The Quest system

[Gondric]

we either need a dev to type in 100 more things for each npc to respond to or have lotsa key words like if u need to get that lamp fuel for jayose u just say can i have some fellas (i think its caleld that) and u get it or u just say fellas u get it. u could even say i am going to need som fellas to pour on ur head and it would work.

[Nikodemus]

The trick its to avaid single word sentences all the time and those which make no sense, but somehow the NPC respond. But some dev would have to work a lot on every NPC and they just sea to not have time for this currently, if ever soon enough. Another reason why players are annoyed about the quest system is that we gave many ideas, also about orgaizing the work, but its like there is noone who would have time to work on it. Even to organize the work better, and maybe get more people to work on certain things. Devs are busy on other things and Talad as head of the whole has too much work too appearently.
Its a hobby, a job for fun, but still it is sad when things could be better but they arent.

[Croconil]

I don't know if this is already implemented in quests, because I have never done one before    I know. Im ashamed.

How about the NPC's say sentances, and key words are bold, so it gives you more of an idea what to say.

[Brendan]

Hi,

We're not most games, and we're not after the easiest, but the most realistic approach. This is a work in progress so unfortunately there are a lot of difficulties to overcome, but the end result will be very much worth all the effort. We want people to treat NPCs as if they were real (i.e., real citizens of Yliakum just like your characters) and not just "tools" to get what you want.

Researchers have been working in the artificial intelligence area for quite some time, with much more funding than any of us are likely to see, trying to figure out problems like parsing natural language, machine learning, etc. The researchers haven't really got very far, but the developers of this game expect to solve these incredibly difficult problems with a few weeks of fiddling.

USER: Is there anything I can do for you?
NPC: Yes, I need 3 carrots for a stew I'm making - could you go to the grocer and get them for me?
USER: Probably not - I think carrots are out of season at the moment. Why don't you just use turnips?
NPC: Hmm, turnips would make it taste strange
USER: What if you only used one turnip, and added some pumpkin to make up the difference?
NPC: Yeah, I guess that'd work. Could you get me a turnip and some pumpkin instead?
USER: Maybe, but are you going to need anything else from the grocer in the next week?
NPC: In the next week? I'll probably need a few sacks of potatoes, more tomatos and some celery.
USER: Hmm, how  about you do a list of things you need from the grocer each week and arrange a regular delivery?
NPC: Hey, that sounds like a good idea...
USER: You could probably even talk the grocer into giving you cheaper prices if it's a regular order..
NPC: Nice idea - then I could make more profit from my stews.  I wish I had time to go talk to the grocer..
USER: Would you give me cheaper stews if I negotiate a regular order with the grocer?
NPC: Ok, as long as the grocer gives me better prices - it's been costing me heaps buying a few vegetables at a time.

In the dialog above, what if the user tried to talk the NPC into dealing directly with a farmer, or growing their own carrots? What if the user had some carrots but tried to barter, or told the NPC that the grocer increased their prices so they could keep the difference? How about if the user was hungry and decided it'd be better to bash the NPC and steal the partially made stew, or perhaps decided to go and get all of the things needed to make stews and start selling stew themselves (and maybe buy every carrot in town to make things hard for the original stew maker)?

There is no way one earth that the developers of this game will ever be able to allow people to treat NPCs as if they are real - the massive number of things a person can say, the incredible difficulty in parsing what users say correctly, and the work required to get the NPC to say sane responses makes it totally impossible. Add to this that most people use tone and gestures - is the sentence "I really like the color pink" a serious statement or was I being sarcastic? You can tell because of the way I said the word "really", and because I poked my tongue out at the end of the sentence...

In practice, there's usually a very small number of responses that an NPC is capable of (except for variations of "huh?" and "I didn't understand that"), and there's also a very small number of things a user can say to trigger the very small number of responses. Keywords will not work - consider something like this:

USER: Is there anything I can do for you?
NPC: Yes, I need 3 carrots for a stew I'm making - could you go to the grocer and get them for me?
USER: I used all of my carrots with your wife last night!
NPC: Yes, carrots - do you have them?
USER: No - I said I've used them all. I killed the grocer last week too...
NPC: Yes, the grocer - did you go see him?

Rather than trying to perform miracles, why not implement something that is practical and can be used? This is what most games do, and I expect it's what this game will do after spending years trying (and mostly failing) to make the NPCs seem "real".


Cheers,

Brendan

[Karyuu]

The researchers haven't really got very far, but the developers of this game expect to solve these incredibly difficult problems with a few weeks of fiddling.

Because clearly every big goal we have takes a few weeks in our mind

There is no way one earth that the developers of this game will ever be able to allow people to treat NPCs as if they are real - the massive number of things a person can say, the incredible difficulty in parsing what users say correctly, and the work required to get the NPC to say sane responses makes it totally impossible.

Perhaps you took my words more literally than I did. We're looking for an "as real as possible" scenario. And it can be done, and we will be able to do it.

Rather than trying to perform miracles, why not implement something that is practical and can be used? This is what most games do, and I expect it's what this game will do after spending years trying (and mostly failing) to make the NPCs seem "real".

I have already stated some reasons we're not going to be using "choices" for NPC conversations It is too easy and turns NPCs into "tools," among others. Like I said, there are certain things with which we are not going to be like "most games." Take into consideration the current version of the game - it is so very early! We have a ton to do before 1.0, and are making progress every step of the way. The current system is a beginning and will improve.

[bilbous]

Perhaps someday you could recruit volunteers to actually take on the personna of NPC's and roleplay interaction with characters without deviating too much from the prepared scripts.

[Croconil]

Perhaps someday you could recruit volunteers to actually take on the personna of NPC's and roleplay interaction with characters without deviating too much from the prepared scripts.

Thats not a good idea. Obliterates the meaning of NPC, and that means people will have to just stand around all day.
 

[Brendan]

Hi,

Perhaps you took my words more literally than I did. We're looking for an "as real as possible" scenario. And it can be done, and we will be able to do it.

Can you define "as real as possible"?

Human languages are unstructured and rely on context. Computers lack "intelligence" in any real form, and are generally unable to work with unstructured things. A computer can remember context, but only within the limits of their programming, and general have huge problems detecting which contexts are important and when contexts cease to apply.

Given this, "as real as possible" typically equates to a structured language consisting of keywords and formal grammar that the programming is capable of dealing with. If you're familiar with the "old fashioned" text based adventure games, MUDs, etc, you'd be familiar with formalised commands like "get <item>", "give <item> to <player | NPC>", "go <direction>", etc.

This approach can be improved with the addition of a built in thesaurus (so that, for e.g., the words gem, jewel, gemstone and diamond can be accepted equally; the words give, assign, deliver, donate, grant and supply are all treated equally; and the words have, take, acquire, obtain and receive are all treated equally). It can be combined with support for alternative syntax (so that, for e.g.,  "give <NPC> <item>", "give <item> to <NPC>" and "let <NPC> have <item>" are treated equally). You can also have some generic rules (like ignoring the word "the" when it occurs before an item, ignoring case and ignoring punctuation). With the examples shown, this would give 136 different combinations of words that could be used to give a diamond to the NPC - for example, "donate gem to <npc>", "let <NPC> obtain the diamond" and "supply <npc> the jewel" would all be equivelent.

With a large enough thesaurus, a large enough set of alternative syntax and enough carefully selected rules it could be reasonably effective. Is something like this what you refer to as "as real as possible"?

I can't help get the feeling that the current approach is to have N strings which are mapped to M responses, where the user must type one of those N strings exactly without any formal grammatical rules to guide them. Given exactly 7 specific words (e.g. cat, mat, hat, pat, dog, log, fog) in any order, there's over 5 thousand different possible combinations. Given the english language (tens of thousands of words) with between 1 and 10 of these words in a sentence, the possible number of combinations (even when you filter out all sentences that don't make sense) is difficult to comprehend. If I'm correct about the current approach your server will probably run out of memory before you can have a string for every "free form" sentence that a user could reasonably expect to work. Given limits on the developer time needed to find and enter these strings and the lack of flexability of the end result, thiis approach would be "less than wise"...

I'm also curious if the developers have considered keeping a log of all of the things players say to "quest NPCs" that aren't understood by the NPC - the variety of things typed in by new users would probably be quite revealing...


Cheers,

Brendan

[Croconil]

I'm also curious if the developers have considered keeping a log of all of the things players say to "quest NPCs" that aren't understood by the NPC - the variety of things typed in by new users would probably be quite revealing...

That is a good idea, but with ONE major flaw. These logs will be about 5 million lines long of roughly the same things.

[Janner]

Or you could do what I did, sit down next time there is a long down time, and right, out how you think a quest could go.

For example:

Player  . hello Harry.
NPC  . hello sir/my lady.
Player  . how are you.
NPC   . mind your own business you muddobber.

 He He, it was a rogue. But you get the idea.
 I for one would like to see how you think a quest would go like.

[Croconil]

Or you could do what I did, sit down next time there is a long down time, and right, out how you think a quest could go.

For example:

Player  . hello Harry.
NPC  . hello sir/my lady.
Player  . how are you.
NPC   . mind your own business you muddobber.

 He He, it was a rogue. But you get the idea.
 I for one would like two see how you think a quest would go like.

Hehe. Harry the rouge.

[Karyuu]

Brendan:

Part of the plan is to use WordNet - basically NPCs will have "access" to a dictionary for synonyms and hypernyms, making them more capable of understanding things no matter how a player may say it. Also, for a long time now logs of all things said to NPCs that they don't understand are sent to the dev team and analyzed.