YANI, camera flash

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Why does the flash from an expensive camera NOT light up the room
briefly, at least in the direction of the flash? The room would not
stay lit, of course, but if you take a photo of a gnome right in front
of you then you should, logically, be able to spot the hill orc
lurking three squares away in the shadows ...

--

JPD


SGFN

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

JPD wrote:
> Why does the flash from an expensive camera NOT light up the room
> briefly, at least in the direction of the flash? The room would not
> stay lit, of course, but if you take a photo of a gnome right in front
> of you then you should, logically, be able to spot the hill orc
> lurking three squares away in the shadows ...
>
> --
>
> JPD
>
>
> SGFN

This sure sounds like a fun idea. I have indeed always wondered why a
camera does not produce any pictures. I guess it's just no polaroid. It
should be, though.

But for the flashlight, you should indeed be able to see some squares
in an 45 to 90 degree angle from where you stand.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

JPD wrote:
> Why does the flash from an expensive camera NOT light up the room
> briefly, at least in the direction of the flash? The room would not
> stay lit, of course, but if you take a photo of a gnome right in front
> of you then you should, logically, be able to spot the hill orc
> lurking three squares away in the shadows ...

I agree, it's perfectly logical, and would be a neat addition.

I think the problem, though, is how to implement it. How long should
the flash last? half a second? 1/10th of a second? How do you guarantee
that each player's machine will interpret the specified delay as the
proper amount of time? Such technical considerations aside, adding a
"strobe" effect seems contrary to the nature of nethack, which
specifically avoids anything that might rely on the quickness player's
reflexes- be they physical or optical. Any 'strobe' implementation
would likely put visually impaired nethackers at a disadvantage as
well.

The alternative is to make the flash last one turn, or until the player
hits "space". However, this effectively gives the player as much time
as they like to study the 'flashed' image, which seems contrary to the
nature of a camera flash IMHO.

Don't like to put a downer on it because it's a great idea, but I think
there are difficulties in implementation.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Well, it shouldn't just be 'a key'; it should be a space, period,
escape or enter: we should still be able to use the farlook.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Well, the beam from a wand doesn't really matter and the sphere
explosion also gives a message. You'd have to kill all the monsters
(yeah, right) in the way or else give a message explaining what you
saw,

Remember, it's a camera! You'd get to view the picture from it as long
as you wanted, just as anything else.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Um... but you take a picture. Shouldn't you be able to see your
picture??

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

dogscoff@eudoramail.com writes:

> JPD wrote:
> > Why does the flash from an expensive camera NOT light up the room
> > briefly, at least in the direction of the flash? The room would not
> > stay lit, of course, but if you take a photo of a gnome right in front
> > of you then you should, logically, be able to spot the hill orc
> > lurking three squares away in the shadows ...
>
> I agree, it's perfectly logical, and would be a neat addition.
>
> I think the problem, though, is how to implement it.

You could flag the otherwise-unseen monsters in the flash radius up
with 'I'. That is, you've spotted there's a monster there (at least at
that time), but can't be sure what it was.

--
: Dylan O'Donnell http://www.spod-central.org/~psmith/ :
: "At the sushi counter of life, you must use the chopsticks of ambition :
: to grab the sashimi of accomplishment or you will be left with the :
: wasabi of disappointment." -- Dan Shiovitz :

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

On 08 Jun 2005 12:47:45 +0100, Dylan O'Donnell wrote:

> dogscoff@eudoramail.com writes:
>
>> JPD wrote:
>>> Why does the flash from an expensive camera NOT light up the room
>>> briefly, at least in the direction of the flash? The room would not
>>> stay lit, of course, but if you take a photo of a gnome right in front
>>> of you then you should, logically, be able to spot the hill orc
>>> lurking three squares away in the shadows ...
>>
>> I agree, it's perfectly logical, and would be a neat addition.
>>
>> I think the problem, though, is how to implement it.
>
> You could flag the otherwise-unseen monsters in the flash radius up
> with 'I'. That is, you've spotted there's a monster there (at least at
> that time), but can't be sure what it was.

That's a great idea ... better than leaving it up until a key, because a
flash isn't as good as a potion of monster detection.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 dogscoff@eudoramail.com wrote:

>
>
> JPD wrote:
> > Why does the flash from an expensive camera NOT light up the room
> > briefly, at least in the direction of the flash? The room would not
> > stay lit, of course, but if you take a photo of a gnome right in front
> > of you then you should, logically, be able to spot the hill orc
> > lurking three squares away in the shadows ...
>
> I agree, it's perfectly logical, and would be a neat addition.
>
> I think the problem, though, is how to implement it. How long should
> the flash last? half a second? 1/10th of a second? How do you guarantee
> that each player's machine will interpret the specified delay as the
> proper amount of time? Such technical considerations aside, adding a
> "strobe" effect seems contrary to the nature of nethack, which
> specifically avoids anything that might rely on the quickness player's
> reflexes- be they physical or optical. Any 'strobe' implementation
> would likely put visually impaired nethackers at a disadvantage as
> well.
>
> The alternative is to make the flash last one turn, or until the player
> hits "space". However, this effectively gives the player as much time
> as they like to study the 'flashed' image, which seems contrary to the
> nature of a camera flash IMHO.

I think you can put it "until the player hits a key". Yes, it's no really
a flash in a technical sense, but considering that 1/ potions of monsters
detection work that way and 2/ nethack is based on the fact that "an
instant" can last as long as the player does not do anything, this would
be perfectly logical.

Of course, the next step would be to take shadows into account and allow a
small monster to hid himself in the shadow of a bigger one...

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

> But seeing as how this is a computer game.... shouldn't the
> cameras be digital?

Haha, well, technically they're digital already aren't they?

It said expensive camera though, so yes, they should be digital.

You could view *all* your pictures!

Including the one of the hidden hill orc...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

dogscoff@eudoramail.com was moved to say:

>I agree, it's perfectly logical, and would be a neat addition.
>
>I think the problem, though, is how to implement it. How long should
>the flash last?

The same time as a beam from a wand or the explosion of a foo-sphere.
Then, as suggested by Dylan, the briefly-seen monsters and objects in
the flash radius get marked with an I ... I say objects as well,
because in the flash one may not be sure if a thing seen in the corner
was a large box or a jackal.

--

JPD


SGFN

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

nazgjunk@gmail.com wrote in news:1118223558.218024.54100
@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

[snip]
>
> This sure sounds like a fun idea. I have indeed always wondered why a
> camera does not produce any pictures. I guess it's just no polaroid. It
> should be, though.
>

There was some patch which allowed for photos to be taken. I think it was
called 'photo patch', try googling it.


--
Kamen K.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

In article <1118227893.324925.153820@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
dogscoff@eudoramail.com wrote:


> The alternative is to make the flash last one turn, or until the player
> hits "space". However, this effectively gives the player as much time
> as they like to study the 'flashed' image, which seems contrary to the
> nature of a camera flash IMHO.

a
What do you want to use or apply? [c or ?*] c
In what direction? 8
The gnome (with a /oDeath) is blinded by the flash! --more--
Gnome turns to flee! --more--
You see also a glimpse of --more--
a newt --more--
a floating eye. --more--


The corresponding symbols would be shown until the last --more-- prompt is
"spaced" away.

--
Panu
"You haven't really been anywhere until you've got back home",
Twoflower in "The Light Fantastic"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

dogscoff@eudoramail.com <dogscoff@eudoramail.com> wrote:
>
>
> JPD wrote:
>> Why does the flash from an expensive camera NOT light up the room
>> briefly, at least in the direction of the flash? The room would not
>> stay lit, of course, but if you take a photo of a gnome right in front
>> of you then you should, logically, be able to spot the hill orc
>> lurking three squares away in the shadows ...
>
> I agree, it's perfectly logical, and would be a neat addition.
>
> I think the problem, though, is how to implement it. How long should
> the flash last? half a second? 1/10th of a second? How do you guarantee
> that each player's machine will interpret the specified delay as the
> proper amount of time? Such technical considerations aside, adding a
> "strobe" effect seems contrary to the nature of nethack, which
> specifically avoids anything that might rely on the quickness player's
> reflexes- be they physical or optical. Any 'strobe' implementation
> would likely put visually impaired nethackers at a disadvantage as
> well.
>
> The alternative is to make the flash last one turn, or until the player
> hits "space". However, this effectively gives the player as much time
> as they like to study the 'flashed' image, which seems contrary to the
> nature of a camera flash IMHO.

I'd have it last until the player next acts. Relatively simple to
implement, I'd think, and the game is all about having time to decide
what to do. Also, the flash should certainly gain the attention of
whatever could see it -- odds are decent that whatever creature you saw
isn't going to be there within a turn or two.

Maybe not wake up monsters as noise does, but conscious, nonblind
monsters would see it and react accordingly.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

ihope <ihope127@writing.com> wrote:
> Well, it shouldn't just be 'a key'; it should be a space, period,
> escape or enter: we should still be able to use the farlook.

I don't think so. With a real flash (and NHIRL, I know) you don't get
a chance to look hard at anything... disallowing farlook isn't
unreasonable.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Dylan O'Donnell wrote:
> (And no, NetHack cameras (without the photography patch) don't take
> pictures that you can see. The dungeon doesn't have film development
> facilities.)
>
But seeing as how this is a computer game.... shouldn't the
cameras be digital?

--
John Campbell
jcampbel@lynn.ci-n.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

dogscoff@eudoramail.com wrote:

> I agree, it's perfectly logical, and would be a neat addition.
>
> I think the problem, though, is how to implement it. How long should
> the flash last?

To add yet more ideas to this, what about if the flash displays
everything that is in the radius, but that these displays are not
updated again unless you can see that square. I.e. monsters and items
can be seen where they were at the time of the flash, regardless of
whether or not they have moved since.

As another idea from this, what about flashlights. Another type of lamp
that lights up a longer distance than normal - maybe 4 or 5 squares -
but only on the squares in the direction that you last moved in, instead
of all around you...

--
Graham

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

> I liked the 'mark as invisible' idea. You know *something* is there,
> but exactly *what* is uncertain.

> Or nastier: make it a hallucigenic look (and for fun, make hallucinating
> counter it).

> *flash* oh no! dragon and mmf!
> *eat fungus* *flash* oh -- a lizard and *normal* mf. great.

> Or perhaps split the difference -- creatures get I, objects get
> hallucination. (potentially) interesting effect, then -- cast darkness
> in a store, flash to find the mimics (I where you'd expect to see
> hallucinated object).

Too many ideas... *brain overheats*

(later, when ihope's brain cools down...)

I like them. Hallucinating countering the 'short flash' thing...

Maybe camera photos could only be developed in a certain shop
(Lighting?) Of course, that would then make the pictures mostly
cosmetic...

But sure, let's make it Keith's.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, Panu Lahtinen wrote:

> In article <1118227893.324925.153820@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> dogscoff@eudoramail.com wrote:
>
>
> > The alternative is to make the flash last one turn, or until the player
> > hits "space". However, this effectively gives the player as much time
> > as they like to study the 'flashed' image, which seems contrary to the
> > nature of a camera flash IMHO.
>
> a
> What do you want to use or apply? [c or ?*] c
> In what direction? 8
> The gnome (with a /oDeath) is blinded by the flash! --more--
> Gnome turns to flee! --more--
> You see also a glimpse of --more--
> a newt --more--
> a floating eye. --more--
>
>
> The corresponding symbols would be shown until the last --more-- prompt is
> "spaced" away.

The xnethack interface does not ask you to space away --more--s. They're
all displayed in the message area, which you can scroll.

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, Keith Davies wrote:

> ihope <ihope127@writing.com> wrote:
> > Well, it shouldn't just be 'a key'; it should be a space, period,
> > escape or enter: we should still be able to use the farlook.
>
> I don't think so. With a real flash (and NHIRL, I know) you don't get
> a chance to look hard at anything... disallowing farlook isn't
> unreasonable.

So perhaps you should not be able to really tell what it is during the
flash. Some monsters will be shown as statues, other as something with the
same symbol ("Oh, a dwarf, let's go. What ! A MMF !") or similar
misinterpretation could happen (the further the object, the bigger the
chance of not seing it properly).

"He ! A figurine of an Archon ! Woops, that was no figurine :-( DYWYPI ?"
"Was that a baby or an adult black dragon ?"
....

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Jym <moyen@loria.fr> wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, Keith Davies wrote:
>
>> ihope <ihope127@writing.com> wrote:
>> > Well, it shouldn't just be 'a key'; it should be a space, period,
>> > escape or enter: we should still be able to use the farlook.
>>
>> I don't think so. With a real flash (and NHIRL, I know) you don't get
>> a chance to look hard at anything... disallowing farlook isn't
>> unreasonable.
>
> So perhaps you should not be able to really tell what it is during the
> flash. Some monsters will be shown as statues, other as something with the
> same symbol ("Oh, a dwarf, let's go. What ! A MMF !") or similar
> misinterpretation could happen (the further the object, the bigger the
> chance of not seing it properly).
>
> "He ! A figurine of an Archon ! Woops, that was no figurine :-( DYWYPI ?"
> "Was that a baby or an adult black dragon ?"
> ...

I liked the 'mark as invisible' idea. You know *something* is there,
but exactly *what* is uncertain.

Or nastier: make it a hallucigenic look (and for fun, make hallucinating
counter it).

*flash* oh no! dragon and mmf!
*eat fungus* *flash* oh -- a lizard and *normal* mf. great.

Or perhaps split the difference -- creatures get I, objects get
hallucination. (potentially) interesting effect, then -- cast darkness
in a store, flash to find the mimics (I where you'd expect to see
hallucinated object).


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, John Campbell wrote:

> Dylan O'Donnell wrote:
> > (And no, NetHack cameras (without the photography patch) don't take
> > pictures that you can see. The dungeon doesn't have film development
> > facilities.)
> >
> But seeing as how this is a computer game.... shouldn't the
> cameras be digital?

Hehe, maybe the 3D graphical interfaces (vulture'eye ?) could add the
photo patch together with some raytracing facility and *really* show the
picture once take

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

John Campbell wrote:
> Dylan O'Donnell wrote:
> > (And no, NetHack cameras (without the photography patch) don't take
> > pictures that you can see. The dungeon doesn't have film development
> > facilities.)
> >
> But seeing as how this is a computer game.... shouldn't the
> cameras be digital?
>
> --
> John Campbell
> jcampbel@lynn.ci-n.com

Why not Polaroid cameras? They're instant, and you would be able to see
the picture within a turn or 2.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, ihope wrote:

> > I liked the 'mark as invisible' idea. You know *something* is there,
> > but exactly *what* is uncertain.
>
> > Or nastier: make it a hallucigenic look (and for fun, make hallucinating
> > counter it).
>
> > *flash* oh no! dragon and mmf!
> > *eat fungus* *flash* oh -- a lizard and *normal* mf. great.
>
> > Or perhaps split the difference -- creatures get I, objects get
> > hallucination. (potentially) interesting effect, then -- cast darkness
> > in a store, flash to find the mimics (I where you'd expect to see
> > hallucinated object).
>
> Too many ideas... *brain overheats*
>
> (later, when ihope's brain cools down...)
>
> I like them. Hallucinating countering the 'short flash' thing...

Maybe if you're hallucinating (under extasy) and flashing too often under
the stroboscope of the night club (your own camera) you could die of
system shock. Or think all creatures are peacefull. Or both.

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Jym wrote:

> Maybe if you're hallucinating (under extasy) and flashing too often
> under the stroboscope of the night club (your own camera) you could
> die of system shock. Or think all creatures are peacefull. Or both.

I think the easiest solution to all the camera problems would be to
abolish the expensive camera completely.

--
Boudewijn Waijers (kroisos at home.nl).

The garden of happiness is surrounded by a wall so low only children
can look over it. - "the Orphanage of Hits", former Dutch radio show.