ADD GLAMOUR EFFECTS SETTINGS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SeedSix

If I want to turn battle effects on/off for my character, party members and others I have the options to do so and it does not affect your character or gaming experience. Also you would not know if I'm using the feature. So, if there is a feature that allows me to disable the visual effects of glamoured gear on my screen and it does affect what you see on your screen, what's the problem?

---

As Kalin said earlier, it's not the same thing.

Disabling effects is a performance/visibility issue.

It also doesn't affect how the character appears. Everyone has the same spell effects and turning them off isn't changing anything about how I chose to customise my character.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pepsi_Plunge

That's not true. At all.
They may tolerate parsers under a "don't ask, don't tell" policy but they were always hard against those model-swaps. Obviously, because: 1) They don't want any nude mods and 2) losing money with glamour and mount-skins. Why should I buy the angels and devils costume or the fatter cat mount at the mogry station, if I could just install a mod, adding those skins to my game for free? Those are the two big reasons why Square Enix hasn't and won't turn a blind eye against modding. They are actually very active against it and have send cease and desist letter in the past (I know about at least 11, because there was a big article about it in a magazine about those strikes against the modding scene and players showing those mods on streams).

---

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...=1#post1408111

Reshade has been officially ok'ed, and as for other client-side mods, there is zero risk of use. SE has literally never banned players for using client-side appearance mods (server-side mods are a different story).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lambdafish

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...=1#post1408111

Reshade has been officially ok'ed, and as for other client-side mods, there is zero risk of use. SE has literally never banned players for using client-side appearance mods (server-side mods are a different story).

---

That's something totally different. ENB is a shaders/lighting-tool for graphical effects. Of course SE doesn't care about it.
Swapping or changing skins and models, on the other hand, is quite another affaire, especially with nudes or chargeable extensions. I'm pretty sure they even had people banned for showing off a modded haircut (not really sure if it was true, but I remember reading about it)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lambdafish

SE has literally never banned players for using client-side appearance mods

---

Because there is usually no way they can know about it as long as they aren't showing them off in streams, videos or in pictures on the internet. But if they do and someone notice it, SE usually take actions. Same is true for the sites publicing those mods. There has indeed been bans and cease and desist letters in the past, like I wrote in my previous posting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pepsi_Plunge

Because there is usually no way they can know about it as long as they aren't showing them off in streams, videos or in pictures on the internet. But if they do and someone notice it, SE usually take actions. Same is true for the sites publicing those mods. There has indeed been bans and cease and desist letters in the past, like I wrote in my previous posting.

---

SE has never once sent cease and desist letters. There are users running Patreons and discords with thousands of members. The only two instances where SE took action were when someone posted obscene NSFW images and the creeper who modded Ryne.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lambdafish

there seems to be a few people who are extremely sensitive, throwing around words like censorship

---

Censorship's exactly what this is about. OP and supporters find other people's glamours objectionable and want an option to suppress them.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censor

Quote:

---

censor verb
censored; censoring\ ˈsen(t)-​sə-​riŋ, ˈsen(t)s-​riŋ \

Definition of censor (Entry 2 of 2)

transitive verb
: to examine in order to suppress (see suppress sense 2) or delete anything considered objectionable (censor the news)
also : to suppress or delete as objectionable (censor out indecent passages)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rongway

Censorship's exactly what this is about. OP and supporters find other people's glamours objectionable and want an option to suppress them.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censor

---

If you are going to use definitions as an argument, you might want to look up the definition of suppress (given its importance in the definition of censorship).

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/suppress

Quote:

---

suppressed; suppressing; suppresses
Definition of suppress
transitive verb

1: to put down by authority or force
2: to keep from public knowledge: such as
a: to keep secret
b: to stop or prohibit the publication or revelation of
3a: to exclude from consciousness
b: to keep from giving vent to
5a: to restrain from a usual course or action
b: to inhibit the growth or development of
6: to inhibit the genetic expression of

---

OP is doing none of this. They aren't restricting peoples glamours, they aren't forcing anything upon anybody. They are making a CLIENT SIDE CHANGE. This affects NOBODY. Nobody is censored, nobody is suppressed, the change affects only the person choosing to use the option. If you choose to be offended or sensitive about this then that is your fault, not the OPs, they are in the right to want this change, and their approach is harmless. Ive seen threads complaining about certain glamour pieces, and their attitude has been oppressive and censoring, but this thread isn't that.

key words: CLIENT SIDE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SeedSix

Similar to the Battle Effects Settings where we have the options to show all, limited or none of the effects for our character, party members and others. It would be nice to have the same options applied to glamoured gear. For example, seeing a Warrior or Paladin tank in a bikini or with no shirt on is not what I\\'ve come to love and enjoy about Final Fantasy games. In my opinion this type of behavior can diminish the enjoyment and overall experience for some gamers. Please consider giving us the option to hide the effects of glamoured gear.

---

No.

To clarify, have you seen unglamoured BiS? It's garish and completely mismatched, even when dyed. Do you really want to see a bunch of people wearing identical mis-matched sets hanging around Eulmore? Because that's what you're asking for, and it's a bad idea not worth the coding time.

Have you ever played FFXI? Mixed matched sets were common.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnowVix

No.

To clarify, have you seen unglamoured BiS? It's garish and completely mismatched, even when dyed. Do you really want to see a bunch of people wearing identical mis-matched sets hanging around Eulmore? Because that's what you're asking for, and it's a bad idea not worth the coding time.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SeedSix

Have you ever played FFXI? Mixed matched sets were common.

---

They were in WoW too. And my eyes frequently bled until they came up with their version of glamours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SeedSix

Have you ever played FFXI? Mixed matched sets were common.

---

And let's leave them there. I'm sorry you're mad you can't force everyone to dress how you want them to.