I was honestly a little sad when I saw the aiming cryptlurker jacket, don't get me wrong it looks nice, but it looks so dirty, it makes my character look homeless.
Printable View
I think in some cases, you'd save time making gear unisex. Look at Copied Factory; there was the 2B glamour box (which everyone could use), cool, excellent. Then you had the actual gear... every single piece of which had two potential designs: one for men, one for women. That means they had to design the gearset twice for each of the FMSASCH (Fending Maiming Striking Aiming Scouting Casting Healing) gearsets.
It strikes me that right now, half the reason we usually have paired gearsets in a gear family being palette-swapped versions of each other is because they're designing twice as many pieces for each gearset. Even though you don't get to pick which you wear (male or female design); in Copied Factory, women were getting the dresses and thigh-highs even if we were viciously jealous of the 9S jackets.
Imagine if they had instead designed one unisex gearset for each of those: you had the (unisex) 2B glamour chest, plus men and women had the same Fending set, the same Maiming set, the same Striking, etc. Now they've only done half as much actual art design (i.e. coming up with the actual gearsets, not the modeling specifically) as they needed previously. Either you've saved time (at least with the art team) which you can use on different content... or you can spend the same amount of art design time and actually make each of the sets unique. So that, say, Fending and Maiming can each have their own design instead of one being a palette swap of the other, etc.
This doesn't mean that's necessarily the best way to handle things, of course; there are a lot of people who liked the 2B dresses that the Copied Factory gear was and, even if there were also a lot of us who wanted the 9S jackets as women. So I'm not trying to say this is what they should absolutely do. But I think it demonstrates that unisex clothing design doesn't have to always take additional dev time, especially since under the current gear system there'd be no way to pick between two designs for clothing.
But regardless of any hypothetical change for the in-game gearsets, I think any glamour set purchased for real money ought to be unisex. And as we've been told many times that all the Mogstation assets are handled by an entirely different team from the actual game dev team -- i.e., that adding new mounts and outfits to the Mogstation in no way impacts the actual dev schedule -- I don't really see a downside there. By Square-Enix's own word, making the Mogstation outfits unisex wouldn't impact the game's development schedule.
(Mostly I just want them to let me wear the Snow coat, dammit.)
So some people are so damn weird that they think THEIR personal preference is valid to shut down any desire ANYONE ELSE may want? Jesus how do some people move with egos that huge?
Are you ok? Did someone force you to wear an outfit that you didn't want and thus you think that me wearing the maid outfit is somehow FORCING YOU to 'enjoy' an outfit? Are you incapable of understanding simple logic of "if you don't want to wear it, don't wear it?" without trying to deprive others of options? Jesus christ dude.
From my perspective as a female lala as well as a person who enjoys all things girly, I prefer if they just keep certain outfits genderlocked. I hate that there are so many cute hairstyles/outfits that are gender neutral because when I wear them, I don’t want people to wonder if my lala is a boy or girl. I want it to be pretty damn obvious that she’s a girl.
I don’t like this mentality that everything has to always be available for both genders. I’d like some things to be kept sacred. (Even though they already ruined that with the Bonding outfits.) But of course, I’m all for adding more gender neutral attire for people who prefer that. I’m just saying, I’d also prefer if there were some outfits just for guys and some outfits that are just for girls. Call me “old fashioned,” but that’s just how I feel.