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

[Arillyn]

How is it "wrong" to want an optional feature that doesn't harm anyone? If wanting something like this is wrong then why not go to the male Viera thread and tell them all that they are wrong for wanting something that not everyone wants. Since when are you the moral arbiter of what's wrong or right?



Except for the part where OP specifically said:

Everyone only keeps bringing up the way guys can dress and ignore the rest because it make them appear to have a moral edge against implied "bigots".

I have an alt I am leveling that is currently wearing the coliseum gear on her DOW. It's not glamoured - that is her gear. Bikini armor FTW!

[Joven]

100 likes its a measly amount in the grand scheme of things. I think I saw someone throw out a number, 1.1 million active subs? Something like that. Not all of those people come on here so there's part of a missing demographic. And without a dislike option, there's another missing demographic. I'd be curious to see where this thread would fall if both were added into a grand total.

The same could be said for the male Viera thread.

There's an interest in a lot of dumb things. Doesn't mean they should ever be added, or God forbid even bother wasting the devs time reading this mess.

So when an idea that others think is "dumb" and "a waste of time" is posted on the forum as a theoretical option it garners backlash, yet when the devs. themselves release something without consulting the fanbase, i.e. umbrellas, that's not considered a waste of time or resources and is perfectly reasonable? People on here have a very screwy idea of what constitutes a waste of time and resources.

[Theodric]

We got to make sure everyone knows why they are wrong for wanting this.

They're not wrong. Diversity of thought and diversity of opinion are invaluable concepts. The game already caters to many different types of players, many of whom never interact with each other. The proposed toggle only affects those who deliberately wish to go out of their way to force themselves on other players - which is a form of harassment.

There's been a lot of support for the proposal, regardless. A hundred likes is a pretty impressive feat - many threads do not reach such heights.

[VictorTheed]

All the folks complaining about dudes in dresses, thongs and bunny outfits tend not to have a problem with all the bikini clad bunny, cat and lizard girls...Just sayin'

Maybe the folks complaining about dudes in dresses, thongs and bunny outfits just happen to share the opposite opinion of you, free will opinions are still allowed aren't they?

Plus OP complained about both dudes in dresses and chicks in bikinis.

[Arillyn]

They're not wrong. Diversity of thought and diversity of opinion are invaluable. The game already caters to many different types of players, many of whom never interact with each other. The proposed toggle only affects those who deliberately wish to go out of their way to force themselves on other players - which is a form of harassment.

How is it a form of harassment to make glamours using the gear that SE has put in the game? I mean if someone wants to tank glamoured in the frog outfit idc - SE put it in the game. I have seen this a few times in this thread and I'm genuinely confused how this is seen as harassment.

[SturmChurro]

So when an idea that others think is "dumb" and "a waste of time" is posted on the forum as a theoretical option it garners backlash, yet when the devs. themselves release something without consulting the fanbase i.e. umbrellas, that's not considered a waste of time or resources and is perfectly reasonable? People on here have a very screwy idea of what constitutes a waste of time and resources.

Looks like we agree! The devs waste a lot of resources! So why should they even bother wasting more time reading something like this?!

[Jadedsins]

They're not wrong. Diversity of thought and diversity of opinion are invaluable concepts. The game already caters to many different types of players, many of whom never interact with each other. The proposed toggle only affects those who deliberately wish to go out of their way to force themselves on other players - which is a form of harassment.

There's been a lot of support for the proposal, regardless. A hundred likes is a pretty impressive feat - many threads do not reach such heights.

It is easy to quote said things to make it look like you have a good cause for asking for optional things.


I don't need all that, All I need to say is that, I don't want others to have the power to see me how they want to see me as. That is that.


It is ok to not have options in a game.

[Arillyn]

Maybe the folks complaining about dudes in dresses, thongs and bunny outfits just happen to share the opposite opinion of you, free will opinions are still allowed aren't they?

Plus OP complained about both dudes in dresses and chicks in bikinis.

Well I hope they don't get upset by my non-glamoured metal bikini in a dungeon on my DOW because it's decent gear for her level.

[Vahlnir]

How is it a form of harassment to make glamours using the gear that SE has put in the game? I mean if someone wants to tank glamoured in the frog outfit idc - SE put it in the game. I have seen this a few times in this thread and I'm genuinely confused how this is seen as harassment.

Because it's not harassment. Period. Anyone claiming that people wearing what they want to wear in a video game is harassment is delusional at best.

[Theodric]

How is it a form of harassment to make glamours using the gear that SE has put in the game? I mean if someone wants to tank glamoured in the frog outfit idc - SE put it in the game. I have seen this a few times in this thread and I'm genuinely confused how this is seen as harassment.

It's a form of harassment for people to make controversial glamours and then force them on people who do not wish to see them - which is exactly what some of those opposed to the idea seem to want to do. If someone were to follow me around in-game in a frog suit simply to make a nuisance of themselves then I don't doubt that the GM's would intervene. That aside, branding people 'bigots' for not liking a particular type of fashion is also a type of harassment in itself - and a very troubling one, given that it devalues actual cases of bigotry.