Please Reconsider MSQ Changes

[Skivvy]

If anything it just comes to show how bad that decision was made that it's so easily work-aroundable by the very nature of the rest of the system. Their alternative in this case would be to make it so that you can't progress or trigger the boss without everyone having seen the cutscene in full, like quest progression............ but if they're already actually changing the mechanics of those instances, which they didn't want to do, hence this rushed "solution", I'd much prefer they cracked and changed them into solo instances. It might actually be less work to boot.

I am very much in the camp that feels this was a lazy fix by SE, but that still doesn't make DCing to avoid CSs an acceptable option.

Exploits aside, the point of the MSQ roulette was to help recruit players to move sprouts through incredibly outdated MSQ content that no one would run otherwise. As long as the queue times remain decent, I personally would be content if they just remove the mandatory CSs for groups that have no sprout or are made through PF. We all still have the choice whether or not we feel the MSQ is worth our time.

Then why is it coded like that? They could code it so that it resets the cutscene if you dc so you don't miss story from it by accident, but they don't.

Because this is a new fix that was placed on top of old coding perhaps. I'm not a programmer, I have no idea how hard it is to catch every single possible interaction between old and new - but I imagine unintended results slip through now and then.

If SE had intended for players to be able to skip CSs, they would have left the "skip" option in game. If you are truly trying to argue that SE intended players to be able to purposefully DC while in a dungeon, in order to bypass their new-mandatory CSs - I just don't know what to tell you. If you plan on being one of those people that DCs, feel free to try and convince yourself it's fine in whatever manner you wish.

[BillyKaplan]

Because this is a new fix that was placed on top of old coding perhaps.

This. This entire fix was likely because SE doesn't want to bother with reopening that code and changing things around. Otherwise there's a variety of options they could've gone with that likely would've been better received by a lot more people.