Miscellaneous Bugs And Questions That Don't Deserve Their Own Thread Thread

Ok guys (immortal and gecko and others), whats the point of asking such detailed questions for such future stages. Right now if you havent noticed, its the microbe stage, and our focus is to get a release of that sometime early 2014. I understand youre all curious but it's getting to a point of being distracting and pointless.
And please can we make sure to READ EVERY SINGLE POST REGARDING THE TOPIC BEFORE YOU MAKE POSTS. This is like standard of every other forum out there. Like theres something called  "SEARCH" function, and these forums are quite organized, and even last resort you dont know where to find a topic (which PROBABLY EXISTS, since thrive is quite an aged forum) just pm a more knowledgeable person.
Let's keep this thread limited to miscellaneous things that actually **relate to the game's progress**

Ok, I am WELL aware of things that are going on chef and have been for some time. It causes no harm to the project if I ask things about the future, devs like Nick and ~scio are patient and answer things like this and direct others to threads where they can find their answers, it is a standard I try to follow myself. If these questions were going to do harm to the project, I would assume someone of their authority would let me know of this.

we should have a "common asked questions" thread. so we can just show it to people so they dont have to ask repeated questions (specially the underwater civilizations belgium).

why? because no one would read the whole topic, its too long

https://thrivegame.canadaboard.net/t692-important-read-before-posting

EDIT: No, I was showing to penumbra that there already is a FAQ thread.

Yes, I understand, my apologies, that was unprofessional of me, and again I am sorry. :oops: :(  :oops:

EDIT: 350th post, new avatar, yay.

Immortal_Dragon wrote:

1. Will creatures in the aware stage be able to develop scars or other markings like that?

This is just as pointless as asking if creatures in the aware stage can find marijuana plants and have a few tokes. Maybe the game can then enter a "high" mode with really chill music and everything looks like flowers.
I feel since this is a development forum, a lot more effort should be put into developing the current project. If you have the choice of developing the current microbe stage or spending time making the much more complicated formulas for later stages, which would you choose? A lot of details in the future stages are probably subject to change after the initial release, since there may be a huge influx of activity and ideas coming in. There's very little point in asking very detailed questions of the future stages. Questions are always good, but what good does it do to know "how fast a creature can be" (which is 35.62 km/h) when you can just go to the forum and see that it applies to locomotion, which is probably going to be quite complicated.
You aren't doing any harm to the project, but you aren't doing any good either!

Psych0Ch3f wrote:

Immortal_Dragon wrote:

1. Will creatures in the aware stage be able to develop scars or other markings like that?

This is just as pointless as asking if creatures in the aware stage can find marijuana plants and have a few tokes. Maybe the game can then enter a "high" mode with really chill music and everything looks like flowers.
I feel since this is a development forum, a lot more effort should be put into developing the current project. If you have the choice of developing the current microbe stage or spending time making the much more complicated formulas for later stages, which would you choose? A lot of details in the future stages are probably subject to change after the initial release, since there may be a huge influx of activity and ideas coming in. There's very little point in asking very detailed questions of the future stages. Questions are always good, but what good does it do to know "how fast a creature can be" (which is 35.62 km/h) when you can just go to the forum and see that it applies to locomotion, which is probably going to be quite complicated.
You aren't doing any harm to the project, but you aren't doing any good either!

I find that very derogatory and insulting language chef. I thought you were more reasonable than this. :no: I was trying to apologize for my answering post, I think I may come to regret even trying.

That was not derogatory and insulting. I was trying to be tactful on my part.
Don't be dramatic. Look, we are both here for the same purpose, to help turn thrive into an actual game, not an idea. My criticism of your post (and the posts of others) is to help thrive become a reality. So let's work on being efficient.

Ok, what about this:

Psych0Ch3f wrote:

This is just as pointless as asking if creatures in the aware stage can find marijuana plants and have a few tokes. Maybe the game can then enter a "high" mode with really chill music and everything looks like flowers.

And this:

Psych0Ch3f wrote:

You aren't doing any harm to the project, but you aren't doing any good either!

How am I and others supposed to find statements like these tactful?

Indeed, we are all here for the same purpose, that is not up for debate here. Stating my own opinions on things is not being dramatic, okay, maybe a little, I'll admit. Criticism is supposed to give a direction for the criticized to improve, so far, I have not received any such impression from your posts, only that my posts and those of others aren't actually doing any good. You say the curiosity is getting to be distracting and pointless, how is that actually going to help anyone, you point out the various functions of the website as if we were children, not once did you actually give a direction we could possibly improve on, only stating that it should pertain to the current project or be relevant.

Okay guys, don't get too hostile here.

On the one hand, pyschochef, please avoid the sarcasm in your posts. On the other hand, it is true that many questions on this thread are excessively detailed and insignificant. As psycho said, the answers to these questions don't even matter because they are most likely going to change as the time comes to approach the issue. Many of the questions that are asked can be answered by contents within the forum or wiki, or are really something that is not known at this point in the development.

Let there be calm amongst us. This thread is to bring up questions we have of the game, not insult each other. That's what Youtube is for.

Psycho, I believe sarcasm is a beautiful thing but you were borderline insulting. At least Immortal was asking a question and not wasting time writing derogatory remarks.

Immortal, I believe that they won't focus on physical features like that. I don't think it's programmed so you will see the same creature twice, it would be very unlikely at least, unless you were following the thing. Even then, I think that scars would be a temporary thing for the idea of showing the damage that any certain part of your creature has taken, the scars showing that there's only a little damage, or that more severe damage has healed.

My question is in reference to feeding, on multiple levels.

My first question starts with grazing animals. Grass. Wouldn't you technically be able to just eat no matter where you went, if you had the ability to eat the types of grass available? (For instance, an example in Africa: wildebeests can eat the sharp, tough tops of grass shoots, but don't focus on eating it all. Zebras can eat the midsections of the grass, but don't focus on the shoots near the ground, which gazelles eat.) So how would you be able to direct your creature to eat, without your screen being full of notices of there being food?

I think browsers aren't as hard to figure, and neither are carnivores.

But I do have a question in reference to all of them, will there be physical evidence that something has been fed off of? Will there be trails in the grass where grazers have mowed it down? Will there possibly be whole branches off of a tree where a browser had been looking for leaves? And the big one, will the carcasses be literally torn apart by a hungry carnivore?

I know we want this to be realistic, and that's hard to do with some programming and/or machine restrictions, but there's even blood baths in nature, and this game wasn't meant to be exactly child friendly. One thing that was a disappointment in Spore was that you just ate off of a dead thing three times and then it faded into oblivion (or 20 times or so off of an epic creature before it too disappeared). In the 2005 demonstration, it appeared you could feed perpetually from one carcass with only having to worry something bigger coming to check it out.

I just think it would be nice just to see how much was left of a carcass when you: A. Found it. Or B. Are done eating from it. It will let you feel the disappointment of you finding it too late. Maybe I'm overestimating technology and even our coders. I know that not every little realistic detail in the real world can be put into a video game. I think that would even kill a computer at NASA.

Anyway, this is the guy who makes everything too realistic talking. Continue on.

dinoman9877 wrote:

Let there be calm amongst us. This thread is to bring up questions we have of the game, not insult each other. That's what Youtube is for.

Psycho, I believe sarcasm is a beautiful thing but you were borderline insulting. At least Immortal was asking a question and not wasting time writing derogatory remarks.

Immortal, I believe that they won't focus on physical features like that. I don't think it's programmed so you will see the same creature twice, it would be very unlikely at least, unless you were following the thing. Even then, I think that scars would be a temporary thing for the idea of showing the damage that any certain part of your creature has taken, the scars showing that there's only a little damage, or that more severe damage has healed.

Please don't carry this on. And no, scars will not even exist temporarily, just like cuts, bruises, wrinkles, or any other insignificant skin features will not be included. It wouldn't even be practical to expect that.

To give you a partial answer to your question dinoman, I believe Nick told me dismemberment is likely during feeding during the aware stage at least, not so much combat itself. Aside from that I have nothing.

Will we have metabolic classifications for organisms such as photoautotroph, chemoautotroph, photoheterotroph, and chemoheterotroph?

If an organism's mouth allows them to eat it, then they can eat it. If their digestive system allows them to digest it, then they can digest it. Anything else either can't be eaten or becomes waste.

I actually have a microbe stage question this time:

*Is there some sort of function for determining the speed conveyed by movement parts such as cilia and flagella?

*Also, how are cells supposed to be expected to find food, those that engulf other cells in particular, since the light-eaters and heat-eaters can just sense what they need.

Aside, whenever PortalFan1000 has posted on a thread I am watching, I don't receive a notification, is there some reason for this?

*That is one of the features yet to be determined.

*Glucose will be found free-floating in the environment, which the cell can use for glycolysis or cellular respiration.

I don't know why such a thing would be happening, but I don't think it's important because I use the Recent Topics list anyway.

Quite the good question there concerning flagellum Dragon.
From my biochem knowledge, pretty much Flagellum gets you linear 2d movement (either propeller or beating motion) and cilia with basic 3d movement (power and recovery motion). Flagellum need to be pointing in same direction btw or you get circular motion (no actual net movement)
heres the biology/math behind it. You dont need to know this but I'd like to share for those of you actually interested.

Spoiler:

Basically more flagellum is higher max speed, and the more ATP available to that flagellum means more acceleration.
When i mean ATP availability (if you didnt read my long explanation) I just mean that flagella have very small SA inside the cell to actually hydrolisize the ATP, which means something like the nucleus will probably get ATP first, and flagella get the leftovers. We need to make sure to factor that into the equation, otherwise in moving a cell, you may end up using too much ATP just to accelerate faster and deprive other cells. OR. we could actually completely ignore that factor and just do the basic
# of flagellum  ∝ Max Speed ; where acceleration is constant. (and ATP used is the same possibility as any other organelle, which means we notice ATP usage linearly proportional to the movement)

ON ANOTHER NOTE:

dinoman wrote:

... not insult each other. That's what Youtube is for.

made me chuckle. kinda true. except bob's army is taking over.

dinoman wrote:

Psycho, I believe sarcasm is a beautiful thing but you were borderline insulting. At least Immortal was asking a question and not wasting time writing derogatory remarks.

1. You do not know what borderline insulting sarcasm is. I will refrain from using that, dont worry.
2. "Immortal was asking a question" and "not wasting time " . No I think we clearly established that some of the questions that have been posted have been very ludicrous and unnecessary. such as: with grazing animals. Grass.  You yourself even mentioned it was unnecessary, yet you still posted it. Even a spoiler would have made it better (like i did with my semi-unecessary but educational post here) BUT i have to say im impressed with immortals latest question, it actually is something that needs to be discussed! (this is in a non sarcastic tone)
3. I cannot criticize a post that has nothing to be criticized on. If you post something that actually doesnt contribute to the project, the only criticism i can direct is towards the author, since he/she could be dedicating their efforts to the more dire areas of need in the forum.
Let's not talk about this anymore. Lets discuss flagellum, theyre much more interesting.

True, and very good explanation chef. I don't like bob's army either. Also, Nick called for a halt of that particular discussion, it is over, done with, in the past, hakuna matata if you will.

But also, these movement organelles will have their own ATP requirements as well, flagella are on the higher end of the scale speed wise, but they will also require more ATP than cilia or the pseudopod, so this is probably why we don't see cells with more than one or even two in life.

The way they scale is this if I am remembering correctly.

*the flagella will provide the strongest speed boost, but it is ATP-intensive to use

*the pseudopod is the slowest, but it is the most energy efficient choice

*the cilia is the middle piece, it is moderately fast while not as intensive as flagella but not as efficient as the pseudopod

In addition, I don't know what other functions the mitochondria will have aside from cellular respiration in Thrive, whether they will act as ATP factories or not.

Psych0Ch3f wrote:

Let's not talk about this anymore

You missed the last sentence dragon =)

I feel that explanation for flagellum cilia and pseudopods is probably generally correct but too generalized.
BUT flagella are often found in large groups

Spoiler:

note that C just spins around (opposing flagella)
so multi flagella-bacteria are quite well known.
I dont know how it would be playing a pseudopod though. like you move at painful speeds, dont you? and your movement is completely controlled by a different process than cilia and flagellum, so i guess its efficient... I'm not knowledgeable enough on that.

You're absolutely right, I did miss the last sentence. :lol: 

A pseudopod moves around with the actual cytoplasm of the cell pushing and flowing through to stretch the cell membrane, so I am not sure how this will be implemented in Thrive's editors.

Playing as one, you will pretty much have to have abundant food around you, since you will be slow as heck, or develop some kind of ambush, such as excreting chemicals to attract your food (EDIT: or like my amoeba on the concept race thread, bioluminescence).

The thing is though, we aren't talking about bacteria, we are talking about eukaryote cells, since the differences between the two has been determined to be too complex at this point, I think.

How these could be more specific, I have no idea at the moment, your equations seem sound to me.

Ok I didnt use the proper example there with flagella.
Pretty much theres nothing stopping you from having multiple flagellum (and there are eukaryotic cells with that behaviour im sure) but i would really have an impact on ATP consumption. Only good part is you move fast and in a straight line.
In contrast cilia are like mega agile, (extremely co-ordinated) , and can actually be used to make a current to drag food in.
Watch this video if you want to see cool videos of them in action:

Spoiler:

Cool video, but one of the things I noticed is that those cells are absolutely covered in cilia to achieve that feat, and from an editing perspective, I am sure players would want to achieve this, so how do we go about that? Do we make this cilia covering just a one-shot deal, one cost for one organelle that only has one cost to run, or do we make patches of them that can stack effects and costs?

The same thing with pseudopods, in my opinion I think just putting it as a one-shot would be all the effect it needs, which would naturally put it ahead of flagella at least in energy efficiency.

Flagellum, I completely agree. So, flagella can be the organelle that is good for fast straight line travel, cilia are for agility, and pseudopod is just plain slow, what benefit would there really be for choosing it then from a player's perspective?

Pseudopodia refers simply to a cell that moves on its own accord, changing its shape to propel forwards. It is not placed or evolved, its simply the default. Cilia are placed in patches, one hex each, along the membrane, while flagellum are placed individually per hex.

I have one other question.

There were two things (amongst others) that bothered me about Spore.
A: How limited the flight was, and how ridiculous it could be. If you didn't have good jumping mixed with the good wings, you didn't fly far, and you had to land after a while because you couldn't continuously flap them, or even glide CORRECTLY.

B. Last I checked, bird's have toes that work like our fingers, but not in Spore, apparently. That just bugged me, mostly because you can't be like a hawk or owl, swooping down and grabbing your prey, you have to go through that crap combat, as always.

My question is if the feet of our creatures can double as grasping appendages, if designed correctly. I asked if prey could be grabbed and carried off before, and was told yes, but I assume that the person who answered thought the prey would be grabbed by the mouth, or in the hands of the creature if they had any at that point. I know that the flying will be less restricted. (How little restriction I am very desperate to see. Of course my testing will result in a lot of crash landings but it's for the good of my gameplay experience!)

Anyway, I'm just asking in case I don't want to force my creature to have a separate pair of arms. As I've said, I'm not going to be playing past the multicellular stages a lot.