Massively Overthinking: That moment when your MMO looks like a ‘fire sale at an exotic pet store’

Massively OP Podcast listener John recently sent us a really great question that saw Justin and me sharply divided in terms of our responses, so naturally, we decided to kick it to the whole team and the readers too.

“When you walk through a city in WoW, you very rarely see two adjacent characters riding the same species of mount,” he wrote. “I just walk by, thinking, ‘Unicorn, griffin, dragon, wyvern, skeleton of a horse, motorcycle, floating-on-a-cloud, mammoth, turtle, rocket, sparkle pony, rancor, miniature TIE fighter,’ and so on. Once there’s a cash shop, special instance rewards and PvP mounts, a flood of new (and increasingly implausible) mounts hit the scene. It makes it hard, for me at least, to imagine that I am in any kind of a coherent setting. Why not add an optional checkbox for ‘Traditional Mounts’ that would cause other people’s mounts to render as normal mounts for their race? Everybody else would be able to see what they want to see, and cities wouldn’t look like a fire sale at an exotic pet store. I also propose the same solution for people who find female gear too revealing and impractical: Give me a ‘Sensible Armor’ checkbox as well!”

Why not indeed? Let’s hear it!

(With apologies to Trove, whose screenshot I just had to use above but is actually wholly justified in being wacky.)

Andrew Ross (@dengarsw): I really have no problem with avatar options. Maybe John’s forgotten the ages of “clone wars,” where we all looked the same. It’s frustrating in PvE games, but downright dangerous in FFA PvP games like Darkfall, where you had to target someone to know if they were on your team, and even then, the game had friendly fire.

But having some simple button that assigns all players the same race/class mount and armor for RP reasons? I don’t see the harm, but I don’t see much benefit either. RPers are generally the first ones modern MMO developers forget about these days. Mechanics tend to come first. I will agree with the sensible armor, though, and give a quick kudos to Ubisoft for getting female armor right.

Brianna Royce (@nbrianna, blog): I’m certain we can go back and forth for days arguing about people’s right to present and whose rights trump whom, and it’s fun to argue about for sure, but this has an uncomplicated analogue already: chat. We can already put annoying people on ignore and never hear or see a thing they say ever again, and communication is a thousand times more important to the sanctity and function of an MMORPG than whether other people know you’re riding a horse or a particle-bedecked bear-pegasus hybrid with a tentacle saddle and flaming purple eyes. I don’t see how putting people (or more specifically, their terrible mount and armor choices) on the equivalent of “visual ignore” is fundamentally different from putting them on “aural ignore” in chat. And we’re not even really talking about a true ignore — just a harmless mask.

Would I use it? Probably not; while I can think of examples of cosmetic outfit combos that definitely belong on an episode of What Not To Wear: MMO Edition, I enjoy people-watching too much. I like the insanity and clutter. I like wacky mounts and nonsense in games. I survived the Great Jedi Duels of Mos Eisley Spaceport! I ran around as a pink Ithorian with a purple lightsaber and a baby Hutt poking out of my backpack! What I’m saying is that I doubt I’d begrudge hardcore roleplayers for doing it to me so they don’t have to look at my ridiculous Elder Scrolls Online camel nonsensically riding around in the snow. In fact, I’d never even know.

That said, it would be nice if game studios didn’t force us into these positions to begin with. The games we discussed on the podcast, including World of Warcraft and Ultima Online, the ones that eventually became the worst offenders and set the worst precedents when it comes to eye-searing monstrosities, really didn’t begin that way, so it seems unfair to blame it on players who ought to have known just what kind of circus sideshow they were getting into. It really is the developers’ responsibility here, but since we know far too many of them care more about selling shinies in the cash shop than about lore integrity, maybe just give us the damn toggle.

Eliot Lefebvre (@Eliot_Lefebvre, blog): There was a supplement for White Wolf’s original World of Darkness line that, while well-intentioned, had some pretty bad ideas about how to manage a horrific environment. In brief, it proposed the idea that characters walking through an environment would each see a different version of the environment, so the character who grew up in Algiers would see dusty pottery and faded scraps of cloth, while the character who grew up in Japan might see discarded electronics.

Obviously, this was a terrible idea, not simply because it meant twice as much work for the person running the game but because it completely divorced you from the idea that you were all sharing the same space and looking at the same thing. Once you can edit the world around you for content, it stops being a shared experience, and while there can be good reasons for making an experience less shared in some fashion (which would make this response even longer), appealing to a personal desire to make more common things in lore seem more common in the game world doesn’t fall under that header.

I can understand walking through a city and thinking “jeez, why does everyone have a flaming unobtainable magical mount instead of common mounts,” but if the developers want those mounts to be common among players, ways exist to make that happen. Final Fantasy XIV has a number of unusual mounts available, but almost all of them are some variety of fairly understandable and comprehensible mounts, and the game extensively shows the commonality of chocobos as mounts all across the game. There’s also no shortage of customization for chocobo mounts, encouraging players to use the birds instead of another mount.

In the case of World of Warcraft, there’s little reason not to use a flying mount in any region with flight, and since flight has been ubiquitous in the game for so long basically everything is based on “what can fly.” Disliking it is a problem of the designers, not the players using the mounts.

Similarly, the idea of being able to turn on an “armor filter” is misplacing the problem. I don’t have a problem with the fact that there are skimpy outfits in the game; I have a problem when armor is skimpy on women and fully covering on men, or when upwards of 80% of the game’s armor for female characters is entirely based around looking sexy instead of functionality. (I hate to harp on FFXIV, but it neatly sidesteps both of these issues, with only a handful of pieces being more revealing on women and a wide variety of styles available for both genders.) I don’t want a switch to avoid seeing it; I want the designers to do a better job.

In short, no, a filter for this stuff isn’t a solution to the problem. And far too frequently, I see the people asking for it also want everyone else to have to adhere to the standard of fewer frills; I’ve seen people arguing that fewer people should be able to, say, wear WoW’s tier sets, while still allowing exceptions so that they still get to wear them. Worth noting.

Justin Olivetti (@Sypster, blog): It’s a very interesting question and one that I try to see from both perspectives: from the person who would want to “censor” or alter other outfits/mounts for the sake of immersion or personal modesty, and from the perspective of people who would be censored without their knowing.

I sympathize with the sentiment here because if a cohesive game world is really important to you, then other players can often muck that up with their goofiness, travel patterns, and choice of costumes and gear. On the other hand, you play MMORPGs; this comes with the territory. I’ve always seen it far more of the charm than a distraction. But should games give tools for players to limit what others show off? They do in a small way, since you can turn off chat bubbles, disable forced emotes, and erase names and titles from your vision. So along this line, it would be more customization on your end that would technically hurt nobody.

But as someone who exists in game worlds and is seen by others, I can say that this would bug me tremendously to both know that others could be censoring my choice of outfits and mounts — and do this without my knowing. One of the great things about MMOs is personal expression and creativity, and many people channel that their their outfits (plus, it’s a great way to show off accomplishments). With one checkbox, this would render all of that null and void. There’d be an invisible barrier separating me from that person, and that’s not a great way to bind communities together.

Plus, what gives you the right to censor my avatar’s looks — even if it is just for your computer? That really rankles. I say, suck it up, be a part of the community, keep those barriers down, and if you don’t like it, there are other MMOs that have more visual cohesiveness for those that don’t want “broken immersion.”

MJ Guthrie (@MJ_Guthrie, blog): I can see how garish stuff is less than desirable (“hurts my eyes” is literal for me in some cases) and how it definitely can yank players out of an immersive mindset. Then again, by including such a motley assortment of mounts the game itself shows an obvious lack of respect for cohesion or immersion, so I have to wonder how much I would bother trying to maintain that cohesion myself when the game is clearly working against it? Do I really want to expend the energy and deal with the frustration working against something the devs are proponents of?

I also can see this from a totally different angle. Should people have the right to only see in game what they want to see, or should they be beholden to what devs want them to see? What about the rights of players to present themselves as they see fit? I mean, we do have many instances of elaborate character customization for just that. Where does it start and where does it end?

In Conan Exiles, you have people who can choose of their own accord to see nudity or not regardless of what others choose. This seems very wise and prudent, yes? But what about when how you look becomes more about your entire visage and not just the parts that bounce when you run? In EverQuest II, players can decide whether they see other characters in the original model form or in the SOGA alternate model. This was bothersome to many players — including myself — and even infuriating to some because people put a great deal of effort into carefully crafting the specific look they wanted to portray, and now people didn’t see that look. I personally detest almost all the SOGA models, and my character looks hideous in it, completely ruining her look. A friend hates the original models and was so happy to finally have a look with SOGA that perfectly portrayed his toon; he was not happy to learn that I and any other players who opted out didn’t see that look.

How you want to present to the world can be a very integral part of the game experience. Yes, some people don’t care one whit, and that’s cool too. But others care about how they are portrayed, and learning that how you portray can be different to everyone is not necessarily pleasant. And it totally sucks for roleplay because you can’t trust your eyes and react accordingly! A matron mother strutting around on her enslaved dragon presents a much different picture than if a few folks only see a little pony.

It boils down to does the right of the person to see only what they want trump the right of the person who wants to be portrayed how they want? Whose right is right?

As much as I am a total proponent of immersion, if the devs aren’t going to prioritize keeping their world a cohesive experience, I am not going to waste my time slamming my head against a wall trying to force it. I won’t win — the devs will! If they want immersion, they will have to work to make it so. Otherwise, part of being in an MMO for me means I just have to deal with all the uniqueness of the individuals involved. As long as players are using items/tools put at their disposal by devs, they have every right to look how they want and ride what they want.

All that said, I cannot deny the allure of the option to visually turn off all mounts in cities. One gets tired of staring at horse butt when one is simply trying to use the bank! And the visual clutter (not to mention how it taxes your system) of pets and mounts and players can get to be extreme.

Your turn!

SHARE THIS ARTICLE
Code of Conduct | Edit Your Profile | Commenting FAQ | Badge Reclamation | Badge Key

LEAVE A COMMENT

58 Comments on "Massively Overthinking: That moment when your MMO looks like a ‘fire sale at an exotic pet store’"

Subscribe to:
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most liked
Mewmew
Reader
Mewmew

People buy this stuff in order to be able to show it off to others. If you weren’t able to show it off to everybody, there’d be no reason to spend all the extra money trying to get the stuff. That is why you’ll never see a way to ignore it.

People choose how they are presented and they should too. You don’t get to set how the world sees my character, I do. If you try to take that power away from me, I’m simply not going to play that game.

If you come up with the argument that it really doesn’t affect us (which it does affect us, many of us put a lot of work into our characters for the purposes of others seeing them) and somehow win that debate, then there would be no reason someone couldn’t make the opposite buttons as well. That is buttons that put all females into skimpy clothes, for instance, or what about buttons to set us all a certain race so you don’t have to deal with races that make you uncomfortable?

It’s up to the developers to protect what is released into their world and the lore and such. Supposedly all of this stuff has a reason to be there and actually does exist in that world, so many you need to expand your vision a bit. Do you really think everybody would just be riding horses if this other stuff existed (which again, it does in that world)?

If you’re looking for a gritty realistic MMO maybe you need to change from whatever one has the sparkling pink unicorns on clouds mounts and find a different game, but don’t try to force the world to have to conform to your idea of what the game and world should be. You don’t get to take away our choice of what we look like, what we dress like, what we ride in the games. We aren’t riding or designing our looks just for ourselves but mainly for how others see us.

Chat is random, your words are not designed by the developers and put into the world. It is why online interactions can’t be rated. Muting chat, which usually is done for people who are breaking chat rules in one way or another, is far different than “muting” character or mount looks. These are things designed to be in the game, made and approved to be part of that world.

I’m starting to talk in circles now so I’ll finish here :D

Reader
O Ra

I don’t think you should even be able to mute people in game.

Reader
Wanda Clamshuckr

Hmm.

Yes, I do definitely wince when I see some outfits and mounts. For the most part, it is a quickly passing figure and then they are gone. Chances are, I’ll never see that person again. So, for the most part, it isn’t too much of a nuisance for me.

Now, with GW2, I found the esthetic to be rapidly tilting to the garish. Weapons, back slot items, wings, etc with as many particle effects and vibrancy possibly allowable without crashing the servers. For me, it was too much, and honestly was a factor for me to find another game. I mean, the main reason was the direction management took GW2, but the esthetic allowed for some icing on that cake they baked.

Would I use a visual filter? Naw. I don’t use them for nameplates either. I do use the ignore function, but for me chat is an entirely different beast. As I mentioned, if I see a Cash Shop Hero on his/her cringe-worthy mount, they simply go away on their own. If the game as a whole becomes too much of an eyesore for me, then I put my money elsewhere.

I suppose that’s why I like games like ESO and the upcoming CU. While ESO has dipped it’s toes into a broadening pond of fantastical appearances, generally it’s still traditional armor and weapons. CU seems to be sticking to their guns in this regard as well, which adds great appeal to what they are already offering.

gelfred
Reader
gelfred

I wholly agree, left playing GW2 for starting ESO a few weeks ago and enjoying it so far, but i do see a few of these unfitting items. Shame about gw2, but the aesthetics and constant mind changing on content make it a poor steady MMO for me, ill still be back for new content.

CU looks great, though its character style doesnt fully please me, the environment is enough to tide me over visually. Not sure if it will have cash shop for giant neon castle signs and triple bladed excaliburs with evil glows or such eventually, but lets hope not!

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Space Captain Zor

*cough* Rancor and AT-ST mounts *cough*

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

how does the allegory of the three monkeys go like again? see no evil hear no evil speak no evil?

i like ot have options for all tastes and desires. and the mmo genre generally does a good job of that (including korean games believe it or not!). i get more tired of the memes acting like it’s some kind of common thing to have all the female armour be sexy and unpractical. or the arguments that impractical armour isn’t realistic or didn’t exist historically. or even worse the idea that heavy plate armour is terribly practical in the first place (it isn’t, not with mideival construction methods no matter how many times they post pictures of that one renfaire sword lady wearing clearly modern designed and constructed breast plate to prove w/e they thing they’re proving).

ultimately yes boob armour existed in real life in history. and even better is that half naked men high on mushrooms berserker raged across europe for a thousand years without much resistence from more heavily armoured local troops.

otheriwse all the silly things you see in mmo’s mount and whatnot wise get a bit extreme in some games and i don’t care for them but it’s also part of the ambience and charm of the genre in itself and does me no acute harm. i can laugh at them and comment and move on and that will be that and i’ll be better for it.

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

the worst is potato sack robes on casters. and how somehow that’s more preferable than cute clothes that show the ankles and even *gasp* thighs. as if running around in a robe down to your ankles is ever practical irl.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Esoteric Coyote

I think seeing players run around in high heels, lingerie, sparkly thongs and angel wings more distracting than whacky and colorful mounts. However I would not want that option to go away, I understand that stuff sells far better than realistic sets. If I don’t like it, I can take my dollars else where or keep my opinions to myself.

Reader
Patreon Donor
Veldan

The problem is that if you are one of the few that dislike that stuff, there aren’t many places to take your dollars…

deekay_plus
Reader
deekay_plus

but but i want the game to change to my tastes and my tastes alone! :D

gelfred
Reader
gelfred

I think there is a line of garishness that is often crossed, whether for ‘prestige’ in gear grind games (WoW, GW2) and microtransaction models, because it drives visibility of the product the game wants you to buy (with time or money).

The legendaries and backpacks in GW2 are saturating the game, and I can imagine it soon being like WoW where the size and glow of pauldrons increases over expansions.

Rift certainly had more crazy stuff once the cash shop was in, and most free games also do similar.

Reader
Loyal Patron
Patreon Donor
Kickstarter Donor
thickenergy

I keep thinking of the all the pet katamari I saw in the Revelation Online stream. People that looked like they rolled around and had a bunch of random animals stick to them.

I don’t understand…

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Pandalulz

Honestly, I don’t think any MMO has really managed to immerse me in any way and anytime I have to work with or around other players, that further goes right out the window. So you know what, it’s a game, have fun with it. I love the silly.
If I want to feel immersed, I’ll play a single player game.
Also, just finished Neal Stephenson’s REAMDE. I love the idea of in game factions forming around “The Earthtone Coalition” vs “The Forces of Brightness.”

Reader
Patreon Donor
Loyal Patron
Suikoden

Yes, I would support the check boxes as the games stand, but ultimately prefer no need to check the box, because I do see how it would bother other players. However, unlike the SOGA models in EQII, the check boxes we are discussing would only apply to characters in violation of the boxes, not every single player. So if you weren’t scantily clad or driving a police car (for example) you would appear as is. So the player has the choice in this cases, versus the SOGA where they did not.

Reader
MesaSage

If the devs want to muck with their own lore, that’s up to them, but I don’t have to like it or stay around for it. I admit that the quantity of silly mounts is *one* of the things that keeps me out of WoW.

Reader
rafael12104

Hmm.So, are we talking MMOs/MMORPGs in general, right? Because niche games handle this differently to a degree.

So generally speaking it is not needed, IMO. First, these games are complicated enough with out adding yet another layer of complexity with regard to toggles that customize and “individualize” what you see. Simple as that. Adding another variable just adds more cycles, more issues, and more player/dev heart ache.

But ultimately, it isn’t needed. The old player immersion argument is starting to wear thin. There are niche games where such things aren’t even an issue because the games are all about being different and unique. And the graphics aesthetic adds to this. You mention Trove. Perfect example. You want to fly around on a toaster? Nobody will even blink.

There are other games were the aesthetic is more serious. And while there is some attempt at allowing interesting and unique mounts or armor they all fall within a specific type and art style. This varies in degrees according to the game. But, generally speaking, fantasy sticks with fantasy, Star Wars sticks with Star Wars etc.

And let’s be honest, when you play these games, the whole point is to be part of a world. In that world, you may see things that hurt your eyes, just like in real life. And when you choose a game, you, in part, make a choice as to what you expect to see. If WoW or any game becomes to liberal with what they allow as mounts or gear and it bothers you that much then maybe it is time to move on to another game.

And btw, I’m not responsible for your immersion, you are.

Reader
Scott Rondeau

The whole point of rare pets is to show off to other people. The option for others to remove that would hurt pet sales.

Reader
Witches

If the devs don’t care about immersion you will be fighting against the game design and will almost inevitably lose.

I’m unsure if this is worth dev time, but the solution could be to give people using the normalize function different coloured avatars that way you would know if someone wasn’t seeing you the way you were presenting yourself, of course this would also act as a scarlet letter, but i think the real issue here is where does one person freedom end and another one stars, and what do we do when they intersect, i see games as a giant intersection so i prefer to see the”real” fake world as it is, even if at times it displeases me.

I think the chat comparison is unfair, the chat is there do be used and it is often abused, the devs do not cause that, that’s all on the players.

Doesn’t something like this already happen with WOW? Or are the Chinese players on their own servers and can’t interact with people playing the regular version of the game?

Reader
Robert Mann

Honestly, a great solution. If you are somehow offended by people wanting to view things in genre then, if I may, I suggest that I DONT CARE!

If it’s really THAT important to people, different servers or games time… again.

flatline4400
Reader
flatline4400

“Plus, what gives you the right to censor my avatar’s looks”… what gives you the right to offend my sense of decorum? lol… and wth do you care how I see you? It *literally* has no effect on you *at all*, except that I guess in the back of your mind you’ll know that showing off your e-peen with a $50 mount gets you nowhere with some people. (And, frankly, those same people wouldn’t care even if they could see it.)

I already mod out some of the more obnoxious sounds of some mounts/pets in WoW (simple replacements of sound files in the client)… the motorcycle in particular is stupid loud. I have no problem with people having the ability to change what they see to some sort of baseline standard. EQ and EQ2 (and maybe others) have long had choices of which character model version your client uses, nobody ever seemed to be terribly upset about that.

Shintar
Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Shintar

Yet EQII is specifically called out in the article as an example of a game that did upset many people by having this option…

Reader
Patreon Donor
Veldan

As always, I find myself agreeing with MJ.

” Then again, by including such a motley assortment of mounts the game itself shows an obvious lack of respect for cohesion or immersion, so I have to wonder how much I would bother trying to maintain that cohesion myself when the game is clearly working against it? ”

This is pretty much why I’m more likely to deinstall a game where the visuals annoy me on a daily basis than try to use options to minimize the effect. If the devs don’t care, I can’t fix it anyway.

Reader
Utakata

What…you think driving around in a mini-police car or an overly saturated dolphin mount is not Tolkien enough for you guys? >.>

Reader
Johnny

Too much wild variation in mounts and all that is what made me leave Tera. The game was already kinda goofy, which I liked. For instance, being a little hamster man running around with a gigantic pike killing massive monsters was entertaining. But when people started driving around in cartoon police cars that didn’t suit the world both lore wise, but aesthetically, I was like… WTF. There were also clowns chasing the car along with all the comical noises you’d expect.

I think its on behalf of the producers to not demand such silly mounts in their game. If you offer to sell it, you can’t offer an option for others to block it as it lowers the value of the purchase. So with that said, I am against the ridiculous variations of mounts, but am against a button to block viewing them. I think its up to the devs to maintain the core of their game and not stray to far from it.

Reader
Chris Mc

Agree 100%. Illusions, outfits, mounts from cash shop which don’t fit the race/class destroy the immersion.

Reader
Mystyrys .

I am only annoyed by large mounts in crowded locations, like crafting areas, bank, auction house, or those that park on top of NPCs I need to click on! I toggle mounts off when in crafting areas in EQ2.

But otherwise, I love wild and crazy mounts. Whimsical, mechanical, Too Cute, choppers, etc. Or plain. I loved my little donkey in ArcheAge. Some are novelty for only a brief time, others become favs I never quit loving.

EQ2 Pegasus

Rift Hellbug

Rift Racing Snail

Rift Copper Eldritch Steed

Rift Opie Artifact Hunting Mount

Reader
Patreon Donor
Veldan

RIFT was actually one of the games where I ended up really disliking what they did to the game with mounts, but not because of the above. Fantasy animals in a fantasy game can work. I think the racing snail is pushing it, but still in the acceptable range.

What really put me off was the big robots, Star Wars-like hoverbikes, flying discs etc. Those had, and have, no place in RIFT. Yes the defiants have magitech, and a perfect example of that is the Eldritch horse you linked. That fits with the lore and setting. Robots and hoverbikes do not.

Yangers
Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Yangers

Yeah, these all sound like good ideas.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Rees Racer

Especially for cash shop costumes, a toggle on/off for other players would hurt sales, denying the purchaser the chance to preen about before everyone else…so that option would toss a spanner right into the works. Even those who spend days or weeks in dungeons/raiding or other grinding methods for cosmetic items would have a similar result.

There is a sort of mechanic in War Thunder that does a rather opposite thing. The official game skins do not display the Swastika (appropriately so, and actually banned in Germany) on Luftwaffe aircraft tails etc, even though it is historically accurate. However, any player may download and apply any community-made skin for any vehicle they choose…including My Little Pony themes, that are only visible to the user. This is not entirely relevant to this particular discussion, but tangentially related at the very least. ;)

Crow
Reader
Crow

Maybe the dodge here is that the plethora and explosion of sparkly, ostentatious cosmetics is pretty directly linked to gambling lockboxes and $60 digital lightsabers.

Moreover, it is a question of if one can continue to take the world seriously when the world doesn’t take itself seriously.

Rare, interesting and “cooler” mounts have almost always been a thing. But initially, before cash shops, they were mostly gated behind various achievements and/or heavy RNG. I did a number of questlines and grinds in vanilla WoW for interesting and/or offbeat pets that weren’t common. Having a Frostsaber was an achievement (hell that grind!) . Even lesser and/or rep mounts were still a certain badge of honor.

Now it means you opened your wallet and shelled out $20. Meh.

One of the reasons why something like SWG has a hard time existing now is because stuff like crafting raids that end up giving you cool stuff get eclipsed and drowned out by the rational lure of monitization. Sure, it is wicked cool to see all that shiny stuff and really be able to make yourself look how you want. But in so many cases that has become so divorced from the process of actually playing the game or engaging with any mechanic other than the storefront.

Reader
life_isnt_just_dank_memes

i like the toggle idea and GW2 already has a version of it to help people with lower end rigs. It puts everyone in default sets of armor. Why not allow for a modesty feature as well? I agree wholeheartedly with Bree’s assessment.

Day to day I don’t want to have to listen to Xx_Vapelord_420_xX ramble on about bs all the time, why should I have to suffer looking at his fantasy lady with the wild boob physics. That begs the question: Can’t we get an option to disable body physics? So distracting. I wouldn’t mind it if they were designed to act like a pair of breasts act, but no games have gone for realistic. If people can have the fantasy, they should be able to get a toggle for a more realistic world as well.

MJ Guthrie
Staff
MJ Guthrie

Just learned that in Revelation Online you can indeed check the box to remove jiggle physics! I did and it worked.

Reader
Sally Bowls

One can have the obligatory whine about WoW or the obligatory whine about cash shops, but IMO both is even less justified.

In 2015, Wowpedia was saying 425 mounts in WoW. By now there are certainly closer to one than zero thousand mounts in the game.

Ten – 10 – are available from the cash shop. A PvPer can count them all without taking off his pants.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Alex Js.

There absolutely should NOT be such “toggle” option to force “stock” textures/models. First of all, it COMPLETELY defeats the availability of optional cosmetic looks. Since you can NEVER be sure if someone will see your different, fancy outfit/mount (and instead they’ll all be seeing same boring stock model/texture because they toggled “boring” option “On”) – there would be very little incentive for other players to acquire those cosmetic items, which in turn means there would be very little incentive for developers to offer such options, for free or for some extra “real life money” price, and in case of cosmetic outfits/mounts being available in in-game store for “real money” this would obviously mean “less money for developers”, and “less money for developers” = bad for everyone, especially since so many developers are trying to turn away from “fixed monthly fee” system.

Second of all, even IF there would be such filter – it won’t solve the “root of the issue”: the developers willing to treat the whole game in a “silly”, “non-serious” way. Meaning that even if you’ll avoid seeing a Rainbow Dash mount or a W40K-like Dreadnaught companion pet running next to some player in your Medieval-themed MMO – you won’t avoid seeing same level of silliness in, for example, some quest descriptions or even the NPC names. Same goes for “scantily clad” armor or any other player outfits.

So for anyone who wants to COMPLETELY avoid such silly, “lore-breaking” or “misogynist” (whatever it’s trendy now to call revealing female outfits) visual expression of developer’s feelings towards particular game – there’s much simpler way: don’t play this particular game altogether and play something different instead. Something less vibrant, with much less choices for players and developers to express their unique personality or their sense of humor.

Reader
Robert Mann

Or, you know, they could re-enable it for RP if they wish to participate. That said, yes, games should be coming out that offer less ‘real-world interface’ setups for us… until then a toggle would be great for many of us!

Actually, developers could even start supporting RP stuff beyond basic emotes again, and you’d have more reason for people interested to get the fancy outfits.

Reader
Hirku

The only thing I care about with mounts is they be disabled in any sort of interior or if the player is doing anything that doesn’t involve traveling across the world. It’s very frustrating to not be able to even click on an NPC vendor because he’s buried in a mass of horses/spaceships/woolly mammoths.

Reader
Patreon Donor
Schlag Sweetleaf

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Greaterdivinity

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Greaterdivinity

100% behind an ability to toggle fanservice armor on/off on the client side. Love me some good fanservice outfits, but totally understand that it can ruin the gameplay experience for others, and a toggle seems like a great way to please both sides. Honestly, I can’t really think of much of a downside.

Never really thought about it for mounts, but makes sense to me as well. I’m down with a similar option.

“*insert game name* is adding in a brand new immersion toggle! Enable this to ensure all cosmetic items – armors, pets, mounts, and more – adhere to in-universe themes and are presented realistically. Disable it for all the glorious insanity and fanservice your heart desires!”

I WOULD SO BE DOWN TO SEE THAT AS A PATCH NOT IN EVERY MMO EVER

Reader
Mr_Planthead

I don’t mind if people don’t see what I’m riding/wearing but I’d never use that option. Its the people that think I shouldn’t even be able to ride/wear what I want that I have a problem with. WoW was a big one with people mad that flying was even available

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
squidgod2000

Armor/costumes/etc doesn’t bother me so much (though I’d love an option to not see custom dye jobs), but mounts and vanity pets drive me nuts. Some games are wise enough to give players the option to hide pets, but I’d love to see a default mount option. It just gets…stupid…sometimes. Even Vanguard—without a cash shop—added tons of random animal mounts like foxes, cats, beetles, rhinos, etc. Just stick to horses, dammit.

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Patreon Donor
Loyal Patron
BalsBigBrother

If someone wants to hide the outfit I put on my character I wouldn’t mind. I generally dress my character in a way I find pleasing and don’t really worry or even care about what anyone else may think or sees.

I would love a tickbox that would instantly hide all mounts / cosmetic pets of any description. That is mainly becuase I hate fighting my way through a sea of horse, camel, dragon butt and assorted pets to click the npc I want to click

Reader
Hirku

Heh, said the exact same thing before reading your post, at least we used different examples of offending creatures.

Reader
Kelley

Its intriguing that nearly all your pictures are Trion games but you link only one which is a Hellbug from Defiance :P

I like showing off my accessories as much as I like seeing others so for me its the right to show what I want that wins.

MJ Guthrie
Staff
MJ Guthrie

The bunny is EQII =D

wpDiscuz