I started working on a mod for this a while ago. Each villager was given a random first name and last name at spawn, and I tried working it in so that each time two villagers made a baby it would inherit the last name of one of the parents, so that you could keep record of the generations. Sadly this mod was lost in the great hard drive crash of a month ago. I think I still have the text file of names though.
I like the idea of the villagers being heavier in the game world; it would urge people to develop their villages better and keep the villagers alive.
Neither are ender chests, nether fortresses, or sound effects for doors. What's your point?
The point here is that the task accomplished from having names is such a minor alteration to the game that it might as well not even be there in the first place.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I've been a Minecraft player since Beta 1.7, still my favorite game!
Twitter: @EvanLange7737
I think names would ruin them and you can always lock them in a shop to where they are a legit shopkeeper, which is actually what I'm planning to do.
Only I would really hate to lock them up. Further, if they are locked up they are unable to socialize and breed. And since most of the villagers offer junk you will need to sort out exactly the right villagers and pen them in.
But I'll accept the solution for now. Fixed trading posts, here we go.
The point here is that the task accomplished from having names is such a minor alteration to the game that it might as well not even be there in the first place.
But it isn't minor at all; named villagers adds emotional depth and higher player involvement in the world to the game. It is one thing to see a villager with an apron running from zombies. But when you see Fargun the butcher running from zombies, and you know he has a kid, AND you know he gives you a sweet deal on your raw pork chops then you will probably be more likely to save his ass.
But it isn't minor at all; named villagers adds emotional depth and higher player involvement in the world to the game. It is one thing to see a villager with an apron running from zombies. But when you see Fargun the butcher running from zombies, and you know he has a kid, AND you know he gives you a sweet deal on your raw pork chops then you will probably be more likely to save his ass.
I suppose there are several opinions on this. Usually I just raid the smithy's chest and kill any villagers that decide to trespass near my base. With my dislike of the trading system, I guess this really doesn't apply to me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I've been a Minecraft player since Beta 1.7, still my favorite game!
Twitter: @EvanLange7737
I suppose there are several opinions on this. Usually I just raid the smithy's chest and kill any villagers that decide to trespass near my base. With my dislike of the trading system, I guess this really doesn't apply to me.
True enough, it really boils down to play style. Suffice it to say that villagers with names wouldn't really detract anything from your game anymore than not having names would.
Charcoal was a huge change to the game when it was implemented. It added early and easy access to torches and proper burnable materials at a time when ore generation was not quite so generous as it is now. People could potentially spend three or four days in a game without finding coal back when it was introduced. I personally had a world that didn't have coal above level 32 in a 123x123x area around spawn.
Neither are ender chests, nether fortresses, or sound effects for doors. What's your point?
Sound effects for doors are a natural and prerequisite part of modern game design. Names are not.
Ender chests and nether fortresses add content, depth, and options to gameplay. They're not the same thing as names in the least.
The notion that names are gender specific is becoming quite archaic, to say the least.
The villagers themselves are quite archaic. They're intended to at base, a sub-medieval culture that has a modicum of magical knowledge. They would still be in the patriarchal throes of development, regardless of modern feelings on names.
Statistics show that people who tell others they need to get a new computer are twice as likely to use "gay" as a negative descriptor and will most likely never see genitals in real life, at least while not in prison.
Sound effects for doors are a natural and prerequisite part of modern game design. Names are not.
Ender chests and nether fortresses add content, depth, and options to gameplay. They're not the same thing as names in the least.
The villagers themselves are quite archaic. They're intended to at base, a sub-medieval culture that has a modicum of magical knowledge. They would still be in the patriarchal throes of development, regardless of modern feelings on names.
All vague ideas and assumptions. Your juxtaposition of the villagers (in a made up world) on a real-world timeline doesn't constitute any reason why villagers couldn't and shouldn't have names. Their development and their names would have nothing to do with one another and I find your conclusion as such to be nonsensical. Explain it more.
I also don't see how character development and sound effects can't both be tools in game design; neither of which are a requirement by the way. How are villager names not content, depth, and options as well?
All vague ideas and assumptions. Your juxtaposition of the villagers (in a made up world) on a real-world timeline doesn't constitute any reason why villagers couldn't and shouldn't have names. Their development and their names would have nothing to do with one another and I find your conclusion as such to be nonsensical. Explain it more.
That quote doesn't have anything to do with villager names, it has to do with your comment about the "archaic-ness" of gender-specific names, and I quoted you to ensure that was evident. The villagers are a primitive and undeveloped people, it would be unreasonable to presume that they would possess modern feelings on naming conventions, and it would be unlikely that they would have developed revolutionary feelings on names through their own development, given that we know of no cultural aspects that would cause it, beyond the lack of apparent sexually dimorphic specimens.
I also don't see how character development and sound effects can't both be tools in game design; neither of which are a requirement by the way. How are villager names not content, depth, and options as well?
Names have nothing to do with character development. That's not an answer. I could just as easily return to you by asking how are they content, depth or options? However, I will not. Names are not options. There is no element of choice involved with them, and they do not inherently bring more options. If villagers had names, how would that add more options to the game? You could lock lil' Joanie in a room and trade exclusively with her ... like people have been suggesting for the nameless villagers throughout this thread.
They can not be defined as adding depth, either, as they do not add any intrinsic value beyond the novelty that you've proposed, although they would add the rudimentary depth of having names, it would be removing the depth caused by the mysterious nature of them, possessing no names, speech, or intrinsic humanity, which negates any potential contribution.
They are not content. How are they not content? Like an apple is not an orange. They're not. They would be essentially useless names displayed under villagers, and contribute no gameplay at all.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Statistics show that people who tell others they need to get a new computer are twice as likely to use "gay" as a negative descriptor and will most likely never see genitals in real life, at least while not in prison.
If this is added, then when you breed villagers, perhaps there could be a small chance to spawn a villager with a title. They would sell the more high end items like Diamond (tools), Bottle o' Enchanting, and Glowstone but they would never buy anything. Other villagers would just sell more standard stuff like food, iron, and coal and buy things. That way, you can't rely on only special villagers and encourage to increase the village population.
First names list: 100 names randomly chosen from various Latin, Asian, and dead cultures. (Easily compiled)
Middle Initials: 50% chance of receiving a middle initial, which can be any of the 26 letters of the Latin alphabet.
Last names list: 100 names randomly chosen from various Latin, Asian, and dead cultures. (Also easily compiled)
This makes for 100 * 27 * 100 different possible names, or 270,000 different NPC names. Also, it would be trivial to eliminate names from the list on a per-world or per-server basis to prevent repeats.
Increasing either of the names lists, or expanding the middle initials to include characters from outside the Latin alphabet. (i.e. Latin letters with tildes, etc.) would increase the number of permutations exponentially.
Lastly, allow the list to be overwritten by a texture pack OR language pack, or otherwise allow for drag-and-drop modification. Don't like human-sounding names? Reduce the list to a single name with that "random character" text modifier using §. Want alien-sounding names? Fill a list with all the names you like! Want fixed combos of first/last names? Empty the last names and initials lists and fill the first names list with full names, resulting in full names in place of first names and "blank" initials and last names.
Yoink! Problem solved! We can all go home now!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Internet is a big place, friend. I've been places you've n͍̺e̩v̦e̦̰͍͓̩ͅr̜̭̝̬̬͉̤̬ ͙ịm̖͇a͍͇̤͙̥g̤̘i͔͖̤̼̪̬n͖͔̳̬̯e̩̘ḓ͈͔̠̙͇̼̯.͎
I like the idea of the villagers being heavier in the game world; it would urge people to develop their villages better and keep the villagers alive.
Neither are ender chests, nether fortresses, or sound effects for doors. What's your point?
The point here is that the task accomplished from having names is such a minor alteration to the game that it might as well not even be there in the first place.
Twitter: @EvanLange7737
Only I would really hate to lock them up. Further, if they are locked up they are unable to socialize and breed. And since most of the villagers offer junk you will need to sort out exactly the right villagers and pen them in.
But I'll accept the solution for now. Fixed trading posts, here we go.
But it isn't minor at all; named villagers adds emotional depth and higher player involvement in the world to the game. It is one thing to see a villager with an apron running from zombies. But when you see Fargun the butcher running from zombies, and you know he has a kid, AND you know he gives you a sweet deal on your raw pork chops then you will probably be more likely to save his ass.
that could be abused (bad words)
I suppose there are several opinions on this. Usually I just raid the smithy's chest and kill any villagers that decide to trespass near my base. With my dislike of the trading system, I guess this really doesn't apply to me.
Twitter: @EvanLange7737
True enough, it really boils down to play style. Suffice it to say that villagers with names wouldn't really detract anything from your game anymore than not having names would.
The notion that names are gender specific is becoming quite archaic, to say the least.
Sound effects for doors are a natural and prerequisite part of modern game design. Names are not.
Ender chests and nether fortresses add content, depth, and options to gameplay. They're not the same thing as names in the least.
The villagers themselves are quite archaic. They're intended to at base, a sub-medieval culture that has a modicum of magical knowledge. They would still be in the patriarchal throes of development, regardless of modern feelings on names.
All vague ideas and assumptions. Your juxtaposition of the villagers (in a made up world) on a real-world timeline doesn't constitute any reason why villagers couldn't and shouldn't have names. Their development and their names would have nothing to do with one another and I find your conclusion as such to be nonsensical. Explain it more.
I also don't see how character development and sound effects can't both be tools in game design; neither of which are a requirement by the way. How are villager names not content, depth, and options as well?
That quote doesn't have anything to do with villager names, it has to do with your comment about the "archaic-ness" of gender-specific names, and I quoted you to ensure that was evident. The villagers are a primitive and undeveloped people, it would be unreasonable to presume that they would possess modern feelings on naming conventions, and it would be unlikely that they would have developed revolutionary feelings on names through their own development, given that we know of no cultural aspects that would cause it, beyond the lack of apparent sexually dimorphic specimens.
Names have nothing to do with character development. That's not an answer. I could just as easily return to you by asking how are they content, depth or options? However, I will not. Names are not options. There is no element of choice involved with them, and they do not inherently bring more options. If villagers had names, how would that add more options to the game? You could lock lil' Joanie in a room and trade exclusively with her ... like people have been suggesting for the nameless villagers throughout this thread.
They can not be defined as adding depth, either, as they do not add any intrinsic value beyond the novelty that you've proposed, although they would add the rudimentary depth of having names, it would be removing the depth caused by the mysterious nature of them, possessing no names, speech, or intrinsic humanity, which negates any potential contribution.
They are not content. How are they not content? Like an apple is not an orange. They're not. They would be essentially useless names displayed under villagers, and contribute no gameplay at all.
(and this idea about identifying them by their looks is ridiculous in large villages aka a village with more than 5 people in it)
I mean you could combine both and have an option for a random name when you are naming the entity.
Farmers are named Mac.
Priests are named John.
Butchers are named Rich.
Librarians are named Sam.
Blacksmiths are named James.
I said this. Two days later, my computer's motherboard melted down and I had to get a new one with Windows 8.
Irony in the first degree.
First names list: 100 names randomly chosen from various Latin, Asian, and dead cultures. (Easily compiled)
Middle Initials: 50% chance of receiving a middle initial, which can be any of the 26 letters of the Latin alphabet.
Last names list: 100 names randomly chosen from various Latin, Asian, and dead cultures. (Also easily compiled)
This makes for 100 * 27 * 100 different possible names, or 270,000 different NPC names. Also, it would be trivial to eliminate names from the list on a per-world or per-server basis to prevent repeats.
Increasing either of the names lists, or expanding the middle initials to include characters from outside the Latin alphabet. (i.e. Latin letters with tildes, etc.) would increase the number of permutations exponentially.
Lastly, allow the list to be overwritten by a texture pack OR language pack, or otherwise allow for drag-and-drop modification. Don't like human-sounding names? Reduce the list to a single name with that "random character" text modifier using §. Want alien-sounding names? Fill a list with all the names you like! Want fixed combos of first/last names? Empty the last names and initials lists and fill the first names list with full names, resulting in full names in place of first names and "blank" initials and last names.
Yoink! Problem solved! We can all go home now!