[MUD-Dev] Usability and interface and who the hell is suppo

[Chris Gray]

[Caliban D:]

:Given a list of 40-some items, the top of the list has scrolled off the
:screen and you can't rely on someone having scrollback; therefore, the user
:can't actually be expected to have the ability to count from the top of the
:list, and is forced to either use scrollback (if he has it, which decreases
:compatibility) or count from the bottom. It's actually a really simple 
:solution to what could be a complex issue, although it certainly could have
:been done better. I was pretty impressed by it when I first came across it.

Hmm. Interesting. It solves one problem, but has the problem of likely
being counter-intuitive to most players. When you've gotten used to it,
it would be just fine, though. I'm trying not to be flip here, but I
think I would just try hard to avoid such situations. Certainly there is
nothing stopping a player buying 100 torches and dropping them all in one
room, but then I count that his problem. I think I'll actually say that
the user ought to have a way of scrolling his history. Since this is
do-able in Amiga shells, Xterms, Windows console windows, etc., this might
even be an acceptable attitude.

:Generally there's either something that fits the description, or you get an
:error. If you get the third sword, but there are only two swords because
:someone picked up the third one, you get an error. If you're getting the
:second sword, but someone already took it, the third sword has now become
:the second sword so you get the wrong sword. *shrug* Can't really be helped
:with numbering; it's hard to tell whether the person is really trying to do
:what he's doing, or has made an error in timing. Lag affects this in an
:unacceptable fashion, IMO.

A lot of this discussion is making me rethink some of the things that I've
done in my scenario (that's good!). I'm tempted to just not try to handle
all possible situations, as long as there is some way out of problem
states. The one big thing that I as a user want from a computer is that
it be mostly predictable (hence a large part of my dislike of Windows!)
I don't think I would like systems that tried to decide for me, what I
wanted to do. A rule I've used for programming language design perhaps
holds here - if its hard to describe, its probably hard to use, so get
rid of it, unless there is some real big benefit.

:Not at all... it's when you start adding things like scanning and parsing
:the rock descriptions to allow 'get the biggest blue rock' that the
:implementation is *starting* to get out of hand, but only just barely. 
:Generally this results in more problems, like for most Americans if there
:are five rocks of different sizes and you want the rock that comes fourth
:in the order from smallest to largest, you can refer to this rock as either
:the 'fourth largest' (the fourth rock counting toward the largest rock) or
:the 'second largest' (not the largest, but the second largest). Most
:British players would probably feel more comfortable with 'next largest',
:which could cause confusion for the NLP module if he has just picked up
:another rock, or even the 'largest rock but one' -- not *actually* the 
:largest, but with only one larger. (I'm not sure this is *common* British
:English, but I've heard it said now and again.) A wiseass might say 'get
:penultimate rock'. ;)

As I said above, I think I would tend to not try to do any of these
things - they offer very little advantage, and can easily leave the
player frustrated. So, I guess I could say that by your definitions, I
don't do NLP.

:I think I've already mentioned my terrible dislike of switching between
:mouse and keyboard. ;)

Me too, but after watching others try to drive the keyboard, I just had
to put something in the client for them. My big problem is that I have
to remember to go and test those things before releases, since they don't
get used during *my* normal testing!

:My understanding of NLP is that NLP comprehends, breaks down, and
:interprets complex and compound sentences according to a series of rules.
:NLP, in my mind, does not mean typing
:
:>go toward the north
:>check the big wooden door for traps
:>open it
:>draw my magic sword
:>wield it
:>enter the treasure room
:>look around
:
:but rather means typing
:
:>go north and check the big wooden door for traps
:>open it, then draw and wield my magic sword
:>walk into the treasure room and look around

Interesting. I can't see a whole lot of difference, other than the use
of compound sentences. I've thought about allowing 'then' to separate
commands as well as the current '.', ';' and '!', but consider it to
be a very minor thing with little benefit. 'and' would be much harder,
since I currently use it to separate noun phrases. I *could* check the
word after the 'and' to see if it is a verb in the grammar, but I would
be concerned about multi-meaning words that are so common in English.

So, now that I've seen what you mean by NLP, I have to agree that it is
not something I'm interested in putting into my system.

[example clipped]

I think allowing this sort of input might be something that an AI student
might have a go at, but I can't imagine it being worthwhile for a game,
considering the developer gets much more benefit from adding interesting
world stuff. Also, as a player who is computer literate, I wouldn't
dream of trying to enter such things - I'd be much too afraid of the
computer doing something I didn't want. As for non-computer-literate
players, well, I don't have much idea as to what they might do. Anyone
out there sat behind a non-computer-literate, but also non-keyboard-phobic
user and seen what it is they try to enter?

:I'm tempted to say that the three swords should have semi-randomised
:descriptions, but I'm hesitant to recommend that because it can create 
:weird descriptions:
:
:(Static portion)
:	You look upon the mighty sword Excalibur, gleaming brightly
:	in its unblemished and razor-keen magical splendor.
:(Random portion, crossreferenced: 'sword')
:	There is a small amount of rust at the base of the blade and
:	the tip appears slightly dull.
:(Unblemished and razor-keen, my butt...)
:
:I don't actually have a perfect solution (or even an acceptable imperfect
:one, IMO). ;)

To carry it even further, make it the several thousand gold coins that
are part of the hoard. I doubt many users would expect the system to be
able to identify each one in any way. At least not without a big
magnifying glass!

--
Chris Gray   cg at ami-cg.GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA