It's time (Option to Hide other players Glamour)

[Krotoan]

The difference is that it would be permitted - and I don't see how it would add any more certainty. Modders are still going to be doing that the same way, and it just adds a new officially-endorsed way to put my character in gear that I didn't pick and don't want to wear.

Your character is unaffected in any way that should matter to you. What some stranger sees on their screen, likely thousands of miles away from you, shouldn't be your concern or your business.

I don't see these as comparable at all. My character in a low-res version of the game is still my character. Spell effects are not personalised.

Your character in generic job appropriate gear is still your character as much as your character in fuzzy 64 bit low textures. How do you feel about people silencing bard performances? People's carefully crafted songs, silenced. Why? Cause some people find it obnoxious.

Because I put time and effort into picking lore-appropriate glamours that suit my individual characters and taste in clothing, and that is how I want them to be seen by other players.

Why does your preference top someone elses on their computer? What about their lore? Should they not have the option to enjoy the game as they wish with no noticeable effect on your side?

And as I said before, the majority of de-glamoured outfits look dreadful, even before you get into whether I want it for the character.

I don't think people realise how many good immersive outfits they'd be losing alongside the few bad ones.

A lot of people would rather see someone in patchwork armor than in a rudolph horns and nose with a bikini top and chocobo pants. That being said I think the best solution would be to have someone appear in their current highest available tier of AF.

[Zaschie]

Glamouring is actually canon, so, no, it's not lore-breaking or anything. Glamour is lore-appropriate and there are a plethora of NPCs that wear "non-standard" gear anyway.

It sounds like you're uncomfortable and just want SQEX to warp their game around your headcanon or your own idea of how a fantasy game should be. No thanks.

[Theodric]

Glamouring is actually canon, so, no, it's not lore-breaking or anything. Glamour is lore-appropriate and there are a plethora of NPCs that wear "non-standard" gear anyway.

It sounds like you're uncomfortable and just want SQEX to warp their game around your headcanon or your own idea of how a fantasy game should be. No thanks.

That particular stance doesn't account for the simple fact that the game actively embraced a larger degree of realism back in the days of ARR and HW, though eased such things over time due to player requests. It isn't unfair for the people who do not want to see such things to have the option to adjust things to suit their own personal tastes.

It also wouldn't affect your character in any way, since the player(s) making use of such a feature would be seeing it on their screen rather than enforcing it on yours.

[MikkoAkure]

On one hand, I spend a lot of time making glams that I want to show off. On the other hand, it's really groan-worthy when you see people running around wearing a bikini top and 2B bottoms for their own perverted self-gratification.

But I don't see how someone having an option of hiding your glamour and you being unaware of that affects you in any way. Like someone else, said, you can already mute performances. I don't see this being too much of a step further from that.

[Kytrin]

Was most likely to help for performance given how older MMOs tended to have to cater to both the people with high end PCs and the people who hooked up internet to their toaster.

*cackles* Okay, I had no intention of replying to this thread, but hooking internet up to their toaster killed me! XD

On topic, I see both sides of this issue. I have absolutely gone goggle eyes over the male roe tank in the thong before, and that which has been seen cannot be unseen. But at the same time, I would be kind of irritated to have my glams turned off. I put a fair amount of effort into those and like to show them off.

Ultimately though, I suppose it doesn't matter. I'll still see me as I'm meant to be seen, and there's no reason whatsoever for me give a flying flip about some random stranger's opinion of my glam anyway. They're not important to me, I don't care about them unless they play badly, and after the dungeon or random encounter I'm unlikely to ever see them again. The people I care about showing my glams off to wouldn't turn them off to begin with.

Yes, I am extremely Sagittarius lol.

[GhostXO]

And replace the glamour with what, potato sacks? God you must be delightful at parties OP.

I'll go make a bikini outfit just for you OP.

[Gula]

On one hand, I spend a lot of time making glams that I want to show off. On the other hand, it's really groan-worthy when you see people running around wearing a bikini top and 2B bottoms for their own perverted self-gratification.

Bold of you to assume I'm not someone who just likes sexy-cute things as aesthetically pleasing. And it sounds like you've got some personal, conservatism issues you need to work out.

[Bacent]

You would love my feathery armour I wear on every class for everything, OP, kweh.

[Zaschie]

That particular stance doesn't account for the simple fact that the game actively embraced a larger degree of realism back in the days of ARR and HW, though eased such things over time due to player requests.

Wholly irrelevant. The original excuse was "but, lore!" and it doesn't hold up. There's no legitimate reason to appeal to "lore" to suppress the way people express their characters. Additonally, the comparisons to Performance are a false equivalence. Performance can be used to be actively disruptive, interfere with music, audio cues, etc. Someone mashing a high-pitched note ten thousand times is not the same as getting upset that someone else doesn't look how you want them to and unlike, say, Guild Wars 2, glamour can't actually be visually disruptive either (as in obscuring important visual information or causing performance issues). Not liking how.someone else looks is not good enough. "Oh, I don't like tanks wearing non-amour! Oh, I don't like men wearing dresses! Oh, I don't like chocobo heads!" Where next? "I don't like coloured hair! I don't like people wearing Ultimate weapons! I don't like that player's roof!" It's nonsense and it's not a stance that SQEX should enable.

[Krotoan]

Not liking how.someone else looks is not good enough. "Oh, I don't like tanks wearing non-amour! Oh, I don't like men wearing dresses! Oh, I don't like chocobo heads!" Where next? "I don't like coloured hair! I don't like people wearing Ultimate weapons! I don't like that player's roof!" It's nonsense and it's not a stance that SQEX should enable.

Because? Please explain , barring developmental resource scarcity (which is the only compelling argument I've read thus far) , why giving people this option would be a detriment to anyone's experience.