NPC faces on Mog Station

[KABESSA]

Isn't fairy but the main npcs on this game looks really better than our characters And some npcs that comes up for events like Lightning, looks aewsome too.
In the first image if you ask for someone who don't know ff but knows rpg and mmos, this person will cleary says that Lightning is the main char and the other one is the npc. Because she is truly more detailed and real than us. Plz look at Lightning, Hien, Yotsuyu, Lyse, Fordola, Yugiri they have special and detailed face. Put them on mog station plz. This will save money than create new faces. I really wanna a hiighlander beautiful as Fordola plzzzzzz SE.

[KABESSA]

[Texa]

They wouldn't do that. They've said they're concerned about adding any more face options because it could make our packet data unmanageably large and hurt gameplay. Also, isn't the first picture from the legacy version? The character models were more detailed then.

[nintendo414]

They wouldn't do that. They've said they're concerned about adding any more face options because it could make our packet data unmanageably large and hurt gameplay. Also, isn't the first picture from the legacy version? The character models were more detailed then.

Nope, the very first xiii crossover event was to promote the Final Fantasy Xiii Lightning returns release for japan . It's been a whiile but i am quite sure it released first in 2013 a few months after release but at the most early 2014 .

[Texa]

Nope, the very first xiii crossover event was to promote the Final Fantasy Xiii Lightning returns release for japan . It's been a whiile but i am quite sure it released first in 2013 a few months after release but at the most early 2014 .

Ah I wasn't sure! Thank you for explaining.

[KABESSA]

They wouldn't do that. They've said they're concerned about adding any more face options because it could make our packet data unmanageably large and hurt gameplay. Also, isn't the first picture from the legacy version? The character models were more detailed then.

The picture is from ARR. And I'm asking if they can do it on the future and not now, maybe on 4.0. We are waiting too much for the customizations. And the npcs faces are already a thing on the game but not on us.

[Yatsurugi]

They wouldn't do that. They've said they're concerned about adding any more face options because it could make our packet data unmanageably large and hurt gameplay.

They seem to have no problem adding hairstyles every patch though. I'll take new faces or any other new character customization additions over more lackluster hairstyles at this point.

[Theodric]

They wouldn't do that. They've said they're concerned about adding any more face options because it could make our packet data unmanageably large and hurt gameplay. Also, isn't the first picture from the legacy version? The character models were more detailed then.

That doesn't stop them from adding new hairstyles with each new patch.

[Mimilu]

While I disagree with adding NPC faces, I agree that I would like to see more face options to help differentiate characters more (both generic NPCs and PCs). With 4 games worth of characters (1.0, ARR, HW, and now SB) characters (again, both NPC and PC) that were made via the character creation options all look very similar.

[Rhysati]

They wouldn't do that. They've said they're concerned about adding any more face options because it could make our packet data unmanageably large and hurt gameplay. Also, isn't the first picture from the legacy version? The character models were more detailed then.

This doesn't make any sense though. Adding new faces to the client won't change packet data size in any way, shape, or form. It's simply a different number string to be called. Right now either things process by having numbers like: 00000001 = First face/eyes/lips/nose/etc. And they have a bunch of numbers in that packet for each individual thing. OR they have every possible combo for faces in one number string so each number is a full combination of things.

Adding new faces or customization would not change that in the slightest and you would still be dealing with the same amount of data that has to be transferred.