It's time (Option to Hide other players Glamour)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Avidria

I wish she didn't. It's awful. Why has nobody given the kid some actual armor? Light armor even?? Some pants???? Better than fighting in what's basically a nightgown...

---

Do not underestimate the strength of plot armour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Avidria

I wish she didn't. It's awful. Why has nobody given the kid some actual armor? Light armor even?? Some pants???? Better than fighting in what's basically a nightgown...

---

Because the devs decided that in their world that's appropriate gear for someone to wear into battle.

Likely because this is a world where glamours exist, she could be armoured to the teeth but she can still wear a cute dress.

Isn't the Crystal Exarch another example, from the look of things he wears his regular robes regardless of whether or not you have him as a PLD, WHM, or BLM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

I'm more boggled by the implication that someone who objects to someone else's appearance can only restrain themself from commenting on it by removing it from their sight - which gives them exactly what they want, at the expense of what the other person might want.

That's not tolerance.

---

If the other person want to impose their appearance on someone despite said someone being uncomfortable with it, would it not be harassment? I doubt someone dressed as a south american ghost, complete with a white pointy hat, would make many friends in limsa or anywhere else in public. What you're asking is for the uncomfortable player to suck it up and endure something that might deeply offends them coming from someone that might be dressing in such a way that purposefully causes distress the uncomfortable player. Endure or walk away. Said player might even lash out from being cornered and at that point everybody's time is ruined.
If the player instead had a tool to shield themselves from offense, like how blacklists work, they would be able to tolerate better what offending them.

Ideally nobody would be offended by anything but alas its not the world we live in. Us humans are wired differently from one another and the best we can do is not exclude others but tolerate each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

Do not underestimate the strength of plot armour.

---

Touché.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sairys

Because the devs decided that in their world that's appropriate gear for someone to wear into battle.

Likely because this is a world where glamours exist, she could be armoured to the teeth but she can still wear a cute dress.

Isn't the Crystal Exarch another example, from the look of things he wears his regular robes regardless of whether or not you have him as a PLD, WHM, or BLM.

---

I mean, fair enough, though my post really wasn't all that serious :P I actually hate it because it's a white nightgown and the thought of the cool zero protection that would provide on top of the cool zero protection from STAINS makes my nose wanna scrunch all up. Like. Seriously. At least the Exarch could have some chainmail hidden under there or something, for all we know. Ryne's just wearing a scrap of white cloth. <.< Probably to make her look more like the legends or somesuch but god I hate "Big" Minfilia's outfit too lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

If the other person want to impose their appearance on someone despite said someone being uncomfortable with it, would it not be harassment? I doubt someone dressed as a south american ghost, complete with a white pointy hat, would make many friends in limsa or anywhere else in public. What you're asking is for the uncomfortable player to suck it up and endure something that might deeply offends them coming from someone that might be dressing in such a way that purposefully causes distress the uncomfortable player. Endure or walk away. Said player might even lash out from being cornered and at that point everybody's time is ruined.
If the player instead had a tool to shield themselves from offense, like how blacklists work, they would be able to tolerate better what offending them.

Ideally nobody would be offended by anything but alas its not the world we live in. Us humans are wired differently from one another and the best we can do is not exclude others but tolerate each other.

---

They're not imposing their appearance on you, they are just existing while wearing an outfit that they like. It's also not harassment, because again, they're just standing there existing.

The only person creating the negativity in that situation is the individual who wants to be able to impose their views on what appropriate clothing is on to other rather than accepting everyone has the freedom to wear whatever they like from the selection provided. The harassment is when someone makes the choice to attack others who have chosen to wear an option the game has provided for them because they don't agree with that option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Avidria

Touché.


I mean, fair enough, though my post really wasn't all that serious :P I actually hate it because it's a white nightgown and the thought of the cool zero protection that would provide on top of the cool zero protection from STAINS makes my nose wanna scrunch all up. Like. Seriously. At least the Exarch could have some chainmail hidden under there or something, for all we know. Ryne's just wearing a scrap of white cloth. <.< Probably to make her look more like the legends or somesuch but god I hate "Big" Minfilia's outfit too lol

---

I mean, yeah, but the wonders of illusion magic!

The canon to me reads that Ryne could actually be wearing something like the scaevan scouting gear or the dungeon sets from the trust dungeons, she's just decided she wants to use glamours to look like she's wearing that outfit heh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sairys

They're not imposing their appearance on you, they are just existing while wearing an outfit that they like. It's also not harassment, because again, they're just standing there existing.

---

Someone was recently given a suspension for existing in a public place while using a spell and it was considered harassment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sairys

The only person creating the negativity in that situation is the individual who wants to be able to impose their views on what appropriate clothing is on to other rather than accepting everyone has the freedom to wear whatever they like from the selection provided. The harassment is when someone makes the choice to attack others who have chosen to wear an option the game has provided for them because they don't agree with that option.

---

What you see as someone imposing their views could be someone feeling uncomfortable by being exposed to something that deeply offends them. By that same logic, someone dressed as a klanman could just be existing while other people shouting at them would create negativity by imposing whats acceptable or not to wear. Someone could see the klanman suit and feel so distressed they would lash out and you'd consider them harassers because they "made the choice" to attack others who have chosen to wear an option the game has provided for them because they don't agree with that option.

Shielding yourself from someone else's glamour can only facillitate co-existence amongst people with possibly wildly different natures. It would be selfish and intolerant to demand that others bypass their identity on the same level that it would be intolerant to demand that others "pray the gay away".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

If the other person want to impose their appearance on someone despite said someone being uncomfortable with it, would it not be harassment? I doubt someone dressed as a south american ghost, complete with a white pointy hat, would make many friends in limsa or anywhere else in public.

---

On the specific costume, if deliberate (which it probably would be), there are other rules that would come under besides direct harassment.

in any case you've flipped your example around and are trying to claim it's the same thing.

The first time, you were talking about giving someone the ability to turn off an "offending man in a dress" that they are personally unable to tolerate. Not because they are trying to harass the person but simply because they are wearing a dress, and somehow (according to you) if the other person "lashed out" it would be the fault of the so-called offender and not the one expressing bigotry.

Now you're talking about someone dressing up as a commonly-identified racial hate group (which, without actually checking, I would assume is prohibited in the TOS, if not actually illegal) and equating it to the same situation, which it is not. It should not be "quietly turned off" and a moderator would probably tell them to change their outfit even if the player claimed they had no idea it was offensive - whereas they wouldn't just because a male character has equipped a normal piece of clothing that their character is able to equip.

"Tolerating each other" does not involve literally refusing to tolerate the fact that someone want to dress in a way you disapprove of. It's putting aside that opinion and accepting that the person can dress like that if they want - and that they want others to see them like that. And putting up barriers where each person can see the world as they like it might create an "illusion of harmony", but really everyone is living in their own little box and it would create a really awful world where you can never be sure how you're coming across to others. It would be an uneasy feeling all the time - maybe it wouldn't bother you personally but it would certainly bother me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

Someone was recently given a suspension for existing in a public place while using a spell and it was considered harassment.

---

We weren't there and we don't have the context for that ruling. Did people ask him to stop? Did he say anything to others?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

On the specific costume, if deliberate (which it probably would be), there are other rules that would come under besides direct harassment.

in any case you've flipped your example around and are trying to claim it's the same thing.

The first time, you were talking about giving someone the ability to turn off an "offending man in a dress" that they are personally unable to tolerate. Not because they are trying to harass the person but simply because they are wearing a dress, and somehow (according to you) if the other person "lashed out" it would be the fault of the so-called offender and not the one expressing bigotry.

Now you're talking about someone dressing up as a commonly-identified racial hate group (which, without actually checking, I would assume is prohibited in the TOS, if not actually illegal) and equating it to the same situation, which it is not. It should not be "quietly turned off" and a moderator would probably tell them to change their outfit even if the player claimed they had no idea it was offensive - whereas they wouldn't just because a male character has equipped a normal piece of clothing that their character is able to equip.

---

So you're okay with people dressing in whatever they like as long as it is not offensive to you. You're not being completely consistent in the 'people can wear whatever they want' argument, because obviously you have exceptions. But we're not allowed to have those exceptions, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

"Tolerating each other" does not involve literally refusing to tolerate the fact that someone want to dress in a way you disapprove of. It's putting aside that opinion and accepting that the person can dress like that if they want - and that they want others to see them like that. And putting up barriers where each person can see the world as they like it might create an "illusion of harmony"

---

The illusion of harmony is harmony. If it allows the most amount of people to co-exist peacefully even tho they may hold disdain for each other in private, then we've made a significant progress from all out war or conflict and harassment.
Thats tolerance.
Given that the only alternative from tolerance is population cleansing, its a pretty good thing and perhaps the best we can do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

but really everyone is living in their own little box and it would create a really awful world where you can never be sure how you're coming across to others.

---

We do live in a really awful world where you can never be sure how you're coming across to others. It sucks but even behind smiles and soft words, people are constantly judging each other wether they want it on not. Its human nature. The best we can hope for is to co-exist despite that fact and shield our eyes from things that offends us if thats the cost of co-existence, which is the option I'm arguing for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

Someone was recently given a suspension for existing in a public place while using a spell and it was considered harassment.

---

That was for spamming Holy in a town. Holy is one of the biggest, brightest and loudest spells in the game. And the spamming happened in a zone where it serves zero function (unlike crafting, penta melding, etc) because obviously there is nothing hostile to attack.

Show us a glam just as enormous, bright and loud, and then maybe mentioning that incident might have some relevance in this thread.

Apples and oranges. Glams do not have the individual spamming power of something spectacular and enormous like Holy, which can easily take up most of your screen even if you're zoomed out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

Apples and oranges. Glams do not have the individual spamming power of something spectacular and enormous like Holy, which can easily take up most of your screen even if you're zoomed out.

---

https://i.imgur.com/YAULQPf.png

Someone got their account suspended over someone else not using the tools at their disposal and would rather cleanse the offender. There's no option to tune down or disable glams and yet they are permanently on until the user glams them out. I'm arguing for something similar to effects possible for glamours as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

https://i.imgur.com/YAULQPf.png

Someone got their account suspended over someone else not using the tools at their disposal and would rather cleanse the offender. There's no option to tune down or disable glams and yet they are permanently on. I'm arguing for something similar to effects possible for glamours as well.

---

You do realise these options are for combat and game performance functionality, right? Spell effects can prevent you from seeing something that can kill your character. Reducing the intensity of spell effects can make less powerful pcs run the game smoother.

Is there a glam in the game that can blind you so much you might die in a fight? Is there a glam that can negatively affect the performance of your pc?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zabuza

He was just expressing himself. Who are you to censor him? He was just existing.

---

I'm not even going to waste a post responding to someone willfully ignoring the difference between clothing and a gigantic spell. So enjoy this edit if you do see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

That was for spamming Holy in a town. Holy is one of the biggest, brightest and loudest spells in the game. And the spamming happened in a zone where it serves zero function (unlike crafting, penta melding, etc) because obviously there is nothing hostile to attack.

Show us a glam just as enormous, bright and loud, and then maybe mentioning that incident might have some relevance in this thread.

Apples and oranges. Glams do not have the individual spamming power of something spectacular and enormous like Holy, which can easily take up most of your screen even if you're zoomed out.

---

He was just expressing himself. Who are you to censor him? He was just existing. Just turn your camera away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

I'm not even going to waste a post responding to someone willfully ignoring the difference between clothing and a gigantic spell. So enjoy this edit if you do see it.

---

You don't need to respond. I just find it funny how it's cool when you want to censor something server side but not when we want to censor something only client side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

You do realise these options are for combat and game performance functionality, right?

---

Not only that, these options makes public areas much more pleasant to navigate as well. Not being bombarded with things I'd rather not see makes for a better experience. The same option for glamours would do the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

Not only that, these options makes public areas much more pleasant to navigate as well. Not being bombarded with things I'd rather not see makes for a better experience. The same option for glamours would do the same.

---

But you do concede that there isn't a single glam in the game that can obstruct your vision in combat, or negatively affect the performance of your pc, right?

SE put in those options for spells to give players an easier time to perform in the game, whether it's to reduce overlapping flashy spells in combat making dangerous things easier to spot, giving their crap pc a break, or both. These serve real functions that can dramatically change the outcome of combat. They're not for solely opinion based matters like "damn this glam offends me, I wish I could turn it off" or "I feel like being the only well dressed person on the server today".

Again...apples and oranges. Disliking how a glam looks isn't the same as risking dying in combat because spells block your view of a telegraph or make your fps drop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

https://i.imgur.com/YAULQPf.png

Someone got their account suspended over someone else not using the tools at their disposal and would rather cleanse the offender. There's no option to tune down or disable glams and yet they are permanently on until the user glams them out. I'm arguing for something similar to effects possible for glamours as well.

---

Actually, what you're pointing out is why this is a waste of the devs time.

The effects setting at least has a functional use of making it possible to run the game on lower end machines and even when people have the option available to them they'll complain about the behaviours of others rather than using it.

Isn't it part of the MMO experience to encounter people with silly looks in a dungeon ?
Don't get me wrong, i'm not against this idea, since it won't change anything for me, but i think that the original issue is that there should be RP-dedicated servers (just like on other MMOs). In my opinion the reason this is happening is because all servers are mixing every type of player, so those who are here for the immersion have to put up with the silly glamours.

But then again, even on an RP server, someone could just say that they are a super strong hentai-cyborg and go with it. Maybe that's their story, and maybe they'd find it immersive, for all you know ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

They're not for solely opinion based matters like "damn this glam offends me, I wish I could turn it off" or "I feel like being the only well dressed person on the server today"

---

They're not solely opinion based matters but they do serve some of that purpose. Hell, if turning glams off meant everyone appears as their default class outfits thats some processing power you're saving if your PC or your internet is on the lower end. Disliking a glam probably wont wipe your party but it makes co-existance in a social based game more difficult

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sairys

Actually, what you're pointing out is why this is a waste of the devs time.

The effects setting at least has a functional use of making it possible to run the game on lower end machines and even when people have the option available to them they'll complain about the behaviours of others rather than using it.

---

The problem doesnt lie in the tools but in the people using them (or not). I personally find that reporting someone for something you could easily solve on your end to be extremely intolerant and selfish, removing someone else from play is different than shielding yourself from someone.
I feel that the GMs only enable those ridiculous suspensions because there's an intolerant mass begging for the cleansing of things and people they dont like rather than using tools to customise their experience thus protecting themselves from offense.

I just want to chime in real quick on some people's defense of turning off glamours... you keep saying to turn off battle effects if stuff like the Holy spam bothers you so much, but if I remember (since I do have battle effects off for other players), don't they still make noise? And honestly, Holy is one of the worst sounding spells in the game. It almost gives me flashbacks to ARR when a WHM in Halatali (Hard) would spam Holy and let the tank die.

So uh, I don't think that's the best defense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

They're not solely opinion based matters but they do serve some of that purpose. Hell, if turning glams off meant everyone appears as their default class outfits thats some processing power you're saving if your PC or your internet is on the lower end. Disliking a glam probably wont wipe your party but it makes co-existance in a social based game more difficult

---

What's your basis for this assertion?
The game would still be ultimately loading in a bunch of customisations and would still need to have all of the assets ready to go in case you just flipped it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

The problem doesnt lie in the tools but in the people using them (or not). I personally find that reporting someone for something you could easily solve on your end to be extremely intolerant and selfish, removing someone else from play is different than shielding yourself from someone.
I feel that the GMs only enable those ridiculous suspensions because there's an intolerant mass begging for the cleansing of things and people they dont like rather than using tools to customise their experience thus protecting themselves from offense.

---

Realistically, if that tool existed for the purpose you appear to believe it does then the GM response would have been to just use it.

You also keep complaining about stuff like people begging for the cleansing of things they don't like... this is what you're doing, you're asking to be able to, selectively or en masse, cleanse Eorzea of appearances that offend you, to pretend to yourself that those people don't exist and instead that everyone dresses in ways you deem appropriate, kinda ironic heh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sairys

What's your basis for this assertion?
The game would still be ultimately loading in a bunch of customisations and would still need to have all of the assets ready to go in case you just flipped it.

---

A simple guess, we're dealing with an awful lot of spaggeti code but I cant imagine having a default state has to be this terrible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sairys

Realistically, if that tool existed for the purpose you appear to believe it does then the GM response would have been to just use it.

---

Blacklisting is a tool that specifically allows you to control the communications you have and yet its still possible to be suspended over being rude, simply because its in high demand in the current social climate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sairys

You also keep complaining about stuff like people begging for the cleansing of things they don't like... this is what you're doing, you're asking to be able to, selectively or en masse, cleanse Eorzea of appearances that offend you, to pretend to yourself that those people don't exist and instead that everyone dresses in ways you deem appropriate, kinda ironic heh.

---

The difference is that it would only affect he user's perception, rather than actively removing people from the game or infringing on their ability to glam as they see fit. You are not cleansing the sun by wearing shades, you just protect yourself from its harmful rays.




The only valid point is that it would differ development time where some clientside meddling can easily fix some of it. There's already a mod out there that "removes" lalafels from the game, anyone enterprising enough could easily mod out the outfits they dislike.

I probably don't care because in dungeon, I'm busy pushing buttons, in trials I'm busy doing footworks and pushing buttons and moreso in Savage.

For DoH and DoL I'm too busy press macro button and automated and go back to Netflix to care who dote, peek, harass, or whatever to me.

Only time I bother to care is when running into the crowd in Limsa because I need to buy raw mats for ARR crafts and that horrid era is over. Or MSQ, which is unskippable and still Netflix time too.

Anyway I ran as a tank wearing a maid dress, it is definitely deemed appropriate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SamRF

Humans in real life are important. Your character in this game is not important, it's a file on your computer and on a server somewhere. Don't be so invested in this game with your values. Your char might get deleted from this game tomorrow due to server failure. This game's community does not represent real life society in any way at all. It's a niche among niches when it comes to means of entertainment.

---

Then it shouldn't matter to you what people have as glamours and you do not need a way to mute it. Since it doesn't matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

A simple guess, we're dealing with an awful lot of spaggeti code but I cant imagine having a default state has to be this terrible.

---

Cost vs benefit, if a lot of players were complaining about performance issues and it would actually help, they'd probably have done it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

Blacklisting is a tool that specifically allows you to control the communications you have and yet its still possible to be suspended over being rude, simply because its in high demand in the current social climate.

---

Because that behaviour is still against the rules regardless of whether or not you can blacklist it away. Really, the blacklist seems more of a stop-gap until a GM can come in and sort it out rather than some way to enable such people to play the game while acting the way they are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

The difference is that it would only affect he user's perception, rather than actively removing people from the game or infringing on their ability to glam as they see fit. You are not cleansing the sun by wearing shades, you just protect yourself from its harmful rays.

---

I don't know about you, but I'm not pretending the sun doesn't exist by wearing sunglasses lol, It's more along the lines of Arkangel from black mirror, that episode where one of the negative effects of such a thing was impairing personal growth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

The only valid point is that it would differ development time where some clientside meddling can easily fix some of it. There's already a mod out there that "removes" lalafels from the game, anyone enterprising enough could easily mod out the outfits they dislike.

---

I mean, if you really want an example of demand, given people haven't been mentioning such a mod already exists, can't be too many people wanting the feature lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

They're not solely opinion based matters but they do serve some of that purpose. Hell, if turning glams off meant everyone appears as their default class outfits thats some processing power you're saving if your PC or your internet is on the lower end. Disliking a glam probably wont wipe your party but it makes co-existance in a social based game more difficult

---

If your pc has so much trouble running the game to the point that it noticeably benefits from putting all players in the same outfit, then you need a new pc. Any gaming rig that has this particular issue with glams would have horrific performance in combat even with all the graphical settings down as low as possible.

Spell animations are significantly more taxing than clothing. I have a really good pc but in some fights my fps can drop for a brief moment due to the amount of spell effects going on (usually during a boss's ultimate attack or something of that nature), but I get zero performance issues even on the busiest days in the busiest towns. Earlier today the whole server was on top of msq npcs in several zones, and my pc didn't even hiccup in the slightest, but it can during some specific moments in combat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

Disliking a glam probably wont wipe your party but it makes co-existance in a social based game more difficult

---

You actually guarantee that people will have more difficulty co-existing if you allow them to remove glams from their view. Because when they go to another online multiplayer game they will be too used to living in a bubble that shielded them from the dreaded fashion choices of other players.

You cannot learn to co-exist with others if you refuse to acknowledge their different choices in appearance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

You cannot learn to co-exist with others if you refuse to acknowledge their different choices in appearance.

---

You seem to fail to understand what co-existing means. Co-existence doesnt even require actions, its the absence of aggression which would put the existence of the other in danger.
Looking away when seeing something offensive does not threaten the existence of someone else, it merely allows for both players to continue existing without incident.
Reporting someone over something offensive, like a man in a dress or a south american ghost, directly threaten their existence. It is an act of violence intended to remove someone. A digital murder if you like. It doesnt matter if rules are the rules, most if not all suspensions stem from user report and the current way the Terms of service are written, extreme intolerance is encouraged and rewarded. People are losing access to the game over a sound/special effect and its being celebrated or apologia is made aplenty for. Thats not co-existence, thats not tolerance.
Its enthusiastic digital murder.
Thats why I'm always going to be in favor of user tools to help them tailor their social experience as it is better than to cut someone from the game over the slightest thing and call it progress.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

Looking away when seeing something offensive does threaten the existence of someone else

---

This is only the case if that something is potentially dangerous. Glams...are not dangerous.

Does your arm hurt from reaching that far?

The player told me they made a typo so the above response is no longer necessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

Reporting someone over something offensive, like a man in a dress or a south american ghost, directly threaten their existence.

---

This is very interesting.

You have perhaps confessed that you find men in dresses offensive. Maybe this is why you're in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

This is only the case if that something is potentially dangerous. Glams...are not dangerous.

Does your arm hurt from reaching that far?

---

Typo, its late and I'm tired.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

This is very interesting.

You have perhaps confessed that you find men in dresses offensive. Maybe this is why you're in this thread.

---

I'm refering to my two examples from earlier, if you're going to argue at least do it in good faith.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zabuza

He was just expressing himself. Who are you to censor him? He was just existing. Just turn your camera away.



You don't need to respond. I just find it funny how it's cool when you want to censor something server side but not when we want to censor something only client side.

---

Thank you for standing up for us holy spammers. Spamming holy in towns is part of my identity, I feel unwelcome and threatened when I hear people are against this, the fact that there's an option to disable battle effects insults me beyond measure. Idk what I would do if I was unable to express my self this way, my existence would be futile. Why don't people understand they have no right to decide how I present myself!!?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

Typo, its late and I'm tired.

---

Fair enough, it happens to us all at some point. I'll edit my post to make it clear I responded to something you had not intended to say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RognarB

I'm refering to my two examples from earlier, if you're going to argue at least do it in good faith.

---

Are you trying to paint glam removal as some sort of saviour against reporting certain glams because people could turn them off? Look if this is the point you want to make I understand what you are getting at, but you seem to grossly overestimate the amount of people who would report this. If this was a real problem threads would be popping up all the time about seeking glam removal. And they would have been doing so for years at this point.

Just look at this thread, it's the same handful of people arguing over and over again. If you were around when Shirogane launched or when 24 mans briefly had greed only on loot rolls, you would have seen what it is like when a large number of players are outraged. Especially with Shirogane, you couldn't escape anything about it. It was even on gaming news sites, it was so bad.

Most players frankly don't give a toss about other people's glams. Why? Because it doesn't affect their personal gain in the game. That's literally it. The 24 man and Shirogane issues were essentially some manner of a loot problem (people wanted their goodies) but someone else's glam has no effect on what loot/possessions you can earn in the game.

The fact of the matter is, OP's suggestion is not only unnecessary to aid in game performance (because as I said before a pc that needs this would be unable to handle combat) it is also unnecessary to maintain harmony because for the most part no one cares how you look, as long as you don't take their loot. It doesn't make sense for SE to spend time and money making a feature that only a tiny amount of people would genuinely use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

Most players frankly don't give a toss about other people's glams. Why? Because it doesn't affect their personal gain in the game. That's literally it. The 24 man and Shirogane issues were essentially some manner of a loot problem (people wanted their goodies) but someone else's glam has no effect on what loot/possessions you can earn in the game.

The fact of the matter is, OP's suggestion is not only unnecessary to aid in game performance (because as I said before a pc that needs this would be unable to handle combat) it is also unnecessary to maintain harmony because for the most part no one cares how you look, as long as you don't take their loot. It doesn't make sense for SE to spend time and money making a feature that only a tiny amount of people would genuinely use.

---

Fair enough,

It could be seen as a niche issue not worth attending given the tech challenge and limited ressources. At least there's always the option to mingle with local files for those who really want it and thats probably going to be the only option for the foreseeable future anyway.
I'm happy to concede over that argument.

So I just ran Praetorium last night on an alt. Out of the 8 players 1 was dressed in an rather absurd manner. I'll call him Gary. Gary was wearing a white long sleeved shirt, white shorts, a white night cap and moogle slippers.

Every time there was a cutscene, which are unskippable so there's no "just turn your camera away", there was Gary in the background standing out like a sore thumb. So much for the seriousness of that whole encounter.

I was actually getting into the dailogue and mood again since it's been a while since I've done that part of the story. And then there was Gary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joven

So I just ran Praetorium last night on an alt. Out of the 8 players 1 was dressed in an rather absurd manner. I'll call him Gary. Gary was wearing a white long sleeved shirt, white shorts, a white night cap and moogle slippers.

Every time there was a cutscene, which are unskippable so there's no "just turn your camera away", there was Gary in the background standing out like a sore thumb. So much for the seriousness of that whole encounter.

I was actually getting into the dailogue and mood again since it's been a while since I've done that part of the story. And then there was Gary.

---

Alright don't lie, you weren't enjoying seeing those awful cutscenes again lol. To be fair though, it's one of only dungeons with story cutscenes, they shouldn't exist in first place and must become solo instances (they're already soloable as healer at sync).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

You're assuming the bard expects every person to stop and listen to them or they're being disrespected - which is highly unlikely to be the case.

---

Then you are also assuming that the majority of people that glamour do it so that people look at them. Yes different people gave different arguments and its fine if you dont like the option. But others can also be fine with wanting one. Its not like SE will see it and just because the thread is made will create it. But people have the right to at least post that they would want that.

About revealing outfits: That can simply be stopped by giving the people the recent job gear which is not revealing.

Editing...


...Okay (I say three hours later), somehow the edit I pasted here didn't take, but did stay visible if I edit again. Have reposted it later. I am so over this discussion and need sleep.

I'm still all for this idea. It's an excellent compromise and there's no harm in giving players the choice to tweak the way they see the game world and other players.

The game already has similar options, so it'd simply be an expansion of the tools that are already available.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joven

I don't know why people keep bringing up characters from the other games in this. This is Final Fantasy XIV, not VII, VII, IX, or any other. That means this game has its own aesthetic for what's expected to appear.

---

Brb, putting my Cloud haircut on

Do we know if the Lightning returns event is returning this year?

Sec, bomb agro

K, need a lift out of this thread? Hop in my Regalia if you want.

Sent from my Magitek Walker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SamRF

Alright don't lie, you weren't enjoying seeing those awful cutscenes again lol. To be fair though, it's one of only dungeons with story cutscenes, they shouldn't exist in first place and must become solo instances (they're already soloable as healer at sync).

---

Oh the cutscenes themselves were aweful, but the mood and setting was great. Though I did find it funny and a bit odd that you beat the crap out of Gaius on the elevator, then just let him walk away to activate Ultima Weapon. Why not just finish him on the spot and the break Weapon while it just sits there? Guess there's no drama in that.

88 pages and 878 replies, as of this post. Seems like this thread is gaining as much dev traction as that support Blue Mage thread and Male Viera thread. And we all know they don't care about either of those.

Move along now, nothing to see here but the same 10 or 12 people falling into an unending echo chamber.