PlaneShift
Gameplay => General Discussion => Topic started by: Vengeance on August 19, 2006, 06:17:20 pm
-
When I was playing PS as a player the other night, I tried talking to the npc's, and aside from the obvious vocabulary problems, I really didn't like how I had to target the NPC first before I spoke. I also didn't like how when I was talking to the player next to me, with the npc targeted, the npc kept responding to my chatting with the other player. So I have changed all that.
Now, to talk to any npc, just say their first name at the beginning or end of your sentence. For example, you can say "Harnquist, hello" or "Hello harnquist", and he should respond. After you have used his name and he knows you are talking to him, he keeps paying attention for 15 seconds in case you say something else. So for 15 seconds, you don't have to keep typing his name. As long as you keep talking to him, the 15 seconds keeps getting reset. If you stop for a while and then start talking to him again, you'll need to use his name again.
Also, if you talk to one npc, then switch to another, the 15 seconds switches to the second one and the first one ignores you again.
Please let me know how this works out. I believe it is much more natural, easier and better.
- Vengeance
-
Haven't tested in game since I'm not playing it for some time but...
the first thing that came to mind is...
If we're meant to "roleplay" with the NPC (yeah that sounds ugly) how we're going to start the sentence with "Harnquist, who are you?" since theoretically the character doesn't know the name.
Previously you asked simply "who are you?" and got the answer of name&profession, using the target as a way of denoting that you were addressing to NPC.
Honestly, I do not see the need of changing that.
-
And what if I want to talk to another player straight after talking to the npc. Do i have to wait 15 seconds?
-
Probably yes. 15 seconds of your prescious time gone won't hurt. :innocent:
-
I would really hate typing the NPC name. What if it has surname too? EDIT(yeah, i meant it ;P)
For example: (possible name)
Hajdzibajahaj Yrgrozt, Hi .
I rather want to press key assigned to macro which targets nearest npc, enter and then write.
Really.
-
Tested it. Works fine for the most part.
Problem: "Harnquist hello." works, but not "Harnquist, hello." which I believe to be proper grammar.
Also, I would recommend two things. One, leave the old system in place as well. Multiple options for talking to NPCs never hurts. Two, Auto Tab complete for NPCs in close speaking range.
-
Sounds like a great improvement. Haven't tested it, but this may get me back ingame to do so...may.
-
It is a pain to target an NPC before talking to them.
Also, I would recommend two things. One, leave the old system in place as well. Multiple options for talking to NPCs never hurts. Two, Auto Tab complete for NPCs in close speaking range.
This i agree with, though.
And what if I want to talk to another player straight after talking to the npc. Do i have to wait 15 seconds?
Not a whole 15 seconds!?!? ;)
This is a good change, but especially for now, you should leave the other system in place. I bet the are loads of people in-game right now that have no idea what to do when talking to NPC's.
BTW: Tested and works, at least on Harn.
-
There are loads of people that will have no idea how to talk to NPCs no matter what system you use. *laughs*
*edit* There are loads of people who will have no idea how to talk to ANYBODY no matter what system you use.
-
I'm wondering how this affects talking -about- an NPC and mentioning his/her name within hearing range. "Harnquist gave me the mining pick" will no longer work as well as "I got the mining pick from Harnquist", if I understand correctly. It would take quite a bit of effort to phrase this sentence so that the NPC's name is somewhere in the middle of the sentence.
Or is this taken care of somehow?
-
There are also loads of NPC's that do not know how how to talk to players..../me ducks and runs for cover.....joking apart, once you learn NPC syntax it is'nt too bad, takes a lot of time though. For a new player it is very hard, especially if English is not your first language. Advisors are not allowed to give more than the broadest of hints....stil amazed it all happens.
-
Karyuu made a good point there.
Also, it feels a bit robotic to start the conversations always like this, with that enclosed way, feels like talking to a computer:
"Computer, turn the lights off"
We've enough clue words when it comes to talk to NPC as to even add more (even if this one is obvious, it becomes too mechanic, and artificial to have to start always with _name_ then sentence)
One of the things that are more difficult, and I talk with personal experience, is to not use the name that is flashing on top of players head, if you haven't been presented to that char or someone else described him/her to your char. It's really hard to not fall into that "temptation". It is as hard, if no more, to try to express this to new players, and convince them. It's one of the first things that allienate completely the game mechanics from the real roleplayed world. There are no labels, you see them, your char doesn't. Do not use the other char name if your char doesn't know it.
Trespassing this concept is hard, as I said, but is generally accepted if explained logically, I just don't see fine that I then have to add: "oh, but if what you try to talk to an NPC, you'll have to use the name you'll see on the label, even if your char doesn't know him/her, in order to make things work" it kind of destroys the argument that was previously built towards a more realistic environment, where you don't "guess" people's names.
There have been comments about how much time is lost and similar, I really think this is not the point here, since, for instance, with the current system yes, you turn to talk to someone, but you left the NPC selected, and the message doesn't show and you get the ugly reply from the NPC. Ok, you deselect the NPC, press up arrow key, hit enter, and the message is now displayed correctly, for the other person to see. I don't think this eats much time, so, time isn't the real point here.
Personally, I did not see any massive claim for this to be changed (talk to npc selecting them first) although it's true I've an enourmous amount of threads yet to be readen, but I never had this feeling of a chorous of voices claiming this to be changed. I do not know for sure, but, judging from the post title, seems as if the change was made without consulting anyone. Since it's a change that affects usability, I think it would have been better if this was asked before, in a separate thread, where people could discuss about this, and reach a point where it's decided (or not) to change how to address to NPC, and then make the code change. Again, when it affects something as close to the user as usability, perhaps it should be better if things were asked and devated first.
Edit to answer point 2:
Yes... but currently the most probable answer will be "Could you say that differently, I am not getting what you mean" and that, certainly is not very immersive, in fact kind of breaks the ambience.
Also, it's a matter of, the message should be recieved not only by the NPC, but also by the person you're talking to.
And the answer? Would it be sent only to the one that said the sentence "Harnquist gave me..." or will the one to whom the sentence was originally addressed to, recieve the NPC answer too?
Because if the NPC eavesdrops that ongoing conversation, instead of keeping a "private" talk (which is how talks with NPC were dealt, fortunately, till now) the most common reaction would be to openly talk to anyone around "You said I gave you what?" (but we all know he won't be answering that) anyway, if that ever happens (the NPC answering in open chat for all to see) that would be exploitable. Imagine someone trying to flood the chat, and even getting the "help" from the NPC, and what is the worst, with the NPC saying the most harmful sentences!
Player A:"Harnquist gave me a sword"
NPC Harnquist: "I don't get what you mean, say it differently"
Player B:"Oh, really, did he?"
Player A: "Of course he did, we're friends since childhood"
NPC Harnquist: "I don't get what you mean, say it..." (he now will talk to that one for the next 15 seconds?)
Player B: "How interesting, but I seem to hear a buzzing sound coming from his hut... something must be melting, and I think it's his brain."
That is, the NPC answer should be kept always in "private" to the one really talking to him, in order to prevent this "flooding", but if it is kept private, then the argument of "with this system there's a more immersive environment" gets broken.
-
1. I will fix the problem with punctuation. That "should" work.
2. If you use the npc's name when talking about him, he will wake up, but if you think about it, shouldn't he? If someone said your name, wouldn't you say "hmm?"
3. We can consider putting the targeting system back in but I really think you only like that because you are used to it now for years. This new way is a much more natural and immersive way to do it. Let's give it a month and see what we think then.
- Vengeance
-
Right now it seems like none of the NPCs will actually talk to me, even if I don't use the comma. I hope this is fixed soon because I have a quest that requires talking to an NPC and I can't finish it.
Anyway, might it be possible to have using the greet command on an NPC work to initiate a conversation? That way you would not have to use the name if your character doesn't know it. Obviously, saying someone's name is not the only way to get them to talk to you.
-
Hello,
Please put the NPC chat back the way it was. The latest changes have made things more complicated, wheras the previous method, select the NPC to talk actually worked quite well.
You have fixed a non-existent problem with a solution that is much worse, :@#\ and has actually broken some NPC's ability to speak and interact altogether.
XW
-
This is a good idea, and I think it's working out a well.
Except some NPC's just don't talk to you at all sometimes, like Toda in Oja.
-
Not all NPC's are converted to the new system.
-
i kind of like the idea i just wish it was this way when i started cuz now i find it hard to get used to
-
Some of the NPCs don't seem to be using either system. I can't get a response from Brintec or Trasok at all, with names or targetting.
It would be nice to have the same system for both players and NPCs. I.e. either have "/tell" for both, or (more immersively) neither.
A suggestion: when major changes to the interface and playability of the game are made, could there be a quick note in the MOTD or the other message you get when entering the world? It would seem to me that this is what they were designed for.
Xan
-
Please put the old system back. If you feel this new way is better then please give us he choice. Thanks.
-
The old way may have been easyer but if you think about it in RL how whould you get someones atention? you wouldn't get a mouse and poke them... well, some people might...
an idea for when you don't know a name of the npc but know what they do, "blacksmith hello" then they would know you don't know there name and introduce them selfs
-
When I was playing PS as a player the other night, I tried talking to the npc's, and aside from the obvious vocabulary problems, I really didn't like how I had to target the NPC first before I spoke. I also didn't like how when I was talking to the player next to me, with the npc targeted, the npc kept responding to my chatting with the other player. So I have changed all that.
Now, to talk to any npc, just say their first name at the beginning or end of your sentence. For example, you can say "Harnquist, hello" or "Hello harnquist", and he should respond. After you have used his name and he knows you are talking to him, he keeps paying attention for 15 seconds in case you say something else. So for 15 seconds, you don't have to keep typing his name. As long as you keep talking to him, the 15 seconds keeps getting reset. If you stop for a while and then start talking to him again, you'll need to use his name again.
Also, if you talk to one npc, then switch to another, the 15 seconds switches to the second one and the first one ignores you again.
Please let me know how this works out. I believe it is much more natural, easier and better.
- Vengeance
VENGANCE you are our savior, seriously, atleast someone understands our woes and our concerns.
I hated having to target and i thought it was sooo unrealistic.
This makes RPING ALOT EASIER, and will make it easier to talk to npc's.
Sure, there are some bugs Karyuu.... we get that, anytime you implement a system like this there will be bugs.
I'm sure vengance can fix those though.
I'm THRILLED :thumbup: :thumbup: :woot: By the idea and i know it will help us.
I had soo much trouble as a new player trying to talk to npcs.
Now new players can just easily go up to an NPC, say their name, and speak to them.
I don't see any flaws with this, except for the bugs, WHICH WILL BE FIXED, so basically it's a WIN WIN situation. \\o//
Thank you for heeding our call vengeance, your idea was awesome.
Keep up the good work. :)
-
@ Datruth:
I don't really see the realism in having to know one's name before being able to ask him for it.
And to me the problem Karyuu mentioned seems not like a technical bug but an inherent design problem that might be not be too easy to fix really watertight.
Besides: What is so unrealistic in targeting someone before talking to that person?
Normally I also don't talk to someone while looking out of the window, except I intend it that way, but that would lead to far. Targeting here only means that you focus your counterpart and look at him while talking.
I don't know if the chat commands are executed on the client side, but if they are, it might help to let people choose in the options if they want to use one or both of the systems. That would also help newcomers to see how to talk to NPCs without having to tell them IG.
-
Adding this new way & keeping the old sounds good...
as for just the new way not the old
My first thought was the 15 second thing, if that can interfere with quests like deselecting could at times... Not worth it.
Next I realized wheneve i would talk to npcs before all this Harn & go seek for testing it would be private. If that is still in place, and especially if you can only talk in public chat to npcs for 15 secs so it won't appear to public, it would be very annoying to be explaining to new players "blank will sell you a weapon"... In general the problem there, if it wasn't clear, isn't just the inconvenience-- it's the having to censor your roleplay. you have to make a concerted effort not to talk about any npc in their presence, or if you do, to place the name accordingly... to me that is less immersive.
with a cursor shaped pretty much like a pointing finger, what is so unrealistic about having to tap someone on the shoulder or arm to get their attention?
-
Cant tell much about the new system, if its working and how it feels to use it, cause none of the NPC's i tried is talking to me in any way (Grok, Boralis, Veja and Gregori it was. i think).
All i know is that i really like the old system and never had a problem with it. Targeting the Npc first before talking to him seems to be very realistic to me either. Iam starting a private chat with him, nobody is interessted in what we are talking about, okay maybe people that are looking for quest solutions :D. And aslong Npcs only talk about how and who they are, setting info and quest stuff, the new system doesnt makes much sense to me, cause they are not a part of the world like players are. I.e. Me: "<Npc_name> long time has gone since we met." Npc: "Huh? You doesnt make sense to me."
I cant wait to be on a quest, using the new system. It'll come to the point that i have to guess a phrase, and that will take its time. It'll be so annoying loosing the Npc's attention every 15 seconds \\o//. That will be great... me smashing the keyboard against the wall.
@Vengeance: I dont get why to wait a month, to see if i get familiar with it. I never had a problem with the old system, and it was quite comfortable to use, to me.
I like the Idea XANTHAN had, with using the /tell-command much more. But it has the same problem with loosing the attention of the Npc, but this time by getting tells from other players, cause you cant use the Re-tell-Shortcut to talk to the Npcs again. But this would be less annoying.
In the end i just want to say: Give me the ability back to use the old system, not in a month.... now. O--) please have a heart.
-
The old way may have been easyer but if you think about it in RL how whould you get someones atention? you wouldn't get a mouse and poke them... well, some people might...
an idea for when you don't know a name of the npc but know what they do, "blacksmith hello" then they would know you don't know there name and introduce them selfs
...But what if you DON'T know what they do? Or what if you know what they do but don't know what the game thinks they do? As I said before, maybe greeting the NPC to start a conversation would be a good idea.
-
Greeting Npc's to start a chat with 'em is a nice improvement to the old system, i think. Makes it more realistic. :thumbup:
But people who dont like to target Npc's wont like this improvement, i guess. Even if its just pressing the default shortcutbutton "9" then "Enter"... and the conversation begins.
@KECEY Its not the mouse you poke with, not from an RP point of view. ... Do you know which NPC, is a street artist, or an architect or the apprentice of jayose..... I wouldn't without asking them. Else i think that this idea isnt working well for people, that speak english as 2nd or 3rd language like me, i dont know all profession names, and sometimes what they mean in particular. Thats may' a reason why i like the targeting-system, too.
-
I think having more than one way to speak to the NPC's would be the best way to go. The old system of targetting them first and speaking to them would be like the equivalent of walking up to them and whispering in their ear (or at least in a lowered voice). It is less disruptive to others in the area and is more of a one-on-one conversation.
The new system sounds very exciting and seems like it will be very good once the bugs are worked out. Just say 'hello' to them and start a conversation.
As an alternative to speaking their name to get their attention, I like Siteri's idea of greeting them a lot. This would allow your character to 'meet' a new NPC that they have never met before. Maybe the NPC could respond by greeting you back along with a verbal greeting. For example:
[Me] <targets Harnquist>
[Me] /greet
[Harnquist] *Harnquist greets Einnol.*
[Harnquist] Hello there.
<Harnquist is now paying attention via the new system.>
[Me] Who are you?
[Harnquist] My name is Harnquist.....(blah, blah, blah)
[Me] Do you need any help?
<Harnquist responds and conversation continues....>
-
A suggestion: when major changes to the interface and playability of the game are made, could there be a quick note in the MOTD or the other message you get when entering the world? It would seem to me that this is what they were designed for.
It is in the MOTD already.
The bugs will be fixed, don't worry.
- Venge
-
I like the new idea and when its refined it should be pretty nice. I guess I could have made it easier before with target nearest NPC but I always just clicked on him and that was annoying at times. So I would say its an improvement.
-
I'd like to make a few points that may not be completely appreciated.
1. How many times have you gone into the 7/11 and paid the counter attendent for your purchase without bothering to find out who they are? More often than not this will be the case.
2. Typing dialogue is not realistic. I do not use sign language to communicate with people so flashing fingers to get my message across is not conducive to realism. I would much rather create a macro for common expressions than have to retype them over and over. The new system does not prevent this but it does discourage it. You cannot create realism when something is inherrently unrealistic.
3. What if I have complete disdain for said npc why do I have to use his full name? Old harnie is a drunkard and does not deserve the honorific use of his full name. 'You there' is good enough for him in RP terms.
If you are going for realism then you must remove the NPC's ability to deal with multiple people at the same time. Harnquist is one person he cannot sell merchandise to 6 people simultaneously. Realism seems to be the euphemism for "Arbitrary Decision".
This is a fantasy role playing game, realism is not realistic. 8 foot blue silicone people are not realistic (in our experience) nor are most of the other races and critters. Neither is magic or the death realm. By all means make whatever arbitrary decisions you want to make just don't try to justify them in the name of realism.
-
Todays fast paced society cannot be compared to a Medieval setting. Price tags were never used, all prices of items in shops were memorized. for selling to a shopkeeper, you had to haggle to get your price. Dialog was always needed for all transactions.
The fantasy based realism, will always be a topic for debate. Everyone has there own unique view on how things should be, through there interpritation of the settings provided.
Just my two tria :)
-
Here's another option... :)
I know we already have a lot of chat panes, but it seems like an NPC chat pane that directs your speech at the nearest NPC might be workable.
Maybe PlaneShift could eventually have several options for the same destination, like the way you can use different ways to get around your computer's system interface, depending on what you like.
Targeting the NPCs bothers some people, the 15-seconds-and-crafting-sentences-with-names bothers other people. An NPC chat pane would probably be tricky for newbies to grasp, but I'd probably use it a lot, to make sure I knew who I was talking to and to easily be sure when I was done and was able to talk to a player character without worrying about the NPC saying "You must stop this gibberish immediately."
And thanks to Venge, for thinking about the system and looking at ways to improve it :thumbup:
-
I like the philosophy of the change. I like the /greet idea. By default it could say "Hello, $targetname." But it could be extended to take arguments for customization like
/greet em tips his hat at $targetname.
/greet say Well met, friend.
/greet shout Great to see you again, $targetname!
They could be macroed and used when appropriate. This would allow for an npc to be woken up in a roleplaying manner suitable for most everyone.
Quath
-
I have a slightly more constructive comment now: When delivering items to an NPC using the give button the NPC should not need to be addressed by name for further conversation for a short time. Currently you give the item, the NPC gives his spiel and then if you want to ask about his next quest (if he has one) you must get his attention first.
-
ive gotten called on a few timess for saying "oh (insert name) thank you"
then im told "how do you know my name?"
this is a difficult circumstance that ive found mysle fin many times trying to honestly rp in the game. i try to find some flimsy excuse like "oh through reputation" or "im psychic" but i feel awfully foolish for it...
also
i happen to use emoticons(is that what theyre called? i.e. :D :( :P) and i was told not to use those in conversation. but its jsut me expressing a feeling like a smile or what not i dont consider it actual conversation, i understand why its considered ooc, but aughghhghghg typing in "kalika smiles" every two seconds is awfully annoying. i would do it more but unless you havent met me in game you would know that im always giddy or something and hugging people and smiling and sometimes the emoticons are just much simpler to use...*ssigh* but i guess
im jsut blathering on
sorrys
anywho tlaking to the np's has gotten easier for me. tohugh i have afew qquests tha ti dont know how to solve other than going up to every npc in the town and giving them the quest item and seeing what happens but so far that hasnt worke for me...i cant really ask for a translator, or i dunnos if i can or cant
again
sorry im blathering
anywho
much love to all
-
Recognizing someone is a tough issue. One way is to have everyone unidenitified until introduced. The character keeps a memory list for each character it knows. However, it can get quite long if you are meeting new characters and npcs over months. If you cap this, you run into problems of forgeting people. (This is not entirely bad and could be based on intelligence stat.)
As for talking to npcs, the goal is for them to listen when talked to but not respond to meaningless chatter. But sometimes that is fun. I once was playing around in a MUD I was coding for. I decided to create a secretary npc that would show people into my quarters and give messages when I was out. (Sometimes boredom is the mother of invention.) I got her detailed enough to respond to so man words, that I renamed her to a generic player name and stuck her in the middle of a town.
I watched people interact with her and got a kick as how often people thought she was a real person. It would take awhile for them to figure out that she was not a pc. But it worked because she listened to everything and would respond to certain keywords.
So I would suggest having some nocs that listen to everything as well as some that only listen when activated.
Quath
-
I quite liked the sound of this change, except for the timer where you're talking to the NPC for 15 secs, so if say, someone comes up to you and says 'Excuse me, can you tell me...' while you're talking to an NPC they'll probably give up on you before you can say anything to them. Maybe a hotkey is needed to break off talking to the NPC, or maybe the NPC could recognise a sentence with 'bye' or 'goodbye' in it to show that you're finished talking to them. Okay, 15 seconds is not ages, and is probably about the minimum you need to make the new system work smoothly, but it could seem a very long time to wait from a response to a player who may be afk (I suppose you could jump up and down or something to show that you'd heard the question and would answer when you could).
Anyway, I might have hit on another problem (related to what bilbous says above), or maybe there's a problem with the quest now, or maybe I'm just being dumb, but I'm just trying to complete a quest for Harnquist and got stuck when you give him something, he says he'll teach you some more, OK?, so presumably you're supposed to respond Yes, but I can't get this to work in the new system. Hopefully the following to illustrate the point is not too much of a spoiler:-
[I give Harnquist the X he's asked for]
Harnquist tells you: Ah good. It is important to ...blah blah blah ... If so, find a Y for me and bring it here. OK?
Aelfwine says: Yes
[No response from Harnquist]
Aelfwine says: Yes Harnquist
Harnquist tells you: Sorry, can you use a simpler but complete phrase?
Aelfwine says: say Yes
Harnquist tells you: Sorry, can you use a simpler but complete phrase?
I've tried it three times now, after the first time making sure I said 'Hello Harnquist' before I gave him the X (again - some more of my hard-earned goods gone!) so that he should already have been talking to me, but the same result. Giving him the items seems to cancel his attention, then if you get his attention by using his name again he doesn't realise he's just asked you 'OK?'.
Any tips?
-
so can we actually talk to the npc's yet??? or is it still not working
-
You can talk to some of the NPCs. Others still don't work.
-
which ones do work?
-
John, simply go find item Y and give it harny. I don't believe you need to respond yes to him asking you ok.
-
Why will Levrus not talk? Is he in the process of upgrading?
I dont mind either system. Its just, i wish I could at least talk to the characters that are more important. Please make sure he gets upgraded soon! I would adore you all if that happened! :woot:
Best of luck gertting this all figured out. 8)
-
John, simply go find item Y and give it harny. I don't believe you need to respond yes to him asking you ok.
Thanks Neko, yes you were right. (That bit of the quest's not very well worded IMO - if he asks a question I'd expect him to want a reply).
-
When I was playing PS as a player the other night, I tried talking to the npc's, and aside from the obvious vocabulary problems, I really didn't like how I had to target the NPC first before I spoke. I also didn't like how when I was talking to the player next to me, with the npc targeted, the npc kept responding to my chatting with the other player. So I have changed all that.
Now, to talk to any npc, just say their first name at the beginning or end of your sentence. For example, you can say "Harnquist, hello" or "Hello harnquist", and he should respond. After you have used his name and he knows you are talking to him, he keeps paying attention for 15 seconds in case you say something else. So for 15 seconds, you don't have to keep typing his name. As long as you keep talking to him, the 15 seconds keeps getting reset. If you stop for a while and then start talking to him again, you'll need to use his name again.
Also, if you talk to one npc, then switch to another, the 15 seconds switches to the second one and the first one ignores you again.
Please let me know how this works out. I believe it is much more natural, easier and better.
- Vengeance
Uh, no. Bad idea. This means that in order to get the NPC to stop spamming your chat box, you have to be silent for 15 seconds. Karyuu and Nilrem also pointed out serious flaws with this change. The "waking up" thing you said is just plain dumb. It doesn't make sense for a NPC to wake up then assume that every single thing you say is directed towards him. As far as realism goes, this kills realism. Using eye contact, tone, and body language, a person can signal who he's talking to without saying the other person's name. This new system doesn't allow for that, whereas targetting did a wonderful job of it. If targetting and untargetting NPCs is too much of a hassle for you, maybe you're just lazy.
I am absolutely opposed to this change. It's unintelligent and unneccessary.
-
hmmm....i agree with zanzibar. The fact that they hear their name and assume they are being talked to is kinda unreal'ish. Cause I hear my name all the time and I can tell when its not directed to me, but maybe its to some other Nate, or its my friends talking about me. So it would be quite annoying to say their name and they automatically respond. Plus i am quite upset how most NPC's wont even talk currently. I am against an all-out change and for the option to choose.
-
The reason why most of the NPC's are not responding, is that the developers have implemented a new system for speaking with the NPC's.
The new system for talking requires, that all NPC's have to be edited all over again and have to be linked to the new system.
It will take some time before all NPC's will be able to repond back on you.
The developers are working as hard as possible to get the NPC's back to work and speaking again.
So from time to time, they will reboot the server for updates.
-
If we are speaking of realism here, in the old system how does the npc "know" that you are targeting him? He is unaware of your mouse and your clicking habits. Saying his/her name is a much better and smoother way to get his attention. I agree that giving an npc something should also attract his attention. I'll add that this weekend perhaps.
As far as everyone knowing everyone else's name without being introduced, this topic has been discussed since 2001. It is simply too much overhead for too little reward to track each and every introduction made by every player to every player or npc. It isn't going to happen. Just RP that every citizen of Yliakum is wearing a mandatory nametag that says "Hi, my name is _____!" if it helps you feel better.
- Vengeance
-
Proposition of improvement (?):
Server knows the angle of character/NPC rotation. Could You implement checking, if player and NPC are looking at each other ? They would have "angle of view" and interaction would occur only within it. The picture below explains it better:
(http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/9434/pcnpcho4.jpg)
This would be substitute of targeting NPC. This also would prevent situation, where 20 players are talking to NPC standing around it. You want to talk - wait in order ;).
Edit: At least - character should look in direction of NPC (more or less).
-
Well, the old system might "represent" some sort of focus/eye contact. Just because you do it with the mouse in real life doesn't mean it can't have an IC equivalent. It's like using the item screen to equip weapons, obviously they don't really get dragged out of a box and into your character's hands, they just pull them out. Game controls aren't necessarily representative of OOC things.
Also, sorry to say I think the idea that everyone is wearing nametags is pretty stupid.
-
I know the ideas I'm about to say have been said already (I read all the thread), but I would like to add my input as well, to stress the idea even better.
In short, with regard to the new change :thumbdown:
The idea is nice in itself and I'm sure Venge put a lot of work into it, but:
- it isn't realistic (Actually I find it even less realistic than the old targetting system)
- it isn't working with all NPC's
- it breaks quests... badly
- it breaks talking... badly
I understand that it is still under work, but it's been almost a week now. If the idea still needs work, then implement it when it doesn't break the game so much, when it has had some maturity both in code&concept and in additional features required to make it work. Someone said it very well, this isn't something that falls into "game mechanics" category, this is something that cuts deep right into usability. I think in that regard we do have a word to say and we should have been consulted. It's not so buggy after all.... it's just very.... undeveloped as a concept.
I understand the reasons which led to this and I fully support the ideas that stand behind the change... as in make the talking to NPC's more seamless, but *this* isn't doing it, because it makes a lot of assumptions (starting with those 15 seconds).
Sorry, but my vote for it, whether it gets to stay this way or not after all... is NO. Perhaps with improvements I will change my mind... but until I can have a conversation (be it as silly as it was before) with NPC's, I'm not going to. And this reason does not rely on the sole fact that I was used to the old system... I am not that old in PS to say that it had got in my blood.
Good luck in dealing with this, but my best suggestion (as it's been said a thousand times before) is to have both systems available and allow players to choose.
-
No, just no. This will make it much harder for newbies. I knooow you're not trying to make it easy for them, but don't make it harder when it's not necessary!
-
If we are speaking of realism here, in the old system how does the npc "know" that you are targeting him?
Eye contact.
-
If we are speaking of realism here, in the old system how does the npc "know" that you are targeting him?
Eye contact.
.... Zanzibar, think a bit, before your back could be turned and you could target and talk.
Eye contact isn't implemented in EITHER system.
Don't RP for a second here, and think of how we target.
CLICK, then TALK.
The CLICK doesn't exhist, And eye contact ISN'T necessary to Click on them.
So i can CLICK just as easily, WITHOUT looking at him.
BY FAR the new system is better RP than the old one, WE all can agree on that.
What i don't like is the wait time to be able to talk to the NPC's.
Hopefully you guys can fix the bugs soo, cause i wanna be able to talk to levrus again and the other NPC'S.
But REALISTICALLY, the new system is more Real.
Eye contact...... ya.... rethink that....
-
Our goal should be a system that is easy to understand, consistent, and functional. "Realism" should not be a goal at this point.
Why not? In a realistic system everyone around you would overhear your conversations with NPCs—both what you say, and they say.
However, this would be terrible:
1. It would give away unwanted spoilers for quests.
2. Lots of annoying chatter—imagine hearing someone repeatedly saying, "give me a quest" until they get one. Or the responses? "Huh? I don't get it. Huh? I don't get it. Huh? I don't get it. Huh? *whacks NPC over the head with a blunt claymore*"
3. I often have to type and reword maybe dozens of times to get the right wording for a quest. Especially when I have to re-ask previous questions to trigger phrases. I can easily type 50 lines and get nowhere, and I'm thankful noone else has to hear.
4. It's impossible to have anything remotely close to an in-character conversation with NPCs. Nilaya's lingo, words she uses, may not make sense. She says "thank you" at times, or "oh?" to express interest. She nods. Little things. In PS you cram everything into rigid dialog, like "tell me about ____". Like for a certain quest, you absolutely cannot ask "have you seen any guantlets?" No! You have to say "tell me about gauntlets," which is something I'd never actually say—it inquires about a generic concept or object, rather than a missing item.
2–4 could be fixed by smarter NPCs, but doing so is a ton of work. 1 is still a problem.
On the pro side, when people ask about culture, others would overhear. However, we can still encourage people to talk to NPCs about such things, and reinterate their stories ourselves, which also brings culture to the masses.
Frankly, I don't find the old system to be terribly bad. When you're out shopping or around town, you usually don't know people's names. You get people's attention and say "Hello sir", or just "Excuse me, could you help me with..." You have to focus on someone, make sure they see you, go up and get their attention somehow. In doing so, your attention is focused on them. Targetting may not be ideal, but it does approximate your locus of attention.
It would take a huge amount of work to get "realistic" NPCs.
Right now we have a lot of NPCs who each have very little to say...and a lot of them have generic triggers which don't fit at all. Some "mean looking guy lurking in the shadows" says "Hello friend! What can I do for you?" Merrinez responds with a generic "I'm very happy with my job! Everyone should be if they can" after griping about how bad it is only moments earlier. Brado says he likes his job if you ask him about being a weaver, but hasn't a clue about being a bartender. Not to mention, they only have a few things they actually do know about. I've also noticed that most of them seem to have rather similar personalities.
My idea to fix that was to start an "adopt an NPC" program for good roleplayers...have our actual players fully work out an NPC's personality, writing his or her opinion on a wide variety of topics. Imagine possible conversations and flesh out the details. Share a bit at first, then respond to prompting ("oh?" "really?" "why?" "tell me more") for more details. Forget having contributors apply to and join the team first, just have people pick or dream up an NPC and write it up. If it's good, use it. If people write total junk, disregard their contributions. If people write decent quantities of good and interesting characters, maybe they can be asked to join Settings. Maybe someone just wants to write one NPC and be done, leaving their mark on the world.
Other issues with the new system:
– If you mention an NPC's name in their proximity, they eat the conversation. Things like "/me nods to Jayose" or "Jayose loves his books very much" are not broadcast to the players around me, and earn me a lovely "You sound like a blithering mud dobber! Leave me be!" And I'm all like, "leave me be, I wasn't even talking to you!"
– Timeouts are weird. "Is it up yet? Can I talk normally yet?" "Gah, I meant for that to go to the NPC, sorry."
– Updating all NPC scripts manually is gonna be a pain. Frankly it seems like unnecessary work.
I do appreciate the idea and the effort, but I feel it would be best to restore the old system until it's possible to have reasonable conversations with NPCs, and work on that instead. As I understand it, one of the reasons for the new system was that targetting is counter-intuitive...but I haven't really seen any new players have trouble grasping it. It's simple and consistent.
Anyway, those are my two cents. And you know how seldom I throw those in on these boards. :)
--Nilaya
-
If we are speaking of realism here, in the old system how does the npc "know" that you are targeting him?
Eye contact.
...blablabla...
Eye contact...... ya.... rethink that....
Actually, you better rethink.
You speak of realism, like the current communication with NPCa was realistic. So he tried to give you realistic interpretation, like you are. Maybe if you opened your eyes, you would see..
Better read what Nilaya wrote, especially the first line.
P.S. Am I iritated? Yeah.
-
Well i'm sorry but you better re read the First post.
The whole point of this is to make the game Realistic.
And the first sentance was not worrying about Realism.... i'm sorry, but that's what this whole system is about.
The first was not realistic, but was easy, user friendly.
The second is user friendly for some and not for others, and Is 10 times more realistic.
I'm sure those who arn't used to it will be, Stop crying about your targeting, targeting is gone, it was fake, we don't walk around with big pointers everywhere.
-
Stop crying about your targeting, targeting is gone, it was fake, we don't walk around with big pointers everywhere.
Try to be less aggressive when you post, Datruth. You have a way of saying exactly what you mean, but there are milder, kinder ways of doing that sometimes :}
Personally I prefer the targeting system - it's a very easy and yes, "realistic" method of communicating with an NPC. By targeting, you roleplay "directing" your speech at that particular person. You don't need eye contact to do that in real life - body language and tone of voice suffice enough sometimes.
Still, the new system would be just fine if you could talk about an NPC without that NPC immediately cornering you into a conversation with it.
-
Personally I prefer the targeting system - it's a very easy and yes, "realistic" method of communicating with an NPC. By targeting, you roleplay "directing" your speech at that particular person. You don't need eye contact to do that in real life - body language and tone of voice suffice enough sometimes.
Still, the new system would be just fine if you could talk about an NPC without that NPC immediately cornering you into a conversation with it.
I like the idea behind the new way of talking to npcs, but as with everything, there is always roomfor improvement. Reading over everyone's comments, I propose this simple yet efficient system.
1) keep the old way of talking as an option. It's is user friendly, simple to use and learn, and as it has been pointed out, it can be thought of as "realistic"
2) Tweak the new system by the following: You want to start a conversation with an npc? Then use the starting phrase, some thing like "Hello, [insert npc name]" That gets their attention and you have your conversation. Ending the conversation is just as simple, no need for time out. "Good bye, [insert npc name]"
This way you can still use the new way of talking to an npc, yet still have all the functionality of talking about the npc to other players around you, without having to reword your sentance so that the npc doesn't interfer when you don't want it to.
-
But then there's still the infamous "you have to know the character's name before you meet them" problem! I hate to be repetitive, but we do have a perfectly functional /greet command, which could do the same thing to begin a conversation, not require censorship of chat around NPCs, and not be OOC.
-
Stop crying about your targeting, targeting is gone, it was fake, we don't walk around with big pointers everywhere.
Try to be less aggressive when you post, Datruth. You have a way of saying exactly what you mean, but there are milder, kinder ways of doing that sometimes :}
Personally I prefer the targeting system - it's a very easy and yes, "realistic" method of communicating with an NPC. By targeting, you roleplay "directing" your speech at that particular person. You don't need eye contact to do that in real life - body language and tone of voice suffice enough sometimes.
Still, the new system would be just fine if you could talk about an NPC without that NPC immediately cornering you into a conversation with it.
Sorry karyuu, i get worked up at times. :)
-
But then there's still the infamous "you have to know the character's name before you meet them" problem! I hate to be repetitive, but we do have a perfectly functional /greet command, which could do the same thing to begin a conversation, not require censorship of chat around NPCs, and not be OOC.
That's why I proposed to keep the old way as well. That isn't a problem then. If your character doesn't know the npc, use the targeting way. After they do know, use the "hello [npc name]" way.
But you're right, /greet should be another option.
-
But then there's still the infamous "you have to know the character's name before you meet them" problem! I hate to be repetitive, but we do have a perfectly functional /greet command, which could do the same thing to begin a conversation, not require censorship of chat around NPCs, and not be OOC.
That's why I proposed to keep the old way as well. That isn't a problem then. If your character doesn't know the npc, use the targeting way. After they do know, use the "hello [npc name]" way.
But you're right, /greet should be another option.
Of course, you have to target someone to be able to greet them specifically rather than "everyone", so if the old system was kept, using /greet would be entirely pointless. I guess you couldn't have both of those two.
-
I do wish you did not have to write in stuff to ask NPC's stuff... Im bad at spelling and have bad grammer... So yoiu can see my problem...........
-
Then this will benefit you in further progressing your knowledge of English and correct spelling of words.
-
I would not be opposed to implementing more of an "eye contact" system, in which if you talk and you are within 2 meters of an npc, facing within 15 degrees of pointing directly at him, he would interpret that as you talking to him without saying his name. I didn't do that the first time because it seems more error prone but perhaps people would get used to it.
Does the group like this idea better?
- Vengeance
-
I'd see that as an improvement over the current system.
Perhaps later on, to tweak it you could have the npc ask if the player was talking to them after it first detects speech, then if the player says yes, the player can continue to talk as they were to the npc. Say they say no, the npc asks them to move a bit or something so that the text doesn't trigger the npc or something.
-
I would not be opposed to implementing more of an "eye contact" system, in which if you talk and you are within 2 meters of an npc, facing within 15 degrees of pointing directly at him, he would interpret that as you talking to him without saying his name. I didn't do that the first time because it seems more error prone but perhaps people would get used to it.
Does the group like this idea better?
- Vengeance
I am entirely unsure how you propose to do this when puppets have no concept of facing as it is. It is currently possible to fight with your back to your opponent's back. This seems like a major undertaking but perhaps it is already in the plan.
-
Well, in defense, most new additions to the game don't work right at first. Because they're new. I mean, these are serious problems, but they will be fixed.
-
Well, in defense, most new additions to the game don't work right at first. Because they're new. I mean, these are serious problems, but they will be fixed.
No. Even if all the bugs were gone, there would still be too many problems for the new system to be viable. What will happen is that the new system will gradually be improved until we're back at the old system.
-
Then this will benefit you in further progressing your knowledge of English and correct spelling of words.
OH YAY! :thumbdown:
Sorry but i dont think i will ever be great as spelling. :'(
But since they added this thing, it must be better. :D
-
I would not be opposed to implementing more of an "eye contact" system, in which if you talk and you are within 2 meters of an npc, facing within 15 degrees of pointing directly at him, he would interpret that as you talking to him without saying his name. I didn't do that the first time because it seems more error prone but perhaps people would get used to it.
Does the group like this idea better?
- Vengeance
In all honesty, I still don't like the new system even with that improvement, although the idea is more realistic.
How about implementing that "/greet" to begin a conversation, and the "Goobye NPC_name" to end a conversation as well, in addition to this new system? If these two things + the new idea of facing get implemented and the dreaded 15 seconds go away into the darkness (since "goodbye NPC_name" makes it pointless to have a check for holding an NPC's attention), then I say... THAT would be very, very, very nice.
I know it sounds a lot to ask... but heck for that sort of improvement, I'll bear the NPC's silence until they get converted to the new system for a whole month from now. Promise! :D
-
I for one like the new system, yes the old worked ok but it was not realistic, even better the eye contact.
It is more real. :thumbup:
-
I can only find two NPC's that will speak.
Is there a list of NPC's i.e. those important to quests which are speaking.
I have a few quests that can't finish and a few that I can't start. Very frustrating.
-
System has been reverted for now, or will be within the next week or so I think (whenever the server is updated). We'll probably look at having a mix of both or something later on.
-
System has been reverted for now, or will be within the next week or so I think (whenever the server is updated).
Good! It's nice to know you're listening to the community.
We'll probably look at having a mix of both or something later on.
I sure hope not! Not unless there's a good reason for it, like someone who's hard of hearing! "Eh, what's that you say sonny? Somebody said my name?"
-
*rolls his eyes at the gloating*
I have read through this entire thread, and it seems to me that many folks like many different options for talking to the dreaded NPCs, and will never agree on one very limited system. That is called being human. I have made my opinion known already on the subject as an RPer. I wish to comment on some of the other suggestions.
Click/talk: The old system. Servicable, easy to use to some, hard for others, and somewhat roleplayable. From a RP point of view, you walk up and look the NPC in the eye and ask your question. 'Clicking' indicates your attention is on them, whether that is with eye contact, body position, or tone of voice. Since it is private, you decide which of these methods best suits your RP. But, as said, it is private, and there is no good way to RP that in a public space. No getting around that with any system besides an open chat where everyone has to stand in line to talk, and everything is 'heard'.
Name/talk/time: The system in question. Ease of use is questionable. For one thing, the names of the NPCs are quite long and very odd. I have seen many people 'talk' to 'Hanrquist' or such without getting him to talk back. The "you will just have to get better at typing and spelling" stand just does not cut it here, and is more than insulting to those who are not so good. Pros? If you know the NPC then it is a good way to start a talk, as it is how an RPer will speak to another real person. However, if you are with others, it is an RP nightmare.
Look/name/talk: This is where you have to be facing the NPC and say their name. As long as you are looking at the NPC, your focus and conversation stays with it. RP-wise, this is better than the Name/talk/time system, though still has the problem of looking away, then having to re-say the name to focus on the NPC again. Not very good for complex RP.
Click/look-to-talk: The shop owner system. When buying something from a shop, you rarely know the person's name. In this system, you click on the NPC to target it and let the system know you intend to focus on it. However, you do not focus until you look at the NPC directly. If the NPC is selected, and you are looking at it within a certain angle, the system assumes you are talking to the NPC. If you turn away to talk to someone else, focus is lost until you turn back to the NPC. The basis for this system is actual RP between people, where they will often face the person they wish to talk to. It may be also called the Look/click/look-to-talk, as you tend to face the NPC to select it. This may be confusing to many new players, so can not be the default setting. **see note
Look/name-or-click/talk: Same as above, but saying the NPCs name anywhere in a statement (or at the beginning or end) while looking at it assumes focus without targeting, and just that statement will be directed at the NPC. No targeting is required. Any statement after that without targeting the NPC will be assumed as not directed at it.
Command: A system creating a 'channel' for talking to NPCs only. This makes some sense to me, since talking to NPCs is basically like tells between players. I suggest /npc, being the obvious choice for talking to an NPC. For talking to NPCs that are close together, either looking at the one you want to talk to, or typing /npc <NPC's name> <text> would suffice. A /npc hotkey would be a nice addition, much as /tell works. The hotkey would contiue to select the NPC you were looking at, or talked to last. A tab channel could be created as well for NPCs, as it would make scrolling up to remember what the last NPC in a quest told you. RP-wise, this is a viable option and easy to learn. It does not interfere with talking to others in any way, nor does it have a time limit or focus issue.
**note: Options! Do not assume the system you chose is the right one just because you are the Developer. Give people options, and let them choose which system they like best in a checkbox advanced chat options menu. You allow people to assign keyboard controls, detail levels, label visibility, chat filters, character mesh/textures, and class, so why limit how they can speak with NPCs? The way to do this would have been to start integrating the new system in, and asking how folks liked it, not just putting it in and saying: "This is better." There is always room for options.
As for now, I take an option many others have taken to as well: I don't talk to NPCs at all. As I am a roleplayer interested on making the world inside the game the best it can be, this should have you worried.
-
I think it's good that the old system is back.
Zanzibar said that at the short term, the "new" system would only be able to equal the "old" one. I understand what Zanzibar meant, and agree to that. The only difference would have been how to address to NPC (not clicking but using a sentence starting/ending with his/her name) once the problems of absorbing conversations for themselves (pointed by Nilaya) and others were solved.
In the long term, though, I see the intentions of Vengeance. Making NPC alive, and interventioning in player talks, if they're named somehow. But that would require, in the first place, that NPC did not absorb the conversation (something that _fortunately_ does now) and talked openly, to anyone in range. Unfortunately, the time is not now.
We've quests ruled by NPC awaiting sentences to be said to them. Those sentences are somewhat predictable. Read this as, if we know this NPC gives the laanx scroll, we know he, somehow, will be asked about it. As it is now, the NPC sentence recognition is being worked out and tried to improve. Fact is, though, that NPC aren't able to react to "predictable" sentences. For Vengeance implementation to be really more realistic and immersive, NPC should be able to react, realistically, to unpredictable sentences (PC can talk about, theoretically, any topic using the NPC name in the sentence)
In other words, the "new" system relied in a functionality that, still, isn't there in order to be really effective and consist a major difference regarding the "old" system.
Side note: Nilaya commented about NPC talks, and that "adopt" an NPC system seems that may work. In any case, I wanted to comment about another thing she pointed out. Culture. I am against NPC giving key (read it basic) culture knowledge. With that I group any information that may be a basic ground to any roleplayer to know the world he/she is going to play in, its habits, how the races are, etc. IMO, NPC can give information, yes, but mainly personal anecdotes. Major basic information for the player has to be given in the playerguide and with accessible for all mediums, such as libraries. I understand the feeling of giving a "reward" to someone that talked to an NPC about, say, cities, or races... but that "reward" can never be a pillar for the roleplay. All players should have equal access to the basics of the world they're going to play in. I expect the NPC to give, then, as they would in real life, more personal anecdotes, than really being the only key to access a knowledge that should be common (race habits, location naming... that should be able to be found in a library, or the player guide) it is inconsistent, to my eyes, that in order to know the name of the Octarch of the first level, the player has to go to an NPC that acts as her hairmaker (IIRC) and ask her about him.
So, information to the players, directly, or openly avaiable. Using essencial information as a reward of talking to a certain NPC may appeal that one who discovered it, but creates a "crack" amongst the player base that may lead to inconsistences.
-
LOL, finnaly i will be happy everytime the server goes down, because there will be new charakter I can speak with!!! (end of sarcasm) >:( I think the best way will be to keep both systems (targeting/talking) and eye contact is great idea.
-
@nilrem i kinda disagree, npc's should be able to speak about the places they live in, or they traveled thro, places were they came from (ancestors) this is something that they could be able to speak about, altho this may not aply to every single npc.
as it happens in real life not every one keeps tracking of were theyr grand grand... parents lived, who they were, and what they did...
this details may not be recorded in books in librarys, but they may be recorded and contain "secret" history details, besides the personal details
-
I don't say they should not talk about places they live in. As I say they can talk about their personal experiences.
What I say is that a player has to have ways to know about the settings, at least the basics informations of it, without need to talk to NPC. Setting information has to be put avaiable to players not with NPC talk, but with the player guide.
-
i agree with that...
just dont agree with the example you gave :-[
-
I still can't talk to npcs.... I tried with Toda and Merrinez. I said stuff like :
"Hello Toda", "Hello toda", "Toda hello", "toda hello"..I tried about, asking a question, selecting the npc before talking, and the old way of doing things, but nothing works....
-
To the best of my knowledge, Toda never was converted to the new system. Also, I believe the old system hasn't been reinstated just yet. Soooo, have a little patience and the devs will get everything fixed in good time.
-
*rolls his eyes at the gloating*
It's not gloating at all, silly. When someone does something I approve of, I say so.
-
Hm.. interesting topic.
My thoughts:
1. The old system sucks because - as Vengeance realised - it's just unnatural. It works out somehow but it's not perfect.
2. The new system sucks because there are too many flaws and system inherent problems.
3. The old system already has that "NPC channel" UTM wants - its a /tell-like /say. Nothing new and nothing I'd advice to go even further with.
4.
I would not be opposed to implementing more of an "eye contact" system, in which if you talk and you are within 2 meters of an npc, facing within 15 degrees of pointing directly at him, he would interpret that as you talking to him without saying his name. I didn't do that the first time because it seems more error prone but perhaps people would get used to it.
Infact I already asked a couple of times on the wishlist about direction dependant effects.
Only a few examples where a more generic "eye contact" system would be helpful:
- sneaking and chances of getting detected (being in front = 100% ; being in the back = 0% chance of getting noticed)
- pickpocketing just the same - the more you are in the back the higher is the chance of a successful pickpocketing
- direction dependant damage (getting hit in the back doubles the damage for instance)
- backstabbing - the more you are in the back of your target, the higher is the chance to be successful in backstabbing
- direction dependant spells for instance like "the evil eye" that only has an effect if you are looking into ones eyes
With all those possibilities I strongly advice to implement a generic direction detection and have the targetting only one use of that system.
Now back on topic:
What about automatically /target the entity (NPC or player) that is just in those 2m and 15° of the range?
It should be possible to deactivate the auto-targetting in the options as it might get annoying while being in a crowd but in general it could make life a lot easier - and controls more natural as you wouldn't have to mouse-click, just look.
5. I've heard that NPCs will be able to auto-greet passengers. If they also automatically turn to the one whom they greet, this could be combined with the auto-targetting.
For instance an NPC (who is awake and isn't too busy) could turn automatically to the one who targets, then greet - automatically again.
Turning around wouldn't change the target unless one looks or manually target someone else.
This way it doesn't require the name calling anymore and no timer.
6.
As far as everyone knowing everyone else's name without being introduced, this topic has been discussed since 2001. It is simply too much overhead for too little reward to track each and every introduction made by every player to every player or npc.
There I disagree. Even if something like that (http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=24686.msg273795#msg273795) won't be implemented (which I hope it will!), I strongly recommend to have a list of responses from NPCs saved client-sided. It adds a lot of realism if NPCs don't just great with "hello there" but with "welcome back, [name]" or "I have missed you, my dear [name]".
It's not just a little detail in my eyes but a whole new feeling.
-
Kerols ideas seem wonderfull, i agree with most of them, but there are a few that could be worked out.
That's for another thread and another time.
But anyways, i just wanted to know why the NPC's weren't fixed yet and what the E.T.A was on them.
~~Datruth 8)
-
What about automatically /target the entity (NPC or player) that is just in those 2m and 15° of the range?
It should be possible to deactivate the auto-targetting in the options as it might get annoying while being in a crowd but in general it could make life a lot easier - and controls more natural as you wouldn't have to mouse-click, just look.
If someone is calling your name in your back, don't you turn your head to him? Why would the AI think "no, he doesn't call me 15° in front, I'll ignore him"? If the NPC is unable to turn to you, just RP he does.
The more irrealist thing about NPC is people crowding around them when a good bussiness can be done, the NPC is beeing trading and talking multiple people in the same time. Beeing also a source of exploit generating wipes time to time, I suppose it will eventualy be fixed. How would you conciliate a fix with a resticted talking area with a locking mechanism? People will do the queue walking upon each others.
-
What about automatically /target the entity (NPC or player) that is just in those 2m and 15° of the range?
It should be possible to deactivate the auto-targetting in the options as it might get annoying while being in a crowd but in general it could make life a lot easier - and controls more natural as you wouldn't have to mouse-click, just look.
If someone is calling your name in your back, don't you turn your head to him? Why would the AI think "no, he doesn't call me 15° in front, I'll ignore him"? If the NPC is unable to turn to you, just RP he does.
I believe Kerol meant PC 15°, not NPC. You don't have to be in the 15° of NPC in front of him to talk with him ;P
- The NPC could turn to you as you start talking. If there are few PCs talking to him at once, then he will choose one of them.
- What if there are two NPCs in the 2m 15° area? The closest NPC is choosen as target.
- Why keep this targetting? So that you know exactly when everythink what you say goes to NPC and when it goes to public.
- Visual effect for this different kind of targetting. At the ground, a 2m 15° coloured surface with 30% transparency could appear if there is NPC in its range. Or a normal targetting marker.
This way you obviously dont have to click the NPC to talk to him (funny, because i never click it, but target it in different way (simply because way too often pointer on NPC and click isn acual to targetting, yeah, not whole surface of NPC is targetable ;))), but its is targetted automatically, so this unrealistic for some people bit with clicking is gone.
Really gone.
-
i have an issue with the idea of being within a certain range of the npc's direction.
There are places, most notably in the magic shop, where i cannot find the npc without placing my character in odd positions. If i cannot see the npc, i cannot know where he is facing. To see hiim, sometimes, i have to stand in the doorway to the stairs to his left and behind him; therefore, i could not interact with him under the "cone speaking" method.
-
Here's the system I'd advocate. People have mentioned similar things and bits and pieces of it... but I don't think this exact system has been described.
Player approaches NPC (way, within 2 or 3 meters). Players makes "eye contact" (this means that the player is completely within the NPC's line of sight AND the player is looking at the NPC). After 3 seconds of eye contact, that NPC considers itself to be talking to the player and remains that way as long as eye contact and distance are maintained. Optionally, if the player is within distance and has acquired eye contact, he/she may say the NPC's name at the beginning of the conversation to skip the delay.
That system seems realistic to me. The only thing it doesn't account for is conversations over long distances. However, I think that's more of the exception than the rule. Just a random note on conversation in general: /say and /shout "radiuses" should not be spheres/hemispheres (as I think they are at present), but more like a set of mathematically shaped fields, mostly going forward, but some back and to the sides as well. In real life you hear speech from in front of a person better than from behind that person; this helps to keep things sane (you hear a lot more of just what's directed towards you, instead of just hearing everything from people around you). I found a link that seems to have equations for the forward parts... I don't know about how you'd deal with the back and sides. Linky! (http://www.kettering.edu/~drussell/Demos/BaffledPiston/BaffledPiston.html)
-
Are you saying that to talk to a NPC you have to be standing in front of them whithin 2-3 meters. How would that work with harnquist where there is a group of people clambering for his attention. Should they form a queue.
What was wrong with clicking on the NPC, ie to get their attention and then you can talk to them for as long or short a time as you like. No panicing because you have not spoken them for 15 seconds; screwing your eyes up trying to read the NPC's name or retyping their name because you misspelt it.
As an aside. How many quests are workable. I have only found one that can be completed. And only three NPC's that will reply.
-
Anybody know if/when the npc's will be fixed? i'm gettin sick of no quests
-
To be blunt, they get fixed when they get fixed. Welcome to a game in developement. Heaven forbid you talk to other real people instead of the npcs. You never know, some might offer quests of their own.
-
To be blunt, they get fixed when they get fixed. Welcome to a game in developement. Heaven forbid you talk to other real people instead of the npcs. You never know, some might offer quests of their own.
Heaven forbid people use 1/4 of thier brain and ask for a time frame of when projects will be finished.
I mean it's the obvious question and it's the pressing question, some of us don't like talking to people all day long.
We like going on adventures.
If i wanted to babble i could easily go on Aim and Yahoo.
I love the human element, but the quests are why i love this game, along with the graphical interface.
Try not to chop people's heads off when asking for an E.T.A, it's the natural question to ask.
I also, think this thread has been beaten to death, seems we have all the loose ends fixed, the old system is back, it's getting ready to be re implemented.
I'm moving on, and i hope this thread will too.
~~Datruth
-
1) it was blunt and to the point, nothing else.
2) Form a group, go kill an ulber with 20 of your friends. Interacting with the human players doesn't mean turning the game into a 3d IRC channel.
3) This is a game in developement by those that do it as a hobby in their spare time. There is no definate, "we'll have this done by such and such date". That's for commercial projects that have deadlines to meet becuase they get paid for thier work, amoung many other reasons.
4) The day I "chop someone's head off" around here is the day I'll be banned for breaking just about every harrassment rule in existance. I can be blunt at times, put I never try to "flame" or "chop ones head off". I give short, structured, blunt, rebutles. Nothing more. I don't take personal chop shots. It's hard to believe but some people do try to be civil even on an uncivil place like the dreaded internet. (again, to clarify, that isn't to mean you aren't civil yourself. I'm simply trying to give explanation to my actions, no personal shots are meant by my typing)
To save some sort of ontopicness, the NPCs will be migrated back to the old when the Devs get the chance to roll back the changes. Until then, try asking your fellow players if they would like to go out on an adventure with you, slay some trepors, hunt for new mines, see they sights, explore the lands, search for piles of discarded items scattered in the vast wilderness, take a dip in the river or go se the waterfall. There is plenty to do other than just stand around an talk to other players. You aren't going to get most of that stuff I mentioned from an NPC anyway.
-
ETA is the same as it's always been and always will be: "Soon"
-
hmm? go talk to other people? tell me you're joking! my character 'frak' is so talkative i get told to shut up by people! i was simply asking because there's only so much kill the gladiator, go and train, kill the gladiator go and trian, mine some gold, go and train that you cajn do before tedium sets in and you start rping suicides just to keep your time occupied. sorry for wanting to know when the dev's would turn the system back to the way it was, it isn't like they have to 'develop' anything new to fix this problem, so yeah [ic] Wind yer' bloody neck in feller-me-lad, ye jus' makin yasel' seem even more of a wee cock that it wuz that i thought ye wuz alreedy reet? :P
-
Im just wondering what the purpose is of telling the NPC hello and talking to thzem as if they were a real person. if there is no purpose to it apart from getting training or obtaining a quest then can you just simply make it one click and whatever information you wanted comes up in a dialogue box which you click and the NPC simply greets you and tells you who he is when you approach and click in him. It would be a bit of a pain in the ass having to know which commands work and which dont if that is how it is, though i havnt played the recent PS yet but always had problems adjusting to how you had to speak with NPC.
-
1. Never change a running system .. is one of the earliest things you learn if you work with a system .. but it seems to be in human mankind to break this rule over and over again :D
2. Yes I agree with a lot of Vengeance arguments but at least: I work in a Medical Computer Science Department .. If someone would change the system and drops all the old stuff before the new stuff is working that one would be kicked directly to the moon in fact because some operations or billings couldn't be processed meanwhile .. this is a bad bad style to go! This seems to be sometimes an overall problem of Planeshift and should worked on because it will break believe an reputation in the great job from all done in PS!
3. Yes I know this is a Tech Demo/beta and the Devs are working on it .. but bad coding/worflow style shouldn't happen!
4. I guess Vengeance and his staff is doing a great job and thought about all the needings before they started to implement that .. but I guess a lot of bugs and missleadings mighte have been overcome if it would be talked over in public before because a Dev always has a different focus an view an a problem as an user will have.
And don't catch me wrong, nor will I start a flame but it makes me sad to see some GREAT IDEAD break a working system which leads to massive work which might be as well had been implemented fluently both together and switch as soon as finished. Anyway to late for those topics to change but I hope that some of those will be prevented in the future.
Anyhow I don't want to only kick on the new system. I guess it is a nice Idea and would lead in a more realistic and/or more easy way but we should as well take note about all the mentions given as there are eye contact, other keywords except the name like 'harnquist' will listen as well to 'smith' ..
About the argument posted once before that the eye contact won't work well if 20 people stand around harnquist ... mhh .. did you ever noticed what happens in real life if 20 people stands around a single person talking to? This person drives nuts or will ran away or cry for silent ... because you can't understand well if 20 people talks mixed up together .. so a real person will indeed focus on the persons in sight and especialy in view to watch the lisps to get what was talking about .. so yes .. I guess the eye contact thing might be a good idea even if people might have to wait a second till there is enough space which you need as well today to be able to target harnquist :)
NICE WORK Vengeance and I'm interested seeing it in full action soon on all players .. till then I hope we might possibly use again the old system even as a backup system if something fails (breaking chains in questmode, etc.)
kind regards,
Sisilam
-
Hello. Being fairly new I'm not familiar with the previous NPC system as it was implemented here, although I've been playing games a really long time and I'm pretty familiar with point and click NPC dialogue interaction.
I just wanted to feedback that I don't mind the personal address system as it is now. It has worked okay for me for the most part. I occasionally lose focus from the NPC due to me taking to long to formulate a response or in a few rare instances latency.
The eye contact idea isn't bad, but under heavy server load I think it might not work as intended. When I play Guild Wars and interact with an NPC they turn to face me until another person clicks on them and interacts, then they spin about to face that player. A very popular NPC will be spinning around a lot. It just looks silly.
I think someone mentioned using /tell to interact with the NPC. I think this might be a good idea when the server population is higher. Having four or five, even ten or so people all addressing an NPC publically might seem odd or annoying.
I do like the conversational system much more than the point and click system. It really seems like I'm talking to someone and not just activating a computer generated script. Sometimes in Guild Wars or Lineage (or other single player games) I would click on an NPC and they would have a page long text blathering on about something. Sometimes I would read it and click on the link to the next really long boring page and then sometimes I would just ignore it and move on. This way it seems much more conversational and interesting. I actually read their responses. It does help that they aren't 400 words long.
-
Vengeance fixed new system this morning, it now works try it.
-
Its as i have been predicting.
You get timeouts all the time.
1) when you are reading the answer (it takes some time for me when i dont want to miss somethink) and then want to answer question
2) its very troublesome when to ask a question, you have to activate some answer by previous question. By the time you read it, you would have to ask the same question again (adding name of NPC), to be allowed asking next. Of curse you will be very lucky if you find such trigger questions, coz you are used you just ask question, not ask the same question all over again so that to have the trigger on for the next question. Not to mention you never know how does look like questions yu can ask.
3) when you wonder about question you want to answer
But there is one situation when it work perfectly fine, (no timeouts)
1) when you ask questions like crazy, trying to gues it, trying every possible variation.
If you are lucky you wil have 20 lines of "huh?, Wha?" and betwean these single answers which make some sense.
Am i missing somethink?
-
Yes i see your point, take this text for a quest, deleted name so hope not a spoiler.
tells you: I may have something for you. I'm investigating the magical properties of the [*randum four word grins*], and it seems that when we throw in certain items, Laanx listens to us. In some old books I found that the usage of recent items is not very appreciated by Laanx, so I'm searching for some ancient items, in particular old coins. Those are not very easy to find for a man like me who spends all day at the temple. Travellers, archaeologists and explorers are more able to find old coins in lower levels or in the labyrinth. Will you search for an old coin and return it to me?
By the time you read that 15 seconds gone and you have possibly lost the quest as you need to reply.
-
maybe the timeout could be a function depending on the length of the spoken text? .. the longer the text to read .. the longer the timeout will be ..
Example:
> Yes, that is true
= 10 sec
> you should take item XXX and give it to YYY in City ZZZ
= 20 sec
> the above long example "I may have something for you. ... Will you search for an old coin and return it to me?"
= 100 sec
remind about that you have to read it AND should have enough time to write an answer .. also think about people having a slow connection (e.g. because they live 1000 miles away from the server)
-
or simply scrap the time out altogether, and implement, "goodbye [npc name]" as the the way to end the session with the npc. granted there should be a fallback timeout in case the use forgets to end the session, but that could be based on the distance between the user and npc, (if they ran away wthout ending, take the difference of postions, if they are over a certain radius, session auto ends) or say a 3 minute timeout (in case they don't move, but forget to end the session) 3 minutes should be plenty of time, and the number scould be adjusted anyway.
and I'd say more like its 10,000-30,000 at least. 1,000 will only get you to Asia.
-
I'd say the distance switch is the best option and was going to suggest it. Goodbye (bye) is good too. It all depend if you are near harnquist and you want to talk with other people instantly once you finish with NPC, or don't want to say anything and just walk away as you talked with random citizen somehere on the streets of Hydlaa.
Though there is still problem of NPC name being in sentence which isn't directed to him, really comlicated NPCs names which you dont like to type, (maybe only 3 letters of it if there are no NPCs with similiar name? But the somebody call it not realistic :P) And the unrealistic magical way that you always know the NPCs name.
and the long pings aren't necessary because you are far away, but because your ISP is having problems or somethink in the beatwen (which is less likely). If your ISP is crap, you are on the end of loooong crappy thelephone line and you are on modem, then 90% of the problem is on the 20miles of your telephone line ;P
-
I agree a lot with the distance swith and maybe an addition high time timeout (10 minutes) .. at least we have a distance/moving implementation while you dig ore. If you dig ore and move your location you fail .. the same technology might be used while speaking to an NPC. If you move out of the listening distance of the NPC he won't recognize you anymore. Most of the time you won't move much if you talk to an NPC (as long as Harnquist hasn't the moving bug again)
-
there seem to be another BUG with the conversation bewteen NPC .. there is a questwhere you have to talk to different NPC standing close each other .. if you say 'tell me about [NPCNAME]' the conversation seems to toggle to the NPC [NPCNAME] and the converation to the first NPC is that way broken and teh quest can't be completed/started .. maybe I will try out if there is a workaround fort that but haven't found one yet ..
-
Punctuation after names does not work. Example: "Hello Nalri!" "Nalri, hello." do not work. I also type slow, so anything that takes longer to type requires you to say the name for every question.
Recommendation: Toss the short timeout, as said above, and replace it with any movement command and a longer timeout of at least a minute or two.
-
*** 2006-08-23 by Keith Fulton
- Converted tabs from "All" to "Main" and made "Chat" into a special tab just for
talking to npc's.
- Took out npc naming system for talking with them. Now it is back to the old targeting
way, plus you must use the NPC chat tab on the chat window.
The old talking system is back as soon as the server is rebuilt and the next version is released.
I personally liked the new talking system once NPCs got fixed. I enjoyed talking to the Death Guardian: "Hi Death" :P
-
i start to like the new talking system as well !!! .. but I like working systems also :)
-
I don't understand why you guys continue to design a system that has already been taken out. Those particular hours of my life doing that "improvement" are now evaporated, as are your hours of time here in this thread "improving my improvement." :-) I still like this way better but Talad and Karyuu wanted it reversed and the consensus in this thread was to take it out, so it is out. Please quit posting improvements to it.
- Venge
-
I don't understand why you guys continue to design a system that has already been taken out. Those particular hours of my life doing that "improvement" are now evaporated, as are your hours of time here in this thread "improving my improvement." :-) I still like this way better but Talad and Karyuu wanted it reversed and the consensus in this thread was to take it out, so it is out. Please quit posting improvements to it.
- Venge
So let me get this straight. There are people who (for whatever reason) actually liked your system, but they thought it was flawed, and you're telling them to stop talking about ways to improve it to the point of being viable?
And no, your hours weren't completely wasted. Can't you look at it as a learning experience or something? Why does it have to be so black and white?
-
I totally agree,
I mean this needed to happen, there needed to be a discussion, and we learned alot.
Your system was good in theory but was also flawed.
We haven't lost anything though, we've only gained from all this, we're all better off now that we went through this stage.
Remember, planeshift is still in it's infancy, we have plenty of time to make changes, till then let's enjoy the experience.
~~Datruth 8)
-
Well, it's Vengeance's time... technically...
-
I also don't think it was wasted time.
As I think a hybrid system would work out best, your first attempt could be recycled later for a better thought out system.. *points to the improvements thought about in that thread*
And besides that I think experiences never are for nought :)
-
@Vengeance:
Your improvement wasn't a waste of time!!! .. indeed it was a good idea and the time will show that it is overall a good thing .. maybe it was just a bad time/way to switch it while not fully working .. but what is needed to get it fully working? .. there are only three small lacks left .. one is that the handling of quest items was a bit broken and the other point was that the timeout may be to short which could easy been managed by using the movemnet stuff used at digging (if you dig and move you fail) and as third the problem of NPC nearby another NPC triggering an existing conversation to stop (which may be solved by not stopping the existing conversation but why not let 2 NPCs listen to a conversation) .. so yes .. it is working in the basics and it will surely work very well and fine in the future!
So don't let your head hang down .. you made a good job!
-
It took a couple of hours to implement at the time and it took 30 minutes to change it back. I am disappointed that we changed it back instead of just improving it because I do think it would have ended up better, but in the end it doesn't really matter. I'm sure you guys will hate the new chat changes too, so you'll just have to get used to it all. :-) What is mystifying to me is why you keep making suggestions about that system when it is already announced to have been taken out. I keep thinking of locking the thread but as a behavioral experiment I leave it open to see when people will run out of ideas for improving something that doesn't exist. :-)
As far as the learning experience goes, I didn't learn a thing from implementing this feature. It has been a while since something radically "new" was added to the game. I did it only to improve the player experience. People didn't like it so it came out.
- Vengeance
-
...I am disappointed that we changed it back instead of just improving it...
Me and I guess all the other people are sad that it was reverted instead improved as well
...because I do think it would have ended up better...
definitly!
...What is mystifying to me is why you keep making suggestions about that system when it is already announced to have been taken out. I keep thinking of locking the thread but as a behavioral experiment I leave it open to see when people will run out of ideas for improving something that doesn't exist. :-)
just simple .. because it is NOT DEAD for US .. we liked the idea, the concept behind .. maybe the implementation lacked a bit .. but thats just another point and is something that could be improved. THATs why we still post .. because we WISH IT .. we wish it in a functional working way that was discussed through all steps to get rid of all eventual failures and lacks .. we WANT IT .. so it isn't dead for us .. we saw it was working and possible to implement.
The thing is .. we wheren't happy that it happend from one day to another without discussion and wasn't working on the first try .. but that DOES NOT MEAN in all cases that we don't want it!
As far as the learning experience goes, I didn't learn a thing from implementing this feature. It has been a while since something radically "new" was added to the game. I did it only to improve the player experience.
I don't agree with you .. maybe you even at least learned that some new nice stuff needs the right time to be implemented ...
People didn't like it so it came out.
that is DEFINITLY WRONG or a at least a MISSUNDERSTANDING! .. we said it is a good idea and nice .. but it is clear that if people can't solve a quest anymore or have timeout difficulty that they aren't amuzed about that .. but the thing is that they wasn't happy about the stuff that wasn't working correctly .. but this is not the same thing to not like your improvement! I guess if your improvement will work without a timeout problem and will work the way that still quests could be solved we all would be glad to have such a solution!!!
so don't crucify yourself or get overall disapointed!
-
It doesn't happen often 100% of people like some feature. Here it was like 50/50% and as we was discussing more people was considering the new system as good if it will be modified the way we suggested. To be functional. I believe with the recent new modifications it would work without flaws. But unfortunately it happened after the decision to bring back the old system and stop work on the new.
Actually i'm starting to feel guilty. The first time i commented this idea, i gave loads of disadvantages and had nothing in mind to improve it. As people posted, I understood there are loads of ideas for fixing the issues.
But the first time i said no (as few others), Talad saw it and said no too.
-
I agree that the 'name' system had an edge on the other, if done correctly. My main issue is that it was implimented before it was vaguely usefull.
Since you think this will not ever be implimented again, which I think is a mistake, I suggest moving it to the Wishlist rather than locking it. then we can continue to wish for this system to come back with our improvements. :)
-
Blah, Point and click is just better. If it wasn't you would not have that rolling thingy next to your keyboard.
[Enormously and pointlessly long quote deleted by Vengeance]
Amen