I think the other Poll was too complex and mired all the issues around.
How about something very straight forward. Theres already 4 voice discussion threads so this thread isnt meant for discussion.
I am not particularily interested in all the inevitable "Its coming, get used to it people." that is not the purpose of this Poll.
This assumes the voice is implimented at the quality level the Lindens suggest, so is entirely your opinion on whether it should be a Second Life feature.
I dont want to confuse anyone. --
Its really simple.
Do you think Linden Lab should add voice chat?
Yes OR No
Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive
These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE
YES or NO - Should LL add this voice chat? |
|
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
03-01-2007 10:46
|
|
Fly Dancer
Registered User
Join date: 7 Oct 2006
Posts: 18
|
03-01-2007 11:23
if it laggs servers and makes more problems than they can allready control .. NO
I have been a MP online gamer for years and wene you start adding chat to games lag comes hand in hand , I dout they could do it without making more issues . If however it can be done without us having to wait 5 hours to teleport to the mainland then YES some how i dont see this happening ..so you herd it here fisrst SL IS DOOMED  |
|
Porky Gorky
Temperamentalalistical
Join date: 25 May 2004
Posts: 1,414
|
03-01-2007 11:27
Yes - Although I will rarely use it, it is vital for LL's vision of making SL a viable alternative to the internet. The sooner its out there the sooner they will iron out the bugs and make it a viable feature.
_____________________
 |
|
Carli Dancer
Registered User
Join date: 15 Aug 2006
Posts: 411
|
03-01-2007 11:28
if it laggs servers and makes more problems than they can allready control .. NO I have been a MP online gamer for years and wene you start adding chat to games lag comes hand in hand , I dout they could do it without making more issues . If however it can be done without us having to wait 5 hours to teleport to the mainland then YES some how i dont see this happening ..so you herd it here fisrst SL IS DOOMED *laughs* well I dont know if its doomed, but it will definitely change, and not necessarily for the better. Though Im sure some people will think so. Im assuming for the purposes of the Poll any resulting lag will be approxiamtely what The Lindens claim it will be. Something close to the lag created by enabling your music? |
|
Marianne McCann
Feted Inner Child
Join date: 23 Feb 2006
Posts: 7,145
|
03-01-2007 11:30
I said yes - but it's not a complete answer. I tink they should go ahead an do it, but I tink their way of implementing it (opt-out, in particular) so far isn't good.
Mari _____________________
 "There's nothing objectionable nor illegal in having a child-like avatar in itself and we must assume innocence until proof of the contrary." - Lewis PR Linden "If you find children offensive, you're gonna have trouble in this world " - Prospero Linden |
|
Carli Dancer
Registered User
Join date: 15 Aug 2006
Posts: 411
|
03-01-2007 11:30
Yes - Although I will rarely use it, it is vital for LL's vision of making SL a viable alternative to the internet. The sooner its out there the sooner they will iron out the bugs and make it a viable feature. It occurs to me - If its implimented as badly as some people fear it could end up used LESS often - much like the SL video feature. |
|
Racal Hanner
Ghost
Join date: 16 Jun 2006
Posts: 406
|
03-01-2007 11:31
I vote yes..it's a way forward.To use it or not is your choice.
|
|
Jake Reitveld
Emperor of Second Life
Join date: 9 Mar 2005
Posts: 2,690
|
03-01-2007 11:36
No they shouldn't. voice chat ruined yahoo chat-turnign it inot a playground of bots and people on voice going: "hello, hello, can anyone hear me." The text spaning a griefing is bad enough, I cannot wait until the voice grifing starts, and never mind the music spam-where someone puts thier mic up to the ghetto blaster and leaves the "talk" button on. There are plenty of thrid party ways to facilitate conversations, including skype. The conversatins have the advantage of being ones we wish to have, as opposed to those that are forced upon us.
_____________________
ALCHEMY -clothes for men.
Lebeda 208,209 |
|
Doing Something
Registered User
Join date: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 120
|
03-01-2007 11:42
I said yes - but it's not a complete answer. I tink they shoudl go ahead an do it, but I tink their way of implementing it (opt-out, in particular) so far isn't good. Mari Children should be seen and not heard. |
|
Isablan Neva
Mystic
Join date: 27 Nov 2004
Posts: 2,907
|
03-01-2007 11:52
I voted no. It will create two classes of people and cast suspicion on anyone not using it; while not being something I personally care out - I think it degrades the entire concept of role playing and freedom to control your "character" on which much of the sucess of SL has been based. I will go out on a limb and bet that 75% of the people in SL do not have a voice that matches their avatar appearance - and I'm not just speaking of gender issues either. It will ruin immersion and destroy the element of SL that leaves so much up to imagination. What I WOULD agree with is that the function be offered exclusively to private estates who want to pay for it. This gives the educational interests something that they need and keep the rest of SL safe for immersion. It becomes the decision of the sim owner as to whether they want voice enabled on their estate.
_____________________
 http://slurl.com/secondlife/TheBotanicalGardens/207/30/420/ |
|
Ravanne Sullivan
Pole Dancer Extraordinair
Join date: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 674
|
03-01-2007 12:17
Ignoring the fact that LL can barely run what they have now, voice chat is a bad idea on many levels. Now at least if you are grieved there is a record of what was said by who, with chat there will be no record and it will be a "hes aid, she said" issue everytime. The potential for abuse is just too high to make it a viable feature at this time.
_____________________
Ravanne's Dance Poles and Animations
Available at my Superstore and Showroom on Insula de Somni http://slurl.com/secondlife/Insula de Somni/94/194/27/ |
|
Jackson Rickenbacker
Registered User
Join date: 8 Oct 2006
Posts: 601
|
03-01-2007 12:17
NO, simplly for the fact i feel they need to improve exsisting features before adding new ones
|
|
Rocky Rutabaga
isn't wearing underwear™
Join date: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 291
|
03-01-2007 12:18
Of course, any poll that is not from a randomly selected sampling of a population is statistically meaningless. (Now try saying that using voice chat.)
|
|
Glenn Nishi
Registered User
Join date: 20 Feb 2007
Posts: 5
|
03-01-2007 12:24
I don't know what types of online games you guys played before..
but I do know that a Voice chat is NOT bringing more lag.. didn't you read that it doesnt connect to LL's servers? Inform yourselves.. I vote for yes. |
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
03-01-2007 12:28
This thread really wasnt meant for discussion, since theres 4 threads and over 600 coments on the blog on this topic.
However I suppose it needs the bumps so more people see it to vote. As the poster said its not scientific. Though I could argue its better, since the forum posters dont tend to be the lowest common denominator amoung SL residents. |
|
Argus Collingwood
Totally Tintable
Join date: 5 Dec 2005
Posts: 600
|
Nope
03-01-2007 12:28
I voted no because I actually like silence, the ambient sounds or the music. If I want to chat with friends in-game with voice there is Skype conference. How would one mute griefers? Too much trouble potential is involved with adding voice IMO.
|
|
Persephone Milk
Very Persenickety!
Join date: 7 Oct 2004
Posts: 870
|
03-01-2007 12:52
What I WOULD agree with is that the function be offered exclusively to private estates who want to pay for it. This gives the educational interests something that they need and keep the rest of SL safe for immersion. It becomes the decision of the sim owner as to whether they want voice enabled on their estate. Voice is very fast and powerful and expressive as a way of communicating. On the other hand there is a certain magic and power to communicating quietly, communicating with text. It allows people to preserve their identity, or their real life identity, in a way that is very appropriate and consistent with the kind of, you know, new world aspects and new identity aspects of Second Life. So that is something we’ve really thought about a lot. It’s not an easy thing to match everybody’s desires on this. One design idea I wanted to throw out for discussion in this program, and then in the forums or email or otherwise after this, was if the ability to do voice communication between people was tied to the parcel of land. So it was something you’d click a check box that said “enable voice chat” on a land parcel?, and then the people that walked on to that parcel if they had headphones on and wanted to use would just walk up to each other and voice chat would just work. That method might be more appealing as a socially balanced kind of approach, because it wouldn’t then allow people to kind of exclude each other by standing and using voice chat anywhere in Second Life while the person standing next to them either couldn’t or didn’t want to, but it would allow, by using it on land, people to create something like an education center where it would be turned on all the time. So I wanted to throw that out, that idea of voice chat on parcels of land as something for people to talk about and think about it. It seems to me it would be a better idea, a little bit more consistent with the way Second Life works. Also, I think it is consistent with things like the idea of streaming onto a parcel. You stream live music today by parcel. You walk on a parcel and you hear live music. Under this model you would walk onto a parcel or chose not to, and when you were on that parcel you’d be able to chat, just a thought. I voted NO too. Now, I do want voice capablities in SL. I just want them to do this right and with sensitivity to the community. _____________________
~ Persephone Milk ~
Please visit my stores on Persenickety Isle Musical Alchemy - Pianos, harps and other musical intruments. Persenickety! - Ladies Eyewear, Jewelry and Clothing Fashions |
|
Porky Gorky
Temperamentalalistical
Join date: 25 May 2004
Posts: 1,414
|
03-01-2007 12:55
Ignoring the fact that LL can barely run what they have now, voice chat is a bad idea on many levels. Now at least if you are grieved there is a record of what was said by who, with chat there will be no record and it will be a "hes aid, she said" issue everytime. The potential for abuse is just too high to make it a viable feature at this time. This is a really valid point I hadn't considered. How do you log a voice conversation? It will be allot harder to report verbal abuse etc. Or instances where a player has been ripped off. The culprit can basically tell you to f*** off, your not getting your money back and there is no way to report that to LL. I suppose you could record all conversations but thats just not practical. _____________________
|
|
Kamael Xevious
Dreams are like water
Join date: 24 May 2004
Posts: 248
|
03-01-2007 13:02
Yes. It may not be useful (and may in fact be counterproductive) for many users--to them I say "disable it." But for many of us in the Education field, it's a long overdue feature some of us have been asking for since the game went public.
And for those of you who don't understand why it's being implemented, read _Snow Crash_. That's the dream that SL is trying to achieve--voice is part of that. Kam _____________________
IX Exotica--It's where you want to be!
|
|
Doing Something
Registered User
Join date: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 120
|
03-01-2007 13:04
I voted no. It will create two classes of people and cast suspicion on anyone not using it; while not being something I personally care out - I think it degrades the entire concept of role playing and freedom to control your "character" on which much of the sucess of SL has been based. I will go out on a limb and bet that 75% of the people in SL do not have a voice that matches their avatar appearance - and I'm not just speaking of gender issues either. It will ruin immersion and destroy the element of SL that leaves so much up to imagination. What I WOULD agree with is that the function be offered exclusively to private estates who want to pay for it. This gives the educational interests something that they need and keep the rest of SL safe for immersion. It becomes the decision of the sim owner as to whether they want voice enabled on their estate. People in SL are already suspicious of eachother. If they're not, then they should be. I'm quite sure a lot of people aren't in SL to roleplay and would much rather know the person controlling the silly avatar. |
|
Brenda Connolly
Un United Avatar
Join date: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 25,000
|
03-01-2007 13:05
If done properly I don't see why not if they feel it is to their benefit. Just as long is it can be disabled, I really don't care. I have no interest in using it.
_____________________
Don't you ever try to look behind my eyes. You don't want to know what they have seen.
http://brenda-connolly.blogspot.com |
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
03-01-2007 13:16
People in SL are already suspicious of eachother. If they're not, then they should be. I'm quite sure a lot of people aren't in SL to roleplay and would much rather know the person controlling the silly avatar. I believe you have just summed up the attitude of many who who feel its okay to ask people to intrude on their privacy. I think this deep rooted suspicion dates way back on the internet and as time passes it is more and more groundless. For example there are considerably more actual women on Second Life than the conspiracy theorists think. People who prefer to keep their RL's out of Secondlife dont consider their avatar silly. Unless its an intentianlly comedic one. A lot of people who freely mix RL and SL dont consider their avatar's silly either. Wheas the current system doesnt impose any stigma on people who concentrate on Real Life - The new system will impose a stigma on those who wish to keep RL entirely private and concentrate on their Second Life. How much of a stigma is debateable. Im pretty sure time will tell. To think it will be neglible is to be hoplessly naive. Since as you point out people are already suspicious. |
|
Persephone Milk
Very Persenickety!
Join date: 7 Oct 2004
Posts: 870
|
03-01-2007 13:25
And for those of you who don't understand why it's being implemented ... _____________________
~ Persephone Milk ~
Please visit my stores on Persenickety Isle Musical Alchemy - Pianos, harps and other musical intruments. Persenickety! - Ladies Eyewear, Jewelry and Clothing Fashions |
|
Elanthius Flagstaff
Registered User
Join date: 30 Apr 2006
Posts: 1,534
|
03-01-2007 13:42
Here's my main problem which no-one has mentioned yet. I do a lot of business in SL and spend a lot of time in three or four simultaneous conversations. With voice chat that will be impossible. Or even if it's possible it will become more obvious that I'm ignoring people 70% of the time.
Anyway, it's going to make my life more difficult. Not to mention with text chat I have permanent logs of every transaction and discussion but when voice comes around I'm suddenly going to lose all of that. Of course my customers will insist on voice chat because it's more convenient for them. And so I'll naturally (and gladly!) accomodate them but all in all it won't help me none. |
|
Ylikone Obscure
Amatuer Troll
Join date: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 335
|
03-01-2007 13:46
Voted Yes even though I will never use it. We must let progress happen, regardless of whether we will partake. Whether or not this is a good time to be working on voice when there are more pressing problems to be solved, that is another question. I would vote No if this had been phrased differently.
|