Villages need to be populated with "decoration" NPCs

[Amadee 1,543]

Nothing wrong with eye candy as long as it doesn't hurt anyone, and anyone not wanting to use it isn't required to for any game advantage.  

 

Nothing wrong with providing choices in a game to appeal to a variety of people, rather than one type.  

 

Thing is, time has shown ever since the earliest days of UO back in the 90s, lots of people like to decorate.  Some people don't see, and will never see, any attraction for it and want other things from the games they play. That's fine, different strokes and all that, and nothing wrong with it.

 

I really like this idea. I'm one of those types that like decorating over & above a lot of other activities and don't need for something to have a function to want it on my deed.  I think if they tied it in with the deed/animal ratio, that should prevent it impacting the server animal cap. It would then just be up to the deed owner. And 5 horses & 5 npcs would have the same impact on passers-by as 10 horses.

 

If it wouldn't hurt anyone, and no one would be forced to use it if they're not into that kinda thing, why would people not want others to have it? 

[Marshlander 188]

Over the course of the thread I've changed my mind a little bit: purely decorative NPCs could be useful to depict the purpose of an area. I'm still not convinced that adding them would enliven the game! And I think they should have no purpose in-game other than decoration (especially not local spam, we have that already, thank you!).

 

Imagine this:

You can name a house "Wayfarer's Tavern", put up a sign outside and some chairs and barrels inside, and people will probably recognize the designer's idea. Now what if a drunk NPC was sitting slumped in a chair somewhere, a mug fallen from his hands?

 

Or:

• a child playing with wooden dolls on the ground?
  
• a sick or injured person lying in a bed?
  
• a prisoner, sitting shackled on the floor?
  
• a monk sitting cross-legged in quiet meditation or prayer?
  

 

I would NOT want NPCs that pretend they are blacksmiths, carpenters, diggers, cooks, etc fulfilling all the activities that a player would. These NPCs would serve to add flavour to an area and indicate it's intended use, and not just be a social prosthetic / placeholder for lack of players.

Edited March 18, 2014 by Marshlander

[Druidnature 1,118]

Over the course of the thread I've changed my mind a little bit: purely decorative NPCs could be useful to depict the purpose of an area. I'm still not convinced that adding them would enliven the game! And I think they should have no purpose in-game other than decoration (especially not local spam, we have that already, thank you!).

Imagine this:

You can name a house "Wayfarer's Tavern", put up a sign outside and some chairs and barrels inside, and people will probably recognize the designer's idea. Now what if a drunk NPC was sitting slumped in a chair somewhere, a mug fallen from his hands?

Or:

• a child playing with wooden dolls on the ground?
• a sick or injured person lying in a bed?
• a prisoner, sitting shackled on the floor?
• a monk sitting cross-legged in quiet meditation or prayer?

I would NOT want NPCs that pretend they are blacksmiths, carpenters, diggers, cooks, etc fulfilling all the activities that a player would. These NPCs would serve to add flavour to an area and indicate it's intended use, and not just be a social prosthetic / placeholder for lack of players.

Would be nice if the players could also get some of the animations along with them. (IE the drinking while sitting in a chair)

[Iulianx 90]

PvP, here, you have a reason now.

 

 

PvP fails to attract enough people, trough I agree, I am starting to see wurm freedom as Farmville 3. Decorate your cute little villages hoard some cows and horses, feed them farm and build a few structures with absolutley no purpose other than to be creative.

 

That's why I will never play on a freedom server but PvP is still sub-par to most games and so people that might be interested are quickly funneled away to freedom.

[Aeris 3,752]

I can currently not use the unstable client like I use to because from what I can tell the sign near my house contains too many errors that it apparently fills up the reserved memory for textures - and I have a good computer. I have no reason to believe that the fps issues where animations are involved are going to be solved anytime soon and while a significant number of people would find it fun to decorate with statues like the ones suggested I still say that now is not the time. I personally see no value in decorations like the ones suggested but even if I had I would have to be realistic and think of the game's current limitations and problem areas and like stated I foresee a lot of problems with this. It might look pretty, but you'd crash every 5 seconds if you don't have a super computer and people would hesitate to visit your deeds.

And Slickshot - I don't care about whatever petty insult you were going to reply with so don't bother trying.

[Elen 1,013]

[10:38:42] You examine the deed owner next door.  She seems attractive and fertile

[10:38:43] You begin flirting.

[10:38:44] Deed owner fears commitment and shy's away.

[10:38:46] You begin pouring drinks.

[10:38:50] Deed owner to the south is pregnant.  She should deliver a Town Crier in about 6.

 

Good to have a chuckle this early in the morning.

[Malena 2,854]

[10:38:42] You examine the deed owner next door.  She seems attractive and fertile

[10:38:43] You begin flirting.

[10:38:44] Deed owner fears commitment and shy's away.

[10:38:46] You begin pouring drinks.

[10:38:50] Deed owner to the south is pregnant.  She should deliver a Town Crier in about 6.

 

Hey what's all this then? We ladies ain't cattle! *grumble grumble*

 

Here's one for us:

 

[16:23:55] You examine the deed owner next door.  He appears scruffy and unkept.

[16:23:56] You begin to back away.

[16:23:57] Deed owner lumbers after you and you notice the putrid stench of old sweat and alchohol.

[16:24:58] You nervously scan the area for a quick exit.

[16:24:58] Deed owner passes out.  You search his body for any valuables.

[Druidnature 1,118]

Hey what's all this then? We ladies ain't cattle! *grumble grumble*

Here's one for us:

[16:23:55] You examine the deed owner next door. He appears scruffy and unkept.

[16:23:56] You begin to back away.

[16:23:57] Deed owner lumbers after you and you notice the putrid stench of old sweat and alchohol.

[16:24:58] You nervously scan the area for a quick exit.

[16:24:58] Deed owner passes out. You search his body for any valuables.

Hahaha! Oh god, someone needs to make a thread in wood scraps just for these ones.

[Becket 843]

Aeris why don't you go give that sign one of your manly hugs and get rid of it.

[Aeris 3,752]

Aeris why don't you go give that sign one of your manly hugs and get rid of it.

I'm waiting for it to be fixed, I'm optimistic like that.

[Druidnature 1,118]

I'm waiting for it to be fixed, I'm optimistic like that.

Hah...haha....hahahaha.

Floorboards, enough said. >_<

[Hussars 511]

I can currently not use the unstable client like I use to because from what I can tell the sign near my house contains too many errors that it apparently fills up the reserved memory for textures - and I have a good computer. I have no reason to believe that the fps issues where animations are involved are going to be solved anytime soon and while a significant number of people would find it fun to decorate with statues like the ones suggested I still say that now is not the time. I personally see no value in decorations like the ones suggested but even if I had I would have to be realistic and think of the game's current limitations and problem areas and like stated I foresee a lot of problems with this. It might look pretty, but you'd crash every 5 seconds if you don't have a super computer and people would hesitate to visit your deeds.

And Slickshot - I don't care about whatever petty insult you were going to reply with so don't bother trying.

 

From the Client Bugs forum..

Try increasing maximum texture size (normal) to 1024

 

I had the same crashing issue with the Unstable client, tried Manny's suggestion and it corrected the problem for me (and a few others in that thread).

[Aeris 3,752]

From the Client Bugs forum..

 

I had the same crashing issue with the Unstable client, tried Manny's suggestion and it corrected the problem for me (and a few others in that thread).

Yeah it's a temporary slapdash fix which I don't want to use since I'm keeping the memory usage on secondary clients as low as possible for the sake of the CPU.

Thank you though.

[Tryfaen 709]

I like to populate my villages with players

[Slickshot 1,195]

I can currently not use the unstable client like I use to because from what I can tell the sign near my house contains too many errors that it apparently fills up the reserved memory for textures - and I have a good computer. I have no reason to believe that the fps issues where animations are involved are going to be solved anytime soon and while a significant number of people would find it fun to decorate with statues like the ones suggested I still say that now is not the time. I personally see no value in decorations like the ones suggested but even if I had I would have to be realistic and think of the game's current limitations and problem areas and like stated I foresee a lot of problems with this. It might look pretty, but you'd crash every 5 seconds if you don't have a super computer and people would hesitate to visit your deeds.

And Slickshot - I don't care about whatever petty insult you were going to reply with so don't bother trying.

You wound me.

 

I like to populate my villages with players

Others do not; to each their own.

[KanePT 699]

You wound me.

 

Others do not; to each their own.

If they don't want to populate their villages with players in a MMO game, then maybe this isn't the correct game for them. Wurm's #1 premiss is that its all player made. Even guards, merchants, traders and the such are a bit intrusive, but they all serve important tasks (except bartenders, for something most players will only use oncer or twice, its kind of a waste of space, could be changed with a "lunchbox" or something added as a starter tool.

Otherwise, if you want to play solo on a MMOgame, then well, sorry, but the same way i won't be stopping you from enjoying the game alone, i don't think its fair that because of a few players that prefer to play hermit otaku my enjoyment of the game should suffer because their preferences are adding extra load to the servers.

[Druidnature 1,118]

If they don't want to populate their villages with players in a MMO game, then maybe this isn't the correct game for them. Wurm's #1 premiss is that its all player made. Even guards, merchants, traders and the such are a bit intrusive, but they all serve important tasks (except bartenders, for something most players will only use oncer or twice, its kind of a waste of space, could be changed with a "lunchbox" or something added as a starter tool.

Otherwise, if you want to play solo on a MMOgame, then well, sorry, but the same way i won't be stopping you from enjoying the game alone, i don't think its fair that because of a few players that prefer to play hermit otaku my enjoyment of the game should suffer because their preferences are adding extra load to the servers.

Got to say here, wurm isn't a MMO really.

Yes, it can be if you put yourself in that area, or you could go for weeks without seeing anyone. I see more people living alone, then with a lot of players.

Of course this is only my opinion and not everyone will agree here, but wurm currently is a lot more fun by yourself or with only a friend or two, instead of 50+ people.

To say no because it's a MMO is very flawed, considering the game itself, if anything, encourages a player to play with only a few people. (Excluding pvp servers, where the more the merrier) because of how land claiming and everything works.

[Slickshot 1,195]

Got to say here, wurm isn't a MMO really.

Yes, it can be if you put yourself in that area, or you could go for weeks without seeing anyone. I see more people living alone, then with a lot of players.

Of course this is only my opinion and not everyone will agree here, but wurm currently is a lot more fun by yourself or with only a friend or two, instead of 50+ people.

To say no because it's a MMO is very flawed, considering the game itself, if anything, encourages a player to play with only a few people. (Excluding pvp servers, where the more the merrier) because of how land claiming and everything works.

This.

 

This is the reason why decoration npcs would be nice to have, if you so choose to have them.  It keeps the small close-circle of neighbors and friends, which encourages others to set forth and make their own destiny, all while sprucing up a village with life.

[Amadee 1,543]

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, i don't think its fair that because of a few players that prefer to play hermit otaku my enjoyment of the game should suffer because their preferences are adding extra load to the servers.

 

I think this, which others have also argued, is the only consideration I could take seriously as a possible negative.  I am always firmly against anything that will negatively affect others.

 

The big question is would it truly negatively affect others.  I think that's the main argument here. Most (not all) of the people arguing against it are concerned with that rather than just their opinion of how others should play the game or denying others what they don't care to use themselves.

 

My own opinion is that it could be done without negatively affecting others and I would really love to see it in game.  

 

If on the other hand, (big IF imo) it would, in fact, negatively affect others then I would of course agree it's not something we'd need to have.

[Iulianx 90]

I think you should be able to have NPCs in your village depending on the number of premium members you have for example.

[KanePT 699]

Got to say here, wurm isn't a MMO really.

Yes, it can be if you put yourself in that area, or you could go for weeks without seeing anyone. I see more people living alone, then with a lot of players.

Of course this is only my opinion and not everyone will agree here, but wurm currently is a lot more fun by yourself or with only a friend or two, instead of 50+ people.

To say no because it's a MMO is very flawed, considering the game itself, if anything, encourages a player to play with only a few people. (Excluding pvp servers, where the more the merrier) because of how land claiming and everything works.

Wurm isn't a MMO? Really? Just because it has a crappy playerbase (number-wise) doesn't make it less of a MMO. It has a persistent world, on persistent servers, can only be played online, everyone plays in the same world. I mean as far as its server structure goes its the most MMO game ever, since most of its servers are linked, doesn't happen in many other MMOs.

 

 

I think this, which others have also argued, is the only consideration I could take seriously as a possible negative.  I am always firmly against anything that will negatively affect others.

 

The big question is would it truly negatively affect others.  I think that's the main argument here. Most (not all) of the people arguing against it are concerned with that rather than just their opinion of how others should play the game or denying others what they don't care to use themselves.

 

My own opinion is that it could be done without negatively affecting others and I would really love to see it in game.  

 

If on the other hand, (big IF imo) it would, in fact, negatively affect others then I would of course agree it's not something we'd need to have.

For it to be done without affecting others the NPCs would have to be static, pretty much the same as merchants and traders. Which as far as decorative and populating a town goes, is pretty lame. So yeah if you want to make this a suggestion for more skins for merchants, so people can decorate their towns in-game. Seing as Merchants are already a item shop only item. I'm guessing it wouldn't be too bad. Just as long as Merchants are still only counted as static items in the databases.

As for fully animated, AI-based NPCs, we can tell that those WOULD impact the servers, otherwise the game wouldn't need all those very unpopular measures to nerf and restrict animal breeding.

 

I think you should be able to have NPCs in your village depending on the number of premium members you have for example.

If you have lots of players you wouldn't need NPCs to populate it. Although some years ago there was a suggestion for a "bot-mode" for players, like if you log out your character would stay online, but controlled by an AI, would be mostly for defensive purposes, but i guess could be used for this. Although again, this would probably tax the servers too much.

[Malena 2,854]

If they don't want to populate their villages with players in a MMO game, then maybe this isn't the correct game for them. Wurm's #1 premiss is that its all player made. Even guards, merchants, traders and the such are a bit intrusive, but they all serve important tasks (except bartenders, for something most players will only use oncer or twice, its kind of a waste of space, could be changed with a "lunchbox" or something added as a starter tool.

Otherwise, if you want to play solo on a MMOgame, then well, sorry, but the same way i won't be stopping you from enjoying the game alone, i don't think its fair that because of a few players that prefer to play hermit otaku my enjoyment of the game should suffer because their preferences are adding extra load to the servers.

 

Like Amadee, I also wonder in which way this would ruin the enjoyment of the game for you KanePT, and others singing in the same choir. Some here have been worried about lag - however this has been countered by the fact that an NPC could replace another critter in the quota. Others have been concerned about NPCs ruining the spirit of the game. But the game already has NPCs! And really, just how often do people venture out and visit other deeds anyhow, aren't most of focused on our own projects? And if you know of a deed that has "those dreaded NPCs", absolutely no-one is forcing you to visit or even look that way. It's sort of like someone in my neighborhood likes to place plastic flamingos and elves on his lawn. Do I like looking at them? Hell no, but nothing is forcing me to look either. He likes them though, so he should have the right to decorate with them if he so wishes. It takes nothing away from me and it's really none of my business what he does with his plot of land anyhow. Just as it's none of his business if I decorate my yard with rose bushes.

 

Could someone offer a concrete and sensible reason why this would impact others in a negative way?

[Slickshot 1,195]

Could someone offer a concrete and sensible reason why this would impact others in a negative way?

Calling you out KanePT.  Please do give us a sensible reason that isn't opinion based. I'd like to see that from you if you can manage it.

[Kagrenac 812]

Could someone offer a concrete and sensible reason why this would impact others in a negative way?

Npcs replacing mobs is already a negative effect, and they would still hurt performance, even if they did replace them.

 

The npcs that exist all serve essential purposes.

 

Being able to decorate how you like in real life is not the same as asking for a feature to be coded into a game. Feel free to use merchants to decorate your village, but remember that the reason merchants exist is to make trade feasible, not to be pretend people. (Or make some alts, dress them up and stand them around you deed)

[thenewcndo 528]

You put a lot of thought into this and that is to be commended, however I am not convinced and to be honest I will never be.

Good post though.

-1 From me.