C3 is crap, that's why. It's clunky, insanely resource-intensive (relatively speaking, for a voip prog), and doesn't work as intended. And there are better programs out there.
I'll stick to my light, set it and forget it Ventrilo, please. Now if I could just find people to join me in my server...
1
Why Does No One Use C3?
Started by FlourBoy, Jan 24 2013 12:25 PM
41 replies to this topic
#42
-
-
- The 1 Percent
- 3,855 posts
Member
- LocationMaryland, USA
Posted 24 March 2013 - 01:18 PM
C3 breaks out to be "Command, Control and Communications".
In-game voice would be the "communications" component, so the C3 feature is NOT what has been kinda integrated. It's only VOIP and, to reiterate, not actual C3. If there were a way to give text commands using macros, like "action right" or "action left", then you have some semblance of the command and control portion.
Regardless, I believe in-game voice should be mandatory if PGI wants the full effects of ECM to be felt.
In-game voice would be the "communications" component, so the C3 feature is NOT what has been kinda integrated. It's only VOIP and, to reiterate, not actual C3. If there were a way to give text commands using macros, like "action right" or "action left", then you have some semblance of the command and control portion.
Regardless, I believe in-game voice should be mandatory if PGI wants the full effects of ECM to be felt.
Edited by Gremlich Johns, 24 March 2013 - 01:19 PM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
