<call#> do we want it?

[Eliseus]

No let's put in a ready check
/sarcasm

Everyone that is so PC interfance oriented, remember that we'll be playing along side PS3 players in the near future. Will a pop up window for a ready check be easily navigated and unobtrusive enough for someone on the PS3?

It's ok! They are putting in a ready check whether you are being sarcastic or not! ^^

Even a caveman can do it. (Figured I'd use that comment since your arguments seem to be around not everyone will be able to use things like ready check, so we must need <call>.)

[Yrusama]

<call5> = Victory Fanfail

I would very much like to hear a grand orchestral version of this.

[Kinyoto]

<call5> = Victory Fanfail

I would very much like to hear a grand orchestral version of this.

Yes!

Also, I can understand people who have a love/hate relationship with <call> but I really think it is such a handy tool. It's nice when people use it to get the attention of our party waiting for something to start & I'm tabbed in another window.

[HamHam]

Actually the eruption lag was client side.
Even those in Japan had to deal with it.

Not true. I'll leave it at that...

[Mychael]

It's ok! They are putting in a ready check whether you are being sarcastic or not! ^^

Even a caveman can do it. (Figured I'd use that comment since your arguments seem to be around not everyone will be able to use things like ready check, so we must need <call>.)

Ready check is a very separate feature from <call>. The issue is not "ease of use," but that a ready check inherently requires user feedback (by whatever easy/difficult method SE devises) to say "Yes, I'm here." It serves its purpose of ensuring that everyone's present at their computer, i.e. conducting a ready check. <call>s accomplish a very different thing.

Maybe this will help put it in perspective. Ready check is like when your gradeschool teachers went around the room, called each person's name, and everyone raised their hand and piped up a (not-so-)cheerful "Here!" <call> is the bell/announcement/whatever that happened at the end of every day alerting you that you're free to leave. It's the fire alarm that rang occasionally telling you "GTFO OR YOU'LL DIE!" (Well....in theory.) It is a notification feature, not a yes/no question.

[Wilksha]

<call> was alright, but a fair number of the calls were too shrill. If they make <calls> have their own audio volume setting I'm all for it (Calls volume 15%)! And if there are multiple <call>s like in XI, let us Block particular one that we fine deafening having them change to a different call of our choosing. And for tell notifications, it's too bad that it's not set to on by default.
Oh maybe let us MOD calls client side so we can set calls to our own cheery beeps and boops.

[Mychael]

And if there are multiple <call>s like in XI, let us Block particular one that we fine deafening having them change to a different call of our choosing.

Better yet, why don't we just avoid making any calls which fall into this category. The idea is to get someone's attention, but a "beep" does that just as well as some of the shrill sounds XI's <call>s made.

[Eliseus]

Ready check is a very separate feature from <call>. The issue is not "ease of use," but that a ready check inherently requires user feedback (by whatever easy/difficult method SE devises) to say "Yes, I'm here." It serves its purpose of ensuring that everyone's present at their computer, i.e. conducting a ready check. <call>s accomplish a very different thing.

Maybe this will help put it in perspective. Ready check is like when your gradeschool teachers went around the room, called each person's name, and everyone raised their hand and piped up a (not-so-)cheerful "Here!" <call> is the bell/announcement/whatever that happened at the end of every day alerting you that you're free to leave. It's the fire alarm that rang occasionally telling you "GTFO OR YOU'LL DIE!" (Well....in theory.) It is a notification feature, not a yes/no question.

I'm assuming with the implementation of add on there will be this "call" feature that some of you want so bad.

Think of deadly boss mods from WoW. If you don't know what that is, just google it. I'm assuming that something like that will be made. Will SE add a call feature? Why not, but considering most of the argument for call has been based off of FFXI, yes, I am referring to it being used as a "get here so we can raid" feature, which they are already making a ready check for.

[Linkurrra]

You think they could make <call#> available to more party conditions than Levequests? Like how party management icons and status icons were only available in a Levequest only and not available for dungeons, regular parties in 1.0! lol I always thought that was weird or such a handy tool!

I'm sure they are for ARR going to do this for ARR. I'm just pointing out the flaw.

[ChiefCurrahee]

I'm assuming with the implementation of add on there will be this "call" feature that some of you want so bad.

Think of deadly boss mods from WoW. If you don't know what that is, just google it. I'm assuming that something like that will be made. Will SE add a call feature? Why not, but considering most of the argument for call has been based off of FFXI, yes, I am referring to it being used as a "get here so we can raid" feature, which they are already making a ready check for.

I know the general idea behind "deadly boss mods" where it scans the enemy actions in text and alerts players of incoming bad stuff.

Ready Check, lets a group leader know everyone is present before they storm in on a dungeon or a boss.

Now, what we are asking for in <call> is for specific communications to members while in a party.

Like for instance in cutters cry when you split the party up and each party has to kill their last ant at the same time. If you did CC with a pick up (ARR is going to have cross server dungeon finder) voice chat was mostly not an option. So we relied on chat to communicate. Unless you had stellar communication between the two groups things fell apart.

<call#> can help with that communication lets say <call1> plays a "ding" sound <call2> plays a "dong" sound when grp 1 gets to their last ant they play <call1> when grp 2 gets to their last ant they play <call2> the grp leader plays <call3> (a "gong" sound) to alert all parties to kill the ants.

Or on ant princess in CC every 60 seconds worker ants woudl attack at 15 seconds play <call4> which might be a "war drum" sound (bombombom...bombombom) to alert of incoming adds. At 2 seconds play <call3>

So are we going to use ready check when we want to kill those ants, are we going to use ready check to make people aware of incoming adds?

Are we going to spam chat in the hope that everyone pays attention to that box instead of the fight in front of them?

It's easy for people to remember the times when they didn't appericiate the <call> function from XI. Like when the lv20 monk has a boost macro that every 15 seconds has the loud whistle.

It's not easy to remember when it was a standard for certain events, because it wasn't abnormal to the situational context. Like pull macros in dynamis or the opening WS for a skillchain/magic burst combo.

A lot of vocal members of this forum think of the exteames, myself included. But in practice we play much more in the center.

Yes if they put in <call> a few players will annoy the crap out of a few people with their macro <calls>. A few people will not even use them.

For the people that abuse a <call> function will learn fast that it's not the way to make friends, and will change their ways quickly or find themselves on the sideline.

wow, that was a lot longer than i anticipated.

TL;DR:
<call#> is a fast way to communicate sitiational awareness, when other forms of communication become confusing, or easily missed.
We all remember the abuses with <call>, but hard to remember when the use was a standard like in pull macros or opening WS for SC/MB combos.
people who abuse <call> learn fast what is accepted and what is not.