Mumble Steam Integration

[76561198077421294]

Mumble is an open source, low-latency, high quality voice chat software which uses less bandwith than other,so my plea to Valve is to integrate this program into Steam as replacement for existing in-game chat or allow us to install it as 3rd party software into overlay and this should be fairly easy considering its Open Source(being computer software for which the source code is freely available)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cn8bCd9n8j4

[Black Blade]

Will be nice even that i cant see them doing it... so far seem Valve like to use Valve software only... but for now
i think OverWolf (overlay for games) will have it earlier and may help you for now
OverWolf: http://www.overwolf.com/

[76561198077421294]

@Black Blade: Thanks,will look into it but Im rather having as less programs possible.Seeing that Gabe is in fond of "open source" Im having fingers crossed.

[Black Blade]

Originalmente postado por Andy69:

@Black Blade: Thanks,will look into it but I'm rather having as less programs possible.Seeing that Gabe is in fond of "open source" I'm having fingers crossed.

well can just hope... what i think Steam really needs is a addon manger so we can make are own add ons.. may come with the SteamOS (not very high) as they say it will be open source
then we can add it are self
OverWolf dose not have mumble yet... but it was ask and has something to add plugins so someone may make it some point

[ReBoot]

What's the Point? Steam has it's own voicechat already.

[Black Blade]

Originalmente postado por ReBoot:

What's the Point? Steam has it's own voice chat already.

well many think its not so good (i think its ok but had some issues with it)

[Fox]

Originalmente postado por Black Blade:

well many think its not so good (i think its ok but had some issues with it)

What reboot says is this :
"We have the service, why should we code another one which does the same core thing ?"
Any valve employee will just tell "we got voicechat, click on it and talk, done"
It's not the quality which matters here, but whether or not you can hear yourselves.
Invalid, as the feature is there.

Originalmente postado por Andy69:

[...] or allow us to install it as 3rd party software into overlay [...]

Into overlay ? Well, overlay already "hacks itself" into games, so, adding a layer won't do.
And for the point of "having add-ons", I'd fear about security. I stayed here long enough to know that several steam users are willing to destroy their steam acoount for whatever-shiny-thing-where-you-need-to-behave-slightly-insecurely they want (see trade windows and their new warning for an example).
Invalid, i guess, for security issues.

[Black Blade]

Originalmente postado por Fox:

What reboot says is this :
"We have the service, why should we code another one which does the same core thing ?"
Any valve employee will just tell "we got voice chat, click on it and talk, done"
It's not the quality which matters here, but whether or not you can hear yourselves.
Invalid, as the feature is there.

I agree with that and really i am fine with the Steam Voice... i am just repeating things i seen in past post abut voice... its not really my opinion if it was i wil have not type in.. "many" but "us" or "i"
Also its not abut what Valve will say abut it its abut giving an idea

[Fox]

Originalmente postado por Black Blade:

i am just repeating things i seen in past post abut voice... its not really my opinion if it was i wil have not type in.. "many" but "us" or "i"

I was just completing your remark and didn't think you thought that. Sorry if you understood it that way, as it wasn't my intention.

Originalmente postado por Black Blade:

Also its not abut what Valve will say abut it its abut giving an idea

Well, the working methods on Valve (the cabal, no-management system) mean that the employees may pretty much think "I'll do what pleases me and the company". (I overdo it, but you get the point)
So, I think it's actually MORE important to put oneself in the shoes of an actual Valve employee than on any other company.
Should valve decides to give the complaining people a better voice chat, it'd actually benefit them from doing it in-house, as they have the "core" feature.

[Black Blade]

@fox got it (did not think just want to put to be sure)
Any way if it really was like that Steam will not really move any were XD even that it is somewhat so..
What i am thinking as it dose seem like there are not one post abut these.. that shows that some are unhappy with steam voice... and really one thing i just got to think abut is that you have to add them to your friends for it (o go from the group chat) and something like mumble can connect you even for one game something Steam voice dose not do at these time
(any way were i learn you must state your ground even if you know the other side is right so the answer will be sharpened to it max so just you know )

[76561198077421294]

@Fox:You are now talking from developer standpoint,but switching into customer shoes you are neglecting idea that people only want better customer experience,dont you think?As for that in-house chat you are mentioning which we have now wouldnt it be easier to pick up someone else code which proven better even from most even paid products and build on those solid foundations rather than wasting time trying to fix something,especially if we are talking about open source programs which dont require paying for licenses.

[Fox]

Originalmente postado por Andy69:

@Fox:You are now talking from developer standpoint,but switching into customer shoes you are neglecting idea that people only want better customer experience,dont you think?As for that in-house chat you are mentioning which we have now wouldnt it be easier to pick up someone else code which proven better even from most even paid products and build on those solid foundations rather than wasting time trying to fix something,especially if we are talking about open source programs which dont require paying for licenses.

Hi,
I always had the standard idea of "an idea is doable if both developers and customers gain from it". Otherwise, it's a crapstorm. You're still free to disagree with me, however, as I don't mind people having different opinions.
The true problem would be about "implementing it" into steam, which is already the case of in-house chat. Although I agree with you about "robust, open-source program which improve user experience", you still have to implement it into Steam. You just can't "pick it up and plug it in", code-wise.
Then, you still have to take on other considerations, as "Steam is a games' platform at core, not a audio chat", which may justify a dev' into not taking up time to implement it, or so.
That's a complicated matter, in fact. You'll just have to convince Valve to implement it, by showing it it's a win-win situation. Because that's how I always had to do.

[76561198077421294]

As you are saying Steam is an "gaming" platform and I agree,also chatting is essential part of playing games especially Online ones,and if allowing users to have better experience isnt priority then I dont know what it is.Same could be said for having In-game gameplay capture tool which people are demanding while we know that there are 3rd party ones.
And about that "win-win" situation,Valve could start renting servers so by default you would get 10-20 slots free and if you want to expand you would pay small monthly fee.So basically Valve would get happy customers and get decent money from it,while customers would get best in-game chat available out-of-box without any hassle to set-up and mantain servers like they do now.Though I am sure there are other mutual benefits.

[Fox]

Originalmente postado por Andy69:

As you are saying Steam is an "gaming" platform and I agree,also chatting is essential part of playing games especially Online ones,and if allowing users to have better experience isnt priority then I dont know what it is.Same could be said for having In-game gameplay capture tool which people are demanding while we know that there are 3rd party ones.
And about that "win-win" situation,Valve could start renting servers so by default you would get 10-20 slots free and if you want to expand you would pay small monthly fee.So basically Valve would get happy customers and get decent money from it,while customers would get best in-game chat available out-of-box without any hassle to set-up and mantain servers like they do now.Though I am sure there are other mutual benefits.

Yeah, you make quite a good point here.
Still, I didn't understand the "so by default you would get 10-20 slots free and if you want to expand you would pay small monthly fee". Would you mind explaining it to me ?
I'd still say it's not really useful for me (I'm already happy with the in-house voice chat, which at least "gets the job done"), but if it would benefit other users, I clearly wouldn't be against implementing it.

[76561198077421294]

Its simple for eg.Valve provides servers for which users have 2 options:A)Free:slots are restricted so you get only to chat with 10-20 people at same time(for casual gamers,smaller clans) B)Paid-Expanded number of slots,price depends on how many slots you want to rent(for larger clans,groups)