13 Jan, 2013, KaVir wrote in the 1st comment:
Votes: 0
quixadhal said:
So, let me ask you this then…

If the player can disconnect at any time, what's the harm in giving them a command called "quit" which does the SAME THING?

Inconsistent command functionality resulting in potentially undesirable and/or unexpected behaviour. As I pointed out earlier:

KaVir said:
In theory you could have the 'quit' work like disconnect in those situations, but that could cause accidents (and result in some very angry players), with people typing 'quit' and not realising that their characters are still hanging around and vulnerable to attack.


quixadhal said:
Some of us don't play with fancy graphical clients that have buttons.

I thought you were a firm believer in not supporting older clients? But that said, I'm very curious to hear which client you use that doesn't offer any way to disconnect or close the client while your character is still playing. Even Windows Telnet has a close button, or lets you press CTRL+? But that said, I'm very curious to hear which client you use that doesn't offer any way to disconnect or close the client while your character is still playing. Even Windows Telnet has a close button, or lets you press CTRL+[ and then type (get this) "quit". Which client are you using?
13 Jan, 2013, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 2nd comment:
Votes: 0
I also disallow the command quit in some cases. Sure you can still close your client, and suffer the consequences, as your char is still online. I will disconnect it properly once I judge it is ok to do so, not you. Want to escape a certain death by quitting ? Tough luck, deal with it.

It is mostly for pk purpose. A PK can only quit right away (by typing it) if he is above 80% hp in health and not fighting.
And I keep the command cause those players want to know they are safe after typing it.
13 Jan, 2013, Ssolvarain wrote in the 3rd comment:
Votes: 0
For PK purposes, Prophecy: The MUD handled it best in my experience.

You get a timer set on you when you enter into any PK activities, and until that timer is over you cannot recall to the only truly safe zone, your clan hall. You also cannot quit. If you find a safe room and close your client, well someone's gonna push/drag you out of that room and kill you without resistance. You also can't quit while fighting, period.

Outside of combat and PK, I don't see any real reason to interfere with a player's ability to leave the game when they choose.
13 Jan, 2013, Lyanic wrote in the 4th comment:
Votes: 0
quixadhal said:
If the player can disconnect at any time, what's the harm in giving them a command called "quit" which does the SAME THING?

The 'quit' command does not do the SAME THING. It typically disconnects AND extracts the character from the world. JUST disconnecting would leave the character in place to finish dying, before being extracted later in some garbage collection operation of linkdead characters. Being able to quit at anytime would allow anyone to avoid ever dying. If I knew such a mechanism were in place, for instance on heavy PvP or permadeath games, I would write a client-side trigger to 'quit' anytime I was even remotely near death. I would then wait a couple minutes for it to be safe and relog.
13 Jan, 2013, KaVir wrote in the 5th comment:
Votes: 0
Ssolvarain said:
You get a timer set on you when you enter into any PK activities, and until that timer is over you cannot recall to the only truly safe zone, your clan hall. You also cannot quit.

So if someone sees you coming, they can set a trigger to quit before you can "enter into any PK activities" with them?

Ssolvarain said:
Outside of combat and PK, I don't see any real reason to interfere with a player's ability to leave the game when they choose.

The restriction is specific to PK locations and (PvE combat) dungeons. You can quit when you choose elsewhere.
13 Jan, 2013, Ssolvarain wrote in the 6th comment:
Votes: 0
But why would you play a PK mud/character if not to fight other people? To say that people will quit rather than fight on a PK mud is just silliness.

This was a game where travel was very simple. You could gate to any area you pleased (which was dangerous with the lag associated with gate), or speedwalk there in seconds. If you left clanhall, you'd better keep an eye on who list and cast 'locate person' frequently to keep track of enemies. It was a very paranoid existence where the advantage went to the one making the opening move.
13 Jan, 2013, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 7th comment:
Votes: 0
Ssolvarain said:
But why would you play a PK mud/character if not to fight other people? To say that people will quit rather than fight on a PK mud is just silliness.


Because PvP is only part of the game. And you may sometimes want to enjoy the other parts without interruption (with this perticular char).

Or not in the mood, not prepared to do so, or knowing you are no match yet and the friend you usually pair with to be able to compete is not online.

Or maybe you are just logging for few minutes have a chat or helping some newbie, but dont want to get involved in the more time consuming pk hunt.

You may ask: why log your pk char then ? Because it is your higher level char, because it is the one other people know about (if you want to chat).

There are so many valid reasons.
14 Jan, 2013, Ssolvarain wrote in the 8th comment:
Votes: 0
Unless your mud has no safe zones at all….

None of those are a concern to a player.

If you have to go out of your way to enable PK, you know what you're getting in to before hand. It's fairly stupid to assume people aren't aware of the dangers of playing PK.


I'm not going to log on GW2, run out in the middle of the wilderness and ask everyone for a time out so I can hunt mobs.
14 Jan, 2013, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 9th comment:
Votes: 0
Quote
It's fairly stupid to assume people aren't aware of the dangers of playing PK.


Being PK is not a duty, this is not a job. Most people will just log off their PK and use an alt then.

Quote
I'm not going to log on GW2, run out in the middle of the wilderness and ask everyone for a time out so I can hunt mobs.


You won't ask, does not mean you will not sometimes wish it.

And yeah my mud has no safe "zones". Only a few rooms are perfectly safe. Where you cannot do much but talk.
14 Jan, 2013, KaVir wrote in the 10th comment:
Votes: 0
Ssolvarain said:
But why would you play a PK mud/character if not to fight other people? To say that people will quit rather than fight on a PK mud is just silliness.

You're kidding, surely? Many players may enjoy doing the killing, but very few enjoy being killed. If they can type "quit" to instantly escape from a fight they don't think they can win, that's exactly what they'll do. Why do you think so many muds have commands like "flee" and "wimpy"?
14 Jan, 2013, Cratylus wrote in the 11th comment:
Votes: 0
There's this game I like called Rock Band. In Rock Band 2 you can "duel" with an internet adversary, playing a song at the same time to see who is better at it. They removed this game mode in Rock Band 3. I was outraged and investigated why.

The explanation I found was that there was no point in coding a game mode so few people use. It turns out that opponents would typically quit a song before losing (I guess to avoid messing up their stats, not sure), and that is a crap thing to put up with, and people just generally gave up on duel mode and didn't play it much.

:(
14 Jan, 2013, quixadhal wrote in the 12th comment:
Votes: 0
Lyanic said:
quixadhal said:
If the player can disconnect at any time, what's the harm in giving them a command called "quit" which does the SAME THING?

The 'quit' command does not do the SAME THING. It typically disconnects AND extracts the character from the world. JUST disconnecting would leave the character in place to finish dying, before being extracted later in some garbage collection operation of linkdead characters. Being able to quit at anytime would allow anyone to avoid ever dying. If I knew such a mechanism were in place, for instance on heavy PvP or permadeath games, I would write a client-side trigger to 'quit' anytime I was even remotely near death. I would then wait a couple minutes for it to be safe and relog.


You misunderstand.

YOUR quit command does this. There's no reason anyone else's has to be so hard-coded. Typing "quit" should always remove you from the game, immediately, no arguments about why you want to quit. Now, if you're in the middle of combat, it should have the EXACT SAME EFFECT as disconnecting the client. If the game decides to kill you instantly, let you continue standing there while your enemies kill you, or whatever… that's up to your particular game mechanics.

Even In Crat's Rock Band example, it's a server decision to allow "quit" to "save" you by not adding a loss to your record. The server could easily make any lost connection be an automatic loss (and it should, IMHO).

I don't understand why you are all assuming "quit" means "escape bad things." Quit means stop playing and disconnect. It *ALLOWS* the server to shut things down nicely, knowing that you actually intended to leave, rather than trying to wait around for you to attempt a reconnection. It also allows the player to know they are indeed not logged in, which might be a concern if they're on a public terminal.
14 Jan, 2013, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 13th comment:
Votes: 0
Quote
Typing "quit" should always remove you from the game, immediately, no arguments about why you want to quit. Now, if you're in the middle of combat, it should have the EXACT SAME EFFECT as disconnecting the client.


The reason you do not do that is to make the player understand WHY it is not a good idea to do that in the situation he is. Better than having them complain afterwards "waaaa why I am naked and dead after I quit"…

You could make a disconnect command though, that would indeed have the same effect. But no, quit shoudl never be the same thing than a disconnection. They are two different things, mixing their behaviour is bad for player awareness. (No they don't read helps…)
14 Jan, 2013, quixadhal wrote in the 14th comment:
Votes: 0
You'd hate my old mud Rarva. It featured rent, so if you quit out in the middle of nowhere, you drop all your stuff to the ground for anyone to scavange as they walk by. :)

I'm sure today's kiddies would whine and complain. I have no problem with that. If they're too stupid to figure out they lost their stuff because they quit in the middle of a fight (typed quit, mind you, while combat messages scrolled on their screen), they probably aren't smart enough to play my mud for very long either.

You know what you get when you coddle people and cater to the lowest common denominator? Stupid players who can't play without being coddled. You can keep them.
14 Jan, 2013, Runter wrote in the 15th comment:
Votes: 0
I don't think quit should unconditionally disconnect the player. It's not a technical reason, but a usability one. If I get ambushed about the same time as I've entered quit I don't want to have to rush through the login flow and hope I'm not dead upon arrival. A more thought out approach would likely involve "quit now" or some such to get that desired functionality, and you might say that when they try to quit at times where the game otherwise believes it's a bad idea. Like being in combat, or involved in administrative conversation with staff, or any number of states.

Quote
Even In Crat's Rock Band example, it's a server decision to allow "quit" to "save" you by not adding a loss to your record. The server could easily make any lost connection be an automatic loss (and it should, IMHO).


Well, no, but it's because we're talking about apples and oranges. There's no tracking of stats for rockband on a server. Whether or not it should have a centralized server is another issue entirely.
14 Jan, 2013, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 16th comment:
Votes: 0
It is not about being smart or not Quix, but about expected behaviour. The rent system IMHO makes no sense. Why would you lose everything quitting a game in the middle of nowhere is beyond me. Suddenly just cause I do not control my puppet he is not able to just sit on his campfire and wait for my return. What is the REASON behind this. 100% chance of being robbed the very second I type quit when noone is in sight just cause I am not looking at him sitting ? It makes no sense. Why cannot he just AT LEAST try to walk by himself to the town, flee from any fight he may encounter and takes no risk etc.
This system just want to force you to play a longer time than you would wish for petty reasons (and lazyness from the admin to not code any automatic process that could at least mitigate that)

Again it is not about coddling to stupid player, it is to give them a hint on what can happen if they do not use the ingame system to leave a game.

Type quit -> you KNOW what happens.
close your client or use a disconnection mecanism that is advertised as such-> well…be prepared to have unexpected and probably unwanted consequences.

As Runter said, it is a usabilty thing.
14 Jan, 2013, KaVir wrote in the 17th comment:
Votes: 0
quixadhal said:
I don't understand why you are all assuming "quit" means "escape bad things." Quit means stop playing and disconnect.

The expectation is that you're safe after typing "quit". The only muds I know of that leave your character in the game after typing "quit" are MOOs (and perhaps TinyMUD derivatives?) - but those I've played had no combat system, so safety wasn't an issue.

There is such a common assumption about the behaviour of the "quit" command that (particularly within a PK mud) I would consider it a very bad design decision to make the command work differently. Too many players expect their characters to be safe once they've properly quit the mud.

I'm also still waiting to hear what client you're using that doesn't offer any way to disconnect or close the client while your character is still playing

quixadhal said:
You'd hate my old mud Rarva. It featured rent, so if you quit out in the middle of nowhere, you drop all your stuff to the ground for anyone to scavange as they walk by. :)

I'm sure today's kiddies would whine and complain.

In old school LPmuds, equipment simply didn't save, period. Every time you logged on, you had to go and find a new set of gear. Proponents of those muds probably think your rent system is for kiddies who whined and complained about not being able to keep their gear.

Runter said:
A more thought out approach would likely involve "quit now" or some such to get that desired functionality, and you might say that when they try to quit at times where the game otherwise believes it's a bad idea.

That would work - I actually have that very option for my "shutdown" command, so if anyone had ever requested the functionality quixadhal describes I'd probably do it like that. It has the advantage of not changing the expected behaviour of "quit", and not adding any additional commands. Furthermore, if anyone did want it to be the default behaviour, they could easily set an alias for it.
14 Jan, 2013, Splork wrote in the 18th comment:
Votes: 0
<85097rm 0wz 515sv>
quit
WARNING! Using 'quit!' to leave the game will drop all of your items.
Instead please use rent from one of the inns.
If you still wish to quit, type 'quit!'

<85097rm 0wz 515sv>
14 Jan, 2013, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 19th comment:
Votes: 0
Splork said:
<85097rm 0wz 515sv>
quit
WARNING! Using 'quit!' to leave the game will drop all of your items.
Instead please use rent from one of the inns.
If you still wish to quit, type 'quit!'

<85097rm 0wz 515sv>


Errr Using 'quit!' .. type 'quit!' :) Someone made a typo in his help message there :)
14 Jan, 2013, quixadhal wrote in the 20th comment:
Votes: 0
No, that's correct. In Splork's case, "quit" displays a warning and tells the user that the real command is "quit!". It's a bit more newbie-friendly than mine, which does what his "quit!" does, allowing the user to learn by experience if they can't be bothered to read the help file. :)

KaVir said:
The expectation is that you're safe after typing "quit". The only muds I know of that leave your character in the game after typing "quit" are MOOs (and perhaps TinyMUD derivatives?) - but those I've played had no combat system, so safety wasn't an issue.


It certainly wasn't that way in the dikurivatives I played… you were "safe" in the sense that if you quit while you weren't in combat, you wouldn't die… but that never meant you would come back exactly where you were before with all your stuff. In fact, the only way to be totally safe was to RENT.

Rarva.Riendf said:
It is not about being smart or not Quix, but about expected behaviour. The rent system IMHO makes no sense. Why would you lose everything quitting a game in the middle of nowhere is beyond me. Suddenly just cause I do not control my puppet he is not able to just sit on his campfire and wait for my return. What is the REASON behind this. 100% chance of being robbed the very second I type quit when noone is in sight just cause I am not looking at him sitting ? It makes no sense. Why cannot he just AT LEAST try to walk by himself to the town, flee from any fight he may encounter and takes no risk etc.
This system just want to force you to play a longer time than you would wish for petty reasons (and lazyness from the admin to not code any automatic process that could at least mitigate that)


Because it's a dangerous world. When you disconnect your player and cut your puppet's strings, he is going to just stand there because there's no human telling him what to do. The odds are pretty good that some wandering monster or bandit will come along and kill him, taking all his stuff, while nobody is at the helm. Rather than actually leaving you logged in until that happens, the game gives you a fair deal… you lose all your stuff, but you don't actually have to die and lose the experience too – unless you disconnected during a fight, in which case we'd rather you not cheat, so you get the full penalty.

Why is renting safe? It's assumed that the few places in the game which let you rent are well guarded establishments, where you're paying the rent fee as much for protection as for the soft bed and hot meal.

If you want to play the realism card… why should I be able to just type "sleep" and regain health/mana/etc in a few seconds? Shouldn't I only be able to sleep at night? Why should I be able to "sleep" on the city streets? Shouldn't a guard come along and wake me up for loitering? If I sleep in the wilderness with no campfire or party members to keep watch, why would I not be eaten by one of the many aggressive creatures that rush up to attack me in broad daylight?

KaVir said:
I'm also still waiting to hear what client you're using that doesn't offer any way to disconnect or close the client while your character is still playing


I was thinking of how I used to play muds, which may not be possible these days. We used to connect from the dorms using the local decnet terminals, and from there connect to our vax/vms mainframe accounts, where we played muds using their telnet client. The issue was that decnet also used telnet, so hitting ctrl-] dropped you to the decnet prompt, not your game client's prompt. Logging back in was annoying, especially during busy hours when you might not be able to get a connection.

I don't have a problem with quit!, dc, disconnect, or whatever else you might choose to call your real "quit" command, as long as it allows me to stop playing immediately. Again, common sense says if you leave the game (by whatever means) in combat, you're probably going to log back in dead. If your players are too stupid to connect the dots, it won't matter how much you sugar coat things.
0.0/45