Party and Guild Chat System Poll

[Mephistopheles]

If it is era accurate for people to use voice chat, then there should be no argument.

Yup.

Ventrillo, IRC, AIM, ICQ, etc = Nothing to do with UO
UO = UO

wrong. this is a marriage of two things. a coming together. you would not use the IRC channel secondage, if secondage did not exist

here is your new proposed party/guild chat.
and i dont ever have memories of this during t2a.

How about those communication crystals?

I hear typing ! before your text makes it into a "yell" that can be seen from several screens away.

[noxmonk]

WHICH ONE IS NOT ERA ACCURATE?

A.) Voice chat: RogerWilco was used and exhisted in October of 99. It was horrible, but you could use it with a fast enough connection.
B.) IRC: 1988
C.) ICQ: 1996
D.) Guild/Party Chat System: UO:R

[Silverfoot]

WHICH ONE IS NOT ERA ACCURATE?

A.) Voice chat: RogerWilco was used and exhisted in October of 99. It was horrible, but you could use it with a fast enough connection.
B.) IRC: 1988
C.) ICQ: 1996
D.) Guild/Party Chat System: UO:R

Actually guild chat is from like 2006.

[venox]

WHICH ONE IS NOT ERA ACCURATE?

A.) Voice chat: RogerWilco was used and exhisted in October of 99. It was horrible, but you could use it with a fast enough connection.
B.) IRC: 1988
C.) ICQ: 1996
D.) Guild/Party Chat System: UO:R

which is considered to be apart of UO?


answer: none of the above.

[noxmonk]

which is considered to be apart of UO?

answer: none of the above.

I'm fairly certain I listed them all as separate programs that act independently of each other. I'm not sure what your point is here.

If you're contending IRC didn't exist and was not used, you're wrong. If you're contending that ICQ didn't exist and was not used, you're wrong. If you're contending voicechat did not exist and was not used, you're wrong. You really don't have any ground to stand on here.

[venox]

what i am doing is reframing your question. broadening the scope. you have to consider the big picture.
there are no patch notes that state irc is "era accurate", that irc is specific to the t2a era.
i am contending that none of those programs are considered to an part of uo, they are all independent. yet we all use them with uo. old or new. and there is no way this can be prevented.
the party/guild chat is simply another version.
and by deleting this you are merging secondage to irc at a greater degree.
action, reaction. simple...
and thus arguing for the sake of era accuracy is void. and an unnecessary change.

[noxmonk]

what i am doing is reframing your question. broadening the scope. you have to consider the big picture.
there are no patch notes that state irc is "era accurate", that irc is specific to the t2a era.
i am contending that none of those programs are considered to an part of uo, they are all independent. yet we all use them with uo. old or new. and there is no way this can be prevented.
the party/guild chat is simply another version.
and by deleting this you are merging secondage to irc at a greater degree.
action, reaction. simple...
and thus arguing for the sake of era accuracy is void. and an unnecessary change.

IRC did exist and was used during that era... they wouldn't make patch notes for separate software. This thread is about guild/party chat. Not IRC ICQ QQ Ventrilo Teamspeak AIM GAIM LAIM or any other myriad of abbreviations for messaging clients. Furthermore, no, party/guild is not the same as the above mentioned items, it is built into UO, the others are not built in to UO.

Era Accuracy void? lol? How is it void? What about era accuracy does not apply to the statement that guild and party chat were not in the T2A era?

[venox]

they wouldn't make patch notes for separate software.

oh ok
so you recognise it is separate, good. and party/guild fits into this same definition.
and that a marriage occurs when the two are used together (cause you clam that this has over time been used with uo), also good. yet at the same time you deny this (by discarding the progmatic and aesthetic implications of this)??? this is everything about 'external' communication features. because by deleting you are bring another into the spot light.

and thus you are implying it is ok to merge a separate program with uo. because that is what is going to happen. yet you wish to delete another separate program (party/guild).
i relise your hanging onto the "its client side" argument. but there is no difference, separate is separate. connected is connected.

surely an ironic outcome.

[noxmonk]

they wouldn't make patch notes for separate software.

oh ok
so you recognise it is separate, good. and party/guild fits into this same definition.
and that a marriage occurs when the two are used together (cause you clam that this has over time been used with uo), also good. yet at the same time you deny this (by discarding the progmatic and aesthetic implications of this)??? this is everything about 'external' communication features. because by deleting you are bring another into the spot light.

and thus you are implying it is ok to merge a separate program with uo. because that is what is going to happen. yet you wish to delete another separate program (party/guild).
i relise your hanging onto the "its client side" argument. but there is no difference, separate is separate. connected is connected.

surely an ironic outcome.

I honestly can't tell if you don't understand because there is a language barrier or what. However, simply, guild/party chat is not era accurate. I put the important part of that phrase in very large letters, hopefully you'll understand. Why do you keep talking about marriages and merging? The programs do not merge, they remain separate software. Party/Guild chat is not separate software. I don't know where you're getting this. I think it comes back to the language barrier.

Here's the short of it.

The aim of the shard is to emulate the T2A experience. Guild/Party chat was not part of the T2A experience. Therefore, guild/party chat should not be enabled on a server trying to emulate the T2A experience. I don't see where you aren't comprehending, hopefully that was concise enough for you.

[venox]

where do i deny that it is not era accurate. infact i accept that part.
at the same token irc is NOT apart of uo.

i am just pointing out the irony of your suggestion.

the reason i point out marriage/merge is because you only use irc( or any other) because of uo. and thus it is connected. or do you not use such things when you play?

like i said connected is connected. apart of. dependent on. attached to. exists only because of. just like party/guild. do you need more examples of why they are the same?

here it is in short.
The aim of the shard is to emulate the T2A experience. Guild/Party or irc or any other variant are not part of the T2A experience. yet remain an extension of. Therefore, guild/party chat should like irc be enabled, on a server trying to emulate the T2A experience. I don't see where you aren't comprehending, hopefully that was concise enough for you.

[ArchaicSubrosa]

The whole arguement is there are ways to communicate without party/guild chat and therefor it doesn't change gameplay a single bit. This topic is beating a dead horse. Using this method is perferable to others to some degree and the fact people are going to use a mass interface no matter what the better system should be implemented.
Who cares if one person drives a chevy and the other person a ford? The party/guild chat let's everyone have a piece of the road.

[Mephistopheles]

"You would not use the IRC channel secondage, if secondage did not exist"

Well stated in that it proves to be a microcosm of the myriad of "Chat Programs" that exist outside of the game.

You do not necessarily use the IRC channel secondage, if secondage does exist.

If you don't use Ventrillo, why are you arguing against "Era Accuracy"?

We're speaking about the "game" itself. Try not to abstract it too much.

Good luck!

....

[Pro]

Tbh it'll just end up being a lot of coding for something that isn't that important and wouldn't really benefit the shard.

[RoadKill]

Bringing up IRC and Voice Comm is way off topic. You could claim my 4GBs of RAM and insane broadband connection are not era accurate. These are not UO and shouldn't even be part of the conversation.

Fact: Guild/Party Chat are not accurate
Fact: People during T2A did use the in-game Chat and Comm Crystals, people used ICQ, Forums, and Private IRCs as external communication

Solution: Remove Guild/Party Chat, fix Comm Crystals, have a link to the "suggested client" that is actually up 24/7 (this will allow everyone to actually use the in-game Chat) - if you use IRC while playing UO, there is no reason for you not to use the in-game chat, it would actually be more convenient than IRC if people would actually use it.

[ArchaicSubrosa]

Bringing up IRC and Voice Comm is way off topic. You could claim my 4GBs of RAM and insane broadband connection are not era accurate. These are not UO and shouldn't even be part of the conversation.

Fact: Guild/Party Chat are not accurate
Fact: People during T2A did use the in-game Chat and Comm Crystals, people used ICQ, Forums, and Private IRCs as external communication

Solution: Remove Guild/Party Chat, fix Comm Crystals, have a link to the "suggested client" that is actually up 24/7 (this will allow everyone to actually use the in-game Chat) - if you use IRC while playing UO, there is no reason for you not to use the in-game chat, it would actually be more convenient than IRC if people would actually use it.

Why not have them all and have players choose for themselves. You don't have to use the feature just ignore it and it wouldn't bother you so much.