Results -9 to 0 of 131

Threaded View

  1. #11
    Player
    Laerune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    2,913
    Character
    Yu Zeneolsia
    World
    Ragnarok
    Main Class
    Scholar Lv 100
    Quote Originally Posted by Songi View Post
    For the record: I support males getting the same amount of options available to them for glamour purposes. The thing is, we all know SE is doesn't like to put in time to design two totally different models for male and females on the same set.
    I understand what you mean, but I do wonder if SE doesnt like putting in time to design for two models, why make the Setzer armour uni-sex and add a female outfit aswell? Its odd and I know that you dont know anything, its just a question that has been stuck in my head for the past few hours.

    What SE should have done is either release:
    1: Setzer outfit for male only and Bunny outfit for female only.
    2: Setzer outfit is uni-sex and Bunny outfit is uni-sex
    3: Sezter outfit is uni-sex and both males and females have their own version of the bunny outfit.
    4: Setzer outfit is uni-sex and no bunny outfit both males and females.

    Instead they went for 2 outfits for the females and 1 outfit for the males, basicly swinging a middle finger to the players who play with a male character. One could say they are lazy, not enough budget etc, but why make a extra female outfit? Its obvious that there is some favourtism at play when it comes to creating outfits and for some reason the developers in charge of making the outfits/modeling favour the females. Afcourse one could say but bunny girls are always in casinos, but Setzer was a male, yet his outfit is uni-sex now (I supported the option for making Setzer outfit uni-sex) , bringing up FF lore or real life wont work here as a argument.

    Males got screwed again and they will probaly get screwed in the future.

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuven View Post
    I think the percentage of people who actually want to put their hulking piece of roegadyn man-meat in a dress is sufficiently small that it's not worth the effort designing dresses for them on SE's side.
    Remember if it's gender locked, it's not that they're actively pushing gender inequality, it's that they don't want to expend extra effort on something barely anyone of the target gender is going to want to use.
    It's why they're a lot more willing to create female versions of the male outfits: A much larger percentage of female character players wear the Best Man's outfit than male character players would even WANT to wear the Bridesmaid's outfit.
    Just because YOU want something, doesn't mean there's enough call for it to be designed as such.
    There are plenty of skirts for men, though. So many that i've actually had friends complain, as casters, that their choices for armor aren't very "manly."

    That said the potential gender locking on the Setzer outfit is...irksome. Same with the Snow outfit. Ladies want longcoats too, y'know.
    You make a fine point, but what about the new outfits? They made the Setzer outfit for both genders and added a female exclusive outfit. They could have made a male version aswell, but instead decided to give females only a extra outfit. Do you think this is oke? I mean what if they decided to give only Lalafell new emotes, because it fits the race. Instead of giving the other races emotes that fit them, they decided to focus only on Lalafell, would this be oke?
    (6)
    Last edited by Laerune; 02-20-2015 at 03:37 AM.