a multiplayer game of parenting and civilization building
You are not logged in.
Due to inability to form long sentences (age-dependant) and in-game life being short anyway (thus making time precious), the fact that you can't use numbers in chat always bothered me. Would it be difficult to implement this feature?
Offline
I think having to say number makes sense, honestly. After all, when you're talking you can't really quickly say 154, you have to say one hundred and fifty-four.
Offline
Yes, but we speak faster than we type. Well, at least I do. And in real life, you don't have to say things like "one hun"..."dred an"..."d fifty"..."four".
Offline
I’d imagine people would start chatspeaking more if we allowed numbers and the standard keyboard set
Inb4: gtg dont w8 4 me
Last edited by lychee (2019-06-06 13:47:51)
Offline
But when we speak we don't stay 'cat' or 'queue' either, we don't speak letters and we don't don't use a closer aproximation to sound, ipa either... This are just representations of speech, keyword: representation. Many languages tie sylables to letters, some languages ommit vowels alltogether, quite a few other languages tie entire meanings to a character.
9 is as much valid as nine is, both are equal constructs of the human writing system.
Offline
One that would be usable in game would be kind of glyph for each name, now some griefers can just get born to only long surname families and never get a curse. Maybe mouseover someone and click to get the name in one/two letter, also copyable by other players.
inb4 client crypt/decrypt shortcuts or links to pages. All of this just makes people use chat in other monitor etc, most helpful to griefers (like the snowball will be-if it will, just while ago tested it dropped item from hand when used). Why all help goes to griefers and none to other players ? I thought most players not griefing, hence snowball dropping weapon is better than missile-kill by bow just on suspicion.
Last edited by Sukallinen (2019-06-06 15:16:37)
Offline
reply from jason on why this is, is in this thread:
Offline
2 many ppl wil use txt msg style 4 talking.
---
omnem cibum costis
tantum baca, non facies opus
Offline
I think having to say number makes sense, honestly. After all, when you're talking you can't really quickly say 154, you have to say one hundred and fifty-four.
Given the assumption of communication of numerals instead of numbers, one could just say the numerals in real life. I think the word 'stop' could also communicate to people when a spoken sequence of numerals ends, once enough people picked up on it. For instance, were I to say to you:
"Seven Five Six Eight Two Four One Stop"
I think you might pick up on what number I meant by hearing it. Or a least, I think you can get:
"Zero Nine Three Two Stop"
or
"One Five Four Stop",
which is fewer syllables than 'one hundred and fifty-four."
From the perspective of trying to make a concise messaging system to communicate numbers like that, 'zero' and 'seven' come as inferior words to the rest, since they need more than one syllable unlike other sounds for numbers.
And it's still quicker to say numerals in real life than you can in game. But also, in game each action takes much more game time (it might take a quarter of a year to say something in the game) than real life time. What could compensate for them to some degree? People being able to say the numerals directly.
Danish Clinch.
Longtime tutorial player.
Offline
Yes, but we speak faster than we type. Well, at least I do. And in real life, you don't have to say things like "one hun"..."dred an"..."d fifty"..."four".
154? Even if you are referring to 154 gooseberries, that's alot of gooseberries!
My problem with expressing numbers is that the very numeric system is a cheat to higher level communication.
It makes encoding easy. The current system dampens the flow of information, by leaving little to no room for shortcuts. You could say communicating is hard, but not unnecessarily hard. It's hard in a good way, which makes you try to be creative when expressing yourself.
Of course, "F" has become an encoding for food too. But with the numeric system, there is much more power involved, as counting is not a simple reference to an entity, but an algorithm, a macro, a shortcut.
Offline
Cookie wrote:Yes, but we speak faster than we type. Well, at least I do. And in real life, you don't have to say things like "one hun"..."dred an"..."d fifty"..."four".
154? Even if you are referring to 154 gooseberries, that's alot of gooseberries!
My problem with expressing numbers is that the very numeric system is a cheat to higher level communication.
It makes encoding easy. The current system dampens the flow of information, by leaving little to no room for shortcuts. You could say communicating is hard, but not unnecessarily hard. It's hard in a good way, which makes you try to be creative when expressing yourself.Of course, "F" has become an encoding for food too. But with the numeric system, there is much more power involved, as counting is not a simple reference to an entity, but an algorithm, a macro, a shortcut.
Hindu-Arabic numerals can get replaced by consonants... see here: https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=6863
Danish Clinch.
Longtime tutorial player.
Offline
I already know and use roman numerals. I am old. My brain is not as elastic as it used to be. I'm just going to use what I learned when I was a kid. Thanks but no thanks.
Offline