Forums » Suggestions

APL pseudo-replacement

«1234567»
May 23, 2010 ryan reign link
Really? thanks, cause ya know... it wasn't OBVIOUS or anything.

What do ya mean "go to shit"? Hell thats where this idea started.
May 23, 2010 Aticephyr link
As in, get further off topic.

BACK. ON. TOPIC.
May 23, 2010 ryan reign link
May 23, 2010 ladron link
This is the worst thread I've ever seen in these forums.
May 23, 2010 Jmvcilus link
Stay on topic plz kthnx
May 23, 2010 zak.wilson link
I like the idea in principle, though it doesn't really do anything you can't already do with IRC or a bot like CHRN's.

As for this thread... It's gone so far off topic that I'm not sure it can be saved.
May 23, 2010 Capt.Waffles link
This thread is

May 23, 2010 Maalik link
Wow, this is a terrible thread. Accept that an official public list showing that this game has about 10 active players is dead and gone. Instead of wasting effort insulting people just program your guild bot O'Malley to help you better stalk people in whatever way you want to stalk them and let this forum re-approach some semblance of civility. Thanks.
May 23, 2010 Aticephyr link
Bitter much Maal? I'd say 90% of the point of this suggestion is so that everyone could easily access the information it would provide, instead of having to log on to IRC to check the data. If I were to write something, it may be useful for a select few, but I'm trying to benefit the greater playerbase here.

As for saving the thread... pretty much ignore page 3 (which completely rehashed page 1 and page 2, due to something of an unfortunate cycle in argument and pure sillyness) and the top bit of page 4.
May 23, 2010 peytros link
May 23, 2010 Aticephyr link
Yay happy threads!

Back on topic?
May 23, 2010 favrewebelieve link
1. When APL was first taken away, players on 100 were chatting about how it sucks, and how they can't avoid VO now when certain players were on.

So obviously removing APL helped make more players log-in.

2. How many games out their have some form of a APL? VO was the first game I've ever came across to have it.

Obviously other games don't have it because they feel it's an invasion of privacy, which it is.

3. IRC is already more than enough help.
May 23, 2010 Aticephyr link
players on 100 were chatting about how it sucks, and how they can't avoid VO now when certain players were on.

Players also complained in far greater numbers that they couldn't use it to log in when they see someone they want to shoot / play with (but wouldn't buddy for RP reasons). I don't doubt that a few players used the APL to avoid, but I firmly believe more players used it to log on than stay logged off. As neither of us has firm numbers, however, that point is going to be left to a matter of opinion.

How many games out their have some form of a APL?

Again, this isn't an APL. It's a RPL (recent players list). This has nothing to do with privacy, and a whole lot to do with getting people in-game. Running silent has its benefits, and I am proposing nothing to detract from that.

IRC is already more than enough help.

This point renders moot your points 1 and 2. What I'm suggesting is to make that info already available to the few who use IRC more public.

Also, thank you for posting on-topic :).
May 23, 2010 Death Fluffy link
Again, I pose my challenge from page one of this thread. Show me where removing the APL has improved the game in terms of an increase in active players and the nature of their activities.

Personally, I don't care that the APL is gone. It prevents me from being bothered when I'm feeling anti social and log into a character that I don't make buddies or join guilds with. However, I see no increase in active players, nor do I see an increase in risky activities such as trade in Grey. So I don't really think Atice's proposal is going to ruin the immersion for people who prefer to run silent. Just shut the fuck up or join another channel.

That being said, I think this would be better as a player created page. I think the Dev's have far more important work than putting something like this up. Just make the link to the web site public knowledge and everyone who wants the benefit wins.
May 23, 2010 Roda Slane link
On one hand, I think the OP makes sense. We know that IRC is already effectively being used to do this. I would not mind a web interface that replicated what IRC does.

On the other hand, IRC already does this.

The main difference between these two arguments, is that IRC is for use by people that already play VO.

My only interest in making any changes to the web presentation of VO, is how it may be used to attract new players. And in that light, I would rather see something that emphasizes diversity.

Lastly, it is important that everyone concerned make a point to express their opinion as to what should or should not be done about the web interface. Expressing your opinion about someone else expressing their opinion about the web interface is called being a bully. VO has flares and positron blasters and rails for that. Take your opinion about opinions in game.
May 23, 2010 Whytee link
And it also allows for cowards to say ...."oh NO!!! peytros is on!!! Im not logging in yet!!!"

You keep forgetting that part.


...why would cowards not log in when peypey is around?

Back when I cared to play, you know, back in the days of the APL, I used it a lot to see who was on, and by their nature, who was on 100. And yes, when peypey had a bad hair day, I wouldn't log on. What I don't get is why it is such a bad idea to have.. And I have read the arguments and counter arguments. Basically, it comes down to this:

By implementing Atice's suggestion, will the opponents of the APL stop logging in? I think not.

Will the proponents start logging in? Maybe.

So where is the harm?

I'd have to say yeah, thanks to the original idea.
May 23, 2010 diqrtvpe link
+A whole lot to Roda. While I have agreed with bits and pieces of what other people have said, his is the first post here that I have wholly and unequivocally supported. I'm not sure exactly where I stand on the original idea, though I'm mostly in favour; Roda brings up a good point about the current system only being available for those already somewhat invested in the game (if you're on IRC, you've invested at least a little bit of time in the game). However, if we make it clear that it's listing only the people to talk on a single public channel in the last whatever amount of time, I think that might allay some of my concerns about new players being turned off.
May 23, 2010 Aticephyr link
We could also make the list available only to subscribers or some such if there is worry about newbies being turned away by a low count. But yes, it should be made clear what the list represents as to not make our community seem smaller than it is.
May 23, 2010 tarenty link
-1.

I'd post more, but this thread is dead. I agree with Ryan on the first two pages of this.
May 23, 2010 Aticephyr link
This thread is not dead. The last few posts have been right on track. Even your post was pretty much on-track.

It seems to me that the people who are against this suggestion seem to dislike the use of people sitting on IRC to do exactly the same thing. However, as IRC is not going away anytime soon, there is a logic gap in opposition to the OP. If your beef is with people who aren't logged in seeing anything that is happening in-game, say so, as that isn't a slight against the OP (as the OP builds on current mechanics), but is rather a completely different suggestion in and of itself.