “what vets want really doesn’t matter because there is enough content in the game”, come on this is basic context, the whole point of writing is you don’t have say every single word that that you mean, you can’t come up with a way that poster saying 1 and 2 in the context of 3 means she is totally pro adding more content for veterans, her point is totally clear, the OP never even actually refuted my point that her statement basically means she doesn’t care about vets all she said was the way I wrote her statement back to her wasn’t “exactly what she said”

Seriously do we all have to type like 5 year olds to understand context, arguing on semantics of how I quoted a person isn’t saying the way I interpreted their point is wrong we are basically at the point of someone saying “the sky is green” another person saying “it’s actually blue” then a third person coming in and saying “acshooly they didn’t say the sky WASNT blue they said the sky was green”