Print

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

[PTTG??]

evolution...i agree, if humans interfer and cause the mutations then its not evolution. its us forcing a change to suit our needs.

changing without mutation is called adaptation

But what makes humans so special? Is it the souls? It's simply not responsible to call one thing artificial selection and one thing symbiosis just because of the involvement of one particular species.

[Tormy]

Spore:Too Childish looking
It looked good earlier on.

Eheh, that was my problem with TF2 actually...however we should not forget about the most important stuff: gameplay > graphics. 

[FoboslC]

And that the problem. Hardest part of game was tribal stage. For the rest - anything is EASILY accomplished. Over-rated game is over-rated. EA, as usually killed VERY good idea. It looked so promising earlier.

[PTTG??]

I agree about tribal mode; playing hard mode and trying to fight all the others leads to you being attacked by twice your population at once. You have to bribe the other sides until you're strong enough, and then go after one at a time.

And let's not forget that the AI has max food at all times.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Sordid, I'm not some kind of neo-luddite (I think that was the term), I don't hate technology. I don't despise science as a whole, just current, "modern" science. Back when they invented electricity and computers, scientists were trying to do new things, and succeeded. Now, anything that is "too new" gets shot down either by the government, or the big corporations, for being "too unsafe" and "too cheap", respectively. Here in Russia, electric cars are not street legal. The exact reasons for that are unknown, but I somehow think the whole "Russia has 70% of its profit in export of oil and gas" thing is a factor.
But that's not the point here.

Imagine that modern scientists decided to abandon gene splicing and do things the normal way. They take a crapton of vegetables and plantlife, and shove them in the general direction of Mars with another crapton of water to make up for its lack. If the plants die, do it again with more/other plants. At some point some plants will actually survive and start adapting to the environment. They will evolve into a new species of plant, and humans can now grow cucumbers on Mars. Was that done with intent? Yes. Humans intended to create a new kind of plant and artificially changed the environment of normal plants to do it. The result was natural - natural evolution of plants. You can call that adaptation, breeding, or whatever. It's still evolution. Not "Evolution", with the capital "E", that created life on Earth. Just evolution, the process that all living things do when their environment significantly changes.

Now, back to the original thought behind this useless discussion on old-fashioned nomenclature. What would be a game of evolution? Or a game as close as reasonably possible to actual evolution, for those of us so sure evolution can't happen with a human in the system.
Right now I see it as, well, something close to Spore, except with good physics simulation and a different view. Instead of a whopping 2 stages of creature development we see in Spore, these creatures would procedurally generate themselves with a simple simulated DNA and random "mutations" taking place at times. The time in the game would of course be horrendously accelerated, but that would have no factor on the actual pace, much like in DF. I can't say I can imagine an interface for it yet (too vague of an idea), but some gameplay elements are: a generic "power bar" that refills when your creatures successfully increase their numbers, cataclysm controls that allow causing volcanoes/earthquakes/meteorites, possibly mass teleportation (that would stretch the evolution thing to the limit, but as long as it cannot work with specific creatures it's fine). Actual random events would happen as well, and other creatures would be present in the world, simulating a basic ecosystem. The goal of the game would likely be to raise your creatures until they form a society, or (a much more ambitious plan) until they ascend into space. The controls won't change one bit btw, even if your crab-people down there are already finishing their third megapolis.

A scenario I can think of from an earlier stage:

<Alright, my three-legged barely-sentient squid-donkeys have finally managed to reproduce enough for me to get a major event started.>
<Hmm, that giant forest over there looks like a perfect place. It seems to have great fruit, some small birds are munching on them like crazy.>
<Oh, there's a canyon in the way. Wait, I can cause an earthquake to reroute a major river into it! My creatures can swim well, because it says so in their profile!>
<Alright, the water's in. Let's cause a little drought over here to make them move.>
<Look at 'em go! Over the ex-canyon and into the forest. Fruit-munching shall commence! I still need to get those last bits of carnivore habits out of their heads.>
<Ouch, are those fruit poisonous? These fellas are dying by the thousand. The river dried up, and they have nowhere to go now. I don't have the power for a teleport, what do I do?!>
<Hmm, the death rate is in decline. I wonder what happened? Oh wow, they've developed immunity to that posion thing! Nice.>
<Yikes, an earthquake! That one wasn't mine. Hmm, it seems some creatures are migrating over the new landbridge from the southern continent. I wonder what those are?>
<I NEED POWER! They are monstrous predators! I can't even drop a meteorite on them! Oh how can I save my population?! Oh, wait. The predators are dying now. What the... ah, the poisonous fruit. Interesting, the creatures adapted to poison and are now too dangerous to be eaten! HAHA! Alright, I got enough power now. Let's beam some five million over to those frozen plains in the distance. I need some fur on these monsters of mine...>

^^Something like that.

[Sordid]

Sordid, I'm not some kind of neo-luddite (I think that was the term), I don't hate technology. I don't despise science as a whole, just current, "modern" science. Back when they invented electricity and computers, scientists were trying to do new things, and succeeded. Now, anything that is "too new" gets shot down either by the government, or the big corporations, for being "too unsafe" and "too cheap", respectively. Here in Russia, electric cars are not street legal. The exact reasons for that are unknown, but I somehow think the whole "Russia has 70% of its profit in export of oil and gas" thing is a factor.
But that's not the point here.

Uh, what? Sorry, I'm not a big fan of conspiracy theories either.

Imagine that modern scientists decided to abandon gene splicing and do things the normal way. They take a crapton of vegetables and plantlife, and shove them in the general direction of Mars with another crapton of water to make up for its lack. If the plants die, do it again with more/other plants.

Okay, I imagined that. It'd be bloody fucking expensive and completely pointless, since we have better and cheaper methods at our disposal.

At some point some plants will actually survive and start adapting to the environment. They will evolve into a new species of plant, and humans can now grow cucumbers on Mars. Was that done with intent? Yes. Humans intended to create a new kind of plant and artificially changed the environment of normal plants to do it. The result was natural - natural evolution of plants.

Nope, it wasn't.

You can call that adaptation, breeding, or whatever. It's still evolution. Not "Evolution", with the capital "E", that created life on Earth.

Evolution did not create life on Earth. Wherever did you get that idea?

Just evolution, the process that all living things do when their environment significantly changes.

That, in and of itself, is not called evolution. You know the correct word, you used it just a few sentences earlier. Why do you refuse to use it now that it is appropriate?

Now, back to the original thought behind this useless discussion on old-fashioned nomenclature. What would be a game of evolution? Or a game as close as reasonably possible to actual evolution, for those of us so sure evolution can't happen with a human in the system.

Like I said, I simply don't see any room for gameplay in there.

Right now I see it as, well, something close to Spore, except with good physics simulation and a different view. Instead of a whopping 2 stages of creature development we see in Spore, these creatures would procedurally generate themselves with a simple simulated DNA and random "mutations" taking place at times. The time in the game would of course be horrendously accelerated, but that would have no factor on the actual pace, much like in DF. I can't say I can imagine an interface for it yet (too vague of an idea), but some gameplay elements are: a generic "power bar" that refills when your creatures successfully increase their numbers, cataclysm controls that allow causing volcanoes/earthquakes/meteorites, possibly mass teleportation (that would stretch the evolution thing to the limit, but as long as it cannot work with specific creatures it's fine). Actual random events would happen as well, and other creatures would be present in the world, simulating a basic ecosystem. The goal of the game would likely be to raise your creatures until they form a society, or (a much more ambitious plan) until they ascend into space. The controls won't change one bit btw, even if your crab-people down there are already finishing their third megapolis.

There are sandbox games that simulate actual creatures with actual DNA, on various levels. They're insanely CPU-hungry, though, so I don't see your dream game becoming reality for quite a long time yet.
Sounds fun, though.

Come to think of it, how about if individual dwarves in DF had a simple DNA that would determine their stats and aptitudes for various jobs?

[PTTG??]

Sean;
Yeah I agree that politics and business have too much control over R&D. And everything else. BTW; hasn't your oil production peaked? I bet once you start importing there's a good chance that domestic electric will look a lot more legal.

I like your proposed game a lot, actually. When you first mentioned a more sophisticated evolution thingy I thought of those old Creatures games. They actually had "dDNA" and biochemistry/neurology and did, in fact evolve. I believe that the longest-line decedent of the first creature had developed a sophisticated fight-or-flight response, among other things.

Of course, dDNA was restricted to primarily defining simple reactions and neurological structure. They could evolve to turn water into air, pain into candy, and old age into food. The could not evolve to, for instance, be three inches taller. Or bald.

The mars plants; I would agree with you that that is evolution; the plants are being selected for being able to survive in an environment that annother part of it's ecosystem (Homo Sapiens) placed it in. It would, however, take millions of years at least before any progress was made, if only because of the unlikely hood of mars-survival mutations. This is par for the course.

If, on the other hand, there was an attempt to use hydroponics and gradually select the hardiest plants first, then the hardiest of the next generation, it would still be evolution, but it would also be artificial selection. In other words, evolution and selection are not distinct processes, instead, artificial selection is where something evolves in response to pressures from a sentient entity in general, and Homo Sapiens in particular.

Sordid;
Yeah, I don't have the time to help you here. But perhaps, if you don't believe evolution created life on earth, perhaps you might find a discussion of it's semantics frustrating.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Let's rephrase that particular part. "Evoultion created sentient life on Earth." There. As is typical of humans, I usualy forget there's life other than its sentient forms. Whatever actually sparked the existence of life, evolution is what brought it to its present state.

And yes, such a game would be very resource-intensive. But don't we have 3GHz quad-cores for that?

[Micro102]

evolution...i agree, if humans interfer and cause the mutations then its not evolution. its us forcing a change to suit our needs.

changing without mutation is called adaptation

But what makes humans so special? Is it the souls? It's simply not responsible to call one thing artificial selection and one thing symbiosis just because of the involvement of one particular species.

because we are the first species to have the ability to change other species...let alone do math

when humans change other animals instantly to an ideal state, its just a mutation evolution has natural selection. but yeh we can be part of that natural selection as long as we dont genetically manipulate them

[Asheron]

Just evolution, the process that all living things do when their environment significantly changes.

That, in and of itself, is not called evolution. You know the correct word, you used it just a few sentences earlier. Why do you refuse to use it now that it is appropriate?

Yes, that is evolution. Evolution is an organism that is changing because a mutation gave the organism a benefit, that allows it to function better in it's environment, thus resulting in more survivability, more offspring and thus dominate the genepool. If the environment changes, the organism becomes less adapted to it, so mutations that are better suited for the new environment will spring up and the creature will change. So, evolution is a process that all living things do when their environment changes. It doesn't even need to be significantly. Sometimes it doesn't even needs a change in environment.

[Micro102]

mutation wasnt mentioned. i think he meant changing to the envoirnment through personality and actions.

i think they were talking about adaptation

[Asheron]

mutation wasnt mentioned. i think he meant changing to the envoirnment through personality and actions.

i think they were talking about adaptation

If you ( humanity ) change the environment yourself, a natural process, evolution, follows. Then it's evolution. If humanity changes the creature itself, then it's manipulation, not evolution.

[Rhodan]

I think the difference between selective breeding and evolution depends on the scope.
If humans selectively breed plants to grow bigger fruits, that's selective breeding.  But humans having developed the brains and sentience needed to go ahead and breed selectively, that's evolution.
So basically, selective breeding is when one species interferes with the development of another species on purpose.  Evolution is still the bigger picture.
But if you make a video game where the environmental changes are caused by anything else than the game's own laws of physics, you wouldn't have true evolution anymore.  There'd be a Creator that hasn't evolved himself and then Evolution is ruined.

Also, just shoving plants in a spaceship to Mars is stupid.  It's like throwing turtles off a cliff until they learn to fly.  In order for evolution to take place, there have to be successive generations from which the better candidates survive.  You'd have more luck breeding plants in a greenhouse on earth which gradually changes to Mars-like conditions.  You need something that can survive on Mars before it can adapt to Mars.  Some bacteria might be able to live there, but good luck getting them to change the atmospheric conditions before your funds run out.

[Asheron]

I think the difference between selective breeding and evolution depends on the scope.
If humans selectively breed plants to grow bigger fruits, that's selective breeding.  But humans having developed the brains and sentience needed to go ahead and breed selectively, that's evolution.
So basically, selective breeding is when one species interferes with the development of another species on purpose.  Evolution is still the bigger picture.
But if you make a video game where the environmental changes are caused by anything else than the game's own laws of physics, you wouldn't have true evolution anymore.  There'd be a Creator that hasn't evolved himself and then Evolution is ruined.

Evolution is the process that allows selective breeding. I think that's it. Selective breeding however, is not always 100% evolution, as it might not be necessarily the organism that has the best chance to survive in environment x that gets picked.

[Sordid]

And yes, such a game would be very resource-intensive. But don't we have 3GHz quad-cores for that?

Bah, maybe you do, I'm still on an ancient 2.8 Athlon...