Vanity slot restriction concerns.....

[Deathgasm]

If I can hide vanity costume by right clicking on a name and choice that option in a menu, then I'm all for total freedom, but freedom for all, to show or to do not see.

I left TSW, partly because of ridiculous costumes everywhere (on a RP server), that's my choice, it can seems ridiculous to you as much as your silly costumes can look ridiculous to me.

What's cool is to have the choice, when you're free of yours and I'm free of mine.
But for those who showing off is at the level of a psychopathology, that hide option will be the ruin of all their efforts to dictate their right way of having fun and the unbearable uncertainty of getting noticed.

[GabrielK]

My body is ready

I'd pet that !

[Kayo]

Id just like it to allow us to use other gear your current class uses. Lets be honest, some of them look ... well, look at the Bard AF gear. Honestly, I wouldnt want to see anyone tanking in a bikini ... it just breaks that 4th wall and looks ridiculous. Just a preference, no biggie regardless of what they do.

Also a 'hide weapon' thing for MNKs would be nice ... not a fan of brass knuckles, claws, of that Nemian Cestus ripoff from God of War 3. Monks ... as is fists>all, even Blizzard had the sense to include a way to customize it.

[Obreck]

don't allow PvP gear to be used as a vanity item or have a vanity option applied to it should be a restriction as well.

No, no, and double NO. This is a tiny minority view in the MMO community that should not be forced on everyone.

The Off Switch Toggle that has been suggested would be a far better solution for players that want to view other's true gear in PvP.

[Jinko]

Id just like it to allow us to use other gear your current class uses. Lets be honest, some of them look ... well, look at the Bard AF gear. Honestly, I wouldnt want to see anyone tanking in a bikini ... it just breaks that 4th wall and looks ridiculous. Just a preference, no biggie regardless of what they do.

If I wana tank in a bikini who are you to tell me not to, screw breaking immersion, this is a video game !

[MachammondtheXXXII]

They are going to be adding outfits from a whole other game, immersion is already tossed out the window.

I say no restrictions. I wanna dress like some of the NPCs get to already.

<^.^>

[Shougun]

If I wana tank in a bikini who are you to tell me not to, screw breaking immersion, this is a video game !

As I said earlier I really dont care about restrictions so long as I can turn the system off (client side option), but for the sake of it. "This is a video game" defense for wearing anything you want doesn't really mean anything.

I've seen it a few times before in vanity threads (and similar arguments in other unrelated threads) and I'm not sure what people think when they say it. Yes it is a video game, has nothing to do with clothes, but yet it also does.

"Who cares about graphics, stories, or even if it works, this is a video game!" are pretty similar statements imo. Immersion is used in discussion because it is a key consideration of designing things, even if you are explicitly taking an incredibly unrealistic phantasmal approach to things (which FF is not taking, though of obviously still not trying to be like say CoD).

Immersion isn't just how "real" it can be and I suppose the discussion can be bad due to flexibility and stretching of words but really its about being able to dive into the content in a way that I'm sure all designers want- most often things don't have to be real to be immersive they just have to flow- the player not mentally cracking from step to step. Its really about your target audience, people who play skyrim wont cry immersion breaking when a dragon pops up- their wandering with bliss in the forest and their immersion is uninterrupted when something happens that is impossible in real life. In fact it would be heightened when they see the dragon in the distance. In that case more immersion from less reality, but of course you are going by a sort of paradoxical logic of what would be real in an unreal reality. So I suppose it is quite understandable to see why some people talk about realism - but its not about "real" reality as much as the reality in the game, and the reality of the game is incredibly important (immersion in these type of games is incredibly important, while there are different types and talking about tetris might make it sound unimportant- in these type of games where you are personally invested with your character.. it is important).

I don't really want to write many lines on this, particularly because I don't think many people here would feel fascinated or care about it.. (and if i write that much i might feel obligated to better proofread lol) but .. the forums mock immersion like a child mocks a subject they cannot even pretend to grasp.. I find it awkward because from all points I look at the subject its pretty easy to grasp and usually boils down to discussing opinions (of what can make sense in what isn't reality). But then again I guess we're not best about discussing opinions lol. I get a little annoyed when I see people mock immersion just because in most cases you can tell they have no idea what they are mocking. Edit: just to be clear I didn't think you were mocking it as much as tossing it out as an idea- not that I think tossing it out is good either but.. just wanted to say the entire passage isn't directed at you lol.

Anyway crapply carrying full circle, saying screw breaking immersion as a blanket statement is a terrible idea- of course for particular audiences you will do it inevitably but really that shouldn't be your goal. Keep your players "immersed", submerged in your game, drowned them in your addiction so they forget about reality.. then you've both created a problem for reality (lol) and also a game people will really talk about.

Vanity system will definitely break some people's immersion but it won't for everyone (in some cases it will "fix it" / enhance it), and even more so if you create caveats like a toggle or restrictions you can even maintain more people caught in the game (imagine a venn diagram of trying to fit as many people in as possible (of your target audience) lol). For myself I say restricted or toggleable because I know an unrestricted system -will- create scenes that I will not be able to handle without being drawn out of the game. Perhaps I'm a small audience and 100% free unrestricted will be their pure target audience- I doubt it.. but Im not the dev. I think they'll add it with restrictions and no toggle, but perhaps some people here on the forums will get it less restrictive, and perhaps those people like myself that wouldn't be happy to see some players creations will get a fix as well.

Tl;dr I don't think you meant what you said /pet peeve.

[Siren]

van·i·ty = noun = Excessive pride in or admiration of one's own appearance or achievements.

Which in plain English means someone can wear (whatever) they want if it brings them pride, if we are going to have vanity slots then it should be that open to everything available as long as it makes you happy, if someone does not like and care for what you are wearing then tough, it is none of there business.

If i want to wear a long black plate jack boots, a bikini bottom, a AF top and a reindeer helm that should be my choice.

[ErikMynhier]

I just want/need to vanity is the AF styles really. I'm not there yet but that DL crap is ugly and the AF stuff is so pretty.

[RyuujinZERO]

Id just like it to allow us to use other gear your current class uses. Lets be honest, some of them look ...

Honestly, I wouldnt want to see anyone tanking in a bikini ....

If you'd paid attention top my earlier post, you'd understand that bikinis technically count as tank gear. Tanks can legitimately wear all forms of cloth armour, including but not limited to the maid outfit for level 40 crafters.

This is why the vanity system cannot and should not be based upon the "normal" descriptors that define what you can wear, because tanks can wear very nearly anything - whereas casters are restricted to potato sacks and dresses