Top Mud Sites Forum Return to TopMudSites.com
Go Back   Top Mud Sites Forum > Mud Development and Administration > MUD Builders and Areas
Click here to Register

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-04-2003, 07:20 PM   #21
KaVir
Legend
 
KaVir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Name: Richard
Home MUD: God Wars II
Posts: 2,052
KaVir will become famous soon enoughKaVir will become famous soon enough
That's all very nice Orion, but it still doesn't prove your "I am the world" line of reasoning; My mud doesn't support feature X, therefore anything which requires feature X is a "bad thing"?

As I've said already, the problem is not with using "you", or with telling people how they feel - the problem is with sending potentially inaccurate information. Obviously the more limited your mud, the more limited the information you'll be able to send - but the fact that mud X doesn't implement hunger doesn't mean that sending "you are hungry" messages to the players is always a "bad thing". And the same applies to any other form of feedback.

No, it shouldn't, because the player isn't the person standing in the room - the character is. The player perceives the world through the senses of their character. If the character is blind, the player should not be able to see. If the character is short, they should find themselves looking up at taller people. If the character is cowardly, they should find themselves feeling afraid.
KaVir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2003, 08:17 PM   #22
Orion Elder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 346
Orion Elder is on a distinguished road
Do you intentionally not read what I've stated, or do you have some interest in trying to make me look bad? I will requote what I stated before, which this "bad thing" quote is coming from:

Under normal circumstances. Meaning without the use of such a system as dynamic room descriptions. Under those circumstances use of the word 'you' is, in my opinion, a bad thing. I never said dynamic room descriptions are a bad thing. I said use of 'you' is a bad thing, EXCEPT (possibly) in the case of something like dynamic room descriptions. Which, based on the information provided, I think it is safe to say this person does not have those. I also stated it was my opinion. You trying to reapply what I said to something else does not change what I said, or the meaning of what I said.

Hunger is based on factual information.

Yes, and the player controls the character and interprets what the character feels. If you want to create an AI system, boot the player altogether and let the world run by itself. If I want to play a role I want to be in control of that role. I don't need a computer to tell me how I should react. That is MY choice to make.

EXACTLY! The PLAYER perceives. The character observes. That's the key point. The above is factual information. If a character is blind they can't see thus the character observes no visual information for the player to perceive and, in turn, interpret. The character is short, they character looks up at other characters who are taller. The character observes, the player perceives and interprets.

Here, I disagree. Fear is an emotion, and emotional reactions are up to the player to determine the reaction. However, we're rather off-topic now (we're now discussing player versus character reactions, as opposed to building ... and while the two are SOMEWHAT related they're not in the context of this post). If you'd like to continue discussing reactions of players versus characters, I would suggest starting a new thread.

In any case, I've given my opinion (which was the point of this thread), so unless something else catches my eye I think I'm done. G'day.
Orion Elder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2003, 08:45 PM   #23
kaylus1
 
Posts: n/a
Cool

I will have to halfway agree with this. Yes, if the person is blind they should not be able to see. In the end though the room is a description of the surroundings and should be left up to the player to decide how their character reacts to it's environment.. within reason.

If a PC is blind then by all means, drop a -- You cannot see. -- message upon them, but -- again all this is personal opinion -- it should be left up to the player to decide if their character trembles in fear from not being able to see. Likewise, I think the player should decide if something in their they see fills their character with lust, sadness, madness, rage unless it is a certainty (as in dynamic descriptions that check).

On the room descriptions, as I said it's all personal opinion. I prefer not having 'you' in my descriptions because it tends to relax my descriptions and I tend to make more mistakes with it then without it. I have seen beautiful descriptions with the word 'you' in them as well.

No not everything that is not supported by code is a bad thing, but everything that I don't like is, on my mud, a bad thing and I reserve that right =) Muahaha. I think Kavir is basically right in his main point that it is not the 'you' but the incorrect information. Although disallowing it to keep a better room description standard is a good thing in my book, as is disallowing it to keep users from writing stupid player descriptions (which for the most part will be static unless you have a dynamic player-desc system with tokens for replacing emotions in other characters, but I have YET to see that... hmmmmmm).
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2003, 06:11 AM   #24
KaVir
Legend
 
KaVir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Name: Richard
Home MUD: God Wars II
Posts: 2,052
KaVir will become famous soon enoughKaVir will become famous soon enough
I'm wondering the same thing myself.  For the third time, the problem is not with using "you", or with telling people how they feel - the problem is with sending potentially inaccurate information.

As you yourself have said in your most recent post, you think it's okay to use "you" if you have dynamic descriptions.  The point that I have to keep reiterating is that it's not a matter of dynamic or static descriptions - it's a matter of information accuracy.  If your mud cannot provide an accurate statement about something, then it shouldn't.

Now you're generaling the other way.  Not all muds have hunger implemented - therefore within such muds a "you are hungry" message would not be based on factual information, and should therefore not be used.  Once again, it's not a matter of "you", or telling people information about themselves - it's a matter of how accurate that information is.

So in a pen&paper roleplaying game, you think something like this would be perfectly reasonable?

GM: Suddenly a huge green dragon the size of a house sweeps down from the sky and lands before you.  You're paralysed with fear!

Player: No I'm not!  I don't need you to tell me how I should react. That is MY choice to make.

GM: But your character has a courage rating of 1% and a phobia of dragons - you even called him Conan the Cowardly!

Player: Yeah, but I don't want to be afraid this time, and this is MY character to control in any way I see fit.  So I'll give the dragon the finger, and then go down the tavern for an ale.


In the above example, the GM knows the character would be afraid.  In some muds, the same assumption can be made.  It all depends on what information you have available - if you know the character would be afraid, then I see no problem with telling them that.  If you know the character would be hungry, then I see no problem with telling them that.  If you know the character is craving alcohol, then I see no problem with telling them that.

But the point I'm making is not about dynamic descriptions, or about the use of emotions - the point is concerning the use of "you", and the fact that there is nothing wrong with it.  The only problem is sending inaccurate information to the player, and that's something which you cannot generalise about, because many muds know different quantities of detail about the characters.
KaVir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2003, 06:40 AM   #25
Orion Elder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 346
Orion Elder is on a distinguished road
Is it about informational accuracy? Yes. But, as I pointed out, the MUD will NEVER know how I would REACT only what I'd observe. As I already stated... if you want an AI system boot the player altogether. So, emotions can be GUESSED at, but it is STILL a guess. Unless you put your poor players through one #### of a long creation process. You want to argue informational accuracy, fine. My character may have 99% courage... but get this, he's afraid of spiders. As he walks through an old, musty area a spider lands on his shoulder. The builder, working on the basis that anyone with 75% courage couldn't fear spiders, has my character, with a hearty laugh, swat it from his shoulder. STUPID PLAYER! GO ALONG WITH MY ALL-KNOWING VISION OF HOW YOU SHOULD REACT! *mutters*

As for your GM conversation... would it be reasonable? Yes. Would it happen? No. I'd have decked the Gamemaster for being a dweeb and telling me how I should react. My character may fear everything EXCEPT for lizards (and in turn dragons), something they'd not know without allowing me to react for myself. The GM doesn't know how my character would react to that nor would a MUD. Unless you have one #### of a long character creation process (and I really doubt you DO collect all this information) you should not make assumptions.

And don't kid yourself, that's exactly what you're trying to perpetuate with this. Sending factual statements (in the situation of dynamic room descriptions) such as "The dwarf is taller than you" or something similar is fine. Telling them they fear something is not. But, that is simply my opinion. Just as you have YOUR opinion.

Furthermore, I said hunger is a factual state. I didn't say everyone supported it. Whether a MUD supports hunger or not, hunger is still a factual state (though maybe not to the mechanics of that particular MUD). If they don't support hunger, why would they be telling people they're hungry, though? That makes no sense. Just as trying to force an emotion on a player simply because, based on the best information you have, you THINK they would feel that emotion makes no sense.

Also, chances are, in a MUD that tells people they're hungry (via some automated process, I assume) when they don't even support hunger at all, they would not really care about the 'you in room descriptions' topic anyway.

But, you talk about providing accurate information... you can't provide accurate emotional information to someone without being that person. You can give it that college try, but you're not always going to be right. My character has 10% courage... he encounters a dragon... get this, he's not afraid of dragons. But, the builder figures everyone with 10% or lower courage fears dragons! STUPID PLAYER! Getting in the way again.

Factual information can be verified. For example a person's height. Thus telling them they would look up at something can be verified. Telling them they would fear something couldn't, without either asking the player and getting a response or asking them how they would react to every POSSIBLE situation. Now, as I've asked before I'll ask again... before this topic is deviated even further from the topic at hand, if you want to continue, please start another thread for it.
Orion Elder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2003, 07:32 AM   #26
KaVir
Legend
 
KaVir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Name: Richard
Home MUD: God Wars II
Posts: 2,052
KaVir will become famous soon enoughKaVir will become famous soon enough
Then I suggest you never play Vampire the Masquerade.

The same logic can be applied to any form of information, but you have to draw the line somewhere - muds are not full simulations of real life.

Thus you can assume people don't have their eyes closed when they type "look", and that they don't have their fingers stuck in their eyes when a sound occurs nearby.  You can assume that if they're hungry, the smell of food will appeal to them - there's no need to define every single food type that they like, or take into account any recent activities which may have put them off eating certain food.  Nor is there any need to make each character specify their exact muscle distribution - you can assume that everyone is fairly balanced.  Equally, if you wish to have something like fear or courage, there is no need to implement every possible phobia.

As long as the information is accurate within the rules of the simulation, you can do a pretty reasonable job.

And finally, stop telling me to start a new thread, because (1) this is still related to the original post, (2) it's completely on-topic, and (3) you're not a moderator on this forum.

The original poster claimed that "you" wasn't the cause of bad descriptions, to which you and several others disagreed.  I agree with the original poster, and I'm explaining why.
KaVir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2003, 12:37 PM   #27
Iluvatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mississippi USA
Posts: 142
Iluvatar is on a distinguished road
I am thoroughly enjoying this somewhat ‘heated’ debate and actually laughed a few times. I don’t feel the conversation has gone off track at all and I believe even beneficial to quite a few.

Oh well, I guess I was wrong and the use of “you” is still a controversy to many. I think I’ll reiterate and simplify my point though for your consideration since those of us who object to its use rarely seem to have a valid answer to “why” according to KaVir. Don’t get me wrong, I totally respect KaVir, but I think he’s overcomplicated a simple issue in my opinion.

‘You’ is a personal thing; a subjective, forced reaction in response to some verb that has/was attempted to imply or apply to your character. If your character walks into a place that exists, then the implication is things exist there that can be looked at or smelled or felt or otherwise experienced but nothing specifically targeted since all ‘you’ did was walk in. Sure, I realize “you are here now” can be a valid response to the action of walking into a new place and I use such a simplistic term because that’s what a lot of builders actually do. Is it realistic though? Find a safe place in some wooded area, close your eyes and carefully walk ten paces deeper into it (without hitting a tree), then open them. Does some voice say to you “you are here now” or do you experience sights, sounds, smells and textures of things around you all at once on a grand scale? Something grabs your attention and sure, ‘you’ look at it.

As I stated in my original post, “you” has its place in grammar and story telling and is extremely valuable in the mind-numbing worlds of super-PK where if you take the time to read you get dead in a hurry. In worlds that pride themselves on interactive rooms or promote the seemingly rare talent of “knowing how to read,” the ability to avoid its use and make generic rooms is a valuable attribute for any aspiring builder. Those who learn when it’s actually appropriate to use are even more rare and valuable.

An interesting side note… I have received from 5-10 builders’ applications every month for at least the last six years from aspiring writers. They are requested to provide three written rooms as examples of their talent for our consideration to hire. It both totally amazes and saddens me that stock mud type descriptions and DOOM type blood and guts is the general rule and not the exception.
Iluvatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2003, 04:07 PM   #28
Orion Elder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 346
Orion Elder is on a distinguished road
Orion Elder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2003, 05:04 PM   #29
Molly
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Sweden
Home MUD: 4 Dimensions
Posts: 574
Molly will become famous soon enoughMolly will become famous soon enough
I think maybe people should not be so quick to impose the standards of their own mud upon everybody else's. After all, we all are different, we have different tastes and different styles of writing. Our muds are different too, and what's perfectly fine and acceptable in one mud, may be totally out of line in another. And isn't that diversity a wonderful thing?

I totally agree with Illuvatar that the quality of a desc doesn't have much to do with whether it contains the word YOU or not. I also think most of us are able to recognise a good desc when we see it.

Personally I prefer descs that are entertaining, in some way or another. And if that means breaking a few rules on the way - fine by me.

I've seen too many descs that were totally flawless concerning grammar and spelling, but also totally without flavour, imagination, originality and wit. Just boring, boring, BORING.

Accuracy is fine, but if all the descs in a zone tells me nothing more than the basic facts of the room I am in, it very soon gets boring to me.

A mud is a text based medium, so the text should entertain, in some way or other. If a book fails to entertain me, I don't read the book.
Molly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2003, 08:12 AM   #30
KaVir
Legend
 
KaVir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Name: Richard
Home MUD: God Wars II
Posts: 2,052
KaVir will become famous soon enoughKaVir will become famous soon enough
But you're providing information which is accurate within the rules of the mud - and that's the best you can ever do, in any aspect of the game, because it's not possible to create a full simulation of real life.  If you don't do this - if you want to account for every possibility - then your mud won't have any descriptions.  And that means there won't be anything for the players to immerse themselves in - which is the same point Molly so succinctly covered in her post.

On a related note, there's interesting article here, which I pointed out the last time this issue was debated (but I think that was on a different set of forums):
KaVir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2003, 07:29 AM   #31
Kastagaar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 117
Kastagaar is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Yahoo to Kastagaar
Exclamation

One important point in the article that KaVir quoted is that using second person is the proper response to the first person that the player actually uses. One doesn't tend to think "I'll have my avatar Duncan pick up the sword and slay the orc with it"; one thinks "I'll pick up the sword and slay the orc with it".

Kas.
Kastagaar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Style based on a design by Essilor
Copyright Top Mud Sites.com 2022