Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[IronTomato]

Eh. I dont really see how. Most of the time that's just how procedural generation is. When the generation of creatures follows a certain set of rules, it's not like you're going to see something that's going to knock your socks off every single time. Still, the guy himself said that he had encountered some memorable animals, such as this weirdass:

Spoiler: Random Creature Generation in No Man's Sky (click to show/hide)

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the creatures look totally unique most of the time, which is more than you can ask for from most games where procedural generation exists, and while they're not always going to be something amazing, the amazing ones do exist and you will see them. That's what seems to be the case from what I've seen so far, and it's good enough for me. The same goes for the planets themselves.

[Akura]

Those trees, or rocks, not sure which, that are on the left side of the image looks like a bunch of dicks sticking into the ground.

I would like the animal more if the skin texture was more or less the same across the entire body. It's got a lizard's rear the suddenly turns into a deer torso(with chicken forelegs and elephant feet), and a neck that looks like a tree trunk.

[Teneb]

Yeah, that creature looks like it was stitched together (which it was, but shouldn't look like it).

[Neonivek]

Yeah, that creature looks like it was stitched together (which it was, but shouldn't look like it).

That is because, I am predicting, that all creatures are stitched together.

Either in an Impossible creatures sort of way... or the even more unfortunate Starbound way.

[Teneb]

Yeah, that creature looks like it was stitched together (which it was, but shouldn't look like it).

That is because, I am predicting, that all creatures are stitched together.

Either in an Impossible creatures sort of way... or the even more unfortunate Starbound way.

I mean, yeah of course they are. If you want procedural creatures you don't have much choice. Dwarf Fortress procedural creatures like FBs and Titans are also done this way. But DF doesn't need to care about textures. They should at least put in a system to make sure a creature is covered by a single type of texture (so scales, or deer, or chicken).

[Neonivek]

I mean, yeah of course they are. If you want procedural creatures you don't have much choice.

Blending.

[Putnam]

Blending requires rules for each combination of parts which, in general, have to be written manually (or, in the very best case, generated then checked manually) to make sure that they don't look awful together.

[Neonivek]

Blending requires rules for each combination of parts which, in general, have to be written manually (or, in the very best case, generated then checked manually) to make sure that they don't look awful together.

Yes, features tend to require effort indeed.

Not everyone can entice the videogame fairies to do the work for them. Otherwise I'd have made that Monster Rancher-esk game I wanted to make for so very long.

[Putnam]

I probably should've emphasized. That's quadratic effort. Programmers usually prefer an O(n) development time on a feature over O(n²), since the latter is liable to take, um, the previous time squared.

By that, I mean the effort required to add a new part in stitching is to model and include some sort of attachment or addition point on the part. The effort required to add a new part with blending is to model the part then model how the part connects with every other part made so far.

Essentially, this means that the amount of effort required to make 20 parts with blending could be used to make 210 parts with stitching.

[Neonivek]

I dunno... Spore did it well and it had to account for near infinite variation.

They just have to deal with a dozen or so parts.

[Putnam]

Oh, that kind of blending. That's really just more stitching with some slight amount of... weird... connective tissue on the edge. If you do it slightly wrong it looks real ugly. Try putting some really long legs really close together.

[IronTomato]

It might just be that creature, since in all the trailers I've never seen one that looked that stitched-together. Or it could just be some malefic malevolent manifestation of the player's deepest fears, in which case it fits the part perfectly.

[miauw62]

Eh. I dont really see how. Most of the time that's just how procedural generation is. When the generation of creatures follows a certain set of rules, it's not like you're going to see something that's going to knock your socks off every single time.

that doesnt excuse it being bad

procedural generation is a tool, not a goal.

[puke]

Spore had a massive art and qa team that worked for years on making sure their procedural creatures didn't look effedup or have glitchy skin transitions.

This dude only has himself, and everyone knew that before they hyped themselves up.

[Neonivek]

Spore had a massive art and qa team that worked for years on making sure their procedural creatures didn't look effedup or have glitchy skin transitions.

This dude only has himself, and everyone knew that before they hyped themselves up.

>_< this isn't how this works

I am supposed to be the pessimistic one and you guys are supposed to tell me why this game is going to be amazing. You don't meet my pessimism with soothsaying.