You can't "lock" something that doesn't exist.

[Joven]

Context is key. Language is descriptive, not prescriptive. That's why one of the dictionary definitions of "literally" is literally the opposite of the primary definition, and this thread is literally going to make me shoot myself.

Why would you shoot yourself over something so trivial?

[Thayos]

I'm definitely on the side of "genderlock" being a dumb term.

I understand the argument that the term has been around forever, and it's not specific to FFXIV. That said, it's still a dumb term that I'd think the MMO community would have outgrown because -- in this case, anyway -- it's not accurate in a technical/functional sense.

My other problem is I see comments/replies from people who seem confused by the term; like, they seem to believe these races exist and SE really has just "locked" us out from using them. This is problematic by fueling misplaced resentment toward SE. ("I don't get it! Why won't they remove the genderlocks?") *Yes, paraphrasing, but you get the idea.

Perhaps it's time for gamer language to evolve?

[Alucard135]

I understand the argument that the term has been around forever, and it's not specific to FFXIV. That said, it's still a dumb term that I'd think the MMO community would have outgrown because -- in this case, anyway -- it's not accurate in a technical/functional sense.

The term was used in a different way in other MMOs. It was used to denote a class that is locked to one gender (e.g. sorceress class being only female in Black desert online). Since the class already exists in the game with all it's animation, play style etc, it was considered gender locked since it's can only be used by one gender. The key point here is the existence of said locked feature as a playable feature in the game.

Take a look at Tera online. There are races with only one gender (Baraka, Elin and Popori). And the term gender lock is used there for classes that are locked certain genders (Brawler was female humans only). But no one was using the term to those races that only had one gender, since nothing exists in the game for the other genders to be considered locked from.

Now when it comes to male Viera and female Hrothgar, there is no playable feature, models or anything for them inside the game as of now. So it can't be considered a locked feature. Male Viera are mentioned in the lore only and nothing more. The actual lock we have is the race lock in Garleans and Lupin (we've only seen one gender for Lupin too, but nobody cares it seems lol), since those already have their models, animations etc in the game.

Genderlock has been a term in use for MMOs for a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time. Well before FFXIV.

Can you provide an example of that term being used the way some are using it here in other MMOs?

[SpiritMuse]

Language evolves. Words acquire new meanings over time. The words "icon" and "avatar" mean things they didn't used to either. And the word "guild" means something entirely different in WoW than it does in FFXIV. That's just the nature of things. Policing language won't change the argument.

[Melichoir]

Can you provide an example of that term being used the way some are using it here in other MMOs?

Warhammer: Age of Reckoning comes to mind.

Certain races (and classes) were 'gender locked'. Wildstar as well. If we wanna point to an FF Franchise, 11 comes out with genderlocked races.

Tera online and BnS are more recent examples that have this.

If you go beyond the scope of just MMOs and focus on online games with multiplayer and RPG elements, Diablo II also had things locked. Though the nuance there was that race/class was somewhat interchangeable as terms colloquially. Maplestory kinda falls into this as well as there are 'different races' (though by appearance they are all human more or less), did genderlock some of their classes/races.

Point stands that the concept of "Genderlocked" has been around for a while and been understood for what it is. If we want to talk about expanding it to be more specific or change the understanding (Such as saying "Genderlocked Races" or "Genderlocked Classes") that can be debated and discussed.

But again, the issue here is that the OP and similar detractors are arguing over the semantics of a word rather than the core issue which is the word is generally understood and associated with. We want to discuss how to use genderlock, start a thread for it. Dont say 'genderlock' is the wrong word to use and because of that we should be totally happy the devs made two races that are limited to a single sex. It's funny cause it's clearly understood by the OP and similar that the point being made is about Hrothgar being male and Viera being female is the core of the issue. They DO understand the common use of the term. It's strange that they would then argue that the term is being used wrong and then suggest that we should be happy with what we have, completely ignoring the core of the grievance in the process because the terminology being used that they clearly understand the meaning of is not semantically correct for their tastes.

[Akonyl]

Everyone knows what people mean when people say a race with one gender option is genderlocked. If anyone using the term actually believes these assets are in-game and just hidden from us, it's a very small minority of the people using the term, and I've personally never seen anyone who believes that. It's a good, easy, descriptive word to immediately get across what you're talking about without having to explain yourself every time, even if you can conjure up a reason why there might be better alternative words.

But I really don't think most people complaining about the term "genderlock" are really just complaining about the term, it just seems like another way to complain about people who want the other options in the game. Would the OP + others in this thread really care that much if people complaining about genderlocked races started complaining about "gender exclusive races" instead? Would they just go "oh, thanks for using the right word" and stop? Or would they just find another reason to complain about the people asking for male viera/female hrothgar, because they think implementing them is a waste of resources?

[Alucard135]

snip

You didn't seem to understand my question. I'm not denying that the term was used in MMOs before. What I'm saying is that the term was used in a different way in these MMOs compared to what's being used here. So I was asking for an example for the use of the term gender-lock in these MMOs solely based on a race having one gender just like like some are doing here.

And when checking the games you named, the term was used for having a class locked to certain genders (as I stated in my previous post). I even mentioned Tera having 3 races that only have one gender, yet the term was used for classes being locked to a certain gender. Even in Warhammer, it was not used for greenskins but for classes being restricted to one gender. So there doesn't seem to be an association of the word with what's happening here in FFXIV.

This is the same thing with those using the sexism and homophobia cards in male Viera and female Horthgar issue. Everyone understood the point why they were upset, but didn't agree on the use of those terms here.

[Ransom]

While I'm fully aware of course that Viera and Hrothgar have existing lore, that lore may not be entirely accurate to how they work in this game.

I'll lol if they end up saying they are the female and male of the same species. (Sexual Dimorphism is a thing after all.)

[Melichoir]

Except it was used for referring to races that only had one gender. Genderlocking was discussed because I played WH in the capacity regarding races being locked to a sex where applicable. Same with Tera. Im not saying there was not class locking going on either, or race locking. Often times, if you see it happen in one capacity, it usually incorporates the others as well. Furthermore, depending how you broaden out the search away from the usual MMO formula to other games, yes, you got gender locking in other online games too that had roleplaying elements.

Finally, you missed the core position of my point. Regardless of any position on it, those who are pushing the semantics argument are not having any difficulty understanding the exacts of what is being said, yet instead of focusing on those issues, the spotlight is being pushed over to dealing with word usage which then gets jumped over to "Since it's not genderlocking as I understand it, we should be happy we got what we did cause everything isnt that bad!" It's being used as a means of discrediting the complaint, rather than addressing it.

Also youre conflating Genderlocking terminology usage with Sexism and Homophobia. The former is discussing an issue where a race is limited to a sex, where the latter is assigning a motive as to why that decision was made. In the case of hte latter, they terminology was being used as intended. Meaning Sexism didnt mean some of other thing - they really meant it as sexism.

[Vahlnir]

In the case of hte latter, they terminology was being used as intended. Meaning Sexism didnt mean some of other thing - they really meant it as sexism.

Just because they mean what they say doesn't mean it's even remotely correct though.