They Should Add An Official Damage Meter With One Condition

[Semirhage]

Realistic arguments? The arguments against parsers are either self-contradictory, explicitly ignore inconvenient facts that nullify their concerns, are based on feelycraft "I'd be judged by other people" paranoia, or outright hallucinations of an imaginary person who is explicitly reportable under the rules anyway.

The only argument that has any weight is that numbers by themselves don't help you determine what exactly is going on. And even that argument is considerably weakened by the solution to that concern: those concerns are alleviated by, oh, I don't know, comparing them to other peoples' performance in a place that I'll call...FFRecords. Or uptime/performance analysis tools. You know, those horrible evil things the anti-parsers think are even worse than the idea of adding a parser, because heaven forbid you COMPARE yourself to something. Ewww.

I have yet to see a single argument against parsers that isn't a flimsy veil for "I don't want to improve or allow other people to see that I have room to improve".

[Saraide]

Realistic arguments? The arguments against parsers are either self-contradictory, explicitly ignore inconvenient facts that nullify their concerns, are based on feelycraft "I'd be judged by other people" paranoia, or outright hallucinations of an imaginary person who is explicitly reportable under the rules anyway.

The only argument that has any weight is that numbers by themselves don't help you determine what exactly is going on. And even that argument is considerably weakened by the solution to that concern: those concerns are alleviated by, oh, I don't know, comparing them to other peoples' performance in a place that I'll call...FFRecords. Or uptime/performance analysis tools. You know, those horrible evil things the anti-parsers think are even worse than the idea of adding a parser, because heaven forbid you COMPARE yourself to something. Ewww.

I have yet to see a single argument against parsers that isn't a flimsy veil for "I don't want to improve or allow other people to see that I have room to improve".

I honestly do not think the devs are both able and willing to provide something as good as we have now with ACT, fflogs and xivanalysis. At most we would get a subpar product covering some bare minimum functions that would have to rediscover much that has been solved ages ago and everyone would just keep using ACT anyway. That sounds like a bunch of wasted effort to me. I'd rather have the written ToS be refined to focus less on harmless third party tools so even the rule lawyers in the room are encouraged to shut up for once.