Male Viera as a playable character! show your support

[Wolfyboy]

There's multiple reasons to doubt that male Hrothgar would be as popular as male Viera and I've yet to see anything from reivaxe (or anyone else, for that matter) that really has done much to suggest otherwise barring speculation about suppressed demand for a beast race... which stats from other games don't really bear out. Even in WoW, it's at most 30%, and then split across very diffuse races with very different body types, and even then not all of that 30% is "bestial" - some is grotesque, e.g. Forsaken. They're not easily substitutable one with another, e.g. to borrow from another game, a serpentine with a feline race, or an orc with a troll.

https://realmpop.com/us.html
https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/comment..._link_between/
https://www.disabled-world.com/calcu...percentage.php (If you’d like to do it yourself)

I have a long shift today so I thought I might crunch the numbers about population of males of each race in WoW. I keep seeing the 30% number thrown around which is the total population male and female of the races. It isn’t focusing on the males which the discussion of Viera vs Hrothgar is about. I sorted from highest to least:

Main Races
1) Human - 8.202 (14.7%)
2) Blood elf - 6.829 (16.3%)
3) Orc - 5.544 (7%)
4) Tauren - 5.117 (6.1%)
5) Night elf - 4.953 (11.6%)
6) Undead - 4.482 (6%)
7) Troll - 3.623 (5.6%)
8) Worgen 3.54 (5%)
9) Dwarf 3.315 (3.9%)
10) Pandaren 2.53 (4.6%)
11) Gnome 2.255 (4.1%)
12) Draenei 2.035 (5.8%)
13) Goblin 1.855 (2.9%)

Human characters - 27.589 (Hum/BE/NE/Dwa/Gno/Drae) 6 races (56.4%)
Monstrous - 26.691 (Orc/Tau/Und/Tro/Wor/Pan/Gob) 7 races (37.2%)

Allied Races
Highmountain 0.56 (0.7%)
Dark Iron 0.522 (0.7%)
Void elf 0.498 (1.7%)
Maghar Orc 0.433 (0.6%)
Nightborne 0.339 (1.3%)
Lightborne 0.256 (0.8%)

Human characters 1.1615 (Dark Iron/Void elf/Nightborne/Lightborne) 4 races (4.5%)
Monstrous 0.993 (Mag Orc/High Moun) 2 races (1.3%)

I didn’t include Zand Trolls/Kul Humans due to the reddit user not splitting them up; however, through anecdotal evidence we can assume that their both majority males. Through the conclusion of what I’ve researched in WoW, monstrous males are played almost as similar rates as human looking characters. The buffer monstrous races have more people playing them as individual races then the lanky/short/fat ones. The more human the human characters look the more people will play them. From the looks of it a size difference (Really large or short) and odd skin colors will make people play a human race category character less.

[Lauront]

https://realmpop.com/us.html
https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/comment..._link_between/
https://www.disabled-world.com/calcu...percentage.php (If you’d like to do it yourself)
I have a long shift today so I thought I might crunch the numbers about population of males of each race in WoW. I keep seeing the 30% number thrown around which is the total population male and female of the races. It isn’t focusing on the males which the discussion of Viera vs Hrothgar is about. I sorted from highest to least:

Main Races
1) Human - 8.202 (14.7%)
2) Blood elf - 6.829 (16.3%)
3) Orc - 5.544 (7%)
4) Tauren - 5.117 (6.1%)
5) Night elf - 4.953 (11.6%)
6) Undead - 4.482 (6%)
7) Troll - 3.623 (5.6%)
8) Worgen 3.54 (5%)
9) Dwarf 3.315 (3.9%)
10) Pandaren 2.53 (4.6%)
11) Gnome 2.255 (4.1%)
12) Draenei 2.035 (5.8%)
13) Goblin 1.855 (2.9%)

Human characters - 27.589 (Hum/BE/NE/Dwa/Gno/Drae) 6 races (56.4%)
Monstrous - 26.691 (Orc/Tau/Und/Tro/Wor/Pan/Gob) 7 races (37.2%)

Allied Races
Highmountain 0.56 (0.7%)
Dark Iron 0.522 (0.7%)
Void elf 0.498 (1.7%)
Maghar Orc 0.433 (0.6%)
Nightborne 0.339 (1.3%)
Lightborne 0.256 (0.8%)

Human characters 1.1615 (Dark Iron/Void elf/Nightborne/Lightborne) 4 races (4.5%)
Monstrous 0.993 (Mag Orc/High Moun) 2 races (1.3%)

I didn’t include Zand Trolls/Kul Humans due to the reddit user not splitting them up; however, through anecdotal evidence we can assume that their both majority males. Through the conclusion of what I’ve researched in WoW, monstrous males are played almost as similar rates as human looking characters. The buffer monstrous races have more people playing them as individual races then the lanky/short/fat ones. The more human the human characters look the more people will play them. From the looks of it a size difference (Really large or short) and odd skin colors will make people play a human race category character less.

Thanks.

The problem here is what, exactly, is the target demographic? If we look at this charitably, and go by build (hence the underlined picks), yes, you can get it up to 30%, but then the question arises as to why Roegadyn aren't succeeding at capturing these players. Anyone who wants such a build without the bestial face, a la Draenei, would qualify as such. The numbers do not change much if looking at males only. Focusing solely on the build and discounting animal-like facial features, it's around 15% in the case of orcs and draenei males.

From other MMOs, we know that Charr are played to the tune of 13%, Orcs in TESO to the tune of 5% (the figure rises if you add Khajit, but their build and aesthetic is very different both to Roegadyn build in terms of features and Hrothgar in terms of build), no idea what Bless's figures are. Meanwhile, in this game the Roegadyn build already exists for people who are not bothered by playing such a character without embellishments like fangs and we know where its figures sit at.

If we go by having a fur and animal-like faces, we're talking about Tauren, Pandaren and, then, the lankier Worgen. Around 16%, but again, the build is not necessarily going to appeal to that demographic as a whole, due to disparities between the three. So now we're looking at 10% or so, but let's say 16% for argument's sake, and I'll bump that to 20% when considering males only. I think this is really the figure that most closely approximates demand for Hrothgar-type races in WoW.

Then you have to further drill down into these figures and consider what subset of these players are a) solely put off XIV due to the absence of a bestial race, and would play it if that impediment were removed AND b) are not bothered so much by how much of a lore presence the race has, since in WoW's case we're comparing to races with a significant presence dating to WC3 in most cases AND c) like the build and aesthetic SE devise. I.e. people who simply want a bestial aesthetic and are happy with the build.

How much lower is that than 37%, 30%, 20%, 16%, or 10%, depending on how you slice this up? In turn, how much would that skew demand away from where the stats currently lie in FFXIV? We don't really know that, without knowing what subset of those "refugees" will be attracted by this move, and also have to account for some cannibalisation of the Roe figures as they move to the newer race, which may result in them being played to a much greater extent but not necessarily due to new player additions. I will throw in one further confounding factor - WoW has a much more cartoonish aesthetic than XIV, so simply transposing what works in it to XIV, with its more "realistic" look, will not necessarily have the same results. There is also the fact that alts are much more prevalent on it than in this game, as those figures give the realm population distribution, whereas in FFXIV we're mostly talking about actively played characters. All of this casts doubt on whether the figures would rise to WoW's levels, however you slice it up.

I personally don't doubt that Hrothgar will do better than Roegadyn (and we will only know several months after 5.0 is out), but the claim being made by some here is that they would be more popular than mViera, which is entirely contingent on the build SE opts for and tweaks it makes to it, enough so for me to dismiss any blanket assertions to the effect about mHrothgar being more popular than mViera as nonsense, particularly when the argument is simply premised on demand based on other games. It all comes down to what design SE chooses to implement for them.

[SturmChurro]

Thanks.

The problem here is what, exactly, is the target demographic? If we look at this charitably, and go by build (hence the underlined picks), yes, you can get it up to 30%, but then the question arises as to why Roegadyn aren't succeeding at capturing these players. Anyone who wants such a build without the bestial face, a la Draenei, would qualify as such.

From other MMOs, we know that Charr are played to the tune of 13%, Orcs in TESO to the tune of 5% (the figure rises if you add Khajit, but their build and aesthetic is very different both to Roegadyn build in terms of features and Hrothgar in terms of build), no idea what Bless's figures are. Meanwhile, in this game the Roegadyn build already exists for people who are not bothered by playing such a character without embellishments like fangs and we know where its figures sit at.

If you include ESO, I think they sent something out a few years ago that high elf was the most played race (official). However, one thing about ESO is people play races for their racial specific passives.

LOL I agree on that.
Roegadyns would be a lot cooler if they weren't so humanish, and they were more like an orc or had something to define them.
I like hrotgar million times more than roegadyn, but I will not make one since I don't like neither their animations or their body type

I think roes look dumb and cartoonish. Their faces look like blobs but square, like I don't really know how to describe it, but they look like a cheap cartoon race or something. The bodies (male) look weird like cartoony hulk, but hulk looks better. If roes looked more human like Gosetsu I think more people would play them.

[Wolfyboy]

Thanks.

I personally don't doubt that Hrothgar will do better than Roegadyn (and we will only know several months after 5.0 is out), but the claim being made by some here is that they would be more popular than mViera, which is entirely contingent on the build SE opts for and tweaks it makes to it, enough so for me to dismiss any blanket assertions to the effect about mHrothgar being more popular than mViera as nonsense, particularly when the argument is simply premised on demand based on other games. It all comes down to what design SE chooses to implement for them.

Ok, I understand what you're doing. You're currently breaking down and narrowing the numbers to better suit Hrothgar with the possible races in WoW where people might be interested in it. I assumed you were throwing that a monstrous male race in WoW in general was 30%, but with the numbers we know they're played around the same amount as attractive options. I dislike always giving a definite statement about popularity of a race because of the circumstances of each game in different. As you mentioned, WoW has a more stylized artstyle in comparison to FFXIV, however, despite this difference Draenei men are still one of the least popular options. Heck, if you've played, often Draenei are compared to fridges *cough cough* like Roe's proportions. It'll be easier to understand how Hrothgar look once the benchmark comes out and we can remove armour off them and play with the camera. It is almost 100% they share similar body structure as Roe, but like what they're doing with Viera, they're probably fixing up their proportions. I know when I looked at the Hrothgar video they made me feel a bit disappointed, however, once I seen images in better lightning they improve drastically to me.

The numbers on GW2 Charr fit pretty well with the 14-15% on the heavensward poll that would possibly play a beast race (If you combined mammal/lizard beastmen). For a race/gender option to be considered a success it requires around 7.1% with the soon 14 options that will be available. Assuming that females will be around 33% of 15% (We know Roe females have a huge number shortage compared to males) we can cut the male population to 10%. We can say 10% is the best case, that despite not getting the beastmen they desired (lanky/short/dragon/dog) they'll race change because it is only the beastial option and assuming people who would play the female version wouldn't play the male as a subsitute. In that case, male Hrothgar would be a successful race/gender combination. Of course, everything is simply a prediction until at least 3-6 months after the race comes out. Once a few months have past we would have a lot stronger ground to even predict male Viera (Au'ra/Miqo'te are like 50% of their female counterpart) and female Hrothgar.

[Lauront]

Ok, I understand what you're doing. You're currently breaking down and narrowing the numbers to better suit Hrothgar with the possible races in WoW where people might be interested in it.

Correct. I think I originally came by the figure by removing some picks which just don't fit at all with Hrothgar, like Forsaken and Goblins. They're arguably monstrous, but on reflection, they don't fit the same aesthetic at all as something like Hrothgar. So you'd need to segregate the race picks along more granular lines to get to something nearer to Hrothgar, which IMO would be Pandaren, Tauren and possibly Worgen.

The numbers on GW2 Charr fit pretty well with the 14-15% on the heavensward poll that would possibly play a beast race (If you combined mammal/lizard beastmen). For a race/gender option to be considered a success it requires around 7.1% with the soon 14 options that will be available. Assuming that females will be around 33% of 15% (We know Roe females have a huge number shortage compared to males) we can cut the male population to 10%. We can say 10% is the best case, that despite not getting the beastmen they desired (lanky/short/dragon/dog) they'll race change because it is only the beastial option and assuming people who would play the female version wouldn't play the male as a subsitute. In that case, male Hrothgar would be a successful race/gender combination. Of course, everything is simply a prediction until at least 3-6 months after the race comes out. Once a few months have past we would have a lot stronger ground to even predict male Viera (Au'ra/Miqo'te are like 50% of their female counterpart) and female Hrothgar.

I think that's a reasonable way to look at it, but with a caveat. Namely, that the race would have to realise greater returns than any money spent on developing and maintaining it. I'm not sure how the development costs for modelling end up being split or how easy it is to just adapt gear developed to fit Roes to fit Hrothgar but in practice you'd probably save some costs given similarities to that model. If anything, it'd make Roe a bit more cost-efficient, too, if I'm correct in my assumption that gear for them could be developed in parallel. So the threshold may end up actually being lower than 7.1% for the race/gender pick to be a financial success. It's difficult to track with precision how much income is attributable to adding a specific feature like a race, but with the right systems in place they could do it, no doubt fantasia income being the easiest thing to monitor, as well as players who begin a new account and pick Hrothgar, and stick to it - at least part of that sub revenue could be deemed to be due to Hrothgar.

Whilst we don't know where the target figure for SE is, my point here is that it could be a bit lower than 7.1% - this is also my argument when it comes to mViera's addition. It doesn't matter so much whether a majority of players desire them, as it does whether 1) it's enough demand to justify the expenditure and 2) alternative uses of the money would not be more lucrative over the game's lifespan. There's very few things that would fit under 2), but something like a graphics overhaul would fit the criterion, with its own pros and cons. This has to factor in the prospect of lost subs, fantasia sales etc. by not adding the option, but the resulting threshold for SE to add them would be a lot lower than a majority of the playerbase wanting them.

If you include ESO, I think they sent something out a few years ago that high elf was the most played race (official). However, one thing about ESO is people play races for their racial specific passives.

They freely publish their stats but the racial thing also applies to WoW to an extent, does it not? I’ve not played it in ages. Either way, it makes ESO admittedly less useful for comparison. Meanwhile, WoW has the issue that the figures provided are for total characters played, whereas as we know from FFXIV, actively played characters are more relevant – it is an alt-friendly game, too, whereas XIV is not.

If you include ESO, I think they sent something out a few years ago that high elf was the most played race (official). However, one thing about ESO is people play races for their racial specific passives.

I think roes look dumb and cartoonish. Their faces look like blobs but square, like I don't really know how to describe it, but they look like a cheap cartoon race or something. The bodies (male) look weird like cartoony hulk, but hulk looks better. If roes looked more human like Gosetsu I think more people would play them.

Yeah, and that is where WoW’s cartoonish aesthetics (as opposed to XIV’s more ‘realistic’ ones) might help a bit for such physiques.

To be fair, if you just read through the thread, minus the same 20 or so people, I would say about 70-80% of the people who have stopped by have said something along the lines of, "while I would personally not play them, I'm in favor of..."

Just because you like something doesn't mean you're gonna play it and that's the kind of feedback they're sifting through. Likes don't mean much if people aren't going to actually spend the money.

Yup, and then SE adds the race, they end up liking it enough to change and they do so. Whilst I don't doubt that most players probably don't care about the issue, once presented with SE's ideas for the finished product, that could well change. SE took that risk with Hrothgar, and they know what their existing players like when considering how to design Viera men. Part of being an entrepreneur is giving the consumer what they want before they know they do.

There are already polls on it and SE is more than capable of conducting its own surveys to gauge demand on the matter. As things stand, people who argue there isn't a demand for it are mostly just assuming their case.