Who doesnt want gear restrictions removed?

[Gemina]

I could be wrong, but I interpreted where they were coming from as a general, “Why do people care so much about what other people do in a video game”. That’s my stance on a lot of these things. I don’t care what other people do with their character. How they dress them. What their glamour preferences are. It doesn’t cause me any harm, so I question why others get so upset over it. The immersion argument doesn’t really hold that much weight in my opinion since it is easy to just ignore what other people are doing.

I think it's pretentious to believe that things happening inside the game are not affected by what's going on outside of it, and we are currently living in a clown world. I strongly believe in the freedom of choice and a male wearing a dress does not affect what I can and cannot do in the game. However, I do have an issue with a dev team who makes decisions that supports an outside agenda that has found its way into a game I invest time, money, and emotion into.

Immersion is not an argument I've used, but I will use a related word: escapism. This is a term I believe applies to the majority of the playerbase, and when outside issues and agendas make it into the game, it profoundly affects what we pay good money to do. SE can never be faulted for this due to the popular "gaming experience may change" disclaimer, but I know better. I very much can blame them for making decisions that eff up my gaming experience, I just can't take them to court over it.

I'm still a subber, which for me means I am happy enough with the game and my experiences. However it's decisions like creating male bunny attire that make me rethink how I want to spend my money, because it makes rethink if im playing a game I can truly enjoy.

[SturmChurro]

I think it's pretentious to believe that things happening inside the game are not affected by what's going on outside of it, and we are currently living in a clown world. I strongly believe in the freedom of choice and a male wearing a dress does not affect what I can and cannot do in the game. However, I do have an issue with a dev team who makes decisions that supports an outside agenda that has found its way into a game I invest time, money, and emotion into.

Immersion is not an argument I've used, but I will use a related word: escapism. This is a term I believe applies to the majority of the playerbase, and when outside issues and agendas make it into the game, it profoundly affects what we pay good money to do. SE can never be faulted for this due to the popular "gaming experience may change" disclaimer, but I know better. I very much can blame them for making decisions that eff up my gaming experience, I just can't take them to court over it.

I'm still a subber, which for me means I am happy enough with the game and my experiences. However it's decisions like creating male bunny attire that make me rethink how I want to spend my money, because it makes rethink if im playing a game I can truly enjoy.

How exactly does them adding a bunny outfit, or dresses to males, even make a difference? Whether you may think they are doing for an outside agenda or not. How does this actually impact you? Are you forced to play a male character wearing a dress? I have questioned their priorities for dresses, but whether they add them to the game or not makes no real difference to me, I'd just like them to add things I want as well.

[HyoMinPark]

I think it's pretentious to believe that things happening inside the game are not affected by what's going on outside of it, and we are currently living in a clown world. I strongly believe in the freedom of choice and a male wearing a dress does not affect what I can and cannot do in the game. However, I do have an issue with a dev team who makes decisions that supports an outside agenda that has found its way into a game I invest time, money, and emotion into.

Immersion is not an argument I've used, but I will use a related word: escapism. This is a term I believe applies to the majority of the playerbase, and when outside issues and agendas make it into the game, it profoundly affects what we pay good money to do. SE can never be faulted for this due to the popular "gaming experience may change" disclaimer, but I know better. I very much can blame them for making decisions that eff up my gaming experience, I just can't take them to court over it.

I'm still a subber, which for me means I am happy enough with the game and my experiences. However it's decisions like creating male bunny attire that make me rethink how I want to spend my money, because it makes rethink if im playing a game I can truly enjoy.

All I can really say is: if adding a male bunny suit impacts your enjoyment of this game that much, then perhaps you should unsubscribe. I’ve never understood how people can’t just...ignore what others are doing. So what if a Roe is in the male bunny outfit? Just ignore it if you don’t like it, and move on with your day. Why are you allowing yourself to get so hung up on what other people do with the character they pay for? That sounds more like something you should work on, rather than blame the developers. Escapism can still be achieved with quirky and funky things added to the game.

When I immerse myself in the story, it’s fairly easy for me to just tune out all the things that “don’t fit” into this universe. I’ve recently gone back to one of my alts on Crystal and have just been going through ARR on her. Even with seeing flying snowmen and Yokai couch mounts and whatever, I can still enjoy the story as it is. I just ignore all those extraneous details.

You’re arguing “escapism”—but the argument you’re presenting is just the same as the “immersion” argument. You’re just changing a word in it.

[Gemina]

All I can really say is: if adding a male bunny suit impacts your enjoyment of this game that much, then perhaps you should unsubscribe. I’ve never understood how people can’t just...ignore what others are doing. So what if a Roe is in the male bunny outfit? Just ignore it if you don’t like it, and move on with your day. Why are you allowing yourself to get so hung up on what other people do with the character they pay for? That sounds more like something you should work on, rather than blame the developers. Escapism can still be achieved with quirky and funky things added to the game.

When I immerse myself in the story, it’s fairly easy for me to just tune out all the things that “don’t fit” into this universe. I’ve recently gone back to one of my alts on Crystal and have just been going through ARR on her. Even with seeing flying snowmen and Yokai couch mounts and whatever, I can still enjoy the story as it is. I just ignore all those extraneous details.

You’re arguing “escapism”—but the argument you’re presenting is just the same as the “immersion” argument. You’re just changing a word in it.

It's like you didn't even read my response to your question at all, or you choose to only allow in what you want to hear. I don't know how many times I have to mention that I couldn't care less about what any individual chooses to wear. If that is going to be the angle of your argument, then you don't have one, nor can we have a constructive conversation. I don't fault these individual players any more than I do a dog chasing after a car. I will however, blame the owner who left the gate open, or didn't build a fence of sufficient height.

My concern is towards the dev team and their decision making process. I'm not talking just the bunny attire, I'm talking any time they reverse a previous decision after taking a stance on it. I just use the bunny attire because it's a shining example of it. The description of the gear clearly implies that they didn't really want to do it, but they did it anyway, and player demand is very likely why that decision was made. If the bunny attire was initially made for both genders, I wouldn't have anywhere near the same issue with male players wearing it. I would still think they look stupid, but I digress.

I am well aware that if my experience within the game is no longer enjoyable, I can check out. I've already mentioned my considerations and don't need you to enlighten me to what my options are. However, I am within my right to express my discontent within the game and the decisions made by the dev team every bit as much as anyone else. Unless of course you would like to show those who want male viera and other gripes of cosmetic issues exactly where the door is at?

No, my stance is dev decisions directly affects the quality of the playerbase, and the quality of the playerbase can indeed affect my experience in game. This holds true for everyone, including you.

Another mistake you're making is you think I'm considering how all this impacts me. As if I'm that selfish. I'm not even looking at things that way per se. I care about the game and the playerbase as a whole. When I feel the dev team is catering to an agenda, or the lowest common denominator, I think the game as a whole suffers. So no, a male wearing a dress or bunny attire may not affect you directly, but there is a ripple effect that certainly can.

[ForteNightshade]

My concern is towards the dev team and their decision making process. I'm not talking just the bunny attire, I'm talking any time they reverse a previous decision after taking a stance on it. I just use the bunny attire because it's a shining example of it. The description of the gear clearly implies that they didn't really want to do it, but they did it anyway, and player demand is very likely why that decision was made. If the bunny attire was initially made for both genders, I wouldn't have anywhere near the same issue with male players wearing it. I would still think they look stupid, but I digress.

You do realize people can change their minds over time, yes? Furthermore, admitting they weren't comfortable porting it to males isn't "taking a stance." It's stating an opinion—one they evidently opted against due to player demand. Which brings us to another point. Why wouldn't they base their decisions on player demand, at least to an extent? If enough people want something, it only makes sense for a business to provide it to them. The fact you claim they're catering to an agenda or the lowest common denominator speaks more about you than them, if I'm to be blunt. You've essentially implied the lowest common denominator are people wanting more inclusive options for their glamour; glamour that is all about individual and subjective expression.

No, my stance is dev decisions directly affects the quality of the playerbase, and the quality of the playerbase can indeed affect my experience in game. This holds true for everyone, including you.

How? How does my glamour decision, yours or anyone else's impact someone else? If they're "triggered" because I opt to wear a bunny suit or put my Hrothgar in dress, they can jump in a lake for all I care. If you mean to imply that by catering to the "lowest common denominator" this will invariably mean the devs cater in other ways too. Then you're lumping two very different arguments together in a way that simply doesn't work. No matter how you slice it, this is a poor hill to die on.

[HyoMinPark]

It's like you didn't even read my response to your question at all, or you choose to only allow in what you want to hear. I don't know how many times I have to mention that I couldn't care less about what any individual chooses to wear.

Oh no, I read it. But it makes no sense when it’s analyzed. The “immersion” versus “escapism” argument aside, if you truly don’t care about what other people are wearing, then why make statements like this:

However it's decisions like creating male bunny attire that make me rethink how I want to spend my money, because it makes rethink if im playing a game I can truly enjoy.

This implies that you do care if you’re suddenly questioning your own subscription. Despite your earlier insistence in that same post about how what other people wear doesn’t impact you. You effectively contradicted yourself in the same post. Hence why I responded with why do you truly care that much. If you didn’t care at all, you wouldn’t say things about rethinking your subscription over a male bunny outfit.

My concern is towards the dev team and their decision making process. I'm not talking just the bunny attire, I'm talking any time they reverse a previous decision after taking a stance on it. I just use the bunny attire because it's a shining example of it. The description of the gear clearly implies that they didn't really want to do it, but they did it anyway, and player demand is very likely why that decision was made. If the bunny attire was initially made for both genders, I wouldn't have anywhere near the same issue with male players wearing it. I would still think they look stupid, but I digress.

They didn’t want to do it in the beginning; you’re right there. And they did it in the end because of overwhelming feedback from the playerbase because, ultimately, SE is a business that needs to satisfy customer demands. Clearly they saw a high enough demand to reconsider their original decision. Much like they have done with previous decisions in the past: both good and bad. From housing decisions to job performance decisions.

Decision reversal isn’t always a bad thing, but your implication here is that it is. Some decision reversals are, but others are not. You’re allowed to condemn for some, but I don’t think you should imply that all are bad.

I am well aware that if my experience within the game is no longer enjoyable, I can check out. I've already mentioned my considerations and don't need you to enlighten me to what my options are. However, I am within my right to express my discontent within the game and the decisions made by the dev team every bit as much as anyone else. Unless of course you would like to show those who want male viera and other gripes of cosmetic issues exactly where the door is at?

Never said that you weren’t entitled to your opinions, however I do appreciate you putting those words in my mouth. Everyone is allowed to express their discontent. What they aren’t entitled to is to shun people with differing views—something that has occurred in both this thread and the other regarding unlocking the hempen outfits. This isn’t to say that you are doing that, before you read too much into that statement as well. I’ve just noticed a trend that the second anyone expresses an opposing opinion, people on the opposite side start accusing the other party of being intolerant and “shutting them down” simply because the two disagree on a point.

If someone is shutting down another’s opposing opinion, that would be when I would draw the line and say that maybe they aren’t entitled to express them here. Because all they want is an echo chamber, not discussion.

No, my stance is dev decisions directly affects the quality of the playerbase, and the quality of the playerbase can indeed affect my experience in game. This holds true for everyone, including you.

Never said that it didn’t. However, I truly don’t believe that the things being heavily discussed here (glamour options, locking/unlocking them, removing gender locks) are highly detrimental to the game. Certainly not on the level of other decisions that have been made this expansion, like the various homogenization of jobs/roles and destruction of some jobs’ identities entirely. But these are just opinions.

Another mistake you're making is you think I'm considering how all this impacts me. As if I'm that selfish. I'm not even looking at things that way per se. I care about the game and the playerbase as a whole. When I feel the dev team is catering to an agenda, or the lowest common denominator, I think the game as a whole suffers. So no, a male wearing a dress or bunny attire may not affect you directly, but there is a ripple effect that certainly can.

Firstly, that’s not how the lowest common denominator works. Lowest common denominator is, for example, when a job is dumbed down to suit the players that are weakest with regards to playing it; i.e., job simplification/narrowing of the skill gap. Adding more glamour options is not catering to the ‘lowest common denominator’ but fulfilling a request a portion of the playerbase has made. In the case of the male bunny outfit, quite a vocal one and I would assume substantial for the developers to reverse their decision and go about doing it. Honestly, your use of “lowest common denominator” here when describing these “stupid” glamours sounds borderline insulting.

And, again, I disagree that adding male dresses has “degraded the quality of the playerbase” of this game or that it causes any sort of “ripple effect”.

My assumptions that you were talking about how all of this affects you is because your previous post was you talking about your own thoughts on continued investment in this game. Hence my response to you. There was absolutely nothing in it to imply that you were talking about how this affects the playerbase as a whole—just how it affects you. Your repeated uses of first-person pronouns is enough proof of that.

[Gemina]

Oh no, I read it. But it makes no sense when it’s analyzed. The “immersion” versus “escapism” argument aside, if you truly don’t care about what other people are wearing, then why make statements like this:

Then you didn't analyze it correctly, because you are still insisting and trying to shape your arguments like what any individual player does in this game affects me. As you have here:

This implies that you do care if you’re suddenly questioning your own subscription. Despite your earlier insistence in that same post about how what other people wear doesn’t impact you. You effectively contradicted yourself in the same post. Hence why I responded with why do you truly care that much. If you didn’t care at all, you wouldn’t say things about rethinking your subscription over a male bunny outfit.

I explicitly stated that it is the dev's decision making process that leads me to question if I am to continue my sub. It's not a contradiction if you are interpreting my posts incorrectly, twisting words, or reading something that it isn't even there.

They didn’t want to do it in the beginning; you’re right there. And they did it in the end because of overwhelming feedback from the playerbase because, ultimately, SE is a business that needs to satisfy customer demands. Clearly they saw a high enough demand to reconsider their original decision. Much like they have done with previous decisions in the past: both good and bad. From housing decisions to job performance decisions.

So what's your point? You haven't stated anything here that I haven't already said myself. Do you believe my issue is one of a lack of awareness?

Decision reversal isn’t always a bad thing, but your implication here is that it is. Some decision reversals are, but others are not. You’re allowed to condemn for some, but I don’t think you should imply that all are bad.

How did I imply that they are all bad? Did I say they are all bad? I'm pretty sure I used a specific example of their decision reversal, and I used the bunny attire in particular due to the comment they left for all of us to read. And while I am quite sure they placed that comment for satirical reasons, that doesn't make their implication any less true that it was a cumbersome process they would have liked to have avoided.

Never said that you weren’t entitled to your opinions, however I do appreciate you putting those words in my mouth. Everyone is allowed to express their discontent. What they aren’t entitled to is to shun people with differing views—something that has occurred in both this thread and the other regarding unlocking the hempen outfits. This isn’t to say that you are doing that, before you read too much into that statement as well. I’ve just noticed a trend that the second anyone expresses an opposing opinion, people on the opposite side start accusing the other party of being intolerant and “shutting them down” simply because the two disagree on a point.

If someone is shutting down another’s opposing opinion, that would be when I would draw the line and say that maybe they aren’t entitled to express them here. Because all they want is an echo chamber, not discussion.

Finally a statement we can see somewhat eye to eye on. I am every bit as disappointed about how the majority of "discussions" in these forums are just people speaking and not listening. Not many care to actually try and see where the other person is coming from rather than just point out that they are outright wrong for having the views they have. I can't come on here and say, "I think males wearing dresses are dumb" and have it JUST be my opinion. No, there's something wrong with me, OR what an individual player chooses to wear clearly impacts me to the point that I might want to consider unsubscribing. I mean seriously. That's some BS if I've ever heard it. I have actually never considered leaving the game at all. However, I have considered leaving these discussion forums due to my thoughts about it being an echo chamber occupied with the hivemind. This is also an opinion I am entitled to have. And if my experiences in game were the same as they are here, I probably would leave. Thank goodness this is not the case.

Never said that it didn’t. However, I truly don’t believe that the things being heavily discussed here (glamour options, locking/unlocking them, removing gender locks) are highly detrimental to the game. Certainly not on the level of other decisions that have been made this expansion, like the various homogenization of jobs/roles and destruction of some jobs’ identities entirely. But these are just opinions.

Everything I have stated thus far, has come from what I have observed both here on the OF, and in game throughout the six years I have been playing this game. I know you have been around about the same time as myself. I would be extremely erroneous if I stated and tried to prove that glamour options by themselves are detrimental to the game's playability, but that has never been my intention. My concern always was, and always will be what kind of overall gaming environment have the devs created and nurture.

When I experience some of the game's toxicity, I immediately question the questionable decisions the devs have made and this includes everything from homogenization of jobs as well as their glamour restrictions because I believe every last ounce of it impacts the quality of the playerbase. I bring up that you've been around as long as I have because you have addressed the exact same concerns in the past. Albeit not for glamour per se, but about dev decisions that are questionable that others can see as trivial.

Firstly, that’s not how the lowest common denominator works. Lowest common denominator is, for example, when a job is dumbed down to suit the players that are weakest with regards to playing it; i.e., job simplification/narrowing of the skill gap. Adding more glamour options is not catering to the ‘lowest common denominator’ but fulfilling a request a portion of the playerbase has made. In the case of the male bunny outfit, quite a vocal one and I would assume substantial for the developers to reverse their decision and go about doing it. Honestly, your use of “lowest common denominator” here when describing these “stupid” glamours sounds borderline insulting.

In my statement, I used both the lowest common denominator, AND an agenda. As both are examples of the devs that I feel negatively impacts the game. I didn't say that to specifically point out that those who want more glamour options are the lowest common denominator. There is even a ',' and an 'or' in that statement, clearly separating the clauses. So who putting words in whose mouth again?

And, again, I disagree that adding male dresses has “degraded the quality of the playerbase”

sigh....

My assumptions that you were talking about how all of this affects you is because your previous post was you talking about your own thoughts on continued investment in this game. Hence my response to you. There was absolutely nothing in it to imply that you were talking about how this affects the playerbase as a whole—just how it affects you. Your repeated uses of first-person pronouns is enough proof of that.

Would you like me to speak in the 2nd or 3rd person? Do I have to speak on the behalf of others despite that not being valid? Will that help you comprehend where I'm coming from? Do you want to know why I even I spoke in such a manner? Perhaps you might want to go back and read the posts in response to mine, as well your your own, and the continuous bombardment of "How does this affect you?". And when trying to explain things that hopefully make me seem less selfish, I am somehow being insulting because again, you choose to read and hear what you want. Not what's there.

All that being said, I am done speaking about this with you. I am not saying that to be mean or disrespectful. I just think you and I have to agree to disagree at this point.