It's time (Option to Hide other players Glamour)

[Bright-Flower]

It is not the matter of the choice you are giving. From a lore and immersion standard. We got people who dress up like that in the game, You can't use immersion, if people have story elements of the goofy wacky mascot outfits in said game. So the outfits being immersion breaking is false based off story elements of the game itself.

What other reasons do you have for having this option. As Immersion is not one of them.

Yeah, this is a setting where hildebrand is canon. Also, glamour is also canonically a thing. Ergo, it's not against lore that some adventurers would choose to glamour silly things into battle. Be it out of a sense of humor, a desire to stand out, or trying to boggle the enemy to get an advantage etc. And even some actual battle gear is silly or skimpy, like the tails from the 5.1 dungeon gear, the 2b inspired dresses from the YORHA raid, shisui and sky rat sets etc. It's not all level 1 glamour items that are silly. If the shisui fending set is okay I see no reason tanking in a yorha dress or maid outfit or bikini isn't.

[Zabuza]

What is the likelihood that anything I have to say is going to open your eyes to the possibility of being wrong? I'd guess it is pretty low, though I would also guess that it is higher in order to save face that doesn't need saving. So, in light of my guess that nothing I say will matter to your opinion, what do you care if I find something to be both a bad idea and unethical, when the only reason I am stating it is to make my own stance succinctly clear. I have already made attempts to explain why.

Genuine question: why do you feel that there should be limits to where human rights should be expressed? Why not have human rights everywhere there are humans?

I suppose nudists should have those same rights of human expression as well then, no? If there's really no limit on this sort of thing.

[Joven]

What is the likelihood that anything I have to say is going to open your eyes to the possibility of being wrong? I'd guess it is pretty low, though I would also guess that it is higher in order to save face that doesn't need saving. So, in light of my guess that nothing I say will matter to your opinion, what do you care if I find something to be both a bad idea and unethical, when the only reason I am stating it is to make my own stance succinctly clear. I have already made attempts to explain why.

About as likely as you opening your eyes to the possibility that you also may be wrong.

Genuine question: why do you feel that there should be limits to where human rights should be expressed? Why not have human rights everywhere there are humans?

Because it has nothing to do with human rights. A video game cannot harm someone or remove/limit their rights. If this were about a humans rights of expression then what about the developer's rights to their expression in not opening up gear to both genders? Or choosing anything that doesn't immediately get them labeled as "regressive"?

[Wavaryen]

Ultimately people, you don't pay others subscriptions. Client side - my screen in my home. Not your screen. I don't care what you watch so why care what I'm watching? Yes, I've spent millions on glamour and crafted and bought from the Mogstation. I will continue to do so whether anyone but me sees it or not.

Sure thing, When you give us a good reason why said options should be added. We will accept it. Until that time, It is MY glamour, and I paid for it. So if I don't want others to have the power to change my glamour to them. My fashion is for others to see just as much as for myself.

So until a good understandable reason can be reach. I don't want developers waste time on this.

[Kohl]

The absolutely ironic part about this is most of the people who want the feature would not care. The people who the "flag" would drive insane would be people who are being blocked. Flag me all you like, as I have stated in the past what you see on your screen is of no consequence to me. This kind of veiled attempt to have a punishment for using the feature only speaks to how vindictive people are being in this thread. ...

So I can easily see how you could come to that irony, and if it were the case for me I would grant it. No, I want to know who is muting players expression so I can choose to do what they should have done themselves and walk away. I don't want to game with them, just like they shouldn't have to game with people who have caused them so much deep distress by existing.

I still don't think that a style expression erasure button is the answer. Unless you need some dance music, in that case Erasure is a pretty good answer!

[Bright-Flower]

Sure thing, When you give us a good reason why said options should be added. We will accept it. Until that time, It is MY glamour, and I paid for it. So if I don't want others to have the power to change my glamour to them. My fashion is for others to see just as much as for myself.

So until a good understandable reason can be reach. I don't want developers waste time on this.

This is also the main reason I've never used any mods to alter character appearances. I don't like having a disconnect between how my character shows up on my screen vs how other people see them.

[Packetdancer]

I haven't seen anyone explain why this is a bad idea any better than "because I don't like it".

I mean, okay? I'll concede that you can frame any of the arguments made against it as "I don't like this idea" at heart if you boil them down.

But to be blunt, I haven't really seen anyone explain why this is a good idea with anything that doesn't boil down to "I don't like your glam" at heart, either.

That's not meant as an accusation or criticism, it's just to say that I feel like "your opinion is subjective" is not exactly the way to undermine someone's argument here, considering literally this entire thread is over 100 pages of entirely-subjective opinions being expressed by opposing viewpoints—albeit with varying degrees of vehemence, verbosity, and volume. (Which, as everyone knows, are the Three V's crucial to all internet arguments.)

[Joven]

I mean, okay? I'll concede that you can frame any of the arguments made against it as "I don't like this idea" at heart if you boil them down.

But to be blunt, I haven't really seen anyone explain why this is a good idea with anything that doesn't boil down to "I don't like your glam" at heart, either.

That's not meant as an accusation or criticism, it's just to say that I feel like "your opinion is subjective" is not exactly the way to undermine someone's argument here, considering literally this entire thread is over 100 pages of entirely-subjective opinions being expressed by opposing viewpoints—albeit with varying degrees of vehemence, verbosity, and volume. (Which, as everyone knows, are the Three V's crucial to all internet arguments.)

Truth be told regardless of whatever argument either side makes, it's all subjective in the end. At this point I'm just hoping we catch up to the male Viera thread as the most pointlessly continued thread.

[CelestePinke]

Actually it does take away something from other players. There's a reason I don't use mods no matter how cool some of them are, it's because others can't see them. I glam with the same feeling I have IRL to express myself and I want people to see it. Whether i'm feeling mad skimpy or serious thematic glam, I want you to see those cheeks in all it's glory

Ok, but I don't care what you look like. If you care what I look like that's on you. I would love it if I'm the only person in pink on my screen.

[Kohl]

About as likely as you opening your eyes to the possibility that you also may be wrong.

I struggle with being wrong all the time. Expressing things the wrong way, not having the best explanation, not dodging that AoE in the right direction to avoid the next mechanic. On this topic I have already admitted that there was a time that I would have wanted this option too (years ago), but I my mind HAS changed on the topic and I find that it was a change in the correct direction. But yes, if someone could actually make a good argument, I would totally reconsider my stance. I am sure you feel similarly to some degree.

Because it has nothing to do with human rights. A video game cannot harm someone or remove/limit their rights. If this were about a humans rights of expression then what about the developer's rights to their expression in not opening up gear to both genders? Or choosing anything that doesn't immediately get them labeled as "regressive"?

The developers are exercising the rights of their company in controlling their intellectual property in slowly moving towards the developers idea of unlocking gender restrictions from gear so as to not so quickly offend people who have a problem with that. If they chose to adopt a "regressive" feature because of demand, that isn't really expressing their own expression as it takes away from their resources to continue the story of their game and game world.

I don't if I am answering your questions in a satisfactory way, but I am trying. Thank you for answering my question.