Genderlock reminder to SE

[ScarboroughFairy]

Haha I remember seeing this same argument on twitter and seeing people laugh at it just as hard. Never fails to give me a chuckle.

Actually, no, that's...quite right. Before I played FFXIV, I gave Black Desert Online and Blade 'n Soul a go. While BDO features the textbook example of genderlocking (only females can be casters, but can't be heavy warrior classes), Blade 'n Soul committed the egregious offense of racelocking; you can only play certain classes depending on your race. Both examples are the reason I dropped both games for FFXIV.

If SE, say, made it so that you could only play Dancer as Viera, that would be a more clear example of genderlocking or locking gameplay behind specific genders. What's happening with the Viera and the Hrothgar isn't an example of genderlocking because everyone's still free to play whatever Job they desire. They simply don't have sexual counterparts present in the game, but are of completely different races.

[Joven]

Okay, someone (actually several, preferably from opposing viewpoints) explain to me what exactly the whole issue is with the lore being used? I'm constantly seeing "the lore excuse" and I'm getting the feeling both sides are interpreting in such a way that supports their own narratives. What exactly irks people about the opposition referencing/ignoring lore? I have my own theories, but I want to see why this gets turned into such a hot topic. Like, at what point does the lore become gospel and unchangeable or nonsense and negligible?

Half-devil's advocate, but genuine question.

I think in terms of the lore they're thinking in the broader MMO framework of lots of people running around as that race would ruin the lore because there wouldn't be an abundance of said race around due to lore limitations. However, in the narrower game world framework it's consider a solo endevor. Even though there are multiple people of that race running around they're unimportant to the world of the game as the plot revolves around the singular player, so lore would still be intact because in that player's world, they're the only exception to the lore rules. At least that's my take on it.

[Nora_of_Mira]

I want to see why this gets turned into such a hot topic. Like, at what point does the lore become gospel and unchangeable or nonsense and negligible?

Half-devil's advocate, but genuine question.

i probably have an unpopular opinion, but I believe it depends on style of game. FFxiv and all MMOs get content added over many YEARS, changing its story and characters, etc. And all of these changes aren't decided on at the same time, the creators grow and get older over time, their opinions and perspectives on life change over time, and that can reflect in the stories they weave and the art they create. So my stance on MMOs: use lore when it's convenient, but dont use it to limit players because the lore can change over time (and has). I think that's perfectly fine. an MMO environment can't adhere strictly to the lore set in place 5+ years ago because things change, peoples desires change, everything changes.

Compare this to a standalone game like Dark Souls whose lore is basically a central pillar of its popularity. The lore was created, and it received 2-3 DLC (i cant remember honestly) in it's lifespan, so its quite easy to adhere to its own lore as its not still in active development. the lore was so ingrained into the gameplay that people often found a forgotten texture somewhere and assumed it was lore. the lore is basically DS's identity and cant afford to change thanks to the value both the devs and players put in it.

I dont think its the same for FFxiv. they dont need to be strict with the lore and I wouldn't use lore as a defense for not adding something at this point.

[WaterShield]

I gotta say, as someone who doesn't give a single solitary crap about male viera and who will never ever play them and as someone who would only play female hrothgar if they're big like femroes, all these comments from folks strongly in favor of genderlocks bringing up people who don't care as if that automatically means we side with you....have inspired me to comment my support on the male viera thread. So, congratulations. You played yourselves.

Have we though. Think on this for a moment. Suppose everyone here actually does want them added... and is faking the conflict to draw attention to this. Then we attempt to influence you to the side you have just chosen.

Now I'm not saying that this has happened here... but I'm not saying it didn't

[Alucard135]

I gotta say, as someone who doesn't give a single solitary crap about male viera and who will never ever play them and as someone who would only play female hrothgar if they're big like femroes, all these comments from folks strongly in favor of genderlocks bringing up people who don't care as if that automatically means we side with you....have inspired me to comment my support on the male viera thread. So, congratulations. You played yourselves.

[Wynn_Storm]

I gotta say, as someone who doesn't give a single solitary crap about male viera and who will never ever play them and as someone who would only play female hrothgar if they're big like femroes, all these comments from folks strongly in favor of genderlocks bringing up people who don't care as if that automatically means we side with you....have inspired me to comment my support on the male viera thread. So, congratulations. You played yourselves.

I'm confused... Why should we care what you support again? How did we play ourselves?

[Elyssia]

Where did you get that the majority wanted it that way ? Its always the minority that need to make 50 topics, not the others. Most of people actually doesnt care about the genderlock, and i hope they wont change it.

[Chalbee]

Most of people actually doesnt care about the genderlock, and i hope they wont change it.

The majority of players couldn't care less about it.Please stick to your guns and call the bluff of those threatening to quit over it.

This is the sentiment that I don't understand. If you don't care, why are you advocating one way vs. the other? If you truly couldn't care less, you wouldn't be encouraging them to maintain the status quo. You wouldn't be advocating either way. Seems like petty spite to me.

[WaterShield]

This is the sentiment that I don't understand. If you don't care, why are you advocating one way vs. the other? If you truly couldn't care less, you wouldn't be encouraging them to maintain the status quo. You wouldn't be advocating either way. Seems like petty spite to me.

Because they like other stuff and would rather Square make other things.

[BillyKaplan]

Because they like other stuff and would rather Square make other things.

Which means they do care.