The creator of upcoming life sim Inzoi says he was "recklessly brave to even think about creating a game of this scale"
-
So everything needs hunger variables
T̸h̶e̴ ̷f̵o̶g̴ ̷w̴a̷s̴ ̸h̸u̵n̵g̴r̸y̸,̸ ̶i̴t̷ ̵a̸t̶e̵ ̵t̷h̵e̶ ̸w̴o̸l̷v̷e̸s̴
Dwarf Fortress goes that deep. They once had to fix a problem where cats died from alcohol poisoning. Dwarfs in a bar would spill their drinks, the cats would walk through the puddles and subsequently lick their paws to clean themselves. It's crazy!
-
You don’t understand this is No Man’s Sky meets Spore with a touch of Daikatana.
What do giant radishes have to do with anything?
-
"Now, I understand why so few companies have attempted to develop a life simulation game. The challenge isn't just additive the more you try to build—it's exponential. At a certain point, finding bugs in this vast world we've created feels like playing tag with invisible ghosts."
He's not bragging; it's honesty. I'm thankful he is sharing the experience. I know totally what he's talking about. I remember trying to make a simulation of reality in the wc3 map editor in elementary school. Add the weather so the plants grow. Tie growth variables also in to deer eating them. wolves eat the deer. So everything needs hunger variables. But already we start having the 'exponential growth' he is talking about: because what about the Weather and the Deer? And the Weather and Wolves? Add aspect of the world for one type of object (weather for plants), and suddenly you have to figure out how or whether it relates to everything else you have (Deer and Wolves). Now let's say we add villagers and Structures. Every time we add something, we have more nodes to consider the interrelations of.
It's easy when there are few systems and few types of things (like a cardgame of creatures with atk and def), but it escalates quick and does exactly what he's saying the more systems you try to accurately include and farther toward 'full life sim'.
So im just a noob, but I see clearly this is what he is conveying to us. (probably cuz i tried a similar path in elementary school. if i remember correctly i ran in to this same issue, scale was too big too big project and i switched to something else. it exponentialed quick; just like he says)
edit: i bet he wasnt brave as much as did not forsee the exponentialness aspect and wanting to aim high caused him to fall in to it
Making a system like this one day is my dream. I'm not in game dev and I'm probably never going to make a playable game but I naively believe that if you organize this well enough in advance, the moment it starts clicking together would be amazing. If you define all the individual actors in a flexible enough way, eventually the simulation should just 'click' and start functioning on its own, right?
For example, you dont need to code the specific wolves+rain interaction - you just need to code "if vulnerable/tired - find shelter" and have rain affect the living creatures in that way. It doesn't matter if there are deer or sheep in the area, "if wolf hungry" logic should just say "find something with meat to eat nearby".
Then again I know enough about programming to know this is extremely naive and it'd probably be a million times more difficult if I ever got around to doing it. I don't even know where I fall on the dunner-kruger graph yet, but it's an interesting thing to think about for me.
-
Seems more like Sims 3-style, but if you cranked up the graphics up to 11.
And that everyone is a kpop star with high fashion.
-
Dwarf Fortress goes that deep. They once had to fix a problem where cats died from alcohol poisoning. Dwarfs in a bar would spill their drinks, the cats would walk through the puddles and subsequently lick their paws to clean themselves. It's crazy!
I think the bug was that a splash of beer had the same alcohol content as a cup.
-
I think the bug was that a splash of beer had the same alcohol content as a cup.
Yes that was the bug. After all it makes sense that cats would clean their paws and get a bit of alcohol in their bodies. Kind of bizarre to think though that the system was sophisticated enough to track grooming behavior but not quantity.
It really goes to show how stupid computers actually are. They just follow your instructions regardless of how insane they may be
-
"Now, I understand why so few companies have attempted to develop a life simulation game. The challenge isn't just additive the more you try to build—it's exponential. At a certain point, finding bugs in this vast world we've created feels like playing tag with invisible ghosts."
He's not bragging; it's honesty. I'm thankful he is sharing the experience. I know totally what he's talking about. I remember trying to make a simulation of reality in the wc3 map editor in elementary school. Add the weather so the plants grow. Tie growth variables also in to deer eating them. wolves eat the deer. So everything needs hunger variables. But already we start having the 'exponential growth' he is talking about: because what about the Weather and the Deer? And the Weather and Wolves? Add aspect of the world for one type of object (weather for plants), and suddenly you have to figure out how or whether it relates to everything else you have (Deer and Wolves). Now let's say we add villagers and Structures. Every time we add something, we have more nodes to consider the interrelations of.
It's easy when there are few systems and few types of things (like a cardgame of creatures with atk and def), but it escalates quick and does exactly what he's saying the more systems you try to accurately include and farther toward 'full life sim'.
So im just a noob, but I see clearly this is what he is conveying to us. (probably cuz i tried a similar path in elementary school. if i remember correctly i ran in to this same issue, scale was too big too big project and i switched to something else. it exponentialed quick; just like he says)
edit: i bet he wasnt brave as much as did not forsee the exponentialness aspect and wanting to aim high caused him to fall in to it
I've read from a few people who've done similar sorts of things that the solution to this problem is to just have everything track everything to begin with. Hunger level, heart rate, mood, everything you can possibly think of to track, and then just have everything else inherit from that global class. A lot of the values will be zero for some objects, but that's okay, after all a storage crate doesn't need a mood, both at some point in the future maybe you want to add an emotional box, and your code will definitely handle it now. Otherwise you have to go back in and alter everything every time you make a slight change.
-
Making a system like this one day is my dream. I'm not in game dev and I'm probably never going to make a playable game but I naively believe that if you organize this well enough in advance, the moment it starts clicking together would be amazing. If you define all the individual actors in a flexible enough way, eventually the simulation should just 'click' and start functioning on its own, right?
For example, you dont need to code the specific wolves+rain interaction - you just need to code "if vulnerable/tired - find shelter" and have rain affect the living creatures in that way. It doesn't matter if there are deer or sheep in the area, "if wolf hungry" logic should just say "find something with meat to eat nearby".
Then again I know enough about programming to know this is extremely naive and it'd probably be a million times more difficult if I ever got around to doing it. I don't even know where I fall on the dunner-kruger graph yet, but it's an interesting thing to think about for me.
According to the dwarf fortress developer the hard part isn't the code exactly it's the graphics which is why he doesn't bother with them.
-
that would be a super cool touch in a game
Secret of the Haunted Forest
Player eventually realizes the reason for the unexplained corpses is the hunger mechanic applies to the fog too.
I'm just reminded of the fog men in kenshi
-
Yes that was the bug. After all it makes sense that cats would clean their paws and get a bit of alcohol in their bodies. Kind of bizarre to think though that the system was sophisticated enough to track grooming behavior but not quantity.
It really goes to show how stupid computers actually are. They just follow your instructions regardless of how insane they may be
What is amazing is how our universe and existence seems to be governed by a few physics laws (which we don't fully understand).
-
Am I the only one that interpreted it as him calling himself foolish?
No, that's how it was intended, and how most people read it.
-
I've read from a few people who've done similar sorts of things that the solution to this problem is to just have everything track everything to begin with. Hunger level, heart rate, mood, everything you can possibly think of to track, and then just have everything else inherit from that global class. A lot of the values will be zero for some objects, but that's okay, after all a storage crate doesn't need a mood, both at some point in the future maybe you want to add an emotional box, and your code will definitely handle it now. Otherwise you have to go back in and alter everything every time you make a slight change.
A more complicated but ultimately faster approach is using a structure like an Entity Component System. You build an entity (deer, person, plant) out of components that are just data (health, hunger, mood), and then each type of component has a corresponding system that updates all the components at once based on other values. It’s somewhat similar, but you save space on unnecessary components not being added, and it packs the data together in way that is faster for the computer to iterate through.
-
I've read from a few people who've done similar sorts of things that the solution to this problem is to just have everything track everything to begin with. Hunger level, heart rate, mood, everything you can possibly think of to track, and then just have everything else inherit from that global class. A lot of the values will be zero for some objects, but that's okay, after all a storage crate doesn't need a mood, both at some point in the future maybe you want to add an emotional box, and your code will definitely handle it now. Otherwise you have to go back in and alter everything every time you make a slight change.
An emotional box? Enough about my wife!
-
This post did not contain any content.
I will still respect him for attempting
-
And that everyone is a kpop star with high fashion.
The Sims 3: K-Pop Stuff Pack.
-
An emotional box? Enough about my wife!
LOL, forgot about that tacky bastard.
-
No, that's how it was intended, and how most people read it.
Some lemmy users really love getting mad xD. Can't believe I thought I would say this but reddit gaming subs are not this bad. Idk if it's just me but It doesn't excite me to check the comments anymore.
-
Anyone that declares that he himself is recklessly brave doing anything is a self-promoting ass.
Bravery is doing a thing that scares the hell out of you. The reckless part is being brave when it's foolish. He's saying he was foolhardy. Probably doesn't know the word exists.
-
"Now, I understand why so few companies have attempted to develop a life simulation game. The challenge isn't just additive the more you try to build—it's exponential. At a certain point, finding bugs in this vast world we've created feels like playing tag with invisible ghosts."
He's not bragging; it's honesty. I'm thankful he is sharing the experience. I know totally what he's talking about. I remember trying to make a simulation of reality in the wc3 map editor in elementary school. Add the weather so the plants grow. Tie growth variables also in to deer eating them. wolves eat the deer. So everything needs hunger variables. But already we start having the 'exponential growth' he is talking about: because what about the Weather and the Deer? And the Weather and Wolves? Add aspect of the world for one type of object (weather for plants), and suddenly you have to figure out how or whether it relates to everything else you have (Deer and Wolves). Now let's say we add villagers and Structures. Every time we add something, we have more nodes to consider the interrelations of.
It's easy when there are few systems and few types of things (like a cardgame of creatures with atk and def), but it escalates quick and does exactly what he's saying the more systems you try to accurately include and farther toward 'full life sim'.
So im just a noob, but I see clearly this is what he is conveying to us. (probably cuz i tried a similar path in elementary school. if i remember correctly i ran in to this same issue, scale was too big too big project and i switched to something else. it exponentialed quick; just like he says)
edit: i bet he wasnt brave as much as did not forsee the exponentialness aspect and wanting to aim high caused him to fall in to it
Hey another kid who grew up wc3 modding! I did a ton of that too.
-
Hey another kid who grew up wc3 modding! I did a ton of that too.
I made a tower defense map in the Starcraft map editor when I was a kid , but it was based off of anti air rather than anti ground like the other TD maps at the time. I got it working pretty damn well (at least IMO) but I didn't have internet at the time and that was on my dads work laptop so it sadly got lost.
I don't think I could recreate that now if I tried, crazy what you can do as a bored kid with too much time.
