Please Stop Genderlocking Gear

[SophiaDL]

First of all: it would look royally stupid on a male character. I mean it already looks dumb on a female one.
Second: the question we really need to ask is: why does it, yet again, turn into sth. a prostitute would wear on females in order to provide fanservice for horny teenagers?

This tbh, but this thread has quite a few aggressive people really that will yell you down the second you dare say something that goes agaisnt what they say, the amount of people in this thread that got called homophobic or bigots for not wanting this is actually crazy, I would just give as advice to ignore them as honestly there's no discussion to be had with them

I'm going to be honest they really opened a can of worms when they started "unlocking" (re-developing) gear for the opposite gender. The extent of the unlock all gear movement really favors male characters as there are some looks that are and will always be forbidden for the females, such as gear with an open chest area, shirtless, etc. Even when nudity isn't an issue they always tend to make the female chestpieces less revealing which also sounds like a double-standard. There is also a cost for implementing crossgender gear which is going to affect quality and efficiency of other new content and must be considered carefully. Quality is greater than quantity.

Gearfitting and design has taken a drop since Shadowbringers. In Endwalker and Dawntrail they went crazy adding crossgender outfits and the quality of work across the board is... debatable. I much rather would have them adding better and more unique sets if they can't handle doing it all.

The Male Tycoon Tights are very lame and uncreative though.

Same as above really, more than valid opinion, I am of the exact same opinion, those tights on male would look absolutely silly and I am more than glad it's not been a thing for males, hopefully it stays like this in the future.

[Granyala]

Both your first and second points were just your feelings. Neither were facts, which makes them invalid arguments and not of much use to read.

Well DUH... Sherlock.
We are talking about clothing here, naturally it is all subjective opinion.

From a technical perspective, there is nothing holding them back. Given that they already designed 2 distinct items, DEV effort is not the reason why they did this, as it would be the same. What does that leave us?

The DEVs did not think it would fit the males according to their design vision. Design vision is part of any game, just like technical aspects. After all, others WILL have to see your glam, whether they like it or not, so your choices also affect others play. DEVs have to consider that aspect too, you know?

Now, you can argue them being inconsistent in said vision.
I would completely agree, once you start unlocking such gear you should do away with the locks completely. Pending manpower, as these items are typically not auto-scalable from female->male and vice versa, thus need to be re-designed by hand. Even the textures may not work due to different stretching / vertex structure. That is quite some effort.
IMHO the consistency ship sailed when they made the "casino-bunny-slu- *cough* lady" outfit available for men) but ultimately it's their game and their prerogative to implement things according to their tastes.

As players we are in a take it or leave it situation. There is no OBJECTIVE argument against their design vision. We can agree with it. We can disagree but we cannot OBJECTIVELY argue against it.

Some people want the glam on males, that is not objective that is their TASTE. This is a legitimate wish, naturally, but lets not pretend you have some moral high ground over me by arguing "facts". You do not.

This tbh, but this thread has quite a few aggressive people really that will yell you down the second you dare say something that goes agaisnt what they say, the amount of people in this thread that got called homophobic or bigots for not wanting this is actually crazy, I would just give as advice to ignore them as honestly there's no discussion to be had with them

I'll admit it: I was bored and thought I poke the hornets nest a bit with an unpopular opinion. Don't worry, I can take the flak. :'D

[Batbrat]

The DEVs did not think it would fit the males according to their design vision. Design vision is part of any game, just like technical aspects. After all, others WILL have to see your glam, whether they like it or not, so your choices also affect others play. DEVs have to consider that aspect too, you know? etc -

You didnt make any arguments. You just talked about a few assumptions and your feelings.

All of this is literally your opinion, just like the people that have the opposite opinion etc -

That person did have some assumptions in there too, but the one that is correct is number 4, and that's really all there needs to be.
As stated, the strongest argument is "Removing the gender-lock from gear would offer many more glam options to players.". It's objectively true.

So far still, every argument against this has still been entirely feelings and/or assumptions, and had nothing to do with the topic.
If you can not prove that removing the gender-lock would not offer new glam options, then you really have nothing to say other than how you feel. That's not to say that you can't say it. But more to just point out, that no actual arguments are being made. You are just making the video game thread your vent diary about your feelings today.

[Granyala]

If you can not prove that removing the gender-lock would not offer new glam options

It doesn't need to be proven, lol.
The DEVs OBVIOUSLY do not want it right now. They may change their minds, if enough people (especially in the JP area) request it but that remains to be seen.

Allowing to dye every piece of gear would increase glamor options too and yet developers to not wish to do it. The game can handle it just fine and it is hardly more effort than setting a flag in the colorset.

Heck, they even lock the option behind high end raids, putting the dyable version out of reach for many people.

So yeah "moar glam options" is clearly not a sufficient argument for the DEVs to deviate from their design vision.
Got anything else?

But it still stands that "removing the gender-lock from gear would offer more glam options to players" is true

Edit due to stupid "no more posts today" bullshit:
From a purely technical PoV you actually REDUCE glamor options overall, as you remove one unique item from the pool to replace it with the same variant from the other sex. Instead of males looking different from the females by default, they now look the same.

If you want to globally increase glamor options, you'd need to retain both versions for both sexes.

[Batbrat]

It doesn't need to be proven, lol.
The DEVs OBVIOUSLY do not want it right now. They may change their minds, if enough people (especially in the JP area) request it but that remains to be seen.

Allowing to dye every piece of gear would increase glamor options too and yet developers to not wish to do it. The game can handle it just fine and it is hardly more effort than setting a flag in the colorset.

Heck, they even lock the option behind high end raids, putting the dyable version out of reach for many people.

So yeah "moar glam options" is clearly not a sufficient argument for the DEVs to deviate from their design vision. Got anything else?

It is an argument, and you did not disprove it.
It does not have to be done immediately, and it does not have to be done at all.
But it still stands that "removing the gender-lock from gear would offer more glam options to players" is true, and a strong supporting argument that makes the thread OP's request valid.

What is a strong argument against it's ability to give more glam options?
Note: "those glam options are wrong to me" is not a valid argument, that is your feelings.
Note: This is not a conversation about devs or any other outside factors that neither parties actually know anything about. This is whether or not unisex clothes can benefit some players. Please stay on topic.

[Granyala]

Note: "those glam options are wrong to me" is not a valid argument, that is your feelings.
This is whether or not unisex clothes can benefit some players. Please stay on topic.

The only benefit some other players get is: "I like this look, it feels good!".
So this whole discussion is basically just an argument between: "I like this look, it feels good!" vs "Those glam options feel wrong to me!"

It's ALL just subjective feelings, there is no right or wrong here and ultimately DEVs have to make a call according to majority popularity. If stockings on male Roes turn out to be all the rave and set a new fashion trend across the source, we will see more of them. If people go: "Eeew!", then SE will never do it again.

BTW: you trying to argue this in a vacuum shows that you do not have any actual, factual arguments. Newsflash: this thing doesn't exist in a vacuum. This isn't a single player game. Others will have to see your glamor and their enjoyment may be affected by it. You can rage at me all you want, that IS something the DEVs have to consider.

Also why stop at the gender thing, yet again?

I would like to be able to wear an Au Ra or Elezen Hempen shirt as a Miqo (if you don't know: this item has unique models per race group).
I would like to put on gear and weapons that are designed for other jobs.

So what if my White Mage glamors a DRK weapon or PLD weapon and shield and wears plate armor to pose as an "Ishgardian Combat Cleric"?
I feel that looks cool (it probably would look rather hilarious due to animations being tied to weapons :'D), who are you (general you) to tell me this is wrong to do?

So where do you draw the line in what freedoms to allow? The DEVs gave a clear reason why we cannot glam other job's gear: recognizable silhouette.... yet we can run around in bunny/frog costumes and hide our weapons, so that reasoning is clearly already out of the window....

If anything, we need more genderlocking gear. There are way too many weirdos out there.

Come on, that is uncalled for and not productive.
People have different tastes and that is okay.

[Batbrat]

The only benefit some other players get is: ( At this point, you assume how others feel )
So this whole discussion is basically just an argument between: "I like this look, it feels good!" vs "Those glam options feel wrong to me!"

Wrong. You are too emotional.
This is not an argument between who likes what. That is what you keep wanting it to be, but that is not reality.
The argument is this:

"Would removing genderlocking gear benefit some players?"
The answer is yes. Until you can prove that removing genderlock would benefit NO players, the argument still stands. You can even begin with me.
"Would removing the genderlock benefit you? (me)" Yes it would.
Ok, so what is your argument to prove that it would in fact not benefit me?

Nothing else you wrote was relevant, nor mattered.

If anything, we need more genderlocking gear. There are way too many weirdos out there.

Thank you for your blog update.

[Evermomo]

So what if my White Mage glamors a DRK weapon or PLD weapon and shield and wears plate armor to pose as an "Ishgardian Combat Cleric"?
I feel that looks cool (it probably would look rather hilarious due to animations being tied to weapons :'D), who are you (general you) to tell me this is wrong to do?

So where do you draw the line in what freedoms to allow?

At least for me this is pretty easy to figure out; nobody is a paladin or mage in real life (unfortunately.) So locking gear to one fantasy role doesn't communicate any values or stereotypes about a real category of human being, but gender locking does.