Look Echo for Hemote 2016

[LauraMars]

Regarding a 'study' command - Main descriptions are one of the best ways a player has to creatively establish their character's appearance. I'd never want to force people into experiencing an irritating delay in order to read someone else's description.  If you want to stare at someone in a way that you think would be noticeable, you are perfectly free to emote doing so.  But just looking at people isn't noticeable, and it's never been realistic that everyone notices you doing it, and I have to assume that is why this change was made.

[valeria]

I'm almost never looking at people to check out their gear. An echoing study command would defeat the point for me and bring back much of the spam. (Also I really don't have to stare at people irl to pick out main facial features, body size and shape, big tattoos, and must other things in an mdesc).

UNLESS there was a disguise command and it would give you a chanceto look through the disguise but I already posted that idea somewhere else so I won't reiterate here.

[CodeMaster]

I don't mind the "visible" look either, so a flag might help for people who don't want their look to be hidden: look -v man

[Asmoth]

This was to cut down on spam and to make the game more realistic. If I go into the local shithole bar where fifty people are, the real life Gaj, and I sit in the corner and look at you, you won't be able to tell unless you get very lucky or are watching me.

Plus as said above, the vast majority wanted this change, let's not muddy it up mlby taking the change that people wanted and making it a choice.  No we don't need a toggle, no you shouldn't be able to turn it on so your sneaky character has a visual cue he sucks at sneaking.

Just adapt and play guy.  I don't think I've seen a single change to the game in the past year where people aren't like, This is awesome, but let's make it a choice...

Just be happy you're not getting spammed by looks constantly like you should and let's move on.

[Kankfly]

This is what I mean by it is only a halfway solution.

Sure, Asmoth, I can suck it up and play the game and still enjoy myself. You will notice that I hardly post on the gdb, and I have always adjusted my playstyle with the new changes, and enjoy myself. The reason why I am posting in this thread is because I feel there can be improvements to the code that can make both the naysayers and the ones for the code happy.

I get your reasons for changing 'look' into hemote. You don't want to be look-spammed. You don't think you should notice that 50 individual PCs in one room are all looking at you. So let's break this down:

1. You don't want to get look spammed.

Some people treat the look command as OOC, some people don't (like me). For me, when a PC looks at me. They are looking at me. they are looking at my hair, if I have booger on my face, if I put on my socks wrong, or if my skirt is tucked up in my underwear because I was in a hurry to get out of the toilet (that can happen you know!). If there are 50 people looking at me when I wander into a room, I will know there is a big frigging crowd of people looking at me. Because... well, they're looking. Since I will be spammed by look echos, I won't go through all 50 sdescs to remember how each person that looks at me look like, except the sdescs that are familiar to me (just like real life!), or someone who has a funny sdesc (just like real life again!).

Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but it feels to me like we should make 'get all bag' and 'put all bag' into hemotes, because we don't want to be spammed.

2. You don't think you should notice every single PCs in a room looking at you.

This is a valid point. This nevered bothered me as a player because I don't always react to people looking at me, unless I'm bored, or if I'm curious, or if I am in need of interaction (OOC things). I have met some players that play their PCs as not noticing my glance (when I emoted it with the look command). Just personally thinking, this should be up to player responsibility to play to the realism of the environment rather than something we should change the code to. You can argue that a majority of players don't care about that, but then I think it's up to us who do care about it to lead by example.

BUT! I'm not here to say this is a really bad idea and we should just revert it back altogether. Like I said, this is only a halfway solution.

My proposed solution was to do a new command. The 'study' idea is a good one. If you don't like splitting it all into two commands, how about tweaking the 'look' command?

>look PC

Without emote, this turns into a hemote.

>look PC (with an emote)

With an emote, this turns into a non-hemote.

I've never coded, so I'm not sure if it's difficult to do or not. Someone with more experience can chime in on this. This is just me brainstorming.

PS. Holy crap, that's a long post. Also, it's late for me. I try to make sense as much as possible when I'm tired but uh.. no promises. >>

[fourTwenty]

What the hell kind of sneaky player are you guys playing with such an abysmal watch skill anyway? Ever since the change went in I'm still noticing looks out the yin-yang and my PC's watch isn't even good.

[Asmoth]

if there is a way to fix it that doesn't make me notice every look and glance, then cool.  But I don't think they need to recode this for that reason.  This is a HUGE win for the look command, it's not a bad thing at all.

[Lizzie]

See post below - didn't hit the quote button like I should've.

[Lizzie]

These seem like edge cases that the player should be RPing via emotes regardless. But... fine, what would you suggest that can be easily implemented without sacrificing look hemote?

The third suggestion I have is to revert look back to an echo but have a "brief look" command that turns them into hemotes.

or maybe it should just be >brief party

Wherein eat, taste, drink, sip, and look all turn into hemotes. Haw.


Honestly, the best case scenario is likely the introduction of the study command alongside mdesc-hiding gear, but people seem really opposed to that for some reason.

Personally I like the suggestion and think it solves everything neatly (and leaves "mdesc" in normal looks for the Lizzies who just HAVE to know if you have a wart on your nose).

Keep in mind that unless the person is smart enough to change out their gear, a mask - mdesc hiding or not - isn't going to save them from suspicion.

I have no suggestion, because I like the change as is. If they had asked me before they implemented it, "Hey Lizzie, we'll do whatever you want - what do you want?" I'd say "ditch the echo for the look command, period. Don't replace it with anything. Just make "look" a completely totally officially OOC command, and if people want someone to know they're looking at them, they can append it with emotes and it'll show up in the game.

[Inks]

Look is not an OOC thing. That is ridiculous.

[Kankfly]

I don't know how to respond because all I'm getting is, 'Look hemote is implented, get over it'.

If you think look is an OOC thing, would you care to elaborate? For someone who has always taken 'looks at you' as an IC thing, this doesn't make sense to me.

[Lizzie]

Look is not an OOC thing. That is ridiculous.

It depends on its use. Just like - if you have set an ldesc, and want to turn it off, you type STAND. Even if you're already standing. That command - STAND - is not IC, when you are using it that way. It is strictly an ooc tool to change a string back to its default.

LOOK - when used to tell the -player- the data they need to determine whether or not their character needs to react to something - is strictly an ooc use of the command. That's actually the #1 use I have for it, personally. I rarely use look as an IC device, it's almost always to inform me, the player, of what my character is being presented with so I can roleplay accordingly.

[BadSkeelz]

Look is IC. I don't know how you can argue otherwise. It's like saying ">close pack isn't an IC thing."

[Kankfly]

When you're standing, you're standing. It's not a pure IC thing or a pure OOC thing. It's a mixture of both.

The OOC part is: You need to get your character standing in order to leave the room.

The IC part is: Your character stands up, because he or she is about to leave the room.

The same goes for the look command.

OOC: You look at a PC to see how he or she looks like and what he or she is wearing.

IC: You are looking at the PC.

By seperating it into pure OOC or pure IC is ridiculous. Because while Arm is a RPI, it is one based on code. In order to achieve something IC, you need to do it codedly (aka stand/sit/look/etc).

[Lizzie]

Look is IC. I don't know how you can argue otherwise. It's like saying ">close pack isn't an IC thing."

I'm not arguing otherwise. I'm _telling_ you flat out. I don't consider it strictly IC, and I don't use it strictly ICly. I use it either ICly or OOCly depending on why I'm using it each time. You don't have to like the fact that I consider it that way, but it's a fact. I do it that way. If you're not able to do it that way, that's okay, I don't mind at all. Just accept that when I type "look badskeelz" I'm not going to type "look badskeelz (but isn't really looking, she just wants to know if you have a humpback so she can roleplay her character making a disgusted expression about it)" I'm going to type just "look badskeelz" and when I see that humpback I will then emote gets a disgusted look on her face.

[Lizzie]

When you're standing, you're standing. It's not a pure IC thing or a pure OOC thing. It's a mixture of both.

The OOC part is: You need to get your character standing in order to leave the room.

The IC part is: Your character stands up, because he or she is about to leave the room.

The same goes for the look command.

OOC: You look at a PC to see how he or she looks like and what he or she is wearing.

IC: You are looking at the PC.

By seperating it into pure OOC or pure IC is ridiculous. Because while Arm is a RPI, it is one based on code. In order to achieve something IC, you need to do it codedly (aka stand/sit/look/etc).

You completely and totally missed what I wrote.

I was talking about using the command STAND in order to revert an ldesc to default. Not to stand up. If you're already standing and you have set your ldesc to "is doing exercises in the yard here"...

and the sergeant walks in and you want to NOT have that ldesc anymore..
you type STAND.
And it will take that ldesc off of you.

You're not roleplaying that you're standing, because you were already standing.

In this case, STAND is strictly an ooc device to change an ldesc to a default.

Look - can be used for a strictly ooc purpose AND it can be used ICly. It isn't exclusively one or the other. And there's no fault to anyone who chooses to use it frequently to remind them of what their VBFF's shoulders look like or what color eyes their 2-year-anniversary mate has, or whether or not they have that famous humpback, so that the player can have their character respond accordingly.

I can say it a few more dozen times, but the answer will remain the same: look has OOC functionality, and until the staff says it's not allowed, I'll continue using it that way. Sorry that it bothers you. Pretty sure that's one of the reasons they changed it so that you no longer have to see the spam.

[nauta]

I'm kind of with Lizzie on this, but I can see it both ways.

I've come to treat look (without command emotes) as a minimal IC thing (almost an OOC thing) to be ignored basically by other characters, and I actually dislike it when people respond to my looks (without command emotes) as if they were IC things like ogles or whatever -- Hey, whatchew looking at?. 

Why?  I don't think sdescs give me a clear enough picture of the people I potentially could interact with for me to understand what's going on in order to RP appropriately.  So I do a look.  At everyone.  In the bar.  Even my friends.  Especially raiders.  Even the NPCs.  Sometimes, I even do it with vNPCs:

Code Select Expand


em looks down at the purple-eyed blue-haired child.


(I'm joking on the last one.)

[Kankfly]

Well, you misunderstand me too.

I am not here to whine. I am here to brainstorm a better option rather than just 'hemote look', which is why I put up proposed solutions. I've bolded 'halfway solution', because it is, and I am certain that there is a viable reason why staff has chosen to implement this change to the game.

This is a discussion board, where players are allowed to speak their thoughts about things, to be convinced that 'oh I haven't thought about that, now that you put it that way it's a good idea' and go along with it, or to come up with a good solution to further improve the game. As you can tell, I am not convinced, which is why instead of 'sucking it up and continue to enjoy the game', I am posting here.

Like I said in my previous posts, I am not telling everyone that we should revert back to regular look. I am merely brainstorming ideas to help refine the solution. You want to keep hemote look, I didn't say we should take it away. All I'm suggesting is tweaking the code.

My proposed solution was to do a new command. The 'study' idea is a good one. If you don't like splitting it all into two commands, how about tweaking the 'look' command?

>look PC

Without emote, this turns into a hemote.

>look PC (with an emote)

With an emote, this turns into a non-hemote.

I've never coded, so I'm not sure if it's difficult to do or not. Someone with more experience can chime in on this. This is just me brainstorming.

[Asmoth]

If you view a command, that's designed to provide you with IC knowledge (Look Command), as an OOC construct at all, you're not using it right.

We aren't talking about Score, or Stat, which is something that others can't see about you.  We are literally talking about someone shifting their eyeballs towards you.

If there is one command that is UNDENIABLY IC, it's the look command.  There is no OOC way to say, "Well when my character looked at him."

You guys are twisting the point of view to try and somehow bend logic into an illogical construct because you don't agree with the way look works.

[BadSkeelz]

Look is IC. I don't know how you can argue otherwise. It's like saying ">close pack isn't an IC thing."

I'm not arguing otherwise. I'm _telling_ you flat out. I don't consider it strictly IC, and I don't use it strictly ICly. I use it either ICly or OOCly depending on why I'm using it each time. You don't have to like the fact that I consider it that way, but it's a fact. I do it that way. If you're not able to do it that way, that's okay, I don't mind at all. Just accept that when I type "look badskeelz" I'm not going to type "look badskeelz (but isn't really looking, she just wants to know if you have a humpback so she can roleplay her character making a disgusted expression about it)" I'm going to type just "look badskeelz" and when I see that humpback I will then emote gets a disgusted look on her face.

You can't look to see if someone has a hunchback without your character actually looking at them. Unless you have a spec-apped "sixth sense for physical deformities" and you can smell cripples or something.

[Vwest]

I've come to treat look (without command emotes) as a minimal IC thing (almost an OOC thing) to be ignored basically by other characters, and I actually dislike it when people respond to my looks (without command emotes) as if they were IC things like ogles or whatever -- Hey, whatchew looking at?. 

Pretty much this.

I like the new look because I can now look around at everyone without it being this:

Aide arrives from the north.

Aide looks at X.

Aide looks at V.

Aide looks at Z.

Aide looks at Y.

Aide walks north.

I want to look at your PC and I want to read your description, even if it will never have relevance to my PC. I used to avoid it because of how some people responded (YOU PEEPIN' FO' SOMETHING FOOL?!  <- an actual thing, thanks 'rinth), or not wanting to spam up a screen with scroll that adds nothing to the flow of things. Now, I can, without it being an issue.

If the look has flavor texted, I treat it as IC.

If it's a straight look, I usually ignore it as players doing some recon'.

Seems like a happy medium and it works for me.

[nauta]

I guess my view is ...

just as look (without a command echo) on objects (like bags, bars, tables, hidden bits in a room, rooms)

so too look (without a command echo) on PCs and NPCs;

but the former doesn't echo anything; therefore the latter too.

[Inks]

I still voted for hemote despite my complaints. I would quite like if look with an emote attached was visible though, much like talk. Treating look as OOC is bad form though, IMO. If you look, your PC is looking at that person/thing.

[Asmoth]

Yep, you can't tell the Raider who says, "Look at me and die!  Give me all your clothes!"

After looking at them.

OOC WAIT, that look was an OOC look...

Let's not be ridiculous here.

[Chettaman]

I'm not going to... well, I am. But I don't mean to... but I guess I do.

I've noticed people on the GDB getting upset OOCly about things that happen ICly.
or... more like, people are getting upset over things that their characters may not be okay with? - but they address the issues here.

I felt like I may have been crazy and just reading something into what wasn't there or whatever, but I thought I should bring it up. This is one of those issues, I can't think of the others off of the top of my head.

Well, no. I guess it makes sense to be upset about people ''spam'' looking. but while I have yet to do it, I like the idea of people being able to ''look dood'' without drawing attention to themselves. I like the idea that people can ''choose'' what catches their direct attention. I mean... it's not like people were complaining when I actually /was/ spam looking at a mural on the wall while I was talking to someone. Or spam looking at the bar. Or spam looking at the tables. Or spam looking at myself - which I do a lot.
Or spam looking at people's items because it's never echoed. Or spam looking at a direction (which I stopped doing as soon as I learned watch was a thing).

no, to tell the truth I can see the ... ooc in all of those things, but I promise I used that evil for good.