To be fair, if something is already named "class style", you should assume it is a class specific thing. But if you're advocating against it, then I don't want to ever hear you talk about "class identity" ever. You guys should really make it clear of what you want. I've been hearing about class identity this, class identity that for years now. And now when the game is actively enforcing via appearance, you guys are driven mad.
I love ESO, but the community on this forum are all over the place with their values. Pick one, it's either enforcing class identity with unique feel to them, or class is just a template and everything should be unified.
ESO_player123 wrote: »
Because it's a class design, it would make no sense to be available for everybody. Sadly this game often give everything to everybody so it will probably change. I think it's better when everybody can't have everything.
It reinforce class identity.
If people like a class motif the devs should do similars cloths in other motifs but nothing more.
To be fair, if something is already named "class style", you should assume it is a class specific thing. But if you're advocating against it, then I don't want to ever hear you talk about "class identity" ever. You guys should really make it clear of what you want. I've been hearing about class identity this, class identity that for years now. And now when the game is actively enforcing via appearance, you guys are driven mad.
I love ESO, but the community on this forum are all over the place with their values. Pick one, it's either enforcing class identity with unique feel to them, or class is just a template and everything should be unified.
And please stop advocating against this idea with the "every single x is y" kind of mentality, because that's very much not what ESO is, right from the beginning. ESO have class specific skill lines, but also universal skill lines that every can access. Both things can exist at the same time, you don't have to choose 1 or another. One is not the upgrade from another or vice versa, they are 2 different tastes of the same aspect.
ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »The concept of "class identity", which was never about fashion or style, but about the use of skills, can exist along side freedom of stylistic expression. We can have class identity, and advocate for class identity in terms of skill use, without including fashion in the mix. When people say "class identity" in terms of combat, they are not talking about fashion and what they want to wear.
After all, we don't have to choose one or the other. Cosmetic freedom can exist along side class identity in combat.
I mean people in real life walk about wearing logos of sports teams, bands and designers that they have no affiliation with other than liking/supporting
It would be more like a player of a sports team wearing the jersey of a rival team.
There is a precedent, BTW, for restricted cosmetics. The Alliance Rider Outfit will only display the colors of that character's alliance. Your DC character does not have the option to say, "I like red, so I'll wear the EP version of this costume".
There are hundreds of styles and costumes. It's fine to have a small handful that are identity-restricted.
There is a precedent, BTW, for restricted cosmetics. The Alliance Rider Outfit will only display the colors of that character's alliance. Your DC character does not have the option to say, "I like red, so I'll wear the EP version of this costume".
ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »The concept of "class identity", which was never about fashion or style, but about the use of skills, can exist along side freedom of stylistic expression. We can have class identity, and advocate for class identity in terms of skill use, without including fashion in the mix. When people say "class identity" in terms of combat, they are not talking about fashion and what they want to wear.
After all, we don't have to choose one or the other. Cosmetic freedom can exist along side class identity in combat.
ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »The concept of "class identity", which was never about fashion or style, but about the use of skills, can exist along side freedom of stylistic expression. We can have class identity, and advocate for class identity in terms of skill use, without including fashion in the mix. When people say "class identity" in terms of combat, they are not talking about fashion and what they want to wear.
After all, we don't have to choose one or the other. Cosmetic freedom can exist along side class identity in combat.
Yeah this is just not true. Fashion or style USED to be highly connected to the identity of a class before transmogification became a thing. Being able to look at a character and know just by their style what class they were was a thing.
If i asked you to describe what a Nightblade (rogue archetype) looks like you wouldn't say a heavy armored axe wielding character. You have an image in your head that most people would describe in a very similar way. A very specific style of fashion.Your Cosmetic freedom already exists.You can be a heavy armor "style" rogue. You know what doesn't exist? Unique class styles.
tl:dr Class identity and style/fashion have been connected since dungeons and dragons created those archetypes.
Yeah this is just not true. Fashion or style USED to be highly connected to the identity of a class before transmogification became a thing. Being able to look at a character and know just by their style what class they were was a thing.
If i asked you to describe what a Nightblade (rogue archetype) looks like you wouldn't say a heavy armored axe wielding character. You have an image in your head that most people would describe in a very similar way. A very specific style of fashion.Your Cosmetic freedom already exists.You can be a heavy armor "style" rogue. You know what doesn't exist? Unique class styles.
tl:dr Class identity and style/fashion have been connected since dungeons and dragons created those archetypes.
ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »The concept of "class identity", which was never about fashion or style, but about the use of skills, can exist along side freedom of stylistic expression. We can have class identity, and advocate for class identity in terms of skill use, without including fashion in the mix. When people say "class identity" in terms of combat, they are not talking about fashion and what they want to wear.
After all, we don't have to choose one or the other. Cosmetic freedom can exist along side class identity in combat.
Yeah this is just not true. Fashion or style USED to be highly connected to the identity of a class before transmogification became a thing. Being able to look at a character and know just by their style what class they were was a thing.
If i asked you to describe what a Nightblade (rogue archetype) looks like you wouldn't say a heavy armored axe wielding character. You have an image in your head that most people would describe in a very similar way. A very specific style of fashion.Your Cosmetic freedom already exists.You can be a heavy armor "style" rogue. You know what doesn't exist? Unique class styles.
tl:dr Class identity and style/fashion have been connected since dungeons and dragons created those archetypes.
ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »The concept of "class identity", which was never about fashion or style, but about the use of skills, can exist along side freedom of stylistic expression. We can have class identity, and advocate for class identity in terms of skill use, without including fashion in the mix. When people say "class identity" in terms of combat, they are not talking about fashion and what they want to wear.
After all, we don't have to choose one or the other. Cosmetic freedom can exist along side class identity in combat.
Yeah this is just not true. Fashion or style USED to be highly connected to the identity of a class before transmogification became a thing. Being able to look at a character and know just by their style what class they were was a thing.
If i asked you to describe what a Nightblade (rogue archetype) looks like you wouldn't say a heavy armored axe wielding character. You have an image in your head that most people would describe in a very similar way. A very specific style of fashion.Your Cosmetic freedom already exists.You can be a heavy armor "style" rogue. You know what doesn't exist? Unique class styles.
tl:dr Class identity and style/fashion have been connected since dungeons and dragons created those archetypes.
ESO_player123 wrote: »
USED to is the key word here. That is not how most people feel about fashion in THIS game THIS day. Also, this is not DnD, so I do not see any relevance here. If we were talking about Baldur's Gate, sure.
One thing I did notice on PTS that is different from live is that equipping at least 5 of the class set style outfit styles unlocks the corresponding class set VFX, which only happens on live if you have 5 of the class set bonuses active. I don't think this was mentioned in the patch notes?
@ZOS_Kevin, @ZOS_GinaBruno - is this behavior intended? If it is, the change to lock styles to classes makes more sense given the added VFX was previously only associated with the set bonuses, which is already class-locked. Personally I would rather have no VFX associated with the style and also not lock the styles to classes, i.e. the same behavior as in the preview on live.
The first image shows my character triggering the VFX on PTS by equipping enough of the outfit styles, and the second image shows the VFX disappearing after I remove some of the outfit styles.
ESO_player123 wrote: »
USED to is the key word here. That is not how most people feel about fashion in THIS game THIS day. Also, this is not DnD, so I do not see any relevance here. If we were talking about Baldur's Gate, sure.
Nah see here's an idea.Release them class locked and then 3-6 months after that put them in the crown store " class unlocked".
Now that's how i like my Fashion scrolls online.That's how modern gamers like it right? or did things USED to be better in gaming?
One thing I did notice on PTS that is different from live is that equipping at least 5 of the class set style outfit styles unlocks the corresponding class set VFX, which only happens on live if you have 5 of the class set bonuses active. I don't think this was mentioned in the patch notes?
@ZOS_Kevin, @ZOS_GinaBruno - is this behavior intended? If it is, the change to lock styles to classes makes more sense given the added VFX was previously only associated with the set bonuses, which is already class-locked. Personally I would rather have no VFX associated with the style and also not lock the styles to classes, i.e. the same behavior as in the preview on live.
The first image shows my character triggering the VFX on PTS by equipping enough of the outfit styles, and the second image shows the VFX disappearing after I remove some of the outfit styles.
ColovianHastur wrote: »Terrible choice. What's next, are Alliance motifs getting restricted to the character alliance? Is the colour red going to be available only to Pact characters, or blue to Covenant and yellow to Dominion? Are Sorcerers, Necromancers, and Arcanists going to be restricted to staves and light armour as their only weapons and armour of choice?
Is the Greymoor style going to be available only to Vampires, or the Worm Cult only to Necros?
Class specific motifs make no sense.
tsaescishoeshiner wrote: »If the style also grants the visual effect, I think it makes more sense that it's class-locked.
Maybe they could just make the visual effect class-locked so that any class can use the nightblade mask, but only nightblades get the red glow for using 5 of the items?