Questions and Concerns

[Googi]

Originally Posted by konidias

npc kings sux0rs! I want my friend to be a king so that we can have absolute power over noobs. why are npc kings better?!

Oh yeah, I completely forgot about how you were going to ruin RPing for us.

[konidias]

How am I going to ruin RPing exactly?

[Questa]

I don't know if this has been addressed, but what about Events? I was really really fond of Survivor back in the day and I consider it to be one of the highlights of Graal2001. Will that make a comeback?

[Googi]

Originally Posted by konidias

How am I going to ruin RPing exactly?

I'm not going to answer to an NPC. What the heck is that?

[Mykel]

Originally Posted by Googi

I'm not going to answer to an NPC. What the heck is that?

I find it funny how you can find it acceptable to make an entire fantasy story about a character in a game that is run by NPCs, but the fact that you would have to accept an NPC as a king just seems ridiculous.

[konidias]

Originally Posted by Questa

I don't know if this has been addressed, but what about Events? I was really really fond of Survivor back in the day and I consider it to be one of the highlights of Graal2001. Will that make a comeback?

Yep. Pretty much all of the old events should make a comeback... Excluding a few that I think were just generally not fit for 2k1... Like the laser arena for example...

Originally Posted by Googi

I'm not going to answer to an NPC. What the heck is that?

You've never enjoyed playing a single player RPG before? I find that hard to believe. Just because the king positions were once filled by human players, doesn't mean that npc kings would be worse or any less fun. If the kings would have been npcs from the start, you would probably be arguing that they shouldn't be made into player kings.

You're simply arguing about change. The change could be for the better but you're not taking that into consideration simply because it's not what you know. It's not as though people can't fall in love with made up characters... There's no difference between liking an npc king and following orders from him, than following a storyline in a singleplayer RPG, or liking characters in a singleplayer RPG story because you find them interesting or something.

[Googi]

Originally Posted by Mykel

I find it funny how you can find it acceptable to make an entire fantasy story about a character in a game that is run by NPCs, but the fact that you would have to accept an NPC as a king just seems ridiculous.

My comment was an exaggeration, but the point is that there's no sense of respect. Having an NPC king is the same as having someone you don't respect as king. If I get an order from an NPC it's like getting an order from Moon Goddess. I'm probably going to flout the order and just do whatever I want. Maybe I'd get around to doing it if I was bored enough.

Sure, you can enforce orders with punishment or by offering economic rewards, but having to do that just proves that you can't make RPing fun enough in and of itself and have to force/bribe players into doing it.

Originally Posted by konidias

You've never enjoyed playing a single player RPG before? I find that hard to believe.

That's completely different. I don't play a linear console RPG and expect a sense of community.

Originally Posted by konidias

Just because the king positions were once filled by human players, doesn't mean that npc kings would be worse or any less fun. If the kings would have been npcs from the start, you would probably be arguing that they shouldn't be made into player kings.

I admit that it might be hypothetically possible to create NPC kings that are superior to player kings. I don't, however, believe that you, any member of your development team, or any Graalian past or present has the scripting ability to actually accomplish this.

Originally Posted by konidias

You're simply arguing about change. The change could be for the better but you're not taking that into consideration simply because it's not what you know. It's not as though people can't fall in love with made up characters... There's no difference between liking an npc king and following orders from him, than following a storyline in a singleplayer RPG, or liking characters in a singleplayer RPG story because you find them interesting or something.

I highly doubt your NPC Kings are going to have fully-functioning AI capable of political strategy. I suspect that they will be highly staff-controlled. I find it interesting that you're willing to outsource kingdom leadership to NPCs but you opposed outsourcing simple police tasks to them (in the form of rock owner tags).

[konidias]

There are too many reasons why an NPC king is the better choice. If you need me to explain them, I will. But I'd rather not have to. The meat of it is... human kings are far more disorganized and susceptible to corruption.

[ViCtOrEhEhEh]

Originally Posted by konidias

There are too many reasons why an NPC king is the better choice. If you need me to explain them, I will. But I'd rather not have to. The meat of it is... human kings are far more disorganized and susceptible to corruption.

But Graal AI doesnt know ****.

[Googi]

Originally Posted by konidias

There are too many reasons why an NPC king is the better choice. If you need me to explain them, I will.

Obviously there's no reason to believe you unless you explain them.

Originally Posted by konidias

The meat of it is... human kings are far more disorganized and susceptible to corruption.

Kingdom corruption has never been as big a problem as staff corruption. My suspicion is that you view player kings as a threat to your absolute power and therefore want to have NPC kings that act as your puppets (which is, in reality, just another form of having a human king).

[haunter]

Originally Posted by ViCtOrEhEhEh

But Graal AI doesnt know ****.

Puppets don't count as 'AI'.

[konidias]

Originally Posted by Googi

Obviously there's no reason to believe you unless you explain them.



Kingdom corruption has never been as big a problem as staff corruption. My suspicion is that you view player kings as a threat to your absolute power and therefore want to have NPC kings that act as your puppets (which is, in reality, just another form of having a human king).

I'll ignore your complete lack of respect for me and your opinions that I am in this for power, and explain why npc kings are better for everyone.

1. npc kings don't have mood swings and family issues and personal dilemmas which cause them to be corrupt or completely absent from the game.

2. npc kings do not show favoritism

3. npc kings are always online. if you live in a different timezone than a player king, you'll probably rarely see them online at the same time you are.

4. other important roles are played by npcs. from shopkeepers to quest npcs... you have no problem following their rules. why should an npc king be different?

5. npc kings do not have to discuss going to war with other kings or rp admins or staff. they can instantly start a war, host an event, ally with another kingdom, etc, etc, etc.

6. through the use of a large database of phrases, plots, moods, events, etc... kings can appear more realistic and less robotic.

I have no idea why people are saying a semi-realistic npc can't be created on Graal. All you'd need to do are factor in several variables for a personality. Here's a rundown of what that would look like:

- First the king is given some static personality traits. like maybe they are lighthearted, maybe they are evil, maybe they are noble, who knows.

- next you give them a mood variable. they could be happy/sad/angry/tired/sick/energetic whatever at any given time

- then give them large databases of phrases to use for these moods

- then give them a large database of mini-events to go through... such as maybe they are going to rest, eat, check on the castle, do something else... etc this is where you can even include "go to war with some other kingdom". it would just be a very slim chance of it happening compared to "take an afternoon nap".

- then of course, connect them to other databases such as the players private roleplaying "scores", a database of the history of events that have already taken place, etc

- give the king reactions to in-game events such as if you try to hit the king or grab him or smile at him or whatever

This is just scratching the surface, but I think you can see if you piece all of that together, you'd have a pretty realistic NPC. Of course, things such as having a conversation with the king would be limited to multiple choice answer type responses. But it would still allow you to choose an answer and have him react to it.

[Googi]

Originally Posted by konidias

I'll ignore your complete lack of respect for me and your opinions that I am in this for power, and explain why npc kings are better for everyone.

I didn't say that you were in it for power. I said that you're reluctant to divest your power to others.

Anyways, the rest of your post suggests you're actually going to try and create an AI NPC King, which I already acknowledged can be better than a player king. It's just that I don't think there's anyone on Graal capable of actually making a good one. If you think it's something easy to do, then try having a conversation with an AIM Bot.

[Crono]

You've never enjoyed playing a single player RPG before?

Graal isn't a single player RPG now is it?

[GryffonDurime]

I'll just say this:

Just as NPC kings can not be corrupt or arrogant, they also can not be creative, flexible, or understanding. To try and reduce RPing, which is at it's most simple level interaction between people, to a catagorical system is not only of great dificulty, it's also more than a little insulting. That NPC may not be able to favor one person over another and that NPC may not have a life that gets in its way, but it also can't adjust for unforseeable circumstances or tell someone deserving of promotion and what little simulated power will be given from someone who isn't.

By your system, Etien could theoretically become a high ranking noble or general of a kingdom. He did roleplay. Numerical systems would be forced to recognize that. But did he roleplay well? Did he follow Graal's canon? Did he deserve ANY prestigue or power?