[Jazuela]

aonean, (sorry if I spelled it wrong) you included RPI in your query. You want to know why light would be interesting or have value.

RPIs are coded with the emphasis on realism. That means if it's dark, you can get lost. If you're carrying a torch in a storm, the torch can go out. Eventually, all torches run out of oil to stay lit. The risk of getting lost in a dangerous area and running into a bad thing (or falling into a pit) is fun, for people who play RPIs. There might be a class of characters who can maneuver around in the dark better than others - this makes that class more valueable in those situations, and gives other character classes a solid reason to want to interact with them.

I believe realism, in an RPI, is a lofty goal and worth striving for. I also believe that playability should always be on the top of the priority list. So you balance realism with playability -

Have torches, but have some other method of lighting a dark room. Have the sun during the day, and moons at night, but also have magick classes that can cast shadows for those who prefer to live in darkness (or who want to trap prey who are lost without light).

As for the day/night thing, I'd rather keep it relatively simple. Have two sets of "outdoor" rooms in the game. Maybe just a single sentence at the end of the room paragraph to differentiate them.

Blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah. Blah blah blah, blah blah blah. Blah blah. Unlit lanterns hang from poles on the edge of the street.

(same paragraph)...blah blah. Lanterns shine brightly from poles on the edge of the street.

And instead of having a different paragraph for each phase of daylight in every single room, have a "weather" system that sends a room echo whenever the sun/moon(s)/wind/storms shift - with the additional "weather" command allowing a player to know what the weather is inbetween echoes.

Another perk this kind of system offers, is that the player can check the weather in the immediate surroundings. If you're in a wilderness area and there's a storm brewing off to the west, you don't have to find out by getting stuck in it. You can look to the west, or type weather west, and learn that the dust is kicking up in that direction. No torch is gonna help you there, but if you're of a class with excellent outdoor maneuverability (or have one in your group), you stand a chance of getting through it unscathed.

[KaVir]

Well you'd want to do that anyway (even stock Diku does that) - but personally I think the current weather can also make a nice addition to the descriptions you see when you type 'look', as (at least to me) it makes the world feel less static.

Surely if there's a storm brewing off to the west, you should be able to see it from a pretty reasonable distance away?

I find it much more convenient to show the clouds overhead in a format like this:

<span style='font-family:Courier'>> weather

.. ..oo.. ..
..oo.. ..oo..
oooo.. ....oo..
oo.. ..oo..
.. .. .... ..
.... ..oo.. ..oo.. .. ....oo..
..oo.. ...... .. .. ..oo......OO.. .. ....oo.. .. ....OO.. ..
ooOOoo....oo.. .. .. ......oooo@@oo..oo.. ..oooo.. .. ..ooOOoo....
.. ..ooOO@@OOoooo.. ..oo.. ..oooooo..
@@@@OOoo.... ..OOOOX@OO.... .. ........
@@OOoooo.. ..oooo@@OO..
OOoo.... ....OOoo.. ..
oo.. ..oooo..
..oo.. ......
oo.. ..oo..
.. ....
..
.. ....
..
There's a thunderstorm.</span>

And then later:

<span style='font-family:Courier'>> weather

.. ..oooo.. ..
.. ..oo....
.. ....
..
.. .. ..oo.. ....
.... ..oo..oo..ooOO.. .... ..oooo.. ..
oooo.... .. .. ..oo..oo..OO@@oo.. ..oo.. .. ..OOoo....oo..
OOoo..oo.. .. .. ........oo@@@@OOoo.. ..oooo.. .. ..ooOO.. ..oo..
OO....oo.. ..OO@@OOOOoo.. ..oo.. ..oooo.. ....
oo.. .... ..OOOOooooX... .... .... ..
.. ..oooo.... .. ..
.. ....oo.. ..
.. ..oo....
.. ....
..
..
..
..
..
There are light clouds overhead.
The tide is currently high.</span>

Thus you can see the clouds swirling around and drifting across the sky from a fairly long way away, just as your character would be able to if standing outdoors. You can even predict when a storm is coming in, although because of the way the cloud pattern swirls as well as moves it's not possible to be overly accurate with your predictions.

[Jazuela]

The ascii things are more a matter of preference. I wouldn't play a game that had them every time I typed "weather." I'm a text kinda gal, and would prefer a textual description of the weather.

A gentle breeze wafts in from the west.

A harsh sandstorm fills the air, swirling in a clockwise pattern.

Torrential rain falls in sheets, mixed with high winds blowing to the southeast.

Stuff like that. Tell me where the wind's coming from, tell me what it's like where I am right now, and maybe tell me if I can at least see where I'm going, if I were to step one or two rooms from my current position.

Just as in real life, I have no idea whether the road is flooded at the end of my street. But, I do know it's raining there. So I can make an educated guess based on the fact that I've experienced this kind of weather in this neighborhood for the past four years. I can decide if I want to risk getting stuck in a flooded road - or if there isn't any risk because it isn't raining hard enough.

If I had just moved in (if I'm a noob), I'd have only basic info, and personal logic to go by. Raining hard here, 2 rooms on a decline toward a valley, hm. Possible flood. I'll stay on high ground til the rain slows, or try to detour around instead of going straight through.

I like it when the text descriptions and echoes tell me the story, and let me add the images in my own mind. Maps are another matter entirely - gimme Visio or give me death!

[KaVir]

I prefer textual descriptions as well, and as I've said I use those too - but for some things it's very difficult to provide accurate information purely with words, and weather patterns are a good example. How would you describe a cloud pattern like one of my previous examples, using only words?

Sure, but the two methods aren't mutually exclusive. I've already talked about how I show the weather at your current location, but realistically a player should be able to see the clouds a lot further away than that.

In real life I can look up at the sky and see clouds a long distance away. In my mud I can do the same, seeing clouds several miles away.

But you'd be able to see a big dark cloud moving towards you - and hear the thunder - from a lot further away (unless each 'room' is a few miles across), regardless of how long you'd lived in the street.

Well the weather command effectively shows a 'map' of the sky. Just like a world map can provide a lot of information that's very difficult to describe purely with words (and believe me, I've tried - several of my players are blind) so a display of weather patterns can do the exact same thing.

[Ilkidarios]

I myself prefer more in-depth looks at my surroundings.  I like to have detailed visualizations in the rooms I'm in.  But I also understand where you're coming from, sometimes there's just too much text in a room description.  

I think the challenge there is deciding exactly how much of a description light should get, and the amount you mentioned I feel would appeal to a median of sorts of people who are not intensely RP, but who like a little more in-depth description so they know what time it is and whether it's night or day.  As a matter of fact, I've seen some MUDs that don't even differentiate between night and day!  In the end, it probably just depends on your player-base.

[Graeblyn]

These two factors are the reason I would loathe the ASCII clouds KaVir described. I prefer to read detailed descriptions, rather than look at ASCII art, and on top of that, those ASCII clouds generate WAY too much text!

[KaVir]

Then perhaps you could answer the question I posed to Jazuela:

How would you describe a cloud pattern like one of my previous examples, using only words?

[Graeblyn]

[KaVir]

It's pretty obvious to most people who've seen it, but I'll explain it anyway, using a smaller piece of cloud pattern:

<span style='font-family:Courier'> ..oooo..
..oo....
....
..
.. .. ..oo..
..oo..oo..ooOO..
..oo..oo..OO@@oo..
........oo@@@@OOoo..
..OO@@OOOOoo..
..OOOOooooX...
..oooo....
....oo..
..oo....
....</span>

The '@' represents a heavy thunderstorm, the 'O' is rain, 'o' is heavy clouds, '.' is light clouds and the rest is clear sky. The 'X' represents my current location.

Thus, looking up into the sky you can see that there's a heavy thunderstorm to the north-west, with wisps of lighter cloud swirling outwards from it.

Those might give an adequate idea of the weather at your current location, but they're not going to provide any insight into what the rest of the sky looks like.

So, once more, how would you describe one of my cloud patterns using only words?

[Jazuela]

That's why I didn't reply..I can't describe something I can't figure out. I have no idea what those ascii symbols are doing, or what they're supposed to represent. They don't look random, but I can't fathom the pattern.

But let's say you're trying to portray clouds coming in from the west, they're rainclouds, and they're chock-full of sand. Typing the word "weather" would return:

Sand-filled rainclouds appear overhead, coming in from the west.

Typing "weather west" would return:

Near west:
The sky darkens to the west, with sand-filled rainclouds looming precariously low to the ground.
Far west:
The sky is completely blackened, obscured by a harsh rainy sandstorm.

or - maybe the storm is coming from the northwest, and the "north" part of it is far, rather than near:

Far west:
Thick dark clouds form overhead from a storm coming in from the north.

Very easy to write, much easier to decipher than an ascii rendering.

[Graeblyn]

Oh, I love Jazuela's suggestion!

[KaVir]

However it still doesn't answer my question, and nor have you.

Jazuela's suggestion is fine for the weather system used by the typical stock mud - a simple state machine where weather is either rainy, cloudy, sunny, or whatever. But when you're talking about actual weather patterns you cannot describe them without losing a vast amount of detail, something which is hardly appropriate when the character could realistically just look up at the sky and view the clouds for themselves.

[Graeblyn]

For me, the main purpose of the game world is to facilitate my character's development and the game story's development. I tend to value parsimony over realism, unless there is a very compelling reason to complicate the game play experience. For example, having to urinate/defecate/eat regularly is more irksome then fun. I suppose that learning a weather pattern ASCII mapping system like you describe just doesn't strike me as any fun, and nor do I see the point of going to the trouble of implementing it, so I'm not really able to get excited enough about the concept to give you helpful suggestions.

[KaVir]

Fair enough - many people prefer to stick to the 'familiar' features that have been around for the last couple of decades, often finding it very difficult to think outside the box. And everyone has a different sense of what is 'fun' (some people enjoy archaic automated combat systems, for example, while others hate all types of combat). Fortunately there are enough muds out there that most people can find something they like.

However what it still boils down to is that you are not able to describe a cloud pattern such as I utilise, using only words. And the fact that you prefer stock weather systems doesn't really make my situation any easier, because I've no real desire to create a stock game.

[Jazuela]

Sure I could describe it, if I could see it. If it's visible, I can put it into words. That's what builders DO, afterall.

But the only people who would be remotely interested in actual and precise weather patterns in a text-based fantasy game would be professional navigators, tower control operators, and sea captains where charting out this kind of thing can mean the difference between smooth sailing and crashing into a glacier.

Since I don't know of many (any) games that require that kind of detail, I feel the exercise is not only pointless, but impossible given the fact that I am not a navigator, sea captain, or tower control operator, and have no idea how to read it.

But if I could, I'd have no trouble at all putting it into a nice neat package of text.

[KaVir]

I asked you how you would do it, not if you could do it. The fact that you keep dodging around the question with comments like "it's pointless" leads me to believe that you've come to the same conclusion as I did - that such information cannot be reasonably conveyed using text.

Even if you prefer stock weather systems, you could apply the same reasoning to ASCII maps of the world. For those who dislike (or are unable to use) ASCII graphics, a description-based alternative to a geographical world map would no doubt be a very useful and welcome addition - how would you go about doing that?

[Threshold]

KaVir, I don't think you are getting their point. You are asking them to engage in some pretty significant game design regarding a feature that they do not feel would be very interesting or useful. They do not appear interested in investing the thought and analysis necessary to come up with an actual system for doing in text what you have done via ascii. To them, it would be a waste of a significant amount of time for no real benefit to them or their point.

It would be like asking someone with no interest in genetics to explain how they would go about creating a pet system that used Mendelian genetics to pass traits along various generations of bred pets. They don't need to know how to do it to decide whether or not they like YOUR method. The fact that either genetics or Mendelian genetics specifically did not interest them might preclude them from wanting to invest a lot of time figuring out how they would do it just to explain why they did not like your method.

Personally, I think your cloud/sky/map thing looks pretty neat and I can totally see the benefits of it. It does indeed convey a lot of information simply and neatly.

That said, there are many people who do not like that sort of thing, and would prefer the information to be conveyed purely via text. I imagine it would be possible to do so, but perhaps you are right and no text implementation could even approach the utility of your ascii method. As it is not a feature I am currently programming (and personally, I'd probably go the ascii route myself) I am afraid I don't have the inclination to figure out a way to do it purely by text either. I hope you aren't disappointed.

Lastly, I wouldn't assume that just because someone doesn't like big ascii maps that they only want stock muds, stock code, or simple, stock weather. Your responses towards those who did not like your ascii map struck me as very presumptuous and defensive.

[KaVir]

I do - I understand that they prefer purely textual descriptions instead of ASCII maps and images. However the point I'm trying to drive home is that for certain systems, a textual description on its own is simply not enough to reasonably convey sufficient information for a player to make an informed decision.

Yes, I use textual descriptions for my weather, as well as to show what you can see nearby, but I also provide ASCII weather patterns and world maps in order to provide additional detail.

But if they had criticised me for using such complexity, don't you think it would be reasonable for me to ask "Then how would you develop a system for passing down traits through generations of pets"?

[Threshold]

I understand where you are coming from KaVir, but you are asking two non-developers to give you a developer-type answer about an advanced feature that they do not find personally riveting.

[Jazuela]

Okay now I think I can see what KaVir is asking, thanks to Threshold (who also didn't quite grasp the point but explained the "non-grasping" better than KaVir did).

To me, it is the same as if someone asked me how I would translate Russian to English. I'm not interested in doing it, but IF I was - I would suggest they find someone who knows Russian and English.

It -can- be done. But, I don't know Russian, so I have no idea how I'd go about translating one alphabet into a completely different alphabet. I don't have enough data to start with.

With that cloud thing, I don't understand it. I can't read it, I lack the data. That's why I gave the example I gave. To suggest that *IF* that example explained what the cloud pattern meant, THEN that was how I'd turn it into text. And IF that was what it meant, then turning it into text isn't difficult at all.

Obviously, that isn't what the cloud pattern meant. I have no idea what the cloud pattern means. And as Threshold says, I don't have enough interest in learning precisely what it means to translate it to text. Just like I'm not interested enough in Russian to translate it to English. I just use the clunky standby Babbelfish for that, or I'll ask a Russian who knows English to do it for me.