Questions about your reception to Dawntrail

[Merrigan]

Also the opinion that forums are havens for negativity seems like shaky logic. Forums, without any data, should be assumed to represent similar opinions to those if you generally polled an audience. There's nothing special about users who use forums and those who don't. There's no official data that you're of a certain pre disposition or IQ level or something if you use the forums. Forums are probably an assortment of a few thousand players that would be the same if you took a few thousand Randoms from Aether sever.

They are - for a simple reason that has been documented: the internet tends to encourage negativity. It's not a question of intelligence or anything like that: it's more a question of environment, and the fact that our brains are made to react to negative stimuli in a more violent way. The ffxiv forum is not alone. I have... mixed memories of the wow forums, where legitimate criticism often went hand in hand with personal tirades that went off in all directions. Add to that the fact that some people stop coming at all because of the negativity around them - and you automatically filter out all the optimists.

Saying that a forum is representative of a population is like saying that an IRL social venue is. It won't be true, because access to that social space is determined by a set of criteria (social, economic, cultural) that establish an initial filter.

Having said that, I'm looking forward to DT. I'd like to take this opportunity (and this is more of a request for confirmation than anything else, I have a doubt): are we really going back to a narrative cycle like the one we had between ARR and Endwalker? Not a stand-alone expansion?

[Turtledeluxe]

They are - for a simple reason that has been documented: the internet tends to encourage negativity. It's not a question of intelligence or anything like that: it's more a question of environment, and the fact that our brains are made to react to negative stimuli in a more violent way. The ffxiv forum is not alone. I have... mixed memories of the wow forums, where legitimate criticism often went hand in hand with personal tirades that went off in all directions. Add to that the fact that some people stop coming at all because of the negativity around them - and you automatically filter out all the optimists.

Saying that a forum is representative of a population is like saying that an IRL social venue is. It won't be true, because access to that social space is determined by a set of criteria (social, economic, cultural) that establish an initial filter.

Having said that, I'm looking forward to DT. I'd like to take this opportunity (and this is more of a request for confirmation than anything else, I have a doubt): are we really going back to a narrative cycle like the one we had between ARR and Endwalker? Not a stand-alone expansion?

This is just you misapplying the data. We might react more to negative threads but that doesn't mean forums are inherently negative. Hope this helps!

Also it's nothing like a music venue which is limited (mostly) to a local population, variating prices, and a fixed location. XIV and the forums are global and have a subscription based economic entry point required to participate.

Like I said l, it's a common shaky logic people use basically to discredit forums it's easy to do because the game churns on and players are playing, seemingly content. But if we actually stopped and asked everyone in game, "Hey what do you think about healers and x people are saying on the forums?" you would probably get a mixed reaction similar to what you see on the forum.

So for example if forums say 50% unhappy with healers, 30% happy, 20% just don't care...there's not a real reason to assume the general game population won't skew the same way if asked.

[AnimaAnimus]

So for example if forums say 50% unhappy with healers, 30% happy, 20% just don't care...there's not a real reason to assume the general game population won't skew the same way if asked.

That's how polls are done too. They never ask every single person who can participate, that would be absurd and impossible. They ask a portion and extrapolate the data from there. We also do not have an upvote/downvote system, like sites such as reddit, twitch or youtube, which skews to the positive since ppl do not want downvotes and want views and subscribers. Therefore they tend to either say something nice or nothing at all, making it an even more unbalanced than here until in inevitably becomes an echo chamber which makes those sources even less reliable unless you are trying to have your positive biases reinforced. It also makes the forums look super negative in comparison.

The big issue that comes to my mind when someone complains about the forums being too negative is that online we are missing key elements of our communication, body language and tone. So, even when you type in something that isn't really that negative or argumentative, it can sometimes be taken that way due to the lack of those two things. And since those posters are not talking in rainbows and unicorns some ppl see something they do not agree with an automatically assume the poster is being negative. This is also why constructive criticism is sometimes just viewed as criticism. Saying the forums skew to the negative may feel that way to some users simply because they are either used to the echo chambers of reddit, youtube and twitch, or because they do not agree with what is being said and automatically make the assumption that person is being negative, when in fact they could be just stating facts as they see them, posting with good intentions about something they see as detrimental to the game or just expressing an opinion that is different. Which is a big problem with the internet in general these days.

[Turtledeluxe]

That's how polls are done too. They never ask every single person who can participate, that would be absurd and impossible. They ask a portion and extrapolate the data from there. We also do not have an upvote/downvote system, like sites such as reddit, twitch or youtube, which skews to the positive since ppl do not want downvotes and want views and subscribers. Therefore they tend to either say something nice or nothing at all, making it an even more unbalanced than here until in inevitably becomes an echo chamber which makes those sources even less reliable unless you are trying to have your positive biases justified. It also makes the forums look super negative in comparison.

The big issue that comes to my mind when someone complains about the forums being too negative is that online we are missing key elements of our communication, body language and tone. So, even when you type in something that isn't really that negative or argumentative, it can sometimes be taken that way due to the lack of those two things. And since those posters are not talking in rainbows and unicorns some ppl see something they do not agree with an automatically assume the poster is being negative. This is also why constructive criticism is sometimes just viewed as criticism. Saying the forums skew to the negative may feel that way to some users simply because they are either used to the echo chambers or reddit, youtube and twitch, or because they do not agree with what is being said and automatically make the assumption that person is being negative, when in fact they could be just stating facts as they see them, posting with good intentions about something they see as detrimental to the game or just expressing an opinion that is different. Which is a big problem with the internet in general these days.

Indeed. The healer strike comes to mind. People probably read it and think "Ah, a haven for negativity". But really it's a lot of players who simply want the game to be better. Strikes have a negative association and attract attention, sure. Negative headlines attract attention just the same. But the reactions to those negative statements can be and usually are mixed.

[Kathryn]

Indeed. The healer strike comes to mind. People probably read it and think "Ah, a haven for negativity". But really it's a lot of players who simply want the game to be better. Strikes have a negative association and attract attention, sure. Negative headlines attract attention just the same. But the reactions to those negative statements can be and usually are mixed.

While I understand the sentiment of the purpose of the thread, aa single person goes in and says they like the healing they get jumped on and called an idiot for liking easymode by like 6 other people, that thread is as toxic as it get's unless you're in 100% support of them.

[Turtledeluxe]

While I understand the sentiment of the purpose of the thread, aa single person goes in and says they like the healing they get jumped on and called an idiot for liking easymode by like 6 other people, that thread is as toxic as it get's unless you're in 100% support of them.

That's just factually not true. If you look at the first few pages there isn't a ton of disagreement, but some players did disagree and cited their reasons and even got decent likes. From what I've observed, toxicity in the thread is reactive i.e. you get what you give. If someone's immediately dismissive or insulting, that's what they get back. And that's my experience on the forum as well-- I can be dismissive and annoying but the difference is I'm self aware about it and prepared for the reactions.

And tbh there's no real reason to be upset about the thread enough to make fun of it. It's coherent, respectful, and organized. In contrast, it was hard to take the benchmark feedback seriously because so many people emotionally communicated all at once and left their actual criticisms quite unclear.

That's why feedback improved over time instead of just being "This isn't who I've known for 10 years she's totally different I'm unsubbing!!!". I don't feel like the healer strike is like that at all, and I'd argue the motivation behind it is nearly universally agreed upon.