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

[Jadedsins]

Isnip

Was a ton to read! But I enjoyed it.



I see your point about the two. I just always found it hard to believe that people who care so much about immersion, would not care about the lore and the story of said world. The two go hand and hand to help you feel lost in said world. But i guess that is not the case for everyone.


Does not change my stance on matter, but I come to understand a little.

[CelestePinke]

You shouldn't touch people without consent.

Do you really want to open that can of worms? But ok for him to <3 at me? See where this could go?

[Iscah]

Remember the fight with Grand Companies? SE didn't care about my glamour and I had to do the fight in normal tank armor. Ugly, non pink tank gear. They can already filter it.

I've wondered before about how those scenes work, and I don't think it's a "filter" - possibly any more than glamour plates were the temporary overlays that people originally envisaged they would be.

In those instances, you're specifically warned that your character is going to appear "glamoured" into certain gear but it won't affect your stats.

What I suspect it might be doing behind the scenes is making a copy of your character (or their gear) and applying glamours to it for the instance.

Regardless of how they do it, it has only been done in solo instances where only your character is affected. The costumes shown have been modest so it's not a case of being forced into revealing gear, as multiple people have mentioned being a concern about a wider filter system.

I DON'T care what your character looks like. What is so hard for you to understand? Nor do I care what you think about my character. I want to be the only character in pink and I don't want to see your character wearing what mine is.

I fail to see how either blocking or not-blocking glamours (I don't know which you are arguing for) will guarantee that you are the only person in the room wearing pink.

[CelestePinke]

I've wondered before about how those scenes work, and I don't think it's a "filter" - possibly any more than glamour plates were the temporary overlays that people originally envisaged they would be.

In those instances, you're specifically warned that your character is going to appear "glamoured" into certain gear but it won't affect your stats.

What I suspect it might be doing behind the scenes is making a copy of your character (or their gear) and applying glamours to it for the instance.

Regardless of how they do it, it has only been done in solo instances where only your character is affected. The costumes shown have been modest so it's not a case of being forced into revealing gear, as multiple people have mentioned being a concern about a wider filter system.





I fail to see how either blocking or not-blocking glamours (I don't know which you are arguing for) will guarantee that you are the only person in the room wearing pink.

I don't care seriously if I'm the only one in pink. Since you couldn't bother to read my other posts, I'm for a filter for ppl to block other ppl's glamour. The arguments previously were immersion in the game, individuality, freedom of expression to which I've commented/ replied to, you missed.
Immersion is solely dependent on the individual player. To that end why, would it matter to others what another individual chose their immersion in the game to be? In my game most players are just filler making my Eorzea look full.
Individuality, well it's not individuality if there are tons of other players that look the same.
Freedom of expression. Fine. Continue to glamour away because I will.
It would not affect sales of glamour one way or another because the players that live by "Glamour is true end game" are the ones that glamour is important to and we will continue.
The claim that is would be a wasted resource, I point out the capability is there to block glamour. The fact it's a solo instance that I used for my example doesn't matter.

[Iscah]

The claim that is would be a wasted resource, I point out the capability is there to block glamour. The fact it's a solo instance that I used for my example doesn't matter.

It does matter actually, because we haven't seen the system working "live" in the game world with other characters present, so we can't say for certain that it's built to work like that.

All we've seen is instances where we are taken out of the main game world and dropped into a unique instance where what appears to be our character is dressed in a different outfit, then returned to the overall game where we are still in the outfit we started with.

From a story standpoint, of course it's our character from start to finish.

From a game programming standpoint, the character in the instance could be just a copy of our main character model, pulled away to have new glamours applied to the outfit, then discarded once the scene is over, because (speculatively) now it has different glamours and the game has no way of restoring your old ones.

It might not be our character any more than Odin taking on the face of the last player to defeat him means he actually is that character.

We can't know how it works for sure, but we haven't clearly seen a filter system at work.

[Packetdancer]

I see your point about the two. I just always found it hard to believe that people who care so much about immersion, would not care about the lore and the story of said world. The two go hand and hand to help you feel lost in said world. But i guess that is not the case for everyone.

I know a lot of people who love Star Wars, but who are demonstrably not willing to engage in a 45-minute-long discussion with me of lore minutia from Clone Wars and Rebels. Or the various tie-in novels for the new continuity.

*sadface*

[Canada_bangs]

What "counter" reason would you have beyond "revenge"? First of all lots of the people who hate this idea mainly hate it because they don't like the idea someone could be not seeing them as they displayed. you solidify that fact and give them a target and you are pretty much inspiring retaliation. Now if you truly do not wish to party/adventure with those people I would accept a "auto blacklist" everyone who has it enabled so they never end up in your parties so you wouldn't be subjected to what you might consider targeted censoring. If you don't wish to interact with them fine, but painting targets on them is very vindictive.

I'm just saying what's wrong with both having the choice? It's kindof unfair that one side gets to do something while the other one has no say on the matter. I think it'll be the only way to do it without breaking the playerbase into a mad tissy. Beside what would be wrong with the option? Maybe because I don't care either way I don't see it in a bad light. I feel like if people get that option to block glams then other people should know, so either an icon or something so other people have a choice too. Again, from the outburst of this thread there's clearly people on both sides, so lets make them both happy instead of just one side. Tho honestly this thread proves why this will never be a thing anyway so all we're doing is going back and fourth with no middle being reached. On that front... I'm hungry? Pizza?

[Krotoan]

I'm just saying what's wrong with both having the choice? It's kindof unfair that one side gets to do something while the other one has no say on the matter. I think it'll be the only way to do it without breaking the playerbase into a mad tissy. Beside what would be wrong with the option? Maybe because I don't care either way I don't see it in a bad light. I feel like if people get that option to block glams then other people should know, so either an icon or something so other people have a choice too. Again, from the outburst of this thread there's clearly people on both sides, so lets make them both happy instead of just one side. Tho honestly this thread proves why this will never be a thing anyway so all we're doing is going back and fourth with no middle being reached. On that front... I'm hungry? Pizza?

The problem being your solution makes one side happy and the other side VERY unhappy and provides a target for that unhappiness. People have expressed a LOT of concern with knowing that people were blocking them as in just thinking about the possibility was distressing. My proposition to allow people to filter out glamour/gear normalizers as partymembers would give them the option to avoid a potentially distressing situation for them. There is no reason to enable targeting for harassment like that.

Just because the topic is a hot button doesn't mean it's impossible to work out.. but people will need to discuss rather than react with emotion and outrage. We've actually made a few inches of progress toward an "acceptable" system so far that I have read and participated in:


People don't want their character in another glamour than they've chosen (or in screenshots) : Solution make the toggle use a generic race/gender/job placeholder and possibly a stand in name (initials or randomly generated name)

People don't want others to show them in mismatched outfits or skimpy outfits: Solution use level appropriate AF or carefully cultivated replacement job sets.

People don't like the idea of being replaced at all : solution, add them to a sort of blacklist where the characters will not interact in anyway, both will be invisible to each other and unable to interact or be matched in parties.



In the myriad arguments over whether it's canon or lore or bigoted or intolerant there have been actual solutions that both sides find acceptable proposed.



I unfortunately am starting to get tubby, so I'm gonna need to lay off pizza for a while. It's broccoli and lean steak for me tonight.

[Kewitt]

I honestly haven't seen a tank in a string bikini or a now men in wedding dresses.

[Kohl]

I know a lot of people who love Star Wars, but who are demonstrably not willing to engage in a 45-minute-long discussion with me of lore minutia from Clone Wars and Rebels. Or the various tie-in novels for the new continuity.

*sadface*

I wish you were in my FC/Server