Please lift glamour restrictions!

[Miste]

Live..and let live. To each...his own.

So you start your post with live and let live. To each his own...then spend the rest of the post laughing that people actually exist who have different opinions than you...

I know it is such an absurd concept right that such people could actually exist; very laughable :/

I realize the topic is far from a serious real world debate, but really? Sigh.

The first post, as of this post, has 49 likes, that is hardly "many of us" (since most of the player base doesn't even use the forums) so pretending that your stance is the majority without knowing real statistics about how many people actually agree with you is a pointless argument to use in your favour.

As for the other points the only one I support is the lore reason. Yeah, they've already done stuff with gear that doesn't follow lore, which is exactly why some of us don't want to remove the lore from this too. I don't see why that is so laughable. I could just turn it around on you that 'if the thought of not having that small 5-10% of gear in the game unrestricted for you to use upsets you (lol) then you need to chill.'

[Vaeria]

So you start your post with live and let live. To each his own...then spend the rest of the post laughing that people actually exist who have different opinions than you...

I know it is such an absurd concept right that such people could actually exist; very laughable :/

I realize the topic is far from a serious real world debate, but really? Sigh.

The first post, as of this post, has 49 likes, that is hardly "many of us" (since most of the player base doesn't even use the forums) so pretending that your stance is the majority without knowing real statistics about how many people actually agree with you is a pointless argument to use in your favour.'

Random comeback with 0 supporting statements strikes again...oh my.

Looks like I mighta struck a personal nerve by so passionate of a reaction haha. Somehow...you try to bleed the phrase 'majority' out of my statements, as if I needed group support to back my own opinion.

Naaaaa....the likes on the original OP already did that of their own accord. Go try again.

As I stated very clearly (perhaps not clearly enough for some it seems) this is a simple artistic problem that should be a no-brainer. "More is just better." More options, more results.Yet, some want just the opposite. The phrase 'To each his own' means to let those who do want it..have it. Those who don't...then just don't utilize it.

I'm just gonna assume here you're in the 'minority' (you can argue w/e the fuggy you like, don't need to see a crispy pie chart to know its a limited view *smile*) who doesn't wanna see the glam options extended for god knows whatever reason.

Ok.

Good.

Like I said...to each his own.

The 'rest of us' (or at least as of this post 49 likie-likie people as you were so very kind to point out on OPs post)'ll just go riiiight on hoping those options get increased, k? *smile #2*

Ona sidenote though, I always find it ...laughable? ....how when a topic is used to generate support for something, there will always be that ONE person...who makes more posts than anyone else on the topic....and goes in the EXACT opposite direction of post under the blanket of 'personal opinion' ....all while being too lazy to simply make a post of his/her own. (aaand ya Miste...the majority of people who posted for this specific topic are in favor of the additional glams verses those who aren't. Go count em.)

[Miste]

Random comeback with 0 supporting statements strikes again...oh my.

Looks like I mighta struck a personal nerve by so passionate of a reaction haha. Somehow...you try to bleed the phrase 'majority' out of my statements, as if I needed group support to back my own opinion.

Naaaaa....the likes on the original OP already did that of their own accord. Go try again.

As I stated very clearly (perhaps not clearly enough for some it seems) this is a simple artistic problem that should be a no-brainer. "More is just better." More options, more results.Yet, some want just the opposite. The phrase 'To each his own' means to let those who do want it..have it. Those who don't...then just don't utilize it.

I'm just gonna assume here you're in the 'minority' (you can argue w/e the fuggy you like, don't need to see a crispy pie chart to know its a limited view *smile*) who doesn't wanna see the glam options extended for god knows whatever reason.

Ok.

Good.

Like I said...to each his own.

The 'rest of us' (or at least as of this post 49 likie-likie people as you were so very kind to point out on OPs post)'ll just go riiiight on hoping those options get increased, k? *smile #2*

Ona sidenote though, I always find it ...laughable? ....how when a topic is used to generate support for something, there will always be that ONE person...who makes more posts than anyone else on the topic....and goes in the EXACT opposite direction of post under the blanket of 'personal opinion' ....all while being too lazy to simply make a post of his/her own. (aaand ya Miste...the majority of people who posted for this specific topic are in favor of the additional glams verses those who aren't. Go count em.)

I always find it ....laughable?....how when a topic is used to generate support in a discussion forum (not a soap box), some think that because you might not agree you aren't allowed to post in that topic to debate the topic civilly or maybe even come up with compromises to try to make the game better for everyone. Seems lazy to me that some just want their idea wholly accepted and not have to discuss it with people that may not agree.

I'm not even sure this post is worth responding to at all actually....since you seem to think that when I said majority I only meant this topic. As I stated, very clearly, (perhaps not clearly enough for some it seems) I meant the whole subscribing player base and the idea that neither of us knows what the majority opinion is...and you can argue w/e the fuggy you like about it? It makes no difference to me so go try again.

My initial response to you still stands. It is pointless to argue who has majority and it is pointless to swim in hypocrisy by saying those well-known quotes about not being judgemental about other people's likes/preferences and then laughing at them for it.

stop trying to forced that 'I only want limited creative options and I want others subjected to this rule too' viewpoint on others.

Oh, and 'Stop trying to force that 'I only want unrestricted creative options and I want others subjected to this rule too' viewpoint on others.' I tweaked it a bit, but sound familiar? You might want to look closely at what I am showing you here.

PS. In case you don't understand what I mean. I am showing you that you are trying to do the exact same thing you are telling others not to do


PSS. Did you actually go through this entire thread and count them? O.o Sorry but I won't go count them I don't think I'd want to waste that much time considering it has nothing to do with my points

[Vaeria]

Oh, and 'Stop trying to force that 'I only want unrestricted creative options and I want others subjected to this rule too' viewpoint on others.' I tweaked it a bit, but sound familiar? You might want to look closely at what I am showing you here.

I understand youre making a sincere attempt at a comeback here (by GOD you get major points for creativity attempting to 'tweak' my words) but did you even read what you tried to tweak? *insert tyranical kingly voice* "I DEMAND ye be subjected to greater creative options. I DEMAND ye be made to suffer by being allowed to have more ways of expressing yourself artistically."

Ya got me Miste. Yeeep...that reeeally makes me a terrible person.

...heres the difference in contrast with your attempted 'tweaking': I WANT more creative options, which you can either enjoy as well....or ignore completely in favor of maintaining some time honored ff tradition (lol). Such a request has no impact on those who chose not to utilize it. On the other hand, YOU want the restriction maintained for all, so that neither you, NOR I can make use of it. (again..why I stated to each his own, live and let live) So whose trying to force something upon another here hmm??

Liiiiike I said...just cracks the hell out of me that the one person with more posts on the thread than anyone else is also the person going directly against said thread's message. *stamps foot "I'm here to make my viewpoint heard dabnabbit!* yes...yes you most certainly are.

[Miste]

Ya got me Miste. Yeeep...that reeeally makes me a terrible person.

Where did I say you were a terrible person?

I was pointing out that you were being hypocritical. Does that make you a terrible person? No, I don't think it does, but you should avoid hypocrisy because it just make your side of the debate look bad.

I WANT more creative options, which you can either enjoy as well....or ignore completely in favor of maintaining some time honored ff tradition (lol).

I know you want more options and I've said over and over I respect that opinion and I understand why some people want more. I also believe though that there are good reasons to keep some traditions and some job locked gear.

Such a request has no impact on those who chose not to utilize it.

Yes it does. I've explained too many times already in many different ways in this thread though so I am not doing it again. Go read some past posts by people if you want to know (hint: some people like having unique to only one job gear even if you don't like it)

YOU want the restriction maintained for all, so that neither you, NOR I can make use of it.

So...did you actually read my posts? I'm gonna guess no.

I've said already that I compromise that sure we can unlock that 95% of the gear in the game for all to use. I just feel there are good reasons to keep that 5% of job locked gear (someone did the math earlier in the topic) that was made in a traditional FF style to stay locked to those jobs they represent.

5% is not all restrictions maintained. It is only 5% of the restrictions maintained. So why are you responding to me about my opinions when you didn't read most of my posts? You don't actually know where I stand about the topic according to this response.

So whose trying to force something upon another here hmm??

How am I, or anyone else here, forcing anything on you? My opinions are my opinions, nothing more. SE is the enforcer. SE controls it all, not me. I have no power to force anything on you.

Even if you ignore the fact that opinions alone do not force anything on anyone you cannot just say we are forcing something on you without realizing you are doing the exact same thing. Which is what I already tried to tell you by flipping the words in the quote in my earlier post.

Maybe an example will help you understand because I don't know how else to make you see what it is you are posting.

For example lets say we share a cottage and say I have the power to do whatever I wanted and I decide I want to change something. If you don't agree with what I want to change, but then I change it anyway then I forced it on you. Say you have the power to do whatever you want and you decide to change something that I don't agree with, but you change it anyway. Then you forced it on me.

Get it now? As soon as someone doesn't agree with your changes in a shared environment and you do it anyway then you forced it on them, end of story. This is why it is hypocrisy for you to label the opposing side as such because your side is doing the exact same thing. SE is the only one with the power to force anything on us though so this is just an example if you ignore that fact.

So AGAIN, no one in this thread on either side is forcing anything on anyone else because none of us has the power to do that. We just all have different opinions.

Liiiiike I said...just cracks the hell out of me that the one person with more posts on the thread than anyone else is also the person going directly against said thread's message. *stamps foot "I'm here to make my viewpoint heard dabnabbit!* yes...yes you most certainly are.

You can use me as a target to take out your turbulent emotions on that not everyone shares your opinion about this topic. Go for it. I can handle it.

PS. Read what I said above about you not reading my posts because I am actually only 5% against the thread's message idk why you try to pretend you know where I stand about it without reading most of my posts. 5% out of 100%? Dabnabbit! 5% is sooooo close to 100% gosh obviously I should have noticed this before <.<

[Emma_Bell]

I would also just like to say I am for leaving the AF gear locked to their respective jobs only.

[Niwashi]

.

You can cut out the snark and insults. It's really hurting any chance you could have of being taken seriously. People shouldn't need to wade through all that vitriol to find if you had any point buried in there. But I think I found the nearest thing you had to a point here:

"More is just better." More options, more results.Yet, some want just the opposite. The phrase 'To each his own' means to let those who do want it..have it. Those who don't...then just don't utilize it.

That might be true, if we were talking about adding more. This thread, however, doesn't suggest adding anything. It's proposing to take away a feature that many people care about in order to use its items elsewhere instead. For people who don't care about job gear and just want a few more generic items, then yes, it represents getting a few more generic items they can use however they'd like. But for people who want job gear, that whole feature would be taken away entirely. And that's a pretty bad trade-off.

When I complete my next White Mage quest, I want to be able to wear the iconic set that identifies me as a fully trained White Mage. You're proposing that I should no longer be allowed to do that. Sure, I could wear a robe that coincidentally happens to be white and coincidentally happens to have red triangle trim, but if this request were approved, then it would no longer be a White Mage robe, just another random generic robe that anybody of any class/job could wear.

It's equally true of all other jobs, of course. (I really just picked WHM as my example because its robe is easy to describe.) We're currently allowed to show off our position as a White Mage, or as a Dragoon, or as an Alchemist, or whatever. If all class/job glamour restrictions were removed (even for AF) then we would no longer be able to do that. The visual identity of the different jobs would be lost.

And sure, there are some players who don't really care about that loss. But saying that those who do should lose an entire feature of the game (and of the franchise) just so that those who don't can get a few more random items is most certainly not "To each his own". You can't just "not utilize" a loss of something you're no longer able to do.

[Naunet]

That might be true, if we were talking about adding more. This thread, however, doesn't suggest adding anything. It's proposing to take away a feature that many people care about in order to use its items elsewhere instead. For people who don't care about job gear and just want a few more generic items, then yes, it represents getting a few more generic items they can use however they'd like. But for people who want job gear, that whole feature would be taken away entirely. And that's a pretty bad trade-off.

I vanished from this thread because the back and forth was getting absolutely ridiculous, but this... just doesn't follow at all. Please don't turn my request into something it absolutely is not. I am in NO WAY asking for the removal of jobs or armor sets designed around a particular job theme and pretending that I'm asking for that is disingenuous at best.

You don't lose a feature just because someone can glamour a piece of gear that they got from a quest.

[Thunda_Cat_SMASH]

You don't lose a feature just because someone can glamour a piece of gear that they got from a quest.

You actually do. You lose the theme behind said gear, you lose the visual effect, you lose the meaning behind said gear, you lose what that piece of gear originally represented. You lose the identity. Anyone that tries to sell it otherwise is being dishonest at the absolute best.

[Niwashi]

I am in NO WAY asking for the removal of jobs or armor sets designed around a particular job theme and pretending that I'm asking for that is disingenuous at best.

You don't lose a feature just because someone can glamour a piece of gear that they got from a quest.

You lose the ability to wear job gear if there is no such thing as job gear. The proposal is to keep the gear we currently recognize as job gear but take away its job association and instead make it (at least its appearance, which is all that matters for this purpose anyway) into generic "All Classes" gear. Instead of the Dragoon AF, for example, showing that you're a Dragoon, it would only show that you like spiky stuff. Outfits that can display your job would be a thing of the past.

You're acting like we'd still have gear designed around a job theme, but once the same outfits can be worn equally by any job, there'd really no longer be any such thing as a job theme, at least not visually. So what, we'd be able to wear gear and remember when that style used to be associated with our job? That's a far cry from being able to wear gear that is associated with a job, and which can identify us as being on that job.

(Also, not all the AF gear comes from quests. The i90 sets are available as a trade in from a dungeon drop. I think the AF2 sets are tome purchases. And DoH/DoL AF can be bought off the Market Board. For any of those, you can collect the set for any class/job you feel like, even if you've never even unlocked it, let alone leveled it. Currently, there's no reason to do so, since you'd need the job to be able to use its AF, but with unrestricted glamour, people would.)