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

[Theodric]

To be fair, blame the TC because they were the ones bringing social issues into it with their line in their first post about "men in dresses" So people bringing these things up is fair game.

The original poster wasn't being discriminatory, though - since she also brought up women in bikini armour. It struck me as more of an aversion to skimpy glamour in general. Even if meant differently, though, I'm not inclined to consider a distaste towards certain aesthetics or clothing to be a personal attack.

[Tsumdere]

The original poster wasn't being discriminatory, though - since she also brought up women in bikini armour. It struck me as more of an aversion to skimpy glamour in general. Even if meant differently, though, I'm not inclined to consider a distaste towards certain aesthetics or clothing to be a personal attack.

Men in dresses aren't skimpy. The dresses the men have available (sans 2B glamour) are very modest. I am saying this as someone who doesn't exactly care much for men in dresses.

They just want people to adhere to their militant tastes rather than treating people like people and allowing them to make choices.

[Canada_bangs]

The original poster wasn't being discriminatory, though - since she also brought up women in bikini armour. It struck me as more of an aversion to skimpy glamour in general. Even if meant differently, though, I'm not inclined to consider a distaste towards certain aesthetics or clothing to be a personal attack.

I don't either, but that doesn't mean others don't. I'm just saying it's the TC's fault. Tho I'm hungry. Meatloaf, pizza, or rice and ground beef. THAT is the choices I'm facing right now.

[Theodric]

They just want people to adhere to their militant tastes rather than treating people like people and allowing them to make choices.

The proposal allows for players to dress their character however they so wish, though. It just provides an avenue for other players to tweak their client to their liking for various reasons, including those unrelated to that.

[Tsumdere]

The proposal allows for players to dress their character however they so wish, though. It just provides an avenue for other players to tweak their client to their liking for various reasons, including those unrelated to that.

The proposal does not allow for people to be seen as they wish though. This proposal removes choice from one party and is therefore, a very unfair suggestion.

Currently with no glamour switch, if you do not like people's glamour you can :

1. Leave the party.
2. Remove the offending person from party.
3. Make your own party and friend group with glamour rules.
4. Run trusts.
5. Turn your camera away.

You currently still have choice to avoid what you don't want to see.

With your proposal, there is nothing that the affected party can do. They cannot make their own party or remove people, as people can conveniently leave out the fact they have the option on. Unless they mark people who use the function for us to do the above as well, it is an unequal proposal and completely removes choice from people who do want to be seen for whatever reason.

[Theodric]

It's a client side option - no different to the blacklist or disabling of spell effects. Or the tweaking of lighting options which affect how skin tone is displayed. We already have tools available to make other characters look different to how they look on the screen of the one controlling them.

Furthermore, the game itself didn't have many 'silly' glamours back in ARR and HW. They were only added after a vocal potion of the community demanded that restrictions were removed on that front. I'd say it's only fair for a client side toggle to be added so those of us who value immersion can tweak things to our liking.

It's easy to claim that we can just look away, though that doesn't work for those of us who are overly perceptive. My biggest hobbies are hiking and geology - my brain is wired to spot things that are out of place.

[MsMisato]

The proposal does not allow for people to be seen as they wish though. This proposal removes choice from one party and is therefore, a very unfair suggestion.

Currently with no glamour switch, if you do not like people's glamour you can :

1. Leave the party.
2. Remove the offending person from party.
3. Make your own party and friend group with glamour rules.
4. Run trusts.
5. Turn your camera away.

You currently still have choice to avoid what you don't want to see.

With your proposal, there is nothing that the affected party can do. They cannot make their own party or remove people, as people can conveniently leave out the fact they have the option on. Unless they mark people who use the function for us to do the above as well, it is an unequal proposal and completely removes choice from people who do want to be seen for whatever reason.

Probably get flack for this, but in all honesty, would you be upset if someone wasn't able to see your glamour if the option was there? How would you know? Are you going to ask if they can see it? Are you going to get upset if they don't see it? A simple option on the client-side will change how they see things from their end and everyone else would able to see it that were into glamours. Its really no different from those that use third-party apps to mod armors, and such that affects the client end. God forbid if someone has seen my character naked on their end because they just want to see naked players 24/7 and they modded it in such a way it's really not any different than asking for a glamour option.

If a person could turn it off on their end to stay immersed so be it. I would go a step further with the option and not allow them to glamour themselves because if they wanted to glamour themselves it has to be an all or nothing option. It just needs to be client-side only.

[MelodyCrystel]

Staying immersed is such a thing when people wear stuff from different settings. Turning glamour off won't make everything simple and pretty, either. You're still going to see ugly things - perhaps even more than before. Good glamour happens way more often than questionable stuff.

[Krotoan]

Staying immersed is such a thing when people wear stuff from different settings. Turning glamour off won't make everything simple and pretty, either. You're still going to see ugly things - perhaps even more than before. Good glamour happens way more often than questionable stuff.

While I appreciate this thread IS 200+ long and nobody wants to dig through it, this has been addressed several times. "default" complete and representative glamours could be set such as class AF, or in the case of something being too risque for too many people, base squish, med, heavy armors could be used.

[Kuroka]

Idm skimpy lala or sexy catbois or traps, as they usually not made offensly, but there are ppl using worst color combinations or on purpose play giant roes with pink dresses or metal bikini just for attention and that annoys me. worst case make a workaround so i dont see glamour of ppl i've blacklisted...