Era Accuracy: Party System

[venox]

spade for a shovel!!!
why!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
idiocracy.

[Charles Darwin]

spade for a shovel!!!
why!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
idiocracy.

It's not idiocracy. It's an Ideology. A belief that, we accept T2A for what Ultima Online was at that time.

[Mephistopheles]

spade for a shovel!!!
why!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
idiocracy.

Sorry, you don't seem to understand the part about "T2A Accuracy".

[venox]

idiologies.
yes the majory belief. idiocracy...
if the great thinkers like charles darwin dare trust such things i doubt he would have achieved much. cause then he would not have dared to do anything.
common sense and nature will always prevail.
changing this does nothing to alter the mechanics to t2a except require player to open irc.
great!!!
big win...
like i said spade for a shovel. if you dont see that your not seeing the idiocracy of it.

[Mephistopheles]

Well, you can feel free to leave if the era accurate system happens to be comm crystals.

[tenduil]

I specifically remember using ICQ or the Phone not a in-game system. Having a external program may serve the same purpose but adds a little bit more difficulty to things AND is era accurate.



I like the idea and would vote to remove the party/talk system.

[noxmonk]

I like the removal of this. IRC and ICQ have always been there since the start of UO, and people did use them. At one point in early T2A, PvPers would be called out as bad for using ICQ to call for backup, when i was in J-D we were called out a few times for icq'ing info around as if it were dishonorable/skill-less. It helped develop an ingame sense of community as well. This is nothing but a good thing in my opinion.

[venox]

I specifically remember using ICQ or the Phone not a in-game system. Having a external program may serve the same purpose but adds a little bit more difficulty to things AND is era accurate.



I like the idea and would vote to remove the party/talk system.

yes i also used ICQ way back when.
i really dont see the point in removing party/talk.
cause all it is doing is diverting traffic. its not changing how you interact with the game, except when you want to talk to your friends you have to click on a separate window.
people are always going to want to send message's in private. especially when in large groups.
and i have a feeling irc will become far more prolific than comm crystals.
talking through irc or talking in-game essentially does the same thing.
without calling on era accuracy (cause party/guild does not affect the mechanics of the game) why?
this is one of those things where people think there is a separation between things.
and in this case, UO is separate from ICQ/Irc.
yet by deleting party/guild. you as essentially merging irc with uo.
OH NO IRC ISNT ERA ACCURATE and/or part of the game. lets delete that too...

[noxmonk]

I specifically remember using ICQ or the Phone not a in-game system. Having a external program may serve the same purpose but adds a little bit more difficulty to things AND is era accurate.



I like the idea and would vote to remove the party/talk system.

yes i also used ICQ way back when.
i really dont see the point in removing party/talk.
cause all it is doing is diverting traffic. its not changing how you interact with the game, except when you want to talk to your friends you have to click on a separate window.
people are always going to want to send message's in private. especially when in large groups.
and i have a feeling irc will become far more prolific than comm crystals.
talking through irc or talking in-game essentially does the same thing.
without calling on era accuracy (cause party/guild does not affect the mechanics of the game) why?
this is one of those things where people think there is a separation between things.
and in this case, UO is separate from ICQ/Irc.
yet by deleting party/guild. you as essentially merging irc with uo.
OH NO IRC ISNT ERA ACCURATE and/or part of the game. lets delete that too...

IRC is era accurate sir. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Relay_Chat

Also, there is still the ingame UO chat system, if you choose to not use that avenues available in-game to you, then you have no one to blame but yourself.

[Silverfoot]

without calling on era accuracy (cause party/guild does not affect the mechanics of the game) why?

The guild chat comes up as system messages that can be used by Razor macros. You are able to see the stamina and mana bars of party members.

But really what this comes down to is era accuracy (despite what you say there). Even if its just a cosmetic change, such as when Derrick changed the fonts and number of characters that appear for runes in runebooks, or fonts on items server-wide, things like taking out guild chat and the party system are needed to get the T2A -feel-.

Why not add in some neon colors? They don't affect game mechanics. It is because then it would not feel like T2A.

[Mephistopheles]

You could always use voice chat too. Much less distracting.

[venox]

do you not understand my rational of how in-effect you will be simple substituting one non era-accurate system for another non era-accurate system?

yes irc or what ever becomes dominant may not physically be part of uo. but the way people use it will.

[Silverfoot]

do you not understand my rational of how in-effect you will be simple substituting one non era-accurate system for another non era-accurate system?

yes irc or what ever becomes dominant may not physically be part of uo. but the way people use it will.

Yes, but why should it matter how people communicate outside the shard? :S

The shard wants to stick to the T2A era as strictly as they can in regards to era game mechanics.
Party and guild chat did not exist during the T2A.
Therefore, they should be removed.
QED

We disagree and therein lies the argument.

(You can also re-read my earlier post for a couple examples of how they actually DO affect the game mechanics in a couple other ways than just chatting.)

[Orsi]

The point is that the client itself shouldn't encourage communication that wasn't 'allowed' in T2A. People have different options: 1) Go into IRC 2) Get Vent or 3) Actually talk in the game. 1 and 2 have been around since T2A in some form, so if the player isn't using one of those yet, it's more likely 3 will be chosen.

Voila! More interaction on a social online game.

[venox]

Yes, but why should it matter how people communicate outside the shard? :S

The shard wants to stick to the T2A era as strictly as they can in regards to era game mechanics.
Party and guild chat did not exist during the T2A.
Therefore, they should be removed.
QED

We disagree and therein lies the argument.

(You can also re-read my earlier post for a couple examples of how they actually DO affect the game mechanics in a couple other ways than just chatting.)

how can you possible separate IRC (or any other program used in conjunction with uo) from uo. and isnt party/guild the same thing just that it is "internal"
have you considered the progmatic and 'cosmetic/aesthetics' of irc. by denying party/guild you are imposing the progmatic and cosmetics of IRC into secondage.
thats not t2a, and to me feels far more separated to era accuracy than party/guild.

i dont feel you are seeing the big picture with suggesting that IRC and UO are separate. yet i can guarantee that all those oppose at least 90% have/do use IRC to coinside with your UO experience.
thats not separate its an extension of the UO experience. and greatly affects the 'cosmetics'

on your note about game mechanics,
the only added thing party shows me is mana and stamina. something that i have absolutelly no control over. and thus is does not affect my game play.
i can not regenerate my party members stamina or mana.
and the uo positioning could be banned within razor could it not?
i dont use this anyway. other than for doing t-maps...

voila--- no
the way people choose to interact through what channel and the amount they choose to is personal and does not come into this argument.