Archeage Pink Dolphin Mount

Game has become too flashy?

Or do you mean too cashy?

Or are they the same thing?

The amount of draconian, unpleasant measures they'd have to impose on this game to keep it from being immersion-breaking is astronomical. I'm not nearly as bothered by weird skins or flashy mounts as I am by people dueling on top of me in a crafting area or inside the bank, or by people throwing an exploding bird. Talk about making the world look ridiculous.

vamp_emily wrote: »

Fashion is OP.

I spent 5 hours Saturday trying to get my Earthgore Helm. Everyone was looking pretty but nobody knew how to fight.

#NerfFashionPlayers

This ^^

this game is one of the most toned down , non flashy mmos out there IMO.

go take a look at TERA's cash shop if you want some perspective.

Eyro wrote: »

Let us go back to The good ole days when all we would complain about is how exposed breast were.

ROFL

That would mean exposing more breasts!

I salute you!

I dont care what people wear or ride. Do I hate pets? Yes! But I dont care if people use them. Who am I to criticize them?

Agree with OP. The flashy stuff has gone too far. Ridiculous mounts

The skill visuals also. Trials are ridiculous now its just a psycodelic light show

Milvan wrote: »

I also don't usually accept wardens and sorcs with pet builds because they are way too annoying

LOL

Ectheliontnacil wrote: »

veloSylraptor wrote: »

Ectheliontnacil wrote: »

Ratzkifal wrote: »

What do you guys think of a toggle option that disables flashy things - aka replace all special mounts with horses, make pets disappear and maybe even the floating balls of certain sets. The more customizable the options, the better.

Ye that sounds good. And people who like vanity pets and glittering costumes are completely unaffected by this .

Except they are effected, their ability to express themselves has been greatly reduced.

@veloSylraptor

Where is this mad scramble for identity and self expression coming from? I suppose it's human nature, but I still find it disturbing. Are you really defined by the clothes we wear? Is flashy armour and cheapish crown store jewellery who you are?

And that's not even the worst part! Somehow you people feel entitled to subject everyone to your appearance. You have the right to look how you like, but I don't have the right to look away?

If someone isn't into clowns swaggering across the Grahtwood city centre, what good does it do anyone to force him to see those clowns. That person's fun and immersion will be ruined and the clown clown's outfit will not be appreciated, which is what would have made the clown happy.

With TES games always opting for rather conservative and toned down graphics and TESO starting out the same way, I think it's a very reasonable demand that ZOS cater to an audience that would prefer less over the top character customisation as well as to an audience that loves this feature.

I just don't get people who think they should always be allowed to have their fun, even if it comes at the expense of other people's fun.

Its quite the opposite really, we choose to define and express ourselves through whatever means available to us. Its not the clothes we wear that define us, but who we are that defines the clothes we wear.

Now, looking away is all well and good, except that is not what's being proposed by that toggle. What is being proposed is much closer to veiling people and therefore make invisible any expression that is not to an individual's liking. That makes those other characters you would see on your screen misrepresent the character they were supposed to represent. It is to virtually eliminate the existence of other personalities, people, characters that don't conform to your preconceived notions of how people should look.

I'm only stating this just to make clear that saying the toggle doesn't effect anyone else is disingenuous, because it absolutely does by the act of veiling them.

Now, to say its reasonable to demand ZoS cater more to the audience that prefer less over the top character customization. Well, the other games in the series are irrelevant. What would be relevant is how much of this game's population would like or dislike being veiled, how much of them would change their spending habits or just generally protest when they know they are being veiled and denied the ability to express themselves and be seen. Because knowing that you may not be seen by other people as you are also ruins immersion. To say that you should be able to make people invisible because it gives you more fun, is also itself having fun at expense of other people's fun.

In the end, we both have the right to express ourselves (within the limits and facilities the game currently grants us). What that toggle does however, is to reduce the ability of some segments of the population to express themselves, and from that granting another segment the ability to shift the world to their liking. Which is why I stated a hypothetical argument of why not make the toggle both ways? That way both extremes in this debate get to silence and veil the other, and you can be seen by others as one of those "clowns swaggering across the Grahtwood."

Also, why the denigration of "mad scramble for identity and self expression"? are you not doing the same with this post? Expressing your dislike to certain identities that fit your own? Asking that other people be limited to an expression and identity that you approve? After all, you are defending the more "less over the top character customization" way of expressing your identity.