Modesty layer should not be required on bundles that support 2D Clothing

Feature Requests Engine Features
#1
This is a repost of this thread.

As a Roblox UGC Creator, I should be able to make my bundle fully compatible with 2D clothes without having to deal with the modesty layer.

Recently, a bunch of bundles without a modesty layer got purged, including mine, “Steven”.
As upsetting as it is, I understand that all of them were bypassing the rules by completely removing the modesty layer.

However, most if not all of them supported 2D clothing. Whenever you don’t have any clothes equipped on your avatar, default pants get equipped that covers the areas that modesty layers would also cover.

I and many other users/UGC creators are in agreement that bundles that support 2D clothing should NOT have to include a modesty layer. I understand the purpose of a modesty layer, but Roblox by default already does the job when it comes to 2D clothing, and when it doesn’t, moderation will (with clothes that are completely transparent for example.)

All older bundles that support 2D clothes do not include a modesty layer, so why should we?

If this issue is addressed, it would improve my development experience because it’d allow people that use our bundles to customize it further.

As much as the layered clothing catalog is filled to the brim with 3D layered clothes and rigid accessories, I feel like 2D clothes are, again, just as important.
They provide so much more customisation, as they’ve been present for most of Roblox’ existance.
They also compliment 3D Layered clothing very well, they go hand in hand together in a lot of cases.

While I’m completely aware that Roblox clearly wants to steer away from classic related avatar options, I still feel like shirts and pants are and will always be a great option for customizability.

Use cases

I’ll use my bundle as an example.
image
image
It automatically pixelates 2D clothing, which allows for a whole new way to customise your Roblox avatar.

But you can also take @dvdko’s bundles, like the Mini Plushie bundle which also is compatible with 2D clothes.

Or even better, Roblox’ own characters, like 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 and other various classic bundles that support 2D and 3D clothes. They still get used and are prefered/beloved by millions of users.

How should it be dealt with?

Simple, allow 2D clothing compatible bundles to exclude the modesty layer, and crack down on invisible 2D clothes and/or bypassed ones, instead of avoiding that issue.

You’ve already dealt with invisible bodypart packages, so why not 2D clothes? I know it’s easier said than done, but 2D clothes are genuinely such an important feature.

:blue_heart:

Edit:

221 Likes
UGC Bundles Need way Looser Guidelines
#2

As someone who really likes the look of classic clothing, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE make this the case. You (roblox) have already shown that you care about r6 experiences by working on a converter, so it’d be greatly appreciated if you could allow classic clothing to shine as well. Certain bundles like this one work significantly better when using classic clothing (other examples I can think of are intentionally low-poly looking avatars), so I don’t see why an artificial limitation needs to be put in place assuming that 3d clothing is good for every avatar type. Not everyone wants their avatar to look super sleek and modern, some people like me prefer intentionally dated looking designs.

43 Likes
#3

Yes, 2D classic clothing already enables the default 2D modesty clothing. There is no need for a built-in modesty layer in the mesh’s texture so we should be able to exclude it.

If, for some reason, there is a need for it even with 2D classic clothing support, some potential feature solutions may include:

  1. Display/include the default 2D modesty clothing on the thumbnail of the bundle
    image

  2. Alternate version of above, as suggested by @keyre124 :

  1. Make 2D classic clothing to overlay ON TOP of the built-in modesty layer of the bundle

Having the modesty layer always visible ruins the user experience and limits customization options for creators and consumers.

48 Likes
#4

i really dont understand the thought processes behind allowing ugc bundle creators to use 2d clothing but still making modesty layers a requirement like doesnt one “cancel out” the other

24 Likes
#5

Looked at a few of my favourite UGC packages today (quite literally just the robloxian 2.0 rig and a few other classic packages but skinned) after noticing they suddenly have an awful black bar across the torso which makes them basically unusable. These are the same packages as the Roblox versions, so why should they be required to bake on a texture? Why is this required of any package? If this is to be the case 2D clothing support is pretty redundant.

It’s a ridiculous idea considering the packages should be moderated on upload anyway. Really ruins a potentially awesome part of UGC.

What’s worse is that since most of these didn’t originally have a modesty layer (and were not moderated) and had to update to add it once roblox started enforcing it, the people who bought the packages are no longer getting what they paid for and can’t receive a refund. Just stupid all around really.

18 Likes
#6

This i completely agree with, 2D clothing is used for literally all outfits and we shouldn’t need to put a huge black bar on our bundles just because of “nudity” despite the fact there is a default clothing that gets put on if there is no 2d clothing put on the character

22 Likes
#7

What’s even worse is that they don’t even give you a reason or a warning before your package gets deleted, and refunds take two or more weeks to come in.

Deleting specifically these packages which are somewhat simple in design, what the hell is even the point when people are gonna put 2D Clothing over it anyway?

This is very much unnecessary for models, especially considering how every Roblox bundle before Rthro doesn’t even have on, and we all know how unpopular Rthro is anyway.

18 Likes
#8

Or make it show the blue checkers

14 Likes
#9

Just from a player standpoint (I don’t make bodies), it makes no sense that a modesty layer is required when a bundle is compatible with 2D clothing. It really seems like granting the ability to create bodies to UGC creators was the nail in the coffin for 2D clothing. 2D clothing in of itself was not even sustainable prior to this ability, and now that we can’t even support 2D clothing on new characters makes it even more true.

3D clothing is not always a suitable replacement for 2D clothing- they both serve different purposes. Not allowing UGC creators to create bundles that properly support 2D clothing (without a modesty layer) isn’t going to change this fact.

Moderation for every single part of UGC is already in shambles, and lo an behold, this statement holds true for UGC bundles, which is what is going on here.

Oddly enough, the bundle thumbnail is the only part that doesn’t show the blue checkers. The individual parts do which makes this even more baffling…
image

18 Likes
#10

The checkerboard used to actually show in the catalog, and not just the body parts when you click on it, but they changed them to gray shortly after R15 or so

image

14 Likes
#11

I genuinely wonder if QA only looks at the thumbnail of submitted characters
If so, showing the checkers in the main thumbnail would fix everything, genuinely :[

10 Likes
#12

I don’t understand why Roblox didn’t think people would uvmap the bundles to allow 2D clothing
this is really annoying since a lot of packages are extremely held back by this

I personally don’t have UGC yet but I was hoping on uploading my f15 bundle once I did, as well as some different variants of it, however this modesty layer issue makes me not want to upload them until there’s a workaround that doesn’t require users to buy more than 1 package.

12 Likes
#13

as someone who’s NOT a ugc creator, i absolutely agree with this,

i can understand why modesty layer is required on more realistic avatars, but avatars that are in the blocky style should not have to use the modesty layer

14 Likes
#14

Another thing they could do is disable the modesty layer when equipping classic or layered clothing and enable it when there’s no clothing equipped. (They obviously have a way to tell when nothings equipped on the classic avatar so there’s no reason that they couldn’t add it)

14 Likes
#15

the complete lack of care roblox incessantly shows especially toward their devs is insane
they need to stop trying to eliminate classic clothing

8 Likes
#16

It really feels pretty tone deaf considering what Baszucki said at RDC this year :confused:
The modesty layer is so incredibly redundant when a system already exists for classic clothing.

8 Likes
#17

i was literally there when he said this :face_holding_back_tears:

really hoping Roblox hears us out on this one.

8 Likes
#18

all the classic clothing bundles that I got before they were made paid got purged and I dont wanna pay 75 robux for something I used to own that also now always looks like capitan underpants unless I have layered clothing which I only own 1 bottom non-pants item that won’t look weird without full layered clothing.

i also can’t live without my eyesore 2016 template clothing

12 Likes
#19

Yea I don’t like that either, its way too much effort to make it work. And no docs about it so.

4 Likes
#20

Well, that answers it, they updated the docs.

e06e543805ec1db04774255580d4e027-Full
e06e543805ec1db04774255580d4e027-Full1224×518 217 KB

It’s a very silent yet loud no for now. Genuinely hope they change their mind.

12 Likes