Dialogue

~sciocont wrote:

It's that we won't be able to achieve the depth we need, because people will come up with concepts we can't think of. Therefore, it's best to let people interpret for themselves and communicate in a simple emotional language that overlays a randomly generated background "dialect" of random noises, movements, chromatophore changes, etc.

I don't understand.

The random selections seems a little too Sporeish for my eyes to swallow (err... New Saying?). this should be handled through the Behaviour Tree.., For example on one branch of the Behaviour tree it could go: Take Stance (Agressive2), flash Red Chromataphores on Head and Hiss.

US_of_Alaska wrote:

~sciocont wrote:

It's that we won't be able to achieve the depth we need, because people will come up with concepts we can't think of. Therefore, it's best to let people interpret for themselves and communicate in a simple emotional language that overlays a randomly generated background "dialect" of random noises, movements, chromatophore changes, etc.

I don't understand.

Basically, the player is meant to to understand the emotions and ideas not through text or speech, but through body language, voice inflection, and basic idea bubbles.

Now if we're going to do this, we need to make it look good. Certain things, like the look in a person's eyes, are used to interperate someone's emotions, and on an alien world, you probably won't be able to use the basic human ways of "emotion detectong". To have the AI express themselves, and be understood by the player, we need some way to make the AI act just a little human- but how do we do that without harming the realism too much?

I don't like this idea. Although good in theory, the variety of creatures (especially aquatic ones) would contain features totally non-human and thus unable to understand through our eyes.

And I doubt were gonna have bug moronic grunts when anrgry and retarded laughing fits when happy. Let alone ways of direction. I just think we should leave it as:

"The caption of you faction wants your troops to head west" or something like that.

Not:

*You see a speech bubble of your captain that says "West"*

Plus, there are so many freaking emotions that people would have that is totally undetecable.

Text is the way to go.

There are several concepts of poses that seem to be universal and could be the result of Convergent Evolution on another planet.., for example:

• Taking a pose that suggest quick and easy running start is a sign that they're going to charge at you if you don't get away.
• Yellow and Black are Earth-wide symbols that tend to mean, stay back.

YourBreakfast wrote:

I don't like this idea. Although good in theory, the variety of creatures (especially aquatic ones) would contain features totally non-human and thus unable to understand through our eyes.

And I doubt were gonna have bug moronic grunts when anrgry and retarded laughing fits when happy. Let alone ways of direction. I just think we should leave it as:

"The caption of you faction wants your troops to head west" or something like that.

Not:

*You see a speech bubble of your captain that says "West"*

Plus, there are so many freaking emotions that people would have that is totally undetecable.

Text is the way to go.

I'm on YB's team. I for one have trouble understanding emotions conveyed in REAL LIFE BY HUMANS. Imagine the trouble i'd have trying to decode the body language of a species that looks completely different.

I agree with YB.


Say, you are in the Blue Faction. Blue is at war with Red. You decide to try to stop the war. You click on the leader of your SC/ a person in the military and choose this:

Social > Promote > Faction > Red Faction

Then you get the prompt:


"Corporal *whatever* is offended"

YourBreakfast wrote:

I don't like this idea. Although good in theory, the variety of creatures (especially aquatic ones) would contain features totally non-human and thus unable to understand through our eyes.

And I doubt were gonna have bug moronic grunts when anrgry and retarded laughing fits when happy. Let alone ways of direction. I just think we should leave it as:

"The caption of you faction wants your troops to head west" or something like that.

Not:

*You see a speech bubble of your captain that says "West"*

Plus, there are so many freaking emotions that people would have that is totally undetecable.

Text is the way to go.

You've got a good point.
I'll think more about this.

I too am on YBs side.

Seeing as how we agreed to similer interactions for the players part, I believe that it wouldn't be difficult to use similar actions and string them together to form simple sentances, along with body language.

Yes, click-action is good for casual talk, (ala Sims games), but what about more fast-paced situations? For example, giving out some signal during a war, or if someone you are aqquainted to is being attacked, or if you're being attacked, calling for help? Really, I wouldn't want to shuffle through list after list of actions in a case like that, it'd just ruin the moment. Then how would we handle that? Click-drag chain reaction? Nimble fingers? Hotkeys?

But, as mentioned before it's just right for the everyday circumstance. So I'm going for half-yes and half-no. Or maybe 'other'.. Yes, 'other.

Noitulove wrote:

Yes, click-action is good for casual talk, (ala Sims games), but what about more fast-paced situations? For example, giving out some signal during a war, or if someone you are aqquainted to is being attacked, or if you're being attacked, calling for help? Really, I wouldn't want to shuffle through list after list of actions in a case like that, it'd just ruin the moment. Then how would we handle that? Click-drag chain reaction? Nimble fingers? Hotkeys?

But, as mentioned before it's just right for the everyday circumstance. So I'm going for half-yes and half-no. Or maybe 'other'.. Yes, 'other.

You could use your pause hotkey, then choose the interaction then use the pause hotkey again to resume?

Oooh...
I have to say, that is quite true, and is an easy way of removing that dilemma.
Also, the peromts are a good idea, but where would they be on the screen? I'm just thinking about how cramped the screen i going to be with all the stuff we're adding to this game...
-Waap.

Waap wrote:

Oooh...
I have to say, that is quite true, and is an easy way of removing that dilemma.
Also, the peromts are a good idea, but where would they be on the screen? I'm just thinking about how cramped the screen i going to be with all the stuff we're adding to this game...
-Waap.

I'll work hard to have the GUI as minimal as possible.

This hasn't been brought up yet, so I figured I would.

How would one initiate conversation between two orgs. that are part of a hive-mind species. You wouldn't necessarily have to be standing right next to the AI you are talking with in this situation, so we need a way to specify. I suppose other things may apply to a hive mind as well. You could quickly send you notion of rebellion or unrest throughout the entire population, greatly changing how the idea is spread, in comparison to a proximity based communication. Of course, now the problem arises as to how the game knows if a comm system is hive-mind or not. If there is no way to differentiate, we either need to preclude the possibility of a hive mind arising, or think of a system that would encompass both standard proximity based communication and hive-mind.

hive mindedness reminds me of ender's game... anyways, i think the text thing would still work, because say you click on (example) bee number 2345, and say you hate oranges. you wouldn't actually say it, they just kinda know what you're thinking, and respond like so: "you receive a feeling of disagreement"

the only difference is how the game shows how the feeling is expressed.

toxiciron wrote:

hive mindedness reminds me of ender's game... anyways, i think the text thing would still work, because say you click on (example) bee number 2345, and say you hate oranges. you wouldn't actually say it, they just kinda know what you're thinking, and respond like so: "you receive a feeling of disagreement"

the only difference is how the game shows how the feeling is expressed.

This is true if you are near bee #2345, but what if you want to communicate something to bee #6789 that is on the other side of the continent? This is possible via a list of all members of your species, but who wants to do that?

well, in this case, there wouldn't really be a specific bee you wanted to talk to because you are all thinking the same thing, therefore are all equally minded and all equal relationships, if you catch my drift. almost as if when you say something to one bee, all other bees heard what you said, therefore each communication is like an announcement.

toxiciron wrote:

well, in this case, there wouldn't really be a specific bee you wanted to talk to because you are all thinking the same thing, therefore are all equally minded and all equal relationships, if you catch my drift. almost as if when you say something to one bee, all other bees heard what you said, therefore each communication is like an announcement.

That sounds about right to me.

this gives me an idea... what if there was a halo flood-like creature?

starting out as a simple spore, landing where it has food, growing into an infector, infecting one dude, gathering his intelligence, releasing many more spores, gathering more and more intelligence, creating a gravemind, gathering more intelligence, and then eating the WORLD . that seems a little cheap, though.

toxiciron wrote:

this gives me an idea... what if there was a halo flood-like creature?

starting out as a simple spore, landing where it has food, growing into an infector, infecting one dude, gathering his intelligence, releasing many more spores, gathering more and more intelligence, creating a gravemind, gathering more intelligence, and then eating the WORLD . that seems a little cheap, though.

I don't think the gathering intelligence part is viable, but a large parasite (say one the size of a cat) seems plausible.