Idlecam upon AFK

[Siven]

Hello! Please add an *option* to automatically /icam when your character goes afk. Thank you!

[Tint]

was wondering why there isn't already an option for that c.c

[BreathlessTao]

Please don't. AFKers don't need any more encouraging than what they already have.

[MaeIsMean]

Please don't. AFKers don't need any more encouraging than what they already have.

Are AFK'ers doing something to offend you, that you would be against something fun like this?

[dementiondrive]

they already do have a idle camera. just not going AFK. type icam and you can AFK after that if you please.

[BreathlessTao]

Are AFK'ers doing something to offend you, that you would be against something fun like this?

Well, let's see...
Do the devs constantly refer to network strain in regards to feature requests? Yes, they do.
Do the devs constantly refer to bandwidth issues in regards to feature requests? Yes, they do.
Do the devs constantly refer to data size limits over the network in regards to feature requests? Yes, they do.
Is the fact that character inventory has to be instantly available at all times for everybody online one of the reasons they can't increase its size (see above)? Yes, it is.

Do AFKers offend? Well, hum, let's see... oh, yes they do. Not on a personal level, but community-wise? Sure. This game is nobody's own private little entertainment source. It's a multiplayer game, meaning it's continuously eating up network resources, and those resources aren't infinite. And while yes, expanding those same resources is one of the solutions, it's an incredible money investment, something that's not happening just yet (from what we know). Considering all these, it's quite staggering that they're so limited on one hand, yet on the other the devs don't seem to want to do what they could do, without much of an effort, to alleviate the situation as much as possible.

If someone's gonna be away for more than an hour, they have no reason whatsoever to stay logged in - no reason whatsoever to have the game running at all, if you ask me, but while in case of a single-player game, that only affects one's own power consumption, here it also affects an entire network, the servers that everybody else is also using. The network and servers that are, admittedly, rather limited and always under a lot of strain. Thinking it doesn't hurt anyone is what I find the most offensive.

If someone's gonna be away, actually away - why would they need something like this anyway? How would it be "fun" for them, if they're not at the computer to see it? Especially if they're gonna be away for 3-6-8-12 hours, because they go to bed or to work or any such (and believe me, I see dozens of those every day in every city, just rooted to the same spot, not even bothering with fake "crafting" or "conversation/interaction" anymore either)? Why would anyone want to run a game, an MMO game at that, as a glorified screensaver, when there'd be no point to it at all because nobody would even glimpse at it anyway? I also find this very offensive.

[Atoli]

The things you refer to are about the amount of data sent between the server and your character. It has nothing to do with other players, so your hate of afk'ers is completely unfounded...

But yeah, I also think you can just turn /icam on yourself when you go afk.

[Sida]

If /icam is indeed valid slash command you should be able to do macro that enables it and puts you in afk. Granted, that wouldn't give auto idle camera with the timed afk.

[Niwashi]

If someone's gonna be away, actually away - why would they need something like this anyway? How would it be "fun" for them, if they're not at the computer to see it?

Because this isn't for people who are away, just idle for a few minutes, so they are still at the computer to see it. And that fact makes the rest of your arguments a moot point as far as this discussion goes (even though they would be valid if we were discussing the sort of long-term absences you resent).

I myself think just manually setting /icam if you want it is sufficient, but wouldn't object to such a change. (And it seems like something that would likely be simple enough to add.)