Statistics | We have 1675 registered users The newest registered user is dejo123
Our users have posted a total of 30851 messages in 1411 subjects
|
Who is online? | In total there are 8 users online :: 0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 8 Guests None Most users ever online was 443 on Sun Mar 17, 2013 5:41 pm |
Latest topics | » THIS FORUM IS NOW OBSOLETE by NickTheNick Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:26 pm
» To all the people who come here looking for thrive. by NickTheNick Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:22 pm
» Build Error Code::Blocks / CMake by crovea Tue Jul 28, 2015 5:28 pm
» Hello! I can translate in japanese by tjwhale Thu Jul 02, 2015 7:23 pm
» On Leave (Offline thread) by NickTheNick Wed Jul 01, 2015 12:20 am
» Devblog #14: A Brave New Forum by NickTheNick Mon Jun 29, 2015 4:49 am
» Application for Programmer by crovea Fri Jun 26, 2015 11:14 am
» Re-Reapplication by The Creator Thu Jun 25, 2015 10:57 pm
» Application (programming) by crovea Tue Jun 23, 2015 8:00 am
» Achieving Sapience by MitochondriaBox Sun Jun 21, 2015 7:03 pm
» Microbe Stage GDD by tjwhale Sat Jun 20, 2015 3:44 pm
» Application for Programmer/ Theorist by tjwhale Wed Jun 17, 2015 9:56 am
» Application for a 3D Modeler. by Kaiju4u Wed Jun 10, 2015 11:16 am
» Presentation by Othithu Tue Jun 02, 2015 10:38 am
» Application of Sorts by crovea Sun May 31, 2015 5:06 pm
» want to contribute by Renzope Sun May 31, 2015 12:58 pm
» Music List Thread (Post New Themes Here) by Oliveriver Thu May 28, 2015 1:06 pm
» Application: English-Spanish translator by Renzope Tue May 26, 2015 1:53 pm
» Want to be promoter or project manager by TheBudderBros Sun May 24, 2015 9:00 pm
» A new round of Forum Revamps! by Oliveriver Wed May 20, 2015 11:32 am
|
|
| Why Auto-Evo is Dead | |
|
+25NickTheNick Noone Mysterious_Calligrapher Redstar toxiciron Poisson roadkillguy Xenopologist EScSi Darkov specialk2121 Pezzalis YourBreakfast US_of_Alaska ~sciocont Invader ParadoxJuice fireballs619 Tenebrarum The Uteen Gotrol Darkgamma Commander Keen Djohaal Bashinerox 29 posters | |
Author | Message |
---|
Tenebrarum Society Team Lead
Posts : 1179 Reputation : 32 Join date : 2010-10-01 Age : 31 Location : ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Mon Dec 20, 2010 8:04 pm | |
| - Pezzalis wrote:
- If we are going with lamarckian or something similar to we will have to sieve over every factor wont we?
Yes. Roll up your sleeves pal, we've got a lot of work to do. | |
| | | ~sciocont Overall Team Lead
Posts : 3406 Reputation : 138 Join date : 2010-07-06
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Mon Dec 20, 2010 9:08 pm | |
| - Tenebrarum wrote:
- Pezzalis wrote:
- If we are going with lamarckian or something similar to we will have to sieve over every factor wont we?
Yes.
Roll up your sleeves pal, we've got a lot of work to do. That's why I don't like lamarckian and I prefer something different- Lamarckian is very limiting. I'm still saying we should use something different, because we'll have to constanly update the code as people get more creative, and there will be absolute mountains of code to begin with. I'm saying -fake darwinian -artificial selection (crowdsourcing, somehow) | |
| | | Invader Experienced
Posts : 528 Reputation : 11 Join date : 2010-07-10 Age : 28
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 1:45 am | |
| - Bashinerox wrote:
- US_of_Alaska wrote:
- Bashinerox wrote:
- US_of_Alaska wrote:
- Bashi, if you think you can come up with a working Lamarkian system, we would all be more than happy to have that in the game. It's better than no Auto-Evo.
That isn't the point. Regardless of methods used to alter data a basic algorithm can't just create envisioned creatures from scratch. What if we start with a few base creatures? Could it evolve them? It's quite possible, but then everything would look like modified versions of a bunch of base creatures But if we create enough base creatures (a LOT of them), and we let them freely evolve enough before we see them, they will all be unique. In other words, we could make a ton of base creatures and perhaps during a loading screen after beginning your save it would put them through a long period of evolution (but not too long) so that when we enter the game, they all look different. I really hope that makes sense to you... | |
| | | Pezzalis Regular
Posts : 260 Reputation : 6 Join date : 2010-08-07
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 4:51 am | |
| Sounding good so far... Im just wondering how these stock creatures would be phased into gameplay... This got me a thinking. *Steps back to Cellular stage* Redstars really long microbe concept: - Spoiler:
Cell Stage Gameplay =================
At the beginning of the game, the player will take control of a single-celled, prokaryotic organism. It will be in one of the following shapes, at random: *Sphere *Rod *Comma *Spiral
The shape of the cell will not initially affect movement.
The player's environment is the "organic soup", a murky screen populated by floating proto-cellular structures. AI proto-cells may include: 1) Wrigglers - Worm-like creatures that move quickly around the screen; assimilating them grants the player a flagellum 2) Writhers - Small globular creatures that move quickly around the screen by rippling cilia on their body; assimilating them grants the player cilia 3) Squirmers - Crescent-shaped creatures that move by undulating themselves up and down like a pair of wings; assimilating them grants the player lamellipodes 4) Squishers - Glob-shaped creatures that move in an amoeba-like fashion, by wriggling their cytoplasm; assimilating them grants the player the ability to move in this way and engulf other cells. 5) Shiners - Small spherical creatures that drift and emit a pale colored light whenever they absorb amino acids; assimilating them grants the player a bioluminescent dot that shines when they feed 6) Clone-Stickers - Tiny globs with a hollow spike (like a hypodermic) that inject their reproductive material into other cells, causing them to die and be replaced by another sticker. Assimilating them grants the player a pilus (hypodermic spike) that can create clones of the player cell in this manner. 7) Poison-stickers - Tiny globs with a hollow spike (like a hypodermic) that inject toxic material into other cells, causing them to die and dissolve into edible material. Assimilating them grants the player a pilus (hypodermic spike) that injects poison. 8 ) Defenders - Tiny capsules that resist being absorbed by cells; assimilating them grants the player an antiphagocytic capsule which defends them from being absorbed by other cells by producing an outer coating of enzyme "slime" 9) Producers - Blobs that cluster around rich regions of the soup, transforming the amino acids into proteins. Assimilating them grants the player double nourishment from absorbing Amino Acids, and allows damaged cell components to be replaced. 10) Dissolvers - Blobs that cluster around proteins and reduce them to amino acids. Assimilating them grants the player double nourishment from absorbing Protein, and allows cells with Walls to be consumed. 11) Eaters - Small globes that absorb proteins and other cells, converting them to energy for reproduction; assimilating them grants the player Mitochondria, which allows them to "eat" carbohydrates. 12) Light-eaters - Small discs that reproduce automatically while exposed to light; assimilating them grants the player Chloroplasts, which transform light into nourishment (carbohydrates) 13) Heat-eaters - Small blobs that reproduce automatically when exposed to heat; assimilating them grants the the player Thermoplasts, which transform heat into nourishment (carbohydrates) 14) Cookers - Small spheres that release enzymes which break down proteins and cells into amino acids; assimilating them grants the player Lysosomes, which give double nourishment from consuming Cells 15) Holders - Hollow membranes that encase whatever molecules they come in contact with; assimilating them grants the player Vacuoles, which can store material to be digested, or compartmentalize harmful substances (like poison or injected reproductive material). 16) Platers - Solid "plates" that reproduce by absorbing proteins; assimilation grants the player Cell Walls, which form a protective barrier around the cell. In silicone-rich environments, these may be 1.5x as hard to puncture/engulf (as they utilize silicate crystals). 17) Gluers - Globs that create a sticky enzyme that can glue cells together. Assimilating them grants the ability to bond with other cells of your type.
Camera angle is locked at a top-down angle on the Z axis; the player can move freely in the X and Y axes. For the first few moments of the game, cell movement will be limited to drifting, with player able to choose direction by clicking. At this point, the objective for the player is to absorb other cells' structures by engulfing certain numbers of them.
Initially, the "soup" is populated with random variants of the AI proto-cells. There should be several different models of every proto-cell for the game to choose from; these will then have their color palette randomly shifted in every new game to create many different-looking proto-cells.
The player's GUI will include a "Nourishment Meter" which will empty at a given rate, and fill as the player consumes proto-cells and other cells. AI cells in the environment will be absorbing proto-cells as well, causing them to become increasingly complex. The player may engulf them by approaching them, provided they are large enough and have the appropriate structures. Initially, they only yield nourishment based on their size, and any structures within them will break down into globs of protein, which are rejected by the player's cell. As the player gains new cell parts, they may gain the ability to digest proteins or carbohydrates produced by other cells.
Every cell, including AI cells, has a Nourishment Meter. Whenever a cell's Nourishment Meter remains filled for a given amount of time, that cell will reproduce. Its offspring will be exactly identical to the parent. If the player cell reproduces, it will release an AI cell of the same type into the environment; cells of similar type to the player's cell will not attack it. If this cell assimilates any new cell structures, it is considered a different species, and will become hostile to the player.
After a given number of organelles are assimilated (exact number TBD), the player will have to assimilate more and more of a given type of proto-cell in order to assimilate it.
When a player's cell absorbs a certain type of proto-cell, it gains the ability to "stick" to other cells of its kind, forming cellular colonies. At this point, the player can become a multicellular organism by bonding with as many cells of its type as possible.
Once a cellular colony has reached a given number of cells (exact number TBD), they will begin to specialize. Outer cells will begin to toughen and become skin membranes; inner cells will become digestion organs. How exactly this process will take place still needs to be determined.
Now. During cell stage you accumulate organelles and other cell parts and functions via assimilation. The basic final metabolism of your cell before you enter multicellular will determine your main means of acquiring energy. For example... If you assimilate lots of Heat-Eaters (#13) you will end up a thermosyntetic organism. Assimilate lots of Light-Eaters (#12) and you will become photosynthetic (Like a plant). Assimilate lots of Eaters (#11) and you will end up with an organism utilizing a form of cellular respiration (Animals/Fungi/Anything that 'Eats') Now whats has these got to do with stock creatures? We should have different forms of stock organisms which apply to different means of attaining energy. But these stock creatures will have to be different. They could be randomly selected or chosen due to other assimilated organelles (Ie a plant like stock-organism would be phased into evolution if the cells had lots of chloroplasts (#12), a cell wall (#16) and a vacuole (#15).) Thats just my basic idea of how this concept could be phased into gameplay. As for evolution from there-on-in... Well i Guess there could be limitations and expectations. IE a consuming (respiration) organism would need means of attaining food. The larger it gets, the more complicated systems it needs ie a mouth and a digestive track. Smaller consumers can diffuse materials or extracellularly digest food (Like fungi). Photosynthetic organisms which are stationary would need to live in light areas and have a large surface area of chloroplast-rich cells (Like leaves). But yeah I guess we all need to get right down to the nitty-gritty of this. P.S sorry if I got carried away | |
| | | ~sciocont Overall Team Lead
Posts : 3406 Reputation : 138 Join date : 2010-07-06
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 11:22 am | |
| Pezz, you should probably open up a thread about that if there isn't one already out there. | |
| | | specialk2121 Newcomer
Posts : 66 Reputation : 0 Join date : 2010-12-14 Age : 27 Location : Empire State of the South
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 11:55 am | |
| I think evolution should work like this... If my organism does a lot of running away from predators, it will give me stronger legs to put on my creature in the editor. If i do a lot of jumping then i will get wings.
Same goes for the AI creatures. If they do a lot of digging the AI dhould be able to give them stonger arms, or claws.
We need AUto-Evo! | |
| | | ~sciocont Overall Team Lead
Posts : 3406 Reputation : 138 Join date : 2010-07-06
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 12:08 pm | |
| - specialk2121 wrote:
- I think evolution should work like this... If my organism does a lot of running away from predators, it will give me stronger legs to put on my creature in the editor. If i do a lot of jumping then i will get wings.
Same goes for the AI creatures. If they do a lot of digging the AI dhould be able to give them stonger arms, or claws.
We need AUto-Evo! Please read threads. What you're suggesting is a Lamarckian system. You also should read the Organism Editor master thread (link in my signature) tio better understand how our game's organism editing works. | |
| | | The Uteen Sandbox Team Lead
Posts : 1476 Reputation : 70 Join date : 2010-07-06 Age : 28 Location : England, Virgo Supercluster
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 3:47 pm | |
| - The Uteen wrote:
- The base creatures could be from your own planet (the one currently being played on). They would be related, if loosely, to the creatures (or plants) you have seen before anyway. And if we did that, the results would be different for each planet. And more suited to the environment. And we wouldn't have to make them all.
I've been blanked here. Please read. Can we do this? I'd really prefer this to pre-made & fixed stock creatures. | |
| | | specialk2121 Newcomer
Posts : 66 Reputation : 0 Join date : 2010-12-14 Age : 27 Location : Empire State of the South
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 3:48 pm | |
| premade creatures wouldwork if they could still change somehow
(im not a programmer) | |
| | | ~sciocont Overall Team Lead
Posts : 3406 Reputation : 138 Join date : 2010-07-06
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 3:58 pm | |
| - The Uteen wrote:
- The Uteen wrote:
- The base creatures could be from your own planet (the one currently being played on). They would be related, if loosely, to the creatures (or plants) you have seen before anyway. And if we did that, the results would be different for each planet. And more suited to the environment. And we wouldn't have to make them all.
I've been blanked here. Please read.
Can we do this? I'd really prefer this to pre-made & fixed stock creatures. Right now I'm teetering towards everything beginning as a template org. | |
| | | Tenebrarum Society Team Lead
Posts : 1179 Reputation : 32 Join date : 2010-10-01 Age : 31 Location : ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 4:33 pm | |
| - ~sciocont wrote:
- Right now I'm teetering towards everything beginning as a template org.
Good. I can see no other viable way (Sorry Uteen!) to start off planets. Now, as I believe I said before, this is not something terrible. If we get auto-evo right, then evolution should change the creatures significantly enough for them to be seen as strikingly different. Again, all animals are descendants of worms, and share the same body plan. Pezz, I like your idea. It will simplify the entire ordeal by seperating kingdoms before hand and not allowing mixing, and it provides a coherent connection to the microbial stage too. A+ Now, onto another topic: anyone who has studied evolution for a significant amount of time should know of the Competitive Exclusion Principle. To those unfamilier, it says, in a nutshell, that no two species can share a niche. Generally, a niche is defined by it's food source. While that isn't everything, we needn't complicate it yet. Let's get down a simplified version first. Back to niches. Niches are either said to be broad, (i.e. Having many different sources of food) or they are narrow. (e.i. Having only a few sources of food.) We'll return to these in a minute. The Competitive Exclusion Principle states that when a niche is shared, one or the other species must do one of the following: Migrate, Change, or Die. What does this have to do with Auto-Evo? Well, while this does nothing to help the big issue, that of the actual process of change, it should help solve a few issues on the question of when evolution occurs. This can, for the time being, be said to be based on the aforementioned principle. If a species is found to share a niche, or more generally speaking, has a niche that overlaps with that of another species, than one must either Change (Evolve out of it's current niche, being best suited to those with broad niches), Migrate (If there is in fact a source of food near enough), or simply goes extinct. Obviously this needs refining, but I thought it might be able to help. | |
| | | ~sciocont Overall Team Lead
Posts : 3406 Reputation : 138 Join date : 2010-07-06
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 5:08 pm | |
| I think bringing that in will be too complicated- each niche depends on the environment as a whole, so to monitor niches, we'd need to simulate everything in the environment at once. | |
| | | Tenebrarum Society Team Lead
Posts : 1179 Reputation : 32 Join date : 2010-10-01 Age : 31 Location : ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 5:09 pm | |
| - ~sciocont wrote:
- I think bringing that in will be too complicated- each niche depends on the environment as a whole, so to monitor niches, we'd need to simulate everything in the environment at once.
As I said, in this case, niche = food source. | |
| | | ~sciocont Overall Team Lead
Posts : 3406 Reputation : 138 Join date : 2010-07-06
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 5:14 pm | |
| - Tenebrarum wrote:
- ~sciocont wrote:
- I think bringing that in will be too complicated- each niche depends on the environment as a whole, so to monitor niches, we'd need to simulate everything in the environment at once.
As I said, in this case, niche = food source. Alien environment = alien foods = alien niche. We don't know what environments will be created, so we don't know how to define each niche. If you're suggesting we monitor food webs, that's another really complex thing, especially since we'd have to model pretty much the entire planet's food web to get an accurate niche placement. | |
| | | Tenebrarum Society Team Lead
Posts : 1179 Reputation : 32 Join date : 2010-10-01 Age : 31 Location : ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 5:18 pm | |
| - ~sciocont wrote:
- Alien environment = alien foods = alien niche.
We don't know what environments will be created, so we don't know how to define each niche. If you're suggesting we monitor food webs, that's another really complex thing, especially since we'd have to model pretty much the entire planet's food web to get an accurate niche placement. Hold on, what? We don't have to monitor food webs. We juust have to moniter food sources for species. They'd be bound to them, like a part. And don't tell me we're simmplifying it to the point that all herbavores can eat all plants, all carnivores can eat all animals, etc. That takes out the very most basic form of prey defense: being unhealthy/poisonous/unpleasant for the predator to eat. | |
| | | ~sciocont Overall Team Lead
Posts : 3406 Reputation : 138 Join date : 2010-07-06
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 5:33 pm | |
| - Tenebrarum wrote:
- ~sciocont wrote:
- Alien environment = alien foods = alien niche.
We don't know what environments will be created, so we don't know how to define each niche. If you're suggesting we monitor food webs, that's another really complex thing, especially since we'd have to model pretty much the entire planet's food web to get an accurate niche placement. Hold on, what? We don't have to monitor food webs. We juust have to moniter food sources for species. They'd be bound to them, like a part. And don't tell me we're simmplifying it to the point that all herbavores can eat all plants, all carnivores can eat all animals, etc. That takes out the very most basic form of prey defense: being unhealthy/poisonous/unpleasant for the predator to eat. I'm not saying we simplify it that much, I'm just saying that food sources will be difficult to track for many different species. | |
| | | Tenebrarum Society Team Lead
Posts : 1179 Reputation : 32 Join date : 2010-10-01 Age : 31 Location : ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 5:48 pm | |
| - ~sciocont wrote:
- I'm not saying we simplify it that much, I'm just saying that food sources will be difficult to track for many different species.
Then how do we code behaivior? P.S. I thought that diet would be part of the OE. :s | |
| | | ~sciocont Overall Team Lead
Posts : 3406 Reputation : 138 Join date : 2010-07-06
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:40 pm | |
| - Tenebrarum wrote:
- ~sciocont wrote:
- I'm not saying we simplify it that much, I'm just saying that food sources will be difficult to track for many different species.
Then how do we code behaivior?
P.S. I thought that diet would be part of the OE. :s Having diet be part of the OE would break the system. The creature would not survive in an environment that didn't support its natural diet, which would wreak hell on the PPG system. The OE, however, can tell you what a creature can eat, through organs, mouthparts, etc. | |
| | | Tenebrarum Society Team Lead
Posts : 1179 Reputation : 32 Join date : 2010-10-01 Age : 31 Location : ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:44 pm | |
| - ~sciocont wrote:
- Tenebrarum wrote:
- ~sciocont wrote:
- I'm not saying we simplify it that much, I'm just saying that food sources will be difficult to track for many different species.
Then how do we code behaivior?
P.S. I thought that diet would be part of the OE. :s Having diet be part of the OE would break the system. The creature would not survive in an environment that didn't support its natural diet, which would wreak hell on the PPG system. The OE, however, can tell you what a creature can eat, through organs, mouthparts, etc. Problem solved. Niche still equals diet. EDIT: Allow me to explain. I assume we'll have to record what organisms are in which biomes/areas in any situation for pollinating purposes, right? So, all you have to do is note diet vs. local edibles. All done. ^^ | |
| | | Darkov Newcomer
Posts : 58 Reputation : 1 Join date : 2010-09-23
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Mon Jan 03, 2011 6:58 am | |
| - ~sciocont wrote:
- I think that we can combine some different approaches here to achieve the best results.
I'd like to do some crowdsourcing, and I think it can be easily done- all we need to do is release a basic Org editor and let people play with it. Then we choose "base creatures" from what they make.
From then we can run the system we choose (be it lamarckian, editing-based, or something like what I proposed) and orgs will evolve as a species.
Crowdsourcing would really help generate interest as well as bring in a lot of ideas for base organisms. Thats the best way to see how auto - evo will work. I've tryed to make auto-evo simulations my self, on game maker, so they are very simple. But what i used was either darwenian evolution, or lamarckian. For the darwenian, i just made a random variable, that would randomzie between 1 and 100 and if its smaller then another variable, called mutation rate, then when the cell splits it would mutate. Now how will it mutate? Well my cells have a set of variables that defines em(x+y+u+i+o+p+..=cell), lets say these variables are 9 i numbers. So i randomize another variable to a random number from 1 to 9. Depending on what is the random number is, i change the specific varaible that changes my cell. Example: - Code:
-
create cell: {x+c+v+b+n+m+o+p+u=newcell} split cell(newcell):{ mutationrate=30 willitmutate = random number from 1 to 100 if willitmutate<=mutationrate then2 { randomvar=random number from 1 to 9 case randomvar==1 then x=x-10+(random number from 0 to 20) case randomvar==2 then c=c-10+(random number from 0 to 20) case randomvar==3 then c=c-10+(random number from 0 to 20) ........................ case randomvar==9 then u=u-10+(random number from 0 to 20) } create cell: {x+c+v+b+n+m+o+p+u=newcell2} } Ofc the code is different, but this is the general idea. Now for the lamarckian, i used global varaibles for each different species. So when a specific species starts to starve, a varible called "starving[SPECIECID]" would increase by 1. And i had many global varaibles like these. When the species reproduces, it reproduces into a new species according to these variables. It will not always improve the same way, because there might be many ways to beat starvation(in this example). So you just need to change the variables of the creature, either by random mutations or in this harder lamarckian way. But in either case there are problems for a massive game like Thrive. The random mutations will create a LOT of stupid creatures and it will take a long time to get a good creature out. The lamarckian is much harder to make realistic, because there will be many different situations, that the programmer must think of before they happen. And it will involve a lot of variables. I have no real idea how this would work in Thrive, but i posted this, because maybe bashi will get an idea, after reading it. | |
| | | EScSi Newcomer
Posts : 15 Reputation : 0 Join date : 2011-01-23
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Sun Jan 23, 2011 4:40 pm | |
| I think you could actually use crowdsourcing for the entire evolutionary system. You could have a library with thousands (many to ensure diversity) of different human-designed organisms in it. Each organism would have a history log that represents environmental influences. Every generation, you'd pick creatures from the library that evolved in a similar environment, in semi-random fashion, and converge onto it.
Example: We drop a population of simple creatures into the world. We track the activities of a random organism and log the actions it does. There are a lot of events in the log for "entered water", "left water" and "attacked animal", indicating that it is a carnivorus amphibian. We search the database for organisms that left a similar log, and choose randomly amongst the candidates. (We can choose two seperate targets to simulate speciation.) Then we have the tricky part. The algorithm starts to measure the target species: the measurements aren't complex but there's a lot of them. It finds that the target has large, webbed feet and toothed jaws. The next generation grow up with larger teeth and feet.
edit: It could be applied to limbs and other parts, too, though it would be harder to implement. One option would be to have a table containing all the parts, with the position of the origin and target species marked on it like a grid. The position would be 'nudged' toward the target, and over time the organism develops more similar parts.
You'd need to design your creature data in a way designed for this kind of manipulation, which would be very difficult, but it'd be humanly possible to code unlike Darwinian methods and it avoids the problem of "loopholes". It'd also be easier to combine with a more intelligent (pattern-matched?) or randomised system if you have the time to code.
edit: I don't like to bump threads too much, so I'll add ideas on the concept to this post. I think it would be relatively easy to add an auto-correction system to keep it from evolving undistinctive or badly-designed creations. If a creature has a lot of "killed by predator" events in it's log, for example, the system will only converge on templates with high defensive stats. If the creature is hunted to extinction by the player, then it will be deleted from the database.
edit: An online database probably isn't possible, but a few hundred quality flora and fauna could be included with the game or as a seperate download. I don't think troll creations would corrupt the database that much, since it's just guiding the evolution along a general path. If the seed was a troll creation it would evolve or go extinct.
Last edited by EScSi on Mon Jan 24, 2011 12:32 pm; edited 1 time in total | |
| | | ~sciocont Overall Team Lead
Posts : 3406 Reputation : 138 Join date : 2010-07-06
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Sun Jan 23, 2011 10:34 pm | |
| The main problem with crowdsourcing is that not everyone will be connected to the internet when they play. Also, trolls. | |
| | | Xenopologist Learner
Posts : 107 Reputation : 3 Join date : 2010-08-07
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Mon Jan 24, 2011 5:47 pm | |
| - ~sciocont wrote:
- The main problem with crowdsourcing is that not everyone will be connected to the internet when they play. Also, trolls.
Perhaps a "hybrid": after initial release, people can choose to put their assets on display and some of the development team will package favorites for distribution into the next release or update. Obviously, assets added to the game automatically will have to be moderated. | |
| | | Tenebrarum Society Team Lead
Posts : 1179 Reputation : 32 Join date : 2010-10-01 Age : 31 Location : ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Mon Jan 24, 2011 6:50 pm | |
| Eeeeeeeeeh... I'm not so sure about this. It'd probably be far better in the long run to have Evolution as a system than an active plan within the community. Plus we still face most of the same issues of "When does it occur?" and "When does which trait pop up?" Basically all this does is take the simplest part, the random changes, out of it. | |
| | | ~sciocont Overall Team Lead
Posts : 3406 Reputation : 138 Join date : 2010-07-06
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead Mon Jan 24, 2011 6:56 pm | |
| - Tenebrarum wrote:
- Eeeeeeeeeh... I'm not so sure about this. It'd probably be far better in the long run to have Evolution as a system than an active plan within the community. Plus we still face most of the same issues of "When does it occur?" and "When does which trait pop up?" Basically all this does is take the simplest part, the random changes, out of it.
QFT | |
| | | Sponsored content
| Subject: Re: Why Auto-Evo is Dead | |
| |
| | | | Why Auto-Evo is Dead | |
|
Similar topics | |
|
| Permissions in this forum: | You cannot reply to topics in this forum
| |
| |
| |