Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Path: news.duke.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cyclone0.chicago.il.ameritech.net!uunet!chi.uu.net!arb.uu.net!nyc.uu.net!world!buzzard
From: buzzard@world.std.com (Sean T Barrett)
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Styles of Asking NPC About Objects
Message-ID: <G766op.6un@world.std.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 20:38:48 GMT
References: <3a61f829.19371784@newsserver.epix.net>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Lines: 81
Xref: news.duke.edu rec.arts.int-fiction:82175

Eric Mayer <emayer00@epix.net> wrote:
>1. The simplest would seem to be that you ask the NPC about an object
>and the NPC knows one thing about the object and keeps telling you the
>same thing no matter how many times you ask.

I'd be cautious about drawing a story/puzzle-game dichotomy
when answering this question, but it does seem a bit natural:
if the NPC responses are needed to advance (the game or the
plot or whatever), then making it apparent that you've gotten
all the information is very important; if the NPC response is
just supplying information or atmosphere that isn't needed to
advance, things are more flexible.

>Also, I suppose such one fact NPCs might seem a little shallow, or is
>this an acceptible convention?

Characters that are only willing to tell you one fact about an
object don't need to seem shallow; they simply think that's the
only thing worth discussing about the object. They may seem
artificially repetitive if they say the same exact words to
reveal the one fact; this can either be accepted as a convention,
or you can write the character to say the same thing different
ways if you want them to sound more alive and less like
console RPG signposts; for example, I wrote this to demonstrate
my "serial printing" modification for Inform:

  >ASK Q ABOUT WATCH
  Q says, "That 'watch' is an exquisitely compact timed explosive,
  007. Turn the minute hand to the number of seconds you want, the
  hour hand to the number of minutes, shake it, push the alarm
  button, and it's activated. Push the button twice rapidly to
  deactivate it. Once it's activated, changing the time won't affect
  the actual delay before it goes off."

  >ASK Q ABOUT WATCH
  Q says, "Do pay attention, 007. The minute hand is seconds, the
  hour hand is minutes; shake the watch and push the button to arm
  it; push the button twice to disarm it."

  >ASK Q ABOUT WATCH
  Q explains again how the watch is a timed explosive, that minutes
  and hours on the watch represent seconds and minutes until it goes
  off, that shaking it and pushing the button activates it, and that
  pushing the button twice in a row deactivates it.

  >ASK Q ABOUT WATCH
  An exasperated Q explains yet again how the watch is a timed
  explosive, that minutes and hours on the watch represent seconds and
  minutes until it goes off, that shaking it and pushing the button
  activates it, and that pushing the button twice in a row deactivates it.

  >ASK Q ABOUT WATCH
  ...same thing...

I believe that shifting out of quoted text and into narration makes
the repetition more forgiveable, since one can imagine the character
is actually saying different things; it's the "adventure game narrator"
who's becoming repetitive, but the narrator's always repetitive with
e.g. room descriptions (except in My Angel).

[saying different things on each query]
>This seems more realistic. However, is it usual for players to try
>asking more than once to see if the NPC has more information. I tend
>to but can an author assume this?

Probably not; but then again, perhaps it's possible to train players
in this; for example, the first NPC encountered can say something
on the order of "If you wish to know more, ask again".

>I realize there's endless variations one can work and my feeling is
>that for a puzzle oriented game NPCs with one thing to say are OK
>(because you can always review what they've said to find any clues in
>it) while in a story oriented game, even though you can't review
>what's been said, somewhat more knowledgeable NPCs might be better.

I don't know; I kind of feel like drawing that line is a cop out; to
me, the interesting side of IF is when there's a good story, but it's
significantly interactive; i.e. a story-oriented puzzle game... in
which case what's the compromise?

SeanB
