Curse

Gedrand · Sep 28, 2006, 12:27 PM // 12:27

I don't have a problem with genders or races in general. My main character was an Elementalist male, and I made a very Asian-looking Assassin called Sakumi Nightshade in Factions and did quite a bit of writing about her. She was a street urchin taken in by a restaurant owner who secretly practised his martial skills by night, which included open hand, dagger, and archery combat skills. He passed everything he knew along to her, training her every night in secret. Long story! It made sense, anyways, since if I wasn't using Palm Strike, I was using Barrage. Heh. She was a lot of fun!

I do find, however, that I have to be satisfied with the look of a character, whatever their race or gender is, in order to get into it RP-wise. There's something about the male Necromancer model that bugs me, for example, and even though I enjoy the Necromancer skills, I just can't get into any of the characters of that profession that I've tried to make.

Really, there are just some face/hair combos that I like and others that I don't, and if there are six faces and five hairstyles that all (except for baldy) look highly similiar, then there's less of a chance that I'm going to come up with an interesting and unique character appearance that I am going to be satisfied with and that I won't find many other copies of in every town.

Females of the new professions seem to have Persian/Arabic/African/everything else in Nightfall represented in their hairstyles in faces, but that didn't seem to be the cast everywhere.

Hell, if I could have made a Paragon that looked as cool as Koss, I would have been all over that.

Kais Unduli · Sep 28, 2006, 12:56 PM // 12:56

I don't have a problem with not being able to "transplant" my Tyrian or Canthan faces onto Elonian characters. Each chapter of the game should have it's own unique look to it. These new faces and hairstyles let people know what land your character is from.

That being said, I am really curious as to why people are complaining about the faces for OLD professions. I would think by now everyone has created at least one character for each of the core professions. I know I have, and across 2 accounts I have 2 rangers, 2 warrior and 2 monks as well. When I make a necromancer (the one profession I'm missing that I really want for PvE) in Nightfall, I don't want it to look like a necro from Tyria or Cantha. I want it to have the distinct look of an Elonian necro.

If you absolutely must have a Cantha or Tyrian looking character, make one in the respective chapter, find the nearest harbor and start the character from Elona. Can't have the hairstyle you wanted? Nobody ever gets everything they want.

lyra_song · Sep 28, 2006, 01:43 PM // 13:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

This will only be a problem for the people who cannot, will not, or simply choose not to RP, and tend to stick with either a character that reminds them of themselves or a character they personally find attractive (which most likely will be of their own ethnicity). The problem here is that GW is about 80-90% filled with people that think this way.

Tis' a shame, but people are free to make their own choices. I don't necessarily call it racism, just habit, really.

I think its called ethnocentricism ^^

Omega X · Sep 28, 2006, 01:47 PM // 13:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solar_Takfar

As I said, look at what mod teams have done in their spare time for other games. it's perfectly possible. So yea, maybe I was shooting a tad high with 50, but I don't see why a professional artist team couldn't make a dozen faces in one day, thus "doubling our fun" (TM anet) by making us have more choice.

Its not possible for ANET because their team is split in half. You have to come up with attractive and glitch free faces and not infringe on anyone's appearance(Celebrities?). With a community as vain as GWs when it comes to facial appearance, its better to have fewer but attractive faces regardless. 50 faces and people will instinctively pick the same type of face every time.

10 is a modest and realistic goal. Yes, professional artists can probably churn out a dozen faces in a day, but you have to realize how much of that can make it into the game if its not good enough. There is a ton of concept work done all the time there, but only a fraction makes it into the game.

Cineris · Sep 28, 2006, 02:11 PM // 14:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

This will only be a problem for the people who cannot, will not, or simply choose not to RP, and tend to stick with either a character that reminds them of themselves or a character they personally find attractive (which most likely will be of their own ethnicity). The problem here is that GW is about 80-90% filled with people that think this way.

Tis' a shame, but people are free to make their own choices. I don't necessarily call it racism, just habit, really.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

I think its called ethnocentricism ^^

It's also called nepotism, realism, or basic storytelling.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with creating characters that are similar to yourself, nor characters who you find attractive. This is an issue that's been hashed out thousands of times since RPGs became popular with D&D.

There are always those elitists who think playing a one-eyed, one-legged eunuch halfling barbarian is "better roleplaying" than playing a highly muscular warrior. It's not. I'd go further and say that playing something that you don't identify strongly with solely for the purpose of playing it is a gimmick, and thus in my opinion worse than the latter option.

And, quite frankly, you never need to interact with another person in Guild Wars at all. If you think their conceptualization of their character's story, if they even have one, is incompatible with yours then ignore them and move on. It's pretty futile to attempt to make everyone in this game coincide with any particular vision, especially considering the significant non-roleplaying element it has.

arcanemacabre · Sep 28, 2006, 02:44 PM // 14:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cineris

There is absolutely nothing wrong with creating characters that are similar to yourself, nor characters who you find attractive. This is an issue that's been hashed out thousands of times since RPGs became popular with D&D.

Never said there was.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cineris

There are always those elitists who think playing a one-eyed, one-legged eunuch halfling barbarian is "better roleplaying" than playing a highly muscular warrior. It's not. I'd go further and say that playing something that you don't identify strongly with solely for the purpose of playing it is a gimmick, and thus in my opinion worse than the latter option.

I've never had a problem with people picking the more 'vanilla' character designs, no matter how boring they seem at first, as long as they can carry it out uniquely and make it interesting. Someone who can do that makes higher marks in my book than someone who simply comes up with the most whacked-out concept and then sits on it, hoping it will grow legs and control itself.

My point was only that 80-90% of the people in GW tend to not give a crap about RP and just choose the first set of features that capture their eye. This doesn't mean that people choosing the stereotypical 'Conan' warrior and marches into Elona are all bad RPers, as there might be a few that make that character with a specific background in mind.

Not that any of it matters to me, what everyone does is their business. As the saying goes "To each their own". I call it a problem only because in the context of creativity, I see the 'gut-reaction' choice as lacking and almost detracting to the community as a whole, though that statement is a huge exaggeration to how it truly is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cineris

And, quite frankly, you never need to interact with another person in Guild Wars at all. If you think their conceptualization of their character's story, if they even have one, is incompatible with yours then ignore them and move on. It's pretty futile to attempt to make everyone in this game coincide with any particular vision, especially considering the significant non-roleplaying element it has.

I think all that is pretty obvious. Thanks for that jump back into reality, though.

thedeadwalk! · Sep 28, 2006, 02:51 PM // 14:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cineris

It's also called nepotism, realism, or basic storytelling.

Nepotism is favoritism based on familial relationships. Or (the basic idea behind), what people complain about Affirmitive Action for: giving people an advantage based on something other than skill.

I would say using your own ethnicity as a standard for whatever quality is not a good part of "realism" or "basic storytelling."

Quote:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with creating characters that are similar to yourself, nor characters who you find attractive. This is an issue that's been hashed out thousands of times since RPGs became popular with D&D.

It sounded like he was commenting on why people chose to make characters similar to them, not that there is something wrong with people making characters similar to them.

Quote:

There are always those elitists who think playing a one-eyed, one-legged eunuch halfling barbarian is "better roleplaying" than playing a highly muscular warrior. It's not. I'd go further and say that playing something that you don't identify strongly with solely for the purpose of playing it is a gimmick, and thus in my opinion worse than the latter option.

What, no one can relate to an one-eyed, one-legged enunuch halfling barbarian other than an one-eyed, one-legged eunuch halfling barbarian? Ever seen The Hunchback of Notre Dame? Frankenstein? You don't have to be a monster to identify with it.

Moreso, people love underdogs, not to mention the creative process in creating a character that's not your traditional role. A one-eyed, one-legged eunuch halfling barbarian saving the world is more heroic than a highly muscular warrior. He's not perfect like other heroes, has his own problems to deal with, and natural obstacles others don't have to face. To me, that is more identifiable than any John Q. Actionman.

Cineris · Sep 28, 2006, 03:45 PM // 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedeadwalk!

Nepotism is favoritism based on familial relationships...

Thanks, but I think I already knew what the term means. Despite it's negative connotations, the concept of nepotism is also useful for understanding not only family, but extended family relations. It's a significant source of good in the world and a substantial driving factor in social relationships.

It's also realism in that asking people not to act in these ways (to the extent that they perceive them as in their self-interest) is pretty much doomed to failure.

Good storytelling comes from the immediacy of connection that occurs between obviously like characters, or attractive characters. Guild Wars itself is distinctly lacking in ability to characterize any PC character. To make up for that, most people want to create an attractive character or one to which they feel bonded.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedeadwalk!

What, no one can relate to an one-eyed, one-legged enunuch halfling barbarian other than an one-eyed, one-legged eunuch halfling barbarian? Ever seen The Hunchback of Notre Dame? Frankenstein? You don't have to be a monster to identify with it.

Nice straw man. My point is that intentionally going out of your way for some outlandish gimmicks is often used as an excuse to avoid real characterization and roleplaying, while simultaneously being used as a [false] signifier superiority.

GloryFox · Sep 28, 2006, 04:09 PM // 16:09

I was very disappointed with the facial options for the Male Paragon. A Paragon should appear charismatic and full of hope. Instead I thought the Male Paragon appeared angry and uncertain. I was also disappointed in seeing a dwindling attitude towards facial appearance in selecting your characters.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sphinx2k
The way i like to think of it in way of face/hair looks are

GW:P = Decent
GW:F = Ugly
GW:N = Ugliest

Is it just me or do most of the nightfall characters remind u of neanderthols.

I agree they do appear like Neanderthals except the women. The women appear very nice and clean and well suited for fantasy.

As for the Black thing… sorry I don’t want my Angelic Protector to be Black, this has nothing to do with race, as we are the entire human race. This has more to do with my concept Angelic protectors to have beautiful hair options and burnished bronze skin tone with smiles and re assurance on their faces. Faces full of hope and natural charisma.

Quote:

posted by SpeedyKQ
I tried to make three different character concepts last weekend and not one of them worked out.

I wanted a black female ranger with an African name and appearance. There were lots of female ranger hairstyles, and exactly ONE of them looked African, and it was hidden behind a big do-rag. Otherwise straight hair all around.

I wanted a white, male, blond-haired paragon. Opposite problem. Every face, every hairstyle looked African. No matter what I did, every paragon with blond hair and a white face just looked odd.

And last, I wanted a male dervish with a middle-eastern appearance. Nope. Again, every face, every hairstyle looked african. This seems especially silly since weren't the real-life dervishes middle-eastern rather than black african?

I had the similar problem,,

I wanted an olive skinned middle-eastern female Mesmer and there were only Black options. I wanted a male black Dervish and could not make one. I wanted a Blond-haired Bronze skinned paragon with Charismatic facial features and had the same issues you had.

TsunamiZ · Sep 28, 2006, 04:17 PM // 16:17

i thought the female paragon lacked hair choices as much as facial choices. none of the long hair that were available for the female paragon suit what i looking for and i thought they were "ugly".

silv3rr · Sep 28, 2006, 06:02 PM // 18:02

Oh not to mention (not sure if anyone said this, I didn't feel like reading 7 pages >_> I deserve any flame thrown at me

) they reuse certain hair styles for multiple classes. I've only noticed this amongst the female (as I only make female characters :P) ranger, warrior and assassin.

Torikae · Sep 28, 2006, 06:04 PM // 18:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by GloryFox

I had the similar problem,,

I wanted an olive skinned middle-eastern female Mesmer and there were only Black options. I wanted a male black Dervish and could not make one. I wanted a Blond-haired Bronze skinned paragon with Charismatic facial features and had the same issues you had.

Precisely. Contrary to the arguments of all these people complaining about racism, I /wanted/ my Elonian Dervish to have Elionian features. But I also wanted him to look /young/. No such luck.

Since I wanted this character largely for RP, I ended up creating yet another elementalist. A Canthan one at that, because it was the only way of getting the skin tone and hair right. Inevitably, I don't want to play him through, already being in possession of two endgame eles, so he's become my mule. Lucky lad.

I'm really not being racist in saying there is not enough variation in the faces and hairstyles they've given us. There's no variation in age, for one thing. Take a look at the Tyrian Male Elementalist options - THAT's the sort of variation I'd like all the classes, in all the chapters, to have (plus I'd like each set to have a face as pretty as the last male ele one ^^').

TsunamiZ · Sep 28, 2006, 06:28 PM // 18:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Lozza

Half the problem with clones in NF will be the problem that has been pointed out 1001 times already: People seem to refuse to make characters not of their own ethnicity.

this thread is all about having choices. forcing or insisting people to go one way or the other is not going to help. this topic is not about color options, either. it's about having more face / hair variations to choose from.

shinrinningu · Sep 28, 2006, 08:35 PM // 20:35

I agree that there will be a clone problem, but let's be real: it won't be to the point of where 90% of people will have the same looks just like some of you have exaggerated. If there were more variety of options, such an effect will be downplayed.

The reason why I first posted in this thread was because I didn't like the lack of variety in faces and hair for males (moreso for dervishes and paragons) especially because they all looked as if they were from the same ethnicity. I'm pretty sure Africa has more than one ethnicity and not all males have big lips, noses, and eyes in that big continent. I was expecting Arab and middle-eastern faces honestly and I'm of East Asian descent. I admit that I don't like big lips and noses. As for the female side of character customization, I found them to be beautiful and if Anet isn't offering anything more to the male side, then I will be creating female characters for both of the new professions. BUT... I really hope they do give the male side more options just so I can retain a little dignity (hahaha).

So, I suggested that there should be more options and if Anet can't develop newer or unique options, then they should just give us access to the older options.

thedeadwalk! · Sep 28, 2006, 09:05 PM // 21:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cineris

Thanks, but I think I already knew what the term means. Despite it's negative connotations, the concept of nepotism is also useful for understanding not only family, but extended family relations. It's a significant source of good in the world and a substantial driving factor in social relationships.

We're not trying to understand family relationships, though. I would like to know some positive examples of nepotism, as in its practice not its usefulness in learning.

Cinders · Sep 29, 2006, 01:04 AM // 01:04

I have to agree, the trend toward less customization is very disappointing. I didn't find a single Rit face I liked but made do since they wear a mask, and don't play Sin's because they all look ridiculous.

Was really hoping for more variety in faces. I like the African look, that many of the new faces have. But still, there was room for more.

Lady Lozza · Sep 29, 2006, 09:21 AM // 09:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by TsunamiZ

this thread is all about having choices. forcing or insisting people to go one way or the other is not going to help. this topic is not about color options, either. it's about having more face / hair variations to choose from.

Actually we were discussing the CLONE problem, which is where colour comes in. And it IS a problem with the clones because with the lack of face and hair options, and 99% of the community wanting a lily white toon, it is MORE likely that there will be clones. Even if the hair and face are the same, skin tone is such a large, obvious, and overwhelming feature that we don't consider someone with black hair, face #1 and white skin to be a clone of someone with the darkest possible skin tone and the same hair and face.

Take my mesmer, for example. There are a lot of mesmers walking around with the same hair. Their are a few walking around with the same face. But there is not one other character I've seen who has the same combination of hair and face, and the same skin tone as my mes. Most mesmers I've seen with this combination of hair and face have chosen a light outdoors type of tan.

Hair colour is another thing which helps keep your character unique, but once again a large proportion of the GW population chooses the same colour - usually blonde.

YES, there IS a lack of hair and face options. But hair and face options are not the ONLY things that contribute to the CLONE problem. Colour both hair and skin do too, and they are LARGER, more obvious, attributes than face shape or hair style.

Most RPers have an image they are striving for. I respect that. But we also must realise that sometimes we can't get it perfect, if we could it would be US designing the game, not Anet.

However to the people who complain about clones I say this:
Hair and face are not the only distiguishing features. If the preview was anything to go by, the most unique characters will be those who chose to play a character who isn't white.

TsunamiZ · Sep 30, 2006, 01:19 AM // 01:19

this thread is not concerned with majority of characters being light colored or not--that's player choice. in terms of color, there is already a varied spectrum throughout each chapter and profession--guild wars expansions have not diminished on skin color selection.

this thread is focused on what players don't have enough choices, which is hair / face options because these are the key features that truely distinguish character personality and identity--and this is where guild wars expansions have dimished on. this is the source of complaint. it is not whether characters out there look like clones or not, but rather a lot of players in the expansions not having enough face / hair choices to create the look of the charater they want due to the skimpy expansion face / hair choices.

Lady Lozza · Sep 30, 2006, 02:45 AM // 02:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by TsunamiZ

this thread is focused on what players don't have enough choices, which is hair / face options because these are the key features that truely distinguish character personality and identity--and this is where guild wars expansions have dimished on. this is the source of complaint. it is not whether characters out there look like clones or not, but rather a lot of players in the expansions not having enough face / hair choices to create the look of the charater they want due to the skimpy expansion face / hair choices.

If this thread is to discuss the hair/face selection issue then surely we are also address the question of WHY there is an issue?

The two overwhelming answers seem to be:
1) CLONES.
2) Non-perfect characters/dislikable characters.
#1 might be fixed by more options, #2 won't necessarily. I've also suggested that #1 could be fixed by people deciding to use skin colours other than white and hair colours other than blonde. By no means am I saying that they have to, or that they should. However I do believe in the course of complaining about clones (and people complain about clones even when referring to Prophecies characters) that many people completely forget that they have chosen something "popular". Blonde monks with buns, anyone? Sure the character is cute, but it is not unique, and I find it interesting that some people complain about how others have "stolen" their look.
My point is simple, you have to choose one or the other - be happy with your look and not care about clones, or be slightly unhappy with the look, hope you adjust, and have a unique character. With less face and hair options it is less likely that you will be able to have BOTH.
So yes, in the course of this discussion clones are completely relevant.

Of course if you are taking a vote on whether people think the choice are decreasing, this entire discussion is completely redundant. The answer is simple - hair and face options ARE decreasing.

Solutions offered so far is this topic:
1) Offer previous campaign faces/hair.
Problem: Possible technical issues. Clones possible in future chapters - something I dare say people would like to avoid.
2) Offer previous campaigns only to those who bought it.
Problem: This is effectively pay for hair/face. Something I don't agree with.
RPers complain about the two above ruining the idea of general culture and society - something I happen to agree with. No I can't force people to place arabic/african looking people. But with less skin tone options for "white" available it makes it slighly more likely that people might give it a go.
3) Recycle hair/face from old campaigns for DIFFERENT professions.
Problem: Still technical issues, re-colourisation, make sure the models fit. If the devs are happy to do this, I'm happy with this option, furthermore I think new players should have option to these "re-skined" faces/hair. See #2.
4) Devs simply create more options. (I like this option best.)
Problem: More work done on something that really doesn't mean all THAT much. It would take away time from other things. It's a d*mned if you do, d*mned if you don't option. They don't do as much work on something else, people will complain about it. They don't do as much work on faces/hair, people are complaining about it.

Simple fact is that ALL of these options require quite a lot of work. It isn't as easy as saying, "hey, just slot in the old faces". It just doesn't work like that.

TsunamiZ · Sep 30, 2006, 03:40 AM // 03:40

actually, i can care less if my character has clones or not. what really matters to me is whether i can make a character that is to MY liking. and i want enough hair / face featuers to have more combinations to choose from because the current options are lacking.