Having awful taste in fashion should be a bannable offense.

[Aodlop.1907]

So much customization in this game. And what do players come up with?

 

Permafrost & Abyssal dyes + awful glowy infusions + legendary weapon and backpack that don't match with anything. 

 

I should be able to report people with awful taste.

[AgentMoore.9453]

Would you mind posting a pic of your main? Unrelated.

 

The Fashion Police would like to know your location. (Y/N)?

[Obfuscate.6430]

Unfortunately taste is subjective - but also flashy (intense shader defying) colors and effects-loaded items have been a way to reward players for difficult achievements. People are going to naturally want to stack as many of those on their character as possible to show prestige, and for some - knowing they are irritating people is also a part of the appeal. 
It is immersion breaking, and lag inducing, but this is also the result of Arenanet's reward system. 
You can not ask people to hide the fruits of their labor, however, there have been threads about disabling the visuals on some of them. 
My own proposition is to give us new ways of collecting and displaying our rewards - similar to the original Hall of Monuments. A place to display collected weapon and armor sets for example, or our crafted legendaries. 
 

[Dawdler.8521]

But shadow abyss and human females give you more dps. Every thief knows this.

[Omega.6801]

"How dare you like what I don't like!!!!!" - the Thread.

[Aodlop.1907]

6 hours ago, Obfuscate.6430 said:

Unfortunately taste is subjective

Taste might be subjective, but beauty isn't. Beauty has objective criteria, and if you claim that beauty is "subjective" as well, that means we live in a world where I can't say that the Chambord Castle and the Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque aren't objectively beautiful buildings. It should also be noted that studies have shown that newborn babies, still too young to be tainted by any form of beauty standards biases, have been shown to react positively to traditionally beautiful faces and traits.

"Subjective" is thrown around way too much these days. I thoroughly dislike this word.

6 hours ago, Obfuscate.6430 said:

People are going to naturally want to stack as many of those on their character as possible to show prestige

You can display wealth while still looking good. Pick either a legendary weapon, backpack, or an expensive infusion and theme your whole armor around it, carefully picking the matching dyes to make it all fit nicely together. 

In a world where infusions cost 10,000 gold, owning abyssal & permafrost dyes isn't really seen as a feat of strength anymore. Might as well not look like a clown.

[kharmin.7683]

Taste subjective, but beauty isn't?  Ha!

[costepj.5120]

Beauty is in the eye of the Beholder. Every Forgotten Realms player knows this to be true.

[Sarrs.4831]

We should be able to vote people out of gw2 on the basis of fashion

[Aodlop.1907]

2 minutes ago, kharmin.7683 said:

Taste subjective, but beauty isn't?  Ha!

Yes. I suggest you read Kant, on beauty and intersubjectivity. It's a pretty interesting read, and I'm sure it will make you reevaluate and question some deeply rooted convictions of yours. 

[kharmin.7683]

3 minutes ago, Aodlop.1907 said:

Yes. I suggest you read Kant, on beauty and intersubjectivity. It's a pretty interesting read, and I'm sure it will make you reevaluate and question some deeply rooted convictions of yours. 

Why, then, do we need beauty contests?  Society should just declare one man or woman as the most beautiful and leave it at that.

[Aodlop.1907]

Just now, kharmin.7683 said:

Why, then, do we need beauty contests?

We don't. Have you ever watched one? I haven't. Most forms of entertainment, especially on TV, are catered towards the lowest common denominator. 

[Jwake.7013]

4 minutes ago, Aodlop.1907 said:

Yes. I suggest you read Kant, on beauty and intersubjectivity. It's a pretty interesting read, and I'm sure it will make you reevaluate and question some deeply rooted convictions of yours. 

Trying to have a philosophical debate about beauty in a video games forum? Ok.

[Aodlop.1907]

I'd argue the world would probably be a better place if philosophical debates weren't expected to be contained in dedicated environments, but instead could happen anywhere, at any time. There's never a bad time to work on your critical thinking skills.

Edited June 6, 2021 by Aodlop.1907

[AgentMoore.9453]

8 minutes ago, Aodlop.1907 said:

I suggest you read Kant, on beauty

I Kant even. I was hoping this was a gag thread.

 

All right then - Kant, on beauty:

What is beauty according to Kant?

Kant defines beauty as being judged through an aesthetic experience of taste. This experience must be devoid of any concept, emotion or any interest in the object we are describing as beautiful. Most of all, the experience of beauty is something that we feel.

 

So according to them, things are beautiful to us depending on taste. If taste is subjective, beauty is subjective. Considering we live in a world where Lucas the spider and arachnophobia are both massively popular, I'd say that tracks.

[Jwake.7013]

6 minutes ago, Aodlop.1907 said:

I'd argue the world would probably be a better place of philosophical debates weren't expected to be contained in dedicated environments, but instead could happen anywhere, at any time. There's never a bad time to work on your critical thinking skills.

That's fair, just found it interesting place to choose is all.

[Aodlop.1907]

5 minutes ago, AgentMoore.9453 said:

All right then - Kant, on beauty:

 

Kant distinguishes between the pleasant, the beautiful, and the good, as these three are subject to judgments of "satisfaction." The merely pleasant is discerned by a sense judgment and is singular (what we would call "subjective," always a matter of what is pleasant *for me*); the beautiful is discerned by an aesthetic judgment, which is universal; and the good is discerned by a logical judgment, also universal. The crux of Kant's position is that while a judgment of taste is subjective, the satisfaction which leads one to such a judgment is universal: "The beautiful is that which apart from concepts is represented as the object of a universal satisfaction"

[Teratus.2859]

I share your disdain for such ugly eyesore characters but banning people for it?..

Nah that's going way too far lol
 

[costepj.5120]

" The crux of Kant's position is that while a judgment of taste is subjective, the satisfaction which leads one to such a judgment is universal"

But that's obviously wrong, so invalidates the whole argument.

[Zohane.7208]

46 minutes ago, Aodlop.1907 said:

Taste might be subjective, but beauty isn't. Beauty has objective criteria, and if you claim that beauty is "subjective" as well, that means we live in a world where I can't say that the Chambord Castle and the Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque aren't objectively beautiful buildings. It should also be noted that studies have shown that newborn babies, still too young to be tainted by any form of beauty standards biases, have been shown to react positively to traditionally beautiful faces and traits.

"Subjective" is thrown around way too much these days. I thoroughly dislike this word.

You can display wealth while still looking good. Pick either a legendary weapon, backpack, or an expensive infusion and theme your whole armor around it, carefully picking the matching dyes to make it all fit nicely together. 

In a world where infusions cost 10,000 gold, owning abyssal & permafrost dyes isn't really seen as a feat of strength anymore. Might as well not look like a clown.

Then again, fashion is about taste, or most of the fashion over the centuries would never have happened.

Take, for example, the trashed clothing that's been popular ("fashionable") on and off since at least the 1970's. I strongly doubt Kant or anyone else would find "objective beauty" in those and yet it's ultra fashionable it seems.

[mindcircus.1506]

GW2 Players: "GW2 has the best community EVER!!!!!"

Also GW2 Players: "I don't like your clothes so you shouldn't be allowed to play the game"

[Astralporing.1957]

1 hour ago, Aodlop.1907 said:

Taste might be subjective, but beauty isn't. Beauty has objective criteria, and if you claim that beauty is "subjective" as well, that means we live in a world where I can't say that the Chambord Castle and the Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque aren't objectively beautiful buildings.

Actually, yes, you can't say that. Or rather, you can, but you would be wrong.

 

What was considered beautiful and not kept changing all over the years. Not only in places like architecture and fashion, but also when considering human figure. And even if we don't look at the history, and look only in the present, it's still not constant all over the globe. A person that is considered beautiful in one culture, may very well end up not being so in another.

 

 

Quote

 

It should also be noted that studies have shown that newborn babies, still too young to be tainted by any form of beauty standards biases, have been shown to react positively to traditionally beautiful faces and traits.

 

There's no such thing as "traditionally beautiful faces and traits". That keeps changing. And as for those studies you brought up - yes, it has been attempted several times. The results were indeed interesting. The most interesting fact was generally infant response was very in-line with what the testers considered to be attractive and unattractive (which was by no means uniform to all testing groups - in fact, i found one case of study that was testing attractiveness of house pets, and let's say i highly disagree with them about how they assigned "attractive" and "unattractive" labels, because to me it seemed to be very arbitrary).

 

Also, please, do not bring Kant in here - philosophers are arguing about the Concept of Beauty since ancient times, and are yet to reach any form of consensus on the issue - often even with themselves. Which (to me) clearly shows that even understanding of what beauty is is in itself something subjective.

Edited June 6, 2021 by Astralporing.1957

[Krzysztof.5973]

Does "your generic WvW commander" look fall into this category? The norn or charr with the legendary wvw backpiece and spikey hair that are made to stand out from everybody else in the squad (or so they think).

Edited June 6, 2021 by Krzysztof.5973

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

Thank goodness the Devs don't agree with such a statement. 

 

That would surely precipitate the doom of Guild Wars 2. 

[Raizel.1839]

No.