Genderlock reminder to SE

[Madiera]

It is still breaking more lore. The only thing you can argue with certain jobs is that the others are conjurers, etc..., but it is still bad to break lore. The jobs change the way the game is played and should have been better handled.

Not to hurt anyone's feelings or offend anyone but, I'm sorry. SE writes the lore and can literally retcon anything to fit within the confines of their own game. So the people who try and use lore as an excuse to keep with genderlocking, have to realize it's inherent flimsiness. To quote someone from reddit...

"It's always explicitly implied the WoL (WoD now?) is an adventurer and adventurers generally buck tradition and cultural norms. Most Lalafell are merchants of some kind and mostly in Ul'dah - but you can still be a greatsword wielding crazy popoto who signed up with the Adders to fight the Empire. The PC in almost every game is a cultural exception due to necessity. While a Male Miqote player can CHOOSE to RP out the N'uhn climb lifestyle, most don't and the main plot-line certainly gives you little time for it.

This implies not even a single male Viera ever decides to leave their seclusion to seek adventure or life elsewhere. And that's ridiculous."

Not to mention using the lore one minute to 'excuse' that there's no male veira and then totally disregarding it with the female hrothgar and simply excusing it by saying "It wouldn't be fair to the veira we genderlocked." Is one of the best examples of flimsy behavior.

[Zsolen]

Not to hurt anyone's feelings or offend anyone but, I'm sorry. SE writes the lore and can literally retcon anything to fit within the confines of their own game. So the people who try and use lore as an excuse to keep with genderlocking, have to realize it's inherent flimsiness. To quote someone from reddit...

"It's always explicitly implied the WoL (WoD now?) is an adventurer and adventurers generally buck tradition and cultural norms. Most Lalafell are merchants of some kind and mostly in Ul'dah - but you can still be a greatsword wielding crazy popoto who signed up with the Adders to fight the Empire. The PC in almost every game is a cultural exception due to necessity. While a Male Miqote player can CHOOSE to RP out the N'uhn climb lifestyle, most don't and the main plot-line certainly gives you little time for it.

This implies not even a single male Viera ever decides to leave their seclusion to seek adventure or life elsewhere. And that's ridiculous."

Not to mention using the lore one minute to 'excuse' that there's no male veira and then totally disregarding it with the female hrothgar and simply excusing it by saying "It wouldn't be fair to the veira we genderlocked." Is one of the best examples of flimsy behavior.

I'm not sure what is bringing about this type of behavior, but I waited some time for people to cool off, because my first attempts to explain my concerns was met with hostility and accusations of trolling. I never said female hrothgar were lore friendly, but they are only as lore unfriendly as female viera and male hrothgar. Male viera take it to a whole other level, and no change in the forest or anything would change the lore. The lore prior to Shadowbringers is that no one sees them at any point in time. That lore would still exist to every player that has yet to reach at the very least the 5.0 MSQ.

[Melichoir]

...Male viera take it to a whole other level, and no change in the forest or anything would change the lore. The lore prior to Shadowbringers is that no one sees them at any point in time. That lore would still exist to every player that has yet to reach at the very least the 5.0 MSQ.

Best of my recollection, the only lore about male Viera in FFXIV is hearsay from a background NPC. That's it. That is, by and large, flimsy lore on quite a few accounts. First, from the dev side of things, they literally had the similar kind of lore for male miqote, and here we are, years later, wtih male miqotes running around doing stuff. So to say the lore is 'concrete' and the devs have no way to change it is a pretty weak position.

A second point, from the dev position, is the devs have already stated that even in game NPCs can be wrong about lore. Meaning, some background NPC talking about male viera doesnt make it the 'word of god' and therefore inexplicably unquestionable. So there's that. And lastly, even the lore GIVEN from the NPC is also very limited and written in a fashion that can easily allow for change. As many people have already said, only a fwe one liners can change whether or not we see male viera, and those explanations are extremely plausible in FFXIV. And consistency isnt a good point, btw, because we dont see RDMs or SAMs until lvl 50+ content technically but I can run into them in dungeons where the game literally states "gather other adventurers to help you". This implies REALLY heavily that for a samurai to be in your party, theyre there. Same with DRK, or any other post ARR classes. Theres going to be some wierd inconsistencies with added facets. That's just accepted. I mean how do you explain Fantasia? A magic potion which changes your appearance and retroactively alters the memories of all existence (including demi gods) to remember you that way? Really then.

And before the "Well IN FFXI/TACTICS/ETC", just stop. Those are separate games and unless otherwise directly stated from the devs, their lore isnt our lore in FFXIV. The only lore that matters to FFXIV is the lore in FFXIV for FFXIV. That's it. Bringing up lore from other games to explain a separate game is like using lore about elves from one fantasy novle to explain lore about elves in a completley unrelated novel. They borrow general ideas, but they're not the same.

Snip Snip

Youre arguing semantics. I explained this. Genderlock is in reference to player position, not dev position, where players are 'locked' into one gender upon choosing the race. Stop trying to redefine it. Even if were all talking to the same end goal, redefining what people mean when they say genderlock is unproductive and doesn't do anything to push the conversation forward. In this case, its attempting to derail the conversation rather than address the crux of the issue.

[Rhomagus]

Best of my recollection, the only lore about male Viera in FFXIV is hearsay from a background NPC. That's it. That is, by and large, flimsy lore on quite a few accounts. First, from the dev side of things, they literally had the similar kind of lore for male miqote, and here we are, years later, wtih male miqotes running around doing stuff. So to say the lore is 'concrete' and the devs have no way to change it is a pretty weak position.

A second point, from the dev position, is the devs have already stated that even in game NPCs can be wrong about lore. Meaning, some background NPC talking about male viera doesnt make it the 'word of god' and therefore inexplicably unquestionable. So there's that. And lastly, even the lore GIVEN from the NPC is also very limited and written in a fashion that can easily allow for change. As many people have already said, only a fwe one liners can change whether or not we see male viera, and those explanations are extremely plausible in FFXIV. And consistency isnt a good point, btw, because we dont see RDMs or SAMs until lvl 50+ content technically but I can run into them in dungeons where the game literally states "gather other adventurers to help you". This implies REALLY heavily that for a samurai to be in your party, theyre there. Same with DRK, or any other post ARR classes. Theres going to be some wierd inconsistencies with added facets. That's just accepted. I mean how do you explain Fantasia? A magic potion which changes your appearance and retroactively alters the memories of all existence (including demi gods) to remember you that way? Really then.

And before the "Well IN FFXI/TACTICS/ETC", just stop. Those are separate games and unless otherwise directly stated from the devs, their lore isnt our lore in FFXIV. The only lore that matters to FFXIV is the lore in FFXIV for FFXIV. That's it. Bringing up lore from other games to explain a separate game is like using lore about elves from one fantasy novle to explain lore about elves in a completley unrelated novel. They borrow general ideas, but they're not the same.



Youre arguing semantics. I explained this. Genderlock is in reference to player position, not dev position, where players are 'locked' into one gender upon choosing the race. Stop trying to redefine it. Even if were all talking to the same end goal, redefining what people mean when they say genderlock is unproductive and doesn't do anything to push the conversation forward. In this case, its attempting to derail the conversation rather than address the crux of the issue.

I'm not going to have you tell me what is unproductive and what isn't. I was addressing the OP not you. I am well aware of what a "Genderlock" is and what it refers to. Unfortunately, demanding these things to be implemented without expecting a reasonable timeframe is obviously apparent in this thread. It's not happening prior to release, though there are some that seem to have their hopes as having that being a feasible possibility. It isn't.

This is why we are "arguing semantics" because people are arguing as if there is a literal "lock" on the genders, and the OP suggests that as such.

I'm not redefining anything, as I'm aware of the term, but it's obviously being misused to put unnecessary pressure on the development team.

We don't even need new races, but we got them, enjoy what is available or make a reasonable request to have something developed and implemented.

Even if it's "player position" don't act like the reality of the implementation has anything to do with "unlocking" or "removing a lock" and not actually committing development resources to make it happen, as that is the most pragmatic means to which to make the request.

The crux of the issue is that the development team decided to give us two races rather than one race with two genders. They made that choice based on audience feedback wanting both Viera and a more Beastial race.

In know way is this a derail, but a tempering of expectations and it absolutely is necessary in order to provide a reasonable request so that we not only move the conversation forward, which is peppered in plenty of other threads on these very forums, but to actually get them implemented.

[Melichoir]

snip snap.

If we all know what is being inferred, then arguing about "unlocking" or "removing a lock" is pointless. It's like arguing the exact word is an issue, and not the core idea.

Also, from the player perspective, yes, you are locked into either female Viera, or Male Hrothgar. That distinction matters because there is an expectation that the game set through precedence that is being violated. You dont get a choice here where you do otherwise. It matters little if the assets exist or not, but rather what the player is seeing. If you change genderlock to mean it from the devs point of view by arguing the implication is the assets exist and therefore are locked by the devs, the player's expectations no longer matter, only what the dev wants. This shifts the discussion to whether we should even ask for the other genders, or if the devs need to even consider it. The extreme end of that change is "Anyone asking for male viera and female hrothgar is entitled and should just enjoy what the devs are giving us." It becomes an immediate dismissal of the core issue by making people seem ultra entitled rather than addressing where player expectations were not met.

I also never said that there wouldnt be implementation time. I think people demanding it now are being nuts about it. Of course there is development time, even if the assets were 99% there, it still takes time to implement. It's not a checkbox. I dont worry about that because that is such a minor point. I know why the devs did it, but it is apparent that giving half measures isnt what the player base wanted broadly. It was a misstep on the devs part, and people addressing the issue by summerizing it as the races being genderlocked implies that the player expectation was violated. If its the other way (dev perspective) then people have to request and the devs can go "we'll think about it."

Best way I can point this difference out is to look at things we request vs things we expect. It was expected we would have a male/female of one race, it is not expected we will have an update to character creator. The push back for when our expectations arent met is a lot harsher than when we would like to see something in game. And mind you, the expectations got ramped way the heck up when they showed off the viera. A lot of us were pointing out it would be most likely a huge disappointment to the base if they didnt give us Male Viera because the expectations have always been male and female of a race since ARR (which set that precedence compared to 1.0).