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

[Krotoan]

This idea is not good.
Style/fashion/glamour is as much a form of expression as speech. It is the first thing people communicate to each other without saying a word. This request is a request to mute others expression, and if given the option to mute things because hearing them makes me uncomfortable, I can tell you as a fact that I would not. If you are going to see "just look away" as an attack on your sensibilities, then it also needs to be considered how muting people's expression is definitely an attack on them and their speech.

I wouldn't advocate for a separate server that was glamour free and had all the gender restrictions you could dream of +10, and I don't advocate for this.

On another note, glamours used to disappear in party instances (dungeons/raids), SE changed that so they are always active; so I highly doubt this will ever get traction.

Freedom of speech is a legal protection, not a protection of repercussion or license to do whatever you want wherever you want. If the expression you're broadcasting non-verbally is "LOL PIG GUY IN A SUBLIGAR", I would love the option to not have to experience it. Muting and blacklisting ingame is a thing already, so "free speech" isn't something they're particularly interested in protecting.

It's not their problem that someone is so distressed by their own appearance because nothing in this game that can be glammed can be seen as offensive. If you turn on the TV and see someone that is so ugly that it physically distresses you, are you going to change the channel or call up the producers and ask them to give you the option to censor them? It is also not my problem that someone may have such a problem with me that they want to make me invisible entirely, I'm going to continue existing where I am and they don't have any right to change that, they can look away or go somewhere else.

Again and AGAIN, they are affecting you in NO way perceptible to you and only affecting the 1 instance in literal thousands of your character appearing in other screens. You will never know and the only perceivable problem is in your own head.

In the case of modifying someone's artwork without their permission, even if the artist doesn't see it, doesn't make it okay. Obviously these two scenarios aren't exactly the same but they are comparable.

The artist created something unique and legally has recourse for intellectual property and such. the glamour is slapped premade parts together in a combination likely duplicated 100's of times. Explain how this is analogous.

My use of the phrase "people die when they are killed" was used to point out the cause and effect of not allowing someone to do something obviously takes away a choice from them and is the entire point.

You aren't taking any choices away from someone. This is the failing in your logic, the only thing being given is the choice to use the option or not. If someone doesn't like your glamour enough they will go through the rigamarole to remove it in their client. They already have the choice to remove you.

I deal with plenty of things I don't like by looking away. I don't need some rose tinted glasses to get rid of what I don't like that's right in front of me. By going to a Convention I am accepting that there is going to be people there that I don't like and that spending my time being upset over people who are going to be there whether i like it or not is a pointless waste of my time and energy.

And a video game doesn't have to follow real life rules. If someone gave me the option of muting all the toxic people I have to deal with in real life and they still all would think I smiled and nodded at their inane chatter I would take it in a minute. This is the beauty of a virtual world MEANT to relax and escape is that real world concerns don't HAVE to carry over.

This also falls under the classic case of "give someone an inch and they'll take a mile". What's going to stop someone from asking "Can we disable mounts so that they're all default chocobos?", "Can we disable exterior housing walls so that they're all the default looks?" and "Can we disable certain races from showing up?" if this is implemented, which it very likely won't because of that very reason.

Sensible game devs, and businesses in general, almost always prefer not to open a can of worms and this would do that very thing.

Look up "slippery slope fallacy" please.

But if this IS implemented, can I glamour the level 50 WHM job armor on Red Mage? And could I also glamour the Edengate Mail of Fending on Scholar? You'd be able to disable my glamour, so it wouldn't be immersion breaking since only I'd see it. Oh wait...did I just prove my point?

Actually you just made a point that if this was implemented all arguments about "glamours have to be restricted because of class recognition" would be null and void opening up cross job glamour for everyone. An argument I made FOR the change quite a few pages back .. Nice =]

I disagree. Umbrellas are giving people a new rp/aesthetic choice for their own character.

The proposal in this thread is to give an option to hide the choices of others from your view. In a MMORPG.

The first is of much greater value to add IMO.

Option one: I can hold an umbrella now and have umbrella related rp! I can add ubrella holding into my narrative

Option two: I can stop breaking my own narrative every time I walk into town or do instances because I don't have to work giant mascot-headed guy in yukata and moogle slippers into it!


sure it's your opinion against mine but I don't know how strong it holds up where one is a modification that adds consistency to the entire experience and the other is.. "I can hold a prop".