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

[Sairys]

The opposition to this feature keeps trying to drag it into a space of intolerance and bigotry when it's just about quality of player experience.

The OP and others have made it clear their support of this feature is because they find things such as men in dresses objectionable and want dev time spent on this because of that.

Some arguing for might actually not agree with that but it is part of the arguments being presented in favour of the change and even the appearance that it could be supporting intolerance is something SE would need to consider.

[Krotoan]

The OP and others have made it clear their support of this feature is because they find things such as men in dresses objectionable and want dev time spent on this because of that.

Some arguing for might actually not agree with that but it is part of the arguments being presented in favour of the change and even the appearance that it could be supporting intolerance is something SE would need to consider.

A consideration for sure. I don't want to appear to support bigotry or intolerance of course. People should be allowed to express and be themselves at all times within reason.

However while you may not find their reasoning acceptable, the fact that they "find men in dresses objectionable" is a personal preference and while not shared should at least be tolerated so much as it doesn't affect anyone else if they choose not to view it. There's a line between saying "I'd like the choice not to see this" and "I don't want you to have the option to do this". I don't support their point of views, but I cannot fault them for having preferences.

[Sairys]

A consideration for sure. I don't want to appear to support bigotry or intolerance of course. People should be allowed to express and be themselves at all times within reason.

However while you may not find their reasoning acceptable, the fact that they "find men in dresses objectionable" is a personal preference and while not shared should at least be tolerated so much as it doesn't affect anyone else if they choose not to view it. There's a line between saying "I'd like the choice not to see this" and "I don't want you to have the option to do this". I don't support their point of views, but I cannot fault them for having preferences.

The issue is that it is how it looks because again, the "pro" view point is being supported by those you seem to not want to be grouped with.
The limitations on how you're allowed to express yourself are defined by what you can glamour, if the devs thought gender non-conforming glamours are that big of an issue they just wouldn't invest the time to create/enable them in the first place.

At the end of the day tolerance as far as glamours go is accepting that everyone gets to define their look within the aforementioned limitations of "what the devs have allowed", everyone currently has equality of choice.
What is being requested is something that, in effect, supports the intolerance of other peoples choices.

[Krotoan]

The issue is that it is how it looks because again, the "pro" view point is being supported by those you seem to not want to be grouped with.
The limitations on how you're allowed to express yourself are defined by what you can glamour, if the devs thought gender non-conforming glamours are that big of an issue they just wouldn't invest the time to create/enable them in the first place.

The fact they're available means nothing other than they wish to provide choice. It took a dang long time for the whole "bunny suit" thing to clear because the devs didn't like it, but they acquiesced because the demand was there (though i gotta admit I don't really see anyone using the male version).

At the end of the day tolerance as far as glamours go is accepting that everyone gets to define their look within the aforementioned limitations of "what the devs have allowed", everyone currently has equality of choice.
What is being requested is something that, in effect, supports the intolerance of other peoples choices.

It supports the option to customize your own experience. The idea that it will ONLY be used to suppress certain things like guys in dresses or what have you is a limited mindset. It will be useful for many who just wish to standardize the world they're living in in their mind, even if that standardization just means "I don't want to see anyone but myself as unique". Tolerance in general is accepting that others will have differing views from your own and you shouldn't try to make them change. The media we're utilizing allows a user to customize their experience at no perceivable cost to any other player and it's boggling my mind that people have a problem with someone trying to customize their personal experience and then calling it oppressive.

[Zabuza]

The OP and others have made it clear their support of this feature is because they find things such as men in dresses objectionable and want dev time spent on this because of that.

Some arguing for might actually not agree with that but it is part of the arguments being presented in favour of the change and even the appearance that it could be supporting intolerance is something SE would need to consider.

Actually, no one has mentioned men in wedding dresses as the only thing. OP also mentioned females walking around in string bikinis. I mentioned the main reason I was arguing for this was I don't appreciate you wanting to control what appears on my screen in a game. I felt as if your side is arguing against freedom of choice. I mentioned animal outfits as an example of something ridiculous at least ten times, and men in dresses one time. On that note, are people allowed to disagree with men in dresses as a fashion choice? Are they allowed to think it just doesn't look good without people shrieking 'muh transphobia'? You're all constantly bringing up the men in dresses to try to fit your narrative that this is done for reasons of bigotry, rather than personal taste. Would you also say we're bigoted against animals, since animal outfits have been brought up numerous times by several people?

[Iscah]

But all these bards playing music where somebody can hear them are not heard at all if I click on the toggle thus they cant seemingly express themselves..or what big difference is between someone taking their time (or not) to create a beautiful piece of music and those that create glamours?

Because muting is not altering.

You hear their music, or you do not.

You're not asking for it to be somehow altered to be more pleasing to you.

Also to see this a bit more positive. Maybe such a toggle would give them the reason to finally unlock more genderlocked stuff because right now they are taking it slowly and are careful on what to unlock because they know that not every player would be fine with it.

how do you know that's why they're being "slow and careful" with it?

Perhaps it just takes time to work on new models in the middle of a busy schedule?

[Alleo]

Because muting is not altering.

You hear their music, or you do not.

You're not asking for it to be somehow altered to be more pleasing to you.


how do you know that's why they're being "slow and careful" with it?

Perhaps it just takes time to work on new models in the middle of a busy schedule?

And yet the person standing there playing the music for others to hear is muted out by an option. You are altering it by not playing the music, so what is going on, on your screen is different from the one that has bard performance not on mute. And yes I clicked it on to be please me because I am often annoyed by the music.

Because Yoshida himself has stated in an interview that they need to be careful with such things because he knows that there are still people that might be offended by it. And we do know that they can take their time when its something they dont want or are careful about. For example: Bunny suit for men. Here it as worked on by females because the male workers seemingly felt uncomfortable with it.

Edit: I honestly would be fine if it was just something that activates only at cutscenes or in instances.

[Iscah]

And yet the person standing there playing the music for others to hear is muted out by an option. You are altering it by not playing the music, so what is going on, on your screen is different from the one that has bard performance not on mute. And yes I clicked it on to be please me because I am often annoyed by the music.

You're assuming the bard expects every person to stop and listen to them or they're being disrespected - which is highly unlikely to be the case.

But then the same argument keeps getting thrown here by those in favour of the filter: "if you're against it, it must be because you demand that everyone look at and appreciate your glamour! What other reason could you possibly have for refusing to let us alter it?"

Meanwhile at least three different people (myself included) have explained that they would personally dislike it not because their fancy outfit is covered up, but that it's likely to leave them in more revealing outfits than they had chosen to wear.

It's not even that we would wear the things that people object to and want to block out - but we would be affected just the same.

[Alleo]

You're assuming the bard expects every person to stop and listen to them or they're being disrespected - which is highly unlikely to be the case.

Then you are also assuming that the majority of people that glamour do it so that people look at them. Yes different people gave different arguments and its fine if you dont like the option. But others can also be fine with wanting one. Its not like SE will see it and just because the thread is made will create it. But people have the right to at least post that they would want that.

About revealing outfits: That can simply be stopped by giving the people the recent job gear which is not revealing.