The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Apr 24, 2016 22:32:25 GMT
PowerlessFollow a species to ascension in observer mode. MalevolentFollow a species to ascension using only auto-evo. DictatorFollow a species to ascension with auto-evo disabled, using only manual edits. UnworthyFollow a species to ascension with auto-evo disabled, without ever applying manual edits. (This would require intervention by a more advanced race) I wonder if anyone can guess what the inspiration for these is?
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 30, 2016 20:57:00 GMT
Pokémon tried this feature too… It worked great for ones like CoBelgiumrigus.
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 26, 2016 0:02:54 GMT
I remember we used to have an idea for, instead of making incremental edits, you could use the editor to make a goal organism - then, over however many generations of small changes is needed, your creature would evolve into that form. If this was how it worked, how would the goal creature be fit for your final habitat? For example, if you live in a swamp, you design your auto-evo to turn you into a frog. However, over millions of years, your swamp turns into a vast desert. your goal creation no longer fits this habitat. It was considered as an additional option, rather than a replacement for anything. Obviously it's impractical for huge changes, but smaller changes might actually be completed in a reasonable timescale, and save multiple trips to the editor. Though I agree with Poisson that it needn't be a priority.
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 25, 2016 23:56:06 GMT
‘How will plants develop sentience?’
If plants can develop senses, I don't see why sentience can't be the next obvious step, as long as the environment provides the energy and stimulus needed.
‘I mean, even if you make being a plant very fun, players will eventually get bored of the monotonous game-play.’
The same could be said for creatures. Even if playing as a creature is fun, they'd get bored of it after a while.
I think the answer is simply that if you don't like the organism you're playing as, evolve. Obviously some designs of organisms will be dull, be it plant or animal, but I think the whole point of Thrive is that the player continually moves to new, refreshing designs as they play.
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 25, 2016 23:34:08 GMT
While for the player the transition will be smooth and unnoticeable, in terms of development, the stage will end when the organism has reached a certain threshold of intelligence. No love for hiveminds? What if intelligence is linked to growth, or only present in adults / a single caste of the species? I propose the correct answer to when multicellular stage ends is: ‾\_(°⁓°)_/‾
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 25, 2016 23:12:15 GMT
I've made a few changes to several pages. Rather than put all the important links on a separate page, I made the home page more of a "hub" as you were suggesting, with as many official links as I could think of. Most of them are still at the bottom of the page, but I think brief game information takes precedence in what should be shown to newcomers. The new design looks great; the big links break up the text, making everything easier to read, and none of the pages feel too long. Another official link would be the deviantart page, which is still only linked in the FAQ. Is this still in active use? Chat looks nice, but I really only remember to use the chat because it's embedded.
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 22, 2016 22:00:38 GMT
TheCreator how will accessibility for colourblind people be approached, given the use of colour coding on the compound clouds? I haven't really thought about it, but you should easily be able to change the colors in the setup.lua file, not that I think it's going to be much of a problem. For the clouds we have light blue, dark blue, white, and yellow. Later in the game, a colour blind person might just evolve different color receptors in his eyes to see the world differently.Wait a minute… That's actually a serious solution. I'd never thought about that. Awesome!
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 22, 2016 21:43:02 GMT
Welcome back! Nice to see fellow veterans! And a fellow Undertale fan, if I'm parsing that sentence correctly? The old forums were hosted by Jamaica Focus, though now that would be the old, old forums. The project's come quite a long way since then, but amazingly Thrive is still around, with more progress than ever! (I don't suppose you were summoned back by one of the mods? I've heard rumours they're running a necromancy project…)
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 21, 2016 22:37:23 GMT
I think I missed something awesome. I need to check that chat box more (or even at all). Thanks. I've just had a quick skim through it, very comprehensive. I'm not sure about the WASD + mouse, though. It's a decent control scheme, and probably matches the 3D controls, but it still feels off. Could I request custom key bindings as an option? I prefer ↑←↓→ to WASD. (I'm requesting this an in-game option, of course, but it would be great to hear that it's already possible by modifying config files )
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 20, 2016 19:55:41 GMT
Could someone link me to the GDD? I get the feeling I haven't seen it, and I'm not sure where to look.
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 20, 2016 19:48:36 GMT
I Think i found a solution for this if you go to properties and click on compatibility you can see a option that say 'Disable Display Scaling On High DPI setting' enable that and it should stop it Thanks, this works! I hadn't spotted that setting before. One limitation is this only works if the game is on the startup disk, so a proper fix would still be useful eventually.
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 20, 2016 19:36:44 GMT
If this was already talked about, sorry. But could we make it so that these plants/fungi slowly become more aware of the environment? More than just "it's winter now", but to like Venus Fly Trap levels and beyond? Tat could be how sentient plants evolve, they prey on insects, and slowly become more and more mobile until they are effectively putting sugary nectar ride outside of ant hills waiting for the entire colony to creep into their mouth. Evolution should occur for all organisms to the same extent, including plants, so this would be a possibility. The largest barrier for plant sentience, in reality (and hopefully in-game), is that plants are relatively low-energy, which makes maintaining sensory and neural systems expensive. Photosynthesis is a relatively slow process, so you're right in that something like the venus fly trap would have a better chance of evolving in this direction. With Thrive, you can control evolution with the Organism Editor, so whether it's likely or not isn't so much of an issue.
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 20, 2016 19:05:50 GMT
Good idea. What would be better to have here though? We need some description of the game, even if it's not quite so high and mighty as it is now. Agreed. Having a description is good, it could just do with a bit of a tweak. I'm going to have to disagree with you a bit here. Most of the FAQs have been passed down from old versions, so some might need a tweak or should be removed (such as the ratings question), but most of them ARE newcomer's questions. If we do get rid of a load, where are we going to put the information within quick reach instead? The community forums might be ok, but a part of me feels nobody would click through, and putting them squarely at the front of the website makes it more likely for people to see. Also agreed, I thought the FAQ was one of the better pages. We just need to make sure important information (links, particularly) are also present in a proper section. There is quite a prominent link to the dev forums under How to Join actually. What do you propose instead? And yes, we do want it to be somewhat 'don't get involved unless you meet our criteria', because we'd prefer not to be inundated with applications from people we have to regrettably decline. That sounds harsh, and it kind of is, but there are unfortunately only certain types of people we can trust to use the development forums properly. Sorry about that, I'll try to avoid posting when tired in the future. My attempt at constructive criticism sort of became more like plain criticism. I mistook the link for a link to the community forums. The page seems to be generally aimed at recruiting people to the dev forums, and seeing it like that, the design is pretty good. The list spacing is a bit of an issue on mobile devices, though, requiring a decent amount of scrolling, and links to the Wiki & ModDB seem to be thrown in because we don't have a proper page for links. Also, having a link in the Get Involved section to these community forums could be something to consider. People might want to get involved in the community, too. Because that's the only page with a sidebar (and sidebars look horrible on all other pages). The two most important of these are included very clearly on the front page anyway. My point was that important links should really get their own page (sorry about the lack of clear communication). Again, the links on the home tab are right at the bottom. That page is pretty long on smaller screens (I generally use an iPad for web stuff), and a reader would have to either read that whole game description, or scroll right past it (there's no indication the links will be there). The post I should have made:Thanks for taking suggestions. Could we get links on the navigation bars between the dev & community forums, and a tab on the RG site with links to all official Thrive sites?
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 20, 2016 18:34:31 GMT
Interesting read! I agree with Admiral, the analysis of the survey was great. Can't wait for compound clouds, and I look forward to the graphics fixes. That's at least 90 people who've read that Uteen biography page I wrote years ago, back when there were about 10 of us on the forum, and no subreddit. Some (most?) of the posts I made back then make me cringe at how childish/awkward I sound. Now there's nearly 3500 subscribed to the subreddit… Scary. +1 for Cheerios.
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 19, 2016 23:45:00 GMT
Congratulations.
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 19, 2016 23:31:38 GMT
With 0.3.2 coming up (though not for a while yet) and more outreach following, it might be time to consider what improvements we need to make to our various websites to make them more appealing to newcomers. Even things as simple as game descriptions might need updating, in places like the subreddit sidebar and website home page. Think back to when you first found Thrive - what were your initial reactions to website appearances, and what could have been made clearer? My initial reactions… I thought the color scheme on the original Evolutions! site was pretty nice.
[deleted, I make my point better later in the thread]
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 18, 2016 23:24:59 GMT
How to deal with overpopulation, in 5 easy steps! 1. Conscript a good chunk of your burgeoning population into (a) massive squad(s). If you can name squads, call them/it something like "The Swarm" or "The Horde." The remainder should be what is enough to keep your civilization and SCs (Society Centers) progressing as usual, or at least functional. 2. Station your legion(s) of commoners at MCs (Military Centers) for training and equipment, keeping them for however long you see fit (skip this step if sheer numbers are sufficient). 3. Send your teeming forces at the nearest SC you don't like. Then realise that "The Horde", as members of your homeless, starving population, were just in it for the free food and housing, and were really hoping you'd repeat step 2 a couple more times. 4. Watch as they bugger off to the nearest SC you don't like, in search of better living conditions. Is your army at least half the size it was before the assault? Almost certainly, and the ones that remain demand more repeats of step 2. You regret including the healthy meals, and working toiletries. 5. Let's take a look at the fruits of your labour. Are there no more/fewer threats to your civilization? You realise that there weren't any external threats to begin with - your enemy laughs at your feeble attempts to feed your own people. Ruling one of your SCs, and receiving their associated food and housing crises, would be a loss for them. Has its growth and aggression created new threats? Yup. The population is turning on you. Civil war is commonplace. People fight on the streets for breadcrumbs, and the endless stream of people leaving for other SCs has become known as "The Swarm", the very mention of whom makes your enemies tremble in fear. You are truly, unrivalled, the most terrifying civilisation on the planet.
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 17, 2016 23:57:05 GMT
Not meaning to sound rude or hostile in anyway Not at all. Debate leads to progress. but; why do we need domestication as something that happens during an aware playthrough, That's the question. Mainly, I think it provides a potential way to expand the basic gameplay of, and add variety for, non-sapient organisms. I think a major flaw of Spore was the way stages were linear, almost like separate games. That was in large part due to all interaction being with species of the same level of advancement. Want to meet a tribe in creature stage? No chance. Want to wander over to a neighbouring city in civilisation stage? I'm afraid you can't control individuals from now on. Inter-stage interaction offers a way to make the game feel like more of a unified whole, and domestication would be a major enabler of this interaction. that gameplay would really feasibly lower your chances of sapience at a later date. I don't really see sapience as something which should be forced upon the player. There are many ways to play the game: become sapient, reach the top of the food chain, evolve into something cool, become the most populous species in an area… Plus your creature is more likely to die than survive if your specimens domesticators die out as your so reliant on them, not just for food it protection. Don't get me wrong I think domestication would be great for aware or even fiddling in the ascended game. Personally, playing as an organism that either eats grass until fat enough to kill, has to take strict orders from master or needs to be milked every day seems ridiculously tedious as you no longer need to trysurvive or even try to thrive, your friendly salient overlords do all the work for you. Just my two cents on the subject. These are good points. I want to be optimistic that it's possible to have good gameplay for this, but until we can confidently say that adding domestication is an overall improvement to the game, it's fair to suggest we leave it out.
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 17, 2016 23:05:40 GMT
AlphaGo is pretty cool, but it's still on the level of those AI that learn to play Mario. It learns, but it doesn't know it learns. I think of it more like artificial muscle-memory than a thinking being.
Any serious AI would require pretty major advancement from today's level. Since we don't know how to make advanced AI yet, it's hard to predict what an advanced AI would look like, but I'm pretty sure it wont be anything like Sci-Fi action movies, with human-like (or plain cartoony) AI. We could create an exact replica of our brain, but we'll have made so many variations by then, it'll just be an interesting thing rather than a revolution.
There are people whose job is thinking about AI, and what the dangers and safeguards would be, and they still have many years to expand our knowledge in those subjects. In a way, it will probably be similar to self-driving cars: beta test extensively in limited environments, then gradually expand their territory.
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 16, 2016 16:39:47 GMT
EDIT: regarding the main topic of this thread, ideas for auto-evo have varied from anything between completely random, to intelligently deciding what changes would be beneficial and making only those. If we had the time, we could probably make a slider for this behaviour - almost like a difficulty slider (random being more difficult). To add on to that history recap, the current plan (and also the plan for the foreseeable future, which we are working to implement) has auto-evo behaving intelligently, within the limits of the simulations not always catching everything that would make sense in real life. The idea of intelligent auto-evo has always bugged me a bit. If it works, then okay, but that's quite a task to achieve. For example, wouldn't this result potentially major inaccuracies for small populations / gene pools (inbreeding)? How would this be solved?
|
|