Results 1 to 10 of 831

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Player
    Shurrikhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    12,866
    Character
    Tani Shirai
    World
    Cactuar
    Main Class
    Monk Lv 100
    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph2449 View Post
    The devs expect that an average person with that gear level and a very average performance is enough, and that average performance is pretty low considering the max performance a job can bring, and more often than not there's more than a few people playing above that average performance which is why content can be beaten with multiple dead players.
    Inevitably, half of all players will fall below "average", as any average is the center-point of that population. In practice, "average" is of course a span, but even so there are some who will fall many standard deviations below what would be considered "average".
    Divide it up by whatever means you like -- mechanics engaged in, throughput-per-gear-level produced, or even effective efforts spent, whatever you wish -- and there will still be people, especially here, who fall well below "average" even its definition were stretched to include 75% of the game's population.
    The players giving rise to this thread's topics are not the average. They are those who (outside of the very rare troll or griefer) have not learned how, or have not been enticed to engage in, combat content to the extent of an "average" player.

    Once again the actual requirements are well defined, the problem comes when elitists demand ultra quick and efficient runs and demand triple the base requirements because god forbid they wipe even once D:
    No, they haven't. An almost entirely irrelevant content-ordering prerequisite, item level, has been defined -- and nothing else.

    You admitted just above that gear alone will not equate to performance. Just prior to that you complained about players asking for more gear when they cannot secure other means of ensuring performance (e.g., skill or prior experience). You should already know that the base gear requirements have little to nothing to do with what's being requested to help and/or incentivize players to bridge their performance gaps.

    Outside of intersections between in-game cultures of responsibility and those of least resistance alone, whether it be in WoW, B&S, BDO, GW2, or anywhere else, those setting extreme gear requirements are typically those who don't want to deal with the full course of a given piece of content -- not the "elitists" who actually enjoy those combat systems -- and would prefer to exclude players in favor of cheesing mechanics than actually engage with that content however they may.
    You see this most often in progression systems that have progression with finely-increasing gear levels without finely-increasing difficulty, as one can simply grind out upgrade after upgrade, taking 3 months via gear to do what skill did in the first week of a given tier, and expect others to grind similarly all while despising the idea of actually learning one's rotations, CD syncs, and/or skill priorities, etc.
    And let's consider what we've actually seen here so far...
    Who here have been encouraging that we let players experiment, learn, and generally get comfortable with what the game has to offer, wipes or no? Those you would call "elitists".

    Who here have been asking for improved learning tools and ways to present the combat more attractively to players? Those you would call "elitists".

    Who here have at all asked for content to be less hinged, in terms of a pool of mechanics and design possibilities, around Savage alone? Those you would call "elitists".
    At this point, if one isn't jumping in place swearing that everything about the game itself is already perfect (except, perhaps, there are people who don't enjoy carrying you or that Extreme content or harder should be removed) or even entertains the thought that there are ways the game could better situate or utilize its combat, are they, too, "elitists"?

    We've got those looking at how things could be improved -- some starting with too high a bar and being talked down from it, others parsing out the best criteria, parameters, and definitions of the problem perceived first, but each nonetheless interested in making things better for the average player. Then we've got what amounts to slander and demands to cease communication. And somehow the first group is the toxic one?
    (7)
    Last edited by Shurrikhan; 07-17-2021 at 10:57 PM.