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

[Joven]

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.

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?

That can be said for any feature added to the game. Just look at Viera and Hrothgar: people are upset because they didn't get the opposite genders added. Look at character creation in general: people complain that certain races have certain features that others don't. Glamour gear: "genderlocking". ETC. The list is infinite on the "why do we have this but not this?"

[Bright-Flower]

It's a better use than umbrellas

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.

[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".

[Theodric]

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

Which is in itself an option, to allow players to tweak the experience to their personal tastes. It also doesn't matter that it's an MMO given that the development team have implemented many features to ensure that players have the tools to distance themselves from other players already if they so wish. For whatever reason they so please.

It isn't restricting another player's freedom if I forbid them from entering my house.

It isn't restricting another player's freedom if I choose to adjust the character lighting settings and see their character in a different manner to how they see them on their screen.

It isn't restricting another player's freedom if I choose to block them so they cannot send me messages.

It isn't restricting another player's freedom if I opt to block bard performances so I cannot hear them.

It isn't restricting another player's freedom if I make the decision to turn off spell effects, which displays their character differently on my screen to their own.

The option to hide their glamour is just an extension of the tools already available to us.

[Bright-Flower]

Which is in itself an option, to allow players to tweak the experience to their personal tastes. It also doesn't matter that it's an MMO given that the development team have implemented many features to ensure that players have the tools to distance themselves from other players already if they so wish. For whatever reason they so please.

It isn't restricting another player's freedom if I forbid them from entering my house.

It isn't restricting another player's freedom if I choose to adjust the character lighting settings and see their character in a different manner to how they see them on their screen.

It isn't restricting another player's freedom if I choose to block them so they cannot send me messages.

It isn't restricting another player's freedom if I opt to block bard performances so I cannot hear them.

It isn't restricting another player's freedom if I make the decision to turn off spell effects, which displays their character differently on my screen to their own.

The option to hide their glamour is just an extension of the tools already available to us.

I didn't say it was restricting peoples freedoms. Just that I see less value in being given an option to hide other peoples choices than I do in giving people new choices/toys for their own characters.

My main reason for being against this is the dev time, and possible performance issues. Because additional code is going to need to be running whenever someone's character is rendered, to determine whether to show or hide the glamour. All for what, so people don't have to see the occasional joke glamour? And where do we go from there, do we also add the ability to hide all the people with ugly hair and face options so we don't have to see those too? Outlandish dye colors on gear that isn't glammed?

I'd much rather dev resources go into giving players new things for our own characters rather than putting time into features to shelter us from the choices of other peoples characters.

[Cithaerias_pyropina]

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 chance quite a few pages back .. Nice =]

Too bad it's too much work for the devs to do, thus they likely won'd do it. They can't even give Viera or Hrothgar new hairstyles.

[Krotoan]

Too bad it's too much work for the devs to do, thus they likely won'd do it. They can't even give Viera or Hrothgar new hairstyles.

Sadly that is a point in favor of it never happening. I won't argue it's likely at all, just that there are myriad advantages that lots of people aren't considering.

[Melichoir]

This is "I dont like other peoples glamours so let me have the devs take resources so I dont have to look at it."

Besides, think this through for a hot minute. You think it looks bad with people running around in speedos or swimsuits, then tell me how its gonna look when people are wearing a mishmash of gears that dont even work together for a nice visual aesthetic?

[Penthea]

I'm back here again because something occurred to me, and it didn't before because this particular issue is something I have been fortunate to not have for a very long time.

There was a long period of time when WoW didn't have transmog (glam) so whatever your gear looked like, you were stuck with that. Even back then WoW had gear that showed cleavage, thighs, waist, etc. I had a few weirdos whisper me about how great my character's body looks.

Since being able to transmog/glam I dress my characters modestly. I like my glams to look practical. There are some exceptions, like the 2B dress, but I never use the legs from the same set because I don't fancy showing my knickers and the curves around it to the world.

But as we all know there is some gear in the game that looks far from practical or modest, and it often is combat gear. I don't like the idea that someone could unglam my character's modest gear into something potentially very revealing that I specifically chose to hide. And then angle their camera to get a good look me. And maybe even upload screenshots of what they found.

I don't need to explain that mmorpgs tend to attract a certain type of creep, and I would like to be able to continue to possess what little power I have to not catch their attention. I can already see the posts from the opposition saying "but I wouldn't creep on anyone!" and while that may be true, you cannot guarantee that someone else would not.

If someone likes to dress provocatively, I'm fine with it. It doesn't bother me. If they like to get attention from that sort of wardrobe, again that's fine with me. I respect their choice to wear revealing clothing, but I would also like others to respect my choice to not do that. By removing my glam you are removing my choice to not wear something that could get attention that I do not want.

Another thing that occurred to me is that even if OP's suggestion comes to the game, there is nothing stopping people from wearing the outfits they hate to see in non-combat zones. If the option comes to the game, everyone will know, and there will be a push-back from those who want to be seen in a particular way. And they would just wear the gear they intended to use as a glam so that no one can remove their outfits.

[Iscah]

Since everyone is so fond of dragging the real world into this let me frame it this way: you get up and dress in an outfit you think is nice and go out into public. You're going to be viewed by others in several different ways. Some people are going to think your outfit is nice, some are going to think it's inappropriate or slutty, others are going to act like you don't exist and go about their business and more than likely there are some that are going to imagine you nude. Their perceptions are altering your appearance in their minds. Does that upset you too? You don't know who's thinking what thoughts so you continue to dress in the manner that makes you happy. If you're able to accept the fact that, in reality, others aren't seeing you the way you see yourself, "the way you want to be seen", then why is it so hard to accept it in a video game?

You want to say that the way you choose to dress in the game is no-one else's business, right? How I choose to view things is also no-one else's business.

Is that supposed to be a logic trap? The situation isn't even equivalent. I've dressed how I want. That is within my control. What people think of it is beyond my control (but is very unlikely to be that it's too revealing, unless they're applying Victorian-era dress code rules or something). If they're "judging me" rather than simply seeing me as an unremarkable person, I can't do anything about it - but at least I'm being judged on my own choice.

In-game, I've dressed my character how I want. That is also within my control. What people think of it is also beyond my control (and also unlikely to be that it's too revealing), but they're still seeing what I chose to wear.

This theoretical system isn't the equivalent of someone looking at me and judging me on my outfit. It's the equivalent of them having augmented-reality glasses that replace everyone's clothes with something more "acceptable" to them - which sounds like a step towards some kind of dystopia. Obviously a video game isn't quite the same thing, but that's the analogy you've set up, and the thought is a very unpleasant one.

I'm not trying to be disruptive. I'm wearing things that are job-appropriate, while keeping within my personal taste. I don't want it replaced with something else beyond my control.