I always find it kind of amusing when people say things like "There will be naked people everywhere then" or that it will be immersion breaking if people are allowed to hide multiple pieces of armour. Same thing was said about being able to dye and make outfits. There would be pink weapons everywhere! Which was a silly complaint for a time when max level characters was forced to have rubedite weapons. That extremely shiny and bright red metal. Most people used the dye feature to give their weapons a less extreme colour.

We can't even be naked in the game. We all got painted on underwear, which people can and do show anyway now if they want to. Several styles and costumes are also as minimal as the underwear.

Things like this aren't even unique to ESO but happens in many mmos that got or want similar things. Many years ago I played the mmo Age of Conan, it was amazing for its time with being a mature rated mmo with voiced characters etc, and like many mmos it didn't come with an Outfit, Transmogrification, Glamours or whatever you want to call them, it got added later. Which to this day still remains my favourite version of cosmetic look change to one's armour.
How it worked there was that on the gear equipment menu, there was a second tab added, which was were you put the cosmetic look for your gear. So as long you could wear it you could use it. Every slot also had a checkmark which was for hiding that part, and yes you could hide every piece if you wanted. Which in AoC was a bit different from other mmos because female characters didn't have painted on bras, so you all can imagine it was popular to show more skin in that game.
But, even though it was possible to run around in full gear but showing nothing but a tiny thong and it was certainly people who did, they weren't that many and it was pretty much the same people who did that before the cosmetic feature was added.

Most people used the feature to make the look they had always wanted possible. A barechested barbarian, a necromancer only wearing a robe they got at low lvl which was useless now, someone wanting to look like they wore commoner or nobles clothes etc. The list goes on.

This cosmetic feature always gets some people worried or at least speak against it, despite the feature always adding more character customisation that adds to immersion and cosmetic options. In my book, someone being barechested, or not wearing gloves, boots or whatnot is a lot more immersive and less of an eyesore than people wearing the oddest of styles and dyeing them in the brightest and most saturated dyes there is. Along with all the strange skins, polymorphs and whatnot.

Don't forget Hide Tassets and Hide Flaps.

I wouldn't like people running naked/underwear in Tamriel but alas we have the nordic bather towel already. So yes, give us more "hide" options

LunaFlora wrote: »

do you work at zos?
ESO isn't every 3d game.
As far as i know, nobody from zos has ever said whether or not it's impossible.
So i doubt it's really impossible.

They never said it was "Impossible".

The problem isn't that the thing is "Impossible"

The issue is it would require a lot of work.

Thus it's a question of how ZoS will prioritize workload. Would they be willing to put so much time and resources into making these additional meshes for every single style in the entire game?

It's possible, given that they're putting so much time and resources into altering skills for their Skill Style system (Wherein they would need to remake skills so that their particle effects can be changed with a modular system where they can create new colour variants)

But it's not likely. Especially with so many gripes about lack of content so they'd likely be wanting to focus on things like bug fixes and content (Especially content that is monetized).

Taril wrote: »

LunaFlora wrote: »

do you work at zos?
ESO isn't every 3d game.
As far as i know, nobody from zos has ever said whether or not it's impossible.
So i doubt it's really impossible.

They never said it was "Impossible".

The problem isn't that the thing is "Impossible"

The issue is it would require a lot of work.

Thus it's a question of how ZoS will prioritize workload. Would they be willing to put so much time and resources into making these additional meshes for every single style in the entire game?

It's possible, given that they're putting so much time and resources into altering skills for their Skill Style system (Wherein they would need to remake skills so that their particle effects can be changed with a modular system where they can create new colour variants)

But it's not likely. Especially with so many gripes about lack of content so they'd likely be wanting to focus on things like bug fixes and content (Especially content that is monetized).

Okay so I’m going to explain why this sentiment is a half truth regurgitated as a result of being focused on a symptom of the main problem.

The last reported monthly income of ESO I’m aware of from a few months ago, being $15,000,000 a month, makes it very VERY hard to believe that they could not afford hiring more talent to help with content AND QoL features when the average developers usually are making between $60k - $70k a year… It gets to a point where there is lack of investment from the company to improve the product at the risk of losing those short term revenue gains. Which hey, is fair enough to a degree, it’s a business. But the real issues that happen within these companies, within these development studios, they are notorious for over promoting individuals into leadership positions. Which create the bureaucracy problems of slow response times and mismanagement ONTOP of more then necessary high paid positions being filled which could have contributed to 1-3 if not more extra developers working directly on the product, depending on that leadership positions salary of course. We are starting to see small independent studios show us how negatively this kind of company progression affects the company as a whole where they are not burdened with these issues, hiring as needed and smaller scale teams (there’s multiple studios that are an example of this) who are achieving staggering amount of development, where it’s hard to believe a company and teams of there size were capable to create games of the caliber that they are creating. Sure they aren’t MMO’s. BUT that doesn’t negate the fact of how overpaid over hired / promoted leadership and management positions creating a slog of managerial communications and goal setting on top of when this leadership lacks the vision and passion to drive the game forward with momentum. And sure even the lack of that leadership being there is a result of the board or parent company making these leadership hiring decisions. Abut sadly these promotions being given more often then not don’t go to the talent who ARE passionate about the product, they go to the financial suites, in terms of the decision making positions. And keep in mind this is not even taking into account the issues of bureaucracy between the holding company and their subsidiary and the additional mismanagement or SLOG that can come from that… and then there’s the issue of leadership positions trying to keep their positions relevant when they simply are not necessary, another wasted resource. Though this also happens down the line in any of the positions within the company (this is a natural progression of any company which falls prey to the unending growth syndrome in Corpo culture). This is why we’ve seen so many mass firings taking place across the corporate spectrum.

Now, the other issue, which I think is even more likely with this game in particular (which EA has done with their mmo SWTOR as a perfect example though smaller scale still) is as active player numbers dwindled, the priority ends up becoming doing the bare minimum of content to hopefully keep players interest peaked, though this interest is usually gained through the marketing done to manipulate current or potential players into trying the game, which is normal, at least it’s quid pro quo in most corporate industries selling a product. And in doing this the company has slowly lost sight of the vision for the game/product and lack the passion to invest back into improving the product and the experience it gives. Because revenue becomes the priority, no longer the product. Now there a several studio heads that believe this way but Swen of Larian Studios sums this whole problem up quite eloquently. If you ever get the opportunity to see his take on current gaming industry standards both in development and company growth. And this is applicable in ANY company creating a product.

All of this being said, excuses the arise in why studios can’t improve the experience or product (ultimately that’s what they are, excuses, and in many cases, like I said are half true) rarely derive from technical limitations, lack of ability to do the work. The real reasons for these issues? The most likely cause of these problems? The answer is simply 2 things. Lack of passionate leadership with vision for the product driving the teams under them forward on a mission to reach that vision. And too many cooks in the kitchen in that leadership coupled with the board members, parent company, and/or shareholder influence deciding what the game should be for their sake rather than the customers. This ultimately, unquestioningly, leads to the decline of the product, the decline of talent morale (leading to stagnate complacency), and eventually a decline of the company in the whole. For the sake of short term gains (around 15million monthly revenue from the in-game store rather than long term gains based on company investment in the product).

So when I see people say it’s not within the studios ability, for whatever reasons are given, it may be surprising but I actually half agree with those sentiments. But for far different reasons. Hence the half truth. I could get into even more of the nitty gritty of why I actually think these problems arise, but for the sake of this not taking up the entire length of a thread page, I’ll leave at this.

Love, Your friendly neighborhood armchair developer queen 💁🏽‍♀️

It was interesting to hear from the devs (thanks to Kevin for passing this along) that they feel some outfits just don't look good with certain pieces and so just refrain from creating them. Are they aware that we're still forced into choosing between a look for that slot (which they don't think works aesthetically) or forgoing that piece of equipment entirely (which doesn't work mechanically)?

I would hope they would agree that we should have the same freedom to customize our looks. Even if we had "hide pants" (which personally I could take or leave, but I believe we should have the option), it's not as if our characters would suddenly be as revealing as Almalexia...

Taril wrote: »

celner4_ESO wrote: »

Okay so I’m going to explain why this sentiment is a half truth regurgitated as a result of being focused on a symptom of the main problem.

It's not a half truth. It's the full truth.

The development team has only so many hours per day they can work on things. Thus they have to prioritize their workload.

The factors that determine their prioritization will be many, between what will be easily monetized and what will impact the game the most (Ideally, positively),

That is the truth of the matter.

Yes, theoretically the overall workload could be increased if executives hired more people. But even if you had literally every developer in the entire world working on ESO and only ESO there would still be a limit in what can be done based on what people are able to do within the limit of time and thus prioritization of workload will still exist, however small.

That executives don't bankroll having tons of staff working on the game isn't "The main problem", neither is the nature of capitalism (Whereby businesses exist to earn profits and thus this need to be economic with expenditures on things like developers and also the prioritization of monetizable features).

The main problem is that there is finite capabilities of any individual within a set time frame. Such is the nature of time.

As such, while the technicallities of implementations of things are often not impossible or even impractical. The base fact is, that time is a resource and thus its expenditure must be used appropriately (Which is true for all things, not merely game development)

Absolutely. Every company will have workers with finite capabilities. Every company will have to prioritize their workload. This never goes away. Absolutely again. I was wrong to say “truth” or “half truth”, as all of my assumptions or concerns are indeed theoretical. Though that absolutely does not invalidate them. I hope you didn’t intend to be dismissive of my concerns either!

These concerns that have formed based on the current performance of the game especially when compared to its competitors. The truth I was speaking of, to clarify and be more specific, was all those problems and concerns I listed DO happen.. and have happened within a number of game development studios over the years. Some more recent than others like Bungie and Pete Parsons as a quick more recent example though I could make quite the list... In some cases we are left to speculate without the communication from those within the company what the exact causes of their decline were, and yes this could be argued as heresay… (which the list of possible precise contributors to the company’s decline or failure could be many and we can even play the blame game like those within the company will often do when a downward trend or failure)

I like to compare Elder Scrolls Online to its competitors such as Final Fantasy or World of Warcraft (but we could include RuneScape or Black Desert Online too even), which is within complete reason. Comparing the player retention and active users (this is not always disclosed but we won’t pretend like Elder Scrolls Online is at a higher active player count than World of Warcraft Craft or Final Fantasy that would be ridiculous), and of course the value proposition. How much content did I receive in that DLC in playable hours. How many bugs and QoL issues were addressed vs those that have remained unaddressed. How much player feedback related to content was addressed/unaddressed. Etc etc etc.. all reasonable comparisons in a competitive market and what I am basing my current opinion of the game on, though yes it is still just my opinion!

Sufficed to say ultimately a company’s decline and/or lack of ability to be competitive in the market ultimately falls on leadership. Whether they failed to prioritize workloads adequately, whether they failed in hiring the right talent who had the capabilities they were looking for, whether they had too few developers to sustain the workload under the set time constraints, as well as any number of additional failures (management, handling of revenue, over ambitious goals, poor leadership qualities significant in supporting moral and mobility forward… could go on and on you get it). Again any failures in these areas, at the end of the work day, falls on the leadership. Though it is my hope Elder Scrolls Online is being managed and developed in a way to pursue PLAYER growth and be competitive not just financially but be competitive with the quality of their PRODUCT they release yearly (can’t be bothered in figuring out how to bold these words so I caps locked instead). Thus far when comparing quality of the products versus those others I’ve mentioned it has fallen short in its value proposition, in my opinion. My wish is not that the company suffers from all the problems I mentioned in my original post, I want them to succeed of course and I want to WANT their product! But the times I’ve returned to the game have grown further and further apart and I care to speculate as to why that is. But hey I’m just the customer. An arm chair developer queen. With dreams of a better game for all of us to enjoy, hopefully! So here I put forth my concerns. Again.

And that my friend, is my whole truth of the matter. Including my clarification on truth, half truth, and my opinion. And all this to say my hope is the game can grow and do better. Not just financially do better! Do better with the product itself and it’s customers.. it’s fans! Ah the age old debate of product vs. profit and which should be priority. Which again is why I value Swen’s experience on the matter! An Incredibly successful game studio CEO and a “product first always, and the revenue will follow” believer to which I couldn’t agree with more.

Yes more options are always good, if you don't want to use those options that's also a choice you can make.

Taril wrote: »

celner4_ESO wrote: »

Which again is why I value Swen’s experience on the matter! An Incredibly successful game studio CEO and a “product first always, and the revenue will follow” believer to which I couldn’t agree with more.

I'll always take Swen's opinion with a grain of salt. Given that he literally went and got the Baldur's Gate IP contract specifically to jump on it's noteriety to boost the company itself, rather than to actually make a Baldur's Gate game.

Like, it's very clear that Swen just wants to make his own games like the Divinity series, but explicitly went and got the BG name for a game so that his company would be more popular because simply focusing on a good game didn't work out for him (With Divinity games being somewhat niche in their appeal)

Which is why Baldur's Gate itself is so full of Larian homebrew, changing the rules of D&D and implementing things into the setting that arguably shouldn't be there (I.e. The abundance of explosives... Factories churning out robots...) and also why he dropped the IP immediately (With the studio not doing any more D&D games at all ever) because he only cared about it for the boost in fame so that more people would buy his games (We'll see how this turns out with their next title)

It’s unfortunate your sentiment towards Swen

I find it interesting your theory of why Swen wanted to develop a D&D game and it echo’s similar sentiments from various other studios and Gaming Journo’s who appeared to be bitter about or jealous of the success of Larian…

I also find it quite interesting you don’t appear to believe Swen’s reasoning for their decision of dropping the IP, which was being a result of the events that took place within Wizards of the Coast and his disdain towards the toxic corporate culture, and it’s negative effects on games (which at this point really is becoming undeniable). You believe his intentions were only selfish? Odd. You know I am now wondering if you are an employee of ZOS? Though you could deny that. Hey maybe you are not I, again, find your sentiment very peculiar, believing Swen only cares for fame…

You know.. These developers within these game studios who feel displaced or threatened at the mention of BG3 or Swen… The commonality between them all is that lack of success. Which hey, to a degree it’s understandable, their sentiments. The quality standard Larian has set is quite high and would create a horrible amount of healthy competition!

Now what’s interesting more, is the sentiment coming from the customers, gamers, does not share this same sentiment of those disgruntled game developers. There are studios which have been generally positive and even publicly so, who’ve been supportive of Larian Studios and their success without any hints or flavors of passive aggression. The sentiment coming from gamers though, from customers, is on the whole and large quite positive and supportive. Which ultimately is all that matters at the end of the day. That’s what decides the successes versus the flops. The customers being happy with the products. More importantly the customers USING the products! In this case playing.

Though you are correct their next game and the success of it will be defining for them still. You know.. I’m of the mind of that a product doesn’t reach a certain level of success without vision, without passion, regardless of whether or not it’s piggy backed on another popular IP or not… Elden Ring for example. FromSoft and their Titles could have remained quite niche still (They’ve not used any popular IP’s to skyrocket themselves to fame) and it could also be argued that every FromSoft game prior to Elden Ring was niche though what’s different here is they’ve NOT used another popular IP to find immense success. Though hey, I get the whole “using another IP to gain success” sentiment as a way to cast aside the validity of their prior work… Regardless, there’s definitely something to say for the product simply being.. very good. To reiterate, having poor leadership, having not very hard working teams with a lack of vision and passion, lacking these key components in any game development studio will not get you games like Elden Ring or Baldur’s Gate 3. I mean this really is a given! Just as much a given as mismanagement or unreasonable time constraints can, to which I sympathize with this plight in my line of work where this is extremely detrimental.

Again though.. I really I am quite suspicious of you being a ZoS employee with your sentiment on this topic. It certainly is a sentiment not widely shared between your average gamers. Whether or not you are though, hey, I do appreciate you appearing to read through most of what I’ve posted and taking the time to address at least some of the concerns I have. So thank you.

Taril wrote: »

This isn't to say that product based development doesn't work... On the contrary, that was literally what started the video game industry and got it making so much money that all the corpos came and set up shop to cash in on the massive market. We also have studios like CDPR that have grown themselves to lofty heights through making good games.

You certainly are right about this!

celner4_ESO wrote: »

I also find it quite interesting you don’t appear to believe Swen’s reasoning for their decision of dropping the IP, which was being a result of the events that took place within Wizards of the Coast and his disdain towards the toxic corporate culture, and it’s negative effects on games (which at this point really is becoming undeniable).

He also has said that he had no issues with WotC and there was no bad blood between them and there was nothing in regards to WotC or the contract they had any effect on his decision to completely drop the IP.

In addition, he's leaving the game itself in a state of vastly underacheiving its potential. Many people wished for at least DLC for BG3 to help tie up loose ends and flesh out some of the rushed or unsatisfying stories. But no, Swen wants to drop everything to do with the IP and immediately jump onto his brand new game completely unrelated to D&D.

celner4_ESO wrote: »

You know I am now wondering if you are an employee of ZOS?

Heh, no. I am not affiliated with any gaming company and especially not ZoS.

Heck, if I were to post my feelings about ZoS, I'm likely to get myself banned. I've already received warnings for stating my feelings about certain practices that ZoS employs...

celner4_ESO wrote: »

Hey maybe you are not I, again, find your sentiment very peculiar, believing Swen only cares for fame…

It's not that he only cares for fame. Its he only cares about making HIS games.

But after the flop of Divinity 2, with it being a niche title, he wanted to get his company more noteriety so he can be successful making his own games.

celner4_ESO wrote: »

The sentiment coming from gamers though, from customers, is on the whole and large quite positive and supportive.

It depends where you look. I spend some time on the Larian forums (Since I actually do like the company. I very much liked the Divinity games) and there's a lot of disgruntled customers to be found there.

People annoyed that they are leaving BG3 with Act 3 being kind of terrible and rushed (With various companions being left being terribly written and having awful stories). That they're not continuing to work on the game with DLC to get it to the best it could be.

There's also people who are upset with Larian because of how un-D&D like this major D&D title is. Due to how much homebrew they used, between things like what they've added to the setting and what gameplay changes they made.

This is to the point where many people are in such distain for the company that they won't purchase another Larian title ever.

I know that overall BG3 gets good reviews and many people did enjoy the game. But many people feel that the game was overhyped due to its more lackluster 2nd and 3rd Acts (Which is typical Larian. They spend 50%+ of the entire development time on the first Act and then rush through the 2nd/3rd acts of their games...).

celner4_ESO wrote: »

Though hey, I get the whole “using another IP to gain success” sentiment as a way to cast aside the validity of their prior work…

I mean, Swen literally outright stated that the exact reason they went after the IP was because of how noteworthy it was.

He even stated he's never played D&D and that no-one in the studio were D&D players.

Meaning that the goal for going after Baldur's Gate IP was never due to any sort of desire to actually make a Baldur's Gate game. It was entirely about getting a noteworthy IP to elevate the company so they can (Hopefully) get by making their own stuff.

celner4_ESO wrote: »

Regardless, there’s definitely something to say for the product simply being.. very good.

Honestly, the main thing in regards to BG3 and Elden Ring's success is... Their accessibility.

BG3 provided a more modern approach to an otherwise niche genre that made it easier for people to get into it. Their focus on making things streamlined and easy to understand (At the cost of making it less accurate to D&D rules) allowed people to try the game while not being fans of the genre.

Same thing with Elden Ring. They made the game a lot more accessible with many QoL features and designs, which allowed a lot more people to try a game of this genre that they never considered before.

Making the games aceessible, especially when they are otherwise niche genres, vastly increases the pool of people who might purchase the game. Throw in some hype from the fans of the genre getting a new game (Even more so for BG3 given that CRPG's are few and far between) and there's a snowball effect that can inflate a game's success.

Of course, the game itself still needs to be at least solid (At least partially... BG3 is great... In Act 1 and becomes mediocre in Act 2-3) otherwise you won't go very far at all.

Taril wrote: »

celner4_ESO wrote: »

I also find it quite interesting you don’t appear to believe Swen’s reasoning for their decision of dropping the IP, which was being a result of the events that took place within Wizards of the Coast and his disdain towards the toxic corporate culture, and it’s negative effects on games (which at this point really is becoming undeniable).

He also has said that he had no issues with WotC and there was no bad blood between them and there was nothing in regards to WotC or the contract they had any effect on his decision to completely drop the IP.

In addition, he's leaving the game itself in a state of vastly underacheiving its potential. Many people wished for at least DLC for BG3 to help tie up loose ends and flesh out some of the rushed or unsatisfying stories. But no, Swen wants to drop everything to do with the IP and immediately jump onto his brand new game completely unrelated to D&D.

celner4_ESO wrote: »

You know I am now wondering if you are an employee of ZOS?

Heh, no. I am not affiliated with any gaming company and especially not ZoS.

Heck, if I were to post my feelings about ZoS, I'm likely to get myself banned. I've already received warnings for stating my feelings about certain practices that ZoS employs...

celner4_ESO wrote: »

Hey maybe you are not I, again, find your sentiment very peculiar, believing Swen only cares for fame…

It's not that he only cares for fame. Its he only cares about making HIS games.

But after the flop of Divinity 2, with it being a niche title, he wanted to get his company more noteriety so he can be successful making his own games.

celner4_ESO wrote: »

The sentiment coming from gamers though, from customers, is on the whole and large quite positive and supportive.

It depends where you look. I spend some time on the Larian forums (Since I actually do like the company. I very much liked the Divinity games) and there's a lot of disgruntled customers to be found there.

People annoyed that they are leaving BG3 with Act 3 being kind of terrible and rushed (With various companions being left being terribly written and having awful stories). That they're not continuing to work on the game with DLC to get it to the best it could be.

There's also people who are upset with Larian because of how un-D&D like this major D&D title is. Due to how much homebrew they used, between things like what they've added to the setting and what gameplay changes they made.

This is to the point where many people are in such distain for the company that they won't purchase another Larian title ever.

I know that overall BG3 gets good reviews and many people did enjoy the game. But many people feel that the game was overhyped due to its more lackluster 2nd and 3rd Acts (Which is typical Larian. They spend 50%+ of the entire development time on the first Act and then rush through the 2nd/3rd acts of their games...).

celner4_ESO wrote: »

Though hey, I get the whole “using another IP to gain success” sentiment as a way to cast aside the validity of their prior work…

I mean, Swen literally outright stated that the exact reason they went after the IP was because of how noteworthy it was.

He even stated he's never played D&D and that no-one in the studio were D&D players.

Meaning that the goal for going after Baldur's Gate IP was never due to any sort of desire to actually make a Baldur's Gate game. It was entirely about getting a noteworthy IP to elevate the company so they can (Hopefully) get by making their own stuff.

celner4_ESO wrote: »

Regardless, there’s definitely something to say for the product simply being.. very good.

Honestly, the main thing in regards to BG3 and Elden Ring's success is... Their accessibility.

BG3 provided a more modern approach to an otherwise niche genre that made it easier for people to get into it. Their focus on making things streamlined and easy to understand (At the cost of making it less accurate to D&D rules) allowed people to try the game while not being fans of the genre.

Same thing with Elden Ring. They made the game a lot more accessible with many QoL features and designs, which allowed a lot more people to try a game of this genre that they never considered before.

Making the games aceessible, especially when they are otherwise niche genres, vastly increases the pool of people who might purchase the game. Throw in some hype from the fans of the genre getting a new game (Even more so for BG3 given that CRPG's are few and far between) and there's a snowball effect that can inflate a game's success.

Of course, the game itself still needs to be at least solid (At least partially... BG3 is great... In Act 1 and becomes mediocre in Act 2-3) otherwise you won't go very far at all.

Well… It goes without saying I don’t agree with you on everything, some things I do though, but ultimately we’ve both got our opinions and I can see where you’re coming from with some things but others I’m still trying to understand that perspective in either seeing your point of view or seeing the validity of some of your claims. So I appreciate your responses and discussion not devolving into name calling. As for you not being an employee of ZOS.. Fair enough, I’m very surprised you’ve been so critical, based on your responses here, to the degree where you’ve received warnings and what not. You know… hard as those criticisms can be for the developers to take that in and not feel defensive, I truly hope they know it ultimately comes from a place of really caring about the future of the franchise and health of the game we’ve investing so much into. And not only what I’ve invested, but friends and family I deeply care for whom I convinced to get into the game years back. I not only want it to be incredible for me, but for those people too. So yes it can get infuriating not seeing the additions, changes, or improvements that I or we would like to see because of the level of investment that is or was there. But this is not to say that the criticisms are invalid because we care so much, quit the opposite!

On another note, I’ve drifted us very far away from the original topic with the post you responded to. I have some questions there!

What do you think about more player customization akin to hiding any armor slot? Do you believe it’s unlikely? I remember people here on the forums (some, not all) saying what a waste of time and resources adding the dye system to weapons would be, and how unlikely it was to happen because of the immense sink that would create, yet it did, which was amazing to see from ZOS. So knowing that are you optimistic of changes like these coming or what other pressing issues would you rather see addressed based on you and your friends experience in the game?

celner4_ESO wrote: »

What do you think about more player customization akin to hiding any armor slot? Do you believe it’s unlikely?

In regards to hiding armour slots, it's much less about the time it takes and more about their overall view of what should be allowed in the game.

Since, technically, it's rather simple to add in a "Hide armor slot" function. Given it's just adding an item for the Outfit system that simply... Doesn't have any textures.

Thus, the main sticking point is in their views of whether it should be possible to hide things. With the concern being "Everyone will just run around in their underwear and that doesn't mesh with the atmosphere of the game!"

Of course, such concerns are moot when we have things like the bathtowl costume and fancy (And/or revealing) dresses that people are capable of wearing while they go off fighting things.

Furthermore, in regards to some item slots, such as chest pieces... We have characters like Sai Sahan who's notably bare chested (Also, we have his costume allowing bare chested characters...) so it's not even particularly outlandish as a notion.

Where the most valid concern would be, is with the pants slot. Given that such a thing doesn't make a lot of sense overall. But as I mentioned way back in my initial post in this thread (Way back as the second reply to the thread) there can be situations where such a thing can make sense. With longer chest pieces that have loincloths, or extend far enough to function as a skirt/kilt.

As far as likelyhood of occurring? I don't know really. Given how simple their addition would be and how desired such a thing has been over the years, it feels like it's something they're actively against given how long it's been since Hide Shoulders were added.

But who knows, maybe it just never fit in with their yearly chapter work schedule (Where they were trying to get all the stuff ready for the mid-year content drop). While with their new more flexible seasons, they will have the chance to just spend the small amount of time needed to implement this and plonk it into the game when it's done.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

AScarlato wrote: »

I don't even know how "NO" would be selected.

The one person who voted No just to say they don't care - um you can continue not to care even if they had it?

It would break immersion in this game world and put me in other games if tons of people were running around in skimpy outfits that looked more like they belong in bikini armor games than the Elder Scrolls. The current design patterns always have something with them to keep the outfit more tasteful than those games so I don't consider that a moot point at all.

I'd rather they continue to add new skimpy outfits in the Elder Scrolls style than make all clothing hidden.

But I liked that they moved away from that aesthetic enjoy the tasteful middle ground the TES games have currently had for the past 20 years. It's one of the smallest things that makes me pick Elder Scrolls games over others but it's nevertheless part of the world building for me.

I think there's other ways they could let more people show off their tats that I'd prefer like a greater selection of skimpy outfits, especially more masculine ones.

Since half the players these days look like neon lightbulbs due to skins and flashy cosmetics, the ship has sailed for me on using immersion as an argument over being able to take off your shirt.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

AScarlato wrote: »

Since half the players these days look like neon lightbulbs due to skins and flashy cosmetics, the ship has sailed for me on using immersion as an argument over being able to take off your shirt.

I do not find that immersion breaking at all. I miss how magical things felt in TES games released prior to Skyrim, and feel that these items added that back into the game. I felt like Skyrim had the least magical vibe of all the TES games that I played. And I was dismayed when I want to say it was Todd Howard said that if magic disappeared from Tamriel tomorrow, most people wouldn't notice. It felt like they're trying to copying more realistic feelings fantasy and I was not here for it.

I do admit some of the stuff they released is too far in this direction like that bizzare horse with all the arms. But, I overall enjoy the flashy stuff because it makes Tamriel feel magical.

I've never had much use for magic in any of TES games. Skyrim was my favorite for many reasons, but that was really the main one.

In ESO, I really don't use magic much at all. My characters I play the most are wardens, with generally weapon skills rather than spells.

I don't like most of the flashy stuff.... though I do have my moments....

Please just open the 'hide slot' on everything. Heck, they've even accidentally showed it off in a dev buuld at one point.

As to the typical "but but but then everyone will walk around naked!!!11!!!1" argument - isn't it totally possible right now for everyone to walk around in the Nordic Bather's Towel dyed bright pink? And... oh, well they don't. Sure, you'll see one or two, but most people want to have that for reasonable purposes.

Absolutely the belts should be hidden. Following that, gloves and feet (but both tend to already be covered by the chest and leg parts anyway since many chests/legs contain painted-on bracers/shinguards, and there are a few 'barely there' versions of hand/foot anyway). I also would love a 'hide chest' as well considering the number of body markings that are shoved into Crown Crates and the fact that lately every skimpy chestpiece includes a bra for both men and women. And after that, well just do legs to finish the set. Not that I'd ever use that one, but if everything else has a hider then why not?