Guild Wars expansions: Trend of decreasing face / hair customization...

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.

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.

I think its called ethnocentricism ^^

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.

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.

Never said there was.

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.

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

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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.


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.

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.

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".

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.

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 ^^').

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Yes, but this discussion consists of more than one person, even though you started it people are allowed to voice their opinions and talk about related tangents should they desire. As long as the discussion does not go wildly off-topic, there are no flames, and we adhere to the general forum rules in regards to language, it is not for you to steer the discussion how you wish.

As I said, the reduction in hair and face numbers is not a question. It is a statement. People here have been discussing WHY they don't like it and there have been TWO answers. We are free to address BOTH since they are BOTH on topic. Clones are a problem for some people. Others simply want a character to look right. However those who want a character to look "right" need to keep in mind that it is not them who are creating the game. Whether the devs add more options upon release will not change the fact that you will have to choose the "best" from a limited pool of options (limited is relative).

well it was starting to get off topic once some start insisting the "clone" issue was due to people not using dark skin colors. but that's not really the matter of concern in this discussion because that's a result of what people choose, not because anet limited our color choices. we don't want the topic to get off track debating controversial real life racial preferences. this topic is about how anet is skimping on face / hair choices in their expansions and our disappointment as a result. this is beyond our control and is why we're posting about it to hopefully get anet to resolve the lack of face / hair choices in expansions.

How do you know that they are skimping?

You saw a limited amount of things for a limited preview. You would wait for the release to complain that they are skimping yes? That way, the suspicion/assumption becomes fact and something to actually complain about?

You know? Common Sense?

if you had read the last sentence of the first post, you would know

Im not talking about face features but I wish atleast we were able to change our hair in game >< I just got armor for my necro but her hair really doesnt go with it lol. This sounds gay... but yeah you know what i mean =P

That quote doesn't mean a thing because you can't directly compare that preview to this one. Things have changed, especially with faces.

Ummm WHAT?! So it's elitist to want to play a non traditional character? And it's a sign of "false superiority? What the hell are you babbling about, man?

Wow those are some wild general assumptions you're making there. Who cares what characters choose to play? Sorry, but those remarks you made are just laughable. And how exactly is playing an outlandish character "avoiding real characterization and roleplaying?

Dude, you're looking far too much into all this and coming up with some very unlikely theories. The point is that your assumptions and generalizations are just as bad as the "elitists" claiming non traditional characters is "better roleplaying"

we're talking about the amount of faces / hair that were the same. and chances are, there won't be anymore nightfall faces / hair to choose from in the final nightfall.

ya...as an american, i must say prophecies had the best character creation options in terms of looks.

But you don't know that because the game isn't out yet.

It's elitist to want to play a "non-traditional" character while denigrating "traditional" options, yes. This is pretty simple really.


Ask yourself this: What characters in fiction can't be represented as humans? Most fantasy roleplaying games (e.g. Warcraft) have specific stereotypes that substitute for basic characterization. See: "Elves are arrogant xenophobes" or "Dwarves are bad-tempered drunks." The typical route here when going for an outlandish character is to try and subvert the stereotype, but a cheerful, sober dwarf is a concept, not characterization. Creating a character isn't something you can do solely by selecting traits from a list.


If you say so. Either way, to try and steer this back towards the topic at hand -- Yes, the trend of decreasing customization options is concerning. And I'd certainly like more options of every kind to be available.

why don't you reply to this thread after nightfall is released then?

Neither GWP or GWF got any more faces added after their preview events. What makes you think that they would add more for nightfalls release?

you know, if there were more face / hair options, anet would probably sell more character slots, too

One of the most insightful posts in the thread imho.

If you want the same content you recieved with the first game, expect to pay more for it now.

You're already on the right track. In a few months, Anet will probably "take note of the discrepancy" and offer this very solution I'm sure. By then, everyone will likely be frothing at the mouth for the variety they were expecting and enough people will be willing to pay extra for it that the addition of content will be hailed the best thing since sliced bread.

All we need to do is forget the OP that says we used to get this type of stuff with game purchase.

That's just idle speculation, of course.

I've got a question, and I did a bit of searching and didn't find the answer anywhere else.

Is the PlayNC website the right place to submit a request for more facial appearances? I'm still a bit bummed about the similarity between all the male Paragon faces.

Why do you think additional hair and face options should cost more, now?

Cineris, I'm not going to debate any further with you on your silly assumptions. I made my point and I've already wasted enough time with the silly arguments of yours.

Back on topic, sort of, the whole debate on white vs ethnic faces is pretty sad. Sad that it even has to be brought up. Sad that people are narrow minded. But it's sadly part of how most people are, unless they're very open minded or have had exposure to a lot of cultures. And sadly you just cant change some people's minds that the only good looking face is a white one or at least an ethnic face that has "anglo" features.

And yes having more customizable appearance options would be great. But some of you need to realize that since Prophecies was the first, that it will always be the biggest and to some...the best. ANET isnt skimping out on us on purpose, we're already getting the most content anywhere for the money that we pay.

"We" are? Compared to what? I hardly think Guild Wars is the most content-rich game out there.

You're joking right?