[Petition] Remove Genderlocked Costumes

[PyurBlue]

I like genderlocked outfits. They tend to be better designed and fitting than most of the universal stuff.

This is separate from locking. The devs can make outfits with a target demographic in mind but then just let everyone use them. Absolutely nothing makes those two things mutually exclusive. I understand that there are some practical limitations, SE doesn't want to spend resources on something unpopular, that's fine. However simple stuff like not locking the Little Lady's Day flower crown and changing how it dyes based on the character shouldn't be hard to do. Removing locks entirely might not be realistic, but I think allowing for more choice in outfits should be a focus from now on. I don't see anything to gain from having your options limited arbitrarily.

[Bonbori]

This is separate from locking. The devs can make outfits with a target demographic in mind but then just let everyone use them. Absolutely nothing makes those two things mutually exclusive. I understand that there are some practical limitations, SE doesn't want to spend resources on something unpopular, that's fine. However simple stuff like not locking the Little Lady's Day flower crown and changing how it dyes based on the character shouldn't be hard to do. Removing locks entirely might not be realistic, but I think allowing for more choice in outfits should be a focus from now on. I don't see anything to gain from having your options limited arbitrarily.

Oh don't get me wrong, I hate arbitrary restrictions too. If there is no budgetarily prohibitive technical reason why a female character shouldn't be able to wear the existing model of Cid's goggles, then a male-only restriction shouldn't be a thing. Likewise, I wish I could put on Gosetsu's shiny hat, and I think the flower crown debacle was silly too. It could have easily been two separate items.

In fact, I'm even strongly against role/job-locking gear. I see no reason why my character can glamour a nice Shire coat as a caster, but for some reason glamour prisms just... refuse to work as soon as she touches a gunblade. That's arbitrary and I know for a fact that there is nothing preventing SE from lifting that restriction by simply adjusting an item flag in a database. Or better yet, writing a short script that can iterate through every relevant item in an instant.

However, that is not at all what I meant in my post. I was referring to the creative process, how the stipulation that every new piece of gear that gets created must be unisex would affect the design of future gear. And looking at the wealth of existing precedents, I'm very afraid that it would result in SE choosing the path of least resistance and either resorting to producing uninspired, generic fashion designed specifically to be easy for 3D artists to easily adjust for any bodytype (so shapeless and baggy, the better to conform to any bodytype, lacking intricate details that could be glitched out by morphing, etc.) or just using one gender as the base template and doing the absolute minimum vertex-moving to adjust the outfit to a body clearly not supposed to fit into it.

More likely than not, even with a mandatory unisex stipulation, the budget allocation and deadlines around outfit development would remain the same, so an artist, expected to create 2 gender variants of one outfit while still only being given resources and time to create one outfit, would naturally take efficient shortcuts to ensure they can meet the deadline and not overcomplicate things for someone else down the pipeline.

In other words, I'm scared of the prospect that if the artists were forced to always account for 2 genders and never had the freedom to just go ham on one, the quality of assets would worsen to accommodate the increased quantity.

So I am in favour of designing gender-specific outfits and giving them special attention and consideration to make sure that they look perfect on the gender they are made for with no artistic compromises. But I am against arbitrarily restricting genders (and jobs) from wearing any pieces that can physically fit on their skeletons as is.

[Hazama999]

In other words, I'm scared of the prospect that if the artists were forced to always account for 2 genders and never had the freedom to just go ham on one, the quality of assets would worsen to accommodate the increased quantity.

If they go ham on one, doesn't the other get shafted?

[Halivel]

If they go ham on one, doesn't the other get shafted?

People usually don't care about this, you see. "I got my candy and want more candies and you should <kupo!> up" kind of logic.

[Ruinfeild]

[DJMau]

There's a slight difference between the two scenarios. While ultimate is optional, it's current. It also rewards its participants with goods such as powerful weaponry and a sense of accomplishment in beating the worst that the devs can throw at you. The other lets a guy wear a dress. You tell me which scenario is more worth it.

[Duskane]

There's a slight difference between the two scenarios. While ultimate is optional, it's current. It also rewards its participants with goods such as powerful weaponry and a sense of accomplishment in beating the worst that the devs can throw at you. The other lets a guy wear a dress. You tell me which scenario is more worth it.

Its entirely subjective really
But you brought up minority and waste of resource since it's for a smaller group of people

[monk-dps]

You would think they could just slap it on our character models easy peasy. But I guess it's Abit more complicated then that.

[MariaArvana]

You would think they could just slap it on our character models easy peasy. But I guess it's Abit more complicated then that.

It's far more complicated than that.

The gear system in this game is essentially Legos. Underneath our gear, there isn't any base model; its an empty void, we don't have a base model the gear is mapped over. When you equip a new set of legs, it's the equivalent of removing a Lego person's legs, then attaching a new set of legs. This means that if skin is showing on an armor piece, it also has to be manually added in by the devs; as if they don't it would only create a see-through/empty void in that area. The only thing static about our character model is that we all have a bald, base head before any facial features, hair, tatoos, etc. Everything else about our character model is 100% modular.

Which means anytime they create a new piece of armor, they must model it to fit every single body skeleton type in the game. For females, that's only two. For males, that can be up to an additional four body skeleton types based on the armor piece.

That would explain a lot about their gear output really...

Although in the specific case of Lalafells, I assume they can just transfer from one gender to the other with minimal effort, unless the costume has a drastically gender-varied design.

For the most part since male <-> female lalafell are extremely similar with only minor modifications to their skeletons, but since it'd look super bad to say 'females and male lalafell only', male lalafell just gets ignored too.
And yes, it was pretty eye-opening when I first read how gear operates in a few discords. It explains why they're so happy to do female stuff given getting it working on one gets it working on every single other one besides lalafell, while they're averted to doing males unless necessary. Their model system basically favors female characters tremendously.

[monk-dps]

It's far more complicated than that.

The gear system in this game is essentially Legos. Underneath our gear, there isn't any base model; its an empty void, we don't have a base model the gear is mapped over. When you equip a new set of legs, it's the equivalent of removing a Lego person's legs, then attaching a new set of legs. This means that if skin is showing on an armor piece, it also has to be manually added in by the devs; as if they don't it would only create a see-through/empty void in that area. The only thing static about our character model is that we all have a bald, base head before any facial features, hair, tatoos, etc. Everything else about our character model is 100% modular.

Which means anytime they create a new piece of armor, they must model it to fit every single body skeleton type in the game. For females, that's only two. For males, that can be up to an additional four body skeleton types based on the armor piece.



For the most part since male <-> female lalafell are extremely similar with only minor modifications to their skeletons, but since it'd look super bad to say 'females and male lalafell only', male lalafell just gets ignored too.
And yes, it was pretty eye-opening when I first read how gear operates in a few discords. It explains why they're so happy to do female stuff given getting it working on one gets it working on every single other one besides lalafell, while they're averted to doing males unless necessary. Their model system basically favors female characters tremendously.

That expains why when I put on different pants and shorts my legs look like they get longer or shorter. Also why some shoes make my feet really tiny.