Or in the same timeframe, they could have released one complete race instead of two incomplete ones, which arguably would be easier, since you don't have to create lore for two races.Release expansion when it was intended and have male Viera with Patch 5.3 on January 10, 2020
or
Delay expansion until January 10, 2020 and we'll have absolutely nothing between 4.58 to 5.0 during that time?
I'll pref. them to release missing genders later and keep expansion release date as it is.
What's done is done, it's useless to complain about it at this point.
Or would you pref. them to scrap races completely now, hm?
Eh, not really, people got what they wanted.
But in current situation some people are even demanding for whole expansion to be delayed, when in above case they had Miqo/Roe prepared for planned 2.0 release date to begin with.
So, I mean - yeah, currently complaining about male Viera/female Ronso might lead to somewhere, but at the same time, they might have already plans to get those for 6.0 as new races aren't planned for it, thus it'd free development time to get proper models for them instead of rushed attempts mid-expansion.
Last edited by Anzaman; 03-25-2019 at 03:30 AM. Reason: -- Hit daily limit, thus editing - wish they'd get rid of this.
You can and should complain. I have.Stop complaining, stop whining, stop throwing a fit, etc. etc. Be happy with what you get!
What's annoying is when you throw yourselves on the ground kicking and screaming and start throwing around baseless accusations of homophobia and sexism over a cosmetic option, especially when you already have those cosmetic options.
Please take a deep breath, go play something else for a while, and get some fresh air outside with the sun.
Looking for RP on the First!
There was not a huge outcry for that though. Not anything like right now.
They did this to show people that 2.0 was not just XI-II.
I'm personally fine with solo gendered races. It's a high fantasy setting, a place where these things can exist and it's (normally) acceptably okay.
http://king.canadane.com
As manickitty said, was there any point to the complaints of Male Miqo'te and Female Roes wasted back during 1.0? What about bow mage, which from my understanding has seen considerable change from. Was all the complaints about having a Male bunny suit also pointless?
Answer to all of those, no it was not pointless. As those are all things in which we now have.
Au'ra would like to have word with this discussion point.Even if that were true, they still wouldn't be the WoL/WoD or adventurers at all, since your character would still have to get to that point in the story anyway. The is a great chance that is not true anyway, since you just made it up. We might not even see one. If you allow them as WoL/WoD, you also allow them as widespread adventurers at the same time.
Au'ra were introduced in the end of the 2.0 series as an introduction to 3.0. Which means Au'ra would effective have to time travel to become the WoL. Using this as a defense against Male viera is pointless as it's already happened before.
No, no such assertion is required as the WoL (player character) is a singular existence, every other player from the WoL perspective are pretty much NPC's/adventurer's with the power of the echo.The is a great chance that is not true anyway, since you just made it up. We might not even see one. If you allow them as WoL/WoD, you also allow them as widespread adventurers at the same time.
As to maintaining an experience of rarity then all they have to do is not utilize male viera as NPC's to keep them "rare". And if the next argument is gonna be, but the players themselves would make them not rare then why did they make Duskwights playable considering they're rare to cities, and Miqo'te are supposed to be uncommon to Eorzea.. yet us players seem to defy those facts.
And yet no one complains about any of that, but Viera is where the line is drawn?![]()
Au Ra had adventurers before that. They just were not a common sight in Eorzea.Au'ra were introduced in the end of the 2.0 series as an introduction to 3.0. Which means Au'ra would effective have to time travel to become the WoL. Using this as a defense against Male viera is pointless as it's already happened before.
No, no such assertion is required as the WoL (player character) is a singular existence, every other player from the WoL perspective are pretty much NPC's/adventurer's with the power of the echo.
As to maintaining an experience of rarity then all they have to do is not utilize male viera as NPC's to keep them "rare". And if the next argument is gonna be, but the players themselves would make them not rare then why did they make Duskwights playable considering they're rare to cities, and Miqo'te are supposed to be uncommon to Eorzea.. yet us players seem to defy those facts.
And yet no one complains about any of that, but Viera is where the line is drawn?
Yes, the other characters are not WoL, which was my point. They are adventurers. So those other adventurers being male viera would make no sense.
The other races have some rarity, but they are more common than you think (or you aren't being honest), particularly female miqo'te. Male viera, on the other hand, are not seen at all. To be honest, they really should not have female viera either, but that is a lot more acceptable in terms of numbers and attitudes than male viera.
Maybe most of the male Vierra were off adventuring. ;D Really our opinions on it don't matter either way. We don't control the lore and with a few keystrokes from the right person, reasoning can be made to bring the males out of the shadows.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Cookie Policy
This website uses cookies. If you do not wish us to set cookies on your device, please do not use the website. Please read the Square Enix cookies policy for more information. Your use of the website is also subject to the terms in the Square Enix website terms of use and privacy policy and by using the website you are accepting those terms. The Square Enix terms of use, privacy policy and cookies policy can also be found through links at the bottom of the page.