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

[LittleArrow]

I tried, very hard, to stay away after posting my support. Alas! I have returned! I'm sorry I haven't really followed many of the posts, but I still wanted to provide -more- support for this feature *is currently running around in a pink frogsuit*

I didn't read all the arguments, but I did catch a couple posts stating how it would be muting other's expressions / affect how others view their characters in game. I also saw a few posts commenting how this would really ruin the game considering how tied the game is to fashion.

I definitely see the merit of those arguments. However, I can't say I support them.

First argument is - lack of control over one's appearance. So, what about the game before glamour was an option? I mean, glamour was just added to the game in its capacity not too long ago. [EDIT] (Seeing as how this sentence has been taken out of context and used as a means to attack a multi-paragraph post, please allow me to expand - IN IT'S CAPACITY meaning, glamour now is MUCH different now than it was originally. I'm fully aware glamour was INITIALLY introduced in 2.2. However, it was NOT as accessible and thus I never saw anyone use glamour nearly to the degree people do now. That's what -IN IT'S CAPACITY- means.) Also, no one is forcing outfits onto anyone that isn't their choice. People have to choose and equip the armor they're wearing. I've heard of players doing pretty heinous things with their clients and forcing other players to look a certain way that the game does not support. -That- I definitely agree with the argument. Yet, this is armor that players are choosing to wear, they just cover it up with something they think looks better.

The second argument is in context with economies / mogstation / etc tied to glamour. I really have a hard time coming around to seeing the finer details with this one. The game was doing fine -without- glamour. Not to mention, no one is saying, get rid of glamours. It's a personal toggle for a personal client. Glamour doesn't cease being important or have value with anyone. It's just not shown on the client of the person how has it toggled.

I guess I'm really confused why people are getting so upset at the suggestion. The glamour system isn't being suggested to be removed. Also, seeing someone's statement boiled down to something like 'I spent so much money on this so you -have- to see it.' Well, that's kind of a rough attitude to take right? Because someone has something they think has an incredible amount of value, I'm -forced- to lay my eyes on it? I mean, not everyone is saying this, but that one really stuck out to me.

Maybe, we could all take a breather and remember this is a game, yeah? This game has -zero- bearing on your life. Your character has -zero- value. It -will- be deleted at some point. The servers will be taken down. You will lose interest in this game eventually and completely abandon it. Sometimes an opinion gets turned into a personal moral standard. That's cool, but maybe not so much with pixels, yeah? ^^

[SamRF]

---

That's too much common sense, we don't appreciate that in this thread.

[Krotoan]

I guess I'm really confused why people are getting so upset at the suggestion. The glamour system isn't being suggested to be removed. Also, seeing someone's statement boiled down to something like 'I spent so much money on this so you -have- to see it.' Well, that's kind of a rough attitude to take right? Because someone has something they think has an incredible amount of value, I'm -forced- to lay my eyes on it? I mean, not everyone is saying this, but that one really stuck out to me.

Maybe, we could all take a breather and remember this is a game, yeah? This game has -zero- bearing on your life. Your character has -zero- value. It -will- be deleted at some point. The servers will be taken down. You will lose interest in this game eventually and completely abandon it. Sometimes an opinion gets turned into a personal moral standard. That's cool, but maybe not so much with pixels, yeah? ^^

There was a very well thought out and formatted response about how both sides are looking at the issue and how one side is simply seeing another video game customization option and another is seeing an attack on individuality and personal autonomy. I might go look for it to refer directly later but atm I do not have the time or patience to re-sift through the thread. Anyway the post was pretty spot on and I don't think anyone in the thread could argue with it, but as both sides are mired in personal preference, morality and values it's VERY hard to get one side to see the other or at least to see why those values are important as they relate to the proposed option.

While I agree with everything you've said, I can understand that my values are not everyone elses and the strong replies, in their heads, are perfectly warranted. So while I may not be able to comprehend WHY someone thinks a certain way , I can try to at least be civil or at least as non-aggressive as I can in an argument since in their perspective I am proposing some of the worst things possible as a cavalier "it'd be nice if... ".


... the reaction was pretty surprising though.

[Baxcel]

Ain't got the time to read this thread in its entirety (at work currently on break) but just seeing posts on first could or pages complaining about seeing Tanks in dungeons with small clothes and stuff..

I think what's your all forgetting about glamour is that "its glamour".. the player might appear to be in nothing but skimp clothing but when in fact they are covered in armor.. the equips are still super defense orientated but they look like regular clothing..

If your going to play to the fantasy troupe about this breaking your immersion.. take it the next step.. it so much magic that super indestructible armor can look like a swimsuit

[SnowVix]

My biggest problem with this suggestion is the bigoted reason it was brought up. Poor widdle OP threw a hissy fit over seeing a man in a dress and wants to not have to see glamour's because their comforting gender roles have been demolished before their very eyes.

[LittleArrow]

snippet!

Well, I can definitely see how quickly things can devolve when anything is taken as personally as that. I guess being a lot older now I see things very differently and I prioritize things in a completely different way than when I was younger. Not saying it -has- to take age, but definitely life experiences.

I remember the days when I would be spend hours and hours just arguing and debating and getting so worked up I'd be furious / depressed / literally crying behind the monitor. I guess once I realized that there are parents who woke up in a hospital couch this morning because of their child, or a pet owner sitting anxiously in some emergency vet waiting room this very minute, or even a worried sibling sitting by the phone because they recognized their sister's/brother's car on television that was just in a crash, this stuff totally doesn't matter lol.

I just wish we could really value what's actually important before we lose it. I mean, I really want the option, and I think the arguments against it are silly (not to be rude, but that's just my take on it), but am I going to quit the game or get upset? Heck no! The season Lord Jesus Christ has me in right now is really nice, but I know there may be a season where I'm that parent, or sibling, or pet owner. The last thing I want is to look back at how much time I wasted being upset at stuff that really just doesn't matter.

[DPZ2]

First argument is - lack of control over one's appearance. So, what about the game before glamour was an option? I mean, glamour was just added to the game in its capacity not too long ago.

Glamour was introduced in the game in patch 2.2, back in March 2014 ... nearly six years ago.

Try again.

[LittleArrow]

Glamour was introduced in the game in patch 2.2, back in March 2014 ... nearly six years ago.

Try again.

Right! I meant in the capacity that is in now. I was playing long before that patch, and let me tell you - glamour was -not- as popular as it is now, b/c it was costly and really clunky to deal with. Yeah maybe someone would glamour a helmet or something, but it wasn't as extensive as it is now. That's why I said in its -capacity-

Thanks for bringing up that date though... man I'm old

[DPZ2]

...I can try to at least be civil or at least as non-aggressive as I can in an argument since in their perspective I am proposing some of the worst things possible as a cavalier "it'd be nice if... ".

Calling someone petty because they indicated they'd support this change if the person who turned off glamours could not see their own glamours is sooooo civil and non-aggressive.

[Eimian_Eda]

Yikes, this thread is toxic as all heck, and honestly, mostly from the opposing side.
I'm surprised it's not deleted/locked yet.