The Real Problem with Parsers

[Aiselia]

Well, here's one thing that's a problem, Aiselia.

You're saying you're pro-parser, but most of your posts involves how it shouldn't be in the game. Don't you believe that's even the slightest contradictionary?

I'm pro-parser. I'm anti-jerk.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be in the game, period. I'm saying they shouldn't be in the game if people aren't mature enough to handle them.

So no, it's not contradictory if you consider my entire stance rather than condensing it into the black and white "pro-" and "anti-" crowd.

Your whole stance is that it will be abused by jerks.

You should stop trying to tell me what my stance is. At no time have you ever come close to being accurate as to what my stance is.

And hey, unsurprisingly, I went over THIS too, with a several-post back and forth about scale of effect being important, as well as expectations from the contrary. Sure, not being able to kick during loot rolls could be abused by people wanting to AFK. But being able to kick during loot rolls can be abused by people who don't want to risk someone else winning "their" loot. So which is expected to be the bigger problem? The one where someone who was helping with a fight gets cheated out of a reward, or the one where someone who isn't helping with fights get carried? But let's face it, if you're still getting through the fights without that person that's AFKing, you don't need them, and if you're not, well, kick them after the wipe, because the loot will have likely run out of time by then.

[CGMidlander]

I'm pro-parser. I'm anti-jerk.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be in the game, period. I'm saying they shouldn't be in the game if people aren't mature enough to handle them.

Lmao
Do you even internet?

[Whiteroom]

I'm pro-parser. I'm anti-jerk.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be in the game, period. I'm saying they shouldn't be in the game if people aren't mature enough to handle them.

So no, it's not contradictory if you consider my entire stance rather than condensing it into the black and white "pro-" and "anti-"

Which given the number of players in game, is a fairly black and white comment in itself... everything will cause greifing in the game, you just have to weigh what is an acceptable amount compared the the benefits the addition brings. The whole thing holding up anyone from taking your point too seriously is that you refuse to give even a vague indication of what that acceptable amount is.

[Aiselia]

The whole thing holding up anyone from taking your point too seriously is that you refuse to give even a vague indication of what that acceptable amount is.

No, I'm pretty sure the whole thing holding up anyone from taking my point too seriously is that they refuse to actually read what my points are, and then lump me in with their perceived notion of the anti-parser crowd. What I think is an acceptable amount of harassment is irrelevant because that amount is subjective.

But if you insist, it's zero. No amount of harassment is or should be acceptable. If you just accept it happening because "people can be jerks", you're part of the problem.

First they came for the low DPS, and I did not speak out because I did not have low DPS.
Then they came for the sub-optimally geared, and I did not speak out, because I used BiS.
Then they came for the non-potion-drinkers, and I did not speak out, because I used HQ Draconians.
Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.

However, since I've already stated (repeatedly) that personal parsers give all the objective benefits of a party parser while still avoiding people being able to harass others over their DPS because they still shouldn't be able to see it as well as sidestepping potential objective detriments that a party-parser would bring (PS3 limits, for example), and still nobody has managed to state an objective benefit of having a party parser over a personal parser, what I think is or isn't acceptable is irrelevant, because I don't support having party parsers as much as I support having personal parsers with optional sharing.

Exactly who are you to judge whether the community is mature enough?

I'm someone who can read this thread and notices the people who aren't even acting mature in discussions ABOUT parsers, not even USING them. It's hard to consider the community to be mature enough when people start insulting others over their low DPS without even having grouped with them.

If the community isn't going to be a jerk to you about it, why would it bother you?

Because I'm not egocentric enough to think that because something won't affect me, it's okay to ignore it, I guess.

[Gorlioliolio]

If you are pro-parser can you just accept the fact that people will be jerks regardless?

There are people in this game that on purpose make 7/8 or 23/24 man groups just to mess with the 1 person that isn't in their FC. While these people should be suspended or banned or whatever should the developers stop allowing pre-made groups because there is the potential for this kind of abuse? Even though the vast majority of 7/8 pre-mades are just because they couldn't find a last person and said screw it let's just DF someone?

Or are you going to argue like you have countless times before that a perfectly good analogy has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

I will pre-emptively show the similarities for you

Devs make tool, small amount of people are a-holes with tool. Devs ban a-holes. Tool helps everyone else.

Replace tool with either parsers or DF you get the same result.

state an objective benefit of having a party parser over a personal parser

Other people can't help you if they can't tell what you are doing wrong, and some people are unwilling to help themselves.

[Malevicton]

Well, here's one thing that's a problem, Aiselia.

You're saying you're pro-parser, but most of your posts involves how it shouldn't be in the game. Don't you believe that's even the slightest contradictionary?

no y'see, he's just saying that it shouldn't be implemented in a way that's bad. Which is totally not vague. And while there's no dev quote supporting anything he's said, they still might support it if asked; we can't prove that they wouldn't.

Oh and he's taking the wild position of being a jerk is a bad thing. Except that's not really his stance, he never explicitly said that, go find in his posts where he said that, he's explained his stance so many times we just don't get it, STOP MISCHARACTERIZING HIS NON-VAGUE ARGUMENTS.

[Whiteroom]

Because they were two different arguments. One argument was from the perceived SE position, and one is from my own. Whatever SE thinks about parsers doesn't change the fact that I agree they're useful. You're spending an awfully long time fighting with someone who wants them in the game too (provided people don't abuse them). In fact, if SE really doesn't hold the fear that jerks will use it to be jerkier, that's better for me.

Not surprisingly, this has already been covered ad nauseam.


Depends on the person.

Most people call them "internet browsers".

Actually it does matter. And that was a very poor example you provided. Your whole stance is that it will be abused by jerks. While almost every everything in game is abused. Compairing guns to pens as killing instraments is not the same at all as someone being a jerk over parser numbers vs using emotes to simulate molesting other players vs not rolling on loot in 24 man content so you can afk the run.

So if your criteria for adding a feature is only if it "doesn't create jerks" (still annoyingly vague, so, I'm gonna go with "is it likely to be abused") then you probably can't add very much to the game.

[Lyrica_Ashtine]

Well, let's start with the history of statements you made that caught my eye up till now.

A simulation you wrote according to you:

Side A: WE NEED PARSERS SO WE CAN KICK PEOPLE FOR BEING BAD AND WASTING FIVE MORE MINUTES OF MY TIME
Side B: But that's exactly the kind of treatment SE wants to avoid
Side A: THEY SHOULD GET OVER IT GIVE US PARSERS SO WE CAN KICK PEOPLE FOR BEING BAD
Side B: But you're just proving SE right by saying that
Side A: I DON'T CARE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T AFFECT ME IN ANY NEGATIVE WAY AND ANYONE IT DOES IS WEAK GIMME PARSERS
Side B: But -
Side A: PARSERS DON'T MAKE PEOPLE JERKS, JERKS MAKE PEOPLE JERKS WE WILL NOT BE JERKS
Side B: But you're already acting like -
Side A: SEE? PEOPLE ARE JERKS ALREADY GIVE PARSERS
Side B: But that's the kind of people that shouldn't get -
Side A: LOL UR JUST SCARED UR DPS IS CRAP SO U WILL BE KICKED YOU TERRIBAD
Side B: I'm a tank.

Meanwhile in another post:

you seem to believe would become rampant.

I never said that.

I do believe your response to StouterTaru there contradicts with what you mentioned before. Unless, of course, you're insisting that really is what Square-Enix is thinking. But you've also stepped away from this standpoint or any statements being valid concerning Square-Enix.

While on the topic of Square Enix:

I'm not. I'm stating SE's viewpoint and why the current arguments don't do anything to defeat that viewpoint, but rather the opposite. The more people who make personal attacks while talking about parsers and say they need them to kick people who might waste 10 minutes of their precious time, the more reason SE has to expect the community can't handle them.

And if SE doesn't want to put in parsers because of that fear, seeing even one person say things like that makes it that much harder to justify adding parsers.

In particular this gem:

People like me? You mean people like me who want a personal parser so people can improve but don't see how the subjective benefits of a party parser objectively outweigh what SE expects will happen?

I don't have to claim that. The pro-parser side already proves it by saying that they'd totally take people to task over low DPS even in content that doesn't have DPS checks at all. Regardless, that's not my claim. That's SE's fear. It's irrelevant if I make that claim because you still have to prove SE wrong. If I stayed out of this thread completely? Yeah, SE would still think the same thing.

Who says it's unneeded? Remember, SE already has the stance that they don't want people to turn into mouthy jerks if they let them talk about others' DPS. If you want to try to help get parsers, you've got to somehow convince them that they're wrong. Which means dispute is absolutely needed. I'd also put forward that it's a litmus test for their own fears. If people can't even handle talking ABOUT parsers without resorting to personal attacks, why should SE expect that they can handle USING parsers without personal attacks?

Coming from people who completely admit that they'll be the people that SE doesn't want?

Which a personal parser can completely do, which I've already said repeatedly I'm absolutely fine with and is a great middle ground for SE because it lets people see their DPS to improve but prevents people from seeing others' DPS to be the elitists SE doesn't want them to be.

Prove it. SE thinks that the number is high enough to warrant not allowing it, so they're the ones you have to convince. Prove it.

Finally:

I'm not clutching at anything. I already said that what their stance is is irrelevant to my own position so I don't really care.

So with all the Square-Enix statements stripped away, that leaves us with your latest post:

I'm pro-parser. I'm anti-jerk.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be in the game, period. I'm saying they shouldn't be in the game if people aren't mature enough to handle them.

So no, it's not contradictory if you consider my entire stance rather than condensing it into the black and white "pro-" and "anti-" crowd

Exactly who are you to judge whether the community is mature enough? You're currently stuck in the limbo of wishes and fearful. If you really are pro-parser as you say, why are you so afraid of it being implemented? If the community isn't going to be a jerk to you about it, why would it bother you? Because this applies not only to you, but for a good chunk of the player base. There are to extreme ends; People who play terrible and those who achieve the maximum possible. But would either be immature according to you? If so, do elaborate in an objective manner.

The common argument (as by previous posts in this topic) would be "I play like I want" or "I'm paying for this game". This applies for others too; if you're choosing how to play, others choose who to play with. Regardless of the parser being present or absent, this will always be the case. So this brings me back to the first post I made in this topic:

You can't blame the tool for a player's behaviour. That's on the same level as blaming a bicycle while cyclists are ignoring traffic rules.

I haven't bothered reading through 38 pages worth of yes-no-yes-no arguments, so I'll drop my 2 cents here: Stop looking at a possible witch hunt that may or may not be initiated by a selective group of people - Hooligans among football fans or literal medieval witch hunting. A parser tool could be useful for those who want to improve their damage output and get out of the so called "scrub zone". If such tools did not exist, no one would have created these "optimal DPS rotation guides" that's all over the place. Prime example being the dragoon topic here. Sure, you can create a rotation based on just theory, but this would create questions as why the rotation in question is "the best" and people start pulling out their spreadsheet programs based on average numbers they put out they see on screen. You could say they're manually "parsing". Such tools would just make it easier and help those improve for those who want to improve. Not only that, if said tools are presented on a silver platter, it may even motivate players to improve more. It takes far less effort and time than using spreadsheets, after all. For those who do not want to improve should not be surprised if they can't beat current- or last patch content till gear makes it completely obsolete. Nor should they be surprised if they get kicked out from parties for being the main cause for failing DPS checks for certain encounters. Which can be argued with what the OP started with what can be roughly translated into "I play like how I want to play". Such comments are double edged. If you choose how you want to play, then the same applies to others and who they decide to play with.

On that note: Damn cyclists are still ignoring traffic rules

[Lyrica_Ashtine]

However, since I've already stated (repeatedly) that personal parsers give all the objective benefits of a party parser while still avoiding people being able to harass others over their DPS because they still shouldn't be able to see it as well as sidestepping potential objective detriments that a party-parser would bring (PS3 limits, for example), and still nobody has managed to state an objective benefit of having a party parser over a personal parser, what I think is or isn't acceptable is irrelevant, because I don't support having party parsers as much as I support having personal parsers with optional sharing.

Since you've brought this up again, here is what I asked you on page 40 (39? 41? not sure)

Some guy who posted before you made the exact opposite of it. So by the statement of "the kind of treatment SE wants to avoid", you could make the same claim about the contrary.

So here's a situation where a parser may or may not come in handy:
There's a DPS check mechanic for a certain encounter, your party keeps wiping on it. Why, who and/or how?

I could have answered the objective benefit for you if you actually answered that, but someone else did it for you. But you didn't pay any attention to it from the looks of it.

What are the objective benefits? Achieving the common goal for the majority of the group. DPS checks are the main causes for failures when every one performs their role up to par. Meaning; no deaths, no agro loss, mechanics handled properly. Now what if the DPS checks aren't met and there's this one person doing less than the tanks when it comes to damage? There are some options here:
1) Continue and keep failing, meaning you'd waste time for the entire party
2) Kick the weakest link and take your chances on getting someone who can deal some proper damage
3) Disband the group completely, even if 7 out of 8 actually has a standing chance of clearing the encounter

If you can't comprehend the situation: You got 6 sandwiches, 7 people to feed. 1 of them doesn't work while the remaining 6 work their asses off for a common goal. Who does not get a sandwich?

This does not only apply to damage. Healing and tank cooldown uses apply. You got tanks who claim they're using cooldowns, but not till they're dead. You got healers who claim they're doing their best, but have the healing output of a level 30 white mage. It helps entire groups identify problems within a group. Yes, there'll be victems when this happens, but rather than looking at the negative, look at the positive. If you do get removed from a group because you're under performing, make use of that parser and/or reach out to others for advice and ask what their damage output is (for DPS cases). If someone's just going to throw a tantrum because they got kicked and do not admit they're doing poorly even if numbers state otherwise. You'd be catering to these particular kind of jerks. Either way, even if you're "anti-jerk", you'll never win any argument as the contrary of what your statements are that supports your stance is also true.

As for this:

I'm someone who can read this thread and notices the people who aren't even acting mature in discussions ABOUT parsers, not even USING them. It's hard to consider the community to be mature enough when people start insulting others over their low DPS without even having grouped with them.

So you've experienced a certain behaviour. Out of how many posts would this be? If the posters you witness where people are not being mature is a mere 0,1%, does that outweigh the remaining 99,9%? Does the remaining 99,9% have to cater to the 0,1% that's being immature? Or whatever number you can think of. However, you made a statement before not to lump you together with the anti-parser group. Why are you lumping entire communities to the jerk-group?

[Aiselia]

What are the objective benefits?

Did you miss the "optional sharing" part at the end? Meaning people have the choice whether or not others see it? Meaning if you wipe purely because of a DPS check, asking for shares of parses would cover that?

Or to respond to the tank/healers, if the tank is dropping like a rock, ask for their share for cooldown uses, or if the tank is doing fine but not getting heals, ask for the healing share.

If somebody refuses to share, it suggests that they recognize that they may have issues but will refuse to take your help into consideration because they won't help you help them. That saves you time talking to a wall. And, I mean, if three out of four DPS share and they're all fine, and the fourth refuses to share, it's a pretty safe bet where the problem lies. If they're capable of recognizing that they're underperforming and that they're embarrassed to share because of that, then a stranger telling them they're bad isn't going to do anything more helpful.

Why are you lumping entire communities to the jerk-group?

I'm not. I've never said that the entire pro-parser side is represented by those people. I have more respect for Viridiana than I have for many people on both sides of the fence, honestly.

But their position is that people shouldn't be bringing them up because it's 3rd party software, not because bringing up dps is just inherently bad. Harassing people would still be against ToS.

Yes, and if they put in a personal parser and people use third-party parsers to see the rest of their group, it'd still be third-party software. What's your point?

There are many times where it's helpful to know what you're group is up to.

Which a personal parser with optional sharing can accomplish, especially with the other person's suggestion that you could optionally make it public.