Get objects problem

[Lazzah]

OK, first real problem I have encountered using v4:

I have created a task GET MAIL {FROM TABLE} which also has PICK UP MAIL {FROM TABLE}, PICK MAIL UP {FROM TABLE} and TAKE MAIL {FROM TABLE} as alternative inputs.

When testing the game if I type PICK UP MAIL or TAKE MAIL the correct response is displayed ("Wait until you are able to frank the mail.") but if I type GET MAIL then the mail is taken from the table.

This seems to be a random thing. If I close the runner and then open it again and then type GET MAIL, the correct response is displayed and if I type TAKE MAIL, the mail is taken from the table.

Can anyone please advise how I can fix this? (Come on David, you love v4 so much! )

Thanks.

[David Whyld]

I don't know about that specific problem, but why so many tasks for it? You don't need PICK UP MAIL and PICK MAIL UP and TAKE MAIL and GET MAIL. One task will cover it all if you add synonyms for GET and save on a lot of typing in the long run.

[Lazzah]

I don't know about that specific problem, but why so many tasks for it? You don't need PICK UP MAIL and PICK MAIL UP and TAKE MAIL and GET MAIL. One task will cover it all if you add synonyms for GET and save on a lot of typing in the long run.

I said "A task", David. I'm not so stupid as to create a separate task for each of those inputs. I have the different commands on separate lines in the GET MAIL task. I assume that's the way you are supposed to do it, as in v5? As I said, sometimes it works properly sometimes it doesn't. If you can't help me with that it looks as if I will have to think again about how to do this.

P.S. This wouldn't happen in v5 btw!

[David Whyld]

If you use the synonym approach, you wouldn't need to put the commands on different lines because there'd only be one command.

[ralphmerridew]

Lazzah: Play "A Day in the Life of a Superhero" to see the problems with the synonym approach.

[David Whyld]

What problem is that? I know there was an issue with the name of an NPC and the smell command, but I'm not sure if that's what you mean.

[Lumin]

I know it's just an accepted thing that we have to include every possible command that can be imagined, but I always wondered who these people are who would type out stuff like 'pick [THING] up' or 'place [OBJECT] on the table' or whatever instead of the simple standards.

Like, if they're enough of a newbie to not know about 'get' than they're probably also not going to know enough to get worked up over the lack of immersion because >acquire hodgepodge of miscellanea didn't work out for them.

[P/o Prune]

I know it's just an accepted thing that we have to include every possible command that can be imagined, but I always wondered who these people are who would type out stuff like 'pick [THING] up' or 'place [OBJECT] on the table' or whatever instead of the simple standards.

It could be that English is not their first language, or that they are new to the IF scene.
I remember another thread where someone told of an experience s/he had with a first timer. The person was in location "Kitchen" and wanted to open the fridge. You and I know that the obvious command would be >open fridge, but this person tried to make it step by step:
>walk to the fridge
>grab handle
>open fridge door
None of this worked (of course) and the "tutor" had to explain how a text adventure actually worked.

Apart from that I have a nasty suspicion that some people are actually looking for commands that doesn't work so they have something to complain about

[Lazzah]

As Po says, if the player/playtester's first language is not English, they often type in the most strange things in order to do something. I therefore try to include EVERY input the playtester could possibly use in order to complete an action. Even then, they will come up with something I hadn't thought of!

I always include a playing instructions page in my games, but even some of my playtesters don't bother to read them. Then they get frustrated when a certain command doesn't work!

[David Whyld]

I always find it surprising that people play IF games without any understanding of how IF games work. It's like buying a car and then phoning the manufacturer the next week complaining that it's stopped working. Out comes an engineer to take a look and his verdict is "it's ran out of petrol" to which the customer responds with a rant about no one telling him he needed to put petrol in it.

[P/o Prune]

I always find it surprising that people play IF games without any understanding of how IF games work. It's like buying a car and then phoning the manufacturer the next week complaining that it's stopped working. Out comes an engineer to take a look and his verdict is "it's ran out of petrol" to which the customer responds with a rant about no one telling him he needed to put petrol in it.

Thanks for a good laugh, David
We have a name for guys like that: ID-TEN-T = ID IO T
We all know they are out there and we're bound to come across first timers who is just beginning to know what it's all about. Larry is onto something when he includes instructions with his games. I have chosen a different way and include a Play-Card (see attached)
But in the end you still end up with the problem, what if the player doesn't read it? Remember in the "old" days, there was thread regarding Readme files and the general idea was that hardly anyone bothered to read the file before starting to play the game.
I guess we just have to bite the bullet and learn to live with it.

Play-Card

Play-card.jpg (332.08 KiB) Viewed 4818 times

[Lumin]

I always look at the readme if they bother to include one. Not reading the instructions sounds like a man problem.