Guild Wars 2

This game seems like it would seriously benefit by having it’s own voice client so teammates could talk to each other in real time without the need for a 3rd party system each player may or may not have access to.

So I was just wondering, is there a plan to have an in-game voice communication client available? And if not currently, do you think this would be worth considering.

The problem with an Anet GW2 hosted voice chat is dealing with in game verbal abuse and what not. If they hosted their own client then they would also have to deal with monitoring it like they do with the in game text chat. That would tie up a lot of resources. It is in their best interest to leave the voice chat to 3rd party programs where they are not held responsible for what might be said.

I’ve often though the same.

I don’t see anet ever adding it to the game though.

No. It would be too easily abused in game, just like dueling in PvE, therefore we can’t have it.

If that was the ever happen…

Map Chat:
ATTACK THE GATE!
ATTACK THE GATE!
ATTACK THE GATE!
ATTACK THE GATE!
ATTACK THE GATE!
ATTACK THE GATE!
ATTACK THE GATE!
ATTACK THE GATE!
ATTACK MY TARGET!

JustTrogdor.7892:

The problem with an Anet GW2 hosted voice chat is dealing with in game verbal abuse and what not. If they hosted their own client then they would also have to deal with monitoring it like they do with the in game text chat. That would tie up a lot of resources. It is in their best interest to leave the voice chat to 3rd party programs where they are not held responsible for what might be said.

What if they added an option to turn off the in-game chat, and actually had it turned off as a default?

Join a guild that has it’s own teamspeak, ventrilo or whatever. Don’t need companies investing time and money to develop and monitor what is readily available outside the game. Just a stupid idea/suggestion.

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

The problem with an Anet GW2 hosted voice chat is dealing with in game verbal abuse and what not. If they hosted their own client then they would also have to deal with monitoring it like they do with the in game text chat. That would tie up a lot of resources. It is in their best interest to leave the voice chat to 3rd party programs where they are not held responsible for what might be said.

What if they added an option to turn off the in-game chat, and actually had it turned off as a default?

It’s more about liability. With text chat they can monitor it and get abuse reports. When they get a report they can go back, read the chat logs which are saved and act on them . With voice chat that would be hard to do. They would have to keep recordings of voice chat to follow up on abuse reports. Those voice recordings would be huge and how would one report voice chat abuse?

It makes sense to keep voice chat via 3rd party programs where they are not responsible for monitoring or acting on cases of abuse.

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

The problem with an Anet GW2 hosted voice chat is dealing with in game verbal abuse and what not. If they hosted their own client then they would also have to deal with monitoring it like they do with the in game text chat. That would tie up a lot of resources. It is in their best interest to leave the voice chat to 3rd party programs where they are not held responsible for what might be said.

What if they added an option to turn off the in-game chat, and actually had it turned off as a default?

It’s more about liability. With text chat they can monitor it and get abuse reports. When they get a report they can go back, read the chat logs which are saved and act on them . With voice chat that would be hard to do. They would have to keep recordings of voice chat to follow up on abuse reports. Those voice recordings would be huge and how would one report voice chat abuse?

It makes sense to keep voice chat via 3rd party programs where they are not responsible for monitoring or acting on cases of abuse.

Possibly a Term of service agreement would need to be accepted.

I`m not sure how other game companies cover themselves from liability, but I`m sure Anet could do the same.

I imagine they would add a new option under the report function ./Voice abuse

If I’m not mistaken GW2 has Mumble built into the API. So theoretically, someone could write some code that would capture your location information from the client and use it so you can hear actual people talking nearby. The further they are from you, the further away they would sound.

I could be wrong.

EDIT Confirmed this is built into the game: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Mumble

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

The problem with an Anet GW2 hosted voice chat is dealing with in game verbal abuse and what not. If they hosted their own client then they would also have to deal with monitoring it like they do with the in game text chat. That would tie up a lot of resources. It is in their best interest to leave the voice chat to 3rd party programs where they are not held responsible for what might be said.

What if they added an option to turn off the in-game chat, and actually had it turned off as a default?

It’s more about liability. With text chat they can monitor it and get abuse reports. When they get a report they can go back, read the chat logs which are saved and act on them . With voice chat that would be hard to do. They would have to keep recordings of voice chat to follow up on abuse reports. Those voice recordings would be huge and how would one report voice chat abuse?

It makes sense to keep voice chat via 3rd party programs where they are not responsible for monitoring or acting on cases of abuse.

Possibly a Term of service agreement would need to be accepted.

I`m not sure how other game companies cover themselves from liability, but I`m sure Anet could do the same.

I imagine they would add a new option under the report function ./Voice abuse

Probably more trouble than it is worth since there are a number of 3rd party programs out there already. Also again, /voice abuse, what is Anet supposed to do, keep countless hours of voice chat logs and then spend who knows how many man hours listening to them to figure out if the abuse occurred and then figure out who did it?

I’m sorry, I know your suggestion had good intentions, I just don’t see it happening. The resources involved in implementing such a thing would be huge. The demand on resources to monitor such a thing, probably not worth the effort.

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

The problem with an Anet GW2 hosted voice chat is dealing with in game verbal abuse and what not. If they hosted their own client then they would also have to deal with monitoring it like they do with the in game text chat. That would tie up a lot of resources. It is in their best interest to leave the voice chat to 3rd party programs where they are not held responsible for what might be said.

What if they added an option to turn off the in-game chat, and actually had it turned off as a default?

It’s more about liability. With text chat they can monitor it and get abuse reports. When they get a report they can go back, read the chat logs which are saved and act on them . With voice chat that would be hard to do. They would have to keep recordings of voice chat to follow up on abuse reports. Those voice recordings would be huge and how would one report voice chat abuse?

It makes sense to keep voice chat via 3rd party programs where they are not responsible for monitoring or acting on cases of abuse.

Possibly a Term of service agreement would need to be accepted.

I`m not sure how other game companies cover themselves from liability, but I`m sure Anet could do the same.

I imagine they would add a new option under the report function ./Voice abuse

Probably more trouble than it is worth since there are a number of 3rd party programs out there already. Also again, /voice abuse, what is Anet supposed to do, keep countless hours of voice chat logs and then spend who knows how many man hours listening to them to figure out if the abuse occurred and then figure out who did it?

I’m sorry, I know your suggestion had good intentions, I just don’t see it happening. The resources involved in implementing such a thing would be huge. The possible liability, probably not worth the effort.

It seems they already have the software built into the game, so cost should not be an issue.

So it comes down to liability- which a cleverly worded ToS should take care of, maybe.

(sorry to keep disagreeing with you , but its something I would love to see implemented)

I don’t think they have the software built into the game. They have the markers another software application can use to determine location built into the game.

I believe, somewhere/sometime a Dev once responded on this matter, and stated the company would not be adding voice chat to the game.

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

The problem with an Anet GW2 hosted voice chat is dealing with in game verbal abuse and what not. If they hosted their own client then they would also have to deal with monitoring it like they do with the in game text chat. That would tie up a lot of resources. It is in their best interest to leave the voice chat to 3rd party programs where they are not held responsible for what might be said.

What if they added an option to turn off the in-game chat, and actually had it turned off as a default?

It’s more about liability. With text chat they can monitor it and get abuse reports. When they get a report they can go back, read the chat logs which are saved and act on them . With voice chat that would be hard to do. They would have to keep recordings of voice chat to follow up on abuse reports. Those voice recordings would be huge and how would one report voice chat abuse?

It makes sense to keep voice chat via 3rd party programs where they are not responsible for monitoring or acting on cases of abuse.

Possibly a Term of service agreement would need to be accepted.

I`m not sure how other game companies cover themselves from liability, but I`m sure Anet could do the same.

I imagine they would add a new option under the report function ./Voice abuse

Probably more trouble than it is worth since there are a number of 3rd party programs out there already. Also again, /voice abuse, what is Anet supposed to do, keep countless hours of voice chat logs and then spend who knows how many man hours listening to them to figure out if the abuse occurred and then figure out who did it?

I’m sorry, I know your suggestion had good intentions, I just don’t see it happening. The resources involved in implementing such a thing would be huge. The possible liability, probably not worth the effort.

It seems they already have the software built into the game, so cost should not be an issue.

So it comes down to liability- which a cleverly worded ToS should take care of, maybe.

(sorry to keep disagreeing with you , but its something I would love to see implemented)

They have audio monitoring built into the game already? You mean they already can record hundreds of hours of voice chat across NA and EU servers and then when they get a report of abuse go to the specific time frame of the abuse and review it? Then figure out who was the abuser? How do you know this?

I know it seems as easy as a ToS change, but it isn’t always that easy. I know it is something you want implemented, hence your OP. I just don’t think it is as easy as you think it is.

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

The problem with an Anet GW2 hosted voice chat is dealing with in game verbal abuse and what not. If they hosted their own client then they would also have to deal with monitoring it like they do with the in game text chat. That would tie up a lot of resources. It is in their best interest to leave the voice chat to 3rd party programs where they are not held responsible for what might be said.

What if they added an option to turn off the in-game chat, and actually had it turned off as a default?

It’s more about liability. With text chat they can monitor it and get abuse reports. When they get a report they can go back, read the chat logs which are saved and act on them . With voice chat that would be hard to do. They would have to keep recordings of voice chat to follow up on abuse reports. Those voice recordings would be huge and how would one report voice chat abuse?

It makes sense to keep voice chat via 3rd party programs where they are not responsible for monitoring or acting on cases of abuse.

Possibly a Term of service agreement would need to be accepted.

I`m not sure how other game companies cover themselves from liability, but I`m sure Anet could do the same.

I imagine they would add a new option under the report function ./Voice abuse

Probably more trouble than it is worth since there are a number of 3rd party programs out there already. Also again, /voice abuse, what is Anet supposed to do, keep countless hours of voice chat logs and then spend who knows how many man hours listening to them to figure out if the abuse occurred and then figure out who did it?

I’m sorry, I know your suggestion had good intentions, I just don’t see it happening. The resources involved in implementing such a thing would be huge. The possible liability, probably not worth the effort.

It seems they already have the software built into the game, so cost should not be an issue.

So it comes down to liability- which a cleverly worded ToS should take care of, maybe.

(sorry to keep disagreeing with you , but its something I would love to see implemented)

They have audio monitoring built into the game already? You mean they already can record hundreds of hours of voice chat across NA and EU servers and then when they get a report of abuse go to the specific time frame of the abuse and review it? Then figure out who was the abuser? How do you know this?

I know it seems as easy as a ToS change, but it isn’t always that easy. I know it is something you want implemented, hence your OP. I just don’t think it is as easy as you think it is.

Perhaps all software required is not already built in but it can be implemented.
To answer your question: I know this because other- much smaller companies already do this.

I dont think it is as difficult as you think it is.

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

I don’t think they have the software built into the game. They have the markers another software application can use to determine location built into the game.

I believe, somewhere/sometime a Dev once responded on this matter, and stated the company would not be adding voice chat to the game.

That`s discouraging to read , but Im well aware that what a dev says on a Monday may not be what he says on a Tuesday xD

I saw this thread and wanted to make a satirical comment about how we shouldn’t have in game voice comms because it would lead to abuse. Trogdor beat me to it, haha.

Plenty of other games manage in game voice communications, so i think GW2 could manage. I would put this pretty low on their priority list though, unless they can contract Teamspeak to start accepting subscription payments in Gems

Scrambles.2604:

I saw this thread and wanted to make a satirical comment about how we shouldn’t have in game voice comms because it would lead to abuse. Trogdor beat me to it, haha.

I didn’t say it would lead to abuse I said it would be hard to track and act on abuse for the sake of maintaining a positive community. Thanks for acknowledging it would lead to abuse though. You are right, more tools that facilitate abuse is not necessarily a good thing for the community as a whole.

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

I don’t think they have the software built into the game. They have the markers another software application can use to determine location built into the game.

I believe, somewhere/sometime a Dev once responded on this matter, and stated the company would not be adding voice chat to the game.

alright!—at least one smart dev—lol

JustTrogdor.7892:

Scrambles.2604:

I saw this thread and wanted to make a satirical comment about how we shouldn’t have in game voice comms because it would lead to abuse. Trogdor beat me to it, haha.

I didn’t say it would lead to abuse I said it would be hard to track and act on abuse for the sake of maintaining a positive community. Thanks for acknowledging it would lead to abuse though. You are right, more tools that facilitate abuse is not necessarily a good thing for the community as a whole.

If you feel GW2 has such a positive community- one worth maintaining ,then does`nt that suggest that the risk of in-game voice comms leading to abuse is relatively low?

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Scrambles.2604:

I saw this thread and wanted to make a satirical comment about how we shouldn’t have in game voice comms because it would lead to abuse. Trogdor beat me to it, haha.

I didn’t say it would lead to abuse I said it would be hard to track and act on abuse for the sake of maintaining a positive community. Thanks for acknowledging it would lead to abuse though. You are right, more tools that facilitate abuse is not necessarily a good thing for the community as a whole.

If you feel GW2 has such a positive community- one worth maintaining ,then does`nt that suggest that the risk of in-game voice comms leading to abuse is relatively low?

Quoting myself to give you a second read since you missed it the first time.

JustTrogdor.7892:

I didn’t say it would lead to abuse I said it would be hard to track and act on abuse for the sake of maintaining a positive community.

I get it, you want voice com. You don’t want to hear anything that is against your suggestion. Personally, I couldn’t care less if there was a GW2 voice channel. I’d keep it off because I don’t want to listen to a bunch of people yelling things like, “YOLO I’m so swag.” That doesn’t change the fact that with your idea there are problems Anet would have to dedicate resources to resolve.

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Scrambles.2604:

I saw this thread and wanted to make a satirical comment about how we shouldn’t have in game voice comms because it would lead to abuse. Trogdor beat me to it, haha.

I didn’t say it would lead to abuse I said it would be hard to track and act on abuse for the sake of maintaining a positive community. Thanks for acknowledging it would lead to abuse though. You are right, more tools that facilitate abuse is not necessarily a good thing for the community as a whole.

If you feel GW2 has such a positive community- one worth maintaining ,then does`nt that suggest that the risk of in-game voice comms leading to abuse is relatively low?

Quoting myself to give you a second read since you missed it the first time.

JustTrogdor.7892:

I didn’t say it would lead to abuse I said it would be hard to track and act on abuse for the sake of maintaining a positive community.

I get it, you want voice com. You don’t want to hear anything that is against your suggestion. Personally, I couldn’t care less if there was a GW2 voice channel. I’d keep it off because I don’t want to listen to a bunch of people yelling things like, “YOLO I’m so swag.” That doesn’t change the fact that with your idea there are problems Anet would have to dedicate resources to resolve.

Ah now I see- you have created a strawman due to your dislike of the GW2 community. nice, man.

also

Yes of course they would need to spend time and resources to implement it- I dont deny that, thats past of running a business.

Mac.3872:

Ah now I see- you have created a strawman due to your dislike of the GW2 community. nice, man.

The most over used an misused term on the forum. I’m sorry I don’t support your idea and gave you reasons why it would be hard to implement. You can grumble on here about it all you want. I gave you very valid reasons why it would be hard to implement. You can deny them all you want.

It’s up to you now to show how it could be implemented with little problem. Enlighten me.

Mac.3872:

Yes of course they would need to spend time and resources to implement it- I dont deny that, thats past of running a business.

I’d rather see them take the time to bring out new content, than to research and code a voice comm service that we already have access to. That would be like Anet throwing money at Devs to invent the lightbulb.

Dev, try to play Planetside 2. You will get why OP wants INGAME voice comm.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

That would be like Anet throwing money at Devs to invent the lightbulb.

Q: How many devs does it take to invent a lightbulb?

A: Nobody knows, they can’t get enough of them into a single instance.

Your very valid reasons came with absolutely no supporting evidence. Your making assumptions.

As an in-game voice comm is a feature you would refuse to use for reasons you have recently mentioned, one has to wonder why you continue to post on the subject.

Ahh..there’s that Dev quote! I was just a little prescient! ; )

Mac.3872:

Your very valid reasons came with absolutely no supporting evidence. Your making assumptions.

As an in-game voice comm is a feature you would refuse to use for reasons you have recently mentioned, one has to wonder why you continue to post on the subject.

Goodnight.

Mark Katzbach.9084:

We currently have no plans to implement an in-game voice communication client. There are plenty of viable third-party options available, such as Ventrilo, Teamspeak and Mumble.

Mark Katzbach.9084:

We currently have no plans to implement an in-game voice communication client. There are plenty of viable third-party options available, such as Ventrilo, Teamspeak and Mumble.

Thanks for the information.

I feel an in-game voice comm would be far more reliable than third-party software, not to mention more convenient for Ad-hock grouping.

Definitely something you guys should consider implementing , especially if you intend to develop more dungeons and fractals, or dare I say it? raids.

If you ever play a game that has built in voice chat the quality is usually crap, to accommodate the hundreds of players that would be in voice chat at the same time the codecs would have to be very low this make people vary hard to understand plus there will always be one or more trolls that will always cause trouble. Voice chat is best left to a third party app run by a guilds. I run a 75 slot TS3 server for my guild 200+ guild members, this is the best way to do this. As a guild we have full control and can set the channels to meat our needs. If it were ingame there would be a limited number of channels and there would be a fight for different groups trying to do different events even if they gave each guild there own channel that would be hard for large guilds doing different things. Trust me you don’t want game run voice chat. Private guild run VoIP server are the best way and always will be.

The quality can actually be very good. I guess it depends on how much the company spend on the feature.

My idea of the voice comm would be that once you create a group of 2-5 players those players would then be able to push to talk to one another without having to download and run a ‘trustworthy’ third party programme.

Mac.3872:

Mark Katzbach.9084:

We currently have no plans to implement an in-game voice communication client. There are plenty of viable third-party options available, such as Ventrilo, Teamspeak and Mumble.

Thanks for the information.

I feel an in-game voice comm would be far more reliable than third-party software, not to mention more convenient for Ad-hock grouping.

Definitely something you guys should consider implementing , especially if you intend to develop more dungeons and fractals, or dare I say it? raids.

See below:

Mark Katzbach.9084:

There are plenty of viable third-party options available, such as Ventrilo, Teamspeak and Mumble.

I’ve used all three, and they work well. No need to spend money to reinvent the wheel, when you can get the wheel for free.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Mac.3872:

Mark Katzbach.9084:

We currently have no plans to implement an in-game voice communication client. There are plenty of viable third-party options available, such as Ventrilo, Teamspeak and Mumble.

Thanks for the information.

I feel an in-game voice comm would be far more reliable than third-party software, not to mention more convenient for Ad-hock grouping.

Definitely something you guys should consider implementing , especially if you intend to develop more dungeons and fractals, or dare I say it? raids.

See below:

Mark Katzbach.9084:

There are plenty of viable third-party options available, such as Ventrilo, Teamspeak and Mumble.

I’ve used all three, and they work well. No need to spend money to reinvent the wheel, when you can get the wheel for free.

I have also used all 3 and in my experience they can go down for hours, usually at the worst possible time too.

It wouldnt be reinventing the wheel- it would be adding a beneficial feature to GW2 that already exists, or will exist, in many other games.

I would mention that I`ve seen countless pug group fail and quit simply because they arent able to communicate effectively in real time during combat, so they get frustrated and /rage quit. Its not a very realistic thing to suggest that people should alt tab out of the game and set up a channel on a third party programme each and every time they want to group up for dungeons etc.

Mac.3872:

I would mention that I`ve seen countless pug group fail and quit simply because they arent able to communicate effectively in real time during combat, so they get frustrated and /rage quit. Its not a very realistic thing to suggest that people should alt tab out of the game and set up a channel on a third party programme each and every time they want to group up for dungeons etc.

I pretty much only do dungeons these days and I have never had a need for voice comm. I only PUG with the LFG tool. Pretty much everything can be communicated easily in party type chat. There are only 5 players involved and the dungeons give time to type in chat what people need to do in between encounters for those that don’t know. My PUGs almost never fail, maybe once out of 30 times. But your hyperbole is welcome.

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

Its not a very realistic thing to suggest that people should alt tab out of the game and set up a channel on a third party programme each and every time they want to group up for dungeons etc.

I pretty much only do dungeons these days and I have never had a need for voice comm. I only PUG with the LFG tool. Pretty much everything can be communicated easily in party type chat. There are only 5 players involved and the dungeons give time to type in chat what people need to do in between encounters for those that don’t know.

Are we talking about the same game? Most people dont even read the chat- especially the new inexperienced players.

Why?

Probably because everyone is busy rushing through them without pausing for a breath.

rush rush rush zerk zerk zerk. Noob = kick

Aint nobody got time to type.

Mark Katzbach.9084:

We currently have no plans to implement an in-game voice communication client. There are plenty of viable third-party options available, such as Ventrilo, Teamspeak and Mumble.

That’s sad, If this was implemented in PvP it would be friggin awesome. No more typing while playing in Solo Q. Comon anet, make an effort , if there was communication the game would be way more enjoyable.

And if trolls start to abuse it just put a temporary bann from the program ( not from the game) . Cuz sometimes trolling is fun.

Mac.3872:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Mac.3872:

Its not a very realistic thing to suggest that people should alt tab out of the game and set up a channel on a third party programme each and every time they want to group up for dungeons etc.

I pretty much only do dungeons these days and I have never had a need for voice comm. I only PUG with the LFG tool. Pretty much everything can be communicated easily in party type chat. There are only 5 players involved and the dungeons give time to type in chat what people need to do in between encounters for those that don’t know.

Are we talking about the same game? Most people dont even read the chat- especially the new inexperienced players.

Why?

Probably because everyone is busy rushing through them without pausing for a breath.

rush rush rush zerk zerk zerk. Noob = kick

Aint nobody got time to type.

You are losing it man. Haha… By the way you said:

Most people dont even read the chat- especially the new inexperienced players.

You are making assumptions the same thing you accused me of earlier.

Mac.3872:

Your very valid reasons came with absolutely no supporting evidence. Your making assumptions.

With that I will leave you on your quest for voice comm even though it has been stated Anet has no plans for it it. You obviously don’t want to hear anything that doesn’t support your cause.

Look me up some time you want to run a dungeon and I’ll show you how easy it is to run without voice comm, even with a PUG. I’m serious look me up and I’ll coach you through it.

If your that adamant about voice in game then rent your own server, they are cheap you can get 10 slot server for around $3.00 a month or use craptastic Skype, it’s free, and you can have up to 30 people in the call at once. Then invite the people you pug with problem solved. They are not going to add this feature there are more pressing things they need to do to this game then add voice chat. You will be surprised at the number of people that will not take you up on the offer. My 75 slot TS3 server goes primarily unused except for the 10 to 15 regular nightly players that get on it with at least 10 other regular guildies that just refuse to get on because they are shy or have mic fright.

Mac.3872:

This game seems like it would seriously benefit by having it’s own voice client so teammates could talk to each other in real time without the need for a 3rd party system each player may or may not have access to.

So I was just wondering, is there a plan to have an in-game voice communication client available? And if not currently, do you think this would be worth considering.

if we get this before weapon additions…

In most games that have voice comms built in, I still used 3rd party tools with guild or clans. I don’t think this trend would change simply because nothing beats being able to administer the comms server with your own community rules.

The GW2 servers can barely handle the load of just the game, they would self destruct if fed even more load.

in-game voice comm would stress the game network bandwidth even more, introducing more lag…

3rd party voice comm is cheap….. get them

Mark Katzbach.9084:

We currently have no plans to implement an in-game voice communication client. There are plenty of viable third-party options available, such as Ventrilo, Teamspeak and Mumble.

Well, what is ‘viable’. They lack coupling with map/team/squad, they lack the coupling of GW authentication (who should and should not be able to be on the channel) and they are cumbersome in use; alt-tab, connect … voip. dot, what was that again, GW2, oh, yeah, alt-tab voip.whatever-ts3.com, … not? GW2 darn, .net, alt-tab, connect voip.whatever-ts3.net, ah, channel? GW2, mhh, alt-tab, guess it’s the one with Tequatl in it, at least no password.

To be honest, if GW2 needs to do anything with voice (of which I’m not convinced…), I think partnering with one of those third-party vendors would be the better move. Then you could work on integration and rearranging players/channels, without re-inventing the wheel on getting VOIP servers to run efficiently, which would be a fool’s errand.

The next problem is that the specifications for how exactly players/channels will be managed, who runs the servers and how/when you get the players joining, dealing with account integration and all the rest of that stuff… well, that could get pretty messy. (And going all in-house wouldn’t simplify it much.)

I think the biggest problem is that the kind of system most people are going to imagine requires ArenaNet to either host or pay for the servers. The extra resource demands that would impose (bandwidth particularly) would probably have you staring subscription fees in the face pretty soon.

frans.8092:

Mark Katzbach.9084:

We currently have no plans to implement an in-game voice communication client. There are plenty of viable third-party options available, such as Ventrilo, Teamspeak and Mumble.

Well, what is ‘viable’. They lack coupling with map/team/squad, they lack the coupling of GW authentication (who should and should not be able to be on the channel) and they are cumbersome in use; alt-tab, connect … voip. dot, what was that again, GW2, oh, yeah, alt-tab voip.whatever-ts3.com, … not? GW2 darn, .net, alt-tab, connect voip.whatever-ts3.net, ah, channel? GW2, mhh, alt-tab, guess it’s the one with Tequatl in it, at least no password.

Grasping at straws much? Third-party voips work fine. Easy to use, reliable and hey, we don’t have to deal with anet if anything comes up!

Deli.1302:

frans.8092:

Mark Katzbach.9084:

We currently have no plans to implement an in-game voice communication client. There are plenty of viable third-party options available, such as Ventrilo, Teamspeak and Mumble.

Well, what is ‘viable’. They lack coupling with map/team/squad, they lack the coupling of GW authentication (who should and should not be able to be on the channel) and they are cumbersome in use; alt-tab, connect … voip. dot, what was that again, GW2, oh, yeah, alt-tab voip.whatever-ts3.com, … not? GW2 darn, .net, alt-tab, connect voip.whatever-ts3.net, ah, channel? GW2, mhh, alt-tab, guess it’s the one with Tequatl in it, at least no password.

Grasping at straws much? Third-party voips work fine. Easy to use, reliable and hey, we don’t have to deal with anet if anything comes up!

No they don’t. With random pugs it is exactly as I put it, third party voip apps lack integration with the GW2 client. I don’t even bother with voip in Wvw unless it’s with my guild.

No. So very much no. Hell no. You can’t even imagine the levels of no this idea invokes.

Consider how laggy (network lag, not low-FPS which isn’t lag) GW2 can get when everyone dogpiles a world boss or when two zergs collide in WvW – now consider how much worse it would be once the GW2 servers have to handle VoIP for each and every player present. It would be an unmitigated disaster.

I was in another MMO that implemented in-game voice chat, but in order to meet the costs of implementing (such a useless feature), they had to sell advertising space in it. That’s right, players had to sit through a commercial every time they fired up the chat before they could actually hear anyone else. Nothing good comes from implementing in-game chat when it’s simple just to go with a third party application that doesn’t needlessly burden the game.

Want to know what this game would be like with in-game voice com? Go to Steam, download Team Fortress 2, and play a few games. Tell me how long it takes before you feel the need to mute an annoying 12-year-old.