headers
Robert Brockway | 1 Aug 2006 16:22

Re: blasphemy, vulgarities etc.

On Sat, 29 Jul 2006, Mark Wedel wrote:

> - Using american MPAA rules, game probably shouldn't be any worse than 
> PG-13, so explicit sexual conduct would probably be out (prostitution, 
> etc).

Depends how explicit it gets I think.  A seedy tavern isn't complete 
without a few prostitutes hanging around for atmosphere :)

>  However, probably be best way is if someone finds something offensive, they
> report it and we discuss it to consider if it is appropriate or not.

What about a runtime flag which sets the "rating level" for the server. 
Depending on the level set, this could block access certain maps and even 
automatically set warnings.

So if the rating level was set to "PG13" then any maps with a higher 
rating would be blocked.  If the rating level was set to "R" then all maps 
would be available but a warning would automatically be present in the 
issue (message before login).  Maps would need to contain information on 
their ratings level of course.

Cheers,

Rob

--

-- 
Robert Brockway B.Sc.        Phone:          +1-905-821-2327
Senior Technical Consultant  Urgent Support: +1-416-669-3073
OpenTrend Solutions Ltd      Email:          support@...
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Wim Villerius | 1 Aug 2006 17:06
Picon

Re: blasphemy, vulgarities etc.

On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 10:22 -0400, Robert Brockway wrote:
<snip>
> What about a runtime flag which sets the "rating level" for the server. 
> Depending on the level set, this could block access certain maps and even 
> automatically set warnings.
> 
> So if the rating level was set to "PG13" then any maps with a higher 
> rating would be blocked.  If the rating level was set to "R" then all maps 
> would be available but a warning would automatically be present in the 
> issue (message before login).  Maps would need to contain information on 
> their ratings level of course.

As long as there is no request for maps rated other than (at most) PG13,
I think this is not worth the efford. And I doubt this demand will ever
arise (unless CF becomes much more graphical)

My main concern was however the language use of NPC's. I don't remember
which NPC's this concerns, but some use expressions that are forbidden
on Metalforge.

Another issue is the naming of certain maps monsters. I guess angels -
and especially arch angels - might upset some people, not to mention the
appearance of 'holy ghosts' in Valriel's church.

Also fighting devils or demons could be too much for some, especially
when it comes to Demon Lords ;-)

And the entry to '/euthville/devil.church1' - a building filled with
devils - is for some reason not manifest to me called 'jesus weeping'
(see as well the name of /eutville/devil.church3). Does this game bring
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Yann CHachkoff | 1 Aug 2006 19:05
Picon

Re: blasphemy, vulgarities etc.

> As long as there is no request for maps rated other than (at most) PG13,
> I think this is not worth the efford. And I doubt this demand will ever
> arise (unless CF becomes much more graphical)
>
I agree with this - and given the tone Crossfire has kept until now, I
doubt the problem is worth a code patch now.

> My main concern was however the language use of NPC's. I don't remember
> which NPC's this concerns, but some use expressions that are forbidden
> on Metalforge.
>
I disagree. If the NPC represents somebody that uses rude language, so be
it. As long as the usage doesn't become excessive, I see no reason to
change that *if that fits the character depicted*. I'd easily understand
that an "upset" NPC or a gruesome pirate to use rude words; OTOH, for most
NPCs, that would be inappropriate.

> Another issue is the naming of certain maps monsters. I guess angels -
> and especially arch angels - might upset some people, not to mention the
> appearance of 'holy ghosts' in Valriel's church.
>
Huh, what ? I strongly disagree with this. Angels are a concept found in
just about all mythologies (including the judeo-christian one); they are
present in the "collective cultural background" of many players. Why the
heck representing angels should ever be a concern ? Who exactly would be
offended, outside of a couple of fundamentalists ?

Let's make my point clear on this: just because some symbols are used in
real-world mythos and religions doesn't mean it is forbidden or offending
to use them in another context. Religions depicted in Crossfire are
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Mark Wedel | 2 Aug 2006 05:47
Favicon

Re: blasphemy, vulgarities etc.

Yann CHachkoff wrote:
>> My main concern was however the language use of NPC's. I don't remember
>> which NPC's this concerns, but some use expressions that are forbidden
>> on Metalforge.
>>
> I disagree. If the NPC represents somebody that uses rude language, so be
> it. As long as the usage doesn't become excessive, I see no reason to
> change that *if that fits the character depicted*. I'd easily understand
> that an "upset" NPC or a gruesome pirate to use rude words; OTOH, for most
> NPCs, that would be inappropriate.

  I think it depends specifically on the words in use.  For many people/parents, 
certain words are off limits, and at some level, it isn't as much about the context.

  So having an NPC say 'you stupid bastard' would probably be fine.  Or we could 
even go the 'don't use swear words, but use symbols instead', so it could be 
'you !%$ bastard!'.  The context is there to know what the NPC thinks of you and 
that it is rude language, but doesn't use actual swear words.

  Some of this I'm sure comes back from metalforge, and maybe others, prohibit 
use of swear words in chatting and the like, so having NPC use these same 
prohibited words is a bit odd.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Wim Villerius | 2 Aug 2006 08:47
Picon

Re: blasphemy, vulgarities etc.

On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 19:05 +0200, Yann CHachkoff wrote:

> > My main concern was however the language use of NPC's. I don't remember
> > which NPC's this concerns, but some use expressions that are forbidden
> > on Metalforge.
> >
> I disagree. If the NPC represents somebody that uses rude language, so be
> it. As long as the usage doesn't become excessive, I see no reason to
> change that *if that fits the character depicted*. I'd easily understand
> that an "upset" NPC or a gruesome pirate to use rude words; OTOH, for most
> NPCs, that would be inappropriate.
As Mark already wrote, it's about consistency. Why prohibit players the
use of certain words if NPC's can use it?

> > Another issue is the naming of certain maps monsters. I guess angels -
> > and especially arch angels - might upset some people, not to mention the
> > appearance of 'holy ghosts' in Valriel's church.
> >
> Huh, what ? I strongly disagree with this. Angels are a concept found in
> just about all mythologies (including the judeo-christian one); they are
> present in the "collective cultural background" of many players. Why the
> heck representing angels should ever be a concern ? Who exactly would be
> offended, outside of a couple of fundamentalists ?
What exactly do you disagree with? Disagreeing that someone might
possibly be upset by the use of angels (and holy ghosts)? It's the only
thing I said, without suggesting that they should be removed. 

> Let's make my point clear on this: just because some symbols are used in
> real-world mythos and religions doesn't mean it is forbidden or offending
> to use them in another context. Religions depicted in Crossfire are
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Nicolas Weeger (Laposte | 2 Aug 2006 10:43
Favicon

Re: Quest management system proposal

Hello.

I'm resurrecting that topic :)
(long mail warning)

After much thinking, I've changed my mind. IMO a quest management system could 
very well be written in Python, with a few improvements to the plugin system.

What I'd add:

First, extend the NPC dialog system.
To enable more interesting dialogs, add some "parameters" after the  <at> match 
line, to build a graph-like system.
Two things:
*  <at> name <name> which would give the step's name "activated" when player says 
the matching
*  <at> follow <name> which would be the required step to actually have a match

<name> would be any arbitrary name, with an optional * in front.
No star => step is NPC specific, and thus step info is stored in NPC's 
inventory
Star => step is player specific, and thus stored in player's inventory

Let's illustrate that:

--------------------------------
Random NPC:

 <at> match hello|Hello
 <at> name h
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 13 comments |
headers
Yann CHachkoff | 2 Aug 2006 14:05
Picon

Re: blasphemy, vulgarities etc.

> As Mark already wrote, it's about consistency. Why prohibit players the
> use of certain words if NPC's can use it?
>
I'd like to point out that prohibiting the use of some words by players is
a decision made by the administrator of each server, not a general rule.
Although I definitely don't think that rude language used without any
reason in the NPC dialogs are a bad thing, I'm not opposed to that when it
is really in-sync with the character depicted.

> What exactly do you disagree with? Disagreeing that someone might
> possibly be upset by the use of angels (and holy ghosts)? It's the only
> thing I said, without suggesting that they should be removed.
>
I disagree that this should even be an issue to consider, at least for
something as basical as names like "angels", "demons" and such.

> And that's exactly why there is no single reason to these symbols and
> names, for there is no relationship with real-world religions ;-)
>
Of course there is - angels and demons do not only belong to religions,
but also to a cultural background of supranatural creatures, like djinns,
ghosts, dragons and faeries. Their concept existed long before the
religions using them nowadays appeared. Crossfire - and just about every
other fictional fantasy universe invented - uses various symbols well
known by most humans because of the inconscious association behind them.
Say "angel", and most people will immediately think "winged people, holy
messenger, defender of the good"; say "dragon", and they'll say "huge
intelligent reptile with powerful magical abilities". There is nothing
religious in that - those symbols all exist outside a single religious
context and are part of our very own civilization background.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Mark Wedel | 4 Aug 2006 08:48
Favicon

Re: Quest management system proposal

Nicolas Weeger (Laposte) wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> I'm resurrecting that topic :)
> (long mail warning)
> 
> After much thinking, I've changed my mind. IMO a quest management system could 
> very well be written in Python, with a few improvements to the plugin system.
> 
> What I'd add:
> 
> First, extend the NPC dialog system.
> To enable more interesting dialogs, add some "parameters" after the  <at> match 
> line, to build a graph-like system.
> Two things:
> *  <at> name <name> which would give the step's name "activated" when player says 
> the matching
> *  <at> follow <name> which would be the required step to actually have a match
> 
> <name> would be any arbitrary name, with an optional * in front.
> No star => step is NPC specific, and thus step info is stored in NPC's 
> inventory
> Star => step is player specific, and thus stored in player's inventory

  Looking at that, and looking at your example, it seems hardly really clear to 
follow.

  It also seems like under such a system, it could be difficult for 
conversations/quests to skip steps.  I'm not sure of where that would be used, 
but perhaps cases where the quest is looking for prerequsites (must have some
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 12 comments |
headers
Nicolas Weeger (Laposte | 4 Aug 2006 09:55
Favicon

Re: Quest management system proposal

I won't reply (yet) too all your points, just one :)

>   OTOH, you don't want a case where player is about to complete quest and
> get reward, and then have everyone join them to get that bonus exp (one
> question if the reward is exp, does it get divided by number of people in
> party?  Does each player just get full reward?).  I'd almost say quests
> can't be shared across parties.

Quests should be shared across parties. It would encourage collaborative play, 
also enable to do fun/creative things.
I for one will either work on a quest system enabling players to share quests, 
or won't work on it at all :)

Nicolas
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Alex Schultz | 4 Aug 2006 17:16

Re: Quest management system proposal

Nicolas Weeger (Laposte) wrote:
>> OTOH, you don't want a case where player is about to complete quest and
>> get reward, and then have everyone join them to get that bonus exp (one
>> question if the reward is exp, does it get divided by number of people in
>> party?  Does each player just get full reward?).  I'd almost say quests
>> can't be shared across parties.
>>     
>
> Quests should be shared across parties. It would encourage collaborative play, 
> also enable to do fun/creative things.
> I for one will either work on a quest system enabling players to share quests, 
> or won't work on it at all :)
>
> Nicolas

I would think a good way to prevent cases of the issues Mark says, would
be making it so only players who were in the party at the start of the
quest, and are still in the party when the quest finished, and are on
one of the maps for the quest when it finishes, should get the reward.

Alex Schultz
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |

Gmane