Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rework HK item names to be more friendly/descriptive #74

Open
dewiniaid opened this issue Jun 12, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

Rework HK item names to be more friendly/descriptive #74

dewiniaid opened this issue Jun 12, 2022 · 4 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request high priority Do this before working on lower priority items. server-side This request or change involves work on the Archipelago Server as well

Comments

@dewiniaid
Copy link
Collaborator

Rename AP-side item names to more accurately reflect the actual received items in HK.

This would need client support as it currently relies on those names to lookup the item it is expecting.

Example renames:

  • Geo_Rock-Default -> 15 Geo
  • Mothwing_Cloak and Shade_Cloak -> Progressive Cloak
  • most underscored item names -> item name without underscores

Some questions:

  • What should Queen/King Fragment and Void Heart be classed as? ("Progressive Fragment" is potentially confusing with Vessel Fragments being a thing)
  • Names for the various spells (maybe Progressive Fireball/Wraiths/Dive?)
@dewiniaid dewiniaid added enhancement New feature or request server-side This request or change involves work on the Archipelago Server as well labels Jun 12, 2022
@Ijwu Ijwu added this to the 0.3.0 milestone Jun 13, 2022
@KonoTyran
Copy link
Contributor

I think progressive fireball works I hear it called that a lot.
Another alternative to spell names is to use "progressive up spell" and "progressive down spell" but I think it would work only if all of them used the same naming convention.

If we use the spells names instead I like the name shriek instead of wraiths

And for void heart I think maybe just "progressive royal charm"?

@BadMagic100
Copy link
Contributor

I will start working on this on the client-side for the upcoming release, but server-side support won't likely be ready.

Proposed solution is to just define the items with the friendly names in IC so the name lookup as presented from the server will remain unchanged. This also would allow defining custom UI definitions/sprites for progressive items (for example, if you send "shade soul" it may be their VS and you can't tell visually from the sender's side). At the minimum this could just be a custom sprite that's half VS, half SS; the high-effort approach would be to define a custom UI def which tracks all sent items to determine what the player will actually get at the time of sending.

@BadMagic100
Copy link
Contributor

BadMagic100 commented Jul 9, 2023

To finalize item names I am suggesting:

  • Progressive Cloak (or Progressive Left/Right Cloak)
  • Progressive Fireball
  • Progressive Dive
  • Progressive Kingsoul
  • Progressive Scream - this one I'm a bit dubious on, but I don't think 'scream' is particularly unintuitive to describe wraiths/shriek, just a bit uncommonly used
  • X geo - for rocks and chests, would need client side logic to pick an appropriate container for rocks as they would all effectively be merged on the server into a single item type
  • X essence - for bosses and roots
  • Everything else - English item name

@BadMagic100
Copy link
Contributor

Would be nice if we could do this for locations too but that's a huge pain I think as each location would be uniquely named (and nobody used hint_location or send_location really)

@BadMagic100 BadMagic100 added the high priority Do this before working on lower priority items. label Oct 29, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request high priority Do this before working on lower priority items. server-side This request or change involves work on the Archipelago Server as well
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants