To be honest, I probably wont use it much versus inviting someone to a discord or group.
There is various way to feel with it.
Personally, i finished by having lot of discord serv only for completing a party of people... i cleaned all recently, 36 serv... so yes, a good VOIP directly ingame to use with "unknown" could be fine. (over 4 years on "solo-MMORPGs)
for the pushtotalk vs voice activation, i think there will be both option... and while i use voice activation, i think for VOIP in game, would be better to have only push to talk... between hearing the keyboard or the breaths...
To be honest, I probably wont use it much versus inviting someone to a discord or group.
There is various way to feel with it.
Personally, i finished by having lot of discord serv only for completing a party of people... i cleaned all recently, 36 serv... so yes, a good VOIP directly ingame to use with "unknown" could be fine. (over 4 years on "solo-MMORPGs)
for the pushtotalk vs voice activation, i think there will be both option... and while i use voice activation, i think for VOIP in game, would be better to have only push to talk... between hearing the keyboard or the breaths...
that's the thing on discord, the servers pick their bitrate quality which affects everyone who uses that channel.
Even thinking back to vanilla wow and ventrillo when everyone was talking or people had open mics, it could constantly eat bitrate causing the others with either hardware and/or internet issues to lag out while playing.
Discord definitely affects bandwidth especially if that voice channel is overly active.
0
Options
mcstackersonMember, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Now imagine there is a beautiful button, just one button, that allows you to mute prox chat so you don't have to hear. Here is the great part, you can press it again and it does opposite and unmutes it.
Yeah, but most people are just going to turn it off.
Adding an icon for if someone is using prox chat is just adding more screen clutter.
In any situation in which prox chat would be used (ie, not in a group, raid or guild situation) there is no inherent need for voice chat. Text is sufficient.
Adding voice chat is just adding layers upon layers of needlessness (mute buttons, icons etc) for no actual functional gain. If you are running around people you don't know and want to communicate, there is a non-intrusive method for doing so that most people will leave on.
I don't think it has to be any more screen clutter the voice bubbles.
I don't think the use case is for organized stuff. it's for random encounters in the world or while in town.
Just because you don't use it wouldn't mean there aren't others who would.
For all other part of your message, so you admit that you won't discriminate people on the fact they use or not proximity chat? Maybe you are a good guy, but it would be a fool to consider people to stick to this... Most people considering "proximity chat is the best way to enjoy games" will just discriminate those who will say "no" when invited to activate proximity chat... Nothing about seeing furture, just reading the past.
Also, why should i have to unmute people to hear them if i just don't want hear anyvoice right now ? This is a part from your message that matters me, you don't want to be forced to type, but you think people have to hear the voice of the other anytime... What would you do if you are trying to share your cute voice to me, and i say "if you want to speak to me, just type" ?
And i pass about people who doesn't use their mic in 1001 toxic ways we all know, but have a bad microphone, or all kind of reason making them hard to understand... Text chat get this good side : no problem to understand anyone you speak with.
Prox chat is a convenience but doesn't net you anything on it's own. If someone doesn't want to play with you because you don't use it, that's there loss.
You don't have to un-mute to hear if you don't want to. That is an argument for people who don't want prox because they think they are going to pick up random nose. Being able to un-mute when they think someone is actually going to talk to them is an advantage.
I don't think the use case is for organized stuff. it's for random encounters in the world or while in town.
This is literally the only possible use case for proximity based voice chat.
This use case is not worth it - it is not worth the need to add a UI element to nameplates to show if players do or do not have proximity chat on (which would be needed), it is not worth the additional moderation that would be needed - and that would require all proximity based voice chat in the game to be recorded, it is not worth the potential for splitting the community in two in these random encounters.
It just isn't worth it to add voice chat to such a small part of the game, especially considering that small part of the game is a part of the game where players can just type.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
To address the oft-exaggerated counter-claim of annoyances, it should be easy enough for players to quickly mute those who abuse the voice system. After sufficient reporting, a GM can look into it. If necessary and just, a temporary mute-ban can be applied.
It's not about abuse, though. Proximity chat in New World is just as immersion-breaking and annoying as it is in other survival games because the only talk you hear is all irl crap. It's just random, unwanted irl discussions that really have nothing to do with what's happening in the game.
And, typically, it seems like the people you hear are in Discord already anyway.
Which is why the Ashes devs have chosen to not have proximity chat and instead use an opt-in in-game VOIP system.
It's easy enough to just ignore the text chat box.
Not as easy to ignore random, extraneous sounds.
Proximity chat is like having that giant global text appear when Steven gives us Siege Notifications - only the text would be some crap about football scores or who got booted from The Bachelor.
It's like your mom barging into your room and screaming at you to finish your chores.
There's nothing at all immersive about proximity chat.
In-game VOIP in the manner the devs are planning will probably work well.
Specifically because it's not random.
Which is why the Ashes devs have chosen to not have proximity chat and instead use an opt-in in-game VOIP system.
It's easy enough to just ignore the text chat box.
Not as easy to ignore random, extraneous sounds.
Proximity chat is like having that giant global text appear when Steven gives us Siege Notifications - only the text would be some crap about football scores or who got booted from The Bachelor.
It's like your mom barging into your room and screaming at you to finish your chores.
There's nothing at all immersive about proximity chat.
In-game VOIP in the manner the devs are planning will probably work well.
Specifically because it's not random.
If speech/noises not intended to be broadcast is the issue, the compromise solution seems to be that open prox voice would require push-to-talk rather than voice detection or open mic. What say you to this hypothetical?
Honestly though, I'd expect most people can just be told once that they're mistakenly speaking in game, then they should learn to use push to talk or mute unless they have some intellectual impediment. Surely some would remain, but they can still be muted and told they're live.
Opt-in systems are for entirely different purposes, and those would still be used where they would normally. Prox chat is for open-world chance encounters and quick grouping. Intrepid proudly states that Ashes is meant to be bleeding edge and using all the right systems. I would say this enormous boost to immersion and ease of communication would bolster their claims and their purpose.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Sounds to me that what the devs have planned should be sufficient.
Proximity chat is horrible.
If speech/noises not intended to be broadcast is the issue, the compromise solution seems to be that open prox voice would require push-to-talk rather than voice detection or open mic. What say you to this hypothetical?
just take a pile of money piece, stick them on the push-to-talk key
go afk while your mic is close to speaker sending any music.
Prox chat is a convenience but doesn't net you anything on it's own. If someone doesn't want to play with you because you don't use it, that's there loss.
You think, i think with as much honesty possible, all people will think your way.
The reality is different. While i disagree with you about the fact that "typing to communicate is a break to playing" (i consider it part of playing, to communicate from any form) some people will consider you to kind to such filthy associal like me.
Just the existence of guilds on some MMORPG where they can ask you to be more on vocal chat even outside of group/raid content is hint that some people are really on easy discrimination because they hate to have to type. And human can be stupid enough, i can totally imagine some part of those extreme people to consider that harassing the "no proximity people" is quite funny. Yes in such situation "report, and GM will ban".
Most of time, i fear feature that could awake bad behaviours. Some people are natural toxic. The best example are the "dumb elitist", discriminating people to join group where they are (be it PvP, PvE, or RP) because "they are bad" (not playing what meta says for example. )
But i also saw many time bad behaviour awakening just from ingame feature added/removed/changed. Duty Finder created lot of associal people. even from some that loved the game before it added it. This is an example i think none here will say i mistake.
I really fear the proximity chat for two reason so
1) the chat invasion toxicity, already existing in text, but personally, it affects me only when i NEED the use of the chat (and most of game i have different tab, so the "general" chat where most of this kind of problem is, is in its own tab. i can't create tab for prox)
2) Awaken this "split" between players. between those focused on text chat who will just turn proxichat off and never turn it on (like some people here clearly said they would) and those who consider that "it is the way to communicate".
I don't say the "written team" is better minded than the other... hoping people will stop voice time to speak with me is as dumb as those expeting me to unmute proxichat to hear them.
But it doesn't change problem. One form of chat have to be the default one. Having the two without defining one as default, will just create 2 clans, untill one "dominate" the other.
And i clearly feel the written is better to be use as "default chat".
First because some don't have mic/doesn't want to speak. Second due to all kind of toxicity you can avoid in written way (tabs) and not in audio. (mute is "no chat" while tabs is "not some chat"). Third because some people could lose some of their fun when their sound environment is broke from any "parasite" sound, be it from stupid song-share, or just anyone saying "hello".
And "mute" is not a solution if the "default" chat is set on the side of the proximity, because deciding to play without it is cutting you outside of the community life, making yourself a paria that only some kind people will come to speak with (using so... text chat)
I would say this enormous boost to immersion and ease of communication would bolster their claims and their purpose.
For me, proximity chat is totally an "immersion breaking" tool.
I can't feel immerse in any game with parasitic sound around...
1
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Going to do a 360 on this one.. whilst there were plenty more randoms than not in New World really breaking immersion in the general world and towns, when it came to pugs.. the lack of need to go to new discord channel every time grouping up with some new group.. well. it was a great addon that would be muted most of the time..
Going to do a 360 on this one.. whilst there were plenty more randoms than not in New World really breaking immersion in the general world and towns, when it came to pugs.. the lack of need to go to new discord channel every time grouping up with some new group.. well. it was a great addon that would be muted most of the time..
So.. all for it.
The game has VOIP for groups, you don't need proximity chat for that.
If we were talking about having VOIP or not having VOIP, it would be a somewhat different discussion.
However, we know we have it for groups and raids, just leaving the question of proximity only.
2
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
We will have in-game VOIP for party/raid/guild that is not proximity-based, so easy pugs should be covered.
While the initial post does nothing else but a disservice to a potential implementation of a proximity voice chat, I experienced and loved the feature in past games, especially from an RP perspective. The access to an immersive way of interacting with players beyond a mere chat is so much better, especially during events where people most likely don't have access to the same discord server. With the right limitations of deactivating voice chat manually and / or flagging repetitively reported players as auto-muted, there would be no issue at all. I hope that a 'I don't want it, so don't implement it' mentality would not prevail over a more open, mature and empathetic way of thinking, that enables other type of players to enjoy what they deem to be relevant for their way of playing this game.
I hope we can at least test the idea of proximity chat in a beta or Alpha-2. I see a lot of doom-and-gloom about any possible way of implementing it. I think the use cases for it in random encounters far outway the annoying aspects of muting players or just turning it off momentarily when needed.
I hope we can at least test the idea of proximity chat in a beta or Alpha-2. I see a lot of doom-and-gloom about any possible way of implementing it. I think the use cases for it in random encounters far outway the annoying aspects of muting players or just turning it off momentarily when needed.
The problem with this as a notion is that testing like this only works to test if systems actually function - you can never use an alpha or a beta to test more social aspects of a game - such as how players are going to actually use a system once it is in a live game.
I hope we can at least test the idea of proximity chat in a beta or Alpha-2. I see a lot of doom-and-gloom about any possible way of implementing it. I think the use cases for it in random encounters far outway the annoying aspects of muting players or just turning it off momentarily when needed.
The problem with this as a notion is that testing like this only works to test if systems actually function - you can never use an alpha or a beta to test more social aspects of a game - such as how players are going to actually use a system once it is in a live game.
If there are 10,000 players in the alpha 1, i can't imagine how many players will be in the betas. I know my strategy for the beta will be to gimmick the systems so i have the advantage upon release. This is gonna be as real of a scenario as we could possibly get
I hope we can at least test the idea of proximity chat in a beta or Alpha-2. I see a lot of doom-and-gloom about any possible way of implementing it. I think the use cases for it in random encounters far outway the annoying aspects of muting players or just turning it off momentarily when needed.
The problem with this as a notion is that testing like this only works to test if systems actually function - you can never use an alpha or a beta to test more social aspects of a game - such as how players are going to actually use a system once it is in a live game.
If there are 10,000 players in the alpha 1, i can't imagine how many players will be in the betas. I know my strategy for the beta will be to gimmick the systems so i have the advantage upon release. This is gonna be as real of a scenario as we could possibly get
The thing is, in an alpha or beta, you don't have players that are just sitting around town either board in general, or just waiting on their friends to log in.
People are off doing things, looking at things, testing things, trying to break systems.
This makes the entire idea of testing how player will behave in any social situation in a testing environment almost entirely irrelevant.
If there is a situation where proximity chat breaks something, or where it doesn't work, or where the range is longer or shorter than it should be, I have no doubt we will find that during alpha or beta - that is the kinds of things testing is there to discover.
That isn't what the issue with proximity chat is though.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
We should also get to test separate PvE-Only servers.
How about we just test what the devs have designed first?
I think devs should try implementing VOIP in a2 or something and then check the feedback. Trolls and irl talk will be in chat either way, no point to remove a fun feature just because something will be done regardless (trolls, irl talk) whether voip is done or not
1
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
After more gameplay, the NW system actually turned out to be quite useful for pugs.. and very occasionally was pleased to overhear game discussions in town.. the rest of the time I could have done without.. but for the pugs, I was very thankful as when new to a dungeon run, and not in the mood to setup a new discord channel on the fly for just one random run, voice communication was easily and quickly facilitated.
After more gameplay, the NW system actually turned out to be quite useful for pugs.. and very occasionally was pleased to overhear game discussions in town.. the rest of the time I could have done without.. but for the pugs, I was very thankful as when new to a dungeon run, and not in the mood to setup a new discord channel on the fly for just one random run, voice communication was easily and quickly facilitated.
The Ashes system as currently understood will allow for voice chat in groups, so pugs are covered.
Comments
There is various way to feel with it.
Personally, i finished by having lot of discord serv only for completing a party of people... i cleaned all recently, 36 serv... so yes, a good VOIP directly ingame to use with "unknown" could be fine. (over 4 years on "solo-MMORPGs)
for the pushtotalk vs voice activation, i think there will be both option... and while i use voice activation, i think for VOIP in game, would be better to have only push to talk... between hearing the keyboard or the breaths...
that's the thing on discord, the servers pick their bitrate quality which affects everyone who uses that channel.
Even thinking back to vanilla wow and ventrillo when everyone was talking or people had open mics, it could constantly eat bitrate causing the others with either hardware and/or internet issues to lag out while playing.
Discord definitely affects bandwidth especially if that voice channel is overly active.
I don't think it has to be any more screen clutter the voice bubbles.
I don't think the use case is for organized stuff. it's for random encounters in the world or while in town.
Just because you don't use it wouldn't mean there aren't others who would.
Prox chat is a convenience but doesn't net you anything on it's own. If someone doesn't want to play with you because you don't use it, that's there loss.
You don't have to un-mute to hear if you don't want to. That is an argument for people who don't want prox because they think they are going to pick up random nose. Being able to un-mute when they think someone is actually going to talk to them is an advantage.
This use case is not worth it - it is not worth the need to add a UI element to nameplates to show if players do or do not have proximity chat on (which would be needed), it is not worth the additional moderation that would be needed - and that would require all proximity based voice chat in the game to be recorded, it is not worth the potential for splitting the community in two in these random encounters.
It just isn't worth it to add voice chat to such a small part of the game, especially considering that small part of the game is a part of the game where players can just type.
And, typically, it seems like the people you hear are in Discord already anyway.
Which is why the Ashes devs have chosen to not have proximity chat and instead use an opt-in in-game VOIP system.
It's easy enough to just ignore the text chat box.
Not as easy to ignore random, extraneous sounds.
Proximity chat is like having that giant global text appear when Steven gives us Siege Notifications - only the text would be some crap about football scores or who got booted from The Bachelor.
It's like your mom barging into your room and screaming at you to finish your chores.
There's nothing at all immersive about proximity chat.
In-game VOIP in the manner the devs are planning will probably work well.
Specifically because it's not random.
If speech/noises not intended to be broadcast is the issue, the compromise solution seems to be that open prox voice would require push-to-talk rather than voice detection or open mic. What say you to this hypothetical?
Honestly though, I'd expect most people can just be told once that they're mistakenly speaking in game, then they should learn to use push to talk or mute unless they have some intellectual impediment. Surely some would remain, but they can still be muted and told they're live.
Opt-in systems are for entirely different purposes, and those would still be used where they would normally. Prox chat is for open-world chance encounters and quick grouping. Intrepid proudly states that Ashes is meant to be bleeding edge and using all the right systems. I would say this enormous boost to immersion and ease of communication would bolster their claims and their purpose.
Proximity chat is horrible.
just take a pile of money piece, stick them on the push-to-talk key
go afk while your mic is close to speaker sending any music.
You think, i think with as much honesty possible, all people will think your way.
The reality is different. While i disagree with you about the fact that "typing to communicate is a break to playing" (i consider it part of playing, to communicate from any form) some people will consider you to kind to such filthy associal like me.
Just the existence of guilds on some MMORPG where they can ask you to be more on vocal chat even outside of group/raid content is hint that some people are really on easy discrimination because they hate to have to type. And human can be stupid enough, i can totally imagine some part of those extreme people to consider that harassing the "no proximity people" is quite funny. Yes in such situation "report, and GM will ban".
Most of time, i fear feature that could awake bad behaviours. Some people are natural toxic. The best example are the "dumb elitist", discriminating people to join group where they are (be it PvP, PvE, or RP) because "they are bad" (not playing what meta says for example. )
But i also saw many time bad behaviour awakening just from ingame feature added/removed/changed. Duty Finder created lot of associal people. even from some that loved the game before it added it. This is an example i think none here will say i mistake.
I really fear the proximity chat for two reason so
1) the chat invasion toxicity, already existing in text, but personally, it affects me only when i NEED the use of the chat (and most of game i have different tab, so the "general" chat where most of this kind of problem is, is in its own tab. i can't create tab for prox)
2) Awaken this "split" between players. between those focused on text chat who will just turn proxichat off and never turn it on (like some people here clearly said they would) and those who consider that "it is the way to communicate".
I don't say the "written team" is better minded than the other... hoping people will stop voice time to speak with me is as dumb as those expeting me to unmute proxichat to hear them.
But it doesn't change problem. One form of chat have to be the default one. Having the two without defining one as default, will just create 2 clans, untill one "dominate" the other.
And i clearly feel the written is better to be use as "default chat".
First because some don't have mic/doesn't want to speak. Second due to all kind of toxicity you can avoid in written way (tabs) and not in audio. (mute is "no chat" while tabs is "not some chat"). Third because some people could lose some of their fun when their sound environment is broke from any "parasite" sound, be it from stupid song-share, or just anyone saying "hello".
And "mute" is not a solution if the "default" chat is set on the side of the proximity, because deciding to play without it is cutting you outside of the community life, making yourself a paria that only some kind people will come to speak with (using so... text chat)
For me, proximity chat is totally an "immersion breaking" tool.
I can't feel immerse in any game with parasitic sound around...
So.. all for it.
The game has VOIP for groups, you don't need proximity chat for that.
If we were talking about having VOIP or not having VOIP, it would be a somewhat different discussion.
However, we know we have it for groups and raids, just leaving the question of proximity only.
The problem with this as a notion is that testing like this only works to test if systems actually function - you can never use an alpha or a beta to test more social aspects of a game - such as how players are going to actually use a system once it is in a live game.
If there are 10,000 players in the alpha 1, i can't imagine how many players will be in the betas. I know my strategy for the beta will be to gimmick the systems so i have the advantage upon release. This is gonna be as real of a scenario as we could possibly get
The thing is, in an alpha or beta, you don't have players that are just sitting around town either board in general, or just waiting on their friends to log in.
People are off doing things, looking at things, testing things, trying to break systems.
This makes the entire idea of testing how player will behave in any social situation in a testing environment almost entirely irrelevant.
If there is a situation where proximity chat breaks something, or where it doesn't work, or where the range is longer or shorter than it should be, I have no doubt we will find that during alpha or beta - that is the kinds of things testing is there to discover.
That isn't what the issue with proximity chat is though.
How about we just test what the devs have designed first?
After more gameplay, the NW system actually turned out to be quite useful for pugs.. and very occasionally was pleased to overhear game discussions in town.. the rest of the time I could have done without.. but for the pugs, I was very thankful as when new to a dungeon run, and not in the mood to setup a new discord channel on the fly for just one random run, voice communication was easily and quickly facilitated.
The Ashes system as currently understood will allow for voice chat in groups, so pugs are covered.
It is proximity that is not being implemented.