Podcast Organization

crovea wrote:

Very nice with the podcast! If i might ask, when was it recorded?

It was recorded around the end of August/beginning of September. I can't remember the exact date.

Great work Oliver! It's good to see another podcast up and ready for show.

Hey guys! I only just noticed you have a second podcast now, and am really excited to see a bit of activity on the Thrive front.

It actually made me wonder if you guys would be open to doing an interview of some description to discuss the differences and similarities between our games and compare and contrast our ideas and approaches. I'm midway through a massive (and incredibly boring) code cleanup on Species ALRE and it seems like it would be fun to do more than just randomly blog about it.

That would be an interesting comparison, although I think it would be pretty unbalanced since you actually have a game to compare with, whereas there there is only concept for the Auto-Evolution process. However, I would be glad to help in such an ordeal. One major difference I can think of right off the bat is the time scale. Thrive encompasses cells to space, whereas Species ALRE covers the organism gameplay.

NickTheNick wrote:

That would be an interesting comparison, although I think it would be pretty unbalanced since you actually have a game to compare with, whereas there there is only concept for the Auto-Evolution process. However, I would be glad to help in such an ordeal. One major difference I can think of right off the bat is the time scale. Thrive encompasses cells to space, whereas Species ALRE covers the organism gameplay.

Oh, I wouldn't compare as-is to as-is, but rather will-be to will-be. Both games are still in very early alpha stages, so it's more fun talking about our insanely ambitious ideas for the future.

One of the strange dichotomies of Thrive is that you're aiming to simulate evolution over a much larger scope/timescale, but at the same time utilising long-living creatures. The creatures in Species are programmed to evolve rapidly, with really short lifespans (no more than a few minutes long at 1x time accelleration), making them more like microbes in some ways (ironic, since Species doesn't have a microbial stage). The creature's in Thrive, meanwhile, will need much longer lifespans for gameplay and behavioral purposes.

One thing I would personally love to chat about is your metabolic systems: currently Species uses pure gaming abstractions like "Health" and "Energy", but I plan to convert that to a far more detailed dietary system based on real-world biochemistry. Since I came up with my plans mostly via Wikipedia, it would be interesting to see where they're similar and where they differ.

Yes, Thrive organisms will have to live longer to allow the player to experience adventures and engaging scenarios each generation.

Metabolism will be halfway between what you have now and what you linked to. Health and energy will exist, but energy will be a derivation of ATP, and the internal organ processes of all organisms will be taken into account. We've done research into Biomechanics and Allometry to determine relationships for finding the basal metabolic rate of any organism based off of its mass, the relationship between the force exerted by a muscle based off of its cross-sectional area, the ATP required to be expended by an organism to perform physical acts given the force required to perform that act, and several other things. However, we actually have a lot of concept still left to iron out, which we can begin to work on again once members like me, ~sciocont, Daniferrito, and Seregon have more free time to spend on the project.

So how would you propose the blog be written?

NickTheNick wrote:

So how would you propose the blog be written?

Heh, in truth I hadn’t really thought that far ahead. Let’s see...

We could use a two-way interview format: we each put together a small number of questions of a “this is how I’m doing X, what are your plans in that regard?” nature, then answer each other’s questions and compile the results into a single post.

Or we could stay informal like we’re doing now and just have a conversation, which we then transcribe. Might not be as well structured as the interview format.

There’s probably other options too, like Skype or... other... things... like I said, I hadn’t thought that far ahead.

Hey Quasar! I don't believe we've met. First of all, I love Species: ALRE. Great job there. I'm excited you're continually interested in Thrive. Personally, I think an interview/joint podcast is a fantastic idea. I honestly prefer a conversational style, but our podcasts so far have been semi-scripted, with the exception of the Q&A section. What is your preference on the matter? I'm looking forward to seeing how we handle this.

WJacobC wrote:

Hey Quasar! I don't believe we've met. First of all, I love Species: ALRE. Great job there. I'm excited you're continually interested in Thrive. Personally, I think an interview/joint podcast is a fantastic idea. I honestly prefer a conversational style, but our podcasts so far have been semi-scripted, with the exception of the Q&A section. What is your preference on the matter? I'm looking forward to seeing how we handle this.

I'm pretty easy: an unscripted joint-podcast was my initial idea, but NickTheNick mentioned a blog and I realised a written article would work too.

If we do go verbal, a semi-scripted format would probably suit me well: if I knew what questions/subjects we were going to deal with, it'd give me a chance to compile my thoughts before responding.

Hmm... weird, overly ambitious idea I had while typing this... I wonder if we could approach Steve Grand (Creatures/Grandroids) and Tom Barbalet (Noble Ape, /r/simulate) to join us as well and do a great big Artificial Life/Evolution Game panel/podcast? I might be thinking too big there, but I'm pretty sure Tom would be interested and Steve seemed like a pretty nice guy over email...

Wow, that sounds ambitious, but I think it would be awesome. Would you like to start an email/Skype conversation with them? I also think a semi-scripted podcast is best, maybe with an accompanying devblog.

Speaking of which, the founder of r/simulate has contacted us before, yet only briefly, for our strategy mode is a long way away.

I like the sound of this - I for one would really like to discuss the similarities and differences between the music of Thrive and Species, providing we can find a time when everyone's available. It would also definitely boost interest in both our projects, although probably a lot more for Thrive seeing as Species already has quite a large fan base. My vote would be for a semi-scripted but more conversation-esque style than the current podcasts, as it would probably be difficult to talk properly about something if we're all reading prewritten parts and haven't got to know each other beforehand.

Well I am really pressed for time these days, so I wouldn't be able to help much in organizing or writing a basic script/outline, but I could provide responses for any of the questions asked. Would someone be able to coordinate it?

Hey guys, I had some time to think about my idea on friday to ask Tom Barbalet and Steve Grand, and though I still love the idea of a big panel among ALife/Evolution game devs (seriously, how could that not be awesome? ), it would also be a lot less focused and potentially a lot less comfortable than the original idea of a compare-and-contrast between Species and Thrive. So I'm thinking it would be a better idea to try the smaller idea first and see how that pans out. If it all goes well, then we can push the boundaries further and take a look at the panel idea.

As for scripts, I wouldn't go for anything too formal: just enough to give us an idea about the questions to be asked and the topics we want to cover.

For my part, I'm free most weekends (which in a US timezone would be Friday and Saturday afternoon/evenings).

So with all that in mind... what's the preferred way to coordinate this? E-mail, PMs, private thread, or just keep chatting here? Also, I've been assuming the technology you guys used to record your own podcasts allows people to call in from overseas?

Oliveriver wrote:

I like the sound of this - I for one would really like to discuss the similarities and differences between the music of Thrive and Species, providing we can find a time when everyone's available.

I’ll ask Brain Sugar about coming in on that discussion. I'll let you know if he'd be interested...

To be honest, I think that before we talk to any other dev working on a similar project; we finish at least an opening build for our stage. I feel like after all this time without any workable product would be embarrassing if we compare to these other indie developers.

Although if we do talk about it with other devs we should stress that our project is, at its base, a crowdsourced project. Very few of us have likely met each other IRL and thats one of our projects weaknesses and strengths. We can pool together an incredibly diverse crew, but our organization isn't nearly as efficient as one where the team members know each other. I'm not sure if a game has been made using our model of development before, as its certainly unique. A bunch of forumites working on a forum to create something that they can be proud of. I think that we need to emphasize this more, we aren't as clear-cut of an organization as other indie projects, we aren't a single person working on a game at his home. We are a group of diverse individuals working towards a goal, some people may contribute more than others but all in all, we all contribute. Best of all, none of us expect to be compensated for our work. We volunteer our time and resources to work on this project.

Quasar wrote:

Hey guys, I had some time to think about my idea on friday to ask Tom Barbalet and Steve Grand, and though I still love the idea of a big panel among ALife/Evolution game devs (seriously, how could that not be awesome? :D), it would also be a lot less focused and potentially a lot less comfortable than the original idea of a compare-and-contrast between Species and Thrive. So I'm thinking it would be a better idea to try the smaller idea first and see how that pans out. If it all goes well, then we can push the boundaries further and take a look at the panel idea.
       
As for scripts, I wouldn't go for anything too formal: just enough to give us an idea about the questions to be asked and the topics we want to cover.
       
For my part, I'm free most weekends (which in a US timezone would be Friday and Saturday afternoon/evenings).
       
So with all that in mind... what's the preferred way to coordinate this? E-mail, PMs, private thread, or just keep chatting here? Also, I've been assuming the technology you guys used to record your own podcasts allows people to call in from overseas?

I think e-mails would be best. I will contact ~sciocont and see what time best works for him, as I think it would be important for him to be able to participate as well. However, yes, I agree with Falthron that a big discussion with the other projects too would be better once we have at least the first stage to show for.

Alrighty then. My gmail address is qu.quasar: feel free to touch base there.

Quote :

Although if we do talk about it with other devs we should stress that our project is, at its base, a crowdsourced project. Very few of us have likely met each other IRL and thats one of our projects weaknesses and strengths.

That's actually one of the things I'd love to talk with you guys about. The Alpha Build release model Species uses is good for establishing our indie cred (even though by this point it's practically mainstream), but you guys have taken it to a whole new level. The idea of crowdsourcing an entire game is simulatiously awe-inspiring and terrifying.

only noticed the new podcast some days ago, i lol'd to see so many people commenting about underwater civs....what a obsession wit the public......

Okay thank you for comment, but please next time only post if you have something constructive to say, not just an opinion, and make sure not to interrupt ongoing conversations.

So the proposal to do a joint podcast with Quasar sort of tapered out a little, mostly due to a lack of free time for most members. While it's not likely everyone's free time is going to coincide anytime soon, planning for it may help find times when most major members are able to participate at some point in the future. There's also still the question of actually contacting Quasar again and finding out when he's available, which should hopefully help decide on a better time frame.

Also, the idea of shorter podcasts with fewer presenters which would be easier to organise has been proposed here. In essence, they would just be a short summary of current development progress (just to remind the fans that we're not dead) from whoever is available at the end of each interval - monthly sounds fairly easy to maintain, with a few days afterwards to quickly edit everything and upload it to the YouTube channel.

I agree with podcasts being shorter. The rate they are produced should be kept in check with how much progress we have and how much free time we have to make them, but I think three 10-minute podcasts in one month is better than 1 half hour podcast.

Regarding Quasar, what sort of format are we thinking of for our discussion with him?

This is what Quasar said on the previous page regarding the podcast's format:

Quasar wrote:

If we do go verbal, a semi-scripted format would probably suit me well: if I knew what questions/subjects we were going to deal with, it'd give me a chance to compile my thoughts before responding.

Also, a more regular podcast may create more incentive for progress over a short amount of time - if what's been done over a month is going to be listed at the end of it, people are going to be more likely to contribute in the hope of raising that amount and consequently our profile. As for the duration, even 10 minutes is probably too long. If no better organisation alternative can be found (i.e. a lot of people aren't able to be around for its recording), it would be difficult for three or four people to keep talking (without going into detailed descriptions of anything, as we have done for the previous podcasts) for that long.