1st Group feedback
Is there will be message sending to user if there’s an event i want to ask when what time,
For example different countries
If the event 6 GTM it should be different from other countries time so there should be a messages and also private message to communicate in groups
2nd Real-time Live Map and Minimap size
Options you can put a map for Desktop and VR turn on or off or customized resize or smaller, what you can see on the map if for example a huge world and you don’t know where’s your friends you can see them on the map so tou can go to them easily, show on the minimap profile photo icon, name, distance, you can also zoom in and out
Please make it, it going to be useful and awesome!
If people are using features in that manner, the users are the problem. I am reiterating this since there has been a trend of great features being criticized, not implemented, or otherwise removed due to concerns of “abuse” . Most notably, an in-game clock being not implemented due to concerns of “negative social interactions”.
A dev mentioned to me that you can still grab the VRCSDK through github, and as such, VCC isn’t explicitly required. So while it is less convenient, it should be possible to pretty much use the existing workflow if you’re a developer with a custom workflow (or linux/osx user).
The messaging around this is hilariously inconsistent. Thanks for the info though, I’ll certainly do this at least until the tools actually work properly.
That’s great there’s an alternative avenue in place, if this continues to be available i will have a lot of respect for this.
I have no qualms with av3, avatar 3.0 is fantastic and people should indeed be encouraged to use it more - though there should also be a different easy-mode for new users that is more straight-forward like sdk2, you just filled in slots and things just worked and you didn’t have to know how to properly set up anything. I see much less people doing anything more than uploading booth prefabs. The age of MMD models etc is nigh extinct because almost nobody converts these anymore due to the avatar 3 animation system being too complicated for most (and recommending random 3rd party script systems is not a solution because it’s more working parts and doesn’t come native). For more advanced users like myself 3.0 is fantastic. The primary issue is with Udon itself becoming mandatory to create worlds.
The overall problem is the lack of newbie-friendly streamlined means of getting into developing avatars and worlds, and it’s not very encouraging to new creators to get started. . . .People shouldn’t have to be studied in logic graphing, mecanim and a ton of other complicated things in order to make decent and optimized content - the lack of this results in a deteriorated experience for everyone, as both av3 and udon have led a lot of uneducated individuals to creating terribly malperformant and buggy content compared to the past.
This is a big issue because it’s the type of problem that is probable to cause a lot of individuals to just quietly give up and not say anything or protest, or create things that detriment everyone due to their inadequate design.
(ps: i have significantly better hardware than years past and yet i seem to be getting gradually worse performance in vrchat as time goes on, i wonder why…)
First off, I’m so excited for Groups!
I co-admin a Discord server that was born from VRChat. Not an interest group. Just a group of people that met each other in VRChat, became friends, invited others to join, and now are big enough to unintentionally invade other’s instances. There are so many times where we have to point out who all is with us, and we’re always letting more people join. We’re about to hit our 2 year anniversary~
Groups will be a great way to identify our current members, and easier for us to add more folks who could find a friend or more within our friend community.
I’m so relieved to hear that toxmod is not planned on being implemented, and I agree with what you guys decided would be the better solutions. I was worried about over moderation, since what people find offensive is very subjective. Self moderation, groups, and better onboarding seem like the best way to go.
Thanks for all the hard work you all have been doing, VRChat has never looked better. Hope you all have a wonderful Christmas, Tupper~🎄
If some people choose to do so, then are they the kind of folks anyone would actually enjoy hanging out with?
I personally like a public, invite only group, because I already have a healthy VRChat community that is active in a Discord server, and we’re inviting people all the time. Having it invite only allows our members to get to know people first and decide that they’ll fit in well with out community’s culture. If random people could simply join, our group’s culture would be destroyed over night.
I also don’t think features should be withheld because some people will use them negatively. That happens to any system that humans touch. Public invite only groups can be used for good or not so good. Just find the good ones.
Can we have private groups able to put their banner on nameplates?? I understand keeping it off of profiles i suppose but you should be able to put it on your nameplate still, or have an option to allow/disallow it, or perhaps even letting only certain member roles able to do it.
You want to have a private group but in public? I’m having trouble brainstorming a socially positive use for such a niche trick. So you might want to enlighten us on the use scenario.
Public means viewable to all.
Then make it invite only and chose the moderation level that lets only certain people accept invites. That should give you what you want.
Hmm, i mean being able to set groups as hidden in your profile is part way there - the point is using the banner for talk subject, but not searchable/joinable and doesn’t show on anyone’s profile (for a private group), as an option i mean. I mean ability for owner (and maybe admin) to allow a group to be representable on nameplate but invisible in all profile/bios (requiring being physically present to be aware of it).
Well, right now, groups can’t be searched for. You can also turn off joining entirely by setting it to invite only. People could type in the short code, but then all they would see is just the group page, which you can leave as sparse as you want by omitting a description and rules.
Individual users can select if they want a group to be visible in their profile or not.
In other words, aside from the ability for admins to force group profile visibility setting, we have all this.
All of that being said, I am also struggling a bit with the use case that you are describing. It seems that you can get 99% of the way there with the current implementation-- what does that additional 1% allow you to do?
Hmm that’s a very reasonable response. I suppose it’s more just the owner/admins being able to make a group hidden on all users’ profiles without preventing the ability to use it’s, potentially nice looking banner. That or making it default to hidden/friends-only mode might be a good alternative.
I suppose omitting any details in it makes sense - but if you can go so far as to hide pretty much everything, i wonder what the point is of having a private group mode other than the personal comfort of it never being randomly made public on you…
Organizational features such as Group instances and instance moderation, I’d wager! Also, more features later on that’ll require being in the same group.
In this baseline, foundational implementation, there isn’t too much you can do. That’ll change as time goes on.
don’t know about you, but this list of lists of minor changes, that tupper posted, is too bothersome to read even for me. and i can bet that for the most part they don’t really affect VRC.
(i’ve actually requested a Unity update a while ago because of that, here: Canny … someone could mark it as complete, or at least in progress until we start using .40 for uploading. idk if the material changes will work correctly with something packed with .31 but run with .40)
Ability to send a message with group join request would be great!
I suppose, but the way it is, it sorta requires people to make multiple groups for some things - a public group for nameplate banners, and private for the real business, if they want to make a hidden group that can’t be looked up for whatever reason but still represent it in person. Add Not saying i necessarily have a use for this per se, but i thought of the use cases so i put in my 2 cents on the subject.
Another idea with what i was saying about admin setting a group as representable or not, rather making it limitable to only certain roles can represent or have group visible on their profile or restrict roles.
Rn I have it set to invite only, as our friend group naturally operated that way as we expanded our Discord server. Playing with strangers, getting to know them, then inviting them to our Discord server to fully integrate them into our community.
Is there a way for people to request to join a group, but only admins, or people with the correct role, being able to accept them?
I wouldn’t mind people being able to request, like a friend request. Some people might be too shy to ask in-person, and might prefer making a request instead. But I don’t want recently joined members being able to accept strangers right away. Our friend group’s culture is very important to us, and an influx of new people could damage it.
Hopefully it’s planned to be able to invite people through their in-game profile as well as under User Actions in the QM! Will help make inviting people to your created groups + groups you have invite perms in a breeze! The current method of inviting people by manually having to type their names in to find them is a bit cumbersome ^^;
One last question; my group is on “Invite Only.” That means I need to change it to “Request Invite” to be able to do both, like you pointed out, right?
There are so many times where we have to point out who all is with us, and we’re always letting more people join. We’re about to hit our 2 year anniversary~
