We could use a Preferred/Blocked player list for DF.

[Chihaya]

There is not much simple and elegant way to do this, the logistics is just complicated especially for larger raids where they need to check for all (24?) players to make sure no one is on anyone's blist. This would make some of the match up very difficult.

This is also very discouraging to new players, if they mess up on their first time, they get blisted.

[MoraClaret]

I think SE would first have to change the game so that it checks accounts - and not singular character names - before this would even be possible. A good idea, but I don't think SE would put forth the effort.

The current system would already need a method to retrieve individual player data and character information to work. They would just have to re-write some code that handles the matchmaking system.

Even some fairly unknown games had at least the blacklisting function in their matchmaking. For example, Age of Empires Online had a matchmaking system that would prevent anyone on your Games for Windows Live blacklist from matching up with you.

I believe Fable 3 and other games using GfWL were required to do the same.

It -would- be some work to implement, but nothing out of the range of SE's coding ability.

[Astralos]

There is not much simple and elegant way to do this, the logistics is just complicated especially for larger raids where they need to check for all (24?) players to make sure no one is on anyone's blist. This would make some of the match up very difficult.

This is also very discouraging to new players, if they mess up on their first time, they get blisted.

I can't imagine that anyone except for the biggest jerks would blacklist a new player over a single mistake. That sounds like it'd actually be beneficial to both parties; the jerks would eventually have trouble finding parties if they persisted with that trigger-happy behavior, and the newer players would be free to party with more compassionate and understanding/supporting players.

[MoraClaret]

There is not much simple and elegant way to do this, the logistics is just complicated especially for larger raids where they need to check for all (24?) players to make sure no one is on anyone's blist. This would make some of the match up very difficult.

This is also very discouraging to new players, if they mess up on their first time, they get blisted.

Like I mentioned previously, it might be required to compromise and make people on your blacklist simply less likely to be matched up with you rather then not at all.

You're also kind of using the most extreme case (CT) to nay-say this idea. Even if it was only used for 4 or 8 member parties it would be beneficial.

[Noshpan]

I do like the idea. I'm not sure how it would be implemented, how it would be implemented or if it even could be implemented, but I do like the idea.

I see that someone already suggested an idea how to differentiate those from different worlds, it would also help in case you encounter those with the same names.

[chocomaid]

Not nay-saying the idea at all. You've got the mindset, kudos to you, but you are going about it the wrong way. You are completely ignoring the amount of effort it will take to develop such a system. And using CT as an example is a good way to test the idea, or even any large dungeon since it re-iterates the complexity of the whole notion. And implementing this system to only 4-8 man parties is a little bit unfair do you think? Since wanting to dodge undesirable players is more common in the larger raids, wouldn't they need this system there on a higher priority?

Instead of thinking ways to separate the community(good and the naughty), why not think of ways to converge them? To make them feel like a team. Re-work the whole mindset of being a jackass while in a party, so the overall level of being in a community increases.

[MoraClaret]

-

I am not completely ignoring the amount of effort it would take the develop such a system. Nowhere in any of my posts did I imply that it would be an easy thing to implement. Not sure where everyone is taking that from.

I find it incredible to what lengths the majority of people on these boards are unwilling to consider an idea IN GENERAL without attempting to tear it down bit by bit. Or make wild assumptions on my intent suggesting certain ideas.

I could have listed all of the required logistics for developing this system and all of the possible issues that the dev team would have to deal with in it's implementation, but I was wanting to keep the original post simple. Most people sure as hell don't read anything thoroughly as it is, if at all.

I was asking for people's thoughts on the idea IN GENERAL.

You are using CT as a way to invalidate the idea without considering it on a basic level, you are going straight to the most extreme case.

Other games have had this feature, games with much lower budgets and much smaller teams. Why is there some assumption that it would be a massive undertaking for FFXIV's dev team? That's absolute nonsense. If the issue is that it might be too much work to be worth it, that's a valid concern, but the point of suggestions is to get the idea to the dev team. They are the only ones who know for a fact if it would be too much work for them to invest the development time in or not.

As for your final point, I personally find it extremely unrealistic. There are many people in the community who are 100% self-absorbed. Every system in FFXIV either supports or does nothing to mitigate selfish behavior. And this preferred/blacklist idea was simply a suggestion to help the current state of things.

[chocomaid]

Again, a lot of people including me, said that it was a good idea. Just hard to implement, more-so on a "baby-stage" mmo like FFXIV. People are giving you other alternatives as well but you know, got ignored as well.

[SirenRanger]

How often do you actually run into the same guys twice via DF??

[MoraClaret]

Again, a lot of people including me, said that it was a good idea. Just hard to implement, more-so on a "baby-stage" mmo like FFXIV. People are giving you other alternatives as well but you know, got ignored as well.

How did I ignore people giving me other alternatives? I already said it would probably require some amount of compromise in it's implementation. And I've read through every reply and replied to those I could add something to.