Creature Naming

shelby • 5 February 2015 at 6:48 PM

Hello.
I couldn't find a similar suggestion, so I thought I'd go ahead and suggest it.

My idea is that the naming system be redone, so that, more than one creature can have the same name.
When you go to name a creature, and the name is taken, you can't name them that.
With this idea, we would remove that mechanic, and you'd be able to name your creature anything, even if the name is already being used.

All creatures receive a unique number once they are stolen, so they do have a unique identifying feature that way.
It's hard to find good names now, and eventually you'll only have the option of using random names like "l80jd".
Obviously, that will make EggCave not so much fun anymore.

Obviously inappropriate names shouldn't be used, but they can be reported and dealt with.

I'm not sure how difficult it would be for this mechanic to get changed/removed, but I think it would be a positive change.

//Update:Edit
Maybe we could have a new limit of 5-10 (or whatever number) per name rather than just one? This would be more fair for people who may have paid for names and be more acceptable to everyone.

#suggestion

univea • 5 February 2015 at 7:07 PM

@shelby
I don't know, I think it's fine the way it is. Mortal creatures die every day and free up names, and the system we're using seems to work fine. It'd be weird to see a bunch of fire - themed creatures named 'Fire' or something, too. I don't know if that makes any sense, I'm really tired, but I've been around for quite a while and even when I was a lot younger I didn't have any problems with the way creatures were named. It makes each creature unique and it's a lot more satisfying when you get a great name.

shelby • 5 February 2015 at 7:13 PM

@univea
Immortal creatures never die, though, and eventually all names will be taken until you can only generate random names, as I mentioned above.
It might be "weird" to have creatures that all have the same name, but at least the person would be happen with the names.

I've been here since '09, and it's a bit annoying not being able to find a name you like, and having to search up on google a different language or the name of a random thing just to find a "great" name.

As I said, the creatures all have a unique ID number, which is what makes them unique.
Names are a personal thing, so being able to name your creature anything without restrictions (as long as it follows the site rules and is not inappropriate) would be better.

I respect your opinion and point of view, though, I see problems arising in the future, if not sooner. You won't be able to get a great name at some point, and will only be able to name them "ji90j903" and such, since other names are already taken.

immortalraven • 5 February 2015 at 7:49 PM

@shelby
Sorry but I disagree with this :c
Maybe make it so two critters can have the same name but not like 2o+ critters can have the same name.

A lot of people have spent a LOT on names. It wouldn't be fair for them if this is implemented. I would have LOVED this if this was implemented in the beginning so I wouldn't have had to spend so much on names but I have spent 7ooCC for some names which is the most I've done for names but others have spent even more than that in CC, EC, critters for names. It's not fair for them to have spent a lot of CC or EC or critters for the names they have because they will become worth like nothing if like 2o or more critters have the same name o3o
Plus a lot of people like newer players make a living on finding and selling names on here. Some would have hardly any nice critters/a lot of EC/have CC if they didn't sell names. I know some that can't be active on events to get LEs and the cave LEs aren't worth that much usually so they sell names to make a 'living' on here.

And people are still finding amazing names today. There are a lot of words that exist.
Though if it comes to it I think the older abandoned accounts' names should be taken and their critters given random names. I know a few other sites that do that for ones that have been gone for awhile. Though I don't like that either cause if they come back then it wouldn't be fair for them. So I don't really think that should. I like the only able to have 2 maybe at most like 5 critters have the same name but other than that I don't see a fair way for getting more available names on here

But right now it is still easy to find great names not taken. And not everything would have to be random. I think it would take a long long time for everything to be randomized words. Because people can make words like 'BrokenHeart', CrimsonRose' which aren't as good as names like 'Broken' or 'Crimson' but better than 78t7tgyu and there are quite a few of those that are easy to find not taken

shelby • 5 February 2015 at 8:00 PM

@immortalraven
I did take that into consideration when making this suggestion.

It wouldn't be fair to remove "abandoned accounts" because the owner may one day come back, only to find everything they had removed, and that wouldn't be fair by any means.

I understand some people might not like the idea, because they paid for names, but I still think it's a good idea.
There might be a lot of good names still out there, and it might take a while until we get to a point where only random names are available, the point is, at some point we will get there.

I understand that people might even get upset if it gets implemented, and that new users have a hard time getting "nice" creatures because they can't get CC, have a lot of EC or what have you, but you can always easily earn EC, if you're willing to.

Maybe a limit per name would be acceptable and wouldn't upset as many people, but I think that would be a detail that would be up to staff and not necessarily users.
A limit of 5-10 maybe.

In the end, whether this happens or not is up to staff, and the finer details of how it would work and whether there would still be any limitations or not is again, up to them.

But I might add a new limit rather than unlimited.

immortalraven • 5 February 2015 at 8:10 PM

@shelby
Mmk

And I know that's why I said I liked the having a limit more since I said it'd be unfair for them also.

If a lot get upset with it it'd probably wouldn't get implemented. There aren't re-releases of critters cause people got so upset bout it. Though re-releases of critters in a small amount wouldn't bring value down as much as this would for names if not a limit. I know some would up and quit if it was unlimited. I wouldn't cause I have an addiction to this but I know some of my friends would since they'd feel cheated sorta I guess. Don't know if that's the right word.

Though I would agree on this with a limit on it. Which I hope if the staff does make it so more than one critter has the same name then it have a limit and they'd understand about the values on it for them to make a limit

shelby • 5 February 2015 at 8:14 PM

@immortalraven

I didn't think a lot of people would be THAT upset if it was implemented, but I forget that I have a high maturity and some people don't and they'd overreact (no offense meant by that statement at all, please don't take it negatively!!)

But hopefully, this way, if implemented, people will be at least okay with it, rather than explode with rage 😋
I wouldn't want people to get so upset over something (seemingly) meaningless that they quit, that's not what I aim to do, and I'm sure the staff wouldn't want that either.

But I guess the new limitation number would be up to the staff, and I don't even know what most people would consider fair.
I think a somewhat "high" number (5-20) would be fair, but I suppose that's going to be an opinion and some people would go for it, and some wouldn't. In the end, it's up to the staff or the masses of people if they create a poll with a number.
I DUNNO.

immortalraven • 5 February 2015 at 8:26 PM

@shelby
I don't. I just have spent a crap ton so I don't think it fair for unlimited. I'm ALL for having a limit for it. Especially cause I want the name of my boyfriend and some others like Shadow and Fire >.> I have my name already. I have his name as this -Chris- but rather just Chris normally o3o

Yeah me too. I don't even see why people hate on the idea of re-release critters. A lot of older players said the ones that had been didn't even lose value >.> And I have spent even more on critters than names lol. Just names are a bit different than just re-releasing small amounts of critters in a small amount of time and making it a little difficult to get em
Yeah, lol when CC trading was taken away a few people left too xD People just make huge deals over things. I didn't mind it since technically we could still trade for freezes and such x3

I'd say no more than 1o. If 2o I think some would get a bit mad. But eeh oh well. Though I think for the original species names like Flintar there should only be like two. They're kinda more special than regular names but don't think they could limit them and regular ones to be different

laurel_wreath • 5 February 2015 at 8:30 PM

@immortalraven @shelby
Ok from the perspective of a fairly new user, I actually don't like this idea. At first when I joined i found it bit stressfull that I couldn't name my critters whatever I liked. But since then it have become one of the things, that I personally enjoy most about the site (in comparance with other other similar sites I've been part of). I find that it pushes me to find names that i really like and i value the names more and I really like that they are unique and that there aren't like 50 other creatures out there named the same. And believe it or not, I don't think that removing limit on names will make nonsense names go away, I just think an idea like this will make people think less about the names they give.
Having a bigger limit, well I like that better. But the question is if that's even possible or just really difficault to re-code the site for that? I wouldn't know.
I do understand why people would like a change like this though, but well I wouldn't. That's just my opinion.

shelby • 5 February 2015 at 8:33 PM

@immortalraven

Yeah a limited number of a certain name seems fair for everyone, in the end.

Yeah I often over look or forget that some people might get really upset over it. To me, it just seems like a small detail that would make the site a little better in some way, but to others, it's a huge thing because they spent money or creatures on names.

Yeah I thought 10 would be a good number, but, I suppose it would depend on the masses and what they think. Some people might even think that's a lot, but if you think about it, it could be 100, so you gotta think of the bigger picture lol.

I'm not really sure how it would work if they do decide to implement it, and all that, would be up to them, if they do implement it at all.

I was just thinking about how other sites work and how popular they are, and thought it'd be a nice idea to bring over here, and possibly bring in more people and such, I didn't consider people getting upset at first, because I thought it'd be a positive change.

tetraethylammonium • 5 February 2015 at 8:36 PM

@shelby

I never really had a problem with naming (all have been neurotoxins till recently) 😋 but I kinda agree and disagree at the same time. Maybe names like original names should be kept to the limit of 1. And although most good names are taken, many names are still available, for example I found the name "Divine" wasn't taken yet. But I would agree if there was a limit of 5-10 or something, I find that newer users have a really hard time finding names they like and it is slightly frustrating if one is trying to look for a name like "flames" or "frozen" or something along those lines. To older users, I cannot really say as I only joined in December...

shelby • 5 February 2015 at 8:40 PM

@laurel_wreath
I understand your viewpoint, which is why I suggested a limit of maybe 10!

@tetraethylammonium
Yeah, I'm just thinking about down the line, in the future. Not necessarily right now, but you know in one year, 2, 5, a loooot of 'good' names will be gone by that time, and it'll be difficult to find a decent name.

Maybe that's something I should add, that it's not necessarily a problem now, but in a couple years, it will be.

shirona • 5 February 2015 at 10:45 PM

@shelby
Oh, boy...
I'm so on the fence about this.

Honestly, I dread the day when there won't be a single decent name available. One of the options mentioned above sounds acceptable: either name purging inactive accounts (3 years maybe?), or more preferably allowing a limited amount of creatures to have the same name.

However, I joined back in 2013. It was frustrating when I couldn't find a single decent name available for my commons, but I would look for names that were previously taken and suddenly find them available again! After nearly 2 years of the occasional name hunt, I've collected enough fairly decent names to give to each of my creatures. A small portion I'll admit to have traded CC/EC/event prizes for.

I just spent the last 3 days doing my occasional name hunt again and found roughly 40 names available. So, I also don't believe this needs to be implemented as of right now.

In the future, when the name apocalypse does come around, I rather have a limited amount of creatures with the same name than endure seeing/giving my creatures garbage names. I'm willing cut my losses for the names I have traded for.

shelby • 5 February 2015 at 10:56 PM

@element
That's what I meant, but maybe wasn't clear enough, is in the future, it's going to be hard to find a decent name.
Since we can Immortalize creatures now, and it's not that hard if you know what you're doing, eventually, it'll be almost impossible to find a name you like.

So this doesn't need to be implemented right away, but at some point, it's probably going to be needed.
I can see it being a problem in the future, that you can't find a good name for your creatures and people being upset about that and not joining or quitting because of it.
Right now, people might get mad because you can still find decent names, but in the future, that's going to change.

A limit of 10 (or whatever numbers) would be okay, because then you at least get a chance to snag a good name.
But even then, EVENTUALLY (10 years+) we'd run into the same problem, where all the good names are taken, and on immortalized creatures.

I can't see purging inactive/old accounts, because there is always a chance that person might come back, and that just doesn't seem right at all. Especially as the site grows and becomes more popular, old users will want to come back, and want to hope on their accounts with the creatures that they had/have with good names.

I think whatever happens, the staff gets to decide, but I think that something will, eventually, need to be done about the naming system, as it is now, or else the site won't be able to continue to grow at some point.

fiera-nyx • 5 February 2015 at 11:37 PM

I like this idea (at least, 5 or 10 per name) - personally I hate adding numbers, underscores, dashes etc to names. I do try and get creative but there are only so many things I can come up with that don't sound overly stupid. I may in the end resort to naming them: pet0001, pet0002, pet0003, pet0004 etc XD

shelby • 5 February 2015 at 11:40 PM

@fiera-nyx
Yeah, that's what I mean.
It gets aggravating to try and get the name you like, so you just end up naming them something silly.
Thank you for your input!

furfur • 7 February 2015 at 5:43 AM

@Shelby

I have mixed thoughts about this but I'd say I'm fine with the way it is now.

I have 600+ creatures all with unique names. I have no problem finding new names for my creatures and most of mine do not have things like hyphens, underscores, and numbers.

When I look through coves while feeding or stalking I enjoy seeing the unique names users come up with and I also feel really good when I think of something nice for one of my creatures.

If a user really wants a name they can just add some hyphens or underscores. They don't look a bad as numbers and you can get almost any name you want if you don't mind the look. I know not everyone does like the look but it is an option.

There are millions of words in the English language alone. Add in other languages and names then we have billions of names to choose from for our creatures with new words and names being created all the time (since languages are evolving quickly). Egg Cave has been around for over 5 years now and I don't think we even have 2 million creatures yet. Its going to be a long time before we truly run out of names.

metaphor • 7 February 2015 at 7:18 AM

@shelby

I wouldn't mind if a name could be used more than once, although I'm not sure how that could be done. However, I am extremely against allowing names to be used unlimited numbers of times. I know that may sound greedy, but I did spend a lot on names, as have others, and they are a big part of the economy here. Allowing one name to be used, say, three times wouldn't bother me so much and I'd probably actually be okay with that--more names could be available while still allowing names a significant place in the market. Ten is too much imho; five maybe. Three would be best, as to still allow some exclusivity.


Names aren't like creatures where they become rarer with time, even if a lot are released or collected. If names are allowed to be used indefinitely, they actually /do/ become useless. Why would anyone spend 500 CC on a name they could get themselves, after all?

I do wish we could collect names of three characters or less. That would free up quite a few names.

I honestly probably would quit if names became fair game. The game would just become boring as I collect names before I collect creatures, really. But that's just me being selfish, sorry.

Also, mortal creatures do die--as mentioned--which frees up names regularly. I find plenty of great names on a regular basis. It takes patience sometimes, but I find them, and great ones too, like Fiddle and Guinea, not vague names like Kinetically or Inestimably. And of course I am stalking several, but one keeps getting fed and is listed on a dying coves list. >___> Ah whatever, people are just trying to be nice I know...

But I am not against middle ground--again, say, 3-5 per name. That could actually be fun. But please don't substitute one extreme for another. It's just not feasible, especially this far in the game where names are worth something.

Also, please do not make this a value judgment about "maturity," no offense. I am willing to compromise, as are plenty of other people. But I wouldn't appreciate it if I woke up one day and all my names were rendered worthless, considering that I put several years into collecting, just as I can understand where people against re-releases are coming from when they say they don't want their Tines to become worthless if they're made available again for too long--even though I totally disagree with the whole re-release phobia. Middle ground is fine, but again, no need for one extreme for another.

Sorry, this is a touchy subject for me. It's like telling a ton of American patriots that you're acting religiously to take away their guns lol.

UPDATE: I pulled up a babies name site this morning and started plugging in names. Maybe I'm just lucky today--and perhaps it's my taste in names--but I'd sat about 1 in 3 of the names I tried went through. And they're pretty nice names too, albeit not terribly common (Mathis, Gaylord, Goddard, etc). Nevertheless, they're real names and they're out there still.

arvak • 9 February 2015 at 7:28 PM

@shelby
Unlocking names sounds fine to me. I think of these creatures as pets. Pets in real life have the same names - just like people and books and movies and bands. It wouldn't bug me to have a pet with the same name as a hundred others. I can see the point that several have made about not changing this feature (and they are all very good and valid points), but I wanted to throw some support your way. 😊

sprite • 9 February 2015 at 7:37 PM

To say the name system needs to change for the site to grow that is the reason given for re-releases. I just don't think it needs to happen this far into what is a well established name system.

The name market creates a unique trading system imo. Every month people excitedly wait for the new names of creatures to snag. This is a very helpful draw for the site. People who get names can trade them for something of value or keep. I have seen those who start here stalk/grab names and be able to trade up all with just starting with a name that is wanted. Where as they would not have that option if this were implemented. Many cannot trade CC or have sought after creatures to trade.

Have traded for/away, given,stalked and looked for names for almost 5 years. It is what keeps me active on here and I enjoy it. There are many names still left on mortals. Many names still free. Have stalked names for over year and was lucky enough to get some and sometimes not so lucky. Part of the name game.

For active players with good names to lose them in a sense would be a purge just like not wanting to purge old inactive accounts so those players don't lose out with their names/creatures.

I have played on sites where names are free for the taking and play on sites where they are not. I prefer that there be only 1 name vs 5, 6, 10, 200 Davids. Just more unique and would hate to lose that on here.


Yes to 3 character or less names should be implemented for use.

Deleted • 10 February 2015 at 4:30 PM

@Shelby

No thanks, sorry. D;

This would make a LOT of people lose a LOT of money from buying AMAZING names from other people. Take @Frosted or @Mairbear . Great names, they probably spent 2mil+ on them. [just recently, mair and I had an epic bid battle on a name. XD]

Deleted • 10 February 2015 at 4:38 PM

@rushingwater
Thanks for the ping.

There are a lot of name collectors like myself, as well as other users. Although it may sound silly that I have spent over 5,000 CC on names itself, it does mean making the creatures overall perfect.

I personally wouldn't go with the idea keeping in mind all the losses that I'd incur, but I would also love this idea to be implemented. Some time I even need to purchase new names due to lack of ones.

Deleted • 10 February 2015 at 7:59 PM

@metaphor
Yeah name collectors like you would be crazy xD

When one pays 500CC for a name that they realize can be used with as much creatures as possible.

I'd bet that most people would start renaming 10 junk eggs themselves so that the extra-name limit can be pushed around. Lol

metaphor • 11 February 2015 at 10:01 AM

@frosted

I'll be the first to admit that if a limited more-than-one name thing were implemented, I'd be the first to snatch up by very own Stella and Faith. 😋 and if I missed them, I'd still be willing to buy a copy of the name for cc probably haha. But I am not going to support something that would take the joy out of this site for me (unlimited name use), sorry/not sorry. I wouldn't support re-releasing tines every February for the whole month either, even though I am not at all against the principle of re-releases. I just don't believe in one extreme for another.

EDIT: Well, it looks like one of my previous comments was deleted here. So if it upset anyone, I am truly sorry. I didn't mean for it to be read as an attack or anything. I don't think anyone is really a traitor. I was just teasing, but it didn't come out quite right. So again, I am sorry. I respect everyone's opinion. This is just a topic I am passionate about, obviously.

zero_chaos • 13 February 2015 at 12:32 AM

Hi, all! Great discussion!

As a forewarning, we do not expect to be implementing a feature like this anytime in the near future. As many people here have argued, plenty of users spend a lot of time and money (literally!) on receiving the names they like. Making all names available to everyone is like re-releasing Macbots as a common cave creature. Everyone that had traded almost their whole coves for a Macbot would be enraged, and for good reason!

While names are more of a grey-area than actual creatures, as they aren't game-changers for everyone, many of them have sentimental values for people, and collecting a cove with nice names takes a lot of time and dedication. Heck, I've been around here since almost the beginning and I still have a hard time getting the names I want! I like having this as a challenge, but at the same time, if I need a quick name, a random word generator can spout out a ton of appropriate creature names that aren't yet taken as well. As both a name and creature collector, I would have a hard time accepting repeated names as well as a Macbot cave release 😊 Unlike Macbots, however, as fufur said, the English language has so many words that this issue becomes almost negligible.

Having a possibility for duplicate names with a limit (say, three) would propose a myriad of different problems. For one, it would probably be downright confusing, especially for newer players! Searching for names you want would become a nightmare very quickly. In addition, the site started out with this feature for a very specific purpose -- to make your creature noticeably unique. We've had this feature for almost six years (it's so hard to believe how long this site has been here!), and suddenly taking it away would not only cause creatures to lose their most unique aspect about them, but also make them less valuable, give less sentimental meaning, and one more thing -- people who are late to the party will miss out on a lot! If we were to suddenly make a blog post right now announcing an extended limit, many of Egg Cave's players would miss out on the opportunity to snatch the names Zero and Chaos, because I know I sure would snatch them! This would make almost six years of names being passed around suddenly hit a brick wall. Suddenly everybody that wasn't able to be online at the time has been slapped in the face, which is something we seriously don't want to do.

This, however, doesn't mean that there isn't room for improvement. What if we had a system where names would "expire" after their owner has been inactive for a set amount of time (say, two years), at which point all of their creatures would be renamed automatically to a random string (similar to names given by the Mysterious Asteroid)? Maybe that could be an improvement to our system to make names more available to active players rather than having them rot on a player's account that has already quit. What do you guys think? I like the ideas going around on here, we just have to be careful about hurting the value of the coves for our active players 😊 Like @metaphor, I tend to collect names before I do creatures, and making names more available via duplicates would be seriously detrimental to the game for players like us. I really like some of the ideas going on in here, though! Feel free to suggest away, since I'm definitely interested in hearing what you guys think 😊

(Also, @metaphor, I'm not seeing any history of your post having been deleted. Are you sure you submitted something in the first place?)

bubblez • 13 February 2015 at 10:54 AM

@zero_chaos

I disagree with your improvement. There's a user that recently came back, and I'm pretty sure they've been gone for a few years. They had great names. Now what if an automatic system renamed their creatures after X amount of years, and they came back to their creatures with names like 01d38hd? All their hard work they once did, just to come back to nothing. It doesn't seem very fair. Even users that have quit worked hard, and they want to leave their cove as a memory for all the work they did to get it.

I'd be devastated if I quit and came back a few years later to see all my hard worked (in names) to be gone.

zero_chaos • 13 February 2015 at 11:11 AM

@bubblez

Of course! And that's a completely fair point. It was more just an idea to go off in a direction that isn't just making names more available, particularly because it would hurt the active users. Oftentimes other sites actually just terminate accounts that have been inactive for a certain amount of time (I'm certainly not suggesting that Egg Cave follows in this path!), and I've had this happen to some of my accounts on other sites before. It didn't bother me too much, however, seeing as I was inactive for so long, I didn't particularly care for said sites.

It is, however, more of a loyalty points sort of thing. If you left in 2011 before immortality was even a thing, if you were to ever come back, you should be under the expectation that all of your creatures would be dead. If you were lucky enough to have some creatures at a high level, many of them might actually remain. Would that person be upset that their names were gone? Probably not, I'd personally be delighted to come back and see my Onny still alive and well. That isn't coming back to "nothing" at all.

Again, I'm not really "suggesting" that we implement a system like that, but I think that there's more to consider than the user eventually coming back and being upset. After all, if you leave for five years and eventually come back, if you weren't prepared for some things to change, then Egg Cave probably isn't a suitable site for said person!