Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 Next »
This Forum is Read Only

Option to inspectFollow

#102 Jun 09 2010 at 8:48 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Zemzelette wrote:
@ Mikhalia

Hmmm.

I wish you wouldn't paint such a universal picture like that. You got chewed out for /inspecting in Everquest too.
Granted, that covers peeking into inventory as well which would probably squick even the nosiest of modern gamers, but there was obviously no cultural basis for it.


Okay, now THAT I think is going way too far.

I see nothing wrong with inspecting gear. Inspecting stats/skills is reasonable in my mind, but I could understand the argument against it. Inventory is where I draw the line though. I'll grant you that in that sort of situation, I could see how one would be against it; I would be too.

Strictly speaking in a party setting, my gear, stats, and skills are directly proportionate to the group's performance as a whole, and if my gear/stats/skills suck, then I suck, and my group deserves to know that.

On the other hand, the fact that I'm carrying around a signed marron glace that I'm not using, or the fact that I have two stacks of pickaxes, mining gear, and some ore because I was mining and ported back when I got the party invite... that doesn't affect the party and is therefore no one's business.

Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
LaFey wrote:
don't threaten me. you deleted my post for no reason other than that you personally didn't like it.


I never, ever threaten, I only promise...


Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
We'll see if he can behave in 24 hours. If not, oh well.


*snicker*

EDIT: Also, my inventory is full of eels.

Edited, Jun 9th 2010 10:49pm by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#103 Jun 09 2010 at 10:40 PM Rating: Good
***
2,535 posts
LaFey wrote:
BastokFL wrote:
Gear and ability choices are part of one's "ability to play the game" - they are not separate things. Items and abilities are the tools you use in-game, and a large part of skill is using the right tools for the job. There's nothing wrong with not using the best tools if they're out of reach; but using the wrong tool (or even worse, going out of your way to use the wrong tool) is a clear sign that one's ability is lacking.

The MNK who's wearing Battle Gloves is most likely a better player than the one who's wearing Master Caster's Mitts.


there's a confusion between causal relationships and correlation, here. a causal relationship would be if you could only play very well because of your gear. the actual relationship between your ability to play the game and your current equipment is that of correlation only. there are many reasons you may not have the absolute best gear, and only one of them is because you don't know how to play the game.

for example, what if i had a life and didn't spend the bajillion hours it requires to farm the parts to make the best gear? i could be the best player ever and still not have gear due to things being more important than a game -- why should i be discriminated against by other players for having a job and being productive elsewhere in life? why should the game mechanically encourage this discrimination?


I said nothing about requiring the best gear - only gear that shows you know what you're doing.

That why I specifically used the example of Battle Gloves: they provide a small amount of accuracy, which is always good for a melee class like MNK, but they are easy to obtain (when I stopped playing the cost all of 10,000 gil, which does not take very long to obtain.

And you're reading the causality completely wrong - I never said or even implied (except to the most warped, willfully miscomprehending mind) that a player is only good because of their gear; in fact that's the reverse of what I said. It's an if-then relationship - IF a player is skilled, THEN they will choose correctly out of the gear that is available to them.

Again, a major part of one's skill is being able to choose the right tools form the ones that are available - it's knowing that, even if I can't go get a ***** gun, the screwdriver on my Swiss army is better for removing screws than the knife blade is.
#104 Jun 10 2010 at 9:34 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
638 posts
What drives me crazy is people who got so sensitive about it. I currently play Aion and even though there is no notification in the chat log that someone's examining you, people still block it. Why do they feel the need to hide what they are wearing? The beauty of Aion is even if they block you from looking in game, you can just log on to their online profile and look if you really really must know what that amazing looking sword is.
____________________________
Courtelise
FFXI -99 RDM/99 BST
Server: Fairy (RIP)->Sylph

FFXIV - Noob
#105 Jun 10 2010 at 11:02 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
**
703 posts
Eske wrote:
Deila wrote:
And some people are so proud of their setups that they don't want people to see what they put together, depending on JUST how customizable armor/equipment is in this game. Some are selfish. Some like to simply give people a hard time or are just being silly. Some have been traumatized before by a person calling out every single thing about their gear. Are any of these BAD reasons for people who pay the same amount for the game that everyone else does?


Err...yes? I'm confused. Other than that last one, they all seemed like poor reasons, to me.


Very well. Suppose I want you to tell me where your favorite gil-farming spot is. Why, I could critique that spot and "help" you out with it. I could tell you better ones. Oh, wait, that would ruin the gil-farming spots for both of us. But we're only being selfish, right? That's no excuse to NOT give out that information...

Also, the fact that a person who pays the same as everyone else can play the game they want to (much to the chagrin of the community) however they desire. It's been a common occurrence that those who wish to interact with the community (aka, party/linkshell) must follow certain standards. What about those that don't, at that time, wish to interact with the community? Commerce aside, of course. Are they REQUIRED to allow access to their gear JUST to play the game?
____________________________
Deila (Tarutaru F)
Server: Seraph
WHM75/BLM52/SMN34/THF24/NIN20/BRD19/WAR10/RDM7
Clothcraft: 81.6 +2; Bonecraft: 3; Fishing: 6; Leathercraft: 3
Maat: Defeated 1st try! Wootaru!

Time Mage - Help us make it a reality!
#106 Jun 10 2010 at 3:00 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Courtelise wrote:
What drives me crazy is people who got so sensitive about it. I currently play Aion and even though there is no notification in the chat log that someone's examining you, people still block it. Why do they feel the need to hide what they are wearing? The beauty of Aion is even if they block you from looking in game, you can just log on to their online profile and look if you really really must know what that amazing looking sword is.


That doesn't surprise me, but I still find it funny.

And the more reasons I hear why "checking gear is bad" all seem to point towards paranoia.

LaFey wrote:
there are many reasons you may not have the absolute best gear, and only one of them is because you don't know how to play the game.

for example, what if i had a life and didn't spend the bajillion hours it requires to farm the parts to make the best gear? i could be the best player ever and still not have gear due to things being more important than a game -- why should i be discriminated against by other players for having a job and being productive elsewhere in life? why should the game mechanically encourage this discrimination?


For one: There are three reasons why you don't have appropriate (not "the best"; just appropriate is fine) gear. either you don't know, you can't afford it, or you don't care. If you're the second, then if you're planning on grouping, you should consider saving up for appropriate (again note that I'm not saying "the best"; just appropriate) gear. If you don't have appropriate gear because you don't know, then just ask. There are thousands of people online and chances are one can help you. If you don't care, then no decent group will benefit from inviting you to their group anyway.

Also, I've never been a fan of the "I have to choose between being a horrible player or having no life, and I choose a life" argument. There are plenty of people who have lives and manage to come up with at least decent gear in MMOGs. Examples like Battle Gloves, Electrum Rings, Spike Necklace, Hairpins, Amemet (NQ) Mantle are reasonably affordable for even casual players. If you're in a mid to high level party with nothing but a Santa hat, a Yukata, and a Bee spatha.... then you're just not even trying. That's not "having a life"; that's "being an inconsiderate moron, and expecting 5 other people to put up with it."

Few people will expect you to show up to a group with "The best" gear (although it's always appreciated). You probably won't get kicked from a merit party on Monk for wearing Melee Hose or other +Kick gear instead of Byakko's Haidate or Usukane Hizayoroi. You'd probably get a pass for Republic Subligar or Vendor's Slops or a number of other options... If you show up in some Slacks or Beetle Harness (or nothing), expect to be booted.

Refusal to tolerate ANYTHING but "the best of the best" gear could be called "elitism" or "discrimination". Refusal to tolerate horribly abysmal gear choices when affordable alternatives are available is called "Not being an enabler".

Again, when you're solo: Wear whatever you want. No one (or few, anyway) will care. But you can't expect to intentionally not buy gear that is anywhere remotely near "decent" (never mind good or best) and throw a hissy fit when you can't get party invites.

Deila wrote:
Very well. Suppose I want you to tell me where your favorite gil-farming spot is. Why, I could critique that spot and "help" you out with it. I could tell you better ones. Oh, wait, that would ruin the gil-farming spots for both of us. But we're only being selfish, right? That's no excuse to NOT give out that information...


Sure there is. Telling people where a gil farming spot is:
1) Does not affect a group's performance
2) Could affect your income adversely

If you're confident that you have a great gil farming spot and someone is asking you for it because they have a better one; counter by asking them what theirs is if you're interested; otherwise it's not relevant to anyone's partying.

And as a side note: If they really wanted to know, there's always /sea, which tells them where you are at any given time. If they did it long enough, they could probably figure it out anyway unless you have a separate character just for farming.

Deila wrote:
Also, the fact that a person who pays the same as everyone else can play the game they want to (much to the chagrin of the community) however they desire. It's been a common occurrence that those who wish to interact with the community (aka, party/linkshell) must follow certain standards. What about those that don't, at that time, wish to interact with the community? Commerce aside, of course. Are they REQUIRED to allow access to their gear JUST to play the game?


I've never argued that people who are soloing have any standards to conform to, and never will. If you want to be a WAR50/WHM11 and fight Yagudo in Oztroja in a Brass harness set... none of my **** business. Doesn't affect anyone else anyway, and most are certainly not going to bother /checking you or care what you're wearing even if they did.

At some point, you likely will interact with others (after all, it's a MUTIPLAYER, ONLINE game that you're playing). And if you want to group with them, they might want to know that you're at least decent before inviting you.

If a person never plans on playing the game with anyone and they just want to play by themselves, at all times, and don't want anyone to see them, ever... then that goes back to that paranoia I mentioned before, and perhaps they should just stick to single player games if they have such a massive fear of being "judged" and "bothered".

Edited, Jun 10th 2010 5:01pm by Mikhalia

Edited, Jun 10th 2010 5:03pm by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#107 Jun 10 2010 at 3:31 PM Rating: Decent
**
736 posts
Quote:
That doesn't surprise me, but I still find it funny.

And the more reasons I hear why "checking gear is bad" all seem to point towards paranoia.



It comes off the other way around from this end.

The checkers are paranoid. The days of complacent automatic trust in your fellow player to be able bodied and capable is gone, people instead default to constant suspicion and doubt. Again, understandable in this casual day and age. Wholly irreversible. But unpleasant.


Edited, Jun 10th 2010 5:32pm by Zemzelette
#108 Jun 11 2010 at 10:00 AM Rating: Good
**
542 posts
I like the /check feature but I can understand why some players would prefer not to be checked. I've seen people laughing in linkshell chat about what others are wearing plenty of times. I've seen threads online where people post screenshots of what others are wearing. I've seen new players get ridiculed because they don't have x. I've also seen players who have really good equipment treated differently, where other players will show jealousy, or possibly (figuratively) bow at their feet, and not everyone wants this type of attention. In short, some just don't want to be immediately judged and/or treated differently based on the virtual equipment they happen to have on.

With all that said, I don't think I'd mind if they allowed an option to block inspection. I'd probably /check people more if they did, actually, considering I'd know that every person I was allowed to check was ok with it.

Edited, Jun 11th 2010 12:02pm by Susanoh
#109 Jun 11 2010 at 10:14 AM Rating: Good
**
346 posts
Quote:
The checkers are paranoid. The days of complacent automatic trust in your fellow player to be able bodied and capable is gone, people instead default to constant suspicion and doubt.


I never took this sort of approach to checking. When I check people it's not to see what they don't have, it's to see what they do have. I just like looking at armor and different combos. I had a PUP back in the day with near Max evasion, I just needed that **** hairpin to max lol. I got checked often and questions about my build sometimes but that's because it was Min/Maxed beyond what some people thought necessary. I liked seeing out of the ordinary builds and such. So I never checked people to mentally berate the crap they're wearing, it was just to see what they had on.

I Check just to Check, I check everyone just to see how they're building it, not to judge how their building it.
#110 Jun 11 2010 at 11:38 AM Rating: Good
Sage
****
6,470 posts
Deila wrote:
Eske wrote:
Err...yes? I'm confused. Other than that last one, they all seemed like poor reasons, to me.


Very well. Suppose I want you to tell me where your favorite gil-farming spot is. Why, I could critique that spot and "help" you out with it. I could tell you better ones. Oh, wait, that would ruin the gil-farming spots for both of us. But we're only being selfish, right? That's no excuse to NOT give out that information...


I think Mikhalia pretty much summed it up, but that's not really a comparable analogy. Losing a farming spot has a quantifiable loss associated with it (though if you asked me where I farmed, I'd probably tell you anyway, personally). Showing someone your particular equipment setup doesn't really lead to a quantifiable loss. There's a vague, unprovable potential loss if your setup alone allowed you to be known as a supremely good player, and through /check, others were able to copy it, so that you weren't so unique anymore. But you can't really argue that hypothetical...for all we know one might even benefit from having others copy their setup.

And obviously, "giving someone a hard time" or "just being silly" aren't legitimate reasons to justify stripping away game functionality.

Deila wrote:
Also, the fact that a person who pays the same as everyone else can play the game they want to (much to the chagrin of the community) however they desire. It's been a common occurrence that those who wish to interact with the community (aka, party/linkshell) must follow certain standards. What about those that don't, at that time, wish to interact with the community? Commerce aside, of course. Are they REQUIRED to allow access to their gear JUST to play the game?


I'm all for players playing the game how they want. Unfortunately, there are limits placed on players due to the shared construct of the game...in most activities, we are playing the game the way Square-Enix wants. If the game is structured in a way that /check has utility, then that's just something that you have to accept as a player (or complain to the developers, by all means). I want players to be able to play in a manner that they feel comfortable, but an accord has to be met when one's activities have a consequence on other players. That means living up to the reasonable expectations for equipment for partying with other players, something which /check helps ensure.

Elmyrsun wrote:
I never took this sort of approach to checking. When I check people it's not to see what they don't have, it's to see what they do have. I just like looking at armor and different combos. I had a PUP back in the day with near Max evasion, I just needed that **** hairpin to max lol. I got checked often and questions about my build sometimes but that's because it was Min/Maxed beyond what some people thought necessary. I liked seeing out of the ordinary builds and such. So I never checked people to mentally berate the crap they're wearing, it was just to see what they had on.

I Check just to Check, I check everyone just to see how they're building it, not to judge how their building it.


Same here.

Edited, Jun 11th 2010 1:41pm by Eske

Edited, Jun 11th 2010 1:51pm by Eske
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#111LaFey, Posted: Jun 11 2010 at 12:07 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) you contradicted yourself in those two paragraphs. i'm not reading the relationship wrong, that is the predicate of your entire stance: that if you're a good player, you will have good gear. ignoring completely, by the way, that the definition of "good gear" is entirely arbitrary and subjective
#112 Jun 11 2010 at 12:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Sage
****
6,470 posts
LaFey wrote:
you contradicted yourself in those two paragraphs. i'm not reading the relationship wrong, that is the predicate of your entire stance: that if you're a good player, you will have good gear. ignoring completely, by the way, that the definition of "good gear" is entirely arbitrary and subjective


While there is certainly a subjectivity to determining, "good" equipment, there is also an objective side. Equipment has stats, and some stats help you perform better. If you're a caster, and you're wearing +STR gear that isn't affecting your performance, then I can objectively say that you are not wearing appropriate equipment.

LaFey wrote:
alas, this thread is so laughable, and the responses are taking so long, that i question why i'm interested in this game at all. how is it that an entire community of potential players are so deadset on deliberately ruining the game for everyone else? i think the compromise of having an option to completely forbid inspection of one's person is the only reasonable action for the development team, and i don't see how there's any room for argument there.

perhaps it's just the ZAM community on this little out-of-the-way board group, because i don't remember the WoW group being so hostile even when i told many of them off for similar stupidness. i managed to reach an amiable accord with those particular people, but here? ohhhhh no, we have the most heinous, unprofessional bullying by staff that i've ever witnessed on any forum ever -- and i should know, i'm a staff member on most of those i frequent! if this is the conduct to be expected from the ZAM population and staff, i'm embarrassed for you since you apparently haven't the sense or conscience to feel properly ashamed of yourselves.

it's lucky that ZAM is but one (failing, apparently) community among many that deals with MMOs. perhaps after the decay has reached a critical point, the petty tyrants who "staff" this place will realize how incredibly pathetic their behavior is. or perhaps the bad apples will be removed from their position due to overwhelming clamor from the abused forum population. if there's no recourse for us after so breathtaking an abuse, all i can feel is a distinct lack of loss by abandoning a corrupt and feeble "community". which should be a darn shame since i've been reading Allakhazam for almost a decade now. why suddenly i encounter such a gross misconduct from the staff now, i suppose is a matter of statistical probability.


By all means, leave. I don't think anyone here will beg you to stay.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#113 Jun 11 2010 at 12:28 PM Rating: Good
**
736 posts
I should have quoted :3

I was referring almost entirely to Mikhalia's specific reason for checking, not the act of checking on a whole.

As I've stated in previous posts, I agree entirely with checking as information exchange. Modern MMOs offer more choices, don't lead you by the nose with quests as firmly as they used to, and don't have a place where you can see all of your available choices in-game. Outside of forums, /checking is the best way to get some direction (though I kind of wish they'd invent something more intuitive).
#114 Jun 11 2010 at 12:31 PM Rating: Good
Sage
****
6,470 posts
Zemzelette wrote:
I should have quoted :3

I was referring almost entirely to Mikhalia's specific reason for checking, not the act of checking on a whole.

As I've stated in previous posts, I agree entirely with checking as information exchange. Modern MMOs offer more choices, don't lead you by the nose with quests as firmly as they used to, and don't have a place where you can see all of your available choices in-game. Outside of forums, /checking is the best way to get some direction (though I kind of wish they'd invent something more intuitive).


If I had my druthers, hovering your mouse over any item in say, the Auction House, would show how it appeared on your character, and provide the +/- vs. your current equipment.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#115 Jun 11 2010 at 12:42 PM Rating: Good
**
736 posts
Ah yes.
Those are the benefits and consequences of your choices, though. Not a list of what all your choices are.
Though AHs are generally great. More modern games have more rare/ex than what you may be used to in XI, so as a list AHs are pretty incomplete.

Edited, Jun 11th 2010 2:43pm by Zemzelette
#116 Jun 11 2010 at 12:48 PM Rating: Good
Sage
****
6,470 posts
Zemzelette wrote:
Ah yes.
Those are the benefits and consequences of your choices, though. Not a list of what all your choices are.
Though AHs are generally great. More modern games have more rare/ex than what you may be used to in XI, so as a list AHs are pretty incomplete.

Edited, Jun 11th 2010 2:43pm by Zemzelette


Boy, if the AH listings had a variety of auto-sort options, that'd be amazing. Sort by class, stats, cost, that sort of thing. Combine that with some sort of compendium of Rare/Ex equipments, and the features I mentioned before, and I'd be set.

Edited, Jun 11th 2010 2:49pm by Eske
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#117 Jun 11 2010 at 1:28 PM Rating: Good
**
736 posts
That would be Awesome :3
#118 Jun 11 2010 at 1:31 PM Rating: Good
Sage
****
6,470 posts
Quote:
Zemzelette
Guru
Send PM
Add to address book

665 posts
Score: Good


*Gasp*







The power of christ compels you! The power of christ compels you!
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#119 Jun 11 2010 at 1:33 PM Rating: Good
***
2,010 posts
Boy, that would be nice wouldn't it? Sorting in the XI AH was a crap shoot and it made it harder to compare stats on different pieces.

I'll tell you what though - I hope that they put more thought into the gear this time around than they did for XI. A lot (and I do mean A LOT) of pieces just reeked of laziness. What I mean is, they just seemed to throw jobs on pieces of equipment at random because they didn't know what else to do with it. So we see MNK and PUP being able to equip a metric **** ton of gear that does absolutely nothing for them.

Rings, earrings, and the like (Trinket-class items) can have some *all jobs* options, but if I see **** like Vermillion Cloak in XIV (MNK,RNG, PUP, really?) I'll personally go to SE headquarters and chain myself to their bike rack or whatever until they see reason.

They have been working on this game for years, and I hope that the level of detail and care given to each class reflects that.

#120 Jun 11 2010 at 3:06 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
Just because I enjoy feeding the trolls from time to time...

LaFey wrote:
Courtelise wrote:
What drives me crazy is people who got so sensitive about it. I currently play Aion and even though there is no notification in the chat log that someone's examining you, people still block it. Why do they feel the need to hide what they are wearing? The beauty of Aion is even if they block you from looking in game, you can just log on to their online profile and look if you really really must know what that amazing looking sword is.


why do you feel the need to know what they are wearing? why do you wear clothes? why not just go naked? why do you feel the need to hide your body from public scrutiny? speaking of your actual body, not just your avatar, to make this point.


Regarding your actual point (armor in game): Going naked is probably the worst possible gear you can have. Even if all of your gear is junk, at least it profides some DEF.

Regarding your snarky joke point (actual nudity): I don't wear any clothes on days that I don't need to go anywhere. If I don't have to run to the store or go to work, I just walk around the house naked. So does my fiancee. We'd be perfectly comfortable going out in public naked if it weren't illegal. Saves time on figuring out what to wear, doing laundry, and shopping for more clothes periodically.

Only time I wear clothes in my home is when guests are coming over, or perhaps when it's really cold (and even then, I'm usually just naked under a blanket because it's more comfortable.

Granted I'm sure I'm a minority, but for the sake of your argument, I have no qualms about hiding my body.

LaFey wrote:
BastokFL wrote:
I said nothing about requiring the best gear - only gear that shows you know what you're doing.


gear may never actually show that you know what you're doing. extraneous circumstances, as i mentioned before.


Good gear may not necessarily indicate you know what you're doing, but bad gear can indicate you don't. Unless you have a reason that someone could theoretically be the most skilled player but CHOOSE to not wear acceptable gear available at a reasonable price. I don't want to hear any of this "He/she may have a life" crap either, because it's ********* I'll grant you that the "They have a life" argument MAY extend to not having the BEST gear but there are a plethora of players who "have a life" and still manage to scrounge up at least DECENT gear.

So tell me: If a person is leveling their... let's say Warrior. And they have two options: one is gloves with STR+2 DEX+2 and one is gloves with options INT+5 MND-2... If you're going to assume this player is as "skilled" as you want him to be for your argument's purpose, why would he CHOOSE the latter option? And why should anyone else not have the option of checking him to know his choice?

LaFey wrote:
BastokFL wrote:
That why I specifically used the example of Battle Gloves: they provide a small amount of accuracy, which is always good for a melee class like MNK, but they are easy to obtain (when I stopped playing the cost all of 10,000 gil, which does not take very long to obtain.


why does the perverse, selfish culture of FFXI mean anything to us in FFXIV? this mentality is deeply disturbing, and i can't imagine that it will promote population growth.


I don't understand what you're trying to say here at all. You're asking why people in FFXIV should want to wear gear than makes sense, "Just because people in another game do it"? I don't care if you're a FFXI MNK or a WoW Warrior or a Swordsman in RO or a Fighter in DDO... if you have two pairs of gloves you can wear, one that gives +Acc and +Eva (or +Hit or +Dodge, whatever) and another that gives no plus to anything... why would anyone want to wear the statless gloves in a party? And don't use the "looks" option either. Again, no one cares about what you look like solo, but when you're in a party, suddenly 5 other people are depending on you to know what you're doing and have gear that helps you do it. How DARE they expect you to not be terribad when YOU want to wear whatever YOU want, whenever YOU want to? Clearly the other five of them are selfish. Couldn't possibly be you, no sir.

LaFey wrote:
BastokFL wrote:
And you're reading the causality completely wrong - I never said or even implied (except to the most warped, willfully miscomprehending mind) that a player is only good because of their gear; in fact that's the reverse of what I said. It's an if-then relationship - IF a player is skilled, THEN they will choose correctly out of the gear that is available to them.

Again, a major part of one's skill is being able to choose the right tools form the ones that are available - it's knowing that, even if I can't go get a ***** gun, the screwdriver on my Swiss army is better for removing screws than the knife blade is.


you contradicted yourself in those two paragraphs. i'm not reading the relationship wrong, that is the predicate of your entire stance: that if you're a good player, you will have good gear. ignoring completely, by the way, that the definition of "good gear" is entirely arbitrary and subjective


Many of the arguments cited don't require you to be a good player or to figure out arbitrary or subjective rules. We're not debating "Haidate vs Usukane" wherein math has to come into it; all of the cited examples have not been arguing whether X piece of top tier gear is better than Y piece of top tier gear... it's arguing the basic ability to read and understand numbers.

If you're a Black Mage, would you pick an item that gives +INT or +STR?
If you're a Dragoon, would you pick an item that gives +Acc or one that gives +CHA?
If you're a Warrior, would you pick an item that gives +5 STR or +2 STR?

These are all blatantly obvious examples where you don't even have to play the game to know what the right answer is. My mother's experience with games is limited to Wii Sports and I'd bet she could get it right. (Okay, maybe tossup on the second, in her case; unless I explained that Dragoon was a DD class first).

Reiterating what I've said in this post: If good gear and bad gear cost the same money, why would a good player choose to wear bad gear and still think they can call themselves a good player?

This all seems to come back to the "I want to where what I want, where I want, when I want, and don't you dare tell me not to, or YOU'RE being selfish" thing.

LaFey wrote:
you can claim that i'm "warped" and "willfully miscomprehending", but the truth is that you don't know why you believe what you do, and instead you simply cling to your idea without thought of the interests of others out of a petty need to make me a villain. your appeals to emotion don't fool anyone... except apparently the fools on ZAM who love drama.

you see, an "IF -> THEN" statement is explicitly a causal fork. i'm not sure how you missed that, but maybe you aren't actually logician or programmer, and you just think you can drop terms without understanding them and not be caught?


I don't know what you're trying to say with any of this. If there was a point in there, I didn't see it.

LaFey wrote:
as for the second paragraph, you willfully miscomprehend the concept that there's reasons which would prevent a perfect player from having even par gear. either real life calls and demands time, or perhaps that player simply isn't interested in grinding for gear? or perhaps he gave it to his wife/boyfriend so s/he could have good gear? or perhaps he's in the process of obtaining that gear? discriminating against players by excluding them from your group is counter-productive in just about any meaningful way, and it demonstrates a sociopathic mindset that, as i said before, is frankly just disturbing.


There are plenty of GOOD players that "have lives" and have ABOVE AVERAGE or better gear. If a player is truly God's gift to the world and has so little time that they can't afford ANY gear (10-15 mins a day worth of login?) I would imagine that they would be gracious enough to bow out.

Any "perfect player" is one who strives to be the best he/she can be; not one who settles for mediocrity. If someone truly is that good of a player, this is someone who will not accept subpar performance from themselves.

There's no such thing as the "perfect player who sucks". If you aren't good at a game, you either get better or you find a new game. Any good gamer (never mind perfect) understands this. Once you get into the "I'm going to play however I want, without regard to performance", you are no longer talking about a good (never mind perfect) player. You're talking about a selfish, immature brat with a sense of entitlement. And at that point, I don't care if their gear is good or not.

All the good gear in the world won't make up for a poor attitude. And when you're playing a game in a group, it's no longer about "What I want" but "What is best for everyone". Imagine how disastrous football or baseball or hockey or any other sport would be if the players showed up wearing whatever they want and did whatever they want on the field, because "We have a life, we can't be bothered to study playbooks"

Again: solo - do whatever you like. But you can't make the "It's my subscription to play how I want" argument when other people enter into it.

****, why don't you just take all the loot too? After all, it's your subscription, why should the rest of your party have a say in what you can or can't roll on?

LaFey wrote:
BAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW


Blah blah blah... Funny diatribe. Hope you enjoyed that 24 hour mute; looks like it wasn't good enough.

We won't miss you when you're gone.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#121 Jun 11 2010 at 3:14 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Torrence wrote:
Boy, that would be nice wouldn't it? Sorting in the XI AH was a crap shoot and it made it harder to compare stats on different pieces.

I'll tell you what though - I hope that they put more thought into the gear this time around than they did for XI. A lot (and I do mean A LOT) of pieces just reeked of laziness. What I mean is, they just seemed to throw jobs on pieces of equipment at random because they didn't know what else to do with it. So we see MNK and PUP being able to equip a metric sh*t ton of gear that does absolutely nothing for them.

Rings, earrings, and the like (Trinket-class items) can have some *all jobs* options, but if I see sh*t like Vermillion Cloak in XIV (MNK,RNG, PUP, really?) I'll personally go to SE headquarters and chain myself to their bike rack or whatever until they see reason.

They have been working on this game for years, and I hope that the level of detail and care given to each class reflects that.



For what it's worth... I've soloed as MNK/WHM (for cures) with a Vermy. Wouldn't do that in a party, but meh. Also, Vermy is nice on a BRD/Mage, which doesn't technically have any native MP.

For the most part though, I agree with the statement that a lot of gear had their "WTF" moments. Especially some of the stat choices on AF/AF2 gear.

Zemzelette wrote:
Quote:
That doesn't surprise me, but I still find it funny.

And the more reasons I hear why "checking gear is bad" all seem to point towards paranoia.



It comes off the other way around from this end.

The checkers are paranoid. The days of complacent automatic trust in your fellow player to be able bodied and capable is gone, people instead default to constant suspicion and doubt. Again, understandable in this casual day and age. Wholly irreversible. But unpleasant.


Most people who use the check feature aren't paranoid, although I do see how it could be looked at that way.

Ultimately it comes down to the fact that you're playing an online multiplayer game with thousands of people; it's not reasonable to trust everyone implicitly, but I agree it's equally unreasonable to distrust everyone too.

I do wish people could trust each other more, but with the abundance of people who do wear insanely questionable gear choices, the occurrence of "Players with horrible gear" is abundant in nearly any game. This too is wholly irreversible and unpleasant.

Also, go go post 666 :)
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#122 Jun 11 2010 at 5:03 PM Rating: Good
LaFey wrote:
as for the second paragraph, you willfully miscomprehend the concept that there's reasons which would prevent a perfect player from having even par gear. either real life calls and demands time, or perhaps that player simply isn't interested in grinding for gear? or perhaps he gave it to his wife/boyfriend so s/he could have good gear? or perhaps he's in the process of obtaining that gear? discriminating against players by excluding them from your group is counter-productive in just about any meaningful way, and it demonstrates a sociopathic mindset that, as i said before, is frankly just disturbing.


Putting the shoe on the other foot for a moment, you seem to willfully miscomprehend that there are plenty of good reasons to examine someone's gear that has absolutely nothing to do with looking down your nose at them because something you see isn't absolutely top-notch. You're look at one extremely isolated application of the option to take a detailed look at the gear on another character and using that as justification to pooh-pooh the feature, which is rather unfortunate.

It could be a matter of idle curiousity. In FFXI, knowing that there was a certain proportion of players that prefered not to have their gear examined meant that poking around to satisfy said idle curiousity was a questionable practice in my opinion. When we talk about being good members of a community, my bored anxiety is not justification to make others uncomfortable. In the absence of that notification, there's absolutely no harm in it. It's just looking. And since the person I'm examining doesn't know I'm taking a peek, no harm = no foul.

It could also be an issue of focused curiousity. Maybe I'm wearing something someone has never seen before and they're curious as to what it is. Or maybe I've just survived the zomfg sewer rat death blow of rabid doom and they're wondering if I've got some sort of anti-rat trinket. Put succinctly, they're examining with a specific purpose in mind and in that case they're being presented with an opportunity to learn and that's never a bad thing. It certainly doesn't degrade the community by allowing other people to see for themselves what I've got on as opposed to them asking and forcing me to give them a detailed breakdown of each piece. Very much a convenience to both me and them.

And yes, you do have people examining other players out of the e-peen curiousity standpoint. They're looking for a reason to make themselves feel better either by looking for someone wearing gear inappropriate for their class/role or the wanna-be elitist approach of, "Your gear might be adequate but obviously you must be stupid because it could also be better." That's a function of idiots, not the feature to examine gear. Idiots will be idiots in whatever way they possibly can be. Preventing them for examining your gear isn't going to change that.

If you want to idiot proof yourself from other players, your best bet is to find an offline RPG that you enjoy. As soon as you throw yourself into an online community like you find in an MMO, you're going to have run-ins with morons. If you're going to argue that the option to examine gear should be excluded for the sake of cutting down on your idiot encounters, you should probably also start arguing against other players being able to see your activity in a combat log. While you're at it, why not start a thread on how absolutely critical it should be to be able to turn off all forms of incoming communication? If they can't see the specifics of what gear you have on, they can't see what you're doing in combat, and they can't talk to you, you should be mostly safe from the idiots. Of course, next up would probably be complaining about people who run around in circles when they're bored, so maybe after you handle the incoming communication issue you can drop a bug in SE's ear about being able to turn off other player models altogether. I reckon that ought to about solve your problems.

You appear to have missed the glory days here when it was very common for people to argue against concepts that SE had already announced for the game, interjecting their own throwbacks to the bygone era of soul sucking MMOs as though their niche interests would only help the community. If you want to see people arguing for concepts that could only hurt the game, bounce back through the threads to 6-8 months ago. Might give you some perspective.

In the meantime, do be a sport and try not to get bant.
#123 Jun 11 2010 at 6:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,911 posts
LaFey wrote:

it's lucky that ZAM is but one (failing, apparently) community among many that deals with MMOs. perhaps after the decay has reached a critical point, the petty tyrants who "staff" this place will realize how incredibly pathetic their behavior is. or perhaps the bad apples will be removed from their position due to overwhelming clamor from the abused forum population. if there's no recourse for us after so breathtaking an abuse, all i can feel is a distinct lack of loss by abandoning a corrupt and feeble "community". which should be a darn shame since i've been reading Allakhazam for almost a decade now. why suddenly i encounter such a gross misconduct from the staff now, i suppose is a matter of statistical probability.


Wow, you just don't learn do you?
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#124 Jun 11 2010 at 7:24 PM Rating: Good
****
5,684 posts
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
LaFey wrote:

it's lucky that ZAM is but one (failing, apparently) community among many that deals with MMOs. perhaps after the decay has reached a critical point, the petty tyrants who "staff" this place will realize how incredibly pathetic their behavior is. or perhaps the bad apples will be removed from their position due to overwhelming clamor from the abused forum population. if there's no recourse for us after so breathtaking an abuse, all i can feel is a distinct lack of loss by abandoning a corrupt and feeble "community". which should be a darn shame since i've been reading Allakhazam for almost a decade now. why suddenly i encounter such a gross misconduct from the staff now, i suppose is a matter of statistical probability.


Wow, you just don't learn do you?

What? don't like the smell of the proletariat rising up to overthrow your oppressive gaming empire?

EVISCERATE THE BOURGEOISE!!!


clearly joking, please don't hurt me big brother :(
____________________________
Almalieque wrote:
I admit that I was wrong

God bless Lili St. Cyr
#125 Jun 11 2010 at 7:25 PM Rating: Good
Sage
****
6,470 posts
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
ban hammer


/highfive
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#126 Jun 11 2010 at 8:23 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:

{I Win Button}

LaFey wrote:
Posting from BANNED


*dances*

Anyone taking wagers on whether we see LaFail v.2 in sock form?
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#127 Jun 12 2010 at 6:55 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
Avatar
43 posts
You should be able to inspect others.
There should also be an option to not allow this if you don't like it. In personal setting or something, just be able to "allow others to inspect" or not. This is how some other games handle it.
#128 Jun 12 2010 at 7:43 AM Rating: Good
***
2,010 posts
Mikhalia wrote:

For what it's worth... I've soloed as MNK/WHM (for cures) with a Vermy. Wouldn't do that in a party, but meh. Also, Vermy is nice on a BRD/Mage, which doesn't technically have any native MP.

For the most part though, I agree with the statement that a lot of gear had their "WTF" moments. Especially some of the stat choices on AF/AF2 gear.


Well I think you'll agree that the intended purpose of Monk wasn't necessarily to sub WHM and solo, and this goes back to a huge problem with XI being the main job is defined by the subjob.

I do agree that BRD\MAGE is a good use for the vermy, but the classes I mentioned (and even bard to some extent) see absolutely no benefit to their main job for being on this piece of equipment. That's what I hope they get away from in XIV so that you don't have to look at a piece of gear and say ok this is only mildly situationally useful when I have this subbed for this task. Let me spend 700k for an item that I might have use for once every few months.

Or things like why can DRK equip all the best shields in the game when we have no native shield skill... AT ALL? I get that in previous games Dark Knights used swords and shields but really, I could forgo the historical correctness in favor of more intelligent choices (or give us some shield skill).

Basically, I just hope they put time into thinking things through instead of just, "Well this looks a little bare with only WHM BLM SMN on it... LETS PUT RNG MNK AND PUP TOO THEY WEAR CLOTH!! YEA!"

Lot of pieces, that's what it feels like. If the choices out there make more sense for the different jobs individually and uniquely, we'll see fewer "wtf" players because benefits will always be clear.
#129 Jun 12 2010 at 8:08 AM Rating: Good
Sage
****
6,470 posts
Torrence wrote:
Mikhalia wrote:

For what it's worth... I've soloed as MNK/WHM (for cures) with a Vermy. Wouldn't do that in a party, but meh. Also, Vermy is nice on a BRD/Mage, which doesn't technically have any native MP.

For the most part though, I agree with the statement that a lot of gear had their "WTF" moments. Especially some of the stat choices on AF/AF2 gear.


Well I think you'll agree that the intended purpose of Monk wasn't necessarily to sub WHM and solo, and this goes back to a huge problem with XI being the main job is defined by the subjob.

I do agree that BRD\MAGE is a good use for the vermy, but the classes I mentioned (and even bard to some extent) see absolutely no benefit to their main job for being on this piece of equipment. That's what I hope they get away from in XIV so that you don't have to look at a piece of gear and say ok this is only mildly situationally useful when I have this subbed for this task. Let me spend 700k for an item that I might have use for once every few months.

Or things like why can DRK equip all the best shields in the game when we have no native shield skill... AT ALL? I get that in previous games Dark Knights used swords and shields but really, I could forgo the historical correctness in favor of more intelligent choices (or give us some shield skill).

Basically, I just hope they put time into thinking things through instead of just, "Well this looks a little bare with only WHM BLM SMN on it... LETS PUT RNG MNK AND PUP TOO THEY WEAR CLOTH!! YEA!"

Lot of pieces, that's what it feels like. If the choices out there make more sense for the different jobs individually and uniquely, we'll see fewer "wtf" players because benefits will always be clear.


*shrugs*

I'm actually okay with the odd job/equipment combinations...provided that thought is put into providing and balancing for each class. Once in a while some odd, totally random equipment finds utility in an unpredictable way. It's certainly a rare occurrence, but when it happens I get an odd kick out of it. Plus, I like the added freedom of using unconventional setups for when I'm soloing or farming and feel like ******** around.

For example:

When I played my Ranger, if I knew that we were going to be exp'ing off of mobs that were close enough to my level that I knew I wouldn't have accuracy problems (pre-nerf), I'd eschew the typical /nin sub in favor of /war, for some added power. When I did, I'd use this for a tiny little bit of extra Defense and HP. But it was mostly because I liked the look of the shield, and I've never been a big fan of dual-wielding.


At the time, I was probably the only ranger in the entire server that equipped a shield, and it was only possible because of the quirky "all jobs" capability for the lvl 30 shields. I loved it, though.

Edited, Jun 13th 2010 8:00pm by Eske
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#130 Jun 12 2010 at 4:34 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Eske wrote:
Torrence wrote:
Mikhalia wrote:

For what it's worth... I've soloed as MNK/WHM (for cures) with a Vermy. Wouldn't do that in a party, but meh. Also, Vermy is nice on a BRD/Mage, which doesn't technically have any native MP.

For the most part though, I agree with the statement that a lot of gear had their "WTF" moments. Especially some of the stat choices on AF/AF2 gear.


Well I think you'll agree that the intended purpose of Monk wasn't necessarily to sub WHM and solo, and this goes back to a huge problem with XI being the main job is defined by the subjob.

I do agree that BRD\MAGE is a good use for the vermy, but the classes I mentioned (and even bard to some extent) see absolutely no benefit to their main job for being on this piece of equipment. That's what I hope they get away from in XIV so that you don't have to look at a piece of gear and say ok this is only mildly situationally useful when I have this subbed for this task. Let me spend 700k for an item that I might have use for once every few months.

Or things like why can DRK equip all the best shields in the game when we have no native shield skill... AT ALL? I get that in previous games Dark Knights used swords and shields but really, I could forgo the historical correctness in favor of more intelligent choices (or give us some shield skill).

Basically, I just hope they put time into thinking things through instead of just, "Well this looks a little bare with only WHM BLM SMN on it... LETS PUT RNG MNK AND PUP TOO THEY WEAR CLOTH!! YEA!"

Lot of pieces, that's what it feels like. If the choices out there make more sense for the different jobs individually and uniquely, we'll see fewer "wtf" players because benefits will always be clear.


*shrugs*

I'm actually okay with the odd job/equipment combinations...provided that thought is put into providing and balancing for each class. Once in a while some odd, totally random equipment finds utility in an unpredictable way. It's certainly a rare occurrence, but when it happens I get an odd kick out of it. Plus, I like the added freedom of using unconventional setups for when I'm soloing or farming and feel like ******** around.

For example:

When I played my Ranger, if I knew that we were going to be exp'ing off of mobs that were close enough to my level that I knew I wouldn't have accuracy problems (pre-nerf), I'd eschew the typical /nin sub in favor of /war, for some added power. When I was did, I'd use this for a tiny little bit of extra Defense and HP. But it was mostly because I liked the look of the shield, and I've never been a big fan of dual-wielding.


At the time, I was probably the only ranger in the entire server that equipped a shield, and it was only possible because of the quirky "all jobs" capability for the lvl 30 shields. I loved it, though.


Now, if I couldn't inspect you and just saw a RNG with a shield, my initial reaction would probably be "WTF?"

/check tells me that you're getting some extra DEF and HP for soloing from it. I probably wouldn't have gone that route myself, but at least I can look at it and say "Yeah, I can see that." and move on.

Lack of check still leaves me wondering "WTF?" and possibly sending you tells to figure out why/how you're using a shield, which wastes your time if you answer me, or leaves me feeling ignored if you don't.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#131 Jun 13 2010 at 12:03 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
703 posts
Or makes the person happy to explain it? There are people that revel in showing off their wonderfully thought out gear combinations with but a question.
#132 Jun 13 2010 at 11:40 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
224 posts
/check


You have all been examined by Nalamwen.
#133 Jun 14 2010 at 10:33 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,010 posts
Mikhalia wrote:

Now, if I couldn't inspect you and just saw a RNG with a shield, my initial reaction would probably be "WTF?"

/check tells me that you're getting some extra DEF and HP for soloing from it. I probably wouldn't have gone that route myself, but at least I can look at it and say "Yeah, I can see that." and move on.

Lack of check still leaves me wondering "WTF?" and possibly sending you tells to figure out why/how you're using a shield, which wastes your time if you answer me, or leaves me feeling ignored if you don't


You didn't need /check to know that someone would be getting extra DEF and hp\block from using a shield though. That's reaching just a tad to prove a point, methinks.

I get that everyone wants to play with other people who at least have a moderate clue what they are doing, but in situations like the above where the guy is doing his own thing, on his own - well he might not give a crap what you or I think about him using a shield, regardless of whether he's a ranger or a warrior or a naked smn\drk.

However, the negative points are a community issue not a mechanics issue. /Check in and of itself is a useful tool. It just sucks that this community is so full of jerks that often misuse it, creating the hostile environment that makes people not even want to have the feature in the game at all.

Sadly, that's not something that SE can fix.



Edited, Jun 14th 2010 12:34pm by Torrence
#134 Jun 14 2010 at 11:40 AM Rating: Good
Sage
**
770 posts
Okay what I got from this whole thread so far, that in a perfect /check feature you could...

Check equiped stuff without having it go in your chat log and have the option to turn the ability to be checked on or off, as well as the chat log daying you have been checked.
____________________________
I do not suffer from insanity.. I rather enjoy it.

{retired} Devalynn Mithra WHM extrodinare -Garuda (gives everyone a high paw! yeah!)

Church OF Mikhalia
#135 Jun 14 2010 at 5:59 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,539 posts
Puppy1 wrote:
Okay what I got from this whole thread so far, that in a perfect /check feature you could...

Check equiped stuff without having it go in your chat log and have the option to turn the ability to be checked on or off, as well as the chat log daying you have been checked.


Ideally, yes. But the problem with giving players the ability to block check is the same as anon; you'll end up with people who refuse to turn it off and get indignant about the fact that you even asked.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
1 2 3 Next »
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 27 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (27)