Printable View
Increase the size limit of the avatars (Both size and memory.) This way, We can have more detailed and animated avatars.
As said in my previous post; This will also give gfx people have more space when working with avatars. Aaaand come on. The one we have atm is just so small. (19 kb? Really. <-<)
(Or we could do it like this; The size limit of avatars or sigs increase for every rank up you have in LG.) This way, The avatars will be very controlled.
What do you think?
2nd thing: Interesting idea
I think the size of the actual image is fine. The file size increase could be good.
I agree with the file size increase. D:
For sure.
I also agree with the second idea.
I think most of the people agree with this idea. I'll bring it up to the rest of the staff members.
I will increase the file size, but not by much. The size limit is there for a good reason. A good many people still use dial up, or have old computers. And I don't want them to have miserable experience. The thing that separates a good website for all the others is it's ability to run smoothly on a variety of computers. As for the avatar size, it's already large enough. I was thinking of lowering it back down to 120x120. The idea is a good one, and once dial-up kicks the bucket we can increase it. But until then I'm not about to put form over function. That's the main reason we don't have a new theme yet. They all ran too slow on older computers.
That's why you have multiple themes, a nice flashy one, and the default one.
Nice flashy themes allows big avatars(pixel and memory wise), while the default theme is, well, default.
If we did different avatars for each theme the user would have to upload 3 different avatars.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakonid
just disable avatars for default
Or resize them.
I support the installation of animated avatars.
I'd like a greater filesize too. You can fit a SMALL animation, like mine, but not much else, so I'd like to see that changed.
There is a very good reason for this. Not everybody has broadband or a nice computer, and we shouldn't leave them with a horrible experience because we added something flashy to the website. A good website needs to run well on a variety of platforms. It also shouldn't be known for it's flash. It needs to be known for good user content. For example, compare Digg and Redit. Digg looks way better, but it's a dog on older computers. Redit runs extremely well on most computers, and has great content from it's users. As a result more people are passionate and loyal to Redit over Digg. Since Digg lost view of content and focused on adding feature after feature after feature.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe
Fair enough, that makes sense. The only reason I was a fan in the first place because it's hard to get an animation more than a couple of frames long to fit in that file size limit and the colors can't be too intense or anything. In the long run though, I'd prefer more people here adding content than making the site so slow they won't even want to come back anymore.
Who still uses dial up? You know anyone? Cuz i don't >_>
Well if you're worried about people with slower connects would it be possible to have an option not to show animated avatars?
Like so everyone else can have their slightly more animated avis and users with slow connections can decided to disable them if it becomes a problem?
Sort of like how gaia has the option to disable animated avis.