Fang shui, the tooth about the issue.

[KaiKatzchen]

the left is better though, but you have my support, there is no reason the fangs length are different for the mouths

I agree with you. When I just looked at the pic without reading first I was thinking Left was the one she had and Right was her only option. I mean both are cute, but I like left a lot.

[Hiruke]

I would actually appreciate a Fang slider. Archeage had one, maybe one could be implemented here?

Honestly, what would be nice, is when (if? when!) PS3 support is dropped, they revamp character creation a bit, and give us some sliders all over the place. Or, at the very least, greatly increase the number of options available. The number of difference face/nose/mouth etc. options is... kind of pathetic. One hopes we could expand this somewhat when breaking free of the limitations of half a gig of RAM.

[BigPapaSmurf]

Greetings,

Apologies for the length of time it took us to get a reply to you, Keroa.

Unfortunately, I'm afraid that I'll be the bearer of bad news as there aren't any plans to make changes to these sets of teeth as the team created them at this size intentionally. As these sets of teeth have always been this way, and there are players who use this mouth option and enjoy it the way it is, I'm sure you can imagine the feelings of those players that would be upset if suddenly their teeth were changed after the fact.

Just Implement a Separate Option for Fang Length/Type JUST LIKE THE TAIL.

Just have the option defaulted the way it is for each mouth-type so people's fangs don't change on them without consent.

[Barboron]

I find this highly distressing.

Honestly? You need to take a long break from this game if some teeth are causing you to lose it.

Just Implement a Separate Option for Fang Length/Type JUST LIKE THE TAIL.

Just have the option defaulted the way it is for each mouth-type so people's fangs don't change on them without consent.

Easier said then done. It was already stated for hairstyles being carried from male to female would require alterations for skulls. Now, I know that's not really the case here but they would have to redesign parts of the skull to cater to the teeth within the size range. It won't be as simple as "putting in a slider" as you, and many others might think.

[Gilthas]

I imagine this is one of those cases where Keepers get the option to have a Seeker trait. That mouth type = Seeker mouth.

[BigPapaSmurf]

^^doesn't matter, if they want us to respect the lore they need to handle these things better.

Sure, it would require extra work but they already said no to more feline-like features.

They said no to butts.

They said no to cat-noses.

They said no to fixing clipping.

Since this' rooted in the lore, they should not have said no to this one.

[Adrian74]

Ultimate solution, go seekers!.. No fangs neither but you obtain cool cat eyes in exchange that are always visible unlike the fangs nya!

Also you have extra DEX for ninja, not much, but, it's something, and... Everyone likes ninja (+2 dex will make you deal more or less +0.1% more damage!... That perhaps is not so much damage in one attack but...The whole dungeon would be an extra of 1000!... And the whole week perhaps 10.000 more damage! It is almost do a 15% of a dungeon boss! )


PS: I like the catchy tittle.

[Ashkendor]

Since this' rooted in the lore, they should not have said no to this one.

The lore just says Keepers in general have more pronounced fangs as compared to Seekers.

It doesn't say that every single last one of them has enormous, easily-visible fangs.

[BigPapaSmurf]

The lore just says Keepers in general have more pronounced fangs as compared to Seekers.

It doesn't say that every single last one of them has enormous, easily-visible fangs.

Those can't even be called fangs though is the thing (in the bad example), they're just not perfectly straight teeth.

Besides, my major point being they've said no to enough of the popularly requested features in this department already.

[gamesmart]

Those can't even be called fangs though is the thing (in the bad example), they're just not perfectly straight teeth.

Besides, my major point being they've said no to enough of the popularly requested features in this department already.

Your "major point" doesn't factor in the development resources that would be needed to pull off some of those requested features. That's a pretty big factor from the development standpoint, it all goes back to cost efficiency. What's the point of making a change that not everyone wants and might end up blowing up in your face, especially if it can take a significant amount of time to implement?