Gamercards in Sigs

bucks73

Mygamercard.net have released a new interactive gamercard for Xbox Live users but unfortunately it uses HTML so cannot be directly entered into a sig here.

http://inside.mygamercard.net/2009/12/31/celebrate-the-new-year-with-the-new-silverlight-nxe-card/

They do however state that forums can create their own custon BBCode to allow is to be used. On MGC they use the tags [NXE] [/NXE ].

So, Im wondering is it possible for something similar to be done here so gamers can then add this new gamercard to their sigs.

Thanks.

Gordon

Have you got an example of this new card? Most of the gamercards I've seen are too big for our sig rules. Yours included actually..

Nerin

bucks73 wrote: »

Mygamercard.net have released a new interactive gamercard for Xbox Live users but unfortunately it uses HTML so cannot be directly entered into a sig here.

http://inside.mygamercard.net/2009/12/31/celebrate-the-new-year-with-the-new-silverlight-nxe-card/

They do however state that forums can create their own custon BBCode to allow is to be used. On MGC they use the tags [NXE] [/NXE ].

So, Im wondering is it possible for something similar to be done here so gamers can then add this new gamercard to their sigs.

Thanks.

you can use a converter like THIS to convert html to bbcode, which is allowed in sigs.

bucks73

It would be the same size as the one already in mine. Its actually identical to mine but just adds interactivity. But if thats too big I will change it to something smaller.

You might want to tell almost everyone else in the Xbox forum too.

Gordon

bucks73 wrote: »

You might want to tell almost everyone else in the Xbox forum too.

For me it's about visibility. If 10 people had a private forum and only ever posted in that private forum and all 10 had 1 megabyte animated signature images: it wouldn't be a problem for me because everyone else is in the same boat.

I'm not going to actively root out oversized signatures, but if I see one in general browsing I may snip it. If it's reported I'll definitely snip it. I don't tend to go into the Xbox forum in general browsing, and I imagine people from that forum don't report sigs, so imo it's a case of trees falling soundless in a relative forest.

bucks73

Thats fair enough. Cheers.

--amadeus--

"Gamercard" sigs are awful - too big and really distracting. Interactivity would only make them worse, IMO. Animation is banned so surely interactive graphics must be a no-no?

Nerin

--amadeus-- wrote: »

Animation is banned so surely interactive graphics must be a no-no?

Not according to Dev.

--amadeus--

Nerin wrote: »

Not according to Dev.

Pfffft, what does he know!

Dont be at yourself

Have you got an example of this new card? Most of the gamercards I've seen are too big for our sig rules. Yours included actually..

That's a real shame, I think. It would be a great way to foster the sense of community amongst the Games forums if users only had to glance at a poster's sig to see what consoles and games they played, and add them to their friends list.

The US Playstation ID in particular is very unimposing, I think.

--amadeus--

--amadeus-- wrote: »

"Gamercard" sigs are awful - too big and really distracting.

Yours is worse to be fair, in that it took me alot longer to scroll by yours than it took to flick past buck's gamercard..
Small italic typed quote with too much punctuation and completely irrelevent to more people than the gamercard. I'm always going to stop and read signatures like yours but usually regret it.

My name is URL

I just had a look at that gamercard site.. the sigs require Silverlight to be viewed, so it's basically Flash based..?

If people don't have Silverlight all they'll see is a box asking them to install it

oscarBravo

Silverlight != Flash.

The main issue I have with gamercards is that they delay page loading.

Dont be at yourself

oscarBravo wrote:

Silverlight != Flash.

The main issue I have with gamercards is that they delay page loading.

Whatever about a Silverlight card, a straight image will be tiny.

By way of comparison: the image I posted in my post was 15kb. The signature bar in your signature is 12kb.

Overheal

oscarBravo wrote: »

Silverlight != Flash.

The main issue I have with gamercards is that they delay page loading.

Frankly the Flash Ads have more to do with slow loading times than Signature Images. "Waiting for google.analytics.net..." "Waiting for doubleclick.net.." "Adserver.adtech..." "Googlesyndication" etc.

These are just some of the phrases popping up when I reload this page.

oscarBravo

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

Whatever about a Silverlight card, a straight image will be tiny.

Overheal wrote: »

Frankly the Flash Ads have more to do with slow loading times than Signature Images. "Waiting for google.analytics.net..." "Waiting for doubleclick.net.." "Adserver.adtech..." "Googlesyndication" etc.

"Waiting for card.mygamercard.net"...

I hadn't realised everyone was back on dialup..

oscarBravo

Deleted User wrote: »

I hadn't realised everyone was back on dialup..

...because external servers being slow to deliver content only happens on dialup.

Dont be at yourself

I don't think either Sony or Microsoft are short on bandwidth, to be fair.

Should the ban also apply to other image hosts that are slow to deliver content?

oscarBravo

oscarBravo wrote: »

...because external servers being slow to deliver content only happens on dialup.

We have signature rules because external servers are slow? I've yet to come across a popular image host that's noticably slow..
For the majority, a second or two of a delay for more content is acceptable. If it's not for some people, let them switch off signatures..
I think it's a bit mad that as more bandwidth and faster computers are constantly becoming available, we can't utilise them at all.