A Random Comment

[Shougun]

I'd love to see the random number generator take in account losses against probability of success, at least then you could look ever hopeful.

[whiskeybravo]

When an airplane crashes, people avoid air travel because "better safe than sorry". Yet air travel is the safest form of travel (much safer than cars) and one plane crashing doesn't change that. However, people feel safer driving.

I always found this comparison funny, as if it has nothing to do with there being millions of cars/drivers and only thousands of airplanes/pilots. Of course the chances of being in a car accident are higher xD

[Rubeus_Carcer]

The only thing I'll say about this is the HQ% on crafting is most certainly not linear. If I jump on CUL to make buttons in a blanket with 347 craftsmanship and 330 control and use basic touch, I'll accrue X quality per usage and my % increase jumps from say 3 to 15. But subsequent uses of the same ability (and quality) increase that % chance in "chunks," which I've never liked. If other systems in the game do something similar, it's a small wonder people are skeptical of the RNG gods. How do you go from 3% HQ to 15 and then to 45 on the SAME number? You don't, because that wouldn't make sense. In a way, the system does absolutely favor failing you.

[kidvideo]

I still blame atma.

[Nekodar]

Anyone that wants to "prove" that the RNG is flawed would have to test the RNG over a large number of crafts, gathers, other things, then parse the results properly before proceeding to analyze if the success rates match reality...

Having only done around 1000 gather sessions and counted number of HQ after that, I can only say that the HQ rate for gathers appear to be correct.

From crafts I've had HQ streaks at around 30% HQ rate and NQ streaks at around 70% HQ rate... Over a large number of crafts however, the listed HQ rates do appear to be correct there as well.

[Krr]

While it's reassuring to see that S-E uses basic modern standards of game RNG algorithms, telling everyone that a good algorithm is used doesn't mean jack squat if a good seeding process isn't being used, something that hasn't been acknowledged at all beyond 'the seed for each algorithm we use is different'. A seeding method that reseeds frequently but doesn't give adequate deviation between each seed is going to produce inadequate deviation by the RNG algorithm, which will crease massive bias toward a certain result.

That said, there isn't a lot of compiled evidence beyond "I observe streakiness!" Which compounds the whole problem of things. It's difficult from a client side to tell if getting the same loot drop from ST 12 times in a row is bad luck or a screwy seeding method.

[Archulak]

-snip-

You're just on that end of the spectrum(or you notice it more often), but I've definitely succeeded 10 times in a row doing 36% desynths before so the other side is out there.

[morpheus]

The problem isn't that it isn't random its that there isn't a system in place to safeguard against horrible rng luck. It's just simply not fair watching someone get 12 atmas in 4 hours while another person spends 60+ hours without one atma. I think SE just writes this off as "more than likely won't ever happen" but it happens way to often. They need a system that scales back rng over time when luck doesn't go your your way. Whether it's atma farming, hunts(logs), materia melding, or coil drops. Seems like every aspect of this game is designed around some type of RNG system which is starting to test the patience of even the most hardcore players. I really hope SE stops designing so much content that is relies heavily around RNG.

[Fawkes]

Even if it is a perfectly random system, if people are largely unhappy with it because of their "cognitive bias" then it is a bad system. People play this game, not robots (for the most part). It should be designed in a way that is not frustrating to the cognitive biased masses.

[blackbluesky]

ITT: A lot of people who know nothing about computer science commenting about computer science.