|
Creatures in the game
|
|
|
|
|
| Conquesti | Date: Monday, 03.02.2014, 20:41 | Message # 31 |
|
Astronaut
Group: Users
Spain
Messages: 53
Status: Offline
| Quote spacer (  ) Conquesti, but there will be 10^200! lifeform species.
our computers today cant do that!
I think it's already amazing that our computers can process a universe like Space Engine.
It has created a star search and we can also create a database of procedural lifeforms on many worlds.
Edited by Conquesti - Monday, 03.02.2014, 20:44 |
| |
| |
| spacer | Date: Monday, 03.02.2014, 21:15 | Message # 32 |
 Star Engineer
Group: Users
Israel
Messages: 1258
Status: Offline
| Conquesti, anyway, this is so cool! i want to see it in the next years... 
"we began as wanderers, and we are wanderers still"
-carl sagan
-space engine photographer
Edited by spacer - Monday, 03.02.2014, 21:16 |
| |
| |
| Inarius | Date: Tuesday, 04.02.2014, 09:21 | Message # 33 |
 Explorer
Group: Local Moderators
France
Messages: 237
Status: Offline
| Well, 10^200, not too sure.
I think that Darwinism is the same rule everywhere.
What works best here will still work best elsewhere.
On these 10^200, how many very small unicellular form of life ? 50% ? 70 %? 90 %? 99% ? 99,9999999999% ?
These are not so interesting.
Creatures can either be in the air, be on the earth, be in the earth, be on water, or under water.
If it's in the air, it can be either lighter than air, or heavier than air.
If it's lighter than air, it can be full of gaz (which is lighter than air, but to make this possible the creature has to synthetize this gaz), or planing (moving between hot and colder air), or moving his body in the air with wings, or whatever (like birds)
etc...etc...each options is only possible under certain conditions of gravity, atmosphere, temperature, presence of X or Y.
The heavier the atm, the bigger the creatures are and more rooted on earth they are.
etc..etc..
The general goal is to make a huge tree of conditions and attributes. The "life scanner" can't be exhaustive, only limited to general forms of life, or it will be infeasible, in my opinion.
|
| |
| |
| spacer | Date: Tuesday, 04.02.2014, 13:30 | Message # 34 |
|
Star Engineer
Group: Users
Israel
Messages: 1258
Status: Offline
| Inarius, i am just kidding, i just write a number. but there will be to much creatures
"we began as wanderers, and we are wanderers still"
-carl sagan
-space engine photographer
Edited by spacer - Tuesday, 04.02.2014, 13:31 |
| |
| |
| Inarius | Date: Tuesday, 04.02.2014, 22:24 | Message # 35 |
|
Explorer
Group: Local Moderators
France
Messages: 237
Status: Offline
| I know, don't worry, i got the general idea. You could replace 10^200 by anything , the problem is the same.
|
| |
| |
| Disasterpiece | Date: Friday, 07.02.2014, 03:16 | Message # 36 |
 World Builder
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 640
Status: Offline
| Quote Inarius ( ) These are not so interesting.
Well that depends how detailed they are modeled. If they are just stock models of cells, then I would agree. But if there was actual science that could be done, and these cells were modeled down to molecular structure, it would be very interesting.
I play teh spase engien
|
| |
| |
| ThriveDev | Date: Wednesday, 30.04.2014, 16:16 | Message # 37 |
|
Observer
Group: Newbies
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Messages: 2
Status: Offline
| I'd be fine if we just had a static or moving leaves flora, and data entryes for creatures which live on that planet with procedurally generated data and images. No modeled animals needed, but if possible, it'd be great!
|
| |
| |
| schwarzwolf | Date: Thursday, 01.05.2014, 14:48 | Message # 38 |
 Astronaut
Group: Users
Germany
Messages: 40
Status: Offline
| I would be aswell for creatures in the game, because it would make living planets way more intresting. Aswell, that the player can interact with them. But of course we would have some restriction. Peoples have written them already, and i only can agree.
1. Don't think we could implement some fully procedural creatures. This would be way to much work and i don't know, that anybody was able to archive this goal in a good way.
2. Simulating all creatures won't work. There are way to much on the planet and having only the life on the actual planet we are simulated would break every game.
Skipping the whole animal part and only have pictures would be a bit boring. The planets would look very empty.
So my suggestion would be:
1. We would need to go one specific way and aswell use only carbon based creatures. How i remember, Thrive has the same plan and only carbon based creatures is logical by our todays knowledge. Silicon based creatures would be the optimal creature on planets like earth because we have very much silicon here (sand, etc.). But even here, all life is based on carbon.
It would possible work with some predefined creatures/parts who are possible altered by procedural generation.
Of course we would need some creatures for different planets. Temperature, atmospheric presure and gravity would alter the creatures.
Yes, it would lead to very many similarities, but i don't think it would be a very bad thing after all. Evolution is always going a similar way by similar conditions. This would even be realistic then. And even in documentations, are very many similarities between tought alien creature anatomy and prehistoric animals. Ok this aswell should only be on a low base and even when we have only few animals with some variations, it would be a nice thing. There could always come more by mods, etc. ^^
But well i don't develop the game, so i shouldn't make so many demands. ^^
2. This would need indeed some mapping systems, possible bound to the planetdata, that the game takes how already mentioned the data of the planet to generate the creatures from it, like in the seedcode. The creatures would be the same for every player and would be only generated in an area the player is.
Possible changes can be saved in a file, for example, when the players hunt a lot of creatures, that the number decrease and the create could possible instrinct, that would marked then. With time and not hunting, the game should slowly revert changes, that data except the extinct creatures could be dropped.
Well, thats my part to the creature debate. ^^
Btw. Hi ThriveDev. Have been aswell in the Thrive forum some time ago. Hope the development is going well. 
|
| |
| |
| ThriveDev | Date: Thursday, 01.05.2014, 15:17 | Message # 39 |
|
Observer
Group: Newbies
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Messages: 2
Status: Offline
| Well we got some basic test prealphaalphas. I haven't done much except some organs but i'm a fan and i wanted to help in it's developement. :P
|
| |
| |
| Zaddy23 | Date: Friday, 08.08.2014, 01:27 | Message # 40 |
 Space Pilot
Group: Users
Australia
Messages: 129
Status: Offline
| Maybe only simulate the creatures in a 20m^2 area? maybe the plants in a 100m^2 area? (changable in settings of course, depending on if you have a potato or Chuck Norris's brain as a computer) which means that flying around the universe, until you land on a planet with life they might as well not exist processor wise.
(I'm not at all into computer programming so don't be afraid to point out holes in my theory)
Another thing I would like to see is a creature creator, I know it may seem a bit indulgent and even lower on the todo list than the creatures themselves but I LOVE the idea of tinkering with them and creating my own, I'm not saying it should be a copy of spore's creature creator, In fact I'd prefer a sort of clay-modelling type of creation, but with a skeleton mechanic.Added (08.08.2014, 00:27)
---------------------------------------------
Quote Disasterpiece ( ) But if there was actual science that could be done, and these cells were modeled down to molecular structure, it would be very interesting.
And very laggy 
Along with fezes and bowties, brown dwarves are cool.
|
| |
| |
| GameQB11 | Date: Saturday, 23.08.2014, 18:53 | Message # 41 |
|
Observer
Group: Newbies
United States
Messages: 8
Status: Offline
| I'd be happy enough if the game only spawned a few of each type of creature on a planet. I would have to use a bio scanner to find the creature. There doesnt need to be flocks of creatures running wild in this game. 1 or 2 representations of the creature to document in an area could be enough, and slightly better than creature discovery being purely text based.
The bigger issue is flora. Im not sure if the engine could support something like a jungle. In that case, we would just have to use our imaginations to fill in the blanks. Maybe there could be a generated 2d card of the planet that we document that could depict an image of a planet flourishing with life.
|
| |
| |
| schwarzwolf | Date: Saturday, 23.08.2014, 19:52 | Message # 42 |
|
Astronaut
Group: Users
Germany
Messages: 40
Status: Offline
| Quote "Zaddy23" Maybe only simulate the creatures in a 20m^2 area? maybe the plants in a 100m^2 area? (changable in settings of course, depending on if you have a potato or Chuck Norris's brain as a computer) which means that flying around the universe, until you land on a planet with life they might as well not exist processor wise.
This is a way many games go by large areals. And Space Engines would have to go a similar way for freatures. Preloading only creatures in a certain area, where the player is. So it would break the number of creatures down to a lower number.
By larger number of objects, like a jungle it might be necessary to clone objects and show the same generated object multiple times, if they should be animated.
And yes, the number of animals shouldn't be to large. It could be intresting, but the problem is, that it would burn down every pc, when the animals are trying to avoid or hunt the player. And looking at the fauna on earth, there aren't animals everywhere aswell. Many tending to hide for humans. This could aswell help reducing the number.
|
| |
| |
| Vakarian | Date: Thursday, 18.09.2014, 12:55 | Message # 43 |
|
Observer
Group: Newbies
United States
Messages: 5
Status: Offline
| I believe adding creature could be too demanding for both the engine and for our computers. Some have issues with smooth graphics now and what would happen if we added moving objects? However plants well flora in general could be FANTASTIC!
|
| |
| |
| schwarzwolf | Date: Thursday, 18.09.2014, 17:49 | Message # 44 |
|
Astronaut
Group: Users
Germany
Messages: 40
Status: Offline
| Quote Vakarian ( ) I believe adding creature could be too demanding for both the engine and for our computers. Some have issues with smooth graphics now and what would happen if we added moving objects? However plants well flora in general could be FANTASTIC!
Well, how already told, its inpossible to simulate all lifeforms. The way i see, is to generate the creatures depending on the planet and the variables. Then the game has to place a group of creatures inside the player view field. Possible would be aswell to track datas, by from player visited planets, like killed creatures, etc. to determinate the population.
|
| |
| |
| DoctorOfSpace | Date: Thursday, 18.09.2014, 20:45 | Message # 45 |
 Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3600
Status: Offline
| You could generate creatures the same way No Man's Sky does it, which is similar to what schwarzwolf said.
The engine would also need to be heavily rewritten anyway to be able to accommodate such things so if creatures are ever added, it will be a few years or more in the future.
Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor
G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory
EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC 6GB
|
| |
| |
ENG
New site
Spain 
Israel 
France 
United States 
Bosnia and Herzegovina 
Germany 
Australia 
Pirate