Typing Indicator/Quacker Trial Feedback Thread

[FurnishMyFlatForCheap]

I found the quackery to be a fantastic addition, Less talking over people who are slower/ faster than myself, just an all-round net positive really.

[Babylon System is the Vampire]

• No quacking when your text box is highlighted but still empty

This just keeps you from accidentally quacking with an empty box. This should be the default behavior IMO

I like the quaking, but this is the bit that worries me. And it won't be solved by adding a letter in the chat box. Maybe I am over thinking it, since I don't see many pvp heavy players raising concerns about it, but maybe they just haven't thought it through yet so I'm bringing it up.

That being said, if it could be tied to letters actively being typed instead of just an active chat box, that would be a good solution.

[Edens_Fall]

I found the Quackers a nice addition to the interaction between characters. They made conversations smoother and allowed confrontations to feel more paced, as opposed to the natural reaction to jump to violence. This was mainly accomplished by allowing either party to understand that their foe was indeed typing out a reply rather than preparing to attack. Thus, I felt less pressure to beat them to that oh-so-important first attack.

So, in short, I like the Quackers and hope they stay.

[woad]

I enjoyed the quack and am very hopeful it returns.

[Seren]

The 'just turn it off for pvp' argument is nonsensical imo because there's no telling whether or not someone has the quacker disabled or enabled, so you just wind up spending an awful lot of time in a tense uncertainty.

I've tried roleplaying with it both on and off and I've noticed that a lot of people pay you far less mind, or walk off in certain situations assuming you're not typing at them (especially if it's a longer message, or you're slow to type) thinking that you're just not in the process of saying anything at all.

Those who seem to turn it off seem to be a minority, which means you're training the majority to expect to see these dots, thus making roleplay just outright more annoying for people who choose to turn it off. This needs to be all or nothing, or you wind up with this rabbit hole of various problems both in PVP and outside of it.

Every other server gets on fine without it.

[Salasker]

I found them useful more times than not, and once I got used to them, tended to ignore them when typing descriptive emotes. I'd say keep them around, but optional for those that find them anxiety-inducing.

[serono]

I changed the quacker visibly quite often on my main.

When I had them off, I felt PCs walked off without giving me enough time to reply, in particular with PCs I usually dont interact with.
Not seeing quackers and assuming Im AFK, perhaps. I found myself assuming the same about others who had switched them off.
Felt the pressure to turn them on more often because of that. I made them very small and ignored their presence.

POTM keeps their chat indicator in the nameplate and they do have an AFK indicator aswell.

[heckinahandbag]

• No quacking when your text box is highlighted but still empty

This just keeps you from accidentally quacking with an empty box. This should be the default behavior IMO

I like the quaking, but this is the bit that worries me. And it won't be solved by adding a letter in the chat box. Maybe I am over thinking it, since I don't see many pvp heavy players raising concerns about it, but maybe they just haven't thought it through yet so I'm bringing it up.

That being said, if it could be tied to letters actively being typed instead of just an active chat box, that would be a good solution.

May I ask why? Like, what problem you're trying to solve here? Mine was simply that I found myself accidentally quacking by leaving the text box highlighted, but I'm not sure I follow what you're concerned about.

[Hoodoo]

POTM keeps their chat indicator in the nameplate and they do have an AFK indicator aswell.

Nameplate solution is one we were aware of before implementation, we thought that that area was too cluttered as is but will consider it as an option if there's another trial.

[BattleDrake]

Started anti-quack. Ended pro-quack.

Looking forward to their return.

[Darkstorn42]

I already miss my quackers. I even thought about how all the concern trolling about waiting to PvP once you see them pop up allows for ooc feints. I think most players attack because they don't know what the other one is doing. Having quacks, and faith in your fellow players, will be a net positive for conflict RP.

I have seen some comments of 'all or nothing' that have made sense, but I'm still not sure about it. I don't think 2 weeks was enough to see any social trends around their use and most of the comments about it are likely anecdotal.

P. S. I look forward to their return.

[Hrothgar Bloodaxe]

I think you should keep the quackers. It's a really helpful tool for facilitating RP conversations, especially in large groups. As anyone that's tried to conduct any sort of group RP event, government proceeding, etc. knows, the dialog can quickly become a mess - this helps keep things more organized.

I understand the objections people have, but I think these are handled easily by the system already in place - you can simply turn it off. If you don't want to see the quackers of others, or have other people see your quacker.... just disable this feature. No one is making you use it.

I think as an optional system, this is great to have. Let the people that want it, use it, and let the people that don't, opt out. Everyone wins, no one has to do anything they don't want to.

[D4wN]

I miss my quackers..

[Tikin]

Hi!

I find myself today considering a “quacker” button in my toolbar (quickslots would do also of course).

This would go this way : slot = "command". Title = "quack" (or whatever). Command = "/tk …"

Which would allow me somehow to use quackers even if they are not implemented, as simply pressing a button would make my character say "..."

Why? Because like many here, I have found myself typing in the wind for someone who leaves a scene as they ignore I’m typing a bit too often for my liking.
Honestly, I’ve even once (way before this quackers trial) typed “…” in frustration as I saw someone leaving while I was typing.
I don’t always feel the need for such an indicator. And during the trial, I enjoyed the “delay” very much, as well as I had a “ON/OFF” button in toolbar because I don’t always need people to know I’m typing. Like when I type prices or writing some letters why would I quack. But I really enjoyed the opportunity to easily and efficiently let someone know I was typing.

I wonder if the team would be ok with me using “…” at times, or if would be frowned upon?

During the preparation of this post I realize I could also make some kind of emote button that would allow me to quickly send something like "seems about to speak" or something like that ... Perhaps all us quackers lovers can make our own "quacker emote"?

Thanks in advance, and yay quacks

[Babylon System is the Vampire]

• No quacking when your text box is highlighted but still empty

This just keeps you from accidentally quacking with an empty box. This should be the default behavior IMO

I like the quaking, but this is the bit that worries me. And it won't be solved by adding a letter in the chat box. Maybe I am over thinking it, since I don't see many pvp heavy players raising concerns about it, but maybe they just haven't thought it through yet so I'm bringing it up.

That being said, if it could be tied to letters actively being typed instead of just an active chat box, that would be a good solution.

May I ask why? Like, what problem you're trying to solve here? Mine was simply that I found myself accidentally quacking by leaving the text box highlighted, but I'm not sure I follow what you're concerned about.

It's about little nuances at the start of pvp. With the talk wait for a response rule, you already had situations where teams were spreading into formation while you waited for a reply, and that's not even getting into the advantages of just being the one who gets the final word in an obvious pvp situation because they have to wait for you to respond, which means you have some time to finagle your first few moves into ready position. Generally, its acceptable to take movement and an obvious delay tactic as a response, but at least with the later it can be difficult to decide how long is long enough. Add to that the image of quackers, and suddenly that guess becomes nigh impossible.

That being said, I thought you were the first person to bring this up, which is why I highlighted your post. This thread is long though, and I found much earlier mentions as well as some sort of fix that has been implemented (?). I haven't been in game for a week and a half now, so my experience with the system is definitely old. In other words, it's very likely my initial post was a case of "Nothing to see here".

[dasdiddlydas]

I don't post often, but I need to say this is a wonderful feature. It helps with the flow of conversation and lets the server feel less like a chatroom since you can see when people are going to say things.

I love it.

[Dreams]

I still really dislike them. They're awkward, interrupt roleplay, all the other reasons have been pretty well mentioned already earlier in the thread.

I think they should be either entirely ON or OFF, without the option to selectively choose to see others whilst turning your own off. It's weird to let people take advantage of extra information whilst having theirs absent. Maybe I've just been the victim of one-line PvP, low RP PvP, weird shotgun-build PvP one too many times and I'm sensitive to the issue?

[KaedeLanyo]

The feature has universally helped pace RP, in my experience. Significantly less people posting at the very same time, during what should be simple chatter. It may also be a little mean to say, but it seems to positively light a bit of a fire under those who maybe would otherwise tend to interact fairly little.

In general, it had fantastic effects for my own anxieties.

[ElevenOne]

I used the quackers since the testing period started and I loved them.

Now they are gone, I don't even know how we could play without them in the past, it was so much QoL for RP.

Crossing fingers they have green-light to be a permanent feature, and hopefully soon!

[AstralUniverse]

I wonder if the team would be ok with me using “…” at times, or if would be frowned upon?

People have been doing this for 20 years and despite it being purely ooc, it's far more elegant than quackers and I dont recall anyone complaining.

If you're giving someone a ... to indicate you're talking to them, I dont see the problem.
If you're ending your long post with a ... to indicate that you arent done talking I also dont see a problem.

The difference is that these examples above dont happen all that often, compared to the dots who happen all the time, thus there's no real opt-out from quackers if it goes in. people will be subconsciously trained to give less attention to people who opt-out because, again, they are always on, rather than something you add in your text in very specific situations.

[Coolguy McMagic]

I wonder if the team would be ok with me using “…” at times, or if would be frowned upon?

People have been doing this for 20 years and despite it being purely ooc, it's far more elegant than quackers and I dont recall anyone complaining.

If you're giving someone a ... to indicate you're talking to them, I dont see the problem.
If you're ending your long post with a ... to indicate that you arent done talking I also dont see a problem.

The difference is that these examples above dont happen all that often, compared to the dots who happen all the time, thus there's no real opt-out from quackers if it goes in. people will be subconsciously trained to give less attention to people who opt-out because, again, they are always on, rather than something you add in your text in very specific situations.

I think your fears of non-quackers being ignored are largely unfounded. In 1v1 situations you notice pretty quickly if someone isn't using quackers and can adjust accordingly. I've had it happen several times before, it was never an issue.

In large groups you don't really pay that much attention to individual quackers anyway, so you barely notice who is quacking and who isn't, and even if you do, nothing stops the non-quacker from saying something and participating as usual?
So if there's 5 people talking you are not going to suddenly ignore what someone is saying simply because they are not quacking. Quacking is not content; the quacking icon does not mean anything. What guides our decisions of who to respond and react to is what others are saying, doing and emoting, not whether or not they are quacking.

Do you really think other people are so shallow that they would let such a low-level perceptive feature guide their RP in such an impactful manner?

[AstralUniverse]

I think your fears of non-quackers being ignored are largely unfounded

Umm....

When I had them off, I felt PCs walked off without giving me enough time to reply, in particular with PCs I usually dont interact with.
Not seeing quackers and assuming Im AFK, perhaps. I found myself assuming the same about others who had switched them off.

I've tried roleplaying with it both on and off and I've noticed that a lot of people pay you far less mind, or walk off in certain situations assuming you're not typing at them (especially if it's a longer message, or you're slow to type) thinking that you're just not in the process of saying anything at all.

This is just from the last thread page. It is real.

[Coolguy McMagic]

I think your fears of non-quackers being ignored are largely unfounded

Umm....

When I had them off, I felt PCs walked off without giving me enough time to reply, in particular with PCs I usually dont interact with.
Not seeing quackers and assuming Im AFK, perhaps. I found myself assuming the same about others who had switched them off.

I've tried roleplaying with it both on and off and I've noticed that a lot of people pay you far less mind, or walk off in certain situations assuming you're not typing at them (especially if it's a longer message, or you're slow to type) thinking that you're just not in the process of saying anything at all.

This is just from the last thread page. It is real.

Yes, it can indeed be hard to tell whether or not someone is going to say something or not after a conversation has seemingly concluded. That's a vanilla Arelith thing and it's part of the reason why quackers were implemented, so of course you see this more if you have them turned off.
If a feature is implemented to reduce a certain problem, and you turn that feature off, you are going to see that problem more than if you had it turned on. That just means it's working as intended.

But again, if you actually interact with someone, you will quickly notice they are not using quackers. If you don't notice it, it's likely because you only interact in passing or because you are in a large group - both situations in which you were liable to be ignored before the quackers were added anyway.

[ThisIsNotADrill]

I love the quackers, it's a great convenience feature to broadcast that your character is speaking/acting.

It tells me when it's a good time to stop talking and listen. It tells others that a response is incoming so they should hold their actions.

It's also just just handy at eliminating some of those casual misunderstandings where you don't know for sure if someone is present and actively engaging with you or if you're talking to nobody. Or someone who doesn't wait for further response before engaging PVP because they assume that their opponent is waiting for them to act rather than trying to respond.

Quackers are good/10 and their absence was my number one missing QoL feature upon starting play on Arelith.

With all the customization features made available for them, including the option to simply disable them outright, I would posit that there's no reason not to fully implement them.

[TempuranTempeh]

Definitely enjoyed seeing the quackers around!

I found them a big help in situations of 'are they thinking, typing or crashed', to better catch when a retelling or something has concluded, so on. The partial opt-out option is something I have used so that I didn't have to see my own typing indicator. Plus I was not comfortable with my typing being shown in case it'd halt the typing of others unnecessarily, so it was perfect.

The customization options are what makes this work well in my opinion, as I didn't feel forced into any particular way of things.

EDIT: After reading some other feedback and concerns, as somebody who turned the indicator off for myself on day 1, I've experienced no issues. Wasn't skipped over in RP, didn't notice any assumptions of being afk, and have never been greentexted about turning it on.