Very Upset at Obsolete Android's Aiming/Scouting

[Penthea]

I really like both outfits but I'm with OP on this one. It's very disappointing when something you love is out of reach solely because of the gender of your character. Genderlocking only limits what we can do and I strongly feel it has no place in a modern game.

Granted, we could also just make an argument here for MCHs to have the ability to hide only the dumb lunchbox, I guess.

I know it's silly but that lunchbox is hugely why I still haven't touched mch yet. I know it would irritate me so much to be stuck with such an obvious piece of gear that I cannot glam. It often doesn't even vaguely match the guns they're paired with.

[Bright-Flower]

I really like both outfits but I'm with OP on this one. It's very disappointing when something you love is out of reach solely because of the gender of your character. Genderlocking only limits what we can do and I strongly feel it has no place in a modern game.



I know it's silly but that lunchbox is hugely why I still haven't touched mch yet. I know it would irritate me so much to be stuck with such an obvious piece of gear that I cannot glam. It often doesn't even vaguely match the guns they're paired with.

I get it. It's ugly IMO and it'd be nice if they had an option to hide it, kind of like paladins having an invisible shield option though maybe not as easy to implement since I don't think the box is affected by glamor is it?

It's not the reason I don't play mch but it is a bit of an eyesore, and for people more interested in just having a gun for a weapon than the full MCH flavor I can see it especially being annoying for.

[Iscah]

I get it. It's ugly IMO and it'd be nice if they had an option to hide it, kind of like paladins having an invisible shield option though maybe not as easy to implement since I don't think the box is affected by glamor is it?

Paladins can glamour the shield because it's a separate piece. The box is part of the gun item and could only be glamoured over if you have a specific gun that doesn't include the box - but you won't get that because lore-wise it's a separate item that we need to make the guns function in the first place.

[Bright-Flower]

Paladins can glamour the shield because it's a separate piece. The box is part of the gun item and could only be glamoured over if you have a specific gun that doesn't include the box - but you won't get that because lore-wise it's a separate item that we need to make the guns function in the first place.

Yeah you're probably not going to get a separate glamour option. Though they 'could' potentially include a gun that doesn't show it. I mean lore wise paladins have shields and they still have that option.

But even then that would just limit people who don't want to box to show to that one item anyway so it wouldn't really be much of a solution.

[D3VNT]

Paladins can glamour the shield because it's a separate piece. The box is part of the gun item and could only be glamoured over if you have a specific gun that doesn't include the box - but you won't get that because lore-wise it's a separate item that we need to make the guns function in the first place.

Even then, it's the exact same copy/pasted box. RDMs always have a Focus, but it changes on different Rapiers. The same goes for the two part weapon on ASTs. At least -something- in that regard would be nice.

[Iscah]

Even then, it's the exact same copy/pasted box. RDMs always have a Focus, but it changes on different Rapiers. The same goes for the two part weapon on ASTs. At least -something- in that regard would be nice.

It's the same copy-pasted box because it is the same box regardless of which gun you have equipped - a recent invention gifted to you by Stephanivien that you use in combination with the assorted guns you acquire from ancient ruins. It's just at a functional game level that they are connected into a single item.

Red magic is evidently well-established enough that rapiers do naturally come with paired foci of the same design.

[MikkoAkure]

I really like both outfits but I'm with OP on this one. It's very disappointing when something you love is out of reach solely because of the gender of your character. Genderlocking only limits what we can do and I strongly feel it has no place in a modern game.



I know it's silly but that lunchbox is hugely why I still haven't touched mch yet. I know it would irritate me so much to be stuck with such an obvious piece of gear that I cannot glam. It often doesn't even vaguely match the guns they're paired with.

I wouldn't call an outfit looking different on a different gender being "genderlocking". Considering that other modern East Asian MMOs come out with genderlocked races and even genderlocked jobs, throwing a fuss over a different top feels like you're just purposefully trying to make yourself upset. Especially when you by admission don't play MCH and don't have a chocobo in this race.

Men and women in real life have different aesthetics and that carries over into the game. Some things that look good on one, don't look good on the other. Having everyone wear the same exact gender neutral clothing would be very boring.

In the case for this specific top, as others have said, the female version of the outfit is based on the character Anemone and the male version is based on the character Jackass. Considering Anemone is a higher profile character than Jackass, Anemone's design is probably the main one they wanted to include since more people (like me) probably remember Anemone more than Jackass. Anemone's top arguably has a more feminine aesthetic, so they went with a side character for inspiration for the male version (though the other character herself is female). If SE wanted to make both genders the same, then we would have had Anemone's outfit for both genders, and not the other one so the OP's problem would still exist anyway.

[Penthea]

I wouldn't call an outfit looking different on a different gender being "genderlocking". Considering that other modern East Asian MMOs come out with genderlocked races and even genderlocked jobs, throwing a fuss over a different top feels like you're just purposefully trying to make yourself upset.

If I cannot have an outfit look a certain way because of my character's gender then that outfit has genderlocking. Whether it means I cannot equip it, or it automatically changes based on the gender my character is.

Especially when you by admission don't play MCH and don't have a chocobo in this race.

This is far from the only piece of gear in the game that has different looks for each gender. I can relate to OP because I had this exact issue happen to me from other gear pieces.

Men and women in real life have different aesthetics and that carries over into the game. Some things that look good on one, don't look good on the other.

This doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to swap clothes. Anyway I've seen some men look amazing in outfits that are typically worn by women. Some people look good in -anything-.

Having everyone wear the same exact gender neutral clothing would be very boring.

That would only be true if we had just a tiny handful of glam options in the game. There are hundreds of glam pieces in the game and when you throw in dye there is even more variation. WoW doesn't have any genderlocking on gear or dye and yet all the players manage to look very different to one another.

[SturmChurro]

I really like both outfits but I'm with OP on this one. It's very disappointing when something you love is out of reach solely because of the gender of your character. Genderlocking only limits what we can do and I strongly feel it has no place in a modern game.

SE removing gender unique gear wouldn't be what people imagine though. There would simply be less unique pieces; as they would have to fit everything to everyone. Better than doing double the work.