Male Viera as a playable character! show your support

Let's please refrain from the personal attacks on both sides of the argument, it no doubt does not present a very positive image to anyone here reading on SE's behalf.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zeylos

You come into a thread with a rude passive aggressive attitude and then complain because ppl tell u their opinion... Interesting

---

I dont want to be the person and I do understand you very well. But by far in this very thread, you are coming off as a very naive and ignorant person. People are trying to tell you not to set high hopes and also try to explain you to be realistic. Its good to be positive and also good to be supporting and requesting for the things you would like to have and see in the game, but you are just keep going with your own attitude and push away everyone's opinion by telling them "passive aggressive attitude". Dont get me wrong, yes - some have been seriously insulting. Many dont share the same opinion as you, that is normal. But sometimes your ideas get into spacious wishful thinking. And while that might be ":S" for some people, you keep going with that.

I am pretty convinced I'll turn out to be the "boo" guy after posting this, but fine by me. I will risk it.
(speaking in general now) These exeggerations will not help you or anyone on your support campaign, you are rather scaring away your supporters by being fanatics. (Im gonna leave this thread from now on as well. Male Viera to be, or not to be)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veis_Alveare

The difference is less players are female and less players play male characters . This is why we see so much favor towards glamour with female characters, something I would imagine the group of people complaining about a lack of male Viera would be aware of.

---

Then here's the question - why invest so much in male Hroth? Why introduce them at all? Cut costs by reusing the Viera assets on the males instead of making two different races. And then you likely gain a better profit because as has been speculated often enough in this thread, male Hroths would likely not be as popular as male Viera.

Quote:

---

You're equating the results of devs pandering to men with the results of pandering to women. These aren't the same.

---

They are not, nor do they need to be, nor was that even my point. My point is that pandering to people who want male Viera would be more beneficial and profitable than pandering to those who wanted male Hroths.

Even if there is demand for a beast race, in the abstract, it does not mean that Hrothgar will be able to absorb the full extent of it, precisely because of their variety (which is why I say the 30% or so they comprise in WoW, depending on how you set about defining one, is meaningless as an aggregate.)

It is intriguing how popular lizard men were in the older polls, though I wonder if that in turn was fueled by Bangaa, which do have their adherents much like Viera do. Then you get the crowd wanting an Avian race, and much more besides. Just adding any beast race isn't necessarily going to sate these people.

I understand and appreciate that they may simply have wanted to offer more variety to the players, which could well be true if this isn't the brainchild of some analyst extrapolating from their numbers in other MMOs (which, by and large, are not that impressive barring WoW.)

It's more the idea that adding male Hrothgar is bound to be more profitable than adding male Viera which I contest as a notion. Now one could put forward the counter that Viera males have a diffuse set of options in terms of how they could be designed, but the devs have already narrowed what range they're looking at (i.e. Yoshi's interview comments re Elezen and Matsuno's tweet in favour of a Highlander type body.) They also know which male body types are most popular and should, I hope, have an awareness of what went wrong with Elezen, and how to design something closer to the popularity levels of male Hyur or Miqo'te, or even Au Ra, any of which represents a substantial advance over Roes.

My only hope is that they were simply pressed for time given project constraints and that we'll see the missing gender for each race added in due course, maybe by 6.0.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BillyKaplan

Then here's the question - why invest so much in male Hroth? Why introduce them at all? Cut costs by reusing the Viera assets on the males instead of making two different races. And then you likely gain a better profit because as has been speculated often enough in this thread, male Hroths would likely not be as popular as male Viera.



They are not, nor do they need to be, nor was that even my point. My point is that pandering to people who want male Viera would be more beneficial and profitable than pandering to those who wanted male Hroths.

---

I follow you, I get it, but somehow people still aren't looking at this from the perspective of SE as expressed by Yoshida.

They wanted to do a beast race for the group of people requesting that.

They wanted to do Viera for the group of people requesting that.

They only had the resources to create two new character models.

If you look at this from that perspective there is no way to create male and female models of two races - that's four models, they've said they had money for two. Of course there would be some reused assets between a race but it certainly isn't that much, between Viera genders I could see ears, skin tones and some hairstyles? The costly part of starting a new race is remodeling all the existing gear and none of that would carry over between genders given that Viera females are very clearly female with female proportions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BillyKaplan

Then here's the question - why invest so much in male Hroth? Why introduce them at all? Cut costs by reusing the Viera assets on the males instead of making two different races. And then you likely gain a better profit because as has been speculated often enough in this thread, male Hroths would likely not be as popular as male Viera.

---

To be fair, people have been asking for a more beastial race for a long time, and they were disappointed that the Au Ra didn't go far enough in this direction. As Yoshi stated, the hrothgar were in development before the Return to Ivalice raids were confirmed in order to satisfy that demand. Then once they got that, they decided to stop work on female hrothgar to make viera instead since that had also been requested. I can't fault them for not wanting to throw away all the work they already had done on hrothgar to just make male and female viera instead, but I do think they underestimated how big of an issue has been for so many players.

Would male viera be more popular than hrothgar? Probably, and to that end if they can get their other systems for efficient, I can see them adding in the male counterpart for the race in the future. We'll see if they can make that happen, but (slightly off topic) this might be best achieved by trimming down all the armor sets in the game. There's currently no reason apart from modeling for dragoons to have seperate left side armor from monks and samurai. If people are thinking having three melee share the same gear, it's worth pointing out that this is how it already is for tanks, casters, and healers. Or they could make samurai share maiming gear and move ninja and monk to the same gear again. Eliminating one full set of armor to do modeling for frees up at least some resources so that modeling on more race options can exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wereotter

To be fair, people have been asking for a more beastial race for a long time, and they were disappointed that the Au Ra didn't go far enough in this direction. As Yoshi stated, the hrothgar were in development before the Return to Ivalice raids were confirmed in order to satisfy that demand. Then once they got that, they decided to stop work on female hrothgar to make viera instead since that had also been requested. I can't fault them for not wanting to throw away all the work they already had done on hrothgar to just make male and female viera instead, but I do think they underestimated how big of an issue has been for so many players.

Would male viera be more popular than hrothgar? Probably, and to that end if they can get their other systems for efficient, I can see them adding in the male counterpart for the race in the future. We'll see if they can make that happen, but (slightly off topic) this might be best achieved by trimming down all the armor sets in the game. There's currently no reason apart from modeling for dragoons to have seperate left side armor from monks and samurai. If people are thinking having three melee share the same gear, it's worth pointing out that this is how it already is for tanks, casters, and healers. Or they could make samurai share maiming gear and move ninja and monk to the same gear again. Eliminating one full set of armor to do modeling for frees up at least some resources so that modeling on more race options can exist.

---

I'm sure we'll find out on 24th May what they're planning to do with that, because there's already been hints at some manner of melee re-categorisation, albeit nothing committal just yet. That would have implications for how the gear sets are shared, if they're re-aligned. I'm kinda hoping for SAM and DRG to be paired up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veis_Alveare

people still aren't looking at this from the perspective of SE as expressed by Yoshida.

---

You're confusing not understanding their point of view, with vehemently disagreeing with it. I fully admit this was done with the best of intentions, but that's the selfsame thing that paves the road to hell, as the proverb goes.
They reintroduced genderlocks after being the ones to remove that moving from 1.0 to 2.0. Mind you, the removal of genderlocks is one of the things the game is known and praised for, which is part of why this stings as bad as it does.
They've earned every accusation of sexism thrown their way, by virtue of introducing each gender for different reasons. And that's regardless of whether or not you agree they reinforce problematic gender stereotypes (coudl've been negated by introducing aesthetically similar gender matches, which they chose not to do), or how Hroth males were designed for the sake of "diversity" and "artistic integrity" or what not but the Viera females are sexy waifu bait introduced to please the masses (not that Hroth weren't requested, but not in such capacity, nor was it stated as the lone reason for their introduction). There's even criticism floating around about how what we saw already for Viera is in contrast to how they were portrayed in XII as far as mannerism goes (giggly, dainty waifus in the reveal trailer), so that feeds back into that all the more.

Now, mind you, they supposedly went on record saying they knew there would be backlash. This goes beyond "we can't please everyone", this is them knowing that they're doing something wrong on some level, they simply thought the good would outweigh the bad.
And then they proved once again how out of touch they are with the playerbase by failing to predict how badly this would blow up in their faces, both because female Hroths and male Viera were also requested by anyone who wanted those races, as well as the very basic act of going back to genderlocks. You have people who don't care for either race in particular but are reconsidering their support of the game because genderlocks are just that big a dealbreaker for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veis_Alveare

snip

---

Here's something. First and foremost, all they had to do (if they haven't already) was to 'borrow' the models from the other races and mildly tweak them, saving them from having to make completely new models from scratch and thus saving themselves time/money. That being said, everything, I wouldn't say was completely planned out, I mean for goodness's sake, they told us, out the gate, that most of the headgear (at least at the time of them reporting it) wouldn't even be wearable for the veira/hrothgar, due to their unique heads, but we're talking about TWO races that effectively cannot wear something everyone else has taken for granted. If that isn't some kind of flub or a sign of some rushed decision making, I don't know what else is.

Not to mention Yoshi and his team have gone on record, shooting down the option to go back and 'improve' the older races (I'm looking at you Male Roes/Hyur's with no eyebrows) by stating at a FF QnA, and I quote "If we changed them, then the people who liked them wouldn't like them anymore." Which.. to me, is so flimsy.. and just a little smug sounding. Especially if you see the numbers of people across the board who play those 'unpopular' races. It's so baffling to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Madiera

Not to mention Yoshi and his team have gone on record, shooting down the option to go back and 'improve' the older races (I'm looking at you Male Roes/Hyur's with no eyebrows) by stating at a FF QnA, and I quote "If we changed them, then the people who liked them wouldn't like them anymore." Which.. is so flimsy.. and just a little smug sounding. Especially if you see the numbers of people across the board who play those 'unpopular' races. It's so baffling to me.

---

I wonder if their stance on that has changed, what with comments at the recent Fanfest in one of the guest sessions with Yoshi to the effect that they'd like to challenge themselves regarding character customisation. Certainly hope so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

I wonder if their stance on that has changed, what with comments at the recent Fanfest in one of the guest sessions with Yoshi to the effect that they'd like to challenge themselves regarding character customisation. Certainly hope so.

---

Letting people keep the old models while giving everyone else new models would certain fall under a customization option...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BillyKaplan

They've earned every accusation of sexism thrown their way, by virtue of introducing each gender for different reasons. And that's regardless of whether or not you agree they reinforce problematic gender stereotypes (coudl've been negated by introducing aesthetically similar gender matches, which they chose not to do), or how Hroth males were designed for the sake of "diversity" and "artistic integrity" or what not but the Viera females are sexy waifu bait introduced to please the masses (not that Hroth weren't requested, but not in such capacity, nor was it stated as the lone reason for their introduction). There's even criticism floating around about how what we saw already for Viera is in contrast to how they were portrayed in XII as far as mannerism goes (giggly, dainty waifus in the reveal trailer), so that feeds back into that all the more.

---

Oh get over yourself. SE hasn't done anything to deserve the sexism claims and you know it. You are hurting your own end game with claims like this. No one is going to listen to someone throwing out silly statements when we have so much that shows it isn't true. As someone else said you need to take a break from this thread because you clearly aren't thinking straight anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spf1200

SE hasn't done anything to deserve the sexism claims and you know it.

---

I obviously don't, other than "I disagree this is sexist" do you have any other rebuttal?

Quote:

---

we have so much that shows it isn't true.

---

Feel free to enlighten me, this too is part of a debate.

Quote:

---

As someone else said you need to take a break from this thread because you clearly aren't thinking straight anymore.

---

I'm not the one losing my temper here :o

EDIT: I do feel like adding that when I say this is sexist, I'm not saying that was an active factor in the deliberations. These things seldom are, they're just that ingrained, alternatively, an unfortunate product of a mixture of decisions made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BillyKaplan

I obviously don't, other than "I disagree this is sexist" do you have any other rebuttal?



Feel free to enlighten me, this too is part of a debate.



I'm not the one losing my temper here :o

EDIT: I do feel like adding that when I say this is sexist, I'm not saying that was an active factor in the deliberations. These things seldom are, they're just that ingrained, alternatively, an unfortunate product of a mixture of decisions made.

---

Personally I do not feel like what they did is sexist on the grounds that their presentation of Viera is, for the most part, very consistent with how they've been portrayed since 2003 with FFTA. However, I would say that the concept art we've gotten for Viera dating since 2003 is pretty sexist considering they're designed entirely around sex appeal. If people can't see that, HOO BOY.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BillyKaplan

You're confusing not understanding their point of view, with vehemently disagreeing with it. I fully admit this was done with the best of intentions, but that's the selfsame thing that paves the road to hell, as the proverb goes.
They reintroduced genderlocks after being the ones to remove that moving from 1.0 to 2.0. Mind you, the removal of genderlocks is one of the things the game is known and praised for, which is part of why this stings as bad as it does.
They've earned every accusation of sexism thrown their way, by virtue of introducing each gender for different reasons. And that's regardless of whether or not you agree they reinforce problematic gender stereotypes (coudl've been negated by introducing aesthetically similar gender matches, which they chose not to do), or how Hroth males were designed for the sake of "diversity" and "artistic integrity" or what not but the Viera females are sexy waifu bait introduced to please the masses (not that Hroth weren't requested, but not in such capacity, nor was it stated as the lone reason for their introduction). There's even criticism floating around about how what we saw already for Viera is in contrast to how they were portrayed in XII as far as mannerism goes (giggly, dainty waifus in the reveal trailer), so that feeds back into that all the more.

Now, mind you, they supposedly went on record saying they knew there would be backlash. This goes beyond "we can't please everyone", this is them knowing that they're doing something wrong on some level, they simply thought the good would outweigh the bad.
And then they proved once again how out of touch they are with the playerbase by failing to predict how badly this would blow up in their faces, both because female Hroths and male Viera were also requested by anyone who wanted those races, as well as the very basic act of going back to genderlocks. You have people who don't care for either race in particular but are reconsidering their support of the game because genderlocks are just that big a dealbreaker for them.

---

I agree with you. I do think that what they did was a very bad decision both from a marketing perspective and specially the fact that they just failed to deliver what the community expected from them, which is no genderlocked races, and I bet a majority of the community is at least somewhat annoyed by gender lock, and that for sure if they only made 1 of the races they wouldn't have gotten near as much backlash

I would love to see male viera! ;v; Even if not right away, eventually they should make male viera and female hrothgar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

I'm sure we'll find out on 24th May what they're planning to do with that, because there's already been hints at some manner of melee re-categorisation, albeit nothing committal just yet. That would have implications for how the gear sets are shared, if they're re-aligned. I'm kinda hoping for SAM and DRG to be paired up.

---

SAM and DRG working together could make sense, though I think the easiest implementation of changes to melee gear is just delete maiming as a set entirely and have monk, samurai, and dragoon all share gear. Tanks will be sharing between four jobs, healers between three, casters between three, and ranged-physical between three, so having the three strength melee share would make sense... but then you have ninja as the odd one out with a unique set. So possibly a 2-2 split is more sensible, in which case I feel like samurai is the more dexterous job than monk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wereotter

SAM and DRG working together could make sense, though I think the easiest implementation of changes to melee gear is just delete maiming as a set entirely and have monk, samurai, and dragoon all share gear. Tanks will be sharing between four jobs, healers between three, casters between three, and ranged-physical between three, so having the three strength melee share would make sense... but then you have ninja as the odd one out with a unique set. So possibly a 2-2 split is more sensible, in which case I feel like samurai is the more dexterous job than monk

---

It's more me being selfish, since I play both DRG and SAM and hate having to gear them separately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lauront

It's more me being selfish, since I play both DRG and SAM and hate having to gear them separately.

---

I wouldn't mine all the STR jobs sharing gear and all the Dex jobs sharing gear. Reguardless of whether the gear changes appearence per job or not. Would also save on inventory slots.

I honestly don't mind if they have to give the same gear sets to more jobs if it means it would allow them to remove genderlock

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zeylos

I honestly don't mind if they have to give the same gear sets to more jobs if it means it would allow them to remove genderlock

---

It wouldn't change much ressource wise.

There would be about the same amount of model to do and the "big" change would be the stats swap which are unreleated to modeling.

Actually, as most armor model are color swap in the case we're talking about, it would most likely not change anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zeylos

Yet they have already stated the backlash is way bigger than they though and they are considering on making the other genders...

---

For that point, I don't remember a time they haven't say that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Madiera

Here's something. First and foremost, all they had to do (if they haven't already) was to 'borrow' the models from the other races and mildly tweak them, saving them from having to make completely new models from scratch and thus saving themselves time/money. That being said, everything, I wouldn't say was completely planned out, I mean for goodness's sake, they told us, out the gate, that most of the headgear (at least at the time of them reporting it) wouldn't even be wearable for the veira/hrothgar, due to their unique heads, but we're talking about TWO races that effectively cannot wear something everyone else has taken for granted. If that isn't some kind of flub or a sign of some rushed decision making, I don't know what else is.

---

That isn't the way things work, though. If they "borrow" a model and tweak proportions on it they wind up needing to tweak all the existing gear (so thousands and thousands of individual items) which is where the large resource drain comes in. If they don't significantly alter an existing model they are then accused of slapping rabbit ears on a Hyur.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BillyKaplan

You're confusing not understanding their point of view, with vehemently disagreeing with it. I fully admit this was done with the best of intentions, but that's the selfsame thing that paves the road to hell, as the proverb goes.
They reintroduced genderlocks after being the ones to remove that moving from 1.0 to 2.0. Mind you, the removal of genderlocks is one of the things the game is known and praised for, which is part of why this stings as bad as it does.
They've earned every accusation of sexism thrown their way, by virtue of introducing each gender for different reasons. And that's regardless of whether or not you agree they reinforce problematic gender stereotypes (coudl've been negated by introducing aesthetically similar gender matches, which they chose not to do), or how Hroth males were designed for the sake of "diversity" and "artistic integrity" or what not but the Viera females are sexy waifu bait introduced to please the masses (not that Hroth weren't requested, but not in such capacity, nor was it stated as the lone reason for their introduction). There's even criticism floating around about how what we saw already for Viera is in contrast to how they were portrayed in XII as far as mannerism goes (giggly, dainty waifus in the reveal trailer), so that feeds back into that all the more.

Now, mind you, they supposedly went on record saying they knew there would be backlash. This goes beyond "we can't please everyone", this is them knowing that they're doing something wrong on some level, they simply thought the good would outweigh the bad.
And then they proved once again how out of touch they are with the playerbase by failing to predict how badly this would blow up in their faces, both because female Hroths and male Viera were also requested by anyone who wanted those races, as well as the very basic act of going back to genderlocks. You have people who don't care for either race in particular but are reconsidering their support of the game because genderlocks are just that big a dealbreaker for them.

---

I'm not commenting on the quality of SE's intentions, I don't see how that matters.

Most western RPGs don't have significant gender locks and XIV may be Japanese-based but the majority of its players are western. Not having gender locks isn't making it stand out against something like ESO, gender locks just aren't as common in this market as they are over there.

I assume by 'aesthetically similar gender matches' you basically mean having an androgynous male Viera? I don't see the need for yet another pretty boy race any more than I see the need for another waifu race. Male hyur, miqo and Elezen can all be very androgynous looking and lalafel barely have perceptible gender differences.

Unpopular opinion but... males and females are different? I get it's a fantasy game and if SE makes a race with almost no sexual dimorphism (like Lalas) that's totally their right but to suggest not doing that is "problematic" is nonsense.

I'm sure SE won't ever say it, they're very much okay with leaving information ambiguous in order to avoid offending anyone just look at their lack of a stance on healer dps but getting your hopes up that enough people are going to unsub about no bunbois to get their attention is unrealistic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veis_Alveare

I'm sure SE won't ever say it, they're very much okay with leaving information ambiguous in order to avoid offending anyone just look at their lack of a stance on healer dps but getting your hopes up that enough people are going to unsub about no bunbois to get their attention is unrealistic.

---

Yet they have already stated the backlash is way bigger than they though and they are considering on making the other genders...

Lol, reading up on the last few pages and its nice to see that the "it's sexism!" Post have come out again with a nice dose of people complaining about HROTHGAR, the race that actually adds something to the line up, cause it's not what they wanted.


And people wonder why the devs ignore the whining of the West.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veis_Alveare

Most western RPGs don't have significant gender locks and XIV may be Japanese-based but the majority of its players are western.

---

It's big within the context of XIV itself. Like I said, they're the ones who removed genderlocks moving into 2.0, and were broadly praised for it. That's why it matters, I don't care about any other MMO.

Quote:

---

I assume by 'aesthetically similar gender matches' you basically mean having an androgynous male Viera?

---

No. I mean equally beastial female Hroths and equally pretty (if still 'noticeably masculine') male Viera. They won't be without differences but they'll abide by the same aesthetic (not to an extreme like Lalafells, but also not like Au Ra). Then people wouldn't have a leg to stand on saying we got beefy men and model ladies (aforementioned problematic gender presentation) because we'd have also gotten beefy ladies or model men (using OR, because this scenario is if they had released one full race instead of two halfs).

Quote:

---

but getting your hopes up that enough people are going to unsub about no bunbois to get their attention is unrealistic.

---

Zeylos already said what I was going to, but you're also forgetting that voting with your wallet doesn't begin and end with ubsubbing. People can stop buying from the Mog Shop. People can keep playing but not maintain their sub uptime whereas before they would be subbed all year round. They can reduce their sub to entry point and keep going with the one character - which also translates to less Mog Shop purchases if they didn't boycott it, because it's less characters to buy glamours for, and it makes mounts noticeably less worth the price.
And SE knows that or they wouldn't have already given us the non-committal yet existing statement about looking into feedback.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zeylos

They did promise it at an interview and I'd like to know what's selfish about it? Is it because we aren't letting Yoshida do whatever he wants? I don't really see that as selfish considering this is not his project and this is not an indie game this is an MMO we pay for monthly

---

Provide me a source where they say something along the lines of "we promise to never gender lock races again" then. As for selfish...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xbahax92

You should be careful with your wordings, some might misunderstand that. If its not his project/game/rights, then he wouldnt be the director and producer. And we as customers, arent above him either. We pay for a sercive, not tell him what to do.

---

More or less, yeah. FFXIV would probably be a dumpster fire if Yoshi-P/the dev team always did what the customers requested/demanded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reivaxe

Lol, reading up on the last few pages and its nice to see that the "it's sexism!" Post have come out again with a nice dose of people complaining about HROTHGAR, the race that actually adds something to the line up, cause it's not what they wanted.


And people wonder why the devs ignore the whining of the West.

---

Please, if u come here to insult others instead of apportion anything there is no need to post on this thread so u can feel better about making others feel bad

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wereotter

SAM and DRG working together could make sense, though I think the easiest implementation of changes to melee gear is just delete maiming as a set entirely and have monk, samurai, and dragoon all share gear. Tanks will be sharing between four jobs, healers between three, casters between three, and ranged-physical between three, so having the three strength melee share would make sense... but then you have ninja as the odd one out with a unique set. So possibly a 2-2 split is more sensible, in which case I feel like samurai is the more dexterous job than monk

---

I think if they'd make gear groups just by main stat (VIT, STR, DEX, INT, MND) then NIN can share the left side with the phys ranged as well (make it as scouting group).
Aside from AF, so far the aesthetics of the jobs don't really matter for the group gears, so it shouldn't be an issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fland

I think if they'd make gear groups just by main stat (VIT, STR, DEX, INT, MND) then NIN can share the left side with the phys ranged as well (make it as scouting group).
Aside from AF, so far the aesthetics of the jobs don't really matter for the group gears, so it shouldn't be an issue.

---

Ah, but you see, will NIN be a DEX dps come 5.0? Stay tuned!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zeylos

Yet they have already stated the backlash is way bigger than they though and they are considering on making the other genders...

---

No, they said that they expected this backlash. And where did they say they were considering making the other gender counterparts? If they had said that then we wouldn't have as many people up in arms about this situation, the most they've said so far is that they are listening to feedback and that they do not have the resources to make the counterparts at this time anyways. Also, further on the making armor designs less varied between the two genders, that isn't how the resources work at all. I said this earlier in the thread, at this point it's up to the higher-ups in Square whether or not the XIV development team gets the resources to make the counterparts, which in itself takes a lot due to having to make the skeleton+model, animations, fitting the armor, etc etc, it's a pretty expensive process.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zeylos

Please, if u come here to insult others instead of apportion anything there is no need to post on this thread so u can feel better about making others feel bad

---

Even though what reivaxe said is pretty much true there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renthas

No, they said that they expected this backlash. And where did they say they were considering making the other gender counterparts? If they had said that then we wouldn't have as many people up in arms about this situation, the most they've said so far is that they are listening to feedback and that they do not have the resources to make the counterparts at this time anyways. Also, further on the making armor designs less varied between the two genders, that isn't how the resources work at all. I said this earlier in the thread, at this point it's up to the higher-ups in Square whether or not the XIV development team gets the resources to make the counterparts, which in itself takes a lot due to having to make the skeleton+model, animations, fitting the armor, etc etc, it's a pretty expensive process.

---

Sigh go and watch the Mrhappy interview in where they say that they are considering it

Also I find it rather amusing at how many ppl takes the time to come to this thread to tell us they hope we won't get what we are asking for and to respect their opinion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zeylos

Sigh go and watch the Mrhappy interview in where they say that they are considering it

---

This is what Yoshi-P said in the interview.

Quote:

---

Short answer is we haven’t made a decision on that. The reason why we can’t say for sure. We need to optimize our work flow with the existing races and the new ones. After that, perhaps we do the other gender. But we don’t know right now.

We did consider Male Viera instead of adding an extra race, but we tried to take player feedback on adding a more beast like race as well as the strong desire to receive Viera. We did expect strong feedback on the gender lock. It was a tough decision, but we decided to do our best to meet both the player feedback and our development team’s vision. It will be very costly to add a new race or genders. So I won’t say no, but I would not like to set expectations high.

We haven’t had time to look at all of the feedback since this is our first day back at the office after the Tokyo Fan Festival. What was the general feedback from NA based on your experience? Were they upset about no Male Viera, no Female Hrothgar or both?

---

Quote:

---

Thank you for the insight. Currently, we are putting together all the feedback. Depending on the feedback we are considering an official statement on the forums.

---

No, they just HAVE to tell you things that 20 other people said before because it coming from them is different

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reivaxe

Lol, reading up on the last few pages and its nice to see that the "it's sexism!" Post have come out again with a nice dose of people complaining about HROTHGAR, the race that actually adds something to the line up, cause it's not what they wanted.


And people wonder why the devs ignore the whining of the West.

---

Lmao so Japan is part of the west now, because their community didn't like it either. Asking for something should not be so offensive to you people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nestama

This is what Yoshi-P said in the interview.

---

Thanks, you yourself made sure to point out on how they say that perhaps they do the other gender but they don't know right now.
I believe that is called....suprise surprise... Considering something!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zeylos

Sigh It isnt about no male viera, it is about genderlocked races, and yes, for me it is, and I ask of you to respect that

---

Honestly, I think you are kind of blowing no male Viera way out of proportion. It would probably just be a Hyur/Miqo'te with bunny ears. That's what the females are.

If they are lala sized I would think that would be a little weird.. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SturmChurro

Honestly, I think you are kind of blowing no male Viera way out of proportion. It would probably just be a Hyur/Miqo'te with bunny ears. That's what the females are.

---

more options never hurt anyone and we can simplify races to something extremely basic all we want but doesn't change the fact they obviously look different and have multiple animations that set them apart

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duskane

more options never hurt anyone and we can simplify races to something extremely basic all we want but doesn't change the fact they obviously look different and have multiple animations that set them apart

---

I would rather there be no gender-locking in the first place. I just don't think it's as big a deal as some people are making it out to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SturmChurro

I would rather there be no gender-locking in the first place. I just don't think it's as big a deal as some people are making it out to be.

---

all a matter of perspective but it is a big deal to some.