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

crovea wrote:

Jupiter34 wrote:

Once the game is finished will people have to download it from the site or will you put it on steam?

I suppose it would be cool to have it on steam, but It probably depends on, if there is any restrictions for steam that don't fit well for our model and if we can get greenlit.

On a entirely different note, I thought I'd suggest an idea for once, couldn't find anything similar around so here it is:

I was reading through the microbe design document and noticed the thing about players, upon death, respawning as a copy of their old microbe.
What if the player had a simulated number displayed for the population of his microbe type.
The number would be calculated based on how long he has had that specific microbe type active and how well he is doing (in terms of losing health/dying and staying high/low on important compounds).

If the population is 0 or very low, the player will not respawn as a copy of that type, but a different one. Could be a previous iteration of his microbe, a random other microbe type or having to start over completely.

This way it puts some varying excitement into the game (When you just evolved your microbe for example) while putting pressure on you to do well. Obviously the difficulty of maintaining a good population number could be adjusted and probably shouldn't be very hard, but I think it would be a cool feature to have the players microbe type go extinct if he dies over and over. Other effects could be coupled into population, such as how easy it is to find others of his kin to merge with. The basic idea of this could perhaps also be taken into the next few single-creature stages. You would need to figure out how this interacts with saved games.

Sorry for the late reply, but I think that sounds like an awesome idea. It introduced an element of mortality to the player's species, and gives some incentive to promote the growth of the species at large. However, this number would be mostly be based off of population dynamics, so it would be more the changes that you make in the microbe editor, and less the actions you take in gameplay, that affect its fluctuation. This feature I think would work well in the later stages as well. What's more, every new generation with a new physical trait would reset the number to 0, so the player would be most vulnerable after reproduction.

I think that if they hit 0 and they die, the game would end, and they would have to load from the last saved game. However, it could also switch to the next closest evolutionary relative, I'm not sure. I think this concept is up for debate.

NickTheNick wrote:

crovea wrote:

Jupiter34 wrote:

Once the game is finished will people have to download it from the site or will you put it on steam?

I suppose it would be cool to have it on steam, but It probably depends on, if there is any restrictions for steam that don't fit well for our model and if we can get greenlit.

On a entirely different note, I thought I'd suggest an idea for once, couldn't find anything similar around so here it is:

I was reading through the microbe design document and noticed the thing about players, upon death, respawning as a copy of their old microbe.
What if the player had a simulated number displayed for the population of his microbe type.
The number would be calculated based on how long he has had that specific microbe type active and how well he is doing (in terms of losing health/dying and staying high/low on important compounds).

If the population is 0 or very low, the player will not respawn as a copy of that type, but a different one. Could be a previous iteration of his microbe, a random other microbe type or having to start over completely.

This way it puts some varying excitement into the game (When you just evolved your microbe for example) while putting pressure on you to do well. Obviously the difficulty of maintaining a good population number could be adjusted and probably shouldn't be very hard, but I think it would be a cool feature to have the players microbe type go extinct if he dies over and over. Other effects could be coupled into population, such as how easy it is to find others of his kin to merge with. The basic idea of this could perhaps also be taken into the next few single-creature stages. You would need to figure out how this interacts with saved games.

Sorry for the late reply, but I think that sounds like an awesome idea. It introduced an element of mortality to the player's species, and gives some incentive to promote the growth of the species at large. However, this number would be mostly be based off of population dynamics, so it would be more the changes that you make in the microbe editor, and less the actions you take in gameplay, that affect its fluctuation. This feature I think would work well in the later stages as well. What's more, every new generation with a new physical trait would reset the number to 0, so the player would be most vulnerable after reproduction.

I think that if they hit 0 and they die, the game would end, and they would have to load from the last saved game. However, it could also switch to the next closest evolutionary relative, I'm not sure. I think this concept is up for debate.

This does seem like a good idea but I think it should be optional, you know only for like a harder difficulty level or something, so as to not scare of new players with the threat of failure with in seconds. If this happens, the first generation should start with the equivalent of at least ten lives. This could be changed by the player (or possibly a difficulty setting if this is going to have one) to increase or decrease starting difficulty.

I like crovea's idea, and think it'd fit in fairly well with population dynamics as it is right now - though in most cases I would expect your simulated population to be relatively huge (1000's), we could certainly scale this to work nicely if we like this as a respawn system.

I'd also suggest we maybe give the player some control over what they respawn as. For example, if a change they made makes their organism unplayable, they should be allowed to choose to go back to a previous population (version), perhaps at the cost of a population penalty (or wasted mutation points).

To what extent do you think a player should be able to retrace their lineage for respawning purposes? One idea is to always allow them to go back to the next closest relative, no matter how distantly related, so technically you will never lose unless life itself is wiped out of the planet. Another idea is to make it only those of your species, but that could also be very dangerous for the player every time their species enters a new iteration and branches off (although I think the danger is fine). This way a player would lose simply by having their species die out, which I think makes more sense.

Planets and Solar System idea:

There are many different big stars in this world, yellow dwarfs, red dwarfs, which becomes blue dwarfs, brown dwarfs and white dwarfs.

what if you were to be able to customize your world, like the closest (a planet) to farthest (m planet)

eg:

sun - __ (shorten the sun type name, like rd for red dwarf) planet distance (use alphabet) --- atmosphere composing (max of 6) oxygen, hydrogen, helium, carbon dioxide, monoxide etc. and percentage of that gas.


picture for (possible) better understanding




well i suggested not long ago about this being an MMO, and it might be added in the future, if this idea were to be added along with the MMO idea, then probably there would only be 7 playable solar systems (the one above and maybe a black dwarf (a star that has exhausted all its energy)) and maybe small solar systems that spawn and despawn if no one terraforms a planet in it after 72 hours.

SawerGreem wrote:

Planets and Solar System idea:

There are many different big stars in this world, yellow dwarfs, red dwarfs, which becomes blue dwarfs, brown dwarfs and white dwarfs.

what if you were to be able to customize your world, like the closest (a planet) to farthest (m planet)

eg:

sun - __ (shorten the sun type name, like rd for red dwarf) planet distance (use alphabet) --- atmosphere composing (max of 6) oxygen, hydrogen, helium, carbon dioxide, monoxide etc. and percentage of that gas.


picture for (possible) better understanding




well i suggested not long ago about this being an MMO, and it might be added in the future, if this idea were to be added along with the MMO idea, then probably there would only be 7 playable solar systems (the one above and maybe a black dwarf (a star that has exhausted all its energy)) and maybe small solar systems that spawn and despawn if no one terraforms a planet in it after 72 hours.

I'm fairly sure that the star thing is already going to be in, it IS a realistic game.
As for shaping your planet... Not until the space stage.
And lastly, the MMO thing. I know you are new, and that's okay, everyone is at one point but... Read the wiki some, the MMO thing simply isn't the type for Thrive.
Please forgive me if I offended you in any way.

NickTheNick wrote:

To what extent do you think a player should be able to retrace their lineage for respawning purposes? One idea is to always allow them to go back to the next closest relative, no matter how distantly related, so technically you will never lose unless life itself is wiped out of the planet. Another idea is to make it only those of your species, but that could also be very dangerous for the player every time their species enters a new iteration and branches off (although I think the danger is fine). This way a player would lose simply by having their species die out, which I think makes more sense.

Just for how far they can trace it back, why not use a Clade diagram that writes itself with each new evolution? It could start in the cell stage and each time you change it marks you as a different species and records all the differences between you and past versions, also showing what those ones that evolved differently have become. It could be for just looking back to the past to reminisce about your species past or as you said for tracking what you'll become if your race goes extinct.

NickTheNick wrote:

To what extent do you think a player should be able to retrace their lineage for respawning purposes? One idea is to always allow them to go back to the next closest relative, no matter how distantly related, so technically you will never lose unless life itself is wiped out of the planet. Another idea is to make it only those of your species, but that could also be very dangerous for the player every time their species enters a new iteration and branches off (although I think the danger is fine). This way a player would lose simply by having their species die out, which I think makes more sense.

I think it should be different depending on the difficulty setting, if there is one:
Easy: The same evolution you are currently at, if there are more of that species and you were not the last one.
Normal: The previous evolution.
Hard: Several evolutions back, or at the very start if the next difficulty setting would not be in the game.
Very hard: Back to square one (the first evolution).

Scottnov wrote:

SawerGreem wrote:

Planets and Solar System idea:

There are many different big stars in this world, yellow dwarfs, red dwarfs, which becomes blue dwarfs, brown dwarfs and white dwarfs.

what if you were to be able to customize your world, like the closest (a planet) to farthest (m planet)

eg:

sun - __ (shorten the sun type name, like rd for red dwarf) planet distance (use alphabet) --- atmosphere composing (max of 6) oxygen, hydrogen, helium, carbon dioxide, monoxide etc. and percentage of that gas.


picture for (possible) better understanding




well i suggested not long ago about this being an MMO, and it might be added in the future, if this idea were to be added along with the MMO idea, then probably there would only be 7 playable solar systems (the one above and maybe a black dwarf (a star that has exhausted all its energy)) and maybe small solar systems that spawn and despawn if no one terraforms a planet in it after 72 hours.

I'm fairly sure that the star thing is already going to be in, it IS a realistic game.
As for shaping your planet... Not until the space stage.
And lastly, the MMO thing. I know you are new, and that's okay, everyone is at one point but... Read the wiki some, the MMO thing simply isn't the type for Thrive.
Please forgive me if I offended you in any way.

wait. that star thing is going to be in!? Oh god. welp. CELEBRATE
ah okay, now for customizing planet. what about post-game? do you get to do that? and also, when that actually happens. would really love it to be my way, cause it seems more like a kepler researched planet.

2nd thing. question if there would be a small easter egg like the one from spore, the "3rd planet from system sol" (earth)

SawerGreem wrote:

Scottnov wrote:

SawerGreem wrote:

Planets and Solar System idea:

There are many different big stars in this world, yellow dwarfs, red dwarfs, which becomes blue dwarfs, brown dwarfs and white dwarfs.

what if you were to be able to customize your world, like the closest (a planet) to farthest (m planet)

eg:

sun - __ (shorten the sun type name, like rd for red dwarf) planet distance (use alphabet) --- atmosphere composing (max of 6) oxygen, hydrogen, helium, carbon dioxide, monoxide etc. and percentage of that gas.


picture for (possible) better understanding



well i suggested not long ago about this being an MMO, and it might be added in the future, if this idea were to be added along with the MMO idea, then probably there would only be 7 playable solar systems (the one above and maybe a black dwarf (a star that has exhausted all its energy)) and maybe small solar systems that spawn and despawn if no one terraforms a planet in it after 72 hours.

I'm fairly sure that the star thing is already going to be in, it IS a realistic game.
As for shaping your planet... Not until the space stage.
And lastly, the MMO thing. I know you are new, and that's okay, everyone is at one point but... Read the wiki some, the MMO thing simply isn't the type for Thrive.
Please forgive me if I offended you in any way.

wait. that star thing is going to be in!? Oh god. welp. CELEBRATE :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
ah okay, now for customizing planet. what about post-game? do you get to do that? and also, when that actually happens. would really love it to be my way, cause it seems more like a kepler researched planet.

2nd thing. question if there would be a small easter egg like the one from spore, the "3rd planet from system sol" (earth)

If by "star thing" you meant blue dwarfs, then sorry to rain on your parade, but no, it probably isn't going to be in the game, since the universe isn't old enough for blue dwarfs to exist, or black dwarfs for that matter.

On the other hand, stellar classification will definitely be in the game. Even Spore had a simple system of stellar classification.

Tarpy wrote:

SawerGreem wrote:

Scottnov wrote:

SawerGreem wrote:

Planets and Solar System idea:

There are many different big stars in this world, yellow dwarfs, red dwarfs, which becomes blue dwarfs, brown dwarfs and white dwarfs.

what if you were to be able to customize your world, like the closest (a planet) to farthest (m planet)

eg:

sun - __ (shorten the sun type name, like rd for red dwarf) planet distance (use alphabet) --- atmosphere composing (max of 6) oxygen, hydrogen, helium, carbon dioxide, monoxide etc. and percentage of that gas.


picture for (possible) better understanding



well i suggested not long ago about this being an MMO, and it might be added in the future, if this idea were to be added along with the MMO idea, then probably there would only be 7 playable solar systems (the one above and maybe a black dwarf (a star that has exhausted all its energy)) and maybe small solar systems that spawn and despawn if no one terraforms a planet in it after 72 hours.

I'm fairly sure that the star thing is already going to be in, it IS a realistic game.
As for shaping your planet... Not until the space stage.
And lastly, the MMO thing. I know you are new, and that's okay, everyone is at one point but... Read the wiki some, the MMO thing simply isn't the type for Thrive.
Please forgive me if I offended you in any way.

wait. that star thing is going to be in!? Oh god. welp. CELEBRATE :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
ah okay, now for customizing planet. what about post-game? do you get to do that? and also, when that actually happens. would really love it to be my way, cause it seems more like a kepler researched planet.

2nd thing. question if there would be a small easter egg like the one from spore, the "3rd planet from system sol" (earth)

If by "star thing" you meant blue dwarfs, then sorry to rain on your parade, but no, it probably isn't going to be in the game, since the universe isn't old enough for blue dwarfs to exist, or black dwarfs for that matter.

On the other hand, stellar classification will definitely be in the game. Even Spore had a simple system of stellar classification.

i didn't mean blue dwarfs. i meant red dwarfs, yellow dwarfs, white dwarfs. and what about changing the age of the universe. (i know that black dwarfs still don't exist, don't know about blue dwarfs) so you can make it possible. maybe a universe that's so old all the radiation on a black dwarf is gone, so it will be seeing planets in the that black dwarf's sky. oorr, a black dwarf system or lone planet so it will be a completely dark world.

SawerGreem wrote:

Tarpy wrote:

SawerGreem wrote:

Scottnov wrote:

SawerGreem wrote:

Planets and Solar System idea:

There are many different big stars in this world, yellow dwarfs, red dwarfs, which becomes blue dwarfs, brown dwarfs and white dwarfs.

what if you were to be able to customize your world, like the closest (a planet) to farthest (m planet)

eg:

sun - __ (shorten the sun type name, like rd for red dwarf) planet distance (use alphabet) --- atmosphere composing (max of 6) oxygen, hydrogen, helium, carbon dioxide, monoxide etc. and percentage of that gas.


picture for (possible) better understanding



well i suggested not long ago about this being an MMO, and it might be added in the future, if this idea were to be added along with the MMO idea, then probably there would only be 7 playable solar systems (the one above and maybe a black dwarf (a star that has exhausted all its energy)) and maybe small solar systems that spawn and despawn if no one terraforms a planet in it after 72 hours.

I'm fairly sure that the star thing is already going to be in, it IS a realistic game.
As for shaping your planet... Not until the space stage.
And lastly, the MMO thing. I know you are new, and that's okay, everyone is at one point but... Read the wiki some, the MMO thing simply isn't the type for Thrive.
Please forgive me if I offended you in any way.

wait. that star thing is going to be in!? Oh god. welp. CELEBRATE :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
ah okay, now for customizing planet. what about post-game? do you get to do that? and also, when that actually happens. would really love it to be my way, cause it seems more like a kepler researched planet.

2nd thing. question if there would be a small easter egg like the one from spore, the "3rd planet from system sol" (earth)

If by "star thing" you meant blue dwarfs, then sorry to rain on your parade, but no, it probably isn't going to be in the game, since the universe isn't old enough for blue dwarfs to exist, or black dwarfs for that matter.

On the other hand, stellar classification will definitely be in the game. Even Spore had a simple system of stellar classification.

i didn't mean blue dwarfs. i meant red dwarfs, yellow dwarfs, white dwarfs. and what about changing the age of the universe. (i know that black dwarfs still don't exist, don't know about blue dwarfs) so you can make it possible. maybe a universe that's so old all the radiation on a black dwarf is gone, so it will be seeing planets in the that black dwarf's sky. :affraid:oorr, a black dwarf system or lone planet so it will be a completely dark world.

You know that the universe is probably not going to be per-determened, right? Correct me if I'm wrong on that, but that would make for a much more boring experience.
What about going to other galaxies? Will that be possible?

Scottnov wrote:

SawerGreem wrote:

Tarpy wrote:

SawerGreem wrote:

Scottnov wrote:

SawerGreem wrote:

Planets and Solar System idea:

There are many different big stars in this world, yellow dwarfs, red dwarfs, which becomes blue dwarfs, brown dwarfs and white dwarfs.

what if you were to be able to customize your world, like the closest (a planet) to farthest (m planet)

eg:

sun - __ (shorten the sun type name, like rd for red dwarf) planet distance (use alphabet) --- atmosphere composing (max of 6) oxygen, hydrogen, helium, carbon dioxide, monoxide etc. and percentage of that gas.


picture for (possible) better understanding



well i suggested not long ago about this being an MMO, and it might be added in the future, if this idea were to be added along with the MMO idea, then probably there would only be 7 playable solar systems (the one above and maybe a black dwarf (a star that has exhausted all its energy)) and maybe small solar systems that spawn and despawn if no one terraforms a planet in it after 72 hours.

I'm fairly sure that the star thing is already going to be in, it IS a realistic game.
As for shaping your planet... Not until the space stage.
And lastly, the MMO thing. I know you are new, and that's okay, everyone is at one point but... Read the wiki some, the MMO thing simply isn't the type for Thrive.
Please forgive me if I offended you in any way.

wait. that star thing is going to be in!? Oh god. welp. CELEBRATE :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
ah okay, now for customizing planet. what about post-game? do you get to do that? and also, when that actually happens. would really love it to be my way, cause it seems more like a kepler researched planet.

2nd thing. question if there would be a small easter egg like the one from spore, the "3rd planet from system sol" (earth)

If by "star thing" you meant blue dwarfs, then sorry to rain on your parade, but no, it probably isn't going to be in the game, since the universe isn't old enough for blue dwarfs to exist, or black dwarfs for that matter.

On the other hand, stellar classification will definitely be in the game. Even Spore had a simple system of stellar classification.

i didn't mean blue dwarfs. i meant red dwarfs, yellow dwarfs, white dwarfs. and what about changing the age of the universe. (i know that black dwarfs still don't exist, don't know about blue dwarfs) so you can make it possible. maybe a universe that's so old all the radiation on a black dwarf is gone, so it will be seeing planets in the that black dwarf's sky. :affraid:oorr, a black dwarf system or lone planet so it will be a completely dark world.

You know that the universe is probably not going to be per-determened, right? Correct me if I'm wrong on that, but that would make for a much more boring experience.
What about going to other galaxies? Will that be possible?

The Universe(or galaxy you are going to be in, to be exact) will have it's content procedurally generated. Stars, nebulae, clusters, planets and the like will be generated, not pre-defined.

As said, other galaxies will not be necessary, since your galaxy will have plenty of places to explore and exploit.

Scottnov wrote:

What about going to other galaxies? Will that be possible?

Considering some of Propulsion components I've notice being tossed around by the bigger folks here, that may be fairly likely a situation. I mean, if there is warp drives, and ascension gates, I think ships could handle inter-galactic travel.

Spoiler:

Ah, thank you for answering.
In case you didn't know, I didn't mean that a procedurally generated galaxy would be boring, but the opposite.

Spoiler:

I never said that you meant that a procedurally generated galaxy would be boring.

Quote :

I never said that you meant that a procedurally generated galaxy would be boring.

Yes, I know. I just wanted to make sure you didn't misunderstand.

Different galaxies could be part of multiplayer, if a server is a single galaxy. If multiplayer was on, all players on that server/ in that galaxy could interact with each other.

PropTheRedstoner wrote:

Different galaxies could be part of multiplayer, if a server is a single galaxy. If multiplayer was on, all players on that server/ in that galaxy could interact with each other.

Hold on, you're the only other one who thinks this game should be an MMO?

SawerGreem wrote:

PropTheRedstoner wrote:

Different galaxies could be part of multiplayer, if a server is a single galaxy. If multiplayer was on, all players on that server/ in that galaxy could interact with each other.

Hold on, you're the only other one who thinks this game should be an MMO?

Multiplayer doesn't necessarily mean MMO, an MMO is something like World of Warcraft or League of Legends. He was talking about multiplayer, which is different (think: Minecraft).
On the subject, I like his idea, it would be fun to play on a multiplayer world, or play with a friend, but I don't think it's possible.

Scottnov wrote:

SawerGreem wrote:

PropTheRedstoner wrote:

Different galaxies could be part of multiplayer, if a server is a single galaxy. If multiplayer was on, all players on that server/ in that galaxy could interact with each other.

Hold on, you're the only other one who thinks this game should be an MMO?

Multiplayer doesn't necessarily mean MMO, an MMO is something like World of Warcraft or League of Legends. He was talking about multiplayer, which is different (think: Minecraft).
On the subject, I like his idea, it would be fun to play on a multiplayer world, or play with a friend, but I don't think it's possible.

oh, I don't play WoW or LoL, i was talking about those games like MapleStory, socializing with friends at a town, hunting mobs together. and doing quest. And yeah, his idea is similar to mine (actually exactly like mine) but you could not understand.

SawerGreem wrote:

Scottnov wrote:

SawerGreem wrote:

PropTheRedstoner wrote:

Different galaxies could be part of multiplayer, if a server is a single galaxy. If multiplayer was on, all players on that server/ in that galaxy could interact with each other.

Hold on, you're the only other one who thinks this game should be an MMO?

Multiplayer doesn't necessarily mean MMO, an MMO is something like World of Warcraft or League of Legends. He was talking about multiplayer, which is different (think: Minecraft).
On the subject, I like his idea, it would be fun to play on a multiplayer world, or play with a friend, but I don't think it's possible.

oh, I don't play WoW or LoL, i was talking about those games like MapleStory, socializing with friends at a town, hunting mobs together. and doing quest. And yeah, his idea is similar to mine (actually exactly like mine) but you could not understand.

Same sort of deal, MapleStory is an MMO as well.
If there WAS a multiplayer feature (which sadly, is close to impossible if not impossible completely), it should not be the only available mode and, from my point of view, would be like Minecraft or Terraria in terms of multiplayer (I.E: set up a server, tell IP to friends, play).

Scottnov wrote:

SawerGreem wrote:

Scottnov wrote:

SawerGreem wrote:

PropTheRedstoner wrote:

Different galaxies could be part of multiplayer, if a server is a single galaxy. If multiplayer was on, all players on that server/ in that galaxy could interact with each other.

Hold on, you're the only other one who thinks this game should be an MMO?

Multiplayer doesn't necessarily mean MMO, an MMO is something like World of Warcraft or League of Legends. He was talking about multiplayer, which is different (think: Minecraft).
On the subject, I like his idea, it would be fun to play on a multiplayer world, or play with a friend, but I don't think it's possible.

oh, I don't play WoW or LoL, i was talking about those games like MapleStory, socializing with friends at a town, hunting mobs together. and doing quest. And yeah, his idea is similar to mine (actually exactly like mine) but you could not understand.

Same sort of deal, MapleStory is an MMO as well.
If there WAS a multiplayer feature (which sadly, is close to impossible if not impossible completely), it should not be the only available mode and, from my point of view, would be like Minecraft or Terraria in terms of multiplayer (I.E: set up a server, tell IP to friends, play).

So I'll have a large game with between 5 and 10 world or servers that support up to 100+ people player made or small servers with 20+ people

SawerGreem wrote:

Scottnov wrote:

SawerGreem wrote:

Scottnov wrote:

SawerGreem wrote:

PropTheRedstoner wrote:

Different galaxies could be part of multiplayer, if a server is a single galaxy. If multiplayer was on, all players on that server/ in that galaxy could interact with each other.

Hold on, you're the only other one who thinks this game should be an MMO?

Multiplayer doesn't necessarily mean MMO, an MMO is something like World of Warcraft or League of Legends. He was talking about multiplayer, which is different (think: Minecraft).
On the subject, I like his idea, it would be fun to play on a multiplayer world, or play with a friend, but I don't think it's possible.

oh, I don't play WoW or LoL, i was talking about those games like MapleStory, socializing with friends at a town, hunting mobs together. and doing quest. And yeah, his idea is similar to mine (actually exactly like mine) but you could not understand.

Same sort of deal, MapleStory is an MMO as well.
If there WAS a multiplayer feature (which sadly, is close to impossible if not impossible completely), it should not be the only available mode and, from my point of view, would be like Minecraft or Terraria in terms of multiplayer (I.E: set up a server, tell IP to friends, play).

So I'll have a large game with between 5 and 10 world or servers that support up to 100+ people player made or small servers with 20+ people

Mostly, yes.
Bottom line, how sad or annoying it may be, with a game so massive as this, there would be a lot of lag, a lot of problems, a lot of people farming smaller races with uber-ships.
Nice concepts, though.

There are many issues with multiplayer, and they have been discussed countless times before (so please go research the topic and read about it instead of bringing it up for the umpteenth time), but basically the big areas where multiplayer conflicts with the game is with procedural generation and stage transitions. There are different timescales between the stages, such that a couple hours of the Aware Stage is representing millions of years of evolution, while a couple hours of the society stage is just centuries in the history of your civilization. Therefore all players would have to at all times be in the same stage and transition simultaneously.

Furthermore, the transitions aren't designed to accommodate multiple species transitioning.

What's more, the game relies heavily on procedural generation to keep the processing demand of the game low. This means that basically anything the player isn't looking at or near, isn't being rendered and is probably only being simulated to the most minimal degree. For example, if your creature enters a valley and spends some time there, the creatures and actions in the valley would all be simulated. However, as soon as the player leaves, all the organisms in that area are converted to simple numbers, and instead of simulating the actions that take place we simply run some algorithms to determine the outcomes of evolution until you return. With multiplayer, you would have to simulate a lot more content at the same time and some of the procedural mechanics wouldn't be possible. This would make for reductions in features and a reduction in performance.

So really the only hope for multiplayer I see is specifically within the span of one stage, where you take a singleplayer game, let your friend(s) hop in and turn it into a multiplayer match, but cannot advance to the next stage until it is converted back into a singleplayer game.