Look Echo for Hemote 2016

[dravage]

Hey I just met you
And this is crazy
But here's my sdesc
So Way me maybe
It's hard to look right at you baby
But here's my sdesc
So Way me maybe

[Kojul]

Hey I just met you
And this is crazy
But here's my sdesc
So Way me maybe
It's hard to look right at you baby
But here's my sdesc
So Way me maybe

Thanks for some wakeup lols dravage.

[hyzhenhok]

Seems like an unnecessary distinction to make.

Of course you have to look at someone to see if there's something you need to react to. Your character can't react unless you look at them. This doesn't make looking an OOC act. It's like saying opening your pack, getting your coins out, putting them back in and closing your pack are all just an OOC necessity when your character wants to buy something. The process is important, not just the end result.

I don't understand why you would need to say "oh, there's nothing there for my character to react to. therefore I didn't actually look at them." You are constantly looking at people all the time without reacting to them. When you turn and look around the room you're in, you just spammed 40 look commands at the various objects there, and it happened completely ICly. The whole point of changing look to be a hemote is that looking should be a ubiquitous, unintrusive thing that people do to one another. The whole point is that there isn't a lot of IC commitment there--you can brush it off as saying you were just looking around the room, only glanced at them or saw them out of the corner of your eye. It's all kosher. And it's all completely IC.

There's no reason to open the door to possible nastiness where you have information you're trying to pretend your character doesn't have, or where you're trying to pretend your character didn't look at someone when other people saw you do it and are roleplaying accordingly.

[Chettaman]

Ya know, Hyzhen. You're right, man.
All the stuff I posted on this look hemote thing... dumb.
There really is no reason to get upset that someone looked at you without you knowing.
Though, I would still encourage people to emote actually looking in directions and at other stuff when appropriate.

[Lizzie]

Seems like an unnecessary distinction to make.

Of course you have to look at someone to see if there's something you need to react to. Your character can't react unless you look at them. This doesn't make looking an OOC act. It's like saying opening your pack, getting your coins out, putting them back in and closing your pack are all just an OOC necessity when your character wants to buy something. The process is important, not just the end result.

I don't understand why you would need to say "oh, there's nothing there for my character to react to. therefore I didn't actually look at them." You are constantly looking at people all the time without reacting to them. When you turn and look around the room you're in, you just spammed 40 look commands at the various objects there, and it happened completely ICly. The whole point of changing look to be a hemote is that looking should be a ubiquitous, unintrusive thing that people do to one another. The whole point is that there isn't a lot of IC commitment there--you can brush it off as saying you were just looking around the room, only glanced at them or saw them out of the corner of your eye. It's all kosher. And it's all completely IC.

There's no reason to open the door to possible nastiness where you have information you're trying to pretend your character doesn't have, or where you're trying to pretend your character didn't look at someone when other people saw you do it and are roleplaying accordingly.

Hey I'm fine with that. But apparently a few people here are adamantly against the idea that using "look" doesn't have to "mean" anything. They insist that when my character looks at them, it's significant and if I roleplay that my character didn't see anything worth reacting to, I'm doing something wrong and twinky, and that using the look command requires a response/reaction, always.

As I've said countless times in the past: sometimes a look is just a look, means absolutely nothing, and there's nothing to respond/react to at all. If look (without appended emotes) had no echo whatsoever, I'd be very happy. Look, all by itself, should have no echo. The only time it should echo is if you attach/append it with emotes, because then you are doing it intentionally as part of the roleplay and not merely for player data-collecting purposes.

[Kankfly]

But that was what I was suggesting

Making 'look <target>' a hemote, and 'look <target> (emote)' not a hemote.

But... like... instead of saying whether this is a good idea or not, all I got was 'it's done, get over it.'

[evilcabbage]

But that was what I was suggesting

Making 'look <target>' a hemote, and 'look <target> (emote)' not a hemote.

But... like... instead of saying whether this is a good idea or not, all I got was 'it's done, get over it.'

o kankfly...

[Kankfly]

o kankfly...

With just these two words, I'm going to assume you think I'm making a deal out of nothing and I should drop it and move on.

In that case, please read my previous posts properly. The point of me posting here isn't to whine against the change, I'm suggesting a code tweak, one which Lizzie seems to agree on, which means we just spent two pages of this thread debating about different views on the change. Rather unnecessary might I add. If you feel this is blown out of proportion or if there is something you don't agree on, please feel free to explain to me, because while I'd love to try a psionist IG, it doesn't mean I am one RL.

[Me]

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.

Once upon a time a long time ago, two PCs from a certain area came to pay my PC from a certain clan a visit and negotiate and "learn". The two clans had strained relationship, so the meeting was tense. My PC had the upper hand due to certain IC reasons and one of the terms & conditions of the visit, is that the two PC are to talk to me while staring down at the ground the entire time without looking up at me or anyone that would be in my company. They complied, they emoted looking down at the sands while speaking to my PC who was very extremely well shrouded.

So! If let's say a similar scene occurs with the hemote look happening, how would these PCs react? Would they still look and role play as them not knowing how my PC would look because it is as Lizzie says "sometimes IC or OOC depending on why I'm using it"? Then how would anyone monitor it? Do I have to watch the two PCs at the same time? (Codedly not possible to do so)

OORRR do I have to just entirely put my complete 100% trust in the other players that they would do the "right thing"?

Because I can envision a few things happening:

1, Player can hemote look then ignore PC A with a massive hump on his/her back (as an example) on an IC basis because this is a purely OOC thing. But in that case, why even look in the first place? To satisfy OOC curiosity?

2, Player can hemote look at PC A with a massive hump on his/her back and then report it to whomever else that the person they were meeting had distinct feature A, B and C. But in THAT case, when someone is actually looking at you....wouldn't you notice they're looking at you and your massive hump on your back?

3, Player can hemote look at PC A with a massive hump on his/her back disguising as an "OOC thing" but then react one way or the other in an IC manner. But then in THAT case...well that's just super twinky isn't it?

So basically...I just need to trust the entire Arm playerbase not to do any of the 3 points above. Am I right?

My Two Cents

Just like subdue which you can toggle on and off. Perhaps players themselves have the choice of toggling on and off whether they would notice people look at them or not? So for distrustful bitches like me, maybe I can have an option of actually KNOWING if someone is looking at me (no matter whether it be OOC or IC), and for others who are sick of the annoying spammage they could switch it off?

Juuuust throwing an idea out there.

[Delirium]

I think in the above case, your PC was not able to keep an eye on both of them at once and one of them snuck a look at you.

That sounds like an IC problem, not an OOC one.

[Me]

I think in the above case, your PC was not able to keep an eye on both of them at once and one of them snuck a look at you.

That sounds like an IC problem, not an OOC one.

I'm using that as an example. Obviously it happened a long long time ago, and it didn't happen. But let's pretend there's you're one on one with another PC and something similar happens?

[Delirium]

In that case all you have to do is >watch that PC. The code handles if you notice that they snuck a look or not.

Not trying to be difficult, just saying - this is actually pretty well handled by the current implementation of the code.

[valeria]

Also with the chance that you'll catch the look emote, they would be taking a calculated risk to try to sneak a peek. I'm also I'm the "the code now handles that very well, roll with it IC" camp.

[BadSkeelz]

I think in the above case, your PC was not able to keep an eye on both of them at once and one of them snuck a look at you.

That sounds like an IC problem, not an OOC one.

I'm using that as an example. Obviously it happened a long long time ago, and it didn't happen. But let's pretend there's you're one on one with another PC and something similar happens?

Use watch or scan to pick up on the echoes. I've personally not found it that difficult to see them, even without active watching or scanning.

And when someone looks at you after being ordered not to, kill them

[Lizzie]

But that was what I was suggesting

Making 'look <target>' a hemote, and 'look <target> (emote)' not a hemote.

But... like... instead of saying whether this is a good idea or not, all I got was 'it's done, get over it.'

an hemote is an echo. I'm saying look, without (emote) should not have any echo at all, not to anyone.

[Delirium]

I strongly disagree for many reasons which have already been stated. Fortunately, I don't see that ever happening.

[Majikal]

look for hemote 2016!

Return the look echo 2017!

Nerf paper plz, rock's fine!

WTF DO YOU PEOPLE WANT!@#!@ 

[Vwest]

To have new and exciting things to be holier-than-thou about, it looks like.

[BadSkeelz]

Who's getting holier-and-thou, now?

Put "emote" back in "Look (With command emotes)" 2Q2016.

[Kankfly]

To have new and exciting things to be holier-than-thou about, it looks like.

Okay. I don't see where my posts are 'holier than thou'. But alright.

In my 'holier than thou' attitude, I propose look WITH emote to be not hemote. Holier-than-thouly.

Those of you who didn't read my posts properly, the above is basically the summery of what I proposed. In a holier than thou tone of text-voice.

[evilcabbage]

o kankfly...

With just these two words, I'm going to assume you think I'm making a deal out of nothing and I should drop it and move on.

In that case, please read my previous posts properly. The point of me posting here isn't to whine against the change, I'm suggesting a code tweak, one which Lizzie seems to agree on, which means we just spent two pages of this thread debating about different views on the change. Rather unnecessary might I add. If you feel this is blown out of proportion or if there is something you don't agree on, please feel free to explain to me, because while I'd love to try a psionist IG, it doesn't mean I am one RL.

i was making a joke about a kankfly that was in the gaj one day, that said "o kankfly".

in front of people.

i apologize for not being clear.

[Majikal]

I'd definitely like the idea kankfly suggested of

l dude (squinting)

to not be a hemote, while look without an emote be hemotey as hell.

It's so hard breaking the habit of putting actions in my looks.

[nauta]

o kankfly...

[...]

i was making a joke about a kankfly that was in the gaj one day, that said "o kankfly".

in front of people.

i apologize for not being clear.

Dude.  The 'o kankfly' thing was my story, and it happened in the Salarrgossy..

http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,31486.msg892026.html#msg892026

Unless it happened twice.

Also, I'm +1 on kankfly's suggestion: old habits have me shoving loads of expressive material into the look command.  (My secret personal preference, which is minority-o-rama is to have look PC work just like look room or bag, viz., without a command emote, no echo; with a command emote, echo.  But I'm down with having hemote instead of no echo.)

[evilcabbage]

i thought i saw it happen in the gaj.

[CodeMaster]

Just takes some getting used to, I think we'll all come around to the change given another week or so of use.

I'll add that if look (frowning) man got the visible emote back, it would be cool if watch (frowning) man got a visible emote too.