How will "Hide player visual effects" impact gem store items?

[Beleron.9347]

I'm really not at all certain what exactly it is that I'm supposed to be impressed by when I see someone wearing some gem store abomination. The size of their wallet? Their dreadful lack of taste? What do these players actually think they're showing off?

[Lucy.3728]

On 5/29/2023 at 5:14 AM, FelixWolf.2348 said:

What I am understanding is that "visual effects" includes minis, pets, etc. "Disable player item sounds" already impacts instruments. To me, it sounds like what it is going to do is just set everything to their default models and what not. At which point, what is the point of buying visual items on the gem store if probably half, if not more, of the player base wont even see it?

As a devoted WvW player I have had everybody else reduced to standard model anyway. Your fear has been my game for 2 years.

That doesn't keep me from pimping up my own chars at all.

It actually boosts my ego because I'm the most beautiful. (And I don't want to offend my eyes with standard gear - although some look nice on some species, my human woman wears some starter gear)

(I don't dress up for others, why do you?)

Edited June 3, 2023 by Lucy.3728

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

6 hours ago, Ashen.2907 said:

Except that what is being argued for is preventing others from choosing not to look at you(in the generic sense, not you personally) when you decide to show off. An ability to hide player cosmetics (somewhat of a moot point because that isnt what ANet has described for the upcoming change) would in no way prevent one from showing off to those interested in seeing others showing off. What the OP, and certain others, are advocating for is, essentially, imposing their desire to show off onto others who dont want to participate in that action.

When your enjoyment of something comes down to forcing others to participate, against their will, in your personal preferences there is somethig wrong.

Your version of "forcing others to participate" really means "they walked into my field of view."  That's not how "forcing others to participate" works.  I could just as easily argue using the same logic that it is a player's right to show off, and having their appearance muted by others is imposing an aesthetic upon them that they are expressly fighting against having.  I could also argue that having boring looking teammates is also "forcing others to participate" when they don't want a game filled with drab and uninteresting looking players.  Is Anet going to create an option to flair up other teammates, just to make the game more appealing to look at?

The concept of rights that you're invoking is a perverted one.  Whereas rights originally meant "freedom to," the snuck presupposition here is "freedom from."  The difference being that the "freedom from" stance comes with a litany of impositions put upon other people to fulfill an unending list of entitlements, while simultaneously denying similar entitlements to others.  Functionally, a "right not to look at people showing off" is on equal grounds with a "right not to look at people being plain," with the only difference being that you've either never considered this position or have deliberately omitted it.  Similarly, the "right not to see" comes up against the "right to be seen."  

Edited June 3, 2023 by Blood Red Arachnid.2493

[Ashen.2907]

4 hours ago, Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

.  I could just as easily argue using the same logic that it is a player's right to show off,

I am not arguing otherwise. I hope that those desiring to show off do so to an appreciative audience.

 

But when the argument against something is, "I dont want others to have an option to avoid my desire to impose my preferences on them," it is a different matter entirely.

And, to be clear, I made no claims about players' rights. I merely pointed out that if one's opposition to a potential hide cosmetics option is that one wants to insist that others who are not interested be be required to be an audience for someone else against their will then there is something wrong. At no point did I argue against someone being able to show off.

[Quench.7091]

Peacock players are a core part of GW2's cash flow, so ArenaNet should preserve their own interests to an extent. It's not constructive to shoo away these concerns as trivial. It's one of the few tolerable payment models in the MMORPG market.

However, to be frank, I'm not concerned about these settings in terms of a cash shop problem. It will probably be only related to the particle, glow, and color tinting effects of abilities. This would include the stuff placed on pets. Basically screen clutter from abilities that make things difficult to see what is going on. Chances are that people will actually get to see the gem store items that you are wearing better with this option.

Edited June 4, 2023 by Quench.7091

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

6 hours ago, Ashen.2907 said:

I am not arguing otherwise. I hope that those desiring to show off do so to an appreciative audience.

 

But when the argument against something is, "I dont want others to have an option to avoid my desire to impose my preferences on them," it is a different matter entirely.

And, to be clear, I made no claims about players' rights. I merely pointed out that if one's opposition to a potential hide cosmetics option is that one wants to insist that others who are not interested be be required to be an audience for someone else against their will then there is something wrong. At no point did I argue against someone being able to show off.

Well, it's unfortunate that my point was missed.  Forgetting the absurdity of comparing player skins to "imposing my preference upon them," the claim can still be flipped the other way around.  The ability to nullify other player's skins is, indeed, imposing preferences upon another player.  Except the difference here is that somebody dressing ostentatiously isn't imposing anything upon anybody else, whereas in-game options to nullify another player's skin is, indeed, imposing something onto another player.  You have not directly called it rights, but you are quite blatantly invoking the concept of rights in your argument.  Specifically, the perverse concept I discussed earlier.  The one where all reasoning and argumentation is pointless because it renders all considerations into merely selfish entitlements.  Really, all it does is change "I don't wanna" into politically charged and deliberately deceptive language.

Since pointing out that this will go nowhere hasn't gotten anywhere, I'll bring up teleology.  All skins in this game are designed to be seen, and to be acquired.  It's easy to prove this, since all of our functional abilities are tied to numbers that are completely independent of the shape, size, and color of the skins that we wear.  Aesthetic consideration is all that matters to skins.  This is a multiplayer game, therefore all skins are meant to be seen by both the player as well as other players.  There are skins in this game that are rarer than others, requiring great wealth, skill, and/or time investment to acquire.  Thus, the appearance of these skins necessarily entails the prestige required to acquire them.  This also further proves that the skins are meant to be seen by others, because prestige is strictly a social currency, requiring the views of others to function.  Finally, there are skins created specifically to be sold in the gem store, which requires either copious amounts of in-game gold (time dedication), or real world money (financial dedication) to acquire them.  Thus, all facets of the skins deduced above are part of the financial structure of the game.  That is the function of skins in this game.  

Someone becomes a willing participant in this game's aesthetics the moment they launch the application.  The argument to not impose aesthetics is just silly in light of this fact, and an insult to the designers of Anet.  The financial structure of this game is dependent on people wanting to be seen in the skins of their choice, both by themselves and others.  Claiming the latter is morally unjust and shouldn't be honored is baseless, nonsensical (as I have demonstrated numerous times), and will negatively impact Anets bottom line if the game is changed in such a way.  It is important for players to dress in ways that you would not find appealing, and you volunteered to see these people when you started playing the game.  The only justifiable reasons to change this is if there's some mechanical problem that arises.  Taste is not one of those problems.  All combinations of colors and clothing, are to be considered intended behavior by default.  

That's why I'm defending FelixWolf on this one.  His concerns are legitimate, and yet so many people here are calling him wrong or even immoral because of it.  FelixWolf isn't doing it wrong when he buys gemstore items to show off.  It's quite the opposite: he's doing it right, because that's the intended purpose of gemstore items all along.  

Edited June 4, 2023 by Blood Red Arachnid.2493

[Fueki.4753]

1 hour ago, Quench.7091 said:

Peacock players are a core part of GW2's cash flow, so ArenaNet should preserve their own interests to an extent. It's not constructive to shoo away these concerns as trivial. It's one of the few tolerable payment models in the MMORPG market.

It's also in Arenanet's interest to retain as many players as possible.

If they can avoid even a handful of players leaving by letting them to opt out of seeing the hideous particle vomit light show of cosmetics, it'd be very much in their interest.

Edited June 4, 2023 by Fueki.4753

[Ashen.2907]

1 hour ago, Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

The ability to nullify other player's skins is, indeed, imposing preferences upon another player.

Your point was not missed.

There is no ability to nullify another's skins, nor is such suggested. Not looking at someone is not imposing anything on that someone.

 

And no, there is no implication of player rights or anything of the sort in my commentary.

Edited June 4, 2023 by Ashen.2907

[kharmin.7683]

3 hours ago, Fueki.4753 said:

It's also in Arenanet's interest to retain as many players as possible.

If they can avoid even a handful of players leaving by letting them to opt out of seeing the hideous particle vomit light show of cosmetics, it'd be very much in their interest.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

[Fueki.4753]

19 minutes ago, kharmin.7683 said:

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

This is not about one or the other.

If players want to show their bling bling particle vomit off to others, they can simply go up to others players on their own screen.

If other players, like me, don't want to see other players' bling bling particle vomit, we ought to the option to not see it on our screens.

That way, the bling bling players can show off on their screens, while we don't see it on our screens.

It's the optimal solution for both sides.

[Jin.8501]

On 6/4/2023 at 9:03 AM, Fueki.4753 said:

It's also in Arenanet's interest to retain as many players as possible.

If they can avoid even a handful of players leaving by letting them to opt out of seeing the hideous particle vomit light show of cosmetics, it'd be very much in their interest.

Whales pay more than non whales 

[Fueki.4753]

24 minutes ago, Jin.8501 said:

Whales pay more than non whales 

And whales still need the others players to have a decently populated game that they deem worth to continue paying for.

Thus, it should be in Arenanet's interest to also care for non-whales.

Edited June 5, 2023 by Fueki.4753

[Epsilon Indi.2031]

On 6/4/2023 at 4:31 AM, kharmin.7683 said:

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

IDK friend.  If "the many" are obsessed with  being obnoxious and forcing their stuff on everyone else, they can go elsewhere.  I'd rather not have ANet cater to people like that.

[Super Hayes.6890]

I would pay money for cosmetics that change other player's appearances on my screen. Anet, please sell me themes!

[Danikat.8537]

So just checking I've understood this correctly:

The answer is that the option to hide players' visual effects won't affect gem store cosmetics at all because it only applies to skill effects in combat, not other types of effects that may be on a character like weapon and armour skins, outfits, mounts, infusions etc.

Some people would like an option to disable those as well, but aren't going to get it in this update and that's why there's so much debate about whether or not it should be added.

[The Boz.2038]

I would really love to reduce most other players to, like, grey goo that doesn't tank my 2080TI and i9 into 16 FPS during Soo Won, DBS, etc. 
I would also really love it if that setting excluded people in my party, so that my friend can show me her new legendary that pairs nicely with her shoes.

[zealex.9410]

The point is for my visual clarity of the game to not be impaired when light shows pass by me and in metas the go the screen go white. It hurts the visual appeal of the game and ruin the art style.

[Astralporing.1957]

On 6/4/2023 at 11:31 AM, kharmin.7683 said:

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

In theory, sure, it's a good rule (and one i 100% agree with). In practice however the current state of the world says something exactly opposite.

[patton the great.7126]

Woo I've run this in PvP and wvw for years...I finally get to turn of the graphical vomit in PvE too!!! 

Anet...your getting me all hot and bothered....suddenly I'm not as bitter about wasted content like fishing and skiffs and ofcourse lack of WvW/pvp content in general. 

Keep up the good work you smexy pirates!

[Sweetbread.3678]

If something is so offensively garish that it's literally interfering with other players' ability to see what's happening in the game, then yeah there should be an option to opt-out of seeing it. If you paid real money for it, great you still get to enjoy it, but if your self-worth is tied up in making everyone look at an outfit you designed that's so tacky and obnoxious that it's become a straight-up gameplay/accessibility issue then that's definitely a you problem.

Edited June 6, 2023 by Sweetbread.3678

[ugrakarma.9416]

I think a fable has been created around this subject, that there are people who care how others see them. I think it's a minority of the minority...

In reality, players who care about dress up are more concerned with immersion.

[Gravitron.7982]

3 hours ago, Sweetbread.3678 said:

If something is so offensively garish that it's literally interfering with other players' ability to see what's happening in the game, then yeah there should be an option to opt-out of seeing it. If you paid real money for it, great you still get to enjoy it, but if your self-worth is tied up in making everyone look at an outfit you designed that's so tacky and obnoxious that it's become a straight-up gameplay/accessibility issue then that's definitely a you problem.

That's a great stance to take, that a players own personal choices are their business, and other players shouldn't be forced to participate in their choices.

[Krzysztof.5973]

Regardless of your opinion on the gemstore... I can't tell if they're incompetent or ignorant but they did not put enough work into this update. For example some mechanics are affected by this option. If someone gets a green circle mechanic during mai trin strike or deimos and have it set to none or even party, it is invisible to you. And we can't even choose how many of these effects are affected. Either you have to see literally everything or cannot see anything at all. 

[Linken.6345]

20 minutes ago, Krzysztof.5973 said:

Regardless of your opinion on the gemstore... I can't tell if they're incompetent or ignorant but they did not put enough work into this update. For example some mechanics are affected by this option. If someone gets a green circle mechanic during mai trin strike or deimos and have it set to none or even party, it is invisible to you. And we can't even choose how many of these effects are affected. Either you have to see literally everything or cannot see anything at all. 

Same with the green on whisper of jormag.

[Smoky.5348]

Surprised how much people don't wanna look at other people in an MMO. And, I thought I was shy.

But humor me this, regardless; how about the opposite effect? How about an option to stop other people from viewing my customizations? Then, l could actually wear what l want and not worry about how other people see me.