REQUEST: Can we have both /changepose Poses?

We've been asking for this for years and haven't heard any mention of it during Q&A or any acknowledgment of it really. Same thing with the glam restrictions.

I'm sure they'll come up with the same old "it's because of old spaghetti code" excuse again. But I agree that this would be nice to have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renato

We've been asking for this for years and haven't heard any mention of it during Q&A or any acknowledgment of it really. Same thing with the glam restrictions.

I'm sure they'll come up with the same old "it's because of old spaghetti code" excuse again. But I agree that this would be nice to have.

---

Yeah, because the mods prefer, for some reason, to choose idiotic questions like Ishgard Housing, who made the sandwiches, Ishgard stuff, Ishgard, housing, and sometimes the people even ask good questions about jobs.

We need new question choosers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renato

We've been asking for this for years and haven't heard any mention of it during Q&A or any acknowledgment of it really. Same thing with the glam restrictions.

I'm sure they'll come up with the same old "it's because of old spaghetti code" excuse again. But I agree that this would be nice to have.

---

It's because I have been asking them to not do it and they agree that it's stupid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Enkidoh

It makes sense that they're different based on gender given who exactly the DRK poses are based on though - the male DRK pose is clearly Cloud's iconic pose from FFVII, but the female DRK pose appears to be emulating Saber from the (non SE/FF) anime and visual novel series Fate ~ Stay Night, so genderwapping them would just ruin the reference.

---

Next thing you know, ladies will want to dress like cloud...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niwashi

Giving people more options adds more variety, not less. Seeing every female with the same pose 1 and every male with the same pose 2 isn't much in the way of variety. Making it so some females use pose 1 and others use pose 2 because they've been given a choice, while some males use pose 1 and others pose 2 for the same reason, is at least a bit more variety than what we have now.

---

Giving people the same options that are available to others isn't adding variety; it's adding alternatives. Those two words are not synonymous. If the dev team wanted to add more variety, they would implement more restricted options, not give the same options that are currently available to other races and genders.

I already know not everyone will agree with that logic, so let me put it this way: I don't want what other races and genders have, or I would play those races/genders. What I do want are more gender and race specific options.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

Giving people the same options that are available to others isn't adding variety; it's adding alternatives. Those two words are not synonymous. If the dev team wanted to add more variety, they would implement more restricted options, not give the same options that are currently available to other races and genders.

I already know not everyone will agree with that logic, so let me put it this way: I don't want what other races and genders have, or I would play those races/genders. What I do want are more gender and race specific options.

---

Who's variety are we protecting then? And do we need to? I'm not sure about you but I just spent 9 hours in pf groups and in that time, probably 20-30 minutes standing around arenas as people afk'd and brb'd. I know perfectly well that if I desperately wanted to see the male poses on my main job I could gender change. If I ONLY played drg I probably would, but I play most jobs so it's a mixed barrel of picking what you like/can stand at that point.

The dev team has said they want to move away from things like gender locked gear, and they've been releasing said lock on more items over time. The moonfire fair event only had the one shared set this year, and the new glamour crafted gear is shared as well. I'd hope that poses for combat would be one of the things the devs would retroactively fix for us.

You're entitled to your opinion of course, I'm just not sure how the changes asked for here cause any harm or take away from others enjoyment. They just feel like a qol change to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imbrium

You're entitled to your opinion of course, I'm just not sure how the changes asked for here cause any harm or take away from others enjoyment. They just feel like a qol change to me.

---

That's easy. There's a difference between releasing new gear and not having it be gender locked opposed to going back an rewriting code for existing gear to remove a lock that currently exists. This takes development time away from releasing more of said gender neutral gear. The same can be said for idle poses and content in general. If you truly want more variety and options in the game, it would make sense to push for the devs to release brand new items.

I could reflect a similar question and ask how gender locks affect the functionality of the game, and even further, your enjoyment? I am not quite sure how standing amongst AFKs and BRBs in PF and having two idle poses to choose from is going to lessen that burden. It actually is ok for males and females to have their own respective idle poses when their weapons are drawn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

That's easy. There's a difference between releasing new gear and not having it be gender locked opposed to going back an rewriting code for existing gear to remove a lock that currently exists. This takes development time away from releasing more of said gender neutral gear. The same can be said for idle poses and content in general. If you truly want more variety and options in the game, it would make sense to push for the devs to release brand new items.

I could reflect a similar question and ask how gender locks affect the functionality of the game, and even further, your enjoyment? I am not quite sure how standing amongst AFKs and BRBs in PF and having two idle poses to choose from is going to lessen that burden. It actually is ok for males and females to have their own respective idle poses when their weapons are drawn.

---

That actually wasn't my point, that was SE admitting genderlocking might not have been a great idea, and that going forward they have been using it less. (Mog station is mog station) They are also still removing from older gear we ask for. The eternal bond attire is on the list, I believe?

As for it being enough to effect gameplay or not, that's more of a person opinion then, as I feel it would increase my gameplay like glamour does just from the fact that I will be enjoying what I look at, leaving out clingy emotional ties to characters.

Do I feel that it would increase my enjoyment enough that I'm ok with the devs spending x time on it and pushing back y emote? Yes. Again, that's my personal opinion and how much enjoyment I would be getting out of it. That's going to differ from person to person.

There are overall very few gender locked things I care about in game, but this is right at the top of the list. Therefore what I want prioritized is going to differ from a person who thinks everything is fine. The question then is is there enough interest in this to justify the time? It's an easy target but still holds true for me: If male bunny suits was apparently justified, I am at peace with myself asking for these poses.

If you are going to ask me how genderlock is possibly effecting my enjoyment of the gameplay, what about the opposite? Would removing it entirely effect anyone's gameplay negatively? Outside of, you may have y emote/glamour pushed back, I mean. Anything else in game?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imbrium

That actually wasn't my point, that was SE admitting genderlocking might not have been a great idea, and that going forward they have been using it less. (Mog station is mog station) They are also still removing from older gear we ask for. The eternal bond attire is on the list, I believe?

As for it being enough to effect gameplay or not, that's more of a person opinion then, as I feel it would increase my gameplay like glamour does just from the fact that I will be enjoying what I look at, leaving out clingy emotional ties to characters.

Do I feel that it would increase my enjoyment enough that I'm ok with the devs spending x time on it and pushing back y emote? Yes. Again, that's my personal opinion and how much enjoyment I would be getting out of it. That's going to differ from person to person.

There are overall very few gender locked things I care about in game, but this is right at the top of the list. Therefore what I want prioritized is going to differ from a person who thinks everything is fine. The question then is is there enough interest in this to justify the time? It's an easy target but still holds true for me: If male bunny suits was apparently justified, I am at peace with myself asking for these poses.

If you are going to ask me how genderlock is possibly effecting my enjoyment of the gameplay, what about the opposite? Would removing it entirely effect anyone's gameplay negatively? Outside of, you may have y emote/glamour pushed back, I mean. Anything else in game?

---

I haven't read anything about SE admitting gender locking might have been a bad thing. Not saying they've made no such claim; I am just not aware of it. What I do know they have stated is anytime anyone brings up reconfiguring/modifying/anything to do with changing old content they will bring up resources, time, and content; all the same things I did.

Regardless of what any one player enjoys, what remains the constant is brand new content is the greatest source of fuel to keep the engines of the game's subs revved up in high gear. Even if you and many other players are 'ok' with new content being pushed back for this kind of purpose, what remains true is it is not healthy for the game overall, especially the long term.

You say that there are few gender locked things you care about in the game; the thing is though, the ratio of restricted vs non-restricted is heavily in favor of the latter, so there isn't a whole lot to fuss over in the first place. Also, the lifting of a restriction on one item does not warrant a lift on everything else. So sayeth the spider, lol.

When it comes to reflecting questions back and forth, we both know that gender lock stay or pass is not going to affect gameplay directly. This is undoubtedly QoL. As a QoL matter, what needs to be understood is the value in the time that is put in for a QoL change. These peeps basically constantly work around deadlines, and the stuff they cram into the patch notes we read is difficult to meet by those DL as is, let alone tossing in a change fewer people want in comparison to brand new content overall. If there is time, they can do something like this; but then they would have to choose between this and other QoL changes players are asking for. I would guess this one is really low on a priority list of any kind to be honest.

I see little to no downsides to having both honestly. the only downside being it will take away some Dev time.

Some Folks prefer the opposite genders poses. personally i do think the Males tend to get the best ones. (Female ones look alot more relaxed).

And those saying i will take away the "uniqueness" not really. both races and genders have other unique animations. and i doubt letting a dude resting his longsword on the ground or a lady resting her longsword upon her shoulder will destroy the very lore and logic of the universe.

you can already see Female NPCs use a Male only pose in Limsa. They be Squattin, something that used to be exclusive only to Male miqo'te i think?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

I haven't read anything about SE admitting gender locking might have been a bad thing. Not saying they've made no such claim; I am just not aware of it. What I do know they have stated is anytime anyone brings up reconfiguring/modifying/anything to do with changing old content they will bring up resources, time, and content; all the same things I did.

Regardless of what any one player enjoys, what remains the constant is brand new content is the greatest source of fuel to keep the engines of the game's subs revved up in high gear. Even if you and many other players are 'ok' with new content being pushed back for this kind of purpose, what remains true is it is not healthy for the game overall, especially the long term.

You say that there are few gender locked things you care about in the game; the thing is though, the ratio of restricted vs non-restricted is heavily in favor of the latter, so there isn't a whole lot to fuss over in the first place. Also, the lifting of a restriction on one item does not warrant a lift on everything else. So sayeth the spider, lol.

When it comes to reflecting questions back and forth, we both know that gender lock stay or pass is not going to affect gameplay directly. This is undoubtedly QoL. As a QoL matter, what needs to be understood is the value in the time that is put in for a QoL change.

---

Had to snip a little off the end there.

https://kotaku.com/we-took-a-bold-st...ect-1835098319

Ah, I was wrong. It wasn't a mistake, it was to be more sensitive I think? Either way, they are making the changes, and seem to have more planned. The q&a for it is near the bottom.

Lifting the restrictions on one thing might not warrant it on another... unless there's enough interest. I'm assuming that's why the first item had it's removed in the first place, and the same should hold true here. If there is not enough interest, or it isn't something that can be done in a reasonable amount of time, I'd expect SE to pass on the idea. Asking however, never hurts.

We don't know how many players might want this change, honestly. We could be .3% of the playerbase, or 85% could want it. The former again I'd expect SE to just continue on its merry way, the latter I'd hope they'd consider adding it to their to-do list down the line. In betweern I would just have to really cross my fingers.

Do I want to take away from major content? No, of course not. Would I be fine if we delayed a new glamour or two if there was enough player interest in this? 100%. SE is already planning on making gender restricted changes anyway, if there is enough interest for the battle poses let's get them in.

I've already said it would be a qol change in a post above, so no argument there. Players will continue to ask for things they'd like to see in game, and we're no different in this thread.

So I made a thread asking for these using a term which was politically sensitive, and got a bit chewed out for it, but I am 100% in support of this (would kind of have to be after starting my own thread which asked for this exact thing).

How much time could this take the Dev's really? The animations exist, and works on all character models, since a Roe and a Lala can use the exact same battle emotes it proves that they are universal. The amount of DEV time would literally be spent on just enabling the emotes on the other genders; either adding a emote action with the genderswapped emotes, or programming the existing one to cycle through. No animations would need to be made.
Anyone against this, can ignore the change if it ever happened.

And yes this adds more variety as male and female characters will show variety with each other. Personality should drive emotes.

I don't understand why they go to the trouble of creating extra poses only to lock them behind something arbitrary like gender.

Please let us use our jobs' cool poses!