[1306] Group publics should automatically close once no group members remain
tracked
Sippbox
Either have the instance stop showing in the list, switch the instance to a regular public instance, or shut down the instance entirely. Whatever the solution is, I don't think these instances should persist in the group locations if there are no group members in the instance.
Log In
unexcept
With the release of Instance Closing this feels less necessary, and while marked as tracked, it has largely fallen off the backlog. As such I'm inclined to consider closing it.
Is this still needed, or does Instance Closing as it current works (manually), cover enough of this ask?
I'd like to give you the space to consider that question, and if you do think it is still needed I'll re-frame the ask into something potentially easier to get buy-in for, and ensure it continues to be tracked.
ʙɪɢ․
unexcept I'm obviously not speaking for everybody, but I do think there's still value in the original sentiment behind this feedback request.
I often find myself worrying that my group is being seen in a bad light if people are joining and seeing a lobby entirely composed of trolls or yelling kids because group members are no longer there to 'set the tone' or moderators are no longer there to maintain it. It feels weird that people can join an instance with my group's name plastered on it when it no longer relates to my group in any way after a certain point.
Being able to close an instance is a great step, but this still actively requires someone to be "the last one out the door" and end the event, which, at least in my case, I don't always want to do if the instance is still going strong and I just personally don't want to be there.
I think Sipp's alternate suggestion in the post description seems like the most elegant solution. If no group members are present in a group public, hide it from the public instance list similar to when the instance is over recommended capacity until a group member joins it again.
Maybe this could be a toggle in the group's settings as well? I'm sure some groups don't mind the existing behaviour.
ʙɪɢ․
Alternatively, (albeit not as ideal of a solution,) maybe we just need a counter that shows how many group members are in a group instance, separate from the total number of users? This would make manually closing an instance slightly more valuable in this context because you wouldn't need to join the instance yourself to know if it's been abandoned by group members or not.
SylerH ~Artax~
unexcept I like Big's idea, however the way it set now works for a band-aid it will likely need more work soon. However, there's far more pressing issues that need to be handled outside this issue so I would hate to see anyone take more time when another is far worse.
unexcept
ʙɪɢ․
Thanks for the reply!
I'll do a write up and get this tracked properly again. I quite like the idea of delisting the instance, and I think that's the most likely one to get approved. Possibly even have it be a group level config that is either "delist when no mods" or "delist when no members" with the latter becoming the default.
Closing automatically could be problematic, and I think manually scheduled closes are safer and easier to accomplish with how instance closing was implemented.
LoppyDaCutie
its still an issue with players making bot accounts that just sit in the lobby keeping them open
Deantwo
LoppyDaCutie: Why is that an issue though?
LoppyDaCutie
Deantwogroups get more people to join when they are more active and the higher up on the instance level the more players that join
Now lets say you sit at the bottom of the instance ladder waiting for players to join and they dont because your instance isnt active put.
If you put a bot in there players arent going to join just because of that also the instance isnt active enough for players to join.
If the instance isnt active (which i hope they fix to have random players join non active instances making them more active) no players will join because the instances are determined by overall activity. If your instance isnt active no one will join thats why you see all those groups at the top of the list all the time
Everytime i have looked at my instance or even sat in there being active no one has joined because just me sitting in there doesnt count as activity.
Deantwo
LoppyDaCutie: I don't know how the instance lists are sorted. I always assumed it was just random, or sorted by number of people. But since the instance lists are still weirdly not updating correctly, listings are usually out-of-date until clicked a few times.
Maybe it would be nice if we could decide how the instance lists are sorted, instead of just based on whatever VRChat is using. Give us more information about the instances and let us decide.
For example I wish I could sort instances by type or number of friends instead of just number of people. But this should likely come together with a greater overhaul or update of instances. Such as allowing us to give an issue a topic or description.
I can't help but think of old Steam/Source game server browsers.
PrideChaser
It would be nice to have the option to leave it open, or close it when your done with the instance or a time limit to set it as per say hours or 1 day or 24 hours etc... Just a suggestion but would love to see this actually happen..!! With the option to change it from public to group only as well is a must need for sure..
ATLWOLF
Currently, when mods are leaving for the night, it's a huge deal to close the instance. We have to drop portals, round people up, and eventually kick them. Then we have to watch for an hour to make sure the instance doesn't repopulate. Ideally, we could allow certain group members to change the instance to Group+ or prevent new joins to just let the instance die when all mods are leaving for the night.
Scout - VRChat Head of Quality Assurance
tracked
Chirping_Cat
The issue with this request is multi-instance club events that are usually spun up from being empty. Obviously, the club will want it to be Groups Public to help get people in after its created even if it is empty. So this just wouldn't be workable for the problem that Groups Public was meant to solve.
Alternate solutions: Perhaps allowing Groups to set an expiration time on the instance? Providing Groups the ability to convert a Groups Public to Public themselves? Or adding a checkbox for the person creating the instance (Ticked by default) that says "Convert to public when I/all Moderators have left"
Most reputable groups will happily do this, and don't want their group name forever tied to an instance they aren't moderating.
haolink
I can confirm - my group started a Public Instance of Murder 4 on Saturday 6 days ago (it's most likely the only EU Murder 4 instance you will see on your list). Well... it is still alive XD and kicking. I tried joining today and I could have easily banned all members in it - obviously this is not intended, I won't kick anyone, they just want to have fun.
But still I imagine this would be a weird thing to play your game peacefully just so that some group admin joins and poofs out everyone just so that the instance disappears from their group instance list.
I would think the best option would be to switch such an instance to a regular public instance once all group members leave - this way: non group members can continue playing on like before - and they barely notice any change. And for group members, the instance is removed from the group instance list. Everybody wins.
LoppyDaCutie
I just want to see the pop up say "group instance has closed" and then "transferring to public instance"
KaiKaroo
I think in addition to this, it would be a good idea to give the group creator or instance creator of the group instance the option to forcly destroy the instance. On the other side i don't see any problems keeping an instance up for reusing it. For example, a public group event ends, kicks out all at once with a message instance has been closed or smth like this. Like Sippbox said, there is no point for keeping the instance up when it's not being used by the group members anymore, but having the option to destroy the instance manually would give the group an option to keep it up for use on the next day without having to create a new one. And ultimately automatically destroy the instance after x days not used.