Talk:Voice chat

I started this by finding the red link in the main policy page. It's been awhile since I've edited a wiki - I hope I'm not forgetting important conventions. Freya 22:10, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Skype

Skype could use a redirect too, i dont know how Xx Evilyn xX 16:37, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I've seen (and heard) this mentioned multiple times in-game. I don't use it myself, but I added it to the list.- Vanguard 14:13, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Yahoo Messenger

I know on yahoo you can do voice calls computer to computer and in conference. As in conference, there's 'hands free'. I'm just wondering if it should be included or not? -- riyen ♥ 18:25, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Can't hurt, can it? -- FreedomBound 18:28, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't see that it can, but lol I'm iffy about touching the page, cause I'd rather have a consensus on this before adding. Some may not want it there, ya know. -- riyen ♥ 21:08, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

That's what reversions are for. Just don't break the mainpage, you probably won't get in too much trouble. ;) -- FreedomBound 21:36, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

There. Thoughts? -- riyen ♥ 21:52, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Very nice blue link. I'd prefer more of a cerulean blue, but I'll take what I can get. -- FreedomBound 22:12, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

lol, blue is a fave color. :-)-- riyen ♥ 22:58, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Qualifying voice software.

Define something we can all at least agree on what should go on the list or what should not instead of breaking 1rr. There are talk pages, they exist for this reason. --Draygo Korvan 06:16, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest you go by this wiki. If at least X number of guilds listed on this wiki use a particular voice service, it should probably be listed. I would say that number should be 25. There are 31 guilds that list mumble as their voip service, and ~330 guilds that use vent. --Draygo Korvan 06:21, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Those are very arbitrary numbers. I think if you know of another program people use, just add it to the list. We don't need to go making unnecessary rules. --Kyoshi (Talk) 07:47, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

People are just reverting when anything new gets added, so clearly there is disagreement Kyoshi. I don't really care as long as Ventrilo and Teamspeak are listed prominently. Ventrilo is in my experience by far the most used. Also, no one has breached GWW:1RR, the relevant policy on this wiki. Misery 09:07, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Couldn't we just note that Ventrilo and Teamspeak are the most common in the article body, then in the see also link to something like this? -- FreedomBound 12:09, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

There's a lot of technical jargon on that page that many people wouldn't get, but I still don't see why people are removing new items from this page. I agree with Misery, though, Vent and TS are the prominent ones in my experience. Beyond that I don't care too much. --Kyoshi (Talk) 19:23, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) In addition to that skype is very popular with european guilds. To compare:

• Vent 146
• Teamspeak
  • Teamspeak 468
  • TS 53
• Skype 153
• Mumble 19

This of course only going by the number of guilds that bother to list properly in the template. It can give you a good idea how the list should probably be ordered. Most popular to least popular is a fair ordering. YOu could argue for a special case for vent, due to its popularity among PvP oriented guilds. (for example, I dont usually see anything but vent being used in HA) --Draygo Korvan 19:58, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) x2, WTF. Randomly as they come up is also fair ordering. We really don't need more rules about this, okay? And we really don't need to regularly poll to make sure we've still got your order right. Really. --Kyoshi (Talk) 20:03, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Who says anything about rules here? I want a few people to agree on an ordering instead of:

1. Constantly reording the list
2. reverting reorders
3. removing programs from the list because they think they are 'not popular enough'
4. removing programs that have been on the list for years because the user who removes it thinks its 'not popular enough'.
5. people reverting the removals because people disagree with the above two
6. other people reverting reverts because they disagree with the revert.

Is it insane to try to find a middleground where we can set this and leave it be instead of having 80% of the edits to the page being the above. If you want it to be just vent teamspeak and skype just say so - but I think I am entitled to my own opinion. And if my opinion is that we should set it based on popularity or alpha order now, and leave it alone (who cares about polling every so often, if someone wants to do that its up to them. I dont really care). If you want it completely random, or no list at all just an external reference, thats fine too. There is a dispute here that has been going on for several months now and no one wants to talk about it - they just edit in their opinion - , and its about time it gets resolved. --Draygo Korvan 20:17, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm fine with removing the list and posting a link to the list on Wikipedia. Simplest solution and nobody can say their program isn't included. Adding rules to this page about what should or should not be included is just not necessary. --Kyoshi (Talk) 20:21, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Using an external list is probably the best solution, thinking about it this way: Does anyone really comes to guild wars wiki to learn about guild voice chat solutions. Do people think - I need a voice chat solution, I wonder what guild wars wiki will reccommend? --Draygo Korvan 20:27, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I donno why this page is even here... nothing to do with guildwars... completely 3rd party, unsupported, irrelevant outside of some guilds who use it 192.203.160.241 20:41, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, many seem to want those additions there. This page is here to document what is used with the game. The voice chats are used with the game on many occasions. Kaisha 03:05, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Many people drink Coke or Mtn Dew while playing the game also, and they would say it is an advantage to their gameplay... some guilds could even recommend the soda's... but would/should a soda's page be added to the wiki? if people donno what a voice chat is they can learn the information contained in this article from a google search (check out what I found as the first result, a wiki that might have more in common with voice chats than this one-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_chat )... a game that includes no voice chat and requires no voice chat to play does not need a page on the wiki about the advantages of a voice chat... IMHO 65.6.156.101 10:20, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

A recommended beverage page has a few possibilities, but should include contrasts with beverage recommendations for other games as well as impact on alertness, civility, dehydration, and reaction times... </grin> Max 2 14:14, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

And downtimes, unless you reuse the bottle >< 192.203.160.241 14:17, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

The difference that you're missing is that Voice Chat is used for the Pvp in many areas, AB - more so gvg, etc. It's also used in PvE for groups fighting or Alliance chatting, or other reasons, including missions, etc. to help the flow of the game better, not what one does at the computer themselves. I don't think we'd need to document what some couples do (as couples or spouses do play this game) as that's not something that is partly used in game. I am for this being here and I prefer the three additions to be added back. What is used should be documented, not what is popular. Kaisha 16:10, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

That point was not missed. The other guy missed the point that more than generic information is needed. I took his beverage argument and stood it on its ear in an attempt to make him(her?) think. I'm not sure that has not happened. Let's give it some time... Max 2 22:10, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Nope, did not miss your point, you reinforced my stance that a soda page has as much relivance to this wiki as this page... my stance is it's not a part of the game... you don't need it to play any aspect of the game... If a guild requires you use one you could find much more benifical information about VoIP from your generic google search then from the wiki of a game that has no "Voice Chat". Do you think the contents of this article informs the unknowing user enough that they could start using a 3rd party voice chat software or would they still have to go from here to google more information anyway? 65.6.156.101 02:56, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Then how about a brief explanation of what it means and what it does, and the Wikipedia link featured above? It isn't directly pertinent to the game, but then again, neither is MMO slang (lfg, afk, etc). It's helpful for people who will look here rather than do a Google search, and as a bonus redirects them to where the Google search will take them. --Kyoshi (Talk) 22:10, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Another link wouldn't hurt... but I want to add this one http://lmgtfy.com/?q=voice+chat 65.6.156.101 22:20, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

If all you're going to do is troll when I make a serious suggestion, go away. --Kyoshi (Talk) 14:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

(reset) My serious suggestion was my first, speedy delete, no relivance on a wiki of a game with no voice comms, the information on this page is not complete enough to warrent it being any better then a google search 65.6.156.101 21:56, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

And I disagree with you. While the game itself does not have any voice chat embedded, it also doesn't require that one uses the more popular MMO acronyms (like AFK or LFG), many of which are currently documented in one form or another, and which are very commonly used. We should not deny people information they may look for here just because it is not directly pertinent to the game.

On the other end: an HA/GvG-centric guild will not require that you drink Red Bull instead of Monster, nor do we know how popular energy drinks are for MMO gamers, much as we love to perpetuate the stereotypes. The aforementioned guild may require, however, that you use Ventrilo or TeamSpeak as opposed to the other. So it's useful to document it, even in as minimal a form as a short description and a link, which I actually think is just fine. Again, denying information because it's not about the game itself is not a good argument. --Kyoshi (Talk) 02:12, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

This discussion alone justifies the article. And there are not many different Voice chat solution used in GW (actually only the ones listed above), so simply add those to the article and it's fine. poke | talk 09:55, 24 March 2010 (UTC)