The Real Problem with Parsers

[Zorlinta]

The fact that parsers are being used now, and basically blessed by SE is very important to this argument. I feel that it enhances my overall gameplay experience, and it's unfair that console players can't get that same experience. It's one of the reasons a full party parser should just be included in-game.

Nope, it should not be implemented a full party parser but a meter instead. Also it should be placed not just for full party, but for individual meters too, and would be better if there be some kind of dps/heal/or tank certification that an NPC or GC extends for the player at certains points that allow the player run determinated duties for current job. So i mean some kind of mini-quest that helps players to meet the minimimus need required for a duty that guarantiee that player will be able to do a satisfactory job. Just have the minimun ilevel is just not enough for that.

[Almalexia]

Class and job quests could stand to be more rigorous in teaching game mechanics to players.

eg. PGL quests teach you how to GL, but it doesn't teach you how to use positionals. The difference between a properly and improperly positioned Boot/True/Snap, the very first combo, is around 35% damage--that's more than a "difference in playstyles," as the GMs would say.

You also face either waves of enemies--again, silly for PGL, whose real power comes from flanking--or a gimmicky encounter that is divorced from the class' expertise.

eg. You learn Touch of Death at lv.15, but only after completing the quest. Why not receive ToD at the beginning of the quest, and let the quest present a scenario for you to use it effectively? Or more recently: why not introduce Form Shift at the beginning of the lv.52 quest, and present you with an instanced encounter where you must preserve GL through a period of non-combat?

The game needs to confront the player about their performance before the community does. As it is now, the game dumps the tools at the feet of the player and leaves them to their own devices. It's strange, because this philosophy is at odds with Yoshida's commitment to accessibility for new players, and these early levels are when new players are most receptive to the game's concepts and mechanics.

A parser only tells us that something is broken. The fix isn't the parser, and the burden is on the devs - not the community - to repair what's broken.

[Fendred]

I think they should redesign the damage dealers to have a "burst mode" where their attacks are visibly different than their normal rotations. Then make fights about taking advantage of weaknesses in the boss's defenses. That way, if a parser is added, it is easier to tell when someone is under geared or under performing. If they are not using bursts at the right time, then there is a visible clue as to what is going on.

It could also help them add new abilities without pushing the ability bar, since they could overlap the burst attacks with the base ones. It would give each ability two modes.

[Erim-Nelhah]

Another question to the anti-parser crowd: I'm a DRK, and can do around 600 DPS with Grit up. Am I an "elitist" for expecting (decently-geared) DPS to be able to do more DPS than that, and possibly wanting to point it out to them if they're not?

--Erim Nelhah

[Clarkamite]

Another question to the anti-parser crowd: I'm a DRK, and can do around 600 DPS with Grit up. Am I an "elitist" for expecting (decently-geared) DPS to be able to do more DPS than that, and possibly wanting to point it out to them if they're not?

--Erim Nelhah

I have a feeling some people would say yes even though you're absolutely correct. As a DPS main seeing other DPS, especially BLM's, play poorly hurts my soul.

[Elazu]

Another question to the anti-parser crowd: I'm a DRK, and can do around 600 DPS with Grit up. Am I an "elitist" for expecting (decently-geared) DPS to be able to do more DPS than that, and possibly wanting to point it out to them if they're not?

--Erim Nelhah

You would definitely be considered an elitist on this forum. Anyone who expects others to at least be somewhat competent is. Because it's their 15 bucks and they are therefore entitled to waste everyone else's time.

[Whiteroom]

So really, if anyone's arguing for the sake of arguing, it's the people who obstinately just put forth arguments like "Jerks will be jerks, gimme parser" or "Getting kicked builds character, git gud, gimme parser". I, on the other hand, have actually put some effort into considering ways parsers could be added for the sake of everybody without stepping on peoples' toes.

Actually, the jerks gonna be jerks is simply stating that claiming parsers create jerks is a fallacy. The jerks are already there, being jerks, the only thing parsers bring is that they can say a number when they are being jerks.... But most people understand that much anyway.


Also, lol, you put forth effort and "considered" personal parsers. Wow. Who, that has put more than a couple minutes of thought into parsers, has not thought of personal ones.

They usually come to the correct conclusion, that they are nothing more than a half measure that is largely useless. A number with out something to compare it to, means nothing. Oh, you thought they could come to forums to find out... if they don't come to read up on proper rotations already, they aren't coming for a number that means nothing to them. Oh, they could share? Lets look at that, why would they, what do they gain. Then, as you obviously haven't considered, according to your parsers will make everyone jerkfaces logic, people who wouldn't share would be kicked as they would be deemed to be hiding bad numbers.

They also don't allow you to diagnose potential problem areas in a run.

Personal parsers are a huge half measure. So please don't claim some "I, on the other hand put deep thought into this" status.

And yes, I skip through most of your posts, you used disabled people as a defense against parsers.... come on, of course I skip through most of it after that.

[Aiselia]

I like how a question that's asked to the anti-parser crowd has only been responded to by people who aren't anti-parser making up answers for the anti-parser crowd.

Strawmen are a good way to practice your rotations, but a bad way to make a point.

Also, lol, you put forth effort and "considered" personal parsers.

Which is more effort than most pro-parser arguments who demand all or nothing.

A number with out something to compare it to, means nothing.

A number without something proper to compare it to means nothing. If I don't have 2 BRDs in my run when I'm running a BRD, I don't know how much damage I should be doing as a BRD. I can see the damage a DRG is doing, but they do different damage.

if they don't come to read up on proper rotations already, they aren't coming for a number that means nothing to them.

If they don't care enough to find out if they're doing good damage compared to the CORRECT class, why would they care what they're doing compared to the rest of their group anyways?

Lets look at that, why would they, what do they gain.

Group wipes, DPS was too low, people ask for parses to see who could pick up their socks. They gain tips if they're willing to listen.

your parsers will make everyone jerkfaces logic

Which I've never said.

They also don't allow you to diagnose potential problem areas in a run.

How does a party-wide parser allow you to do this that a personal parser wouldn't if they show the same information except not to everybody?

Personal parsers are a huge half measure.

Which you should be happy with if that's where they want to start.

So please don't claim some "I, on the other hand put deep thought into this" status.

I didn't say I put deep thought into it. I said I put some effort into it, unlike the majority of pro-parsers. Like you. What have you considered as a way to get SE to add parsers in?

you used disabled people as a defense against parsers

No I didn't. That would be extremely difficult since I've never made an argument against parsers. I've voiced the common argument against parsers which is apparently the reasoning for SE not adding them and how people here either fail to even attempt to disprove it or outright prove it to be a fair fear.

Disabled people were a side point about whether everybody can objectively put out the same numbers even with equal gear and whether everybody should be held to the same standard with equal gear regardless of any other factors.

So yeah, overall, your problem appears to be that you completely made up my argument and are trying to disprove some things I never said. You should fix that.

[Cynfael]

Strawmen are a good way to practice your rotations, but a bad way to make a point.

You get points for a clever turn of phrase, but you really can't expect many intelligent anti-parser arguments. This isn't necessarily because people are stupid, but I think that a few points are relevant:


1. Many players who might object to parsers probably don't even frequent the forums. Of those players, I bet that a good portion aren't even currently aware of the existence of parsers.

2. There aren't many arguments against the inclusion of some form of official parsing that haven't been presented many times before and been, in most cases, soundly rebutted. At best we get nebulous arguments that claim that official parsing will contribute negatively to the culture of the game; at worst we get nonsense arguments about parsers turning people anti-social, many of which pretend that parsers aren't already in use.

3. The fact that parsers are in use goes a long way to dispel any notion of disadvantaged (or just plain bad) people being excluded from content any more than they already are.

4. Some players looking for a form of official parser want it because they play on a console so that they can enjoy the same kind of metric feedback that PC players already do.

[Clarkamite]

Snip

I think, generally, offering up a personal parser as a solution is seen as sort of a compromise. Personally as a console player, I'd much rather have a parser that shows me everything like ACT does for PC players, but rather than asking for one like that I'd be fine asking for a personal one. It would show me what I need to see and the people who are afraid of parsers wouldn't really have a good argument to not include one.

I'll still be able to research what my numbers should be at on the forums and reddit and I'll still be able to compare numbers in my static group. True some people won't know what their number means, but those are the same people that couldn't care less (or are against having one) regardless.

I think SE would be more inclined to include a personal parser before one that operates like ACT does. I could be way off but I feel like they wouldn't really want to stir the pot on this issue. It's already really sensitive for some people as it is. Giving everyone the option of having an official personal parser is a good compromise. The people doing serious content as a group will be able to work on what they need to and compare numbers and see where issues might be, console players will be able to make minor tweaks and try out new rotations and CD usage without having to ask after literally every run, "Ok how was I that time? Where did I peak? What about this phase?" and people against parsing could all just not turn theirs on.

You get points for a clever turn of phrase, but you really can't expect many intelligent anti-parser arguments. This isn't necessarily because people are stupid, but I think that a few points are relevant:


1. Many players who might object to parsers probably don't even frequent the forums. Of those players, I bet that a good portion aren't even currently aware of the existence of parsers.

2. There aren't many arguments against the inclusion of some form of official parsing that haven't been presented many times before and been, in most cases, soundly rebutted. At best we get nebulous arguments that claim that official parsing will contribute negatively to the culture of the game; at worst we get nonsense arguments about parsers turning people anti-social, many of which pretend that parsers aren't already in use.

3. The fact that parsers are in use goes a long way to dispel any notion of disadvantaged (or just plain bad) people being excluded from content any more than they already are.

4. Some players looking for a form of official parser want it because they play on a console so that they can enjoy the same kind of metric feedback that PC players already do.

^this exactly.

My big issue with people against having an official parser is they generally don't realize how useful of a tool it would be. I often see them saying how every serious group will have a person with a parser in the group already so having an official one wouldn't change anything so the people for one should just keep quiet. But there's more to it then just knowing your number at the end of a clear. I can't ask my raid members to keep track of my numbers and different points of the fight just to see where I begin to dip. I can't ask them to watch me and only me to see where my numbers change and how my cool down usage changes things.

That type of knowledge only comes from having one yourself and being able to watch it. Sure, you don't care to do that but why can't I? My only option right now would be to buy a ridiculously priced setup of a PC, purchase a new license of the game for a PC, just so I could download an add-on that isn't even officially sanctioned to be able to watch my numbers. I'm dedicated to my craft, but I'm not willing to drop that amount of money and time on something like that.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying I would be forced into buying the absolute best setup of PC. I'm just saying that dropping even a thousand on a setup for literally one game wouldn't be worth it in the long run. I'd rather take a vacation somewhere with my girlfriend, then spend a grand on a PC.