Game Mechanics The Problem With NPC Happiness

Would you get rid of happiness-based price increases?


  • Total voters
    126
On a side note: many criticise Terraria for being too grindy. Some, however, state that it struck satisfiable balance between grind and fun. So i'm telling you — this fourth pic right here is the first time i had drive to min/max this unpleasant since forever. Sure, devs said i can ignore Happiness, and buy these two Minisharks i need anyway. For 50 gold each, which means grinding EoC for money. Or, just build this shoebox.

It should be noted, "build this shoebox" is merely the choice you get if you're lucky.

If you're me, who needs a Minishark so that it can be upgraded into a Megashark, but didn't buy one before Hardmode like a moron, and then the Hallow/Crimson infested both deserts... Well, let's just say it's a good thing I'm playing on Journey Mode and I can just dupe money.

It's either that or Clentaminate my desert. Where exactly is the "creativity" in that choice?

And the actual process of doing so was often painful. Building my Jungle house overlapped a thunderstorm, so at one point I had bats, zombies, and rain enemies all dive-bombing me every five seconds while trying to place a few blocks. And my Desert house...dear lord. Over the course of building a simple rectangle that didn't even fill an entire screen, I experienced a sandstorm, a Blood Moon, a Goblin Invasion, a Slime Rain, and I think maybe another Blood Moon. It took me three in-game days to finish one simple build. Utterly ridiculous.

Wait: how did it take you that long to build a few 10x6 rectangle houses? I mean, even in the middle of a Blood Moon, that should have been pretty quick.
 
He plays on Master, and i can confirm that even a trivial building task can take a lot of time there.
Exactly. Trying to build anything during a Master event is essentially a non-starter, at least at my power level at the time. And I was trying to do a bit more than simple little cubicles, since apparently that's what this update is forcing encouraging, so the houses were more like 40x20 or so, with something resembling an actual roof.
 
Any word on this from devs?

The poll results at the very least suggest this is quite a divisive topic. I still posit that the only result of this change for me (and many more players) is that we now have higher prices, because we like to have a populated town.
 
I realize this thread hasn't been posted in for a while, but I want to make my stance known. This system is most of the reason why I haven't played Terraria at all since a short time after 1.4 came out.
Many games have tried to punish certain playstyles with negative reinforcement before, and it seems like it goes badly every single time. Re-Logic already made a mistake with negative torch luck, but I didn't like this system from day one(though it has taken me a while to work out exactly why).
In XCOM 2, many players complained about the turn timers being far too strict, forcing people to make risky moves and do things that the entire game's design went against. These timers were implemented by the developers because they wanted to discourage people never taking risks, never flanking, and playing the game too safe. But they realized that this was the wrong way to do it, as the game would punish you for going too fast, AND for going too slow. Ever since War of the Chosen, they've changed this back to the way it was.

This is relevant because a lot of players were upset with the negative reinforcement that was going on there- people who enjoy playing the game in a certain way HATE being told by the game, arbitrarily, to stop it because you're not supposed to play it like that, and for no other reason. This is exactly what the happiness system is doing.
Some of the developers have expressed that 'the price markup never became a problem in testing', but in-house playtesting can only do so much. When a very vocal portion of your community is complaining about a new mechanic punishing them for daring to play the game the way they've been doing for the past nine years, you might have done something wrong.

To be honest, if you got rid of the price markup entirely and kept everything the same, I'd probably be able to accept it. Yes, I did build several towns in my 1.4 playthrough, and it was reasonably fun and interesting, but it's not the way I'd want to usually play the game.
What I typically do is build a large, expansive, fancy town near spawn and keep everyone there. But with this new system, that kind of building is being punished- this would make me want to just not bother and put the NPCs in tiny, spread-out cubicles instead. The system was supposed to force players to stop doing that, but it fails at even this- in fact, since making fancy spawn towns is now the 'wrong' way to play, it ends up encouraging some people to just give up and build isolated wooden boxes instead, since there is no actual punishment for cubicle houses.

Not that I think there SHOULD be one in the first place- why should it matter so much how people build? This is a singleplayer game for a lot of people. What does it matter if someone is playing the game in a way you wouldn't want to? It's their game, not yours. Do people honestly believe it's better to sacrifice other people's enjoyment just to force them to play 'correctly'?
Moreover, the NPCs are not actual people. Actual people would probably be fine with living in a large, expansive, nice town with their own house, in safety and company.

In my mind, the severity of the punishment is neither here nor there- if it was so important, why remove negative torch luck? It was inconsequential for the most part, right?
I'd remove this for the same reason that was- because it's punishing people for playing how they want to, for no reason other than that the developers don't like it.
Of course, part of the reason negative torch luck was removed was because it was also 100% invisible, and the game never explained it to you. While NPC happiness is slightly more visible, it's also far more impactful, and STILL mostly invisible. Just knowing NPCs can be unhappy will not help you, since realistically, building a nice big town with plenty of space would make someone happier than living in a wooden box- but they'd rather live far away from everyone else in a wooden box than live in a big, fancy town together with everyone. Intuition has no place here.

That said, I know exactly how NPC happiness works and I STILL hate its guts, because of the fact that it's punishing a previously-valid playstyle. My biggest question with this is why? Why punish players for not playing the way you want them to, regardless of if they're doing what they find most fun? Why would you KNOWINGLY punish players for playing your game in the way they enjoy the most, just because that's not what YOU enjoy about it?

It's okay to add an incentive for building spread-out. But pylons by themselves already accomplish this purpose- why would you then try to force people to do it this way by further disadvantaging them with a punishment for making spawn towns? The price markup is just unnecessary, and all it does is frustrate people who want to play they way they like.
This is true no matter how much or how little they're punished; the point is that they're being inconvenienced intentionally by the game for no reason other than that the designers think they're 'doing it wrong'. What does that matter, if they're having more fun than they would be if they did it 'right'? Is that not the primary purpose- having fun? Why try to force people to sacrifice that just so that they can play the game 'correctly' when it doesn't affect you?

I don't like the Calamity mod. Does that mean I think people should stop playing it forever, and that it should be removed from the mod browser? Of course not! I want people to have fun, too- and if their fun includes that mod, then more power to them. My criticisms of its balance and design have no place in the discussion of whether or not people should be allowed to have fun in the way they prefer, considering this is a singleplayer/server-based game. Nobody's fun is invalid in a singleplayer game, or in a server where you know what you're signing up for.

It's like complaining about people using Mechjeb in Kerbal Space Program. It doesn't affect you, please don't complain about how people are having fun 'wrong'.

- Edit -
I'd also like to clarify that I don't think this is the same sort of change as what was done to the Reaver Shark, or Meteorite ore. Those changes were made to address issues with the progression, where certain options were far more powerful than they were supposed to be, and which directly went against the design of the game.
Terraria is supposed to offer the player creative freedom in how they want to build their housing for NPCs. What most people ended up doing was something practical, but some people did extra work to make it aesthetically pleasing. These large spawn towns, or huge, fancy castles, managed to retain most of their practicality while still being fancier than a wooden gulag. They were built this way, though, because it made the most sense to keep all your NPCs close by, as travel time from one NPC to another was very short and this required little setup.

That hasn't changed- keeping NPCs close to each other is still more practical than pylons, since you have to build multiple houses across the world to get and use them, not to mention they cost money. The difference here is that the happiness system now punishes you for doing the thing that makes the most practical sense. By itself, that WILL upset a lot of people, guaranteed. To avoid a huge price markup, you have to take the weird option that makes less sense, and sacrifice a bunch of your money anyway to buy pylons.

If you remove the markup, though, there might actually be a reason to keep building spawn towns or wooden gulags. As it is, this previously-valid option is so heavily punished(both by lack of access to pylons and a steep price increase) that you're severely gimping yourself by building for practical purposes.

You could argue that the game's design has changed, but then I would argue it's changed in a way that doesn't make sense, as it seems this design is intentionally alienating people who just want to build how they want. What purpose does that serve?
Being able to build spawn towns without punishment never broke the game. Players never experienced an enormous progression-destroying advantage for just... having their NPCs close to them. Why is this a problem that needs fixing?

The reason why I haven't played the game for a while is because I'm waiting for TModloader to update. When it does, someone is going to come out with a mod that removes NPC happiness altogether along with updates for all the other mods I like- and when that mod appears, I'm going to install it immediately and never look back, if the system remains in its current state.
I can't be certain how many other people will do the same, but I have a feeling a significant portion of the game's players will be doing that. If that many people want an entire mechanic removed outright, there's usually at least something wrong with it.
I can't say I recall an instance of this happening in Terraria before, but I can definitely tell you it's happened to other games as well.
Turn timers in XCOM 2. Random crits and damage spread in TF2. To a lesser extent, many RNG elements in Pokemon. Shoehorned motion controls (particularly in Mario Odyssey).
In all of these instances, developers with the best of intentions, who had likely tested these things many times, found many people outside their testing staff had issues with these mechanics.
TVTropes has an entire article about this.
A mechanic doesn't need to be 100% broken and irredeemable to be worthy of reexamination and changes. And, the majority does not need to hate it for it to be a problem.
If 20% of your playerbase has a huge problem with a new mechanic you introduced, your response should not be 'well, they can go fiddle themselves'- you should be wondering why they had that reaction, and seeing if a compromise can be reached.
 
Last edited:
After catching up on this I only really have one standing curiosity... I haven't been playing Terraria as long as some and despite the sudden addition while still learning a lot of stuff I am kinda confused as to the complaint as to the building restraints... Other than of course in regards to the overcrowding aspect which definitely needs adjustment...

Like I have always built a variety of bases in every biome I enter. Usually just starting from a practical shack I've had to construct for me personally to stay safe at night when I couldn't make it back to my main base. Then. I built up around that simple base. The happiness system for me really just gives me MORE reason to do that. Now I'm not just building empty elaborate constructs. I'm building towns for my NPCs to be happy. And also for those sweet sweet Pylons. Plusssss I feel like since in many ways the game obligates you to make sure your NPCs are okay since in many cases they're useful to you...making them happy should also be a factor.

Why should you benefit from treating the NPCs like crap. That's why I don't mind the price penalties and bonuses. Like it makes sense. Why would an unhappy person do anything nice for you. If you don't care about your NPCs enough to make them happy why should they help you?
 
After catching up on this I only really have one standing curiosity... I haven't been playing Terraria as long as some and despite the sudden addition while still learning a lot of stuff I am kinda confused as to the complaint as to the building restraints... Other than of course in regards to the overcrowding aspect which definitely needs adjustment...

Like I have always built a variety of bases in every biome I enter. Usually just starting from a practical shack I've had to construct for me personally to stay safe at night when I couldn't make it back to my main base. Then. I built up around that simple base. The happiness system for me really just gives me MORE reason to do that. Now I'm not just building empty elaborate constructs. I'm building towns for my NPCs to be happy. And also for those sweet sweet Pylons. Plusssss I feel like since in many ways the game obligates you to make sure your NPCs are okay since in many cases they're useful to you...making them happy should also be a factor.

Why should you benefit from treating the NPCs like crap. That's why I don't mind the price penalties and bonuses. Like it makes sense. Why would an unhappy person do anything nice for you. If you don't care about your NPCs enough to make them happy why should they help you?

It's a long thread so maybe you missed some of the arguments that answer your questions. I'm basically going to be repeating what has already been said, but that's fine:

1) It sounds like you were already playing in a similar way so not much has changed for you. This means you have no reason to be unhappy about the change on a personal level, because it doesn't really affect you. This is absolutely valid, but it doesn't address the complaints other have.
2) Nobody is saying "I want to treat the NPC's like crap". We're saying that for lot of us, it makes sense to have a community of NPC's forming a town. They can still all have nice houses, some of us just prefer having one centralized location for them all. This change forces those who enjoy a cozy populated town to scatter everyone around the world. It makes no intuitive sense, and it makes for an unpleasant experience for those who prefer the other way of playing.

Again though, before you even do counter-arguments on these if you're so inclined, I would urge you to actually read at least some of the thread because these points have been gone over many, many many times already.
 
After catching up on this I only really have one standing curiosity... I haven't been playing Terraria as long as some and despite the sudden addition while still learning a lot of stuff I am kinda confused as to the complaint as to the building restraints... Other than of course in regards to the overcrowding aspect which definitely needs adjustment...

Like I have always built a variety of bases in every biome I enter. Usually just starting from a practical shack I've had to construct for me personally to stay safe at night when I couldn't make it back to my main base. Then. I built up around that simple base. The happiness system for me really just gives me MORE reason to do that. Now I'm not just building empty elaborate constructs. I'm building towns for my NPCs to be happy. And also for those sweet sweet Pylons. Plusssss I feel like since in many ways the game obligates you to make sure your NPCs are okay since in many cases they're useful to you...making them happy should also be a factor.

Why should you benefit from treating the NPCs like crap. That's why I don't mind the price penalties and bonuses. Like it makes sense. Why would an unhappy person do anything nice for you. If you don't care about your NPCs enough to make them happy why should they help you?

Basically, it's a matter of having options. People are punished for not liking to spread their NPCs across the world and no one likes being punished for playing their own way, especially when it comes to aesthetic choices. Everyone would have been fine if players who like spreading their NPCs now have the option to do that more easily with pylons, but not at the expense of their own option to keep them in a centralized hub.

Think about it this way: If price penalties were gone tomorrow, nothing would change for you and how you play, but many other players who prefer building one centralized base would benefit from it, so why oppose it?

Additionally, I do think that there should be more different options to make NPCs happy that relate to the actual home that the player builds for them. Just simple things like using more than one type of background wall, giving them more than the bare minimum of furniture, giving them more than the bare minimum of space to make valid housing, adding decorative objects like paintings, item frames etc.

It just feels off that someone would rather live in a plain dirt shack with one person they like in the biome they like (no matter if they can even meet each other at all), rather than in an beautifully decorated home that happens to be in the wrong biome or happens to house more than two people.

As for why would an unhappy person do anything nice for you... well, first of all, you give them a home rent free and secondly, you may have literally saved their life (like the Goblin Tinkerer, the Wizard and several more). And really, we're not even asking for them to do something nice for us, we're just not looking to be overcharged because the free home we built for the NPC is in the wrong place.
At least I'd be a bit taken aback if I give someone a free home and the next time I visit that person's shop, I get charged 10% extra because they hate their neighbor.
 
Like I have always built a variety of bases in every biome I enter. Usually just starting from a practical shack I've had to construct for me personally to stay safe at night when I couldn't make it back to my main base. Then. I built up around that simple base. The happiness system for me really just gives me MORE reason to do that. Now I'm not just building empty elaborate constructs. I'm building towns for my NPCs to be happy. And also for those sweet sweet Pylons. Plusssss I feel like since in many ways the game obligates you to make sure your NPCs are okay since in many cases they're useful to you...making them happy should also be a factor.
Well, consider this: tomorrow Relogic releases a patch that adds price penalties to NPC living beyond a certain distance from the spawn. Thus forcing centralized base building upon your preferred playstyle. They will justify this by new in-game parameter called, i don't know, let's say "Sense of Security". They will tell you that "you have to keep your NPC secure in a large group at the spawn, because hostile mobs, bad biomes and other lore-justified reasons". Then somebody will find a discord post revealing that Redigit wanted players to engage in centralized base-building and the addition in question was the implementation of this desire. I will understand if this situation will make you upset, and more than that, it will also upset me.
Edit: oh and btw. This Redigit part would be ok, if it was a setup for something bigger, like expanded NPC quest system or, let's say, a base-defence mini game. Just to take Terraria — a game which many Happiness defenders refuse to recognize as a sandbox — and shift it even more in metroidvania direction in a clear and well-thought way. But it doesn't seem to be the plan.
Why should you benefit from treating the NPCs like crap. That's why I don't mind the price penalties and bonuses. Like it makes sense. Why would an unhappy person do anything nice for you. If you don't care about your NPCs enough to make them happy why should they help you?
IIRC this has been addressed in this thread and other threads, but a weird set of gamey preferences, such as, again "living in Desert", which, on top of that, are carefully balanced for maximum housing spread, doesn't turn NPCs from "walking vending machines" to relatable characters i feel like i should care about. As a matter of fact it makes them worse in that regard, as now i can't even freely apply headcanon without game holding my hand. And that comes from a guy who, at early stages, really tried to suggest improvements that will add a meaning and, dare i say so, "soul" to the entire system. Now, seeing that situation didn't improve with 1.4.1 (and as some say, it was made worse, but i've yet to play it to see for myself) and there likely will be no major overhaul to Happiness, all i ask for is removal of price hikes, so i can pretend this entire story simply never happened.
 
Last edited:
Bummed to see that 1.4.1 didn't address this. Ah well, can't have everything. Thank goodness it's still an amazing game. It would be nice to have some "after the fact" commentary from devs, even if it's just "Yeah we considered removing it after community feedback, but just didn't have the time or resources", or perhaps "We think it's a great system and some players agree, and that's why we didn't change it".
 
Back
Top Bottom