Discuss : is ffxiv in trouble

[Striker44]

I’ve never understood the argument of “the forums are a negative echo chamber so you should just assume that everyone who isn’t on here is mostly happy” for 2 reasons

1) this is where we are told to come to make a complaint if we aren’t happy with something in the game, complaints are why this forum exists

2) if square has such hard and fast data on the fact that these complaints don’t represent the general playerbase why do they never engage with us on here, you could shut the entire healer subforum up in 5 seconds if a GM posted “according to squares internal data healer gameplay and engagement are where we desire them to be at and as such we do not see a reason to redesign the healers again”. Instead they remain completely silent while we argue over the tiny bit of data we can pull from the game ourselves

The fact that the devs tell us to come to the forums then just ignore us while we argue amongst ourselves is exactly why the forums are the way they are

1.) Complaints are only one small, small portion of why this forum is supposed to exist. If it was the sole reason, it would be called the Complaints forum, or even Complaints sub-forum. This forum exists for a wide variety of purposes, in the case of "General Discussion," to discuss anything and everything about the game.

2.) "if square has such hard and fast data on the fact that these complaints don’t represent the general playerbase why do they never engage with us on here" I feel like this sentence answers itself. They don't engage with us here because they know this forum isn't representative of anything useful. I'm guessing they also realize the psychological value of giving people a place to vent, anyway. They are a business, after all, and people who get the chance to vent and/or feel like they're making a connection with other forum posters are more likely to stick around longer. Just my thoughts on the matter...

(General Point - I can't recall anyone ever saying someone should assume everyone who isn't here is happy. All I've said is not to assume that everyone in the general playerbase mimics the forums in thought, and that the devs have far more information than we do on the subject. You seem to be setting up a straw man, which implies a lack of ability to validly counter the actual point being made.)

[Supersnow845]

1.) Complaints are only one small, small portion of why this forum is supposed to exist. If it was the sole reason, it would be called the Complaints forum, or even Complaints sub-forum. This forum exists for a wide variety of purposes, in the case of "General Discussion," to discuss anything and everything about the game.

2.) "if square has such hard and fast data on the fact that these complaints don’t represent the general playerbase why do they never engage with us on here" I feel like this sentence answers itself. They don't engage with us here because they know this forum isn't representative of anything useful. I'm guessing they also realize the psychological value of giving people a place to vent, anyway. They are a business, after all, and people who get the chance to vent and/or feel like they're making a connection with other forum posters are more likely to stick around longer. Just my thoughts on the matter...

(General Point - I can't recall anyone ever saying someone should assume everyone who isn't here is happy. All I've said is not to assume that everyone in the general playerbase mimics the forums in thought, and that the devs have far more information than we do on the subject. You seem to be setting up a straw man, which implies a lack of ability to validly counter the actual point being made.)

So your logic is we should know that square ignores us on here because it’s obvious that what we say isn’t indicative of the general playerbase so it’s pointless even engaging with it

I mean I can’t refute your point outright because I have no data but that seems awfully convenient for your line of thinking

[Katish]

So your logic is we should know that square ignores us on here because it’s obvious that what we say isn’t indicative of the general playerbase so it’s pointless even engaging with it

I mean I can’t refute your point outright because I have no data but that seems awfully convenient for your line of thinking

I should add on, why should the silent majority matter when they don't speak their mind? Honestly, look at this through a looking glass...if the silent majority absolutely hate/love something they would come out and say it on here, that's what the forums are for, discussion. The reason they don't I think, is because the consensus aligns with their point of view or the formula hasn't changed enough for them to warrant feedback (this can be negative or positive (I see it as mostly negative)). People like to say we don't represent the majority but the truth is more likely we do, at least some of them. [People who refute that premise are obviously being bad actors.]

Though, honestly we should really stop pandering to a silent majority...that accomplishes nothing..Because by the end of the day you can use that argument for anything to turn down any premise when you absolutely don't know what the major popular opinion is, it's data we can't collect. Even if we could, would it evaluate to anything meaningful(?) Mixed thoughts tend to become a blob of information if not generalized.

[Erzaa]

I should add on, why should the silent majority matter when they don't speak their mind? ...if the silent majority absolutely hate/love something they would come out and say it on here...

Because, "qui tacet consentire videtur - he who is silent is taken to agree". They are speaking their minds, through their silence. It's called the silence procedure.

People without complaints, are happy with things as they are, they don't have a reason to complain. It doesn't matter if you see it as a negative, it's a commonly understood principle, even with legislations and diplomacy.

Though, honestly we should really stop pandering to a silent majority...that accomplishes nothing..

This is a silly argument to hold. The company isn't going to make big changes to the game to keep the vocal minority happy. If they did, they'd risk alienating the majority, losing subscriptions and money, and possibly having to rollback those changes anyway, wasting time and resources. If something's not broken, you don't fix it, is the safer option.

When enough people complain, thus becoming the majority, that's when changes come.

[Katish]

Because, "qui tacet consentire videtur - he who is silent is taken to agree". They are speaking their minds, through their silence. It's called the silence procedure.

People without complaints, are happy with things as they are, they don't have a reason to complain. It doesn't matter if you see it as a negative, it's a commonly understood principle, even with legislations and diplomacy.


This is a silly argument to hold. The company isn't going to make big changes to the game to keep the vocal minority happy. If they did, they'd risk alienating the majority, losing subscriptions and money, and possibly having to rollback those changes anyway, wasting time and resources. If something's not broken, you don't fix it, is the safer option.

When enough people complain, thus becoming the majority, that's when changes come.

Just because someone is silent does not mean they are taken to agree, there is such things as civil unrest for a reason...that is a bad assumption and why many of wars have started lel.
And I don't want the forums to be a vocal minority either, that is why you play with the hornets nest...if it attacks you, you know you've done wrong...

Edit: Plus you can't technically use that argument if people are still posting on the forums their distaste, because it refutes that it truly is "silent". Unless you assume the forum doesn't share the opinions of some of the full "silent" majority, then you are bad actor, because statistically that is very improbable.

[Erzaa]

Just because someone is silent does not mean they are taken to agree, there is such things as civil unrest for a reason...

Uhm... no. It is. Civil unrest isn't silence, it's build up to what leads to revolution, war and eventual change. If people in large numbers started unsubscribing, voicing the same complaints amongst themselves as the forums do, that's the equivalent to civil unrest.

I'm not talking about people being silenced through force. Nobody's forcing the playerbase to be silent by using force. They're silent because they don't feel like there's anything to complain about. You're welcome to look up the silence procedure for yourself.

Edit: Plus you can't technically use that argument if people are still posting on the forums their distaste, because it refutes that it truly is "silent". Unless you assume we don't share the opinions of the full majority, then you are bad actor.

I didn't make that argument. I made the argument that listening to the vocal minority over the silent majority could possibly lead to the silent majority becoming vocal, which would be much worse for the company and their profits, and disputing your argument that they should listen to the people voicing their distaste on the forums.

Why listen to what one person in a room wants to do, when the other ten disagree? How's that fair to the other ten people? I mean, the Greeks figured this out millenia ago.

[Katish]

Uhm... no. It is. Civil unrest isn't silence, it's build up to what leads to revolution, war and eventual change. If people in large numbers started unsubscribing, voicing the same complaints amongst themselves as the forums do, that's the equivalent to civil unrest.

I'm not talking about people being silenced through force. Nobody's forcing the playerbase to be silent by using force. They're silent because they don't feel like there's anything to complain about. You're welcome to look up the silence procedure for yourself.


I didn't make that argument. I made the argument that listening to the vocal minority over the silent majority could possibly lead to the silent majority becoming vocal, which would be much worse for the company and their profits, and disputing your argument that they should listen to the people voicing their distaste on the forums.

Why listen to what one person in a room wants to do, when the other ten disagree? How's that fair to the other ten people? I mean, the Greeks figured this out millenia ago.

Would the major opinion becoming vocal be bad? THEN they would look to the forum more for how to continue, and be able to gather information rather quickly. You can't really say that faithfully...as for your example, it's not fair but that's why they SPEAK up. You can't gauge someone disagreeing if they never disagreed in the first place the same vice versa. If someone is quiet, you can't assume they agree with you.

[strawberrycake]

I should add on, why should the silent majority matter when they don't speak their mind? Honestly, look at this through a looking glass...if the silent majority absolutely hate/love something they would come out and say it on here, that's what the forums are for, discussion. The reason they don't I think, is because the consensus aligns with their point of view or the formula hasn't changed enough for them to warrant feedback (this can be negative or positive (I see it as mostly negative)). People like to say we don't represent the majority but the truth is more likely we do, at least some of them. [People who refute that premise are obviously being bad actors.]

Though, honestly we should really stop pandering to a silent majority...that accomplishes nothing..Because by the end of the day you can use that argument for anything to turn down any premise when you absolutely don't know what the major popular opinion is, it's data we can't collect. Even if we could, would it evaluate to anything meaningful(?) Mixed thoughts tend to become a blob of information if not generalized.

It's funny because in other games, not catering to the lowest common denominator and catering to those of no opinion is what happens.

[Gordita]

I should add on, why should the silent majority matter when they don't speak their mind? Honestly, look at this through a looking glass...if the silent majority absolutely hate/love something they would come out and say it on here, that's what the forums are for, discussion. The reason they don't I think, is because the consensus aligns with their point of view or the formula hasn't changed enough for them to warrant feedback (this can be negative or positive (I see it as mostly negative)). People like to say we don't represent the majority but the truth is more likely we do, at least some of them. [People who refute that premise are obviously being bad actors.]

Though, honestly we should really stop pandering to a silent majority...that accomplishes nothing..Because by the end of the day you can use that argument for anything to turn down any premise when you absolutely don't know what the major popular opinion is, it's data we can't collect. Even if we could, would it evaluate to anything meaningful(?) Mixed thoughts tend to become a blob of information if not generalized.

There's a large amount of silent people because of how people behave on the forums. It's usually people arguing, or being so loud and excited over materialistic things that any post related to qol or fine tuning a long list of super annoying parts of the game... It's just ignored, ridiculed, and buried under a massive pile of "noise".

[Katish]

There's a large amount of silent people because of how people behave on the forums. It's usually people arguing, or being so loud and excited over materialistic things that any post related to qol or fine tuning a long list of super annoying parts of the game... It's just ignored, ridiculed, and buried under a massive pile of "noise".

But even then it's easy to determine what that "noise" is...that still doesn't undermine what the point of the argument was. It's worse to do nothing than to do something. That was my argument, pandering to a silent majority accomplishes nothing thus we get nothing accomplished. "Because apparently the place were our opinions matter is for naught." Why even have a forum if our opinions warrant zero value?

As I have brought up in the past HSR is listening to feedback because they provide surveying as means to receive it, and that generates a positive outlook for the game. Since we don't even have that, the forums is the next best place for giving said feedback to the devs. But if someone rejects notions and keeps pandering to the silent majority then obviously they are going to overlook any sort of feedback present. (Because the ones who think they are being positive are actually hindering progress because companies would rather do nothing and profit than be held responsible)

Do note, I do not blame Yoshida, the fault lies solely with Square as an enterprise. Companies want the least amount of effort for the most amount of money. And despite what people think, they do value public opinion of them because that is what keeps new players flowing (or at least I would hope so or else truly nothing would get done).