Creative responsive, or co-op emotes

[bqptize]

I think there should be emotes where you could respond kinda.

Let's say InsertUser1 Hugged InsertUser2. InsertUser2 would have a screen, similar to the voting screen when you vote on a map for murder where you can accept the emote or reject it. If you don't respond in a quick enough amount of time it would go through and give a normal emote like you would see normally in chat. If you accept the hug emote, it would show up in chat as; "InsertUser1 Hugged InsertUser2, InsertUser2 hugged back!" Or a variety of different responses that will be picked at random. Now if you reject someone's hug, it would still appear in chat, but it would go something like this; "InsertUser1 tried to hug InsertUser2, but did not succeed." Or maybe; "InsertUser1 hug InsertUser2, but InsertUser2 had other plans, InsertUser1 was struck across the face!" You get the point.

Also, it's time to ditch the lick emote, it's not kid-friendly at all, and I'm not even the type to be like, "Oh, we need everything to be kid-friendly, shelter the kids!" I really don't care, it's just not your policy.

-bqptize

The last part wasn't part of the big idea, it was just an extra thought!

 

[Arujann]

Not bad with the first part, but the ditching the lick emote? I think that one's pretty harmless.

 

[bqptize]

Yeah, I know. pfft

After writing I regretted the last bit.

 

[Jxliee]

I enjoy the first section, I believe that’d be a nice little addition to our emote system.
The only issue is players using this to use emotes they don’t have access too. Maybe limiting emotes they can respond to, based on what they have? Overall I enjoy this idea.

I don’t really understand why we should ditch the lick command, as it's rather harmless- though you’ve stated you regret the last bit, I suppose this is no longer relevant.

Overall, I believe this would be a nice addition.

 

[bqptize]

Thanks for the positive feedback!