test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
We would higly enjoy open gender options
gminfly
Member Posts: 38 Arc User
Dear dev team,
please give this at least a neutral consideration for a moment.
There are many In-Canon species with more than 2 Genders:
Bynars are described within the TNG Episode they first appear in to be neither male nor female.
Co-Joined Trills are clearly socially somewhere in between sexes. As we see in TNG when Beverly deals with a gender swapped lover. As we see in DS9 with Dax and now even in Discovery with their latest Trill.
J'naii have transformed themselves into an androgynous race that views binary people as lesser in a clever social commentary given in TNGs episode "The Outcast"
Vissian had co-genitors who provided a 3rd gender necessary for reproduction.
Rigelians According to Phlox statements made in the same Episode have possibly 4 genders.
Q can be whatever they choose obviously! They only choose binary options for our monkey brains.
Even Species 8472 is described to have 5 genders within the very same Voyager Episode.
The fact that we see the Founders in gendered form at all is clearly for our viewers minds as well.
There is even more in Beta sources, like Andorians having 4 genders necessary for procreation as seen in the DS9 novel Avatar, Book Two.
Lastly social as opposed to biological gender, for humans, has lately evolved past the binary constraints.
Now even if we disagree on whether any of this is necessary, it will help plenty of players to implement some solution here.
All we really want is a 3rd "Other" or "NB" option, with a Textbox and unlocked costume options.
We understand that this is actually a lot of work with the current database entities and costume options. Issues with the body models might also arise, but we'd be fine having them as a sub option. It must be doable.
We surely forsee people making fun of this, running around as "Attack Helicopters" and "Snowflakes", but who cares, when it will help thousands of other players none the less.
Hell some will just love it for my Alien Bridge officers, some of which who really should not be binary.
We expect bugs, surely but there are costumes that disable entire limbs, so I doubt people will complain.
Please consider it. If not for the disenfranchised players who really would enjoy this, then for the positive Press and interest in the game it would generate.
Thank you.
please give this at least a neutral consideration for a moment.
There are many In-Canon species with more than 2 Genders:
Bynars are described within the TNG Episode they first appear in to be neither male nor female.
Co-Joined Trills are clearly socially somewhere in between sexes. As we see in TNG when Beverly deals with a gender swapped lover. As we see in DS9 with Dax and now even in Discovery with their latest Trill.
J'naii have transformed themselves into an androgynous race that views binary people as lesser in a clever social commentary given in TNGs episode "The Outcast"
Vissian had co-genitors who provided a 3rd gender necessary for reproduction.
Rigelians According to Phlox statements made in the same Episode have possibly 4 genders.
Q can be whatever they choose obviously! They only choose binary options for our monkey brains.
Even Species 8472 is described to have 5 genders within the very same Voyager Episode.
The fact that we see the Founders in gendered form at all is clearly for our viewers minds as well.
There is even more in Beta sources, like Andorians having 4 genders necessary for procreation as seen in the DS9 novel Avatar, Book Two.
Lastly social as opposed to biological gender, for humans, has lately evolved past the binary constraints.
Now even if we disagree on whether any of this is necessary, it will help plenty of players to implement some solution here.
All we really want is a 3rd "Other" or "NB" option, with a Textbox and unlocked costume options.
We understand that this is actually a lot of work with the current database entities and costume options. Issues with the body models might also arise, but we'd be fine having them as a sub option. It must be doable.
We surely forsee people making fun of this, running around as "Attack Helicopters" and "Snowflakes", but who cares, when it will help thousands of other players none the less.
Hell some will just love it for my Alien Bridge officers, some of which who really should not be binary.
We expect bugs, surely but there are costumes that disable entire limbs, so I doubt people will complain.
Please consider it. If not for the disenfranchised players who really would enjoy this, then for the positive Press and interest in the game it would generate.
Thank you.
0
Comments
Outcome ..... Too hard to code. So no point in discussing further.
That being said, while normally I'd try to refute 'too hard to code' given Cryptic's activity lately, I'm sadly inclined to agree that it might actually be beyond their meagre capabilities.
They can feel free to prove us all wrong, however.
Change tokens are to hard to code, same thing we hear about race reroll for years. This thread said nothing about the feasability of a third "open" gender.
Sure, that's why I avoided that all together. NB or Other is fine. Who cares what you identify as. Hence Textbox, you could write co-genitor or zhen (for Andorians).
Or you'd write genderfluid or you'd write attack helicopter.
Point is it doesn't matter. It's a tiny point in the bio and unlocked costumes.
Politics are for twitter, 4chan and people who think their opinion is important somehow.
I mean why not. You make your own lore anyways.
> Actually, maybe the most sensible thing would be to give different gender options to different races. For example, Andorian Captains would have a choice of 4. That would fit the ST universe without breaking canon.
The four genders in Andorians is however not canon 😱
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
While it is the only non Canon example I gave, I'd still like the Option.
Most of this stuff is just people trying find a way to either fit in with some crowd or get attention. The brain in some cases can't even code this stuff its like people sit around making up some kind of new sexual lifestyle. So yes I am a gummyasexual I can only perform these acts while I have a mouth full of gummy bears.
> Most of this stuff is just people trying find a way to either fit in with some crowd or get attention. The brain in some cases can't even code this stuff its like people sit around making up some kind of new sexual lifestyle. So yes I am a gummyasexual I can only perform these acts while I have a mouth full of gummy bears.
That's not at all how this works. In regards to STO, they simply state that they would like a neutral option next to male or female to add to character customization.
And on the topic of gender, it has nothing to do with sexual lifestyle or performing acts. People are born with a biological sex, but associated with this sex are societal expectations, or 'roles', which basically is 'gender'. These expectations often conflict with reality and cause grief to people, thus they seek to liberate themselves from these archaic restrictions.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
This also applies to getting rid of said options.
It wouldn't undo the whole game, but it would be a start. I know I personally would immediately buy several outfit items from the Z store, starting with the Formalwear, so I can put some of my butches and enbies in a suit.
It's not like we're asking to rewrite dialogue and rerecord voice acting for custom pronouns. Most of the dialogue is written without assuming player character gender anyway, and that's one of STOs strengths.
The loadout and trait QoL change late last year likely wasn't an immediate money maker but I think satisfied players do spend more, and that's pretty important.
First of all it would bring positive user reception, secondly this predatory thinking is what hurts free to play titles and games as whole. Just stop.
Get off youtube and go outside.
If they'd want positive user reception they'd fix bugs that have been around for months, some even years. But they aren't willing to spend the resources just to do that, so they don't really care about user reception. They care mostly about money in the bank.
I hear ya so I will turn off the heat so you do not melt anymore.
Son I am straight, white, have a beautiful girlfriend, no kids and a good paying job. If the only answer to me telling you that you are sheltered and that you need to leave your echochamber is a snowflake joke you're barking up the wrong tree.
Also you got some catching up to do cause 2016 was over 4 years ago.
That's because of how hard-coded things in this game are, you can't actually change the name of the character. You simply change the display name, deep down in the code. Your character will always have the original name you'd create it with.
Yeah. Just getting the "sub-factions" to work properly is apparently a pain in the butt.. The game is hard coded to be blue vs red.
Male and Female.
Etc Etc.
Messing with something like this, considering the spaghetti code of the game. I believe it's way too much a risk for the developers for very little gain. I doubt there would be much money from it, you can always make your own gender etc in the biography.
You don't really know any of that
I remember digging in the client to find that they key lists of boffs, player and ships by name instead of giving them an autoincrementing ID.
Yet they have missed the foresight of checking for capitalisation on a key that does not filter caps. Hence why you can break your game to the point where you need to start in safemode to change your ships name or safe loadouts by just naming your ship after your toon with different capital letters.
This just bad planning and old code but your player name does not just magically hardcode itself. You have no access to the code, you have access to the DB.
So on the one hand yeah, the game has problems due to age but I believe they can add LOV entrys for say a 3rd gender and maybe you don't see the reward but others do.
I agree it might be hard but so is any change to an 11 year old deadline ridden game codebase.
That's in violation of the terms of agreement...