You can't "lock" something that doesn't exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

EDIT: this debate is a farce. Unless I change to a roe you're not going to take me seriously. Going to ignore any future replies from you. Letting you know so that you don't waste your time with a response. Good luck.

---

This entire race/gender ordeal is a farce so what's your point? Anyways, you can't just make statements about my intentions and then cover your ears and say "I'm not going to listen to your replies, lalalala".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

This doesn't mean cat ears, tails and fangs not bestial features. Take away those things from a miqo and they still look cute. Give them to a roe and they still won't look cute.

---

Cute is subjective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

That's only the case with the male au ra. Only two of the female faces could be described as truly fierce, and that's if you choose the right versions of the eyes. The other two look pretty calm and are basically impossible to make fierce. Unless you start spamming facial emotes.

---

You just said you wanted beastial. You have an option for beastial.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

So what you're saying is that just because my main is a pretty catgirl it completely invalidates my want to play a bigger catgirl?

I'm not allowed to like multiple things? What?

---

I never said it invalidates your want to play as a bigger catgirl, just your claims that you're "sick of cutesy and sexy females".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

Had I answered this way you likely would have given me lip for only giving a brief answer, and that my lack of explanation with it showed that I cannot make an argument for my stance.

---

So anyone critizing you is just giving you lip? That's some arrogance.

I would have been perfectly happy with "no, because even though it bothered me it didn't diminish the fun I was having." Or "yes, because I've been advocating for larger female options for a while now."

Instead your assumptions led you to post a fluff piece that answered nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penthea

Can't win with you. You think everything I say is wrong because I play a catgirl. You keep going back to the race I play instead of taking what I say for what it says.

I think you just hate catgirls.

---

I called you out for declaring your opinions as facts. That had nothing to do with being a catgirl. What DOES have to do with you being a catgirl is when I called you out for being a hypocrite, because you said you were tired of cutesy portrayals of female characters and yet you chose to play as the thing you claim to hate when other options were readily available. So essentially you're right, I can't take you seriously unless you change what you play as.

I think that the devs are not going to stall out primary content for developing the off race genders. If it is going to happen, itll likely happen slowly by the next xpac. The only way I would see them sidelining primary content is if the bean counters and marketers figure that introducing them will net them way more profit. It is unlikely theyll rush it for any other reason. I think the people in the middle on both sides accept this as being the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

The only way I would see them sidelining primary content is if the bean counters and marketers figure that introducing them will net them way more profit.

---

And it's very likely the bean counters already did their math in that regard and probably deemed it sufficient to get what we're getting, like it or not I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sated

To debate the terminology, logistics, and ethics of it is just a derailing tactic to try and squash the interest a lot of players have in playing male viera and female hrothgar.

---

Whatever way anyone tries to spin it, it doesn't change that there is something standard (being able to play both genders of a race) that players want but cannot have, and it's causing controversy. And that's the actual issue. Not the semantics over what can be argued as lock and so on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sated

Ultimately it boils down to SE looking at the feedback from players and determining if the interest matches the development time it will take to fulfill the request, as with anything else.

---

If SE do a good job on the in-game portrayal of viera and hrothgar, from a cosmetic and lore point of view, it will only increase the demand for the missing genders. Especially with viera. Long time fans of the Final Fantasy series have been curious about them for a super long time. Easily over a decade in some cases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melichoir

It is unlikely theyll rush it for any other reason. I think the people in the middle on both sides accept this as being the case.

---

Exactly that! But god forbid we say that to some people lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sated

Locking things that don't exist is possible and does happen. First example pops to mind is Overwatch's Twitch has "locked" emotes that haven't even been revealed (or probably even created) yet as rewards.

---

You know it's one thing that the reward hasn't been revealed yet, which means it existed. But saying it was not even created, that's where it starts to sound off. So they locked players from accessing a file that isn't in the game yet? Furthermore, if you're going to say "they planned that but didn't implement it" that's another thing, since you already knew they planned it. But you can't say you're locked from a non existent thing that you had no idea it was even planned.

Let me give you a better example of how you can get locked from something. The Regalia mount. People already data-mined it (even how to obtain it) and there are even videos on how it looks like when you're using it and flying with it. But we're locked from using it. (There's another example regarding schoolboy and schoolgirl but I'll not spoil it).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sated

To debate the terminology, logistics, and ethics of it is just a derailing tactic to try and squash the interest a lot of players have in playing male viera and female hrothgar.

---

Here we go again. Assuming that the intent of this entire thread is to try and squash the interest of players for something they wanted, even though there is no mention of such thing in the OP regarding that. You know you can just avoid this entire discussion by just saying "please add male Viera and female Hrothgar". Do you think you will not get them if people were to say that? Or do you think if people didn't use the term gender lock they will not get what they want?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colino

And it's very likely the bean counters already did their math in that regard and probably deemed it sufficient to get what we're getting, like it or not I guess.

---

For the xpac launch, yeah. Thats pretty much it. Unless they OT everyone involved, theyre not going to push out the other genders before launch. Given production time, theyre probably wrapping up teh xpac and shifting to 5.1 content among other things.

It's likely that at this time, theyre gauging the player base demand vs costs to add them. If the marketing and bean counters come to the conclusion that it would generate them a pretty decent RoI, we will get it. The bigger the RoI, the sooner we would probably get it (within reason). If the trend for the xpacs is slow down and burnout mid way through, having the off gender's introduced then would help negate that effect. Or they could wai ttill the next xpac as an additional selling point since new races in general are off the table. From my initial impressions, given the hard response from the player base, there is a fairly good chance we will get them, though I would hazard we wont see it any sooner than 5.3 or 5.4.

So you really made a post to argue about the term gender locking which is the agreed upon term in the video game community for decisions to lock races or classes to one gender or the other? You might as well try to argue with a dictionary. Also the gear argument is invalid, since the only gear they actually have to change is the helmets. The bodies for viera and hrothgar use hyur and roe rigging. The way gear works is that midlander, elezan, miqo'te, and au ra all share the same skeletal rigging meaning gear is scaled up or down for them but it uses the same gear. Roes, highlanders and lalafells all have unique skeletons so gear for them is just for them. The slides very carefully stated that the unique thing about each race is the head. This is because viera will use the hyur gear, none of it has to be changed for them, Hrothgar will use the roe gear, none of it will have to be changed, even adding a slouch is already in the game which can be viewed in several emotes. So, they would not be making a new model at all, just a new head, same as they already did for both "new" races. So they literally can slap a boobs on a hrothgar and call it female since that body already exists as the female roe.

Jeez guys, this isn't that hard.

Genderlock simply means "you can't do X thing in our video game unless you play as Y gender"
In this case, X thing is "play Viera race"

For some reason, some people seem to think this is something that only applies to playing certain character classes, even though the term "genderlock" doesn't necessarily allude to that at all and there is more to what certain players might want to play as aside from character classes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fynlar

Jeez guys, this isn't that hard.

Genderlock simply means "you can't do X thing in our video game unless you play as Y gender"
In this case, X thing is "play Viera race"

For some reason, some people seem to think this is something that only applies to playing certain character classes, even though the term "genderlock" doesn't necessarily allude to that at all and there is more to what certain players might want to play as aside from character classes

---

Did you read any of the statements made by others on here or did you simply read the title and reply?

The stance against how the term "genderlock" is being used in regards to this situation is that the option for male Viera isn't provided so you aren't "locked" from playing them, they're simply not there. If they had displayed both genders and only let you play as females THEN you'd be genderlocked from them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joven

The stance against how the term "genderlock" is being used in regards to this situation is that the option for male Viera isn't provided so you aren't "locked" from playing them, they're simply not there. If they had displayed both genders and only let you play as females THEN you'd be genderlocked from them.

---

could you imagine if male viera were fully implemented and we just werent allowed to play them