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

[Shougun]

So where do we draw the line? What is actually realistic?

It's rather simple rules to be honest, but those rules rest on an extreme subjectivity, a desired vibe/goal. That subjectivity while isn't entirely random it does have bubbles of thought. Such that someone that gravitates towards a sort of skyrim vibe will have an entirely different idea of what is reasonable than a person who is more into Persona and more interestingly it isn't just bubbles as people are able to shift too depending on what they expect- like if I play Mario Party I'm not looking for Bloodborne vibes.

The simplicity is the story of the visuals. What are you trying to convey? Your simple viewing of what people have issues with can come from that. Some people do just have problems because of morality or stuff, but from what I read most people, at least my self particularly, they see mascot armor and think 'the story is you're making this out to be a joke'. And I like jokes but I don't like jokes right in the middle of content that was supposed to be serious.

Like people who think frog suits or bikini armor is reasonable might also think "wth?" if we had 100% full detailed nudity naked fighting or if you could wield tools that look suspiciously similar to what might be used in Saints Row. I don't feel unreasonable to suggest the amount of story telling bikini armor offers is limited in comparison to even slightly more armor, but even a bikini armor user who feels they've enough story from it might be like "naked isn't a story, I don't need to see the twirly whirly" lol.

Ultimately I would look at how unreasonable it is or is not by asking the artists that design characters and asking them to design the character. What I mean is of course we have things like chocolina, that sexy chocobo outfit girl, we have loads of silly moments, and thats great, imo, but the amount of times you're going to see them take that sort of outfit, as the main outfit, for the main character of the entire 'story' is going to be.. basically nil. SE was never going to put cloud in a frog suit as his standard combat outfit, they might do it shortly for the humor but they would do it for the whole purpose of the scene- they're not going to frog suit cloud in the middle of his epic showdown because the artist themselves would know how damaging that would be to the scene.

So you might have difficulty imagining immersion or realism for the perspective of someone else, and that's fine, I feel like honestly its like trying to imagine having or not having different types of religions or political beliefs- you have to shift your entire world view if you're trying to do it honestly when you don't match them in the first place; however, I think you can more consistently replicate how many people here feel just by imagining you're a professional making a professional game that MAY have some silly moments but also HAS to be taken seriously with high cinematic value in other points.

In this way I hope how you can see mascots and bikini stuff being potentially pure fire to the scene, taking an epic dialog with Gaius and turning it into a clown car show. As I hope you could see how in a professional setting the artist / designer of the game would be very unlikely to do something like that to their 'serious' scenes.

If it was your job to make the next FF game, you might frog suit him at a few points cause it'd be hilarious, but you'd not frog suit him for everything unless you were intentionally making the entire game a joke. With a clear note frog suit isn't meaning frog (like the frog from Chrono Trigger) I mean clear joke mascot outfit. And again I'm not annoyed the bikini or mascots exist, I think it's awesome they do, men in dresses is not an issue to me either, just wish there were some sort of FF filter wall between serious content and joke / another day in the city content.

Wish they had designed their glamour system more sincerely to allow as few restrictions as they can for player freedom without damaging the seriousness / professional artist approved vision of the game (to be fair my perspective on the system has shifted a lot from back then too, so.. I'm not begrudgingly saying it or anything, as I think now that a glamour system is a must in any non-hyper realistic MMO, but hopefully they can encourage a FF visual and maintain serious content as much as possible while not using too many rules). Of course we might want to tweak the example further now though, say seriousness in One Piece setting is worlds apart from seriousness in Divinity Original Sin- which gets us pretty much back into to the massively subjective world... lol.. but you hopefully at least could see how someone would love the style of FFX and not FFX-2. So while still super subjective again you might at least be able to equip different lenses of styles and see how certain lenses are just more or less interesting to people (like certain types of games, FPS, RPG, moba, etc).

So some people might want the art direction of FFX-2 here and others the FFX. Honestly fine with lulu direction in FFX (or tidus, his outfit is pretty wild too lol), and in general all of FFX, but I thought FFX-2's costumes were just 'too' silly and it didn't capture the vibe of FFX, the reason why I touched FFX-2, in a way that interested me as much as FFX did.

A FF filter in that a professional making a game would apply to ensure their game is viewed in the light they're looking for. While there is still some subjectivity of this compared to 'mah immersion' I hope you can truly feel the difference, an sRPG might allow players to make a joke out of their own game by optional costumes but it's not going to willingly do it on it's own unless that scene was meant to be a joke in and of itself (and jokes are not always bad, Cloud dress up was funny to me and I had good fun with that, but if I had to play Cloud in a mankini the whole game I'd be like '...this game doesn't take itself seriously').

The option to do that could be funny though, like in Assassins Creed I made the game a joke by keeping Bayek in his bath towel outfit because I wanted the game to have that joke feeling)- thing is this is a multiplayer game so we all kind of bump into each other.. no longer an option to see something anymore. So no longer an option to play that FF7 in a mankini- because now someone is going to do that to all your content whether you like it or not. That said there are many other ways someone could ruin the vibes of the game, like if you just used clown dye choices lol, or not even visuals but if someone was attacking you verbally - that could ruin the whole experience too. So I don't want it to sound like a one direction road, but I do not feel guilty asking SE to consider, at least the next time they do this glamour system, to try and make their system generate professional FF vibes.

I say at least for the next one since I think taking away things always is a bummer, but I've had a few first time dungeon experiences turned into carnival experiences because of certain outfits. Which honestly after the 800th time I've done the content having a mascot is just funny and not even that bad of a experience, like you might go through the game again in Bayek's bathrobe because bathrobe assassin is funny, but the first time you might want to have the 'director's intended vision' and you only really get one first time unless you can memory purge like from a very long break.

[Theodric]

The feature wouldn't be solely for censorship reasons, though it isn't the end of the world is someone doesn't want to look at a particular type of fashion/glamour. Some people have expressed a desire for the feature to be added for the sake of immersion, since they're weary of seeing players in frog/pig suits show up on their screen during what are meant to be serious, touching MSQ scenes. Others want the feature because to aid in loading times, especially for content that puts a lot of different players in the same area such as during A and S rank hunts. Various other reasons have been stated throughout the thread, too, though those listed in this post are the most common/relevant.

[Crushnight]

The original post has 142 likes as of the time that I'm writing this. That's not exactly a small number, especially compared to the amount of likes many other suggestions receive around these parts. The developers have also added far more niche features to the game based on feedback and/or a desire for furthering player choice.

I'm sure if the question was posed to the community as a whole, the amount of people who would be in support of the idea would be a reasonable amount - and those against it aren't missing out, since they aren't owed anybody else's time or attention to begin with.

155 people liked the idea of making all their glamours thongs in response, 137 people liked the 1st No comment, at best if this was indictive of the playerbase at large your looking at a 51% for it vs 49% against, not great odds for a proposal and one that seemingly comes with nearly as much negative as it would praise.

I also have no doubt this feature has already been passed on, it is a popular thread with a decent following more so than many others, I just have little doubt that the idea has been shelved indefinitely, I mean it took 3 years for the male bunny suit to be a thing and by Yoshi P's own admission that was due to the male devs being uncomfortable with doing it, so it was passed on to their female developers. Clear as day the male devs have their own views on what they like to see, and most likely proposed an idea similar to OP upon knowing that male bunny suit was going to be a thing, so they didn't have to see something they didn't like regularly yet it hasn't come to pass maybe they are waiting for enough positive reception, maybe they got told outright no, who knows.

But what we do know is there will never be teenage looking permanently playable character race due to how some members of the community will lewd them just look at Ryne/Alphinaud/Alisae, most likely this suggestion will fall in under the umbrella of no because of the few individuals who will use this tool to discrimate and you know damn well some people will, most won't just like most won't lewd teenagers but SE may not want to take that risk. Unfair to those that won't, yep, but that is what the state of affairs online games have become nowadays.

[Krotoan]

My concern would be if Development time would be wasted on a feature that a minuscule amount of players would use.

Adding to this thread, I will now validate the OP's argument by wearing skimpy glamour, out of sheer spite. I already do, and I look fabulous!

You are welcome. ^.~

Again, you are proving a point a lot of supporters of the feature have stated , some people use the glamour system to antagonize on purpose. Something it would be nice to have an answer to.

Fine, then.

It just doesn't feel right. Whenever someone comes up with the idea to hide player glamour, it is strictly for censorship reasons... and Yes, I am aware that it would be an option for a player to toggle on their side of the screen, but still. /shrug

Censorship is me telling you that you cannot wear something, at all. You have every right to wear whatever you want.

Customization is changing my personal experience to suit me. You have NO right to tell me what I have to or do not have to see.



You seem aware that there would be little to no effect on anyone.. yet persist in feeling it's persecution. Who's problem do you think that should be?

155 people liked the idea of making all their glamours thongs in response, 137 people liked the 1st No comment, at best if this was indictive of the playerbase at large your looking at a 51% for it vs 49% against, not great odds for a proposal and one that seemingly comes with nearly as much negative as it would praise.

and you don't think that HALF the playerbase wanting something is significant?
though this is the forum. A tiny disproportionate sample, so really.. hard to argue ANY sort of %, but given you're quoting those numbers...

But what we do know is there will never be teenage looking permanently playable character race due to how some members of the community will lewd them just look at Ryne/Alphinaud/Alisae, most likely this suggestion will fall in under the umbrella of no because of the few individuals who will use this tool to discrimate and you know damn well some people will, most won't just like most won't lewd teenagers but SE may not want to take that risk. Unfair to those that won't, yep, but that is what the state of affairs online games have become nowadays.

You're going to compare the option to make people appear as what could only be considered "background characters" to the risk of people basically making child porn?

... don't feel that's a bit incongruous?

[Doozer]

I don't know why you keep insinuating that people can't handle looking at someone in a bikini or men in dresses like it's an anathema to their eyes. To some it may be, but the bulk of the people on here who want this feature just think it's tacky in a serious combat arena, nothing more. I think you just want to be antagonistic to the point of trolling.

I'm just mentioning things people have brought up. I believe even the OP mentions men in dresses or something to that effect? And someone else explained that seeing a dude in a bunny outfit can make them rage so hard and that's why the devs should enable them to remain ignorant. I'm only referring to things that have already been said. Go back and read the rest of the thread. And you'd be surprised by what excuses people will make in order to appear less bigoted.

But if I'm really just a troll, then ignore me. Isn't that what you're supposed to do? Actually, I'll save you the trouble, since I get the feeling you can't resist responding to me, so I just won't reply to you from now on, or refer to anything you say. And I recommend putting me in your ignore list, since my presence is probably a bit tacky in such a serious thread.

[Theodric]

It's a matter of personal preference rather than a case of 'bigotry'. Unless gay men such as myself - and other players - aren't allowed to dislike certain aesthetics/fashion choices? If so, that's a rather troubling development!

I'd say it does a major disservice to victims of actual bigotry to treat someone disliking certain aesthetics as some huge slight. The more certain terms are thrown around, after all, the quicker they begin to lose relevance and meaning. Even when used in more fitting and dire scenarios.

Though, once again, I'd like to point out most of the outrage in this thread is coming from those desperate to paint any and all support for the thread's premise as 'bigots'. The vast majority of posters in support of the thread, meanwhile, have been exceedingly polite. Thankfully some of those against the thread have managed to be civil and polite even in cases of disagreement. I suppose that comes more naturally to some posters than others, though.

[Joven]

It's a matter of personal preference rather than a case of 'bigotry'. Unless gay men such as myself - and other players - aren't allowed to dislike certain aesthetics/fashion choices? If so, that's a rather troubling development!

I'd say it does a major disservice to victims of actual bigotry to treat someone disliking certain aesthetics as some huge slight. The more certain terms are thrown around, after all, the quicker they begin to lose relevance and meaning. Even when used in more fitting and dire scenarios.

Though, once again, I'd like to point out most of the outrage in this thread is coming from those desperate to paint any and all support for the thread's premise as 'bigots'. The vast majority of posters in support of the thread, meanwhile, have been exceedingly polite. Thankfully some of those against the thread have managed to be civil and polite even in cases of disagreement. I suppose that comes more naturally to some posters than others, though.

It amazes me how quick people are to throw out those words and accuse others of something like "sexism" or "bigotry" simply because they prefer not to see something. If someone was outright making slanderous statements and harassing others because of something like this, then yeah, you may have a case of bigotry, or the person is just a massive dick. It's nearly impossible to have a discussion on topics like this because of how wantonly these terms are used in order to try and undermine someone's argument because they're nearly impossible to refute.

[Crushnight]

You're going to compare the option to make people appear as what could only be considered "background characters" to the risk of people basically making child porn?

... don't feel that's a bit incongruous?

Your not getting the point I was making.

Yoshi P outright said no to a teenage race due to how the very very very low amount of players that will lewd them.

It is not unfeasible to realise he may say no to this feature for the very very very low amount of players who would actively discrimate against people. You know the idiots who would open their mouths saying they have the filter on because they don't want to see any x, y or z type of people aloud in chats.

Both are bad, the child porn is definitely way worse, but discrimination is just as serious an issue with serious ramifications in real life, Yoshi P and SE may just not bother with something if it could lead to such an issue happening regardless how small (which would be very small in this game)

That is the point I was making that the issues the feature could bring, emphasis on could, might be bad enough that it warrants never touching it, which is why I also say it sucks for those that wouldn't (which would be the vast majority of players) because the actions of the few ruin it for the many.

Discrimination does happen in FFXIV, I have seen it happen on 3 occasions with my time playing FFXIV since patch 2.2, it is sparse but it happens, you cannot deny that there won't be a single abuser of this feature who would use it to fuel their discrimination, SE may just not want to give them that fuel in the 1st place, sucks but it is an understandable viewpoint.


Now for the bigotry/sexism stuff popping up in this thread ain't touching that with a ten foot pole, enjoy the devolving.

[Lauront]

It's no more abusable in that sense than the blacklist feature. Discrimination is something we do as humans all the time in all our interactions. It's more that, to some people, certain kinds of it are "bad" and others are fine. Where one draws the lines is down to one's personal sense of morals and values/aesthetic preferences/etc.

It's already against the TOS to make certain statements, so the phrasing of it would be the key determining factor, but I for one don't see this perpetual bogeyman of "bigotry" being so huge a factor that they'd not consider adding such a feature because a tiny sliver of players might abuse it, much like they can do with many other things.

The only major issue, in my view, is whether it is cost-efficient to add this, and we can but speculate as to how cumbersome it'd be to add it. I'd appreciate an answer from SE rather than anyone here on that front.

[Joven]

I'm just mentioning things people have brought up. I believe even the OP mentions men in dresses or something to that effect? And someone else explained that seeing a dude in a bunny outfit can make them rage so hard and that's why the devs should enable them to remain ignorant. I'm only referring to things that have already been said. Go back and read the rest of the thread. And you'd be surprised by what excuses people will make in order to appear less bigoted.

But if I'm really just a troll, then ignore me. Isn't that what you're supposed to do? Actually, I'll save you the trouble, since I get the feeling you can't resist responding to me, so I just won't reply to you from now on, or refer to anything you say. And I recommend putting me in your ignore list, since my presence is probably a bit tacky in such a serious thread.

The OP mentions women in string bikinis as well as men in wedding dresses and the part about seeing a dude in a bunny outfit causing someone to rage was a hypothetical scenario. That's the reason I call you an antagonistic troll. You use half of someones statements and take others out of context to make your "arguments". On top of that you accuse people of being bigots to downplay anything they say and make them look bad. The only reason I reply to you is to call you out for it. So go ahead and continue with your snarky, out of context nonsense and I'll continue to call you out on it.