|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 8, 2016 11:16:07 GMT
I just recalled that tribal stage clothing gives bonuses. I think it would violate the spirit of the challenge to use the outfitter, wouldn't it?
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 8, 2016 10:35:33 GMT
EDIT: No, please don't do this! That's a hideous GUI. I don't care that it shows more information; even if the graphics were replaced it looks fit for Windows 95. It's just the layout. There are updates to the way the game works that will require a few more panels. It's going to look better in the future. The layout IS the problem. I mean, once you've tasted caviar, it's hard to go back to catfish. I just did. Fix it up with my suggestions and you have a GUI that's competitive with anything a gaming company could produce. What functions would the game have that aren't capable of being represented by the current shattered glass look?
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 8, 2016 5:22:48 GMT
Some thoughts on the current GUI: The light blue color meshes very well with the background and creates a genuine feeling of serenity. tjwhale suggested gray, but I don't think that would work as well. I like the 'menu' in the bottom left corner, although options and statistics need to switch places- a player will be using the latter much more often than the former, so it should be more prominent. It should be more obvious that the big button with the Thrive logo minimizes it. Heck, there's even mouseover text saying "exit to main menu," which I assume is left over from when it did. ATP should have its own bar below HP. The numbers on both bars should be black, since the current white text blends in when there's no green below it. The reproduction button should be where the compounds are listed currently (bottom right), and the compounds should be below the HP and ATP bars. They should be both bolded and color-coded, because they're aggravatingly hard to keep track of right now.
Lastly, any popup text should be black, and its box should be the opposite color of the biome the player is in. Spore did this well- their popups were yellow, which made them visible against the blue background of the cell stage.
EDIT: No, please don't do this! That's a hideous GUI. I don't care that it shows more information; even if the graphics were replaced it looks fit for Windows 95.
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 8, 2016 2:29:33 GMT
It's not as if it will pose any challenge after tribal stage.
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 8, 2016 2:25:32 GMT
Thrive does not match the width of my screen, so that extra space simply turns black when the game is open. But recently, the black areas stayed on after exiting. It wasn't a resolution change (which is a common glitch in games), it was more like I simply couldn't see those areas. Loading up the game again or logging off didn't help- in fact, the spaces stayed even on the login screen. I finally solved the issue by opening Thrive and then using Task Manager to shut it down.
I have Windows 10, if that helps. And I've opened and closed the game many times before without an issue.
(I don't know if this is technically a 'graphics' bug, but it's the only term which fits.)
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 8, 2016 0:58:00 GMT
Easy!! just mate immediately after hatching!! No, he said you could only mate every time you went up a brain size. So three times in the creature stage, plus one more in the transition to tribal.
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 7, 2016 23:54:42 GMT
Manually, you mean?
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 7, 2016 23:08:57 GMT
I have some worries about this. Spore's ability to animate characters without a predetermined morphology was cutting-edge, and it couldn't even incorporate collision. Has procedural animation really advanced so far in a decade that a team of nonprofessional volunteers (not to disparage them whatsoever; they're clearly talented) can do better?
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 7, 2016 22:35:44 GMT
I should also mention that I like the OP's ideas about venom and poisons, although I don't know if blood will be implemented in detail (I think it will, but I could be wrong there).
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 7, 2016 21:13:58 GMT
The point is really that natural selection and social development work just fine without it. I mean, maybe there could be some kind of mechanic added after the stages are largely fleshed out, but I can't imagine having actual infections realistically spread and affect a population. So it's another factor to watch out for when evolving, how will that hinder gameplay so much that the game becomes impossible to balance? From what I understand, the process of evolution in Thrive is pretty complicated already. If you add a mechanic, you have balance it with almost every other mechanic.
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 7, 2016 21:04:54 GMT
I mean diseases and stuff play a large part in natural selection and societies so I don't see how they won't be included in the game. The point is really that natural selection and social development work just fine without it. I mean, maybe there could be some kind of mechanic added after the stages are largely fleshed out, but I can't imagine having actual, defined diseases/parasites realistically spread and affect a population.
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 7, 2016 20:49:42 GMT
It's alright. I probably shouldn't have been going around refuting people's notions because they don't meet my standards either (this is a community forum). Soren Johnson gave a pretty good explanation, if you're interested.
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 7, 2016 20:43:31 GMT
Look, I'm not trying to be grating. I'm trying to explain that games aren't the same things as simulations. They're effective when they use simple rulesets to create emergent gameplay, not when they try to describe everything for the sake of completeness.
(Removed the quote since the post I'm responding to was deleted.)
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 7, 2016 20:38:12 GMT
If I tamper with the rules enough, I can make chess into a simulator of twentieth-century geopolitics. Doesn't mean that chess is improved by that level of depth. So you`re saying that Thrive should take the easy route and just ditch the idea of diseases? Sorry, but that sounds really shallow and boring. Sorry, I apparently edited my post after you quoted it. Shallowness and boredom are subjective measures. Thrive is going to be tremendously complicated compared to almost any other game. It's not a very effective (or polite) approach to propose something and than declare that a refusal to implement it is taking 'the easy route.'
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 7, 2016 20:32:16 GMT
If you trade with someone, you're going to have to come to some understanding of value. Thrive isn't an economy sim. A single abstract currency works as a mental placeholder for this understanding. Possible Compromise: Different empires, depending on their type of society (robocracy, democracy, monarchy, etc.) have a "preferred currency" that, while you can still trade using other things, you could get discounts or perhaps more in return by using said preferred currency. This way, there is still a level of logic and thinking involved without being an economy sim. It still begs the question: why is it necessary? Does adding this element to the game improve it? Or does it just add yet another factor that has to be balanced?
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 7, 2016 20:20:56 GMT
Most infectious organisms are bacteria, which we will not be able to play as. Creating a parasitic species like worms or lice would require an exponentially more complicated system than is currently planned, and would have very little payoff in terms of overall gameplay. It`s called unique dynamics and encouraging creative adaptations and/or problem solving. No, what you're really advocating is complication. Put enough "dynamics" into a game and it becomes impossible to balance, or even play for anyone not willing to spend days learning how every subsystem works. Go try out Victoria II if you want to see what I mean.
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 7, 2016 19:38:16 GMT
Most infectious organisms are bacteria, which we will not be able to play as. Creating a parasitic species like worms or lice would require an exponentially more complicated system than is currently planned, and would have very little payoff in terms of overall gameplay.
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 7, 2016 19:26:10 GMT
You've made the forums a tiny bit more active. There is that.
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 7, 2016 19:21:05 GMT
Hello! I'm new on the forum (and not a native english speaker). I didn't know where to put this exactly so if I made an error, please correct me. I can't recall any previous threads talking about how the Geologic and Genetic history is gonna be saved and shown to us (if there is, please, could you send me a link to it?) Welcome, Elliran! I think your English is pretty good. Unfortunately, I don't know how to answer your question; I don't recall what the devs have said, or indeed if they've said anything at all. It's something which isn't that central to gameplay, so it's possible that there is no actual plan for it right now. One thing would be digging for fossils of species that lived in the planet before!! Who knows... you could find a fossil of one of your first creatures while playing the game!! Just imagine that ur playing in the aware stage and then u die at the beach... but later in the game when ur in society stage u invent digging for fossils and start digging somewhere near the coast nd u find the fossil of a creature and notice it was the species u had earlier in the gane and that exact fossil is the time u died in that coast!! That sounds like it would require a lot of stored information. Dwarf Fortress, anyone?
|
|
|
Post by Mouthwash on Sept 7, 2016 19:08:31 GMT
Why does there have to be disease? It adds yet another variable for the devs to balance and doesn't seem necessary (or fun).
|
|