Shamaya, on 04 February 2010 - 10:23 AM, said:
you don't even play the game you fucking tea drinking cunt
I'm just taking a break you sushi sucking sodomite.
Quote
There's a huge difference in something that turns 3 button presses into 1 and something that does everything on its own.
Unfortunately you appear to be placing path's argument with mine, this isn't the case. Spellcast utilises customised scripts to take several actions under specific conditions, you have already gone way beyond your own definition of its purpose by explaining how it will detect your job/subjob and react accordingly. A basic windower macro fits your description, it allows you extend a macro beyond the limits placed upon us by SE.
Spellcast xmls on the other hand will modify their actions based on your specifications, making use of functions and variables unavailable within the game. It isn't as simple as freeing up macro slots, that is merely a by-product of the reduced player interaction, and a convenient excuse used to validate it's use. Many users will be quick to point out the potential exploits such a system is capable of, quickly following it up with "but I don't use that" which is supposed to make things better. I only used FFXI-APP for the built-in translator to make communicating with the Japs a lot easier, that means the program was acceptable right? I mean, other people might cheat with it, but I don't.
You cannot program a standard macro to react differently based upon the situation you happen to be in. You cannot tell the game to equip specific items based upon your HP. You cannot alter your equipment based upon the element/casting time/MP cost, nor can a macro tell if you are in combat or not. These are just a few of the variables available that give Spellcast users an advantage. What about detecting buffs, or the day, or moon phase? Maybe you'd like to download a pre-defined set of rules to govern your actions?
Quote
Is there really so much skill involved in using the former macros as opposed to the latter?
I hear this line thrown out a lot by people defending Spellcast, the simple answer is yes. We all know shitty players, and it would be easy to hand them Spellcast, with pre-made xmls and see an immediate improvement. I'm sure most people can name at least one player who would be lost without it. If the ability to layout and operate standard macros made no difference, you would see no performance increase between to identical players with and without Spellcast. The fewer steps required to perform an action, the fewer decisions are made, the easier things become. A subpar player with extensive knowledge of Spellcast is capable of much more than usual because many of the decisions, reaction times, and planning has been done for them. That they had to write a script themselves to do this is beside the point, it's a
script, not a
macro. The weak link being that you use a macro to trigger the script.
If all you needed was a method of reducing the number of buttons pressed, a windower macro would suffice, it is the additional features of Spellcast that draw people in.
Quote
SpellCast maximizes your potential with fast gear swaps.
Using ChangeSpell, you can automate this and have SpellCast cast lower levels of spells when you don't have enough MP for the first one.
You only have to type a part of someone's name. It will match anyone in the zone, but people in your party or alliance will get priority.
Those are just a few of the features listed on the Spellcast page that go way beyond simply reducing keystrokes, you can keep clutching at your straw if you want, but the authors are more than happy to elaborate on the extensive "advanced features." The only difference between Spellcast and a bot is the level of interaction required to make them work. They are both just scripts in the end.
Sign In »
Register Now!
Help
Back to top
