Discussion - The Skin Toggle Button

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ronyn

Commander
Staff member
Community Manager
Director of Marketing and Community
Jul 26, 2016
722
2,698
93
#81
All of this has been said and re said.
I'm about to lock this thread for being circular and useless.

I'll give it a few hours to see if anything new is brought to the table, otherwise everyone will have to just let it be.
 

ChAzZ_NuT

Kaiju Slayer
Kaiju Slayer
Jan 22, 2017
93
194
33
#82
Everyone's offended by everything these days, not a legit reason.

Sexual, yeah, and sex sells. Grummz knows it, he even made fun of Blizzard and laughed as they censored WoW while he added the Mariegold skin, brawling about how proud Em8er is of their navels.
Em8er is also not age rated, and if my memory serves me right Grummz has said that making Em8er for a specific age group is not in his focus or interest... He wants to make Em8er, and it'll get the rating it gets.

Immersion breaking... That's the only valid point. But at the same time, Crixa is in full control of how immersion breaking they're making their skins as they're the ones deciding to put them in the game. And this has never been a major problem in any other game before, sure, one might be upset that there's police car mounts in a fantasy-game but gamers have always solved that issue by looking the other way.
Not to mention our character's skins will mostly be covered up by battle frames anyway... People finding you on the battlefield for example won't have to worry about your character's skin cuz you're gonna main a Heavy Frame, which is fully enclosed according to current design.

You also forgot to add that people pay for skins for their visual expression with either time or money, possibly both of required to mix-match details earned in game. Someone might've spent 100's of hours grinding a specific piece of cosmetic armor, and getting that piece and finally be able to wear it and display that they're the proud owner of such item... Should not be filtered away.

So why is it that we can't find a middle ground? Instead of focusing on ON vs OFF, we could do what Ashes of Creation does and have a button for AUTO-OFF when performance calls for it, if FPS gets low in crowded areas. Because that'd be a legit reason to turn cosmetics off, because performance should always come first in priority... If this was the function of this button I'd have it checked myself.
I disagree, the fact that this can simultaneously be used as a way to filter out stuff that may offend you for X,Y and Z. Without effecting others, is a valuable reason to have it. There are so many different cultures, religions, groups... people from all walks of life with different experiences. They can quietly decide what they want to see, and it won't effect you in the slightest.

Whether or not if sex sells, does not disprove the value which many individuals can gain from filtering out a skin which is overly sexual. Some people do not want to see it in their game. And they don't have to.

Sure Grummz might have made jest at WoW, whilst advocating for sexy skins. So what? Does not change the fact that there will be individuals who don't want to see it in their game.

Yes Em8er has not been age rated yet, not sure what your point is there.

You saying "Immersion is the only valid point" does not make it the only valid point. I disagree.

Yes Crixa is in control of what skins will be immersion breaking, what is your point?

Yes the frames will cover part of your skin, you will also be able to see part of your skin depending on the frame you chose. And you'll get to enjoy looking at the skin on your frame too.

I believe you over exaggerate the term "Filtered Away", like all of a sudden everybody's going to suddenly start filtering one particular piece of clothing you spent hours grinding for. It's just very unlikely to happen.

I don't know why you keep bringing up performance, this has nothing to do with game performance.
 
P

punkbuzter#6186

Guest
#83
Ok so there we have it. They do exist. That was my point all along.

But then you say they don't care about their projection on others, ok. Interesting.
Earlier in this thread, didn't you say something like "if people don't like the skins in the game they can just not play"?, and "if parents don't want their kids to play a game they should just not let them play"

So why is "if people don't like the toggle aspect they can just not play" any different?


Ok.

BUT to be fair, speaking from a purely mathematical/statistics context: we don't have any reliable metrics for gamers as a whole on an issue like this because it hasn't been brought up to them. Speculation is not data. We can only infer what it would be based on how other personal toggle features have done, and even that only takes us so far.

In reality, it's only the portion of the EM-8er fanbase who noticed, and then only the few who have spoken up about it so far. Out of that sample group who have spoken up, most are fine with it or even for it. Very few have made any statement against it. Again, speculation about what people might say if they did speak is not data. We can't do anything with that.


Think about what you just said.
You could make that same blanket argument against any new feature, but by itself it holds no value.
Every feature (mechanic and genre) that is common now, was once brand new and never before seen.
For every new feature it's the same story.
The industry survived without it for a while, sometimes years, sometimes decades, and then it got created. Someone somewhere did it for the first time, then it was no longer new.

If you want to stop the creation of a new feature, of any kind, what you have to provide is a reason to think that enough people won't like it, that it would limit the games success. BUT by your own argument, you think it's half and half on either side, and that most people won't care much.


Do what is best for your own happiness.
Where do I say "if you don't like it don't play it"?
If I have said that then there must've been a misunderstanding along the way.

Parents should take more responsibility, yes. I see parents at the supermarket putting iPads in front of their kids while grocery shopping to keep them quiet instead of doing their parenting and being active with the kids. A screen is the solution to a lot of parents and that's F'ed up imho.
If a parent can't check ESRB/PEGI ratings on the games they buy for their kids then it's a messed up world... Oh, but they don't. There's 10yo playing GTA even tho it's an 18+ game, same goes for a plethora of games out there, parents just don't bother and even if they do bother, if the kid is determined to play that game they're gonna find ways to play it anyway... So whatever obstacles you throw around at the rest of us, the only ones that'll suffer is the ones you didn't intend to suffer.
If the kids managed to bypass parental control, if the kids managed to bypass the age restrictions to buy they game, if the kids managed to bypass the age restrictions during account creation, if the kids managed to bypass age restrictions during account sign-in... What makes you think they won't bypass a button in the game settings? That is outrageous!


If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
You could as well have made a proper survey to add this button further down the road when you have more people/data to rely on, during Beta for example. You're talking to me about statistics, how come your statistical analysis to add this button is more accurate than mine when you don't have accurate data to prove your own points?
You told me you had to make a hard turn to one side or the other, that tells me the validity of the discussions and arguments at the time was closer to 50/50 than 80/20, so why does Crixa at this point in time when it hasn't been a major issue in other games before decide to address a non-issue during early pre-alpha... It doesn't make sense.
At the time, and even today, we still don't have our paid and "overly-sexy" skins visible in the demos, which means it has not yet been an issue where you need to start covering skins up... Literally creating a solution to a problem that does not exist.

What I have done is speaking from my own perspective, from another developer's perspective, from my friend's perspectives, and literally another community's perspective since I openly asked how they'd react to a button that turns off cosmetics for other players unwillingly. They all say the same, NO, unless it's about performance, and I agree.

I don't want to stop creation of new features, but I want to stop new solutions to problems that don't exist. Crixa is not a nanny.

My own happiness says NO to Em8er, until Grummz withdraws his stance during next CC and address this "problem" of un-immersive skins when it's an actual problem and make a proper survey, preferably during a Beta phase when there's enough people to give a valid result.
But until then, until proven to be wanted, don't even pretend you're gonna add it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
P

punkbuzter#6186

Guest
#84
I disagree, the fact that this can simultaneously be used as a way to filter out stuff that may offend you for X,Y and Z. Without effecting others, is a valuable reason to have it. There are so many different cultures, religions, groups... people from all walks of life with different experiences. They can quietly decide what they want to see, and it won't effect you in the slightest.

Whether or not if sex sells, does not disprove the value which many individuals can gain from filtering out a skin which is overly sexual. Some people do not want to see it in their game. And they don't have to.

Sure Grummz might have made jest at WoW, whilst advocating for sexy skins. So what? Does not change the fact that there will be individuals who don't want to see it in their game.

Yes Em8er has not been age rated yet, not sure what your point is there.

You saying "Immersion is the only valid point" does not make it the only valid point. I disagree.

Yes Crixa is in control of what skins will be immersion breaking, what is your point?

Yes the frames will cover part of your skin, you will also be able to see part of your skin depending on the frame you chose. And you'll get to enjoy looking at the skin on your frame too.

I believe you over exaggerate the term "Filtered Away", like all of a sudden everybody's going to suddenly start filtering one particular piece of clothing you spent hours grinding for. It's just very unlikely to happen.

I don't know why you keep bringing up performance, this has nothing to do with game performance.
Why don't we delete the idea of this button for the time being, since we don't have un-immersive skins that offends anyone at this point in time anyway, and make a proper survey about it when there's more people to give an accurate result like a Beta phase, and see if people want that option or not?

5k votes when people have seen and played with the skins and actually have an experience with the game to make a proper call, then we have our reading.
Meanwhile, we treat Em8er as we have treated any other game, without the idea of this button... Then we'll see if people actually want it.

I think that's a great and balanced idea, then we'll see who's right.
 

ChAzZ_NuT

Kaiju Slayer
Kaiju Slayer
Jan 22, 2017
93
194
33
#85
Why don't we delete the idea of this button for the time being, since we don't have un-immersive skins that offends anyone at this point in time anyway, and make a proper survey about it when there's more people to give an accurate result like a Beta phase, and see if people want that option or not?

5k votes when people have seen and played with the skins, then we have our reading.
Meanwhile, we treat Em8er as we have treated any other game, without the idea of this button... Then we'll see if people actually want it.

I think that's a great and balanced idea, then we'll see who's right.

The thing is Zingo, personally I don't see a problem with having it. Having listened to the proposed negatives so far. I actually started off leaning against the idea, having not made up my mind yet. But you and a few others changed my mind, now that I have a broader idea of the use case for this function.

And I'd like to respect the decisions of the people before me who put it into place to begin with. The positives outweigh the negatives. And if people don't like it, they'll definitely speak up.

And I don't understand how you use the term "Fixing something that ain't broken." Nothing is necessarily broken, but I definitely think this is a great way to improve peoples options over how they get to control their own gaming experience as individuals.
 
P

punkbuzter#6186

Guest
#86
The thing is Zingo, personally I don't see a problem with having it. Having listened to the proposed negatives so far. I actually started off against the idea. But you and a few others changed my mind, now that I have a broader idea of the use case for this function.

And I'd like to respect the decisions of the people before me who put it into place to begin with. The positives outweigh the negatives. And if people don't like it, they'll definitely speak up.

And I don't understand how you use the term "Fixing something that ain't broken." Nothing is necessarily broken, but I definitely think this is a great way to improve peoples options over how they get to control their own gaming experience as individuals.
You can't even lift a finger to agree to let the idea go, treat Em8er as we have treated all the other games, until we have enough people to give an accurate read if people want this button or not...
it is hopeless
 

ChAzZ_NuT

Kaiju Slayer
Kaiju Slayer
Jan 22, 2017
93
194
33
#87
You can't even lift a finger to agree to let the idea go, treat Em8er as we have treated all the other games, until we have enough people to give an accurate read if people want this button or not...
That's not true, I literally just stated that I was initially against the idea.

When more people join the community, there is always the chance that stuff which is currently in the conceptual stages may be changed. It is inevitable.

If the function was going to have a blatant, seriously dramatic and damaging outcome. Then I'd be more concerned, but I don't see the problem personally.

If people want it changed, they'll speak up. Just like you are doing.
 
Likes: Mahdi
P

punkbuzter#6186

Guest
#88
That's not true, I literally just stated that I was initially against the idea.

When more people join the community, there is always the chance that stuff which is currently in the conceptual stages may be changed. It is inevitable.
WE DONT HAVE SKINS TO PLAY WITH, yet you insist that we should have a button to mute the very skins you have no experience playing with.... IN A PRE-PRE-PRE-PRE ALPHA to create a solution to a problem that does NOT EXIST yet.... WHY?

Why can't we have the idea of this button removed until proven wanted, as all the other games out there... Instead of needed until proven unwanted ???
Why is Crixa approaching this in reverse??? I am literally pulling hair I don't have....
 

ChAzZ_NuT

Kaiju Slayer
Kaiju Slayer
Jan 22, 2017
93
194
33
#89
WE DONT HAVE SKINS TO PLAY WITH, yet you insist that we should have a button to mute the very skins you have no experience playing with.... IN A PRE-PRE-PRE-PRE ALPHA to create a solution to a problem that does NOT EXIST yet.... WHY?

Why can't we have the idea of this button removed until proven wanted, as all the other games out there... Instead of needed until proven unwanted ???
Why is Crixa approaching this in reverse???
The cap's are very childish, and that's coming from ME.

Yes, you are correct. We don't have a game where skins can be equipped yet. And when we do, we may be able to see the skin-filter function in action.

And if this is a solution to a problem, then it may very well be a great one at that. And I look forward to seeing peoples reactions. They might love it. :)
 
P

punkbuzter#6186

Guest
#90
The cap's are very childish, and that's coming from ME.

Yes, you are correct. We don't have a game where skins can be equipped yet. And when we do, we may be able to see the skin-filter function in action.

And if this is a solution to a problem, then it may very well be a great one at that. And I look forward to seeing peoples reactions. They might love it. :)
No we don't, because you won't know who has it on/off.

Let there be a problem first so we can bring the solution.
Instead of applying the solution before we have a problem.
Because if there ain't a problem we don't need the solution.
And right now we don't have the problem because the skins doesn't exist.
... Thus we don't need the solution.

Capiche?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.