Messages

Nice to see things finally calming down in here.
I was starting to get worried.

If by "calming down" you mean that one side has successfully hounded the other away from participating, then yes.

Darth, for somebody calling people out for disrespecting other opinions, you sure show a lot of disrespect for other people's opinions. Practice what you preach.

All right, I've PM'ed it to you. I've been trying if this might be e.g. a missing rep_ex function or on_call, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Some nullpointer perhaps? We'd appreciate your advice.

Oh, it did generate a .dmp file, does that help?

For the moment, yes. We're in the middle of a release and would prefer not to switch engine versions now.

This is somewhere in the midst of game update routine, I do not think it is possible to deduce exact reason without more info.

Would it help to send you the game in question? It's not that big.

It may be that no one used this feature for several years, and some long existing bug was not found in time.

That is likely

Any suggestions as to what this might mean? Happens right after a successful RunAGSGame call.

I frankly would not compare controls by how easy it is to script them, because that's lazy programming. Controls are for players, so usability should be on first place (invent good idea first, think about how to program it later).

Indeed. Furthermore, with interface design, you shouldn't pick the interface that most people like. Rather, pick the one that the least people dislike. Why? Because if people see an interface they like, they're not even going to comment on it; whereas if they see an interface they'll dislike, they'll go play something else almost immediately.

It's you who haven't explained why the verbcoin is so inconvenient, or why what I've said is incorrect.

You're funny. Please read the last dozen posts in this thread.

I think I've already explained why the verbcoin is at least the second most convenient interface for adventure games.

No, you haven't. The point you're missing is that design isn't about what's convenient to you personally, but about what's convenient to your players. As before, there's plenty of games in the bit bucket that are forgotten merely because the programmer didn't account for user feedback.

I'd still be interested in hearing what you don't like about verb coins (and I don't mean those where you have to hold down the mouse button)

Fair point. The main issue is that they overlap the game screen, which is your connection with the game world. On the one hand, a permanently visible menu on the side of the screen is more immersive than a temporary menu that appears whenever you're trying to do something (and on top of the thing you wanted to do). On the other hand, a button with a fixed location on the screen is more convenient to the player than a button relative to where the cursor currently is.

Aside from that, almost every verbcoin I've seen is badly implemented, in that it (1) requires the awkward click-hold-drag-release sequence, and/or (2) doesn't have hotkeys, and/or (3) is designed with no regard for visual clarity, and/or (4) gives no meaningful reactions for most verb/hotspot combinations.

and what other input method you would suggest that doesn't rely on having a right mouse button.

You can go a long way by having just left click (for basic action) and having lots of items that are effectively verb substitutes. Bear in mind that in most Sierra interfaces, easily 95% of all "hand icon" and "mouth icon" interactions are just vaguely-joking variations of "you cannot take / talk to that".

I don't see the verbcoin as inconvenient at all, either. It's a quarter-of-a-second click versus holding LMB for a half second.

But many people do. Case in point,

the verbcoin is simply a bad method of interaction, to the point where I'd personally even say having a permanent onscreen verb list (like the early Monkey Island games)

It is terrible if you have to hold down the mouse button to activate the verbcoin

This is what UX and interface design is about. Programmers always like and understand their own interface, but if numerous other people don't like it, then the reality is that you either change it or you lose your audience. It's not just adventure games; for example, if you design a platform game and people dislike your jump physics (e.g. because you haven't considered subpixels or inertia) then they're going to play something else. There's plenty of games in the bit bucket that are forgotten merely because the programmer didn't account for user feedback.

Another free game on Steam,

https://www.humblebundle.com/store/dirt-3-complete-edition

Well here's a link that should explain some things.  He's got an English accent so what he says must be true .  Have fun and hysteria watching.
https://youtu.be/1d9lm-T87AQ

Also an insightful view. It strikes me that a vocal number of people from both sides support democracy only as long as their side wins. This whole us-against-them mentality is the actual problem here; do all two-party systems get to that eventually? People have been saying for awhile that the election system itself needs to change. I think the last time we saw such a change is when presidents were limited to two terms, about a century ago, so I don't have high hopes of such a change happening the next four years. That said, clearly a number of trump supporters are hoping for him to change the system, and he strikes me as more likely to actually do so than hillary. No guarantees though.

I think this satirical sketch, or whatever it may be, could offer an interesting point of view to everyone who's completely baffled by Trump's supporters.
(Be warned though, it's really offensive and full of swearing.)

I endorse this video.

Simply speaking, perhaps not, but surely you can appreciate that it's one method by which it can be achieved.

Actually, no I don't. In order to actually add to gameplay, a verb needs to (1) meaningfully contribute to a number of puzzles, (2) get a non-trivial response from a large number of hotspots, and (3) be convenient to the player (which on a verbcoin it won't be). Otherwise you're just adding complexity for its own sake.

But what happens if the player chooses the wrong option? Will something game relevant happen? Or is there just a message like "I can't do that". In the second case, the player does not have more options, just more work to do (by clicking useless GUI buttons). But the reason I use computers is, that I want THEM to do my work...

Precisely. "Giving the player the option to be wrong" is just frustrating to the player, and doesn't make your game any better. Giving the player more room to explore is a good idea, but you don't accomplish that by simply adding more verbs.

I've constantly heard the whole "you'll throw your vote away", but that just makes me question.
On the one hand everyone is being told that they should always vote, because no matter how insignificant a vote may seem, it can still help.
Yet on the other hand, everyone is also being told to never vote for a third party because that's just throwing your vote away.
WHICH ONE IS IT!!!

The setup of the "electoral college" system means that any candidate that cannot reach 50.1% of the votes in each of a substantial number of states is completely irrelevant.

Reality check: https://twitter.com/i/moments/796417517157830656