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

[Krotoan]

Mentors are not being banned for false reasons left and right even though plenty of people are offended over the icon existing. You are giving these harassers too much credit. In reality, they are just as invisible and powerless in game as they are in real life.

Left and right? No , but they are getting actioned and harassed. Again, it's not a non existent problem, which is my point. No problem is better than a little problem.

[Klb600]

Voluntarily associate? No. But imagine a group of people dead set on "punishing" those who aren't allowing them to "express themselves". Reports, kicks, etc etc.

This. Earlier in the thread people suggested the idea of "all or nothing" as well, such that would be users of this feature would lose access to the glamour feature themselves(essentially penalization for a QoL feature that impacts nobody), now a marker suggestion to label would be "bigots and intolerant" people.

Seems like a whole lot of passive aggression for a feature that at the end of the day affects no one in any tangible or measurable manner, you can make the $$$ argument, or the Technical limitation argument, but if you want to equate the "Rights" of a human to a what is essentially Bits and HEX, that's a you problem.

[Cithaerias_pyropina]

Solve that problem when it becomes a problem?

I'm not entirely sure that that could or would even be able to be solved. There currently is no way to selectively mute or disable the SFX or VFX of individual players or jobs, it's you, your party or others. I would love the ability to selectively mute and disable the effects of certain jobs though so that it would only be my own and the three healers's sounds and effects.

[Eldevern]

I'm not entirely sure that that could or would even be able to be solved. There currently is no way to selectively mute or disable the SFX or VFX of individual players or jobs, it's you, your party or others. I would love the ability to selectively mute and disable the effects of certain jobs though so that it would only be my own and the three healers's sounds and effects.

Rather agree, Bahamut is kinda big, for example. It is not how it looks, it's just too big and can be a problem for players with a little screen. It sometimes forces me to move the camera an uncomfortable angle.

[Canada_bangs]

This. Earlier in the thread people suggested the idea of "all or nothing" as well, such that would be users of this feature would lose access to the glamour feature themselves(essentially penalization for a QoL feature that impacts nobody), now a marker suggestion to label would be "bigots and intolerant" people.

Seems like a whole lot of passive aggression for a feature that at the end of the day affects no one in any tangible or measurable manner, you can make the $$$ argument, or the Technical limitation argument, but if you want to equate the "Rights" of a human to a what is essentially Bits and HEX, that's a you problem.

To be fair.. this whole thread is nothing but passive aggression. I feel like everyone here were trolled massively because the TC hasn't came here once after they made this topic. It seriously feels like this was nothing but a massive trolled that got everyone in arms. And sadly it worked. And a maker wouldn't label you that. It'll just be an icon that lets other people know you have it on. And if they don't want to be effected the icon lets them know not to party with you. Whats wrong with that? Why do you get a feature and not the other side? Why be unfair? Whats wrong with an icon?

You act like people wouldn't already find ways to find out if you're using it or not anyway.

[Halivel]

Rather agree, Bahamut is kinda big, for example. It is not how it looks, it's just too big and can be a problem for players with a little screen. It sometimes forces me to move the camera an uncomfortable angle.

/bahamutsize small

Solved. Though I'm not sure if it's a client side command or not.

[Canada_bangs]

Left and right? No , but they are getting actioned and harassed. Again, it's not a non existent problem, which is my point. No problem is better than a little problem.

But the issue is there's no such thing as no problems in anything. There's always going to be issues, honestly the best way to have no problems is to not put it in. But that wouldn't work for you. But that IS the best way to have no problems in this topic.

[Klb600]

To be fair.. this whole thread is nothing but passive aggression. I feel like everyone here were trolled massively because the TC hasn't came here once after they made this topic. It seriously feels like this was nothing but a massive trolled that got everyone in arms. And sadly it worked. And a maker wouldn't label you that. It'll just be an icon that lets other people know you have it on. And if they don't want to be effected the icon lets them know not to party with you. Whats wrong with that? Why do you get a feature and not the other side? Why be unfair? Whats wrong with an icon?

You act like people wouldn't already find ways to find out if you're using it or not anyway.

Check Topic creators History, they did infact continue to post afterwards, their last post is on this thread. For all we know their Sub might have lapse and hasn't subbed since(Cant post anymore)...

And even if this was an attempt at trolling, it doesn't change the fact that this is still a feature that people want.

What passive Aggression? All the other side stated is that they would like a QOL feature that enhances their enjoyment at no cost to the other party. All I have heard from the Oppositions side is, attempts to wear glamours to annoy those that want this feature, labeling others as Bigots/intolerant, and stating a label should be made to weed out these people.

If you want this marking, I personally don't mind and its not about "them finding out" I could care less if someone knew I used the feature, but its the principle of the matter: why a marking? Are you that Vain that cant just cant enter a dungeon with a player that isn't basking in your amazing glamours? These counter measures cant be seen in any other way then as coming from a place of vitriol, when as stated..............is a feature that is entirely client side and does not impact you in anyway.....

It just makes you look butt-hurt, kind of like that kid who takes his ball and goes home because he didn't get his way.

[Canada_bangs]

Check Topic creators History, they did infact continue to post afterwards, their last post is on this thread. For all we know their Sub might have lapse and hasn't subbed since(Cant post anymore)...

And even if this was an attempt at trolling, it doesn't change the fact that this is still a feature that people want.

What passive Aggression? All the other side stated is that they would like a QOL feature that enhances their enjoyment at no cost to the other party. All I have heard from the Oppositions side is, attempts to wear glamours to annoy those that want this feature, labeling others as Bigots/intolerant, and stating a label should be made to weed out these people.

If you want this marking, I personally don't mind and its not about "them finding out" I could care less if someone knew I used the feature, but its the principle of the matter: why a marking? Are you that Vain that cant just cant enter a dungeon with a player that isn't basking in your amazing glamours? These counter measures cant be seen in any other way then as coming from a place of vitriol, when as stated..............is a feature that is entirely client side and does not impact you in anyway.....

It just makes you look butt-hurt, kind of like that kid who takes his ball and goes home because he didn't get his way.

And it doesn't make you look butt hurt to ask for something to hide something as simple as some glams? It really does go both ways. And if it didn't impact people we wouldn't have over 200 pages of people going back and forth. Fact is just as some people want it, there are just as many people who don't want it. That's all I'm saying. Instead of insults noone has actually provided a reason as to why an icon is a bad idea? If you can have a choice to hide them, then the other side should have a choice to not party with you either. I don't care cause this would never see the light of day anyway. BUT I like being fair.

I'm not just gonna say one side is wrong cause honestly there is no right or wrong here. Just two sides who dont want to see the other side at all. And that goes for BOTH ends.

[Klb600]

And it doesn't make you look butt hurt to ask for something to hide something as simple as some glams?

Context. The difference is I will continue to play the game whether this feature is implemented or not. And this includes partying with the large green metallic frog, because its an optional feature.

If you need a countermeasure to avoid playing with people in all of its entirety over a feature that only enhances someone else's playing experience at no cost to yourself then yes that makes you look very butt-hurt.

"And if it didn't impact people we wouldn't have over 200 pages of people going back and forth."

This only honestly further proves the hypocrisy of this community, they go on about "more options is a good thing." Clearly only when it suites you(And I am not specifically addressing you just to be clear.)

But the Crux of the matter is I acknowledge that a feature like this is slim because of various reasoning, but the the people going on about the "Philosophical" counter argument is just not sound reasoning as to why not.