Game Mechanics The Problem With NPC Happiness

[Nicol Bolas]

You say it is a one sided choice because the other side is just "dumb". This is not an argument, explain why it is dumb. I personally would be willing to pay more to have all my NPCs in one place because it can save time. Also, don't make blanket claims about all of Terraria players. Remember, the poll currently favors keeping the system.

First, I didn't make a claim about "all of Terraria players". I said, "everyone who is against happiness". That claim is based on the multitude of discussions about it on these forums.

As for why it is dumb, that's basic human nature. Human beings will, generally speaking, optimize the fun out of a game if that option is presented to them. They will play in a boring, uninteresting way if it gives them an advantage. So if it is between player convenience and gameplay benefit, they will choose the latter far more often than the former.

The old system was even more restricting, forcing you to place all your NPCs near each other, lest you have to walk for 5 minutes each time you want to trade with the arms dealer. How is this not restricting?

And yes, the restrictions the old system impose do make sense, just as is makes sense for the NPCs to charge higher prices because you treat them poorly.

The difference between these is which mechanics are arbitrarily imposed by the system and which are natural outgrowths of basic rules of the gamespace.

Having to walk 5 minutes to trade with the Arms Dealer is a natural, expected consequence of you putting the Arms Dealer 5 minutes of travel time away from you. That is not an arbitrary rule imposed upon you by the game; it's a thing you did to yourself knowing full well what the consequences would be.

NPCs charging higher prices because they don't want to be anywhere near more than one other person is not a natural, expected consequence of anything about how human beings act around one another. Nobody looked at Terraria 1.3.5 and said, "hey, those NPCs ought to be charging people more money!".

That's an arbitrary rule imposed upon you by the game.

One of these is a restriction based on the physics of the game space; the other is a restriction based on an arbitrary rule that says you'll get punished for doing that.

It's the difference between "running a marathon is hard" and "running around the block is hard because someone shattered my kneecaps".

A decision that doesn't make much of a difference isn't interesting, and thus not fun. Can't we all agree on that point?

How do you define "make a difference"?

To some people, putting NPCs farther apart "makes a difference" compared to putting them closer together. To others, it makes a difference to move them closer together.

Yes, this is a big benefit, but having a monlithic, cheap, easy-to-defend base with all you're stuff in one central location is too.

Easy to defend from what? Nobody attacks your base; even invasions happen in the middle of the map, which may not be where your base is.

If you're talking about defending them from infections, that's just doing standard biome quarantines against infections. Any "damage" they cause is temporary anyway; you can just move the NPCs elsewhere while you repair the situation.

 

[PixelPatcher]

NPCs charging higher prices because they don't want to be anywhere near more than one other person is not a natural, expected consequence of anything about how human beings act around one another. Nobody looked at Terraria 1.3.5 and said, "hey, those NPCs ought to be charging people more money!".

If some god-like entity forced me to live in a tiny little shoebox with nothing but a table, a chair, and a torch on the 5th floor of a tall skyscraper with 20 other people and didn't let me leave the building and go outside, I would be pretty pissed and would most likely expect some more money from the guy.... This is natural and part of human nature.

How do you define "make a difference"?

By "make a difference", I mean that the decision will have lasting effects on how you play the game. One choice will result in a different situation later on than the other one.

Easy to defend from what? Nobody attacks your base; even invasions happen in the middle of the map, which may not be where your base is.

Have you never had an NPC die from being attacked by enemies? Do you know how inconvenient that is? In one of my 1.4 worlds, I still don't have the merchant because he died at some point, and I haven't been able to get him to move in again. Building a monlithic base with all the NPCs trapped inside where there are no enemies is a HUGE benefit.

Edit: Also, you literally said "nobody", how is this not a blanket statement?

 

[smeagolheart]

"Spreading your NPCs out:

PROS:

CONS:

• Harder to access. "

You can build teleporters to get the same effect as pylons so it's the exact same con in the new system. The con is no different.

 

[PixelPatcher]

"Spreading your NPCs out:

PROS:

CONS:

• Harder to access. "

You can build teleporters to get the same effect as pylons so it's the exact same con in the new system. The con is no different.

Yes, but this is still a con because in a monolithic base, you don't need to spend all the time and money to set it up.

 

[Talerax]

Have you never had an NPC die from being attacked by enemies? Do you know how inconvenient that is? In one of my 1.4 worlds, I still don't have the merchant because he died at some point, and I haven't been able to get him to move in again. Building a monlithic base with all the NPCs trapped inside where there are no enemies is a HUGE benefit.

My Angler died once in the ocean and at that time I thought that he just wondered around and drown so I just added tall walls on both sides. If he did die from monster, I will now change my opinion of this system from 'the system that punish one playstyle' to 'the system that punish you for whatever you used to do'

 

[Mihn]

New System

Putting all of your NPCs in the same place:

PROS:

• Easy to access.

CONS:

• Higher prices.

Spreading your NPCs out:

PROS:

• Lower Prices.
• Pylons.

CONS:

• Harder to access.

Harder to access isn't even a downside, since pylons negate that entirely. Also add "less chances of a NPC massacre" to the pros of spreading NPCs out because enemies can't spawn offscreen so every town you are not at will be safe, compared to the central base where everyone can die in one swoop if you are around.

You don't need to defend NPCs that are 1000 blocks away. Nothing will kill them except their own stupidity.

From what I see, there are no cons to spreading out NPCs. Giving pylons to small town already overpowers the convenience of having everyone in one place and is already a big incentive to build minibuilds. The price penalty (and heck, even the reduction) is entirely unnecessary if Red just want people to "build small towns".

If some god-like entity forced me to live in a tiny little shoebox with nothing but a table, a chair, and a torch on the 5th floor of a tall skyscraper with 20 other people and didn't let me leave the building and go outside, I would be pretty pissed and would most likely expect some more money from the guy.... This is natural and part of human nature.

Said god-like being also saved at least 5 NPCs from getting rot in some chasm, purified one from the depths of hell, killed many of the world evils to protect them, and most importantly build them the house in the first place. Don't know about you, but I wouldn't go complain to the one that saved my life that "it's too crowded, even though I have a big- room with all kind of toys you gave me to play around with". It's not like I shoved every single NPC into a 9x3 tube to be some sort of meat chamber.

Though I'm considering setting a King/Queen's Statue into a lava pit due to how cranky everyone's become.

Also I will quote myself again (with minor edit)

I always liked the idea of having a central base that slowly gets more lively as the game progress. It's nice to see Dirtmouth in Hollow Knight went from just the Elder Bug to a bunch of other bugs, some open up shops, some blabber non-stop,... They all give the place a lively atmosphere from the state of lonliness and isolation previously. Same with Terraria, despite me being a total builder but I like seeing the game going from 1 wooden box to... a bigger, more intricate box with random decorations, banners everywhere.

So why am I being punished for that? Is my method of playing not valid? Is my viewpoint of a sandbox game not good enough?
I'm OKAY with pylons and their requirement. They just need to ditch the penalty, then a lot of people would be perfectly fine. In a perfect world, castles/big build should get another bonus to be balanced with pylons, but I will take the penalty removal.

 

[PixelPatcher]

Said god-like being also saved at least 5 NPCs from getting rot in some chasm, purified one from the depths of hell, killed many of the world evils to protect them, and most importantly build them the house in the first place. Don't know about you, but I wouldn't go complain to the one that saved my life that "it's too crowded, even though I have a big- room with all kind of toys you gave me to play around with". It's not like I shoved every single NPC into a 9x3 tube to be some sort of meat chamber.

If I were an NPC, it wouldn’t really matter how many good things you did for me. You’re arguing that, if you save someone’s life, they get to be your slave. I think it is reasonable for a person to be angry if you force them to live somewhere they don’t want to next to people they don’t like, no matter what you have done for them in the past. I also think it is reasonable for a person to charge more money, if they don’t like you or are generally unhappy.

Also, you clearly aren’t in a stay-at-home order if you think a big room with a bunch of toys is enough to keep someone sane, not to mention happy.

So why am I being punished for that? Is my method of playing not valid? Is my viewpoint of a sandbox game not good enough?

You can’t use the sandbox game argument to justify removing punishments for certain play styles. That argument, if lead to it’s inevitable conclusion, will result
in a boring game that is no fun to play. I have clearly established that in my previous posts.

At the end of the day, it’s up to Relogic to decide which play styles are valid, and they are clearly aiming for realism with the happiness system. Your play style is simply unrealistic, so it is penalized.

Here is the question I have for you, if this system was in place from the moment Terraria was released, would you be complaining about it? If that answer is no, then why is it an issue other than it’s change and change is automatically bad? If your answer is yes, then why is realism in a game a bad thing? I understand that a game can be too realistic, but this system is not that. There are still plenty of ways to approach NPCs, so I don’t find the system at all limiting. For example, you can cluster them in different biomes using the pylons, or you could spread them out in a single large town and connect them with minecarts, and if you want to build a big castle, you can still build a big castle, just don’t put all of your NPCs there as if they’re serfs.

I think the happiness system is simple: Treat your NPCs well and with respect, and give them the things they want, and they will reward you for it. I can’t believe such a simple, sensible change would be this controversial.

Edit: My old pre-Hardmode strategy relied on getting meteorite armor before defeating any bosses. I can’t do that anymore, but I’m not complaining saying that “Terraria is a sandbox game, so I should be able to get meteorite armor before defeating bosses, Isn’t my play style valid?”

 

[Snickerbobble]

A decision that doesn't make much of a difference isn't interesting, and thus not fun. Can't we all agree on that point?

It makes plenty of difference. It lets people build the way they wanna build without missing out on stuff. If you only allow one way of building, that makes things more similar, which I think is what's not as fun. Limiting building options does not allow more building options.

 

[Mihn]

Also, you clearly aren’t in a stay-at-home order if you think a big room with a bunch of toys is enough to keep someone sane, not to mention happy.

And now I'm giving them an empty box stripped to the bare minimum in the middle of nowhere. This supposedly makes them happy. As opposed to before where everyone go out and talk and play rock paper scissors, now everyone is a giant loner.
They are totally happy and sane with even less people around them, in a worse box than what I would usually make for them.

Your play style is simply unrealistic, so it is penalized.

Can you explain to me exactly how is it "simply" unrealistic? What is unrealistic about people gathering to a big town? Is everyone, including the most extroverted people, suddenly getting cranky about having more than 4 people around them realistic in any way, shape or form?

and they are clearly aiming for realism with the happiness system

Demanding realism in a game about killing lovecraftian monsters with a catsword? This game is as detached from reality as it gets.

Here is the question I have for you, if this system was in place from the moment Terraria was released, would you be complaining about it?

If the local grocery store suddenly charges me more money because of arbitrary reasons, yes, I would complain about it. And realistically, that is a pretty good way to make people simply go to another store.

See where I'm going with this?

No, the intention wasn't realism at all. If they aimed for realism, they failed spectacularly. Happiness were created so that people would build more towns everywhere because that's what Red wanted. I can fetch the exact screenshot from Discord for you if you want.

If they simply added pylons and give a price cut when building town, okay. Fine. Me and around 90% of people against this change would be okay, that's already a big encouragement to build more towns considering pylons are a godsend mechanic. But no, there has to be a penalty for some reason.

And to this point I have yet to see a proper explanation why a penalty needed to exist if the point was just to make people build more towns. That is the problem. Can you give me a reason why a penalty should be in place?

Edit: My old pre-Hardmode strategy relied on getting meteorite armor before defeating any bosses. I can’t do that anymore, but I’m not complaining saying that “Terraria is a sandbox game, so I should be able to get meteorite armor before defeating bosses, Isn’t my play style valid?”

I wouldn't complain about any of the nerfs/combat changes because there is a person that explains most of that decision (Lein). I may or may not like most of them but I understand what they are going for, game balance isn't my forte and I'm sure they know more than I do. I don't usually go for the most optimal tactics available either way, so if they think Reaver or whatever breaks progression, so be it.

The penalty doesn't affect the game balance or progression. The old system wasn't broken. They were totally okay with it until 1.4. And now suddenly you get a price hike for building the same way you do the last 5+ years.

Once again, if you or anyone else are able to give me a proper reason why a penalty has to be in place if they just want people to play with the new mechanic, I would happily withdraw from this conversation.

The existance of a penalty makes people feel forced to play a certain way. Take that away, you curb most of the complaints. Simple as that.

 

[Tyrian3k]

f I were an NPC, it wouldn’t really matter how many good things you did for me. You’re arguing that, if you save someone’s life, they get to be your slave. I think it is reasonable for a person to be angry if you force them to live somewhere they don’t want to next to people they don’t like, no matter what you have done for them in the past. I also think it is reasonable for a person to charge more money, if they don’t like you or are generally unhappy.

Also, you clearly aren’t in a stay-at-home order if you think a big room with a bunch of toys is enough to keep someone sane, not to mention happy.

They are staying in a room that was built free of charge for them and they then complain that it's not good enough for them. It's called "Looking a gift horse in the mouth". But I guess you find it realistic to complain to someone who saved you and even provided a home for you free of charge. Guess I need to get some rope and put that ungrateful goblin back into the caves the way I found him.
Besides, they pretty much want to be under a stay at home order, considering that they penalize you if you put more than one person to socialize with and have no issues being locked up inside of a wooden box with no actual exit.

You can’t use the sandbox game argument to justify removing punishments for certain play styles. That argument, if lead to it’s inevitable conclusion, will result
in a boring game that is no fun to play. I have clearly established that in my previous posts.

At the end of the day, it’s up to Relogic to decide which play styles are valid, and they are clearly aiming for realism with the happiness system. Your play style is simply unrealistic, so it is penalized.

Here is the question I have for you, if this system was in place from the moment Terraria was released, would you be complaining about it? If that answer is no, then why is it an issue other than it’s change and change is automatically bad? If your answer is yes, then why is realism in a game a bad thing? I understand that a game can be too realistic, but this system is not that. There are still plenty of ways to approach NPCs, so I don’t find the system at all limiting. For example, you can cluster them in different biomes using the pylons, or you could spread them out in a single large town and connect them with minecarts, and if you want to build a big castle, you can still build a big castle, just don’t put all of your NPCs there as if they’re serfs.

I think the happiness system is simple: Treat your NPCs well and with respect, and give them the things they want, and they will reward you for it. I can’t believe such a simple, sensible change would be this controversial.

Edit: My old pre-Hardmode strategy relied on getting meteorite armor before defeating any bosses. I can’t do that anymore, but I’m not complaining saying that “Terraria is a sandbox game, so I should be able to get meteorite armor before defeating bosses, Isn’t my play style valid?”

Realism has nothing to do with this and I wonder how you even came to that conclusion. NPCs just want three things: The right biome, the right neighbor and not too many neighbors. You can still shove them all into tiny boxes since their actual home has no impact on their happiness whatsoever. You can build a palace for them with a beautiful garden, a swimming pool and just about any recreational activity that Terraria has to offer, but they'd prefer to live in a tiny wooden box with no door if it's next to the right other NPC and/or in the right biome. Very realistic, that.
The reason people complain about this change is because, as you admit yourself, it takes away options from them. The issue is that these options, unlike the one you present, relate solely to aesthetics, not gameplay. Deciding on when you should have what kind of gear is a different thing compared to deciding what the living arrangements of NPCs should look like.

And I wonder what treating NPCs with respect actually means. After all, you can lock them in a small wooden box, kill their best friend in front of them and they'll be just as happy as before once their friend respawns. Once again, very realistic.

Have you never had an NPC die from being attacked by enemies? Do you know how inconvenient that is? In one of my 1.4 worlds, I still don't have the merchant because he died at some point, and I haven't been able to get him to move in again. Building a monlithic base with all the NPCs trapped inside where there are no enemies is a HUGE benefit.

No, that basically never happens to me because I know how to prevent that from happening. Mostly has to do with not having your NPCs live on the ground floor, not fighting invasion events right next to them and not building your boss arena to fight the Destroyer in right next to their homes, really.
And that Merchant not spawning sounds pretty out of the ordinary. Normally they just respawn the next day or even earlier and it typically takes 5-10 minutes at most. NPC spawn rate is pretty easy to see when killing the Guide over and over for the purpose of fighting the WoF.

 

[Flubman]

By "make a difference", I mean that the decision will have lasting effects on how you play the game. One choice will result in a different situation later on than the other one.

But the pylons being locked behind NPC happiness already gives base-building strategies enough consequence.

 

[Flubman]

Also, is there a single liked post in this thread that defends the happiness-based price increases? I don't think there is, and that says a lot.

 

[smeagolheart]

Happiness does not only affect price increases, it affects sell prices.

So you get burned both ways - buying and selling - if you don't max out happiness to the particular NPC you are selling to.

 

[PixelPatcher]

Also, is there a single liked post in this thread that defends the happiness-based price increases? I don't think there is, and that says a lot.

I have one, maybe two.

 

[PixelPatcher]

Also, is there a single liked post in this thread that defends the happiness-based price increases? I don't think there is, and that says a lot.

Also, don’t forget that the MAJORITY of people are in favor of the system, you are a minority, a vocal one, but still a minority.

 

[PixelPatcher]

But the pylons being locked behind NPC happiness already gives base-building strategies enough consequence.

Please read what Iwas originally responding to when I said that.

 

[PixelPatcher]

They are staying in a room that was built free of charge for them and they then complain that it's not good enough for them. It's called "Looking a gift horse in the mouth". But I guess you find it realistic to complain to someone who saved you and even provided a home for you free of charge. Guess I need to get some rope and put that ungrateful goblin back into the caves the way I found him.

Yes, if someone saved my life and gave me a free house, I would be grateful and thank them. But if they also chained me to that house and gave me no freedom to move somewhere else, I think I would be in the right to want it to be to my liking. The important point is the chain. The happiness system reflects how I would behave in the NPC's place, so I consider it realistic. And if that makes be ungrateful, so be it.

Realism has nothing to do with this and I wonder how you even came to that conclusion. NPCs just want three things: The right biome, the right neighbor and not too many neighbors. You can still shove them all into tiny boxes since their actual home has no impact on their happiness whatsoever. You can build a palace for them with a beautiful garden, a swimming pool and just about any recreational activity that Terraria has to offer, but they'd prefer to live in a tiny wooden box with no door if it's next to the right other NPC and/or in the right biome. Very realistic, that.
The reason people complain about this change is because, as you admit yourself, it takes away options from them. The issue is that these options, unlike the one you present, relate solely to aesthetics, not gameplay. Deciding on when you should have what kind of gear is a different thing compared to deciding what the living arrangements of NPCs should look like.

And I wonder what treating NPCs with respect actually means. After all, you can lock them in a small wooden box, kill their best friend in front of them and they'll be just as happy as before once their friend respawns. Once again, very realistic.

Demanding realism in a game about killing lovecraftian monsters with a catsword? This game is as detached from reality as it gets.

Besides, they pretty much want to be under a stay at home order, considering that they penalize you if you put more than one person to socialize with and have no issues being locked up inside of a wooden box with no actual exit.

I never said the system was perfectly realistic, I just said it was "aiming" for realism. I understand that Terraria is an inherently unrealistic game. But that doesn't mean that more realism isn't good.

Happiness doesn't come from material wealth (actually, it seems to be the opposite, look up "minimalism"), it's called "money can't buy happiness". Thinking that giving the NPCs as much material wealth they want and that should, for some reason, make them happy isn't how the world works. Also, the happiness system doesn't make you isolate your NPCs, it does just the opposite, it greatly rewards clustering you NPCs into small towns with 2 to 3 NPCs each, because they prefer the same biomes and like each other.

 

[PixelPatcher]

It makes plenty of difference. It lets people build the way they wanna build without missing out on stuff. If you only allow one way of building, that makes things more similar, which I think is what's not as fun. Limiting building options does not allow more building options.

"without missing out on stuff"

So... without consequence. "Missing out on stuff" is the entire point of a video game: I like the corruption, and can't stand the crimson. This means that I miss out on all the great weapons the crimson has to offer, like the vampire knives. (I know I can create a separate crimson world and go there, but doing that makes me cringe, so I don't.) "Missing out on stuff" is what makes decisions in video games interesting and fun.

Terraria has more limitations than any other sandbox game I know, it's not supposed to be "unlimited".

If the local grocery store suddenly charges me more money because of arbitrary reasons, yes, I would complain about it. And realistically, that is a pretty good way to make people simply go to another store.

See where I'm going with this?

No, I don't. If a grocery store overcharges for an item, it overcharges for an item, regardless of whether it used to charge less. The only reason you would complain in one situation over the other is because you were already shopping at one store, and would have never started shopping in the other. Taking this analogy back to Terraria means that you would never have started playing if this system was in place from the beginning, which I find hard to believe.

Once again, if you or anyone else are able to give me a proper reason why a penalty has to be in place if they just want people to play with the new mechanic, I would happily withdraw from this conversation.

In the early game, yes, pylons are a great advantage. But as you progress through the game, with teleporters that can be placed anywhere, and movement accessories and minecarts that allow you to traverse the entire map in seconds. The advantage becomes far less important.

At the same time this is happening You get more and more stuff, as well as more and more NPCs that need to be maintained. It becomes easier and easier to have them all in the same place where you can see all of them without having to open the map. I also find I tend to spend more and more time at my base, crafting and fighting enemies in my arena, but that might just be me.

The end result is, without any penalties, people will eventually revert to having all of their NPCs in one place again, defeating the purpose of the pylon and happiness system. Without the penalties, the path of least resistance is to simply ignore the new system, which, as you said, isn't what Red wanted.

 

[Snickerbobble]

"without missing out on stuff"

So... without consequence. "Missing out on stuff" is the entire point of a video game: I like the corruption, and can't stand the crimson. This means that I miss out on all the great weapons the crimson has to offer, like the vampire knives. (I know I can create a separate crimson world and go there, but doing that makes me cringe, so I don't.) "Missing out on stuff" is what makes decisions in video games interesting and fun.

Terraria has more limitations than any other sandbox game I know, it's not supposed to be "unlimited".

I don't know how that even remotely relates.

Crimson items aren't convenient, QoL items. (You can get most Crimson items now in a Corrupt world now btw, with graveyard biome)

Why the heck does building one way give a consequence? ....This is still a question no one has been able to answer and I've asked it 5 or 6 times by now... and why are you fine with a consequence for one way of building.. which is a way people have been building for the past 9 years?

 

[PixelPatcher]

I don't know how that even remotely relates.

Crimson items aren't convenient, QoL items. (You can get most Crimson items now in a Corrupt world now btw, with graveyard biome)

Why the heck does building one way give a consequence? ....This is still a question no one has been able to answer and I've asked it 5 or 6 times by now... and why are you fine with a consequence for one way of building.. which is a way people have been building for the past 9 years?

This is by no means the first time building one way over another has had consequences. For example, ever since the beginning of the game, people have been lifting their bases off the ground to help protect against enemies. This choice is a tradeoff: lifting it off the ground does provide better protection, but it can make your base harder to get into and it could look ugly.

Why doesn't this count as building one way having consequences?

As for it being the way people build for the last 9 years, I don't think this should matter. It's simply saying: "It's been this way for such and such a long time, so it should continue to be this way until the end of time." It shouldn't matter what's happened for the past nine years, what's best for the game is what's best for the game. I haven't seen a single person make a compelling argument saying that this new system somehow breaks the game.