Would you like an in-game parser?

[LyraKuroneko]

People discriminate on item level all the time in Party Finder, which is a less accurate way to accomplish the same thing: making sure you have enough DPS to beat the enrage. I always chuckle when I see a minimum 330 Lakshmi.

They sure are funny. On this case though, they won't be a pain on your party ^^

[Zeonsilt]

I always chuckle when I see a minimum 330 Lakshmi.

Maybe they want some speedruns/faster clear time. ilvl330 requirement is already pretty low, it's not 340.
If people want things to die faster, they put higher ilvl requirement for "x" duty.

[Tridus]

Maybe they want some speedruns/faster clear time. ilvl330 requirement is already pretty low, it's not 340.
If people want things to die faster, they put higher ilvl requirement for "x" duty.

330 is pretty high for something that drops 320 gear, though.

The main reason I brought it up is for what you said: they're doing it because they want higher DPS. It's simply a less accurate way of doing that than being able to measure actual DPS is, so it winds up cutting off someone in 325 who has mastered their rotation but allows someone in 330 who hasn't. I'm having a hard time understanding why the anti-parser crowd considers that *better*.

[Zeonsilt]

330 is pretty high for something that drops 320 gear, though.

Honestly, at this point most people can easily collect full 330 Creation gear.
I haven't played for 4 months(since mid-august,came back like a week ago) and my BRD/MCH is at ilvl 336 from that time.
TL;DR ilvl 330 is "low" for your "main" class.
Plus there Ivalice, one free ilvl330 + one 340 upgrade every week.

It's simply a less accurate way of doing that than being able to measure actual DPS is, so it winds up cutting off someone in 325 who has mastered their rotation but allows someone in 330 who hasn't. I'm having a hard time understanding why the anti-parser crowd considers that *better*.

This, actually, is not parser-related and exist because there's "no official parser".
People like to play it safe, so they put a high ilvl requirement, so that they'l get mostly people, who "main" that class. Because if you "main" X class, you should be far higher in ilvl, than 330, even if you just collect Creation gear + Ivalice + those upgrades to 340. (aka doing zero Savages)

p.s. I also got 4-5 340 upgrades items from Hunts. Forgot about those.

[HyoMinPark]

Maybe they want some speedruns/faster clear time. ilvl330 requirement is already pretty low, it's not 340.
If people want things to die faster, they put higher ilvl requirement for "x" duty.

Well, for the i340, unless you have cleared V3S, you can’t be full i340, because your weapon will either be the i330 Lost Allagan or the i335 Shinryu weapon (that is, until they allow the Rabanastre coin to be traded in for the Roborant which will probably happen in the patch they’re doing this coming Tuesday). If people are putting up Susano parties with a minimum requirement of i340, they’re dumb. I’m sorry, not going to sugarcoat that.

Regardless, Tridus was just using it to show that discrimination already occurs in this game, and we don’t have a sanctioned parser. She was saying she can’t understand why anti-parser people think it’s okay for people to use PF for discrimination/why the anti-parser crowd conveniently ignore that kind of discrimination, but then get uppity about parsers and discrimination. Discrimination happens regardless.

All that being said, I’ve seen people in full 320 do a far better job than someone in 340 DPS-wise, so the ilevel requirement for “better DPS” or for “things to die faster” isn’t exactly going to give people what they want when they set ilvls so high. Though, I do get amused when I see Shinryu learning parties for ilvl 330 or higher. Learning parties, mind you. Not farms. I don’t care what a person’s ilevel is, so long as they pull their own weight. That’s all I want in a PUG group.

[Zeonsilt]

If people are putting up Susano parties with a minimum requirement of i340, they’re dumb. I’m sorry, not going to sugarcoat that.

Haven't seen any of those, though.
Pretty much all parties locked at 330 or 335 these days(Chaos DT).
It is indeed dumb to make it "340 only", but "330" is pretty "meh" at this point, it's already December. Even Ivalice was released in October.

All that being said, I’ve seen people in full 320 do a far better job than someone in 340 DPS-wise, so the ilevel requirement for “better DPS” or for “things to die faster” isn’t exactly going to give people what they want when they set ilvls so high.

It's impossible to know about that until the actual combat part starts (and only if you parse). Unless you know them personally or that person got some FF logs available on another class.
I've seen a lot of those too.

Imagine you got a full 320 party, you will not know who underperform in that one and the only way to know that is "to parse".
Otherwise, it's "ggthxbye" and time to create another PF with different people. That's why people like to play it "safe".

p.s. Not too many people parse in FF XIV, especially when it's "PC exclusive" feature.

[Taika]

I always chuckle when I see a minimum 330 Lakshmi.

I've had such a difficult time getting in to the lower Savage floors to gear new jobs. I've had i320 gear on healers and tanks and no one is accepting me in even OS1! Meanwhile I have cleared whole Savage and am progressing in Ultimate on my main job. But whatevs, I guess I'm just not good enough for them.

[Miste]

I've had such a difficult time getting in to the lower Savage floors to gear new jobs. I've had i320 gear on healers and tanks and no one is accepting me in even OS1! Meanwhile I have cleared whole Savage and am progressing in Ultimate on my main job. But whatevs, I guess I'm just not good enough for them.

I have the same problem on my alt xD

Her gear is a bit weak so I have a hard time getting into groups for stuff. I cleared Shinryu EX on her but all the farms ask for item level higher than I have, but I understand why, so I don't quibble. I was gonna try to get weapon from him, but eh she is just an alt so I don't care much. O1S and O2S same thing, usually the item level is set higher than I have on her, sometimes they let me join if I send a tell though.



Anyway time to go put up a PF for Susano EX i340.......

If people are putting up Susano parties with a minimum requirement of i340, they’re dumb. I’m sorry, not going to sugarcoat that.

Shoot.....

OH EM GEE Hyomin! Way to ruin my day! xD

Now what will I do! Gosh darnit.

[HyoMinPark]

Anyway time to go put up a PF for Susano EX i340.......

Shoot.....

OH EM GEE Hyomin! Way to ruin my day! xD

Now what will I do! Gosh darnit.

Now, now Miste. Play nice. ;p
If you wanna do it the right way, you gotta set a Susano Ex Farm for ilevel 400. That’s how it’s really done. Gonna get all the good deeps then. ;p

And on the same side of that coin you also can't disprove it either. You can say the burden of proof lies with the claimant; which is true, but when people claim there's not enough proof of harassment, it is also demonstrably false, as absence of proof does not equate proof of absence. The only side that can provide any sort of factual numbers for or against either case is the XIV team. But utilizing simple observations of complaints in the mistreatment of certain features; such as the Party Finder and Mentor channels, that turn up on the forums is justification for concern.

Contrary to what I think you’re thinking, I’m not trying to prove anything. All I am saying is that personal anecdotes can never be a solid basis for an objective argument. I have never pulled out any statistics from thin air to try and justify why I am “pro-parser”, but I see such behavior frequently from the opposite side, as well as using their own personal experiences (anecdotes) to cloud their judgment rather than looking at a situation objectively. That is what I take issue with: people making up statistics to further their own arguments (I’ve already touched on this in other posts in this thread); using the reasoning “parsers breed toxicity”, but then proceed in the same breath to demand SE “ban everyone who parses on the spot”, calls pro-parsers names (again, “parsetard” is now a personal favorite)...basically just combating toxicity with their own toxicity and trying to claim only the pro-parser crowd is the toxic crowd; or people that try to pass off their personal experiences as pervasive facts.

Those are feature's meant for making parties and people searching for help respectively. And yet seem to be points of contention, vitriol, and at times harassment if we follow some of the forum complaints. It's not much of a stretch to think or even make claims that a group wide parser will be mistreated. A good tool in the hands of those that know what it's for and how to handle the information, a weapon in the hands of others that don't, and it's not worth the chance of alienating parts of the community moreso than what it is.

Using this logic, though, you could simultaneously set up an argument against Party Finder the same way you would parsers:

Example
“Parsers breed toxicity and discrimination on the basis of a person’s DPS.”
—Party Finder is already full of parties with minimum ilevel requirements of i330/i335 for fights like Susano Ex or Lakshmi Ex, which need no where near that requirement to actually clear; those parties are discriminating against individuals that fail to meet those item levels, indirectly discriminating upon players’ DPS, since a lot of people assume higher item level = higher DPS (Tridus already touched on this).
—Party Finder is full of parties that have locked job slots to certain jobs or say “no doubles”, discriminating against other jobs or players that want to only play one job but can’t because they’re either locked out of the party or it would be a double job (though for Savage, I understand completely the “no doubles” for roles because DPS loot—tanks and heals aren’t so lucky, unfortunately).
—Party Finder is full of parties that have in the descriptions “Wipe on Phase 1 and disband”; one could say these are “potentially toxic” environments if one is following the whole “Skip Soar or disband” meme that was prevalent during 3.55 when ZurvanEx came out.

Party Finder already has the potential to breed toxicity and discrimination, and already had the potential to alienate parts of the community, yet it is still in this game. Why should a parser be treated any different? Why treat one tool differently and prohibit it, but allow another to “pass”? They’re both tools, are they not? One can mistreat the Party Finder the same way one would mistreat a parser, just the execution of said mistreatment would be different. But the concept is the same.

[HyoMinPark]

You read only half of it, as said before i never said they ALL do discrimation using a parser. Just saying that a lot do. And i'm against encouraging that. I don't need exemple. It would be pointless, if you ask for exemple, next you can also say they're made up. Lastly i wouldn't talk about it if only seen once, if that were the case i would only have thought that the person was an idiot and whatever.

I read your entire post, but only responded to the second paragraph; that’s not me “reading only half of it”.

You’re using anecdotes and trying to pass them off as factual. You are saying you see harassment and that it is “bad enough as it is” (the rate of harassment), but you are using anecdotes as a basis, and to fuel that argument. Just as I use anecdotes when I counter and say, “no, it is not as bad as you think it is”. The anecdotes prove nothing, and therefore cannot be used as a logical/factual basis for why parsers should or should not be allowed. Again, don’t blame the tool because someone uses it in the wrong way, and that is what it seems like you are doing.

The party finder example was just an example of how players already “discriminate” in this game by setting PF limitations. It isn’t a made-up example. I also never asked you to provide any “examples”—I asked you to prove with quantitative, hard numbers that harassment is pervasive. You can’t argue with numbers, so if you did prove them and they were solid, then I would concede.

The only thing I’m saying are “made up” are these “statistics” people have been posting in this thread and trying to pass them off as “hard facts” as to why parsers should not be implemented. See the individual that said “for every one person using a parser for ‘good’, there are three others using it to be tools” a few pages back, and then resorted to accusing any and all who disagreed with them of “thumbs up circle jerking” (whatever the hell that is). There is no factual basis behind that statistic—it’s as made-up as this one: 75% of all statistics are all made up. I’m not saying that your personal experiences are “made up” or not true, but that they are anecdotal. And anecdotes =/= facts. That’s why they aren’t used in any sort of solid arguments and/or debates, because they are personal and skewed, not objective.




Discrimination will exist with a parser or without a parser. There’s no way around it.