(04-30-2015, 04:17 PM)K Wrote: Limiting design options because previous races didn't have as many sounds absolutely ridiculous to me. If they were really concerned about that then they should just add an extra option or two for other races further down the line.The crux of it is, while we are free to make positive estimates on the reaction of the Playerbase, Square Enix, or any game Developer really, have a bad track record of such assumptions.
Frankly, Au Ra have no extra options. Like miqo'te, they don't even have muscle definition sliders, so I think that covers the limbal ring and colour additions. They also have fewer tail options than miqo'te if I recall correctly. Would the single addition of choosing horns independently really upset people? I highly doubt it... and even if they believed that it might, I think it would be absurdly silly for them to hold back because of it.
As such, I don't think that's why horns and faces are linked - and I certainly hope it isn't.
Also, speculative equivalencies are merely speculative. The Limbal Ring for a Au Ra can be the equivalent of a tattoo Hyurs. Tail Sliders are muscle sliders are ear sliders and so on. Scale patches are beauty marks and scars and so-forth.Â
Suddenly Au Ra get differential horns but Elezen don't get differential ears, followed by Mi'qote. Then that happens and Au Ra wonder why they don't have horn sliders and Hyur, Roe, and Taru wonder what they're going to get for all the new additions.
While you may think otherwise, Square Enix can't take that chance. They've got a backlog of bugs and concerns and imbalances and loads of complaints that there's not enough (insert piece of content here) to address, on top of any new content they wish to add. It would take time and resources to what would amount (to be fair) to an overhaul of the character creation and character rendering process. I assure you, it would not wind up being 'easier' than that given all the technical testing quality control, and coding (it's not just character wise, it's data storage and load both server side and client side)anything short of that wouldn't be worth the work load because of all the technical hurtles they'd have to cross.
It's easy to sit client side and speculate as to what little difficulty it would be to change something. It's an entirely different world to sit on the production side of what's pretty much considered a 'living game'.
____________________________________________________________
Again, as a personal perspective, I'd be all about more options. However I'm a hobbyist when it comes to following Gaming as an industry and am familiar with a lot of the tripping points and tropes of developers.
I do not see this happening, at the very least not anytime soon. The way it's structured implies to me that they created a rather rigid system off the bat and to expands the options will likely require a good bit of overall. I could be wrong, but my gut feeling on this tells me to settle in with what we have.
I'm not saying 'don't give feedback' as, again, I want this to happen too. Just please, please do not become hung up on it.
