93 replies to this topic

[thievingmagpi]

SirSmokes, on 23 October 2020 - 11:15 AM, said:

Sorry man when it done well it is great. Great game https://www.google.c...iw=1680&bih=880
great game
https://www.google.c...iw=1680&bih=880
Oh almost forgot got
OMG silly me almost forgot https://www.google.c...iw=1680&bih=880
OMG silly me forgot https://www.google.c...iw=1680&bih=880
great game
https://www.google.c...iw=1680&bih=880
great game
https://www.google.c...iw=1680&bih=880
not a fan of rougelikes I guess not being a fan of something doesn't make it craphttps://www.google.c...iw=1680&bih=880

Sorry, none of those indicate that procedural generation isn't trash.

And I've 100% run FTL and was a backer of Rimworld when it was first available.

Edited by thievingmagpi, 23 October 2020 - 11:39 AM.

[The pessimistic optimist]

thievingmagpi, on 23 October 2020 - 11:37 AM, said:

Sorry, none of those indicate that procedural generation isn't trash.

And I've 100% run FTL and was a backer of Rimworld when it was first available.

Still wrong stating option as fact doesn't make it fact

[RickySpanish]

Procedural terrain and levels obviously work fine, as multiple successful game franchises have shown. You'll notice that thievingmagpie simply states his opinion without providing any discussion. Perhaps this is the sort of discussion our gentleman is most familiar with, which would explain his fascination with 2 hour videos as a means of getting a point across. Namely, that any discussion should be a one way statement.

[Monkey Lover]

Use the map generator they made for unreal to port map mesh and textures to mwo.

[thievingmagpi]

SirSmokes, on 23 October 2020 - 12:02 PM, said:

Still wrong stating option as fact doesn't make it fact

Sure, when you don't understand what facts are.

[The pessimistic optimist]

thievingmagpi, on 23 October 2020 - 03:59 PM, said:

Sure, when you don't understand what facts are.

OK https://en.wikipedia...wiki/Narcissism

[thievingmagpi]

RickySpanish, on 23 October 2020 - 12:12 PM, said:

Procedural terrain and levels obviously work fine,

Proof?

Still waiting btw.

RickySpanish, on 23 October 2020 - 12:12 PM, said:

as multiple successful game franchises have shown.

Is rimworld an online pvp fps?

No?

Anyway, you were saying?

RickySpanish, on 23 October 2020 - 12:12 PM, said:

You'll notice that thievingmagpie simply states his opinion without providing any discussion.

https://en.wikipedia.../Dwarf_Fortress

Doesn't sound much like MWO at all to me.

RickySpanish, on 23 October 2020 - 12:12 PM, said:

Perhaps this is the sort of discussion our gentleman is most familiar with, which would explain his fascination with 2 hour videos as a means of getting a point across. Namely, that any discussion should be a one way statement.

Oh, the discussion where you don't understand that Rogue Legacy and MWO aren't comparable in any way, shape, or form?

Lmao.

[RickySpanish]

thievingmagpi, on 23 October 2020 - 04:03 PM, said:

Proof?

Still waiting btw.




Is rimworld an online pvp fps?

No?

Anyway, you were saying?




https://en.wikipedia.../Dwarf_Fortress

Doesn't sound much like MWO at all to me.




Oh, the discussion where you don't understand that Rogue Legacy and MWO aren't comparable in any way, shape, or form?

Lmao.

Waiting for proof? What are you on mate? Multiple users have provided you proof right in this thread lol. You're surely deluded or trolling.

"Procedural maps are bad and have always been bad and will probably always be bad for quite some time into the future." He says. Then gets BTFO by listings of multiple games in various genres that use procedural terrain and level design and have been very successful. Why don't you jog on sir, you're out of your depth!

[thievingmagpi]

RickySpanish, on 23 October 2020 - 06:17 PM, said:

Waiting for proof? What are you on mate? Multiple users have provided you proof right in this thread lol. You're surely deluded or trolling.

No proof huh?

Cool, didn't think so.

RickySpanish, on 23 October 2020 - 06:17 PM, said:

"Procedural maps are bad and have always been bad and will probably always be bad for quite some time into the future." He says.

Yep, because when I play Rimworld I think "Wow! What a great map!" They are there as a function to support its brand of emergent gameplay, nothing more.

RickySpanish, on 23 October 2020 - 06:17 PM, said:

Then gets BTFO by listings of multiple games in various genres that use procedural terrain and level design and have been very successful. Why don't you jog on sir, you're out of your depth!

please quote where I said "Games that use procedural level design can't be successful".

Go ahead.

I'll wait.

Edited by thievingmagpi, 23 October 2020 - 06:22 PM.

[RickySpanish]

thievingmagpi, on 23 October 2020 - 06:20 PM, said:

No proof huh?

Cool, didn't think so.




Yep, because when I play Rimworld I think "Wow! What a great map!" They are there as a function to support its brand of emergent gameplay, nothing more.



please quote where I said "Games that use procedural level design can't be successful".

Go ahead.

I'll wait.

You categorically stated that procedural level design is bad, as if it were a fact. The measure of success of a game is not based on opinion, but on how well it sells. If a game that uses procedural level design sells well, then clearly procedural level design is a feature that draws sales. There are multiple successful games that use procedural level design, ergo it is a desireable feature for one reason or another. There is your, rather obvious, proof.

By the way, emergent gameplay was something the OP desired by way of implementing random maps that not everyone was familiar with. An interesting point, since you bring up Rimworld and why procedural level design is used there, in your opinion. Of course, that's not the only use for procedural design and yes, I may provide proof for that too if you desire.

Edited by RickySpanish, 23 October 2020 - 07:44 PM.

[thievingmagpi]

RickySpanish, on 23 October 2020 - 07:42 PM, said:

You categorically stated that procedural level design is bad, as if it were a fact.

Yep.

By the way, you haven't answered my questions.

RickySpanish, on 23 October 2020 - 07:42 PM, said:

The measure of success of a game is not based on opinion, but on how well it sells. If a game that uses procedural level design sells well, then clearly procedural level design is a feature that draws sales. There are multiple successful games that use procedural level design, ergo it is a desireable feature for one reason or another. There is your, rather obvious, proof.

Turns out lots of games have ****** elements. Like procedural maps.

RickySpanish, on 23 October 2020 - 07:42 PM, said:

By the way, emergent gameplay was something the OP desired by way of implementing random maps that not everyone was familiar with.

Then they should probably stick to Roguelike #019321458

[RickySpanish]

Games like Minecraft, Elite and No Man's Sky have cemented procedural map design as a desireable feature, certainly those games have prominently advertised that part of the game and received favourable reviews from players. If you don't like procedural design that's fine, but claiming it is somehow bad flies in the face of substantial evidence to the contrary.

[thievingmagpi]

RickySpanish, on 23 October 2020 - 09:34 PM, said:

Games like Minecraft, Elite and No Man's Sky have cemented procedural map design as a desireable feature,

Ok let's see, a voxel based kid's game which uses procgen for resource-gathering and exploration based maps, bland galaxy exploration that use procgen to make things like names and bland galactic features and even more bland galaxy exploration to make even more bland planets.

Really proves my point.

RickySpanish, on 23 October 2020 - 09:34 PM, said:

certainly those games have prominently advertised that part of the game and received favourable reviews from players. If you don't like procedural design that's fine, but claiming it is somehow bad flies in the face of substantial evidence to the contrary.

Actually, all of the evidence shows that in fact procgen does nothing to improve over bespoke map design, and thus, trash. No Man's Sky sucks because it's bland. That's because of its reliance on procedural generation. Elite Dangerous sucks because (among many reasons) it's bland.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Problem by all PT worlds, the looks likes Clones ...you see 4 worlds in NMS you have see all, all only AI Variations of teh same Elements without each creativity,and Citys and technical Installations further a big problem by PT Worlds ( new Engines thats not for Games,can handle it) or natural formations like Rivers,waterfalls thats going over in a river,a Bridge over a River, streets and Lamps and little Details aside.
We seeing in MW5 , the same Trees over and over standing line in line, no really woods, thats looks natural , no real Citys...you drive over a world in NMS and all the same

RickySpanish, on 23 October 2020 - 06:04 AM, said:

I can read, write and speak three languages, two fluently, so actually learning a new language may not be impossible for me. Certainly I know and regularly code in many languages and APIs. My company recently purchased the entire stock of its competitor's arcade cabinets, running on a proprietary engine. The engine includes everything from graphics rendering to bill validation, although my speciality is graphics and games programming. There is very little documentation for the engine, and none for how the game event system works. And yet... I now know enough to build new components and games from scratch for it. We've added a host of new features and games, we've updated various parts of the codebase, we converted the entire project (about 150 components and thousands of code files) from visual studio 2005 to 2019. Nowhere did we say "well damn, we can't do this, we don't know how this works!! Plz give us easier work!". No, because we are professionals and we know what the heck we are doing, and a complex system isn't so complex when you start experimenting with it and crucially, have been given the time to work on it.

Thats cool (thump up) you a profi, thats what PGI not have (more) How many Gys like you give it? and how many will life and Works in Canada by PGI (with no great reputation or Future) by a old Engine, programming from other Profis,and with a game thats in maintance mode?

[The pessimistic optimist]

thievingmagpi, on 23 October 2020 - 10:04 PM, said:

Ok let's see, a voxel based kid's game which uses procgen for resource-gathering and exploration based maps, bland galaxy exploration that use procgen to make things like names and bland galactic features and even more bland galaxy exploration to make even more bland planets.

Really proves my point.



Actually, all of the evidence shows that in fact procgen does nothing to improve over bespoke map design, and thus, trash. No Man's Sky sucks because it's bland. That's because of its reliance on procedural generation. Elite Dangerous sucks because (among many reasons) it's bland.

Once more options are options not facts if you didn't enjoy those games that's fine but your option doesn't supersede other peoples options. Unless your one those people that thing there sitting there floating about us and your **** smells like roses?

Edited by SirSmokes, 24 October 2020 - 04:35 AM.

[RickySpanish]

thievingmagpi, on 23 October 2020 - 10:04 PM, said:

Ok let's see, a voxel based kid's game which uses procgen for resource-gathering and exploration based maps, bland galaxy exploration that use procgen to make things like names and bland galactic features and even more bland galaxy exploration to make even more bland planets.

Really proves my point.



Actually, all of the evidence shows that in fact procgen does nothing to improve over bespoke map design, and thus, trash. No Man's Sky sucks because it's bland. That's because of its reliance on procedural generation. Elite Dangerous sucks because (among many reasons) it's bland.

Those are all your opinions though, and you fail to admit that. The only objective way at looking at how good something in a game is, is whether it hinders or promotes the sales of that game. Procedural map design obviously helped sell those games, because those game worlds could not have been constructed by hand. Similarly OP's point of randomizing the map could only be done procedurally. It's a perfectly valid idea to present and claiming that procedural design is somehow bad for that without any reason as to why just isn't productive. On the other hand, Waldorf Statler has put together a very good summary of concerns for why procedural design would be a challenge, and he did so in one post. You could take a leaf out of his playbook if you wish.

Waldorf Statler - I think tile based design would be the way to go for structures and cities, placed atop a terrain layout generated by a more "natural" algorithm, i.e. Not tile based. Certain map seeds could also be saved and chosen for a particular map rotation that lasts say, a week. A hand curated list of randomly generated maps could weed out bad outcomes but would require attention to the game from the devs that is ongoing.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Yes
im Thinking modul system like MW 5 a great idea and good way for it (seeing Xcom 2) for little natural looking handworked Places in Combination with PT today...and why not Jungle Woodmaps, with large handcreated Woodmodules ,and swamp areas between (like the swamps of mordor ) and little Research Labor Modules in it or a city with a habor Modul ?im thinking the new Crew for mW5 Have many ideas and Creativity


therside im thinging PT in the Future make a Big Jump when im seeing how modern algorithms creates Full Citys with Bridges; Rivers (and in Future im seeing Citys with little Details like Lamps, scratchboxes)in unity engine and Blender..im Thinking a NMS in 10 years have Citys like MWO build with Algorithms

Thats like the First Pixel 3D View in Doom and MWO today

Edited by MW Waldorf Statler, 24 October 2020 - 10:37 AM.

[VonBruinwald]

thievingmagpi, on 23 October 2020 - 06:20 PM, said:

please quote where I said "Games that use procedural level design can't be successful".

Go ahead.

I'll wait.

thievingmagpi, on 23 October 2020 - 06:20 PM, said:

Games that use procedural level design can't be successful

[thievingmagpi]

SirSmokes, on 24 October 2020 - 04:35 AM, said:

Once more options are options not facts if you didn't enjoy those games that's fine but your option doesn't supersede other peoples options. Unless your one those people that thing there sitting there floating about us and your **** smells like roses?

Wrong. I stated facts.

RickySpanish, on 24 October 2020 - 04:52 AM, said:

Those are all your opinions though, and you fail to admit that. The only objective way at looking at how good something in a game is, is whether it hinders or promotes the sales of that game. Procedural map design obviously helped sell those games, because those game worlds could not have been constructed by hand. Similarly OP's point of randomizing the map could only be done procedurally. It's a perfectly valid idea to present and claiming that procedural design is somehow bad for that without any reason as to why just isn't productive. On the other hand, Waldorf Statler has put together a very good summary of concerns for why procedural design would be a challenge, and he did so in one post. You could take a leaf out of his playbook if you wish.

Waldorf Statler - I think tile based design would be the way to go for structures and cities, placed atop a terrain layout generated by a more "natural" algorithm, i.e. Not tile based. Certain map seeds could also be saved and chosen for a particular map rotation that lasts say, a week. A hand curated list of randomly generated maps could weed out bad outcomes but would require attention to the game from the devs that is ongoing.

Facts are facts. Not a hard thing to understand. For some anyway. Seems like you struggle with that concept.

[The pessimistic optimist]

thievingmagpi, on 25 October 2020 - 09:38 AM, said:

Wrong. I stated facts.

OK explain to me why what you said is not your option and it is indeed fact.