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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsumdere

The proposal does not allow for people to be seen as they wish though. This proposal removes choice from one party and is therefore, a very unfair suggestion.

Currently with no glamour switch, if you do not like people's glamour you can :

1. Leave the party.
2. Remove the offending person from party.
3. Make your own party and friend group with glamour rules.
4. Run trusts.
5. Turn your camera away.
You currently still have choice to avoid what you don't want to see.

---

All these choices being "you need to avoid THEM.". No compromise here. Just it's your problem that you don't like the glamour, THEY can do whatever they like wherever they like. Why doesn't this bother people who seem to have the same problem with just the possibility of not being seen exactly as they've crafted? Someone out there is now beyond ignoring them and is now actively resenting their existence and changing their entire experience to AVOID them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsumdere

With your proposal, there is nothing that the affected party can do. They cannot make their own party or remove people, as people can conveniently leave out the fact they have the option on. Unless they mark people who use the function for us to do the above as well, it is an unequal proposal and completely removes choice from people who do want to be seen for whatever reason.

---

The compromise is that the people who wish to have an option to remain in certain spaces NOW DO instead . You are, as others have, operating on the premise that currently what we have is a fair and balanced situation. Which it is not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krotoan

All these choices being "you need to avoid THEM.". No compromise here. Just it's your problem that you don't like the glamour, THEY can do whatever they like wherever they like.

---

Yes. You have the objection to the outfit which the person has every right to wear, therefore it's up to you to not look at it. Just like if you don't like someone's outfit in the real world.

If they're making it clear they're wearing it to annoy you, then that's harassment and you have other routes to deal with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krotoan

Why doesn't this bother people who seem to have the same problem with just the possibility of not being seen exactly as they've crafted? Someone out there is now beyond ignoring them and is now actively resenting their existence and changing their entire experience to AVOID them.

---

Because instead it's bothering me that I'm almost certainly not someone they would go out of their way to avoid, but it would target me regardless.

I'm actually pretty conscious about not wanting to end up wearing something that looks out of place in a serious battle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krotoan

The compromise is that the people who wish to have an option to remain in certain spaces NOW DO instead. You are, as others have, operating on the premise that currently what we have is a fair and balanced situation. Which it is not.

---

Your proposal isn't fair and balanced either. It just tips the unfairness in an opposite direction.

You now get to remain in the place you want. But you don't want a marker on because then people might decide to leave you.

So on the one hand, the current situation is unfair because it might force you to leave.

On the other, you get what you want and it would be unfair to you to let other people know if you have the filter on.

All the protections are going one way.

Only reason people feel it tips the scale is the divided between right to wear verse right to be seen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

Yes. You have the objection to the outfit which the person has every right to wear, therefore it's up to you to not look at it. Just like if you don't like someone's outfit in the real world.

If they're making it clear they're wearing it to annoy you, then that's harassment and you have other routes to deal with that.

---

Except this situation does not follow real world rules or physical limitations. There are solutions beyond going up to someone and telling them they cannot wear what they are wearing around you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

Your proposal isn't fair and balanced either. It just tips the unfairness in an opposite direction.

You now get to remain in the place you want. But you don't want a marker on because then people might decide to leave you.

---

Leave? No, harass and target. I don't care if people don't want to party with me. I don't want people unfairly targeted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

So on the one hand, the current situation is unfair because it might force you to leave.

On the other, you get what you want and it would be unfair to you to let other people know if you have the filter on.

All the protections are going one way.

---

The current situation is unfair because the people who want to "express themselves' have all the advantages and no detriments.

If I get the choice to not see them, or see them represented but with a placeholder, this is now equal. They can wear whatever they want and be seen by (likely) the majority of the playerbase, I get to opt out and be left alone. I still have to enable an option that would also screen even glamours I would have liked to have seen.
When one side finally gets one detriment, this doesn't mean the side that finally got some equality needs ANOTHER detriment.

It should be an option. And does not breaks anyone wish. You get to wear what you want. And other people get to see it as it its.
Both get what you want that does not involve forcing the other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rxantos

It should be an option. And does not breaks anyone wish. You get to wear what you want. And other people get to see it as it its.
Both get what you want that does not involve forcing the other.

---

According to those against it does go against the wish of those against since it infringes on their right to be seen the way they wait. It has less to do about what they are wearing and more that people wish to be seen a certain way.

Sadly there is no method SE could add just a feature that would please the side that wants to be seen a certain way. Though those against it would be more honest and call it for what it is, people want to be a special snowflake that is all, or that is how it seems to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rxantos

It should be an option. And does not breaks anyone wish. You get to wear what you want. And other people get to see it as it its.
Both get what you want that does not involve forcing the other.

---

Yeah, it's a pretty efficient compromise.

It's also impossible to implement any feature with complete approval, so it's bizarre to me that so many additions to the game are shot down through extremely contrived arguments. The 'concern' about appearing differently on the screen of strangers feels very contrived to me, especially with the consistent evasion of the simple fact that we can already tweak how strangers appear on our screen. My character's skin tone, for instance, looks pretty different based on the environmental lighting and character lighting - the latter of which is a client side toggle.

We can also turn down spell effects, which means that if a character is shooting a fireball at something it can look pretty epic on their screen but will be completely absent on the screen of a player who has disabled spell effects in certain situations.

We can also reduce other player's character names to initials if we so wish and if glamour is an expression of how someone wishes to portray their character to other players then it stands to reason that their character name follows the same path.

So, to me, it doesn't make much sense for glamour to be considered to be a no go. It isn't even universally considered to be super important for every single player - I know quite a few individuals who don't care about it in the slightest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

According to those against it does go against the wish of those against since it infringes on their right to be seen the way they wait. It has less to do about what they are wearing and more that people wish to be seen a certain way.

Sadly there is no method SE could add just a feature that would please the side that wants to be seen a certain way. Though those against it would be more honest and call it for what it is, people want to be a special snowflake that is all, or that is how it seems to me.

---

Also do not mean it in a negative way, just not sure how else to Express what I feel regarding those against the idea to make this an option for the reason it would infringe on the enjoyment of others because they cannot be seen a certain way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

Also do not mean it in a negative way, just not sure how else to Express what I feel regarding those against the idea to make this an option for the reason it would infringe on the enjoyment of others because they cannot be seen a certain way.

---

I just want to say you can say the same about people who can't leave well enough alone and just move their camera or walk a few feet somewhere else to not have to stare at something so ugly to them too. But I am tired of this... nothing is being gained and noone is going to move from their post. I'm going to play the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canada_bangs

I just want to say you can say the same about people who can't leave well enough alone and just move their camera or walk a few feet somewhere else to not have to stare at something so ugly to them too. But I am tired of this... nothing is being gained and noone is going to move from their post. I'm going to play the game.

---

True we could leave well enough alone, and truth be told I do feel many people in favor of the idea know it will never happen. So that point is kind of moot, and is already a granted position. Same with the fact it may not be use of resources, I can agree with that point. Though being against something because well it prevents one from being seen a certain way is kind of meh and seems like a call for attention not else how to put it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

Though being against something because well it prevents one from being seen a certain way is kind of meh and seems like a call for attention not else how to put it.

---

We've been around this so many times in this topic. There's a difference between "demanding to be seen" and not wanting to be seen in a way you didn't choose to be seen.

I don't care if you don't look at me. But if you do look, I want to be the one who chooses how my character appears to you because it's representing me. Not because I want to force you to look at my outfit, but because I-as-my-character don't want to be forced into something else I wouldn't wear.

It's just... how society functions. This is a social game. We exist as people in it and interact with other people, whether we go out of the way to do so or not.

The real world functions very differently to FFXIV on many fronts when it comes to how people dress themselves. It's rarely a case where anything and everything is permitted and tolerated. Indeed, certain establishments will - quite rightly - turn individuals away at the door if they are not dressed to the liking of the hosts.

Furthermore, plenty of people socialise in FFXIV without glamour ever being a factor in their interactions with other players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

We've been around this so many times in this topic. There's a difference between "demanding to be seen" and not wanting to be seen in a way you didn't choose to be seen.

I don't care if you don't look at me. But if you do look, I want to be the one who chooses how my character appears to you because it's representing me. Not because I want to force you to look at my outfit, but because I-as-my-character don't want to be forced into something else I wouldn't wear.

It's just... how society functions. This is a social game. We exist as people in it and interact with other people, whether we go out of the way to do so or not.

---

This is a video game though it allows us to deviate from reality. So why not let everyone with a differing view have control over their own personal experience.

The reality is you may not want to force people to see you in a certain way but currently it does play out that way. Just as people have to see my Frog Suit if they do not want to be penalized for leaving because they do not want to see a bright pink frog. Sure they have a choice but it is a shitty one, the option would remove the need for such a choice to be made. Personally I would gladly give up having people see me a certain way if it would make the game more enjoyable for them on a personal level.

When we wear things our intent may not be seen to force, but when we reject the idea if a client side altercations that preserve your appearance on your and others that do not have the option toggled you are forcing people into a situation. Sure they could quit, leave the group or find a new game / group but should we really view a solution that involves players to either leave the game or suck it up as the only solution. Doesn't that seem selfish in the sense that said option is good enough for those who do not wish to see certain things but the same cannot be said for those that want to maintain their right to be see a certain way?

Sorry moblie, also I may be dense but in my eyes you do care if people look at you, since you want them to see you a certain way. If you did not care you would mind how they saw you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MsMisato

Probably get flack for this, but in all honesty, would you be upset if someone wasn't able to see your glamour if the option was there?

---

Yes...? I would be upset. I dress my character the way I want to be seen which is very carefully. I would be upset to be seen in the skimpy AF DNC gear, a long dress-like robe, or something that doesn't play to my race's features (my main is a male Elezen). It is very different from modding as it would be officially sanctioned by SE and widespread.

I am more upset with the idea of being dressed down which would ultimately would defeat the OP's "skimpy" concern, seeing as how some AF and starter gear is far less covering and modest than what people currently glamour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krotoan

All these choices being "you need to avoid THEM.". No compromise here. Just it's your problem that you don't like the glamour, THEY can do whatever they like wherever they like. Why doesn't this bother people who seem to have the same problem with just the possibility of not being seen exactly as they've crafted? Someone out there is now beyond ignoring them and is now actively resenting their existence and changing their entire experience to AVOID them.

---

It IS your problem if you don't like something. Do you ask people to not eat tomatoes in front of you because you can't stand the sight of them? Or do you just look away?

And to be fair, I wouldn't want to play around people who get so upset about a specific glamour they literally drop parties or avoid city states. That just sounds like someone who would get upset if they cannot control everything around them. So, keeping glamour on is just an extra bonus for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsumdere

It IS your problem if you don't like something. Do you ask people to not eat tomatoes in front of you because you can't stand the sight of them? Or do you just look away?

---

In the real world I would ignore it because I would be limited by real world physics and social constraints. This is not the real world, stop using real world logic to argue problems that have viable virtual solutions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsumdere

And to be fair, I wouldn't want to play around people who get so upset about a specific glamour they literally drop parties or avoid city states. That just sounds like someone who would get upset if they cannot control everything around them. So, keeping glamour on is just an extra bonus for me.

---

Then it would be your problem that you cannot stand just the idea that somewhere, someone mightnot see your avatar as intended.

This again, is not a valid argument against it so much as a protest that you wouldn't like a certain aspect of it. there's no inherent value in peoples beliefs that they NEED to have EVERYONE see them exactly as they are. While I won't say they're wrong, they would just have to adjust to the new normal. Yeah, I get they don't want it. But I want a certain experience out of the game I'm playing and using my hardware to render.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcaviusGreyashe

...

---

A progress is a progress only if it is beneficial for the wider range of people (and the proof is done when it doesn't backfire).

Unfortunatly, what people don't see or don't want to realize is the backfire. They ignore (purposely or not) it can backfire and don't care about the backlash.

The problem? The ones who will suffer the most of the backlash is the ones the double standard (and so called progress) is supposed to protect.

I don't care about the "gender" matter of crossdressing. From my side, it is mainly and mostly a simple factor : all cuts don't fit everyone, and cuts for women really rarely fit men shape.
All cuts for men don't fit all men, all cuts for women don't fit all women.

To see it only as some kind as LGBT matters is forgetting that a lot of person don't especially find the "fashion creative design" especially fit, it is often bizarre. See? It is just a taste, an opinion. The gender factor as nothing to do. I don't think kilts fit men, hopefully they wear high socks to hide hairy legs :p (I could joke about hawaiian shirts too since it is a common meme in USA).

Conceptual art or metaphoric art doesn't especially fit my tastes but it can sometimes be interesting.

The problem I have, in fact, is to hear people who imagine to be born straight (and/or be part of the middle class) immunize against frustrations and complexes (at least they talk as if) when the reality is trivial : to grow as an adult is first of all to learn to deal with frustrations and complexes.

Everyone face frustrations all the time, many have complexes too. The projection of "an ideal happiness" some suppose others to have is just some kind of comfortable illusion to excuse jealousy and a compensation for being frustrated. But it is not a truth. That's all the problem.

To force people to see is the worst solution because for sure it will backfire. People will ignore, try to avoid, to evade and it will not solve anything. But if the glamour is hidden, people will maybe be surprise to talk and discover, in fine, they get along, only as friend, but, anyway, they get along.


PS : You know, when I see the doomsday clock, I've never seen the society as a whole so tense, and even if it can sound only as a detail, it contributes to make the situation tense. I'm really worry about all the backfires that could occur on many subjects. A little thing added to another little thing, step by step can ends as a really huge backlash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsumdere

Yes...? I would be upset. I dress my character the way I want to be seen which is very carefully. I would be upset to be seen in the skimpy AF DNC gear, a long dress-like robe, or something that doesn't play to my race's features (my main is a male Elezen). It is very different from modding as it would be officially sanctioned by SE and widespread.

I am more upset with the idea of being dressed down which would ultimately would defeat the OP's "skimpy" concern, seeing as how some AF and starter gear is far less covering and modest than what people currently glamour.



It IS your problem if you don't like something. Do you ask people to not eat tomatoes in front of you because you can't stand the sight of them? Or do you just look away?

And to be fair, I wouldn't want to play around people who get so upset about a specific glamour they literally drop parties or avoid city states. That just sounds like someone who would get upset if they cannot control everything around them. So, keeping glamour on is just an extra bonus for me.

---

To be fair if we had a toggle they would not have to ask. I do not see how that is not a win, no one would have to leave the group, nothing would have to be brought up and everyone in the group is able to finish the run without having to cause any player to wait for a replacement player, and everyone's overall experience is kept intact.

Since some hide-glamour-people aren't that much into understanding the counter-arguments, I guess something should be asked:

When you do dungeons / raids / trials / ex-fights, do you really have the time to play fully zoomed in and goggle at your comrades' clothes?
Means: Shouldn't your eyes been keeping track of the mobs, bosses plus possible AOEs (as well as health when you're a healer) instead of enraging because a stranger's glamour looks bad to you?

Another thing I wonder: Does even a MMO exist which entirely hides glamour? And if so, what clothes displayed then? Or do other playable characters simply vanish from the screen?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MelodyCrystel

Or do other playable characters simply vanish from the screen?

---

Well this would be a wonderful solution which I've seen requested before. Just /blacklist and poof! Nothing but their name and hit box remains. This would also work on the players who emulate adult activities with emotes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MelodyCrystel

...

---

Maybe because... we can meet them in the cities and, in fine, it forces some people to jump away to another place.

This said, since I'm playing on a rather little screen, what bothers me, when it happens, is the mounts show off close from the aetherits. Or people jumping around like some kind of big frog...

Some people are comfortable with the crowd, some others prefer the wild wide Nature almost all alone, they are both right, would you force people who like the crownd to remain all alone? Would you force people who prefer to remain with few close friends to stay in the crowd?

Still and again, it is for a client side option...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MelodyCrystel

Another thing I wonder: Does even a MMO exist which entirely hides glamour? And if so, what clothes displayed then? Or do other playable characters simply vanish from the screen?

---

FFXi does, it puts other players in their starter gear.

Guild War 2 does, it puts them in Generic gear.

Black Desert sort of. It renders Players on top of their generic class model used in the character creator. In its case however it has a feature to straight up remove other players from screen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MelodyCrystel

Since some hide-glamour-people aren't that much into understanding the counter-arguments, I guess something should be asked:

When you do dungeons / raids / trials / ex-fights, do you really have the time to play fully zoomed in and goggle at your comrades' clothes?
Means: Shouldn't your eyes been keeping track of the mobs, bosses plus possible AOEs (as well as health when you're a healer) instead of enraging because a stranger's glamour looks bad to you?

Another thing I wonder: Does even a MMO exist which entirely hides glamour? And if so, what clothes displayed then? Or do other playable characters simply vanish from the screen?

---

My personal method would be if the toggle is on everyone is in a black caster robe with hood and only their initials are shown. Though if they could make everyone into just an icon, I could get behind that, would be funny to see the class icon running ahead taking a large pack of mobs.

Reason I personally do not get the counter arguments is because I do not why people feel the need to have others seem them a certain way. Granted I am an odd ball.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AcaciaTyrannia

it's time to adopt an option a lot of other games have: Hide Glamour.

---

Care to name "A LOT" of other such games.

Sure, games like WOW disabled 'cosmetic' gear in PVP content, which seems fine to me, but I can't think of one game where you can do what you ask for (though I'm not saying I've played EVERY MMO), but I'm damned sure there aren't "A LOT" of them!

To be entirely honest, starter gear I could accept [I can see why lots wouldn't like their lv 1 mini mini skirts though], but I absofrikinglutely refuse to be seen in healer gear. Whoever complains about seeing "men in dresses" have clearly never seen a non-glamoured male WHM. Congrats, you went from seeing a man dressed as a bride to a man dressed as the nun attending the wedding, and you'd be seeing a lot more of them too.

The OPs problem isn't really about glamour in general as much as the glamour that is permitted on certain gear. However, the fact is that FFXIV already has bikini armor that is actually legit bikini armor out of Shisui Palace for every role and it's not the only location. They also have the armor out of Dark Hold that does the plate bikini armor thing as well. It's just not worth the development effort to implement in this game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Klb600

FFXi does, it puts other players in their starter gear.

Guild War 2 does, it puts them in Generic gear.

Black Desert sort of. It renders Players on top of their generic class model used in the character creator. In its case however it has a feature to straight up remove other players from screen.

---

Starter gear is a nope for me I do not want to be seen in the Viera lingerie starter gear and as a Dnc main yea no to af gear again too skimpy for my tastes, this leaves generic hall of novice like gear which is eh go for it modest, I would just find it boring to see hundreds of people in the same gear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colt47

The OPs problem isn't really about glamour in general as much as the glamour that is permitted on certain gear. However, the fact is that FFXIV already has bikini armor that is actually legit bikini armor out of Shisui Palace for every role and it's not the only location. They also have the armor out of Dark Hold that does the plate bikini armor thing as well. It's just not worth the development effort to implement in this game.

---

Yes, the fact that this thread was created the day wedding gowns were allowed on men, and despite the fact we got Crystal Towers full of bikini-clad tanks, heals and damage dealers the day glamour system was released is purely a coincidence. Don't know why anyone would argue about LGBT in here, clearly not the point. Besides, that goes exactly the way some people ask to have everyone have racial gear. Tank vieras in lingeries are a perfect fit for a realistic game. Same for Ahwa's burqas, they definitely make sense for a tank.

If you want immersion you should probably avoid MMORPGs in general or just stick to roleplay venues maybe.

I wouldn't want my character to be seen in any way I don't want him to be, I don't want him to be seen in traditional healing gear by anyone, thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcaviusGreyashe

Yes, the fact that this thread was created the day wedding gowns were allowed on men, and despite the fact we got Crystal Towers full of bikini-clad tanks, heals and damage dealers the day glamour system was released is purely a coincidence. Don't know why anyone would argue about LGBT in here, clearly not the point. Besides, that goes exactly the way some people ask to have everyone have racial gear. Tank vieras in lingeries are a perfect fit for a realistic game. Same for Ahwa's burqas, they definitely make sense for a tank.

---

To be fair.. the OP brought that up so it kindof is the point. They said it in their first post. " Men in dresses"

There are mods that turn people’s clothes off. Why not the Devs make a filter that can be toggled on or off in the menu. Where the starter gear/weapons will be everyone’s default. Like the profanity filter we have.

Maybe the lvl 50 artifact gear can be the default. Like the bots used to wear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krotoan

If I get the choice to not see them, or see them represented but with a placeholder, this is now equal. They can wear whatever they want and be seen by (likely) the majority of the playerbase, I get to opt out and be left alone. I still have to enable an option that would also screen even glamours I would have liked to have seen.
When one side finally gets one detriment, this doesn't mean the side that finally got some equality needs ANOTHER detriment.

---

I seriously don't mind you having the option to block glamour. One, it doesn't hurt the hamsters running 14s servers. Two, you can't record/stream the game in anyway with this option on. But how does your side propose that SE do this? I at least feel this is a fair compromise people get to express themselves and people who don't like it are contained in their own little section of the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moonlite

I seriously don't mind you having the option to block glamour. One, it doesn't hurt the hamsters running 14s servers. Two, you can't record/stream the game in anyway with this option on. But how does your side propose that SE do this? I at least feel this is a fair compromise people get to express themselves and people who don't like it are contained in their own little section of the world.

---

The way glamour works, at least by what most games have done and likely how SE does it is all the actual model and skin files are stored on your computer (just being thorough). The server gives positional and flag (model,color, texture, size) data to your computer and the client takes that data and shows what it's supposed to. If you create an option for the client to ignore the appearance data coming from the server and just use the positional data, you'd just be telling the client that instead of reading the data coming from the server it would enable a "default" appearance for whatever job/race/sex. There is no extra data going back and forth and honestly some PC's would benefit because they'd be loading less different data (instead of the millions of possible combinations for all the other people around you, there would be.. say hundreds.). It's not particularly complex or harder to implement than say a graphic setting. All the load would be client side (and as I said it'd probably be less) and it would cause no extra data going back and forth between servers and players... unless someone NEEDS to know that you have it on and they implement some kind of marker, then there would be additional data that would have to be sent saying you had it enabled (though admittedly it'd be minor).


The perceivable affect being, you enable the option and everyone else except for you appears as either: no glamour (probably a bad option since it'd make mishmash looking people), Default glamour (either level appropriate AF or some very class iconic gear), or even completely replaced by a random NPC (randomized features, default glamour but same sex/race). In the case that people particularly hate that they could be recorded in any way (workarounds to any in client limitation could be done by using outside programs), names could be forced to the first initials only setting which is already in the game.
EDIT: On your screen only, i should specify. Nobody else around you is affected or aware of the option being enabled unless very specific questions are asked and answered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LalafellDown

There are mods that turn people’s clothes off. Why not the Devs make a filter that can be toggled on or off in the menu. Where the starter gear/weapons will be everyone’s default. Like the profanity filter we have.

Maybe the lvl 50 artifact gear can be the default. Like the bots used to wear.

---

Didn't Yoshi say they try to implement features in game to extend you wouldn't need to mod anything? They should add such change/hide/default glamour option then so people won't be tempted to start modding their client.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krotoan

The way glamour works, at least by what most games have done and likely how SE does it is all the actual model and skin files are stored on your computer (just being thorough). The server gives positional and flag (model,color, texture, size) data to your computer and the client takes that data and shows what it's supposed to. If you create an option for the client to ignore the appearance data coming from the server and just use the positional data, you'd just be telling the client that instead of reading the data coming from the server it would enable a "default" appearance for whatever job/race/sex. There is no extra data going back and forth and honestly some PC's would benefit because they'd be loading less different data (instead of the millions of possible combinations for all the other people around you, there would be.. say hundreds.). It's not particularly complex or harder to implement than say a graphic setting. All the load would be client side (and as I said it'd probably be less) and it would cause no extra data going back and forth between servers and players... unless someone NEEDS to know that you have it on and they implement some kind of marker, then there would be additional data that would have to be sent saying you had it enabled (though admittedly it'd be minor).

---

Very Nicely explained, I haven't delved much into Graphics/Rendering programming but assumed this was how it was usually done, hell as I mentioned before, Black Desert renders whatever your customization features on top of the Generic Class model found in character creator, Since the tech that BDO uses to seamlessly stream the data from server to client can be slow at times, there are instances where you can see this in action, when it loads in and the client model details have not finished authenticating with the server side, so you will control the Generic character model and other players will appear as generic models until every detail streams in and is authenticated.

I never understood why people believed that a feature like this NEEDS constant server streaming/Authentication to begin with when mods/plugins already debunk this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SamRF

Didn't Yoshi say they try to implement features in game to extend you wouldn't need to mod anything? They should add such change/hide/default glamour option then so people won't be tempted to start modding their client.

---

Yeah, he did. The established trend so far is also that each patch brings a number of quality of life improvements to the game. Naturally not all of those quality of life improvements need to appeal to every single player, especially if they're entirely optional and limited to client side displays.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moonlite

I seriously don't mind you having the option to block glamour. One, it doesn't hurt the hamsters running 14s servers. Two, you can't record/stream the game in anyway with this option on. But how does your side propose that SE do this? I at least feel this is a fair compromise people get to express themselves and people who don't like it are contained in their own little section of the world.

---

The option would not have an impact on performance that part is easy, now the streaming aspect might be another story. Though I am not sure why that is even on the table as an issue since one would straight up have to go out their way to find screen shots or a stream to see if their character was altered on another's screen. Since like an unreasonable request in terms of a compromise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Awha

The option would not have an impact on performance that part is easy, now the streaming aspect might be another story. Though I am not sure why that is even on the table as an issue since one would straight up have to go out their way to find screen shots or a stream to see if their character was altered on another's screen. Since like an unreasonable request in terms of a compromise.

---

Why unreasonable? You are literally telling people that what they are wearing is unacceptable. Yet they would want to use videos/images with the version of you that they deem acceptable. How is that a fair compromise? If one side can agree that other players may not enjoy their glamour and accept that to help the other persons enjoyment they are misrepresented on another players screen. The least they can do is be prevented from recording that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moonlite

Why unreasonable? You are literally telling people that what they are wearing is unacceptable. Yet they would want to use videos/images with the version of you that they deem acceptable. How is that a fair compromise? If one side can agree that other players may not enjoy their glamour and accept that to help the other persons enjoyment they are misrepresented on another players screen. The least they can do is be prevented from recording that.

---

Cause in the end this feature is no different from profanity filter expect it would be a glamour filter. If the same standard of not being able to stream is not a held for language which is another means of self expression why must it be the case for glamour.

Even if I were to grant everything you said, that would be such a pain to prevent streaming. A more reasonable solution in my opinion would to have the toggle also enable first and last initials sure with some effort one could see if their character was altered but the general public would be none the wiser. Sure they would still be misrepresented so to speak, but the general public would have no knowledge that is your character and the only way for the public to know said character is yours falls in line in a similar fashion of you finding out. The person streaming would have to inform the viewer base, and even possibility direct the viewer base to the person in question. So while yes they would still be misrepresented, being as generally no one would know who they are, can we really say it would have any negative impact that comes with misrepresentation?

Truth be told with the plethora of methods of capturing and streaming ones screen, I do not even know if it would be possible to restrict streaming in any reasonable manner.

Considering streaming, depending of the countries, the fact a player appears in a video, if he hasn't been informed the party is recorded, could theorically already complain and obtain the video to be deleted/put offline.

This is why streamers need/should always display initials of players rather than the full name and most already hide chat.