How would an optional, official parser be toxic?

[Miste]

I'm just going to give up on this thread. No one wants to face the fact that parsers are tools that can fuel multiple things, including toxicity, because they're being wilfully narrow minded and only thinking of how it can benefit themselves.

You don't want to face the facts that tools have the capability to also bring more good than bad as well. You are just running off the assumption that the majority will be bad and not good, but you have zero proof or facts to say that it will. It is an unknown to both sides.

I mean you are claiming others won't face the facts, but remember our earlier exchange? You didn't acknowledge what I pointed out to you as being a flaw in what you were claiming. You just tried to shift the responsibility onto me instead of owning up to it yourself. It doesn't seem like you want to face facts either?

So who is being narrow minded here when it is obvious you don't want to acknowledge anything that challenges your opinions or doesn't align with your opinions.

You don't want to have a discussion about the possibilities and are only glued to your one personal opinion that parsers will not help and that they will end up with such an increase in toxicity that the game will go down "a dark path" as you put it.

You won't accept the fact that your experiences in WoW don't prove it will happen in FFXIV exactly how you experienced it there or acknowledge that others have had different experiences than you altogether on WoW.

People have acknowledged the possible issues with parsers, but many of us also realize it is an unknown area for this game since it has never had an official parser so it has the potential and/or possibility to end up being beneficial to the community.

But clearly looking at the big picture is discouraged so...yea. I'm done. Have fun with this endless argument which has turned into little other than an echo chamber.

You aren't looking at the big picture. You are glued to parsers only ending one way: badly, when you have no proof or facts to back that premise up.

Seems to me you are the one who wants an echo chamber? You are disparaging the discussion (Just because it isn't going your way??) and giving up on it because...why? There aren't enough people agreeing with your opinion? Because people are challenging your arguments? Because people disagree with you?

So please, if you are going to start calling people narrow minded for not agreeing with all of your opinions on something and saying people just want an echo chamber you might want to have some inner reflection on how you are presenting yourself as well.

[Shurrikhan]

Wow. You try to argue that parsers can noticeably improve the playerbase because supposedly Blizzard said they did. I tell you that there are add-ons that can greatly assist in doing a rotation so such a statement should not be taken for gospel...and now you give me an example that basically says "doesn't matter if someone gets handholded with add-ons, better dps is still better dps".

So am I to take this as you are also advocating for an official handholding rotation helper too?

Read the analogy again. Several times if necessary. Their performance is unchanged. One simply requires a larger initial investment on the employer's part. There is no continuous intervening cost, however. The same is true of making information conveniently accessible. It has an initial development cost (much of which would simply be repealing previous conscious decisions to hide information) and perhaps a fair bit of revision to ensure that the "at a glance" information is relevant and accurate (to what may be distinct perspectives, due to differing goals), but nothing continuous.

The same can be said of providing proper job guides through in-game learning activities, improving off of where WoW's Proving Grounds and XIV's Guildhests left a lackluster shallow attempt at the same. That involves initial cost. It does not involve continuous hand-holding in the actual content, even if the initial learning activities may be very guided.

Our concern is how many players can participate -- without burdening their fellow players -- in most or all content. A bit of investment cost, its benefits plopped comfortably into the players' laps (targeted at some but useful to all), may be more than worthwhile.

[TaiyoShikasu]

I don't see such learning parties in PF and i'm on Chaos datacenter too.
I see learning parties with special practice goals who demand that you know the upleading mechanics but that should be normal.

Probably don't see them 'cause Chaos caves in on itself every twenty minutes.

[Legion88]

Probably don't see them 'cause Chaos caves in on itself every twenty minutes.

I don't have any problems with DC's on Chaos datacenter, so, maybe lucky again?

[TheCount]

It would be completely non-optional. I think you know that though, OP, the moment they add something like that it would be mandatory and watched like a hawk.

[WitchOfMiracles]

I don't mind private parsers, but it's not something that's personally needed for me. As long as we get through the content without much issues then that's fine enough for me :P

Public parsers hell no lol, for obvious reasons.

[Ranetsu-Akagane]

Alright, so people are saying public parsers will only cause problems if added. There is another outcome that could happen though. For example, say SE decided to add them tomorrow, I doubt an increase of harassment would just suddenly spike, I mean think about it people have been asking for an official parser for a long time now. I believe people will try to be very careful about how they use it, as to avoid having it removed.

There will be some that will still abuse it sure, but I don't think it would happen too much. Also, people would really need to learn to understand if someone says your damage is low, that it's not a personal attack, but that's just my opinion on the matter.

[Ursa_Vonfiebryd]

It wouldn't so long as the parse data couldn't be shared, accessed or view by anyone else but the player who generated it. Because that's the only way you're going to get away with the 'general betterment' argument. If only the original player can see it then fine. Parse away.

[Ursa_Vonfiebryd]

It wouldn't so long as the parse data couldn't be shared, accessed or view by anyone else but the player who generated it. Because that's the only way you're going to get away with the 'general betterment' argument. If only the original player can see it then fine. Parse away.

Oh. And you can only see your numbers. No one else's.

[HyoMinPark]

Oh. And you can only see your numbers. No one else's.

The issue with this is that it doesn’t give you anything to go on—it’s literally just a number with not a lot of context behind it.

Unless there were players sharing their numbers, general baselines could never be established when it came to performance. A BRD seeing that they are doing 12,000 DPS (random number) doesn’t tell them anything. Is that good for their item level? Is it bad? Could they use improvement, or are they doing well enough? You don’t know without other numbers to compare it to. They could think they’re doing well when the average could be 15,000 DPS (again, random number).