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

[SamRF]

But the thing is, at the root of it all, both viewpoints are valid. It's not wrong to not want to see a person dressed like a giant frog, or wearing a bathrobe and moogle slippers with a Namazu head, or whatever else during serious cutscenes. And it's also not wrong to be concerned about the overall impact such a feature will have on day-to-day life when you reinforce those sort of negative views for the people who do hold them, even if those aren't the people actually asking for the feature.

You're being reasonable in your post so I'm not bashing on you, just want to point out that by that logic we should also get rid of lalafells because they might reinforce pedophiles who will dress them half naked and imagine it being a child. We shouldn't take minority of people with negative views into consideration when implementing features.

What about aggression? This game allows fighting and killing which could perhaps reinforce real life aggressors (many studies from research done with various methods and designs show that violent video games make people more violent aggressive), does this mean we should get rid of combat and make this game purely focused on crafting? (I'm sure good portion of community wouldn't mind this lol)

[Lufir]

You know, I had a big reply written out, but I deleted it—because as much as I feel the idea of robbing someone of their individuality, forcing them to wear a helmet, or curating the world to your own selfish, petty desires is morally wrong and the height of bigotry and intolerance...

The simple answer is no, it'll never happen, and while people have raised really good points as to why its a bad or good idea; on both sides, I'll give you the real reasons...

1.) Too costly and would require too much time to develop a system to instantaneously hide a person's glamour, place a helmet on their head and adjust it for you client side; as all of this is sent to the server and they've already said they can't do anything extra to character appearance because the data is too bloated as is.

Considering the fact they won't separate horns from the faces of Au Ra among other things—it's just not going to happen because those things are minuscule compared to what is being asked for here.

2.) Mogstation exists, it is a cash shop, it sells non-restricted, freely glamourable items that appear and can be used in game.

I hate to break it to people (I actually don't), but the best form of advertising for a cash shop of any kind is for your players to purchase said items and to wear them. Giving you this option would remove one of Square Enix's main avenues of marketing and advertising Mogstation cosmetics to you and for that reason alone this will never happen.

Not to mention the amount websites, opinion pieces and bad press the game would get for including a button that would quite literally be called a "bigotry" button in news articles related to it. It's not a good idea from a development or financial angle nor would it give them any positive publicity as a result.

People need to stop asking, lighten up and just enjoy the game as it is, not as it could be or as you perceive it should be. They have their vision for the game, everything fits into that and if it didn't, we wouldn't get it. It would do people well to learn to respect that.

1. This should rarely be an excuse if a large portion of players desire something within reason to SE
2. I might be in the minority here, but everything I purchased from the Mogstation was because I wanted my character to have it. I could care less what others thought of my mounts, glamours, etc. You would still have the option of wearing those glamours... the OP isn't advocating to remove them.

[Granyala]

But the thing is, at the root of it all, both viewpoints are valid. It's not wrong to not want to see a person dressed like a giant frog, or wearing a bathrobe and moogle slippers with a Namazu head, or whatever else during serious cutscenes.

Umm.. aren't we basically alone during most story cutscenes anyway?

As for the rest: A dude wearing a dress or some magical frog costume is no more immersion breaking than some tiny Lalafell tank taking hits from a dragon 100x its size or some caster having a physical statue that would make Arnold Schwarzenegger green with envy.

You would still have the option of wearing those glamours... the OP isn't advocating to remove them.

No you would not.
Again: the point of glamors is to control how you appear.

Yes, teenagers with raging hormones will use it to skimp out as much as possible but most glams I see are actually pretty thoughtful.
One could argue that stuff like the frog costume should be restricted from glamor but that ship has sailed a long time ago.

[Krotoan]

robbing someone of their individuality, forcing them to wear a helmet, or curating the world to your own selfish, petty desires is morally wrong and the height of bigotry and intolerance...

While you see it this way, generally this is not what the people asking for the feature perceive it as. Many discussions have been had but I need to ask you , what exactly is the problem? The fact that you know someone isn't seeing your character EXACTLY as you wish? The fact they'd have a choice to not see things they might find disagreeable? The idea your character might appear in something you didn't choose? There are solutions for lots of these problems that would make both sides happy.

1.) Too costly and would require too much time to develop a system to instantaneously hide a person's glamour, place a helmet on their head and adjust it for you client side; as all of this is sent to the server and they've already said they can't do anything extra to character appearance because the data is too bloated as is.

Considering the fact they won't separate horns from the faces of Au Ra among other things—it's just not going to happen because those things are minuscule compared to what is being asked for here.

Generally the way a game client gets data for your appearance is flags are sent from the server to the client. One identifier to tell your machine what it should show at whatever coordinates your player is based on your race, size and possibly a flag for what color. This option would actually REDUCE the the traffic because instead of querying the server for other players it would just take the data for class/race/gender/level and use predetermined results. Your client wouldn't care what people were actually wearing (or in some cases chose for appearance options) it would just use the settings defaults.

It's possible with the weird mystery that is FFXIVs legacy of development that this isn't the case but in SoP your argument doesn't particularly hold water. Adding a new option to character appearances is an entirely different matter. You're ADDING an entirely new data flag stream into the mix which is possibly different for thousands upon thousands of characters. You're also adding a variable that all the gear has to look OK in/on/over so that quality control needs to be involved.

2.) Mogstation exists, it is a cash shop, it sells non-restricted, freely glamourable items that appear and can be used in game.

I hate to break it to people (I actually don't), but the best form of advertising for a cash shop of any kind is for your players to purchase said items and to wear them. Giving you this option would remove one of Square Enix's main avenues of marketing and advertising Mogstation cosmetics to you and for that reason alone this will never happen.
.

Yes mogstation exists for people to buy items they like the look of. Liking the look of something for MANY people is because they like how it looks on their characters and want to see it when they play the game. This would not affect this at all.
They may lose some visbility but everyone will not have the option enabled and in game "ohh hey lookit that" advertisement will still happen. Your perspective is again skewed in an "all or nothing" manner.

Not to mention the amount websites, opinion pieces and bad press the game would get for including a button that would quite literally be called a "bigotry" button in news articles related to it. It's not a good idea from a development or financial angle nor would it give them any positive publicity as a result.

Again you assume ALL news outlets view it as you do and as we see even within this thread the perspective on it is wide and varied. Some people still see it as just an option and the percent of people even in this thread viewing it as "bigoted" is small. Sure some more liberal perspectives might take your stance, but there are all kinds on the net, it will likely not be quite as widely one side polarized as you think.

People need to stop asking, lighten up and just enjoy the game as it is, not as it could be or as you perceive it should be. They have their vision for the game, everything fits into that and if it didn't, we wouldn't get it. It would do people well to learn to respect that.

[/QUOTE]

So stop asking for things we might want ? Sit down shut up and take what we're given?

[Granyala]

what exactly is the problem? The fact that you know someone isn't seeing your character EXACTLY as you wish? The fact they'd have a choice to not see things they might find disagreeable? The idea your character might appear in something you didn't choose? There are solutions for lots of these problems that would make both sides happy.

No, there aren't. It's a binary situation. Either you have the freedom and control or you don't.

My cat never wears revealing outfits, so I would glamor stuff like the Shisui gear. With your "option" half the playerbase would see her in pretty darn skimpy gear and there is no way around that, except for me to be aware of it, passing on the stat upgrade and not wear it.

I think we can both agree that would be a dumb solution.

Personally, I find it idiotic that after 6 years of freedom, people are suddenly clamoring for more restrictions.

Technically you could make a list of some of the more "offending" items and only have your option apply to them but
a) that would only lead to endless debates why item X is filtered and item Y is not
b) it's way too much DEV effort that is better spent on the actual game and not appeasing a puritan, narrow minded minority

[Packetdancer]

You're being reasonable in your post so I'm not bashing on you, just want to point out that by that logic we should also get rid of lalafells because they might reinforce pedophiles who will dress them half naked and imagine it being a child. We shouldn't take minority of people with negative views into consideration when implementing features.

Honestly, I would not be surprised if there are players who were the subject of childhood sexual abuse who do feel uneasy about lalafell, even if the point is that they're not supposed to actually be children.

Which brings us to the reason I think that clothing/gender expression/skin color is a more raw-nerve topic for more players: far more players on average have dealt with being judged for their gender expression, their skin tone, or other aspects of how they appear to others. I'm a woman who is also a senior engineering program lead at a technology development firm; we work with a lot of other companies, and I've had people tell me I'd be 'prettier' in a skirt or whatever. (Never mind that anyone who wears a long flowy skirt in a lab full of prototyping gear is possibly not thinking terribly well about safety; I enjoy flowy blouses, but I also enjoy not catching sleeves on the edge of an industrial laser or accidentally yoinking a plugged-in soldering iron off a bench. ANYWAY.)

I'm not saying that one sensitive spot is 'more valid' than another, but human nature is that the ones that touch on things we ourselves—for the generic definition of 'we' here—have experienced are, in general, going to hit harder than things which we care about in the abstract.

It thus does not surprise me that in terms of personal emotional reaction, the idea of encouraging/enabling folks who are prone to judging on gender presentation or suchnot is going to provoke more than something more abstract; the more abstract thing can be viewed from an emotional distance and more easily judged to be "nah, that's just overreacting/being too extreme".

[Canada_bangs]

You're being reasonable in your post so I'm not bashing on you, just want to point out that by that logic we should also get rid of lalafells because they might reinforce pedophiles who will dress them half naked and imagine it being a child. We shouldn't take minority of people with negative views into consideration when implementing features.

What about aggression? This game allows fighting and killing which could perhaps reinforce real life aggressors (many studies from research done with various methods and designs show that violent video games make people more violent aggressive), does this mean we should get rid of combat and make this game purely focused on crafting? (I'm sure good portion of community wouldn't mind this lol)

The last part I feel is reaching tho. I don't think her point was to throw everything off the cliff. In other words isn't your last point abit extreme? I mean that's extreme. Well I pointed this out earlier but your first point is abit extreme also. The best option I think is to give both sides the option. I don't see another way for it to be as fair as possible. Yes if they ever put this in noone but you can see it.. but come on. People WILL know and will feel bad or whatever just because the option is there. So a way to do it is a switch for people to turn it off and a switch for others to bypass it completely. It's not like everyone would use either option anyway. But that way it's fair to both sides. Or just never put it in.. but yeah.

[Krotoan]

No, there aren't. It's a binary situation. Either you have the freedom and control or you don't.

There are degrees of both. The idea that neither side would have to compromise AT ALL is silly, however there are levels of each that are acceptable.

My cat never wears revealing outfits, so I would glamor stuff like the Shisui gear. With your "option" half the playerbase would see her in pretty darn skimpy gear and there is no way around that, except for me to be aware of it, passing on the stat upgrade and not wear it.
I think we can both agree that would be a dumb solution.

If you'd read the thread, and I get that its a LOT to read, you'd know there are options I've proposed myself that circumvent that such as defaulting to AF gear appropriate for the level or having a standardized generic set for each job that meets a certain "decency" standard" OR replacing your character entirely so it wouldn't be you wearing whatever outfit.
This is why paying attention to the whole discussion is important, your problem has already been addressed.

Personally, I find it idiotic that after 6 years of freedom, people are suddenly clamoring for more restrictions.

You see it as restrictions when players not using the option would have NO limitations on their gameplay or visuals. It is an option for a client side change that nobody but the user would see.

Technically you could make a list of some of the more "offending" items and only have your option apply to them but
a) that would only lead to endless debates why item X is filtered and item Y is not
b) it's way too much DEV effort that is better spent on the actual game and not appeasing a puritan, narrow minded minority

And technically you could use some of the other options we've proposed and not have to bother with that kind of checklist.

You assume people don't want to see something because it "offends" them on some moral level. For a lot of us we just think it's ugly or undesireable. While we should never TELL someone what we think of them negatively without them specifically asking for it, people are welcome to have personal tastes.

[Awha]

I did not read the entire thread, and I do think this idea is implausible nevertheless, if such a feature was added wouldn't it be client side, if so the only way a person would ever know their glamour was changed is either if the person streams and the person who glamour was changed happens to find their stream, person takes a screen shot and the person who had their glamour changed happens to find their screen shot, or the person mentions they have altered the glamour.

It seems people are getting upset simply over the mere possibility that someone may not see them they way they wish, which seems fairly odd though I generally do not care about my appearance in game so maybe I am missing something.

[Granyala]

Honestly, I would not be surprised if there are players who were the subject of childhood sexual abuse who do feel uneasy about lalafell, even if the point is that they're not supposed to actually be children.

To my knowledge I have never been abused but I find them Lalafell to be creepy as heck. Esp in skimpy attire.
I would never ask for a filter though. I don't have to be comfortable with everything I see in the world.